# Ash trees and foundations



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Hi all,
We, barely, got planning permission but did so on the condition we plant *3 metre thick hedge* between our site and my brother's who will also build at the same time as ourselves. The county council have asked for trees native to the area such as *Hazel, Beech, Hawthorn, Holly* as well as *Ash*and many more...all being *"2 and half metres high at time of* *planting"* (Cost approx 4500 euro). I have been advised by local garden centres that the *Ash trees grow horizontally near the surface of the ground and may interfere with the foundations of the house*. We are annoyed having to plant such a density (3 metres thick) of unattractive trees or "weeds" as my future mother-in-law calls them! This is ridiculous as we are family, building on family land next door to our parents!!! We, actually, wanted a Beech hedge with an arch between each of the three houses for convenience! Can anyone confirm or otherwise the "Ash" theory? Thank you.


----------



## sydthebeat (28 Jul 2009)

Liza said:


> Hi all,
> We, barely, got planning permission but did so on the condition we plant *3 metre thick hedge* between our site and my brother's who will also build at the same time as ourselves. The county council have asked for trees native to the area such as *Hazel, Beech, Hawthorn, Holly* as well as *Ash*and many more...all being *"2 and half metres high at time of* *planting"* (Cost approx 4500 euro). I have been advised by local garden centres that the *Ash trees grow horizontally near the surface of the ground and may interfere with the foundations of the house*. We are annoyed having to plant such a density (3 metres thick) of unattractive trees or "weeds" as my future mother-in-law calls them! This is ridiculous as we are family, building on family land next door to our parents!!! We, actually, wanted a Beech hedge with an arch between each of the three houses for convenience! Can anyone confirm or otherwise the "Ash" theory? Thank you.



just plant tress that are indigenous to the area... you do not HAVE TO plant ash trees...

ash tress can grow to 30-40 ft high...

in my opinion you should stick to your thorns (white + haw), hazel, holly, beech.... and intersperse some feature tress such as ash, birch and maybe oak...


----------



## mathepac (28 Jul 2009)

A rule of thumb for the spread of root systems from trees is that the spread will at least equal the spread of the untrimmed canopy of a tree.

Studies in the UK (I am not aware of any local studies) have produced this table (specific to a particular part of England) - 

_"Their conclusion suggests that very different figures are appropriate as      safe planting distance - ... 

   Willow 18m
    Poplar 20m
    Oak 18m
    Elm 19m
    Horse Chestnut 15m
    Ash 10m
    Maple 9-12m (depending on species)
    Cyprus 2.5m
    Lime 11m
    Beech 9m
    Plane 10m
    Robinia 8.5m
    Birch 4m
    Cherry 3m
    Rowan 5m

which you will see allows considerably more scope for urban tree planting than the figures you give. Again, it must be stressed that this type of damage and the need for these distances ONLY applies to shrinkable clay soils. ..."_ 

Original Info source - http://www.gardenlaw.co.uk/trees.html

Your house insurers may have some information as well as may nurseries or suppliers of trees.


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Thank you all for the fantastic advice. We spoke with the planner this morning and, unfortunately, the only leeway he allowed us was for the Holly trees to be a little shorter as the garden centres have difficulty sourcing 2 and a half metre high Hollies. He* "will be inspecting height of trees, width of hedge and species of the trees*." He advised us that, in a few years time, when the trees are beginning to smother eachother, that we are to take some of them out!!! 
I, certainly would not want exotic species of trees but my grandmother's house which is an old landlord's house (on the other side of my brother's site) and there are beautiful Boxwood hedges, Beech hedges with arches, Horse Chestnut, orchard fruit trees and other beautiful trees which really give the feel of an era gone by. (Maybe I'm mistaken...maybe these are not native species?) As our house is an Edwardian style and very much in keeping with olde worlde, inside and out, I really hoped to be spending my money on trees which suit the house more amd my taste!


----------



## sydthebeat (28 Jul 2009)

Liza said:


> Thank you all for the fantastic advice. We spoke with the planner this morning and, unfortunately, the only leeway he allowed us was for the Holly trees to be a little shorter as the garden centres have difficulty sourcing 2 and a half metre high Hollies. He* "will be inspecting height of trees, width of hedge and species of the trees*." He advised us that, in a few years time, when the trees are beginning to smother eachother, that we are to take some of them out!!!
> I, certainly would not want exotic species of trees but my grandmother's house which is an old landlord's house (on the other side of my brother's site) and there are beautiful Boxwood hedges, Beech hedges with arches, Horse Chestnut, orchard fruit trees and other beautiful trees which really give the feel of an era gone by. (Maybe I'm mistaken...maybe these are not native species?) As our house is an Edwardian style and very much in keeping with olde worlde, inside and out, I really hoped to be spending my money on trees which suit the house more amd my taste!



liza.. .is this in northern ireland??

because ive NEVER heard of a planner inspecting a site subsequent to a decision in ireland....


