flatbushtree_0908.jpg
A Flatbush resident recounts a tale of woe concerning her beloved oak tree. Her neighbor, a local temple, wasn’t fond of the tree’s branches. The rest in her words: “I came home today at 11 AM to find a whole crew of people all over my lawn and driveway chopping up the big huge branches they had already chopped off the tree. This seems very wrong. Shouldn’t they have at least asked me before climbing up the tree and chopping big parts off? This is a venerable old oak that has been here I am going to guess for more than 100 years. The deed was done by the time I got home &#8212 but they (the crew) were still out on my lawn, chain-sawing the branches into bits and pieces. Add this to the fact that the temple’s compressor runs loudly night and day &#8212 even when it is 55 degrees out and the temple has the windows open… And the senior center food garbage is a stinky mess that leaks out some pretty nasty luiquid onto the sidewalk (where my one year old child walks). I really need some help &#8212 how I can exert a little pressure on the temple to act more like good neighbors?? The tree, the noise, the garbage &#8212 it is really bad.” BTW, she called the police, who “were completely uninterested.”


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. There are regulations against illegally cutting city trees…. I think the person SHOULD call 311. I’ve seen places where people have cut down street trees so they can park in front of their house. That really makes me angry.

    So she should complain. Maybe nothing will be done, but maybe it will. In addition, the OP should write a letter to the synagogue, informing them of the illegality of their action, and reminding them that being neighborly means being neighborly to all neighbors. The OP should also mention the problems with the way that the synagogue takes care of its own property, especially concerning health issues.

  2. “The homeowner does not own the tree. The city does. However, I did not see a Parks Dept. truck, which is what comes out when I call the city to prune the large city-owned trees in front of my property.”

    It’s possible the city hired a contractor on this job.

  3. That is so strange for the synagogue to just hire someone to go on someone else’s property and trim their tree. I guess if the owner had liked it, she would have thought that they were really nice neighbors to be helping out. Me thinks there is much more to this story, as usual.

  4. I saw the incident as the crew was cleaning up. It was without question a city tree, and the crew was definitely all over the owner’s lawn without permissio. They did not simply cut off the sections of branches overhanging the synogogue’s property – they cut it off at the trunk.

    The homeowner does not own the tree. The city does. However, I did not see a Parks Dept. truck, which is what comes out when I call the city to prune the large city-owned trees in front of my property.

    The homeowner has trespassing issues, among others, with the synogogue, definitely. However, she does not own the tree (unfortunate in this case). That said, I did not get the impression that it was a Parks Dept pruning job – rather something organized by the temple, seemingly without permission from the Parks Dept (although I don’t really know that for sure).

  5. Pruning done by a professional is healthy for a tree, randomly taking branches off is not. Cutting these branches up on your lawn is trespassing and I personally find it mind bogglingly rude.

  6. TownhouseLady, you can redeem yourself by pointing us to a link as amusing as the Mill Basin Fantasyland. Actually, save it for next week. I’m leaving early today and traveling until Tuesday and would hate to miss the fun!

1 2 3 4