We would like to add a couple of trees to our landscape. We wanted to plant a weeping higan cherry tree and a japanese maple in two different locations near our house. Is 3 feet from the house too close? What is minimum distance we should maintain from the house? Do these trees grow deep or shallow roots? How wide will the roots spread? thanks, Matt
Yes three feet is too close. Both are shallow rooted and the roots will spread a long way. You ought to plan on having the tips of the limbs no closer than 20 to 30 feet from the house. As in plant the tree 30 feet away if the spread is 20 feet(20/2+10).
3 feet is too close - you need to allow sufficient room for both trees to develop normal canopy spread without encountering any obstructions like the side or roof of your house. Neither tree is a huge spreader, canopy-wise so you CAN plant them close - just not that close. Cherries tend to have a lot of surface roots, as do J. maples, but neither have so invasive a root system as to be a concern with the house foundation - they will simply grow around obstacles or along the side. FYI, tree roots can spread a good distance. As a rule of thumb, figure 2-3 times the width of the mature tree canopy.
pam - gardengal
30' ...??? Yesterday while driving around town, I took notice of trees planted near peoples houses. I must have seen 50 trees in excess of 24" diameter, literally 4 to 6 feet from different houses. Somehow I think our little japanese maple and weeping cherry will be just fine within 10' of the house. thanks,
I have asked this question myself and wondered at some of the replies. The information may be accurate but they also mean that the average suburban yard (.15-.25 acre) would not have room for any trees.
Isn't 2 times the mature canopy for a dogwood is 40'-50' away! Maybe along the very back of yard right up against the fence. I would agree that 3' is too close, but no trees even small ones within 40' seems like too far away. Can this be correct?
Swyck
Stop and inquire at a few of these houses and ask them if they would plant the trees if they had to do it over! If I had to do it over after 25 years, I would never plant a large tree within 200 feet of my house or a small one within 30 feet for that matter. Frank
I agree that roots may extend well beyond the reach of branches, but I see no need to put a small tree like j. maple or cherry so far as 40'. I'd say most of these trees reach a mature spread of 10'-15', so maybe
6'-8' from house would be a minimum. You could probably get away with closer (I also agree it won't do any significant foundation damage) but you'd get a far less attractive tree in the end, since it would develop distorted form. Also remember that most j. maples need a certain amount of shade or they will be sunburned all the time and will never thrive (but you can find sun-tolerant varieties if needed).good luck, Keith Babberney ISA Certified Arborist #TX-0236 For more info about the International Society of Arboriculture, please visit
Listen to Frank. Tis much better to be too far than too close. Same goes for foundation plantings. I've a little Japanese maple 20 feet away from my house who has branches pruned due to hitting our home. This after 30 years. Please remember it is OK to make mistakes....also remember transplanting a 10 year tree/plant is real work.
Bill
I have to wonder at some of the replies too. It sounds like some of my tree-hating neighbors who consider trees on their property to be enemy number one in terms of leaves and potential damage. A 40 foot away from the house minimum for a Japanese maple or even weeping cherry is more than a little paranoid. We're not talking about sequoias, here. We're talking about foundation plantings of small, ornamental trees.
And the slightly distorted growth habit that may arise is part of the charm. The trees grow around the house and frame it, as a foundation planting is supposed to.
Japanese maple in particular is very well behaved, and very slow growing. Gee whiz, if it does become a problem in 40, 50, 60 years it can always be gotten rid of. Chances are it will be the new homeowner's problem by then.
~flick
One foot of distance for each inch of trunk diameter when fully grown is a fairly good thumb rule.
I have a 10 inch diameter maple that really suggest s 1.5 foot for each inch in diameter. This for upright types. I also have a japanese maple which is 10 inch's wide an 6 inch's tall that is about 10 years old. hmmm.
I was lucky to plant it where we did and was rewarded with many very mutated maples which we were quick to remove from the mother plant. Mom would kill them in time.
Have Fun
Bill
Into Moon babies at this time.
Sorry to mislead Trunk is 1/2 in diameter if lucky. Branch's are 10 inch's wide an 6 inch's tall after 10 years.
Bill
When we moved to Pennsylvania, I looked at the old stone farm houses that had been here for 200 years and many of them had Norway Spruce planted fairly close (10'). I planted some Norway Spruce fairly close to our stone farm house and haven't had any problems and they are twice as tall as the 2-story house now.
It depends upon the variety. Some trees like Norway Maple have huge surface roots. Some trees like our spruce have deep tap roots. When in doubt consult with an arborist.
I was always told that you shouldn't plant a tree closer to a building than the eventual height of the tree, so a tree that will grow to 60 ft.........60 ft away.
Keith, that was the info I was trying to impart - hope it came across in the same vein. While the root spread might be considerable, that should not necessarily be the overriding factor - canopy spread should be. And yes, I agree that both these trees tend towards the small side, so depending on the specific cultivars, somewhere in the 8-10' range should be about the right distance.
pam - gardengal
Definitely 3 ft is too close. And those who don't think so are welcome to come help me take down 5 nice, 20 ft columnar arborvitaes that the previous owner planted about 2.5 ft out from the house. They're nowhere near full grown, but I figure this is about the last season they've got before the moisture trapped near the siding starts to rot it.
I hate to ruin a good gardening argument with ugly data, but:
I think you may have been a little confused by my previous answer - it is the ROOTS that can spread out 2-3 times the spread of the canopy but this is not the controlling factor in the proper placement of a tree on a residential property. Trees should be positioned so that they are able to grow unimpeded by structures, both for their health and the safety of the structure. How far from a house they should be placed depends entirely on the tree species - there are trees and then there are TREES. I wouldn't recommend planting a large oak or red maple immediately adjacent to a house - they simply get too big - but there are scores of smaller trees more suited to smaller gardens and many of them can be planted relatively close, certainly well within the 40' restriction posted by others.
FWIW, I live on a 6000sf property and I have planted 19 trees on my property (not counting the 60' Doug fir that was already there) and have a number more either growing in containers or awaiting planting. All are considered small trees suitable for an urban garden and none will exceed 30 feet in height nor develop huge canopies. The closest (and one of the smallest) is 5 feet away from the corner of my house.
As a landscape designer, I recommend placement of trees on properties for a living. If you have specific concerns on what to trees to select and where to place them on your property, you might want to consult with a certified arborist or a design professional - they are going to be able to provide you with accurate info for your specifc situation. Some of the previous responses have been right off the wall!
pam - gardengal
Just pay attention to what a more mature tree size is. We have a short and wide flowering tree at the edge of the driveway. It spreads out wide(20'), but is only about 10-12' tall. Consequently trucks can't get into the driveway without ripping down big limbs. I duck (6' 3") when I walk under some. The owner sees planting that tiny tree as a bad move now. To take it down is a tough decision since it took decades to get to that size, maturity and character. Many nicely landscaped homes are not mature landscapes, often being only a handful of years in place. Just go to a corporate parks or shopping/walking strips that is 5-10 years old and you'll see those tiny trees they planted on islands and along the sidewalks are overgrown, covering street signs, bursting out of there grill and brick pottings. My city has a number of this tiny trees and street signs a few feet away have disappeared.
If you are looking for a tree that will be there when kids are full grown and bringing grandchildren around, you have to look at adult specimens, or simply accept that when the tree matures to too big a size you will simply rip it out.
DiGiTAL ViNYL (no email) Zone 6b/7, Westchester Co, NY,
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.