NOT to want to chop down my leylandii?

[morningpaper]

OK OK I know it is a scourge etc.

I have a long garden and two old leylandii (60 footish) at the very back. They used to block the view of the council scrap yard which backed onto us.

Two years ago they erected four squillion houses on the old scrap yard. Including 4 along the back of our garden - with foundations TEN FEET from the leylandii.

Of course, the gardens there are only 10 feet long and nothing will grow. The leylandii branches touch the back of the houses.

One of the residents has now asked me to remove my leylandii.

What is the right thing to do?

I understand that the leylandii are the "easy" solution, but they won't add anything to the value of your property plus they annoy the neighbours...

Think that landscaping your garden is your best bet - I know it's more work, but you can definitely recoup money when you sell that way...

Who needs carpets?

I don't have carpets or curtains - horrible things

I have lovely trees in front of my windows though (merci ville de Paris ).

I'd go with chopping some off the top - but this will be an ongoing process. If they are leylandii they're going to hit 75'+ and reputed to grow at 4' a year.

It seems unfair that you could be landed with a cost for trimming the trees while the developer's made his money and gone.

Why should you do anything? What was mentioned in planning permission when the flats were built? Am assuming you're in London... this kind of crazy in-filling of every tiny area is being done without any thought for light/water table/quality of life to those who will live in what is built.

We have a large estate at the bottom of our garden. A few years ago the council redid the boundary fence which meant they cut down all the ivy and climbing things which had provided a non-obtrusive screen. It was horrible. We barely used the garden until we put up, at our expence, a trellis and only now, four years on, does it feel private again.

Obviously it is an issue of privelege: big private garden you V lots of poorer folk with council accommodation. But if you cut down the hedge, you will screw your property price as being "overlooked" is a key factor for buyers.

Is anyone official trying to get you to cut it down? And what is the law on this?

sadly am in somerset

I'd go for chopping to 2nd floor level - even if this won't allow 'sun' into their garden it should make them lighter from 'sky light' - but I would also start contemplating replacement options. I know that a 2m fence on the boundary won't help. But what about some 'features' sligthly further back into the garden that could be taller and could have plants grown up, and how about planting some trees in front of the lelandii that would be able to start growing now and get to a reasonable height so that if you ever do have to take the trees out you will already having some trees established that will quickly take their place in the summer particularly. I have a willow that I brought to our garden five years ago as a branch when we moved that was stuck into the ground - I have given it its second serious pollarding at about 6' and it forms a dense green tree in the summer, with beautifully coloured twigs in the winter. I also have a silver birch growing right next to my neighbour's leylandii in the front.

I wouldn't worry about the overhang into your neighbours' gardens too much - if they are concerned, they can deal with it! I had to prune a neighbour's leylandii hedge in my previous garden (which was on joint boundary between attached semis) - I managed to grow a montana clematis up my side which significantly improved the appearance!

The right thing to do is remove them. Your 60ft trees are actually touching the back of your neighbours houses, and will continue to grow. Leylandii are hated because they shut out the light, look ugly and grow so unbelievably fast. You could grow something attractive in their place.

But, it is a moral dilemma. It is a tradeoff between your privacy and your neigbours having use of their gardens and natural light.

MP - I have huge sympathies with you, and would feel the same as you do about my house and garden but we can't control (beyond planning law) what happens beyond our boundaries, and there was always a chance the yard would be developed. I have the same thoughts about a row of lock-up garages beyond our wall.

As I understand it, the residents of the houses beyond your garden would be well within their rights to chop off every branch that overhangs their property, and if they do do that the trees may well die anyway.

Put up a fence with a trellis, some nice climbers, let your kids run naked in the garden - unless your neighbours spend all day in their upstairs rooms deliberately peeking out they won't see much, and presumably by the time your kids reach puberty, they won't want to run wild and free and naked so all will be well.

Or put a paddling pool your side of a beach windbreak, close to your house and the privacy will be increased.

The moral thing to do is free them from your leylandii.

If your neighbours take a less than moral stance, they migt take guerrilla action and start poisoning the roots ...so perhaps friendly respect on both sides will pay off best in the long run.

I think that had Robert frost written the 'good fences make good neighbours' poem after the advent of leylandii he might have added another verse about fences of the other extreme to the flimsy and permeable.

