Would you prefer developers kept large mature trees around the houses? (lawn, landscaping)

[GraniteStater]

The more trees the better! I would never buy a house that did not have mature trees around. A lot of the newer neighborhoods tend to plant small ornamental trees that offer little shade. In the Great Plains you need as much shade as possible in the brutal summer months. However, it is a good idea to trim branches away from the house as well.

[riveree]

Our builder left the lots wooded until the lot was purchased. Then, I was allowed to walk the lot and mark any trees I wanted to save. They could not save all of them, but they saved what worked.

I have a neighbor that was mad that the builder saved one tree for his backyard - he didn't want any! And, like us, he bought on a conservation lot that backs up to woods. When it came time to fence the yard, he puts a big wooden privacy fence up to block his view of the woods he paid extra to live on......? I guess he really doesn't like trees .

But to clear a lot of all the mature hardwoods? So wasteful.

Shade was touched on, but I think it goes even deeper to protection from solar radiation - as time goes on, people are going to wish they had mature trees protecting them.

After Hurricane Katrina, in some places, the only thing standing were the Live Oak trees.....comments were made that some of those trees saved those homes (as Cil pointed out, trees can be windbreaks). Living in Florida, I plan to always have a good Live Oak or 2 protecting my house .

Another thing trees help with is sound reduction.......they just do so much!

[Moth]

Originally Posted by Twinkle Toes

I hate all these new developments where all you see are rooftops and NO trees. It just looks so barren and dry. I'm all for having a nice, new house, but I love mature trees not only for environmental reasons but because they add character and a "homey" feel.

Agreed. And others have pointed out the importance of trees.

I will add one thing. I had to walk away from a fantastic house in a 50s modern burb where the designer had intentionally kept the trees. Some are now quite large and one, located in the next lot, was leaning over and would easily crush the house were it to fall. I decided that trying to cajole the neighbor into spending thousands to address this was not worth it.

So yes, keep the mature trees, but tend to them as well.

[Darlynn0217]

I say RESPONSIBLE Development !! Do not cut down ANY trees that do not absolutely have to go! Remember....It's not nice to fool (with) Mother Nature!http://bestsmileys.com/weather/3.gif (broken link)

[Padgett2]

If you live in the Deep South, you treasure trees. A large tree is said to reduce the temperature under it's branches by 10 degrees in the summer. Have several shading your roof and your a/c bill is reduced a good bit.

Those lovely lawns take a good bit of water. Water that is running short in a lot of places. There's nothing sadder that a wide expanse of lawn that has dried up because of drought and heat.

[martinez4]

We actually had the builder of our home on 1/3 acre lot move the house 5 ft to the left to save a beautiful Live Oak. We have about 30 trees that the builder built around....what a blessing those trees are. The shade, the squirrels, birds, ....we love everything about them, even the upkeep

[nativeDallasite]

Originally Posted by goodtype

A relative of mine did not buy a new house because he said there were to many large mature trees in the yard. He said he preferred the developments where all the trees were removed so he could chose what to do with the open areas. He wanted to keep most of the lot in grass and plant a few small trees of his choice. He did not like a home where much of his lot would be in shade due to large trees or have to worry about raking leaves every fall.

How about you, do you prefer a lot with alot of trees or mostly grass? Should the housing developers cut down most of the trees or try to save as many as possible?

I would prefer that they keep the trees but if they're building a new development on many acres, they seldom do.

[SouthernBelle3]

Depends on what kind of mature trees and where you live. I had a house built in Florida over an old citrus grove. Thankfully, the developer did take out all the ugly trees. Yeah our development looked bare for a few years, but after 10 years, the development looks so good and we all got to plant the trees we wanted. Now our ten year old houses have young live oak trees already 30 ft tall or so, and young enough to withstand tropical storms and hurricanes. Last thing I want on my roof is one of those mature trees planted to close to my house. I made sure the oaks went on the back of my property. Trees are so renewable, and I love trees, but when buying a new house, planting your own trees is so cool, watching them grow with your family.

[bellafinzi]

I agree, keep some of them mature trees.

Though I've always felt sorry for homeowners who have so many trees in their yard that its impossible to lay out in the sun in your backyard and get a tan.

[notjustamom]

I agree too, keep some mature trees. I don't like the barren look of a house without trees. The homes in my Connecticut neighborhood were all built in the 60's, with many, many beautiful mature trees. Our town is a rural, wooded area. Our wonderful neighbors across the street moved last winter, and the new self-admitted tree haters moved in. So far they have spent several thousand dollars removing every last tree from the two acre property, and plan to remove the woods in their backyard, too. They are on the corner, and the house has become a huge eyesore, it is so ugly. Yet they love it, they feel it makes their house look "new". They have no idea that most of their neighbors are appalled. Although, maybe they do, I know one said she asked them if they knew trees provided oxygen. They didn't reply.