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Also, thank you *Mactheknife1 *for the future forest website, I will def check that out. I would be delighted if it cost a lot less than this but these are the quotes we're getting form local garden centres. We have been told to plant 
*11 Beech, 12 Ash, 20 Silver Birch, 37 Hawthorn, Hazel, 16 Holly*
*(2 and half metres high, holly being only exception with some leeway re height)*

Does this sound excessive or within reason? When you build a house, it's generally for the first and last time in my area anyway and so I am totally naive to everything! :-/


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

No, it's just this side of the border. He has a reutation for being incredibly difficult!


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Also, there is a mound to be arranged between our two sides in which the trees are to be planted. Maybe I am imagining it all wrong but I can't envisage how this will add in any way to the aesthetics of our homes. Am I wrong? I would be delighted to hear that I am!


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Also, *Sydthebeat,* a man approx 8 miles away from my house had to, very recently, uproot the trees he had planted, discard of them and plant the exact ones asked for. In the past, the landscape planning seemed to be applied in theory only for the grant of permision. However, lately, they are inspecting, closely the landscaping and acting where necessary. All must be in order before commencement of building... Do you think in my area it's more strict than other areas of the country?


----------



## z109 (28 Jul 2009)

Liza said:


> Also, thank you Mactheknife1 for the future forest website, I will def check that out. I would be delighted if it cost a lot less than this but these are the quotes we're getting form local garden centres. We have been told to plant
> *11 Beech, 12 Ash, 20 Silver Birch, 37 Hawthorn, Hazel, 16 Holly*
> *(2 and half metres high, holly being only exception with some leeway re height)*
> 
> Does this sound excessive or within reason? When you build a house, it's generally for the first and last time in my area anyway and so I am totally naive to everything! :-/


Yes, that sounds excessive.

See here for an indicative list of what the prices of bare-root stock suitable for hedging should be:
http://www.cvni.org/treenursery/prices/price_list.pdf

For planting, you'll need a mini-digger, dig a trench all the way round, pop in the stock and fill in. Er, that's it. Hand week around them about twice a year.

Silver birch is totally unsuitable in a hedge.

Protecting from deer and hares is a bit of a divil, but maybe you don't have them?

The requirement for a particular length is also ridiculous as it's about a season's growth and to get a good thick hedge, the first season you want to clip the main stem back sharply to encourage branching. This is a typical planners requirement from someone who hasn't a clue what they are talking about. It is also not a requirement that is in the planning regulations (as they have written it).


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Thank you *Yoganmahew*. I thought it was excessive alright. The garden centres we consulted with expressed exactly the same opinion as yourself and I quote "He just hasn't a clue!" 
Frustrating to say the least when planners give *their "opinion"* on issues involving *our homes* and it suddenly becomes law...*Misplaced Authority* if you ask me :-/


----------



## sydthebeat (28 Jul 2009)

Liza,
in Ireland (rep) the onus to check compliance with planning conditions is on the Building control section of your local authority. Unless this planner is a little general with influence above and beyond his station, its the Building control officer that will have the final say as to whether what you do complies with planning or not.

Contact your local building control officer and put your issues to him, requesting an official clarification that what you want to do does not contravene the planning conditions (there is ALWAYS leeway)....

also, does that particular condition have a time span mentioned?? ie "prior to commencement" or "within 6 months of completion" or "within the first planting season",....


----------



## z109 (28 Jul 2009)

That's a good point syd, the planting season for bare root stock is November-March, I believe.

I had similar hedgerow conditions on my planning, with an additional one to have pebble-dashed pillars on the gate (I live in a field! With a driveway that is a lane off a lane!). 

I put in a stack of hedgerow (200 m of it). Nobody came to see it. Nobody stopped the local farmers chopping existing hedgerow to pieces (whether in or out of nesting season). I later found out that they could only tell me what to plant and how much if I'd taken existing hedgerow away (I hadn't). This was a few years ago, so I don't know if the rules have changed, but I question the basis on which that condition has been attached, if you are not taking away existing hedgerow. If it is under the "rural amenity" catch-all, my feeling has always been that you should largely fit in with the planting that is around you (whether native or not!), but I am not a planner!