AND leylandii are ecologically the equivalent of a Fruit Shoot.

lol @ fruit shoot

I know it's true

But removing them will mean re-mortgaging and there will be no chance of replacing them or landscaping due to budget restraints

I think removal will cost several thousand - they are 4foot wide at the bottom and there is no road access

So I am still in favour of the reducing-the-height-by-half

I used to rent a house next door to one with Leylandii,and my grass wouldnt grow or shrubs,I asked for the landlord of the house next door if he would have them Lopped as they were taller than the house. He ignored my requests as a neighbour,then I moved into the house next door,and went to "work" on him!!

He eventually agreed to have them chopped down,as he could see on a visit that no grass would grow in either garden,and my new garden looked like a building site,or overgrown forest!

The difference was amazing,I had Sun in the garden,instead of a black hole,I was able to have turf laid,and plant shrubs,I totally transformed the garden,and the neighbours were grateful too.

I realise Privacy is a big issue,but if the trees were cut to 6ft,you'd be unaware of being overlooked,whilst in the garden,and would only notice there was any views from neighbours windows,whilst looking out from an upstairs window.

MP - do it in stages! Remove some now and start building alternative options whether growing new or putting other structures in. Agree, total removal at the moment a bit drastic...

But if your neighbours have approached you to see if you'll do something, why not ask them to help out with the cost? There are 4 neighbours, so a relatively modest contribution from them might help you out quite considerably.

I think they have to be ten feet or less if within ten feet of someone's house.....worth a call to CAB.

my first response to them is TOUGH! the trees were there first...

but...my slightly more reasonable response is what you are thinking, reduce their height a bit and see if that makes them happy.

Of course, they are allowed to trim their side up to the fence line - maybe they don't realise this?

think you said it was social housing - does this meant they were 'placed' there? so maybe they didn't choose to live there? then i feel sorry for them cos yes leylandii in close proximity are horrible (they do a great job in the right place tho).

you have to be careful about chopping them straight down you know becayse they might (prob would at that size) cause the houses that are close to them to subside!

It has already been pointed out that cutting back sixty foot Leylandii to the fence line would be a specialist job. You would need some kind of scaffolding to use a chainsaw at that height.

Using clippers you would be reduced to making some kind of dark cave in your garden.

cant they contribute to cutting them down?

cant you be ever so nice and say I cant afford it but if you want to pay thats fine?

I think you're right to refuse- FGS- why were they allowed to build houses so close to existing trees?
The trees were there when the people moved in- if they didn't like it, why did they take the house?

Privacy is very important- the noise alone would make your life hell!

hmm upwind you are right. i'm still thinking of these neighbours as poor souls who have been given this house with no say - MP tell me if i'm wrong won't you? - and as such they won't have the money to pay for scaffolding & men, etc.
but...MP shouldn't have to worry about that either should she?
the builders should have trimmed their side before selling the houses???

i suppose, ideal world, MP pays to trim both sides and lower the height but given the no money situ, best just to go with lowering them for the £500 quoted.

i would want to maintain my privacy - it being part of the reason for buying the house originally - at (nearly) all costs!

When they removed the ones in the garden of the house I rented,I didnt know the cost,but they said there was no need to "remove" them,but cut them down to stumps,and they would die anyway.I'm sure it didn't cost thousands as the Landlord wouldn't have considered it.

Some people I know,chatted to all the neighbours and explained that they wanted to do something about their fences of their large garden,which were falling down and rotten,and they backed onto at least 3 gardens,but they couldn't afford to,so they all clubbed together,to pay,as although it wasn't their responsibility,they would all benefit.I wonder if that idea could be used here.....?

how about MP pays the £500 to lower the height;
the tree-fellers would prob have to go round the other side anyway (?) and then those people could be given the option of paying for the fellers/surgeons to further trim their side?

that way surely most people would be happy - if they don't want to/can't pay for further work at least they have lower leylandii.

Did they make any noises with regard to sharing the cost, MP?

They said something along the lines of 'we'll help pay - it will only be a few quid I expect'

and one of them said 'I've got a mate who could do it'

I smiled weakly

The woman was called Charlemaine and had a scary dog

I'd leave the trees, and make sure they were well fed. If they are tennants, then be really careful. If you did have them cut back (at their request) and it went on to cause subsidence, the landlord/council could try to blame you for the damage.

they can cut anything off on their side of the property line - ikf they do that the trees will be lopsided