Fastest growing privacy trees.

Eric Cartman

Im looking at buying a site, Ideally I would like to surround the entire thing (0.75 acres) with trees that create a uniform wall that can't be seen through about 3-4 meters high. Im factoring this into costings. The perimeter works out at about 700~ft , theres 12 ft taken out for 2 entrances but id like to plant the entire rest of the site.

I was looking at leylandii but they're not the most attractive. Looking for something that grows very close to the ground and rather quickly , ideally id have reached my 3-4 meters in less than 5 years.

Maintenance im not too concerned about, the biggest thing is really uniform coverage that makes visibility impossible and lessens noise transmission.

Track9

Fastest growing privacy trees
Agree Llayandi need to avoid. I had them & they are high maintenance & go woody near the base as they age,
I tried Laurel as a Privacy & Child barrier between neighbour & myself.
Delighted with them, they stay green all year round, grow quickly & grow densely at lower levels.
Aloos he plants are easy to control, cut & trim.

Donegalforever

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im looking at buying a site, Ideally I would like to surround the entire thing (0.75 acres) with trees that create a uniform wall that can't be seen through about 3-4 meters high. Im factoring this into costings. The perimeter works out at about 700~ft , theres 12 ft taken out for 2 entrances but id like to plant the entire rest of the site.

I was looking at leylandii but they're not the most attractive. Looking for something that grows very close to the ground and rather quickly , ideally id have reached my 3-4 meters in less than 5 years.

Maintenance im not too concerned about, the biggest thing is really uniform coverage that makes visibility impossible and lessens noise transmission.

My advice would be don't set Leylandi anywhere near your proposed house.
They are most likely to get out of hand as they grow 4 ft per year. There could be problems with the roots interfering with the foundations of your house and with any drains.

I set Leylandi some years ago around my house for shelter and it is a decision I regret.
I cannot get anyone to cut the tops of them. It is apparantly too much like work for those specialising in trimming hedges.

You might like to consider Box as a hedge, although it also grows fast but should not be as difficult to maintain as Leylandi.

Escallonia Hedging might also be worth looking at.

Oldtree

I used alder at the front side of the house here. Good summer privacy and lets light through in winter. Fast growing when settles in. I face them up every year and top to 10 foot every couple of years. Recovered v well from pruning. Attractive green leaf and yellow catkins in spring. Can mix grey alder and Italian alder. Can take water around it roots for months if necessary. And I don't fertilise in any way.

Start with 60-90's (60-90 cm plants) and prune back a bit.

Only issue is aphid sap and cars

I mixed the alder with ash, birch and hawthorn and a few more out the back. With a beech hedge to the front.

The noise is a bit more difficult. Maby staggered planting may help.

NancyG

I think you need to decide if you want a hedge or a line of trees or a mixture of both. You also need to get something that frost tolerant, esp if you're in the midlands (so that means the other usual suspects like grisellinia and escallonia are out). Yes, laurel is a evergreen, quick growing hedge that's frost tolerant (you can get variegated versions also). However, it's not native and not particularity attractive in my opinion.

I know you want quick growing but ultimately what you really need is longevity, easily maintenance and attractiveness - the last is particularly important if you plan on living in the house for any length of time. So, I would always recommend something native and personally I'd go for a mixture as it's just more interesting. If you're fixed on just one species - why not holly? It's got everything going for it...rich, dark evergreen leaves, frost and drought tolerant, intruder and livestock deterrent, native so it looks right in any setting and you can cut it back as hard as you want at any stage. Hawthorn is also great and very traditional.

Alternatively, go for a mixed native hedge, you should be able to pick up a range of whips fairly cheaply if you go wherever your local farmers go to buy planting for the GLAS scheme.

Good luck with it all - but do bare in mind the long term rather than short term gains.

rn

+1 on a mix of native species into a hedge.

Laurels are a pet hate of mine. A toxic plant that dominates where it grows and it's leaves last forever when they fall off from time to time. If it does get out of hand, it's a huge job to bring it back into a nice size. Neighbours laurel hedge has gone to approx 5m high x 4m deep in a small town garden. It's easily almost half his garden. I hate the sight of it.

emmetdoc1991

Hello

As a horticulturalist,

would def recommend that you for laurel, The laurel is fast growing and will reflect light back into the garden, the problem with leylandii is that its not so fast growing and can end up dying in the middle as its density does not allow the light to get in to the middle to keep it nice and fast growing

emmetdoc1991

Just to give you bit of advice, Do not ( If you can) Go for bareroot plants.