In the last resort, talk to a local councillor about the policy and the interpretation of it. That is what they are there for.


----------



## Sherman (28 Jul 2009)

yoganmahew said:


> Silver birch is totally unsuitable in a hedge.


 
+1. I also second the recommendation above to talk to Future Forests.


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

sydthebeat said:


> Liza,
> in Ireland (rep) the onus to check compliance with planning conditions is on the Building control section of your local authority. Unless this planner is a little general with influence above and beyond his station, its the Building control officer that will have the final say as to whether what you do complies with planning or not.
> 
> Contact your local building control officer and put your issues to him, requesting an official clarification that what you want to do does not contravene the planning conditions (there is ALWAYS leeway)....
> ...


 
Yes my permission was granted on the condition that "All of the above landscapoing be implimented prior to commencement of any building works to the dwelling hereby grante


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

Sherman said:


> +1. I also second the recommendation above to talk to Future Forests.


 
For what reasons is Silver Birch unsuitable? The more I am made aware of the problems, maybe the better chance I have of eliminating or, at least, lessening the undesireable ones. Thanks.


----------



## z109 (28 Jul 2009)

Let's be a little bit clear here, the planner is talking about a privacy hedge along the site boundary not a replacement hedgerow for one that you have removed at the front of your site?

For a silver birch, or even an ash or mountain ash to grow into a tree like shape, it needs to be clear of the hedging around it. The other alternative is to 'hedge' the trees (this is what you do with beech, hornbeam, hawthorn, blackthorn, holly and the like). But, as far as I know, silver birch and mountain ash don't 'hedge', you can't trim and shape them. They won't expand into a hedge. You can do that with ash, but it is a little tricky and ash grows like stink so it is hard to manage (you end up with lots of stalks going up from the top of the hedge - it'll grow six feet in a season.

Basically, birch is a woodland tree.


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

yoganmahew said:


> Let's be a little bit clear here, the planner is talking about a privacy hedge along the site boundary not a replacement hedgerow for one that you have removed at the front of your site?
> 
> For a silver birch, or even an ash or mountain ash to grow into a tree like shape, it needs to be clear of the hedging around it. The other alternative is to 'hedge' the trees (this is what you do with beech, hornbeam, hawthorn, blackthorn, holly and the like). But, as far as I know, silver birch and mountain ash don't 'hedge', you can't trim and shape them. They won't expand into a hedge. You can do that with ash, but it is a little tricky and ash grows like stink so it is hard to manage (you end up with lots of stalks going up from the top of the hedge - it'll grow six feet in a season.
> 
> Basically, birch is a woodland tree.


 

Yes it's a privacy hedge and not replacement of a previously existing hedge. We have hedges at the front and back of the site and I, genuinely don't mind keeping these, in fact thge one at the back is really lovely, I would hate to take it away. I've grown up all my life in this area and do appreciate the native tree issue. However creating a new hedge with the listed species in such vast amounts is incredibly frustrating as nowhere in the area do they exist in such density. I'm getting more frustrated the more I think about it.

I have been given some great advice here today and will consult my better half before doing anything but it has got me thinking. Really appreciate it


----------



## MacTheKnife1 (28 Jul 2009)

I am glad the planner wants a good hedge planted. No problem with that. I applaud it.

But the size of the trees makes them expensive. Can you talk to the guy, offer to plant twice the number of trees he suggests - just smaller ones. Explain the cost issue and plead with him/her?

Now if a person were to wander into a local coillte plantation one would find a nice forest. These trees have been planted by coillte and are growing well. BUT beneath the canopy one will find trees that are growing wild. These trees will be destroyed by coillte when harvesting their taller commercial crop. Not suggesting someone could take a few of these but one never knows... You will often see ash trees that are 10 feet tall growing beneath the canopy.

I planted a nice hedge - I mixed mountain ash, birch, hawthorn, beech, rosa rugosa, hazel, wild pear, wild cherry, dog rose. I absolutely LOVE it, cannot reccommend it highly enough. When trimming the hedge you avoid trimming the odd birch tree as other posters have pointed out.

In years to come these trees will serve as the base of tree houses for your kids/grand kids.


----------



## Liza (28 Jul 2009)

MacTheKnife1 said:


> I am glad the planner wants a good hedge planted. No problem with that. I applaud it.
> 
> But the size of the trees makes them expensive. Can you talk to the guy, offer to plant twice the number of trees he suggests - just smaller ones. Explain the cost issue and plead with him/her?
> 
> ...


