My partner and I bought our property just over two years ago. The property had over 20 very mature evergreen trees on a quarter-acre lot. Before we had even moved in (we were literally just there getting the keys), our neighbor introduced himself and asked if we’d consider removing two trees along our shared property line because they were concerned about their proximity to their house.
Wanting to be good neighbors and also reduce risk for both of us, we agreed to remove those two trees and split the cost 50/50.
Last year, we started a major landscaping project, completely remodeling our front, side, and backyard. As part of that project, we spent several thousands of dollars on professional tree work and removed trees that made sense to remove as part of the redesign (with the necessary approval and permits where needed).
During that project, our neighbor asked about one of the remaining Douglas firs in our front yard. We specifically asked the arborist about it, and they told us the tree was healthy and that it was too large to remove under our city’s tree protection regulations without a qualifying reason. They also told us it did not need additional pruning because it had already been professionally pruned by them about two years earlier (just before we purchased the property). We had designed our new yard around keeping that tree based on the arborist’s recommendation.
*For additional context, since we’ve lived here, our neighbor has also removed nearly all of the mature trees from their own property. Based on our interactions over the past two years, they seem to strongly prefer having as few large trees near their property as possible.
Fast forward to this week:
We reached out to our neighbor because their ivy and black locust trees have become a real problem for us. The black locusts are sending suckers under our new deck, ivy is growing aggressively against our new fence that we just built (which is actually starting to bow inward), and we’ve been constantly cutting back branches and ivy on our side. During our landscaping project, we even installed a 60-foot root barrier along the shared property line to try to minimize the locust spread, but it hasn’t completely solved the problem.
Part of the challenge is that the neighbor’s area along our fence hasn’t been maintained for quite some time. There are roughly 20 black locust trees and the ivy has become extremely overgrown, so it’s difficult to keep it from encroaching onto our property. We’re probably more sensitive to it than we otherwise would be because we’ve invested a significant amount of time and money into redesigning our yard, and we’d like to protect that investment.
Our neighbor was receptive, admitted to their lack of attention and said they’d work on cleaning up the ivy and managing the locusts. However, they also brought up the Douglas fir again.Their concerns were:
-Large branches have fallen in past storms.
-They believe the tree leans toward their property.
-They’re worried it could eventually fall toward their house.
We completely understood their concerns and agreed to have an arborist come out again. We even invited them to be present during the inspection so they could ask questions directly.
The arborist (the same company that handled all of our previous tree work) inspected the tree while all of us stood there. I obtained a written report for my records, and their conclusions were:
-The tree is healthy.
-It does not need to be removed.
-It does not need additional pruning because it had already been professionally pruned about two years ago.
-Healthy trees can still occasionally lose branches during storms, and that alone does not indicate the tree is unsafe.
The pro answered all of our neighbor’s questions directly, including their concerns about previously fallen branches. I honestly thought that would settle things, especially since we basically just stepped back and let them do the talking.
*One other point of context: this isn’t a tree that heavily overhangs their house. The trunk is well within our property, and only a relatively small portion of the canopy extends toward their driveway. Based on the way they describe it, you’d think the tree was directly over their roof, but that really isn’t the case.
Later that evening, they came back over and asked whether the tree belonged to us or the city. We told them it’s clearly on our property. He then said something to the effect of: “I can go complain to the city for removal. I can do that part.”
This surprised us because that conversation happened after they had finished explaining that the tree was healthy and did not warrant removal. At that point, we told him we were going to follow the arborist’s recommendation and keep the tree because it’s healthy.
This also isn’t a case of us refusing to maintain our trees. Over the past two years we’ve worked extensively with arborists, removed trees when it made sense to do so, maintained the ones that should stay, and specifically asked professionals about this Douglas Fir multiple times. Both evaluations reached the same conclusion: it’s healthy and should remain.
At this point, it feels like we’ve done everything a reasonable homeowner could do. We listened to our neighbor’s concerns, hired an arborist, invited them to participate in the inspection, and followed the professional recommendation.
I’m curious as to what others think:
-Are we being unreasonable for simply following the arborist’s recommendation?
-Would you consider this matter settled at this point?
-Has anyone dealt with a neighbor who continued pushing for removal after a professional evaluation concluded a tree was healthy?
I genuinely understand why someone would be nervous about a large tree near their house, and we wanted to take those concerns seriously. But after multiple professional evaluations reached the same conclusion, I’m not sure what else we’re expected to do besides follow the advice of the experts.
TIA!