People often say that they are much cheaper than any potted plants, that simply not true,there are many good growers that can sell you potted laurel ( 2 litre) at about 1.5 Ft to 2 foot in height that will sell you for 1.50 Euro...EVEN SOME BARE ROOT ARE DEERER THAN THAT... PLUS THEY ARE MUCH BUSHIER AND GOOD ROOT THAT HASN'T BEEN DISTURBED.

Oldtree

emmetdoc1991 wrote: »

Just to give you bit of advice, Do not ( If you can) Go for bareroot plants.

People often say that they are much cheaper than any potted plants, that simply not true,there are many good growers that can sell you potted laurel ( 2 litre) at about 1.5 Ft to 2 foot in height that will sell you for 1.50 Euro...EVEN SOME BARE ROOT ARE DEERER THAN THAT... PLUS THEY ARE MUCH BUSHIER AND GOOD ROOT THAT HASN'T BEEN DISTURBED.

Stay well away from potted plants, if you can.

With bareroot you can see the roots and judge the health of the plant. Potted you have no real idea.

Some nursery's just pot up this winter seasons bare root and sell on as potted at a higher price.

If you are buying potted now, then you are possibly buying last seasons leftovers.

It's far too late now really as everything is budding and the plants will not have the best apart, and ideally you would have wanted the plants in the ground a month ago.

Some nursery's may have refrigerated stock, but I am not in favor of planting that now and would wait till next year to plant.

emmetdoc1991

THIS IS SILLY, SIMPLY REMOVE THE POT FROM AROUND THE PLANT AND YOU WILL SEE THE FORMED ROOT WHICH WILL HAVE MOULDED IN THE POT!!

PLUS,

ASK ANYONE THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT PLANTS, THE POTTED IS ALWAYS SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER THAN THE BR

IF WHAT YOUR SAYING WAS CORRECT WHY WOULD ALL THE MAJOR RETAILERS SELL POTTED MORE EXPENSIVE THAN BR

SILLY STUFF!!

Odelay

emmetdoc1991 wrote: »

THIS IS SILLY, SIMPLY REMOVE THE POT FROM AROUND THE PLANT AND YOU WILL SEE THE FORMED ROOT WHICH WILL HAVE MOULDED IN THE POT!!

PLUS,

ASK ANYONE THAT KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT PLANTS, THE POTTED IS ALWAYS SUBSTANTIALLY BETTER THAN THE BR

IF WHAT YOUR SAYING WAS CORRECT WHY WOULD ALL THE MAJOR RETAILERS SELL POTTED MORE EXPENSIVE THAN BR

SILLY STUFF!!

I'm not sure why you're shouting? Anyhow the reason major retailers charge more for potted may well be to public perception and the public will pay more for a plant in a pot??
Have a look around any recent plantations, you won't see any pots scattered about, but there will be plenty of sacks.

emmetdoc1991

I apologies if you feel im shouting!!

And i dont mean to be rude, but that is not true,the reason the potted are more expensive generally is that they are better quality, how could a potted plant be inferior to a plant that is ripped from the ground... as i said i was a horticulturalist and ran a garden centre for 10 of those....

Public perception? i think that actually works the other way.. people feel they are getting a bargain on bareroot..plus it would be unlikely one would leave pots scattered around...lol

How could an undistributed root that has had its slow release fert applied and continues to get the benefit from be inferior to one torn from the ground....

anyone worth their salt would tell you this!!

Sorry

greysides

Now folks, just to lay somethings out for you. Typing in capitals is considered 'shouting' on the internet, hence the comment.

Opinions will vary, naturally, but Oldtree is an experienced professional in a horticultural area too so his comments, while an opinion, can't just be discounted. You may just agree to disagree.

Oldtree

emmetdoc1991 wrote: »

THIS IS SILLY, SIMPLY REMOVE THE POT FROM AROUND THE PLANT AND YOU WILL SEE THE FORMED ROOT WHICH WILL HAVE MOULDED IN THE POT!!

That is the point emmet, what you are describing as a moulded root system, I would describe as a potbound plant, not at all ideal.

And yes I would check the root in a potted plant, if I was to buy one and if it was in any way potbound I would reject it.

Now leylandii can easily grow a meter in each direction a year once they settle in and quickly become the monsters that nuisance laws have been passed in the UK about. Planting them is asking for trouble unless you intend to maintain them on a twice annual basis as a hedge that is easy to trim. Or for some strange reason that you actually like them .

