Someone without a powersaw
Its a problem either way, but at least if you cut it down you will only have to worry aboutThe tree is fine. So is the slab. Without looking at it in person I would say leave it be. It’s a super interesting addition to the home.
Your worried about what will happen to the slab and foundation if the tree starts lifting it, correct?
Have you considered what will happen if you remove the tree, and all the root mass below the slab decays, and the ground settles? Foundations crack not only by being lifted up, but also by settling down.
Leave the tree be.
That is because you are looking at the tree as a problem, rather than an asset.....Its a problem either way, but at least if you cut it down you will only have to worry about
the lesser of two evils, that being the slab sinking, which is a lot less likely than it being lifted
if the tree is left, and when its gone you will never loose a nights sleep wondering if it will blow down,
get hit with lightening or otherwise cause you grief. Personally I would never fall for a house with tree
growing too close to it, never mind in it, that just adds cost to the house in that you need to eventually deal with such.
Actually... to be more accurate...I tell people on a regular basis in my line of work: If you have any trees within striking distance to your house you have some level of risk.
If you remove all the trees around your house you have a real crappy property.
Probably pruned on a yearly basis, years ago I maintained high dollar properties and certain trees and plants were hand pruned with care . Sometimes I would spend days in a small tree to straighten out the growth patterns ( think big bonsai) .Correct, looks like it was cut multiple times, that adds up to the bill.
I will put some budget aside and cut it down later this year or early next year, and replace the stump by a table with a base made of the stump.
You do, but you have reduced the aesthetic appeal of you property, in my opinion.If you remove all the trees around your house you have ZERO risk of a tree falling on your house.
Um, did I say pour concrete in place of trees? No.You do, but you have reduced the aesthetic appeal of you property, in my opinion.
If you want concrete, move back to the city.
Trees are assets, not liabilities. Unfortunately, many people in the tree business have convinced people of the latter, because there income is directly related to only cutting trees down.
How large a tree is, does not directly correlate to liability.Um, did I say pour concrete in place of trees? No.
I agree, trees are a definite asset - as long as it's not a monster next to your house, then it's a liability.
I have a giant American Holly that should be taken down for that reason.
https://www.epa.gov/watersense/landscaping-tipshttps://extension.missouri.edu/publications/g6900
Agreed. And I still think any way you look at it, this tree will be a problem for someone.What I expressed in my first post still remains true. The OP is concerned about the roots possibly lifting.
There will definitely be settling after the tree is removed due to decay of the root system.
One is a possibility, the other is a guarantee.
Enter your email address to join: