11:31 Guest: I'm very disappointed to hear that, but it sounds like you have experience with this.

So, if my neighbor has the right to remove the tree, how would you go about trying to convince him to keep it? I think I have some solid arguments, but also think money may talk better. Do you think that's a good/bad idea?

I figure giving him a money ($500?) annually (for his yard clean-up) makes sense. If I gave him a lump sum, he could turn around and cut the tree down.

Also, I'm concerned because he's removing it himself. This tree's roots are undoubtedly in many neighboring properties.

We're planning to talk to the neighbor this afternoon.

I'd really appreciate your input.

Posted by: clintonhiller at August 12, 2007 11:46 AM in response to Massive Tree Doomed?

I prefer Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Boerum Hill and Carroll Gardens to Park Slope.

I lived in Park Slope and Boerum Hill briefly, before moving to Fort Greene and very recently to Clinton Hill. I definitely consider all of the neighborhoods above safe... and vibrant in their own ways. (I'm refering to neighborhoods proper - check a map, don't listen to broker-speak).

It depends on what you like and what, in your mind, contributes to a neighborhood's vibrancy. I suggest spending a day and evening of two in each... Or ask specific questions. Happy to offer my two cents. I'm a woman in my late 20s (you didn't mention your age, but maybe that's relevant).

Also, are you new to Brooklyn?

Posted by: clintonhiller at November 13, 2007 8:12 PM in response to Seeking Condo!

As an owner of a property with such a tree (actually I HAD 2 such trees) I see both sides of the picture. First, I am assuming that the owner wants to take it down.

Why? Is it diseased? Dangerous? Too high maintenance? Causing too many problems with water issues (leaves and seeds clog drains and gutters causing all manner of problems). You need to know what is going on with the tree. I bought my place almost 3 years ago and since then, I spent 6,000 dollars on trees. I took down an enormous diseased silver maple at a cost of 3500 dollars in total. It was massive and leaned over my neighbors' (several properties), and was a disaster waiting to happen. It didn't happen because I took it down.

The other one is a Norway maple which stretches over 7 properties. It is beautiful, probably 75 feet high and probably a lot like the tree you describe. It suffered from deferred maintenance and I had it trimmed last year at a cost of 1500 dollars and this year the Nor'Easter snapped two large limbs, which were perched like missles in the top of the tree -- an emergency costing 1,000 dollars. I sweep a small garbage bag of seeds per day and the terrible storm last week swept errant seeds over my drain causing a lake outside my kitchen door which made it into my kitchen (and cellar).

Are you getting my drift? My tree is majestically beautiful, it is also an expensive, high maintenance pain in the ass.

Regarding "rights" to the tree, the
tree is your neighbors. He/she is responsible for any damage it might cause to others and may remove it. It has nothing to do with landmarks. That doesn't stop you from having a conversation about it.

Posted by: donatella at August 12, 2007 2:05 PM in response to Massive Tree Doomed?

I had a similar delema with a tree in our yard. I hired an arborist from BBG to come out an assess. Here are some questions to ask: What is the overall health of the tree? What are it's longevity prospects? Don't assume it's healthy and will live on for another 20 years. Can it be pruned to keep it's health, relieve the problems and still look like a beautiful tree? Maybe offer to pay 2 or 3 arborists come out and assess the tree. If it's a problem that can be solved with constant pruning, offer to pay for that.

Posted by: guest at August 12, 2007 10:02 PM in response to Massive Tree Doomed?

I had a related issue with the neighbors tree in his front yard. I spent most of my garden time cleaning up after seeds and leaves from trees not in my yard, spent money paying to prune branches scraping my roof after he refused to and also had to get someone out to remove the tree roots from my waste line. That corner of my garden was never able to grow much because of the roots.The tree was beautiful but it was costing me money and time on a regular basis. When the lot was sold the tree was removed for a development. Obviously I'd rather have the tree than a big, incredibly ugly building but it was an opportunity for me to pick a better choice of tree for my own front yard. My neighbor to the back has had their silver maple split branches twice, causing damage to their property both times and my property once.

Keep in mind, back when that tree was planted there was probably very little thought given to the consequences of planting such a large tree in an area with so little space. That was really not taken into account much in that era and when planted, I'm sure it was quite small. I've taken many a course in landscaping at NYBG and I've talked to the 2 arborists when they came out to deal with each of my two neighbor's trees. Generally speaking, their consensus was that the species that were planted when Brooklyn was being developed really are completely inappropriate for the sites they were planted on. And most people have not been maintaining their trees properly so many are weak and damaged, thus dangerous.

Look at this as an opportunity for you, if possible. Maybe you can plant a smaller tree more appropriate for the site and proximity to buildings in your own yard. I redid my front yard garden and added a much smaller tree with a much less aggressive root system. I had the pleasure of picking something I really liked that will be much less likely to cause the same kinds of problems that my neighbors trees have caused. I also have the joy of getting to watch it grow and can start maintaining it from the beginning. You now have a similar opportunity- go for it!

Posted by: kensington gal at August 13, 2007 1:04 PM in response to Massive Tree Doomed?

i agree with 8:12pm on all the areas she mentioned. make sure you walk around the area from day time to night time. week days and weekends to get the feel of the vibe.

also make sure you walk around the main areas like where the shops are.

but don't forget prospect heights too.

Posted by: armchairwarrior at November 13, 2007 8:39 PM in response to Seeking Condo!

citing safety specifically, park slope is the safest of the all the neighborhoods mentioned. also the most vibrant, hands down.

i've heard some really bad stories regarding friends being mugged on the way from the trains in clinton hill...especially lately.

agree that you should walk around and see what you like, but seeing that you cited vibrance and safety specifically, there is no question that park slope most suits those two things.

clinton hill has very little in terms of services and even less in terms of transportation which means long walks to/from the subway...oftentimes along pretty desolate stretches. nice homes though...

parts of ft. greene are good also for what you're looking for. shops, restaurants, bars, lots of trains, etc.

good luck!

Posted by: guest at November 13, 2007 9:44 PM in response to Seeking Condo!

Bay Ridge. Very diverse, vibrant community, best restaurants in Brooklyn and real estate at about 1/4th the price of Park Slope, if you don't mind an extra 15 minutes on the train. Extremely safe as well, has been an established middle class neighborhood for the last 100 years.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 10:32 AM in response to Seeking Condo!

Bay Ridge is a GOOD hour from Manhattan on a good day.

Not really an option for most people.

Best restaurants in brooklyn???

LOLOLOL

Come on now.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 11:37 AM in response to Seeking Condo!

Wait a second, guest 9:44-- I'm not trying to get into nabe-on-nabe arguing, here, but it's a stretch to characterize Clinton Hill as full of desolate streets and muggers. I live in the Hill, and it's bustling, vibrant, diverse, and has a great bohemian mix of people. And it's completely safe. People get mugged everywhere, including Park Slope (which is beautiful and full of amenities, but also really congested and expensive). If you're not into the Slope, which I'm not, Clinton HIll has an amazing vibe.

Posted by: Rehab at November 14, 2007 12:29 PM in response to Seeking Condo!

As far as Bay Ridge restaurants, sorry I'll be more specific, best Middle Eastern, best Pizza, best Scandavian, best Greek, best Indian, best Southern Italian, best Diners and best Chinese outside of Brooklyn Chinatown. That better? No, there aren't many "Applewood" type restaurants, but how often are you eating at those types of places anyway???? Feel free to walk down 3rd Ave and 5th Ave in the 60s - 80s and actually try some of the restaurants and then take it up with the Chowhound people, you'll find many Bay Ridge food fanatics:

http://www.chowhound.com/boards/19

As far as commute times, I do it daily and it's 40 minutes to downtown Manhattan from 77th St (60s-80s are where most of the younger ppl live) on the R local train, and faster if you take the N from 59th (4 stops to Union Square/14th St). Yes, it is longer to midtown as it is with most Brooklyn neighborhoods.

And a beautiful, large 1-bedroom (750 sq ft plus) in a safe and attractive building will only cost you $250k. No, it's not the latest hipster trend, it will never be because it's a safe neighborhood and there's very little that's edgy about it, no projects, low crime, the local precinct is where police officers go to retire. It has too much history as a middle-class area to ever be the next "it" place, but it is a great neighborhood for a single woman looking for a nice apartment in a vibrant area with $400k.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:34 PM in response to Seeking Condo!

i think most young people would rather go to jersey with a 15 minute commute than to bay ridge if they are looking for a deal.

Posted by: guest at November 14, 2007 1:39 PM in response to Seeking Condo!