The successful plantings of bareroot trees around my own house and having watched them carefully over the years, tell me a lot about what I need to know on a practical level about bareroot plantings on an intimate level.

emmetdoc1991

Very well gentlemen!!

As they say everyone to their own!! However there is no doubt ( In my opinion) that potted quality plants are vastly superior, I have run a garden centre for years, ( no one has to agree with those views)

Thanks lads

I apologies for shouting guys,much apologies, didn't realise

Guys, thanks anyway for pointing out that capitals is shouting. Sorry

gozunda

emmetdoc1991 wrote: »

Very well gentlemen!!

As they say everyone to their own!! However there is no doubt ( In my opinion) that potted quality plants are vastly superior, I have run a garden centre for years, ( no one has to agree with those views)

Thanks lads

I apologies for shouting guys,much apologies, didn't realise

Guys, thanks anyway for pointing out that capitals is shouting. Sorry

Yeah capital's are shouty

As a qualified horticultarist- I will agree with you that a good potted plant (which is not rootbound) will establish more quickly than barefoot. The main advantage is that they can be planted year round. However they can be an expensive option if you need a lot of them or are buying other than young plants.

Bare root plants are a good option where someone requires large amounts of young plants - this can work out as a cheap option. But are slower to establish in general and only planted outside the growing season.

As an aside I personally dislike it when any one opinion is held up above others. No one persons should be imo. A similar issue nearly led to the death of the f&f forum a few years back.

I do not wish to be devisive and with all due respect greysides - afaik and correct me if I am wrong but OT is an arboriculturist. There are many posters on boards who are also experienced professionals. We all have our opinions and yes we may disagree - that is how it is.

As to the OP

If you are looking for privacy screening of a good height and easy to establish I would suggest something like Privet. As a hedge it is not evergreen but will hold its leaves well into winter and the dense network of small branches make it a good hedge and a windbreak. It requires annual cutting but is easy to manage and damn hardy to boot.

I have 70 foot of Privet hedge which I established from cuttings which looks really well after 20 years and survived the bad weather of 2009-2010 with a bother. But not suitable if directly bordering agricultural fields. Reason. Plants poisonous to livestock.

You can buy young plants in most suppliers and as spring is here(?) You may not be able to get bare root plants in time. The advantage of Potted plants is that they can be planted at any time.

If your house borders agricultural fields DO NOT (shouty bit for emphasis only ) plant Laural - it is also poisonous to livestock.

Best of luck with it.

Ubbquittious

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Im looking at buying a site, Ideally I would like to surround the entire thing (0.75 acres) with trees that create a uniform wall that can't be seen through about 3-4 meters high. Im factoring this into costings. The perimeter works out at about 700~ft , theres 12 ft taken out for 2 entrances but id like to plant the entire rest of the site.

I was looking at leylandii but they're not the most attractive. Looking for something that grows very close to the ground and rather quickly , ideally id have reached my 3-4 meters in less than 5 years.

Maintenance im not too concerned about, the biggest thing is really uniform coverage that makes visibility impossible and lessens noise transmission.

Christmas trees.

Once they get to the right size you can sell them. Have 2-3 layers so you never run out

gozunda

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Christmas trees.

Once they get to the right size you can sell them. Have 2-3 layers so you never run out

Good idea - hadn't thought of that. And the nice thing is you don't need a felling licence either as Christmas trees are exempt afaik.

Oldtree

gozunda wrote: »

Good idea - hadn't thought of that. And the nice thing is you don't need a felling licence either as Christmas trees are exempt afaik.

Just to clarify for you so you wont need to use afaik in future

Also it is worth stating that, in the opinion of the Minister, trees planted and managed solely for its foliage or for decorative purposes, such as Christmas trees, are exempted from the requirement to apply for a felling licence.

The minister is referring above to a plantation, as against a private garden, but I guess if the intent is there to manage the trees in a garden to sell them in the end, an argument could be made that the christmas trees in the garden fall within the exempted tree criteria. The trees would be exempt anyway if the trees are less than 30 metres from a building or in an an urban area. But the problem here is that the op would then lose his 'uniform wall'.

In private gardens a felling licence would not be necessary if the tree is within 30 metres of a building or a tree in an urban area, see the link to exempted trees from the DoAFM for a complete list of exempted trees.

http://www.agriculture.gov.ie/media/migration/forestry/treefelling/ExemptedTreeInformationNote271017.pdf

greysides

Okay folks, some pollarding has been done to remove off-topic posts. Hopefully it hasn't left the remainder too disjointed.

Should we have a series of similar posts here again then some radical coppicing will have to be done.