 

The planner is very specific as to what he wants and will be out to inspect as he told us this morning. No, the height issue is non-negotiable bar the Holly... The total number of trees is 129 so more trees may not be, physically, possible! 

We have taken on board all the advice offered here today and will draw up a proposed variation of our current landscape plan with increased hedging ie. Hawthorn between a smaller number of trees which is more like the hedgerows of the environs and see how we go. We will still have lots of trees but at least we can keep the hawthorn down a tad. My brother will lose out on lioght to his house, I feel, if we have the "forest" the planner is suggesting.

Thanks everyone.


----------



## callaghanj (28 Jul 2009)

Does anyone have a photos of hedges they've planted that they could share with us......looking to plant bare root hedge this year and any guidance would be much appreciated.


----------



## MacTheKnife1 (29 Jul 2009)

Teagasc have some great information on hedge planting (including some poorly taken photos of hedges):

[broken link removed]

From a biodiversity point of view - put a nice mix in there of native trees/shrubs. Usually you plant a hedge in a double layer - a bit like the way a cavity wall actually is made up of two walls. Well a hedge is usually made up of two lines of trees. Plant the nice fruit bearing ones on the inner line - so you can pick the fruit/nuts and not the neighbours ;-)

I plant for food (fruit and nuts: hazel, blackcurrant, wild pear, crab apple), for aroma (rosa rugosa, honeysuckle), protection against animals breaking in (thorny bushes like hawthorn and blackthorn), autumn colour (mountain ash with its red berries, field maple for golden leaves). I mix them all up but plant them tight together in a double lined zig zag fashion.


----------



## MacTheKnife1 (29 Jul 2009)

Another useful teagasc document on choosing hedgerow species is:

[broken link removed]

Its good but it appears to show pictures of rhododendrons in there - please dont plant them as they take over whole forests and can never be eradicated.


----------



## Sherman (29 Jul 2009)

As mentioned, silver birch is unsuitable as hedging as it doesn't respond to trimming into shapes. Birch is notorious for weeping badly when cut (i.e. sap continues to seep out of wounds long after the tree is cut which is unsightly at best and allows all sorts of disease and fungal infection to attack the plant at worst). It doesn't have the same branching characteristics as more suitable hedging specimens such as beech, hawthorn, hornbeam, holly etc.

The arguments I would make to the planner are as follow:

(a) mature plants are significantly more likely to die off when planted in hedging, resulting in gaps and holes which will never look right;

(b) the younger the hedging plants are when planted, the better the hedge they make as they establish quicker and 'knit together' much better. This will (with a little patience initially) lead to a far more satisfactory hedge from a screening point of view. Young hedges usually catch up with, and outpace, older hedges in a couple of years. The dense hedge you'll get from planting young plants will also be far better for wildlife than a patchy, weak hedge you'll get if you plant mature hedging;

(c) mature plants require expensive staking when planted as hedging, something 1-2 year old hedging plants do not. Mature plants also require vigilant, extensive watering for at least 12 months after planting, which again young plants (planted bare-root during winter) do not. Surely in this era when planners are trying to encourage environmentally responsible development wasting vast amounts of water on mature hedging for at least 12 months goes against all the planning guidelines?; and

(d) there's a recession on! Mature hedging is bloody expensive compared to younger plants - I planted a 3ft beech hedge where each plant cost I think €1.50 - the hedge has rocketed away and is topping 5ft at this stage, barely 18 months after planting.

I'm sure others can add more/better points so you can make an argument to the planner or, if necessary, appeal.


----------



## Liza (29 Jul 2009)

Sherman said:


> As mentioned, silver birch is unsuitable as hedging as it doesn't respond to trimming into shapes. Birch is notorious for weeping badly when cut (i.e. sap continues to seep out of wounds long after the tree is cut which is unsightly at best and allows all sorts of disease and fungal infection to attack the plant at worst). It doesn't have the same branching characteristics as more suitable hedging specimens such as beech, hawthorn, hornbeam, holly etc.
> 
> The arguments I would make to the planner are as follow:
> 
> ...


 
You are dead right in everything you say here and, unlike the planner, talking complete, down to earth, common sense! Did I forget to mention that the conditions state "Any plant which fails in the first planting season to be replaced, Landscaping to be permenantly retained as part of this development."

It looks like spend momey on trees or build a house. It won't be easy!


----------

