Tree heights and distance from house?

[jackyspratty]

My friends have bought a property which is very overlooked at the back by houses. The houses at the back have very small gardens so are closer to the boundery fence than my friends house.

My friend says they can plant trees to increase their privacy and height is not an issue with certain trees so they can be pretty hhigh? However even if this is true, does it matter how close the houses are at the back to boundery fence? As it means that the trees will be very close to the back of hese houses.

Im not sure what trees they want to plant that fall into this category, just wondered if any one could clarify? And what the legal situation is regards to planting new trees, height and distance to adjoining houses?

[Mikey]

As far as I'm aware the majority of trees other than conifers can be left to grow to their full height aslong as they don't become dangerous (diseased), or overhang public highways.

The council won't as a general rule get involved in cases of complaining neighbours about tall trees that are inappropriate for their location. I know I have a neighbour with an 80ft eucalyptus which shades my whole garden, its going to cost me approx £800 to trim the overhanging branches, as the neighbour won't do anything about it. It is approximately half its full height at present.

Some trees are inappropriate for back gardens willows because they will break through water pipes in search of water, eucalyptus as it grows 12 months of the year, the majority of wide canopied trees, as their roots extend to their full canopy dimension. There are loads however that are absolutely fine, check out the following link for RHS recommended options.

[Hilary B]

Depends on the subsoil and the age of the houses.
I believe if it is a 'privacy' hedge, the neighbours are entitled to insist it is no more than 15ft high (but will check that one, it might only apply to the likes of leylandii). Of course if the trees concerned are not evergreen, they may not be an all-year-round screen; beech can be persuaded to keep the old leaves until the new ones start to appear, but only if trimmed as a hedge, not just allowed to grow on.
If the subsoil is clay then you need to be careful. The biggest problem isn't roots directly affecting foundations etc, but the way clay soil expands and contracts as the trees take up water. It can happen to a lesser extent on other soil types. If the house was built before 1975, it may not have deep enough foundations to withstand this effect.
Whatever trees are being considered, they WILL need annual check-ups and removal of any branches which have become dodgy (ie more likely to fall off).
Incidentally, if you want to get your neighbour to control his tree, best approach might be a solicitor's letter....

This link has a good summary of the rules

http://www.naturenet.net/trees/hedgerow/highhedges.html

[TonyF]

When we lived in the Uk we had a nightmare neighbour who insisted on letting their trees overhang their garden boundary on all sides. I mentioned it to them a couple of times and they didn't do anything about it so I did. I took a saw to everything of their tree that overhung our front and back gardens and to comply with the law, I gave all the cuttings back to them.

Their back garden had two huge leylandii at the very back which completely blocked the light from the folks at the back and their gardens. One old chap asked them nicely to have the trees topped a couple of times and was just told they couldn't afford it. So he had it done when they went on holiday and paid for it himself - bit of a novel approach but they were completely bummocked by it.

Here in France there are very strict rules about hedges, closeness to boundary lines, height of hedges, closeness of trees to hedges, houses, roadways etc etc and round here they are quite strictly enforced to make sure that there are no silly neighbour disputes about boundary lines and overhanging branches. And if they do overhang, you are completely legal if you cut them off, as you are in the UK, so long as you at least offer them back to the neighbour.

[valmarg]

When it comes to hedges, there's nowt so queer as folk. We planted a leylandii conifer hedge alongside our border. We were both working, and it got a 'bit out of hand', ie it grew to about 35'. We eventually decided to have it taken out and had a fence erected in its place.

We were told off by our next door neighbours for not asking their permission to remove 'OUR' hedge. Their garden must have been in shade for most of the year. We had destroyed their privacy. Daft old folk.

When it comes to trees, and the nearness to houses, what you have to realise/understand is that what you see above ground, is what there is underground. So the closer you plant a tree to your buildings the more likely it is to cause damage. The one tree you don't plant anywhere near your buildings is a weeping willow. It might look nice/attractive, but the roots will go through your foundations (and undermine your foundations) in search of water in a dry year.

valmarg

[valmarg]

I've dug out an old newspaper article about the distances trees should be planted from buildings.

Magnolia/Yew 16'. Laurel/Holly 20'. Spruce 23'/Pine 26'. Laburnum 29'. Apple/Pear or Birch 33'. Plum/Rowan and Cherry 36'. Hawthorn 39'. Walnut 46'. Beech 49'. Sycamore/Lime 56'. Maple/cypress 66'. Asj 69'. Plane and Hoprse Chestnut72'. Oak and Elm 98'. Poplar 115', and Willow 131' (aka nowhere near any buildings.

valmarg

[valmarg]

Mickeywills, your neighbour's 80' eucalyptus -are you sure after this winter that it is still in good nick. A chap over the road from us had a similar sized tree, and it looks 'done to a crisp' with the frost and snow we've had. It is an Australian native, and might not have appreciated the severe winter we've had.

valmarg

[Hilary B]

I've dug out an old newspaper article about the distances trees should be planted from buildings.

Magnolia/Yew 16'. Laurel/Holly 20'. Spruce 23'/Pine 26'. Laburnum 29'. Apple/Pear or Birch 33'. Plum/Rowan and Cherry 36'. Hawthorn 39'. Walnut 46'. Beech 49'. Sycamore/Lime 56'. Maple/cypress 66'. Asj 69'. Plane and Hoprse Chestnut72'. Oak and Elm 98'. Poplar 115', and Willow 131' (aka nowhere near any buildings.

valmarg

How old is that, (and what origin)? I've doubts about those figures.

look at this one http://www.trees.org.uk/faqs/Distanc...ding#question2

[jackyspratty]

Ok thaks all! Lots of opinions but not sure Im any clearer! Looks as though common sense should prevail!

[valmarg]

[QUOTE=Hilary B;828504]How old is that, (and what origin)? I've doubts about those figures.

Well it was an extremely reliable publication. There are recommended restrictions about how close to plant trees/shrubs to property. There are risks involved. Too close can cause problems.

valmarg

[Hilary B]

[QUOTE=valmarg;828920]

How old is that, (and what origin)? I've doubts about those figures.

Well it was an extremely reliable publication. There are recommended restrictions about how close to plant trees/shrubs to property. There are risks involved. Too close can cause problems.

valmarg

I do know a fair bit about this sort of thing; my husband is a Chartered Surveyor, he inspects houses for potential purchasers some hundreds per year, and I usually assist.
I have a great deal more confidence in the article I linked to than something out of a non-specialist publication. Even the most reliable of the general media are prone to publication of 'old wives tales', which may or may not be supported by the facts.
Most houses we see have some sort of tree nearby, and the great majority are much closer than those recommendations. The problems that we OCCASIONALLY see are the result of trees removing water from a clay subsoil. The few damaged drains are either broken by the changes in soil moisture content (again on clay) or for some other cause mechanically damaged and the trees (or other plants) have taken advantage of this when seeking water. We have seen drains blocked by the roots of a hedge, or ivy, but whatever species it may be they always seem to have got in through a place that was already damaged, or at least weakened.