OK, so this tree is clearly on the property line and therefore the roots encroach into (under) the neighbors property. I'm sorry the tree is going to die, but I side with the neighbors.
Posted on 06/30/2024 9:40:13 PM PDT by where's_the_Outrage?
However, this is Minnesota.
The new neighbor had best not park any nice vehicles outside...
In my state, you have the absolute right to remove the root system from your own property, even if it destroys the tree. Don’t know the law in Minnesota.
I’m wondering the same thing. Roots run as deep as the tree is tall. And as wide underground as above ground.
Of course this story is about someone from Reddit, which means you’re not getting all the facts, and that the complainer is just a wild loon of sorts.
>> I’m sorry the tree is going to die, but I side with the neighbors.
But but but they have a LOVE sign in the window! Because progress! And it’s a TREE for pete’s sake! Sacred! Clearly the whinin... er, complaining neighbor is in the right, because wokeness!
(My goodness! Can you say ZERO LOT LINE? lol)
The advisors allowed him onstage for more than three minutes, and without a teleprompter. Clear political malpractice.
what?
In the picture, it appears that the existing house already wiped out 40% of possible rut space for the tree, so perhaps the existing homeowner should have torn down his house and restored his land once the neighboring lot was sold, so that the tree could live.
Oops. Wrong thread. I thought I was responding to a post about Obama’s advisors blowing it on the debate.
So hateful to kill an old oak tree. We need millions more trees planted to beautify and oxygenate the world. The anti- CO2 zealots should be doing this, instead of forcing taxpayers to blow trillions on harebrained solar and wind projects. Via tax breaks and subsidies. EV tax breaks too.
Sphinx, for the good of the party and more importantly for the good of your country we think it’s best that you not be president anymore. You can still have ice cream but you have to step down.
I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or you are series.
Either way, take a drive through PA and then say we need more trees.
We have more trees than we did 100 years ago.
As joe says, "No joke".
Minnesota Statutes
https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/561.04
561.04 TRESPASS; TREBLE DAMAGES.
Whoever without lawful authority cuts down or carries off any wood, underwood, tree, or timber, or girdles or otherwise injures any tree, timber, or shrub, on the land of another person, or in the street or highway in front of any person's house, city lot, or cultivated grounds, or on the commons or public grounds of any city or town, or in the street or highway in front thereof, is liable in a civil action to the owner of such land, or to such city or town, for treble the amount of damages which may be assessed therefor, unless upon the trial it appears that the trespass was casual or involuntary, or that the defendant had probable cause to believe that the land on which the trespass was committed was the defendant's, or that of the person in whose service or by whose direction the act was done, in which case judgment shall be given for only the single damages assessed. This section shall not authorize the recovery of more than the just value of timber taken from uncultivated woodland for the repair of a public highway or bridge upon or adjoining the land.
You can't willfully cause loss to a neighbor without facing repercussions.
This is a tort at minimum; the construction neighbor caused a loss to the neighbor with the tree who's now forced to pay for removal of the tree. Nature doesn't follow property lines and the construction neighbor can't argue that it was an unforeseen event. Of course, the poorly written article doesn't mention any variances or issues identified when the permits were filed.
I mentioned the setback because, depending on the town, the construction neighbor may not be able to justify digging right up to the property line, even for a retaining wall. While a setback is for buildings, it can also be for any construction, including driveways, depending on local laws. The tree might have survived if the digging wasn't right up to the line.
On a related note, if the tree had fallen on the excavation crew, the excavation company and the construction homeowner would be responsible for the deaths and/or injuries.
I am very pro tree planting. I have fruit trees on my property. I am aware that New England is more forested than 100 years ago/ The USA has zillions of dry acres of land where trees should be planted and drip irrigated for 5 years to start them off.
Israel is very big on planting trees to make the deserts into tree-scapes as much as possible
Perhaps there are no setback lines. See the picture in post 5. It looks like the house is 5 feet away from the property line. Although the house looks 100 years old and could have been built before setback lines.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.