orioncyg

Hi all. I could really use some second (and third, and fourth!) opinions on this situation. I bought a century home in southeast Michigan earlier this year, and the property has many large and tall trees. One of them seems particularly concerning—it’s a double-stem white cedar growing literally within a foot of the foundation: https://imgur.com/aT8vILf During the contingency phase, the previous owner mentioned that an arborist had looked at it in the past and said it wasn’t an issue -- not sure how much I trust this, but it really doesn't matter to me at this point. I had an ISA-certified arborist come by today, and he recommended removing it. Here’s what he said: He believes the tree was intentionally planted around the time the house was built (so roughly 100 years ago). He also said that the tree isn't native to the area and is from Northern Michigan, and that it's a very slow growing tree. He recommends removal because it could eventually affect the foundation, and the branches pose risks to the siding and shingles. They also make it easier for rodents to access the roof -- rodents are gonna get up regardless if that tree exists or not so... His company would remove it by cutting it down in sections from top to bottom, leaving the stump in place. He said that once cut to the stump, a tree like this won’t regrow. I asked about potential foundation issues after removal—since I’ve read that removing trees can sometimes cause soil voids or settling. He explained that once the tree is cut, the remaining stump and roots will simply decay over 10–20 years, and there’s no need to remove them. He said this is standard practice and shouldn’t cause any voids or damage. Can anyone help fact-check his comments, especially the part about soil stability and stump decay, and supposedly no impact on the foundation? One thing that I don't understand is if this tree's can damage the foundation, and if it's really been around for 100 years, it seems like there's a chance my foundation could already be damaged and I just haven't noticed it yet? I’ve also gathered several quotes for the removal, ranging from about $1,000 to $3,000—a pretty wide range. All companies say they’re insured and licensed. Normally, I’d be cautious about going with the lowest bidder for home projects, but I’m wondering if that concern applies here. If they’re insured and properly licensed, is there any real downside to choosing the lowest quote?