tree house

[Chris at eden]

I'm not sure it would escape building regs Chris - wouldn't approved document A section 1 structural work of timber apply? Plus maybe being a structure >300mm above ground?

 

I have experienced a complaint against a tree house and, whilst technically it was found to have been required to have planning and building control sign off, it had already been installed and LA (Cornwall) found, after months of correspondence, that it wasn't in the public interest to take enforcement action.

 

It wasn't something I'd installed or been directly involved in but I kept an interest in how in proceeded.

 

Not sure mate, possibly. I was thinking along the lines of it being an outbuilding with a floor area of less than 15 sq m, so no building regs. Possibly not a permanent structure?

 

Definitely planning required though.

[10 Bears]

Not necessarily definitely requiring planning - just depends on how you go about it.

 

I am part way through a build of a tree house for my kids, and despite formerly good relationships with my neighbours, the tree house seems to have caused them some disquiet. I shan't give all the gory details, but there was a 'meeting' at my house where it turns out that my neighbour doesn't like to be looked at by my children! As such, she threatened reporting me to planning etc. unless I cease building the tree house immediately. So, I did what any reasonable person would do, I told her to stop being so ruddy stupid and to have a rethink about coming round to my house to tell me what I can and can't do in my own garden!

 

Anyhow, back to the point. I followed all this up with the local planning office and have emails confirming this information. Basically, yes it would be a structure over 300mm above ground, which under the new regs would normally would require planning permission - but as long as the tree house ridge (if it has a roof) does not exceed 4m and the eaves are not above 2.5m, then it is an outbuilding and not subject to full planning. The guidance is here: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/miniguides/outbuildings/Outbuildings.pdf

[daltontrees]

So, I did what any reasonable person would do, I told her to stop being so ruddy stupid and to have a rethink about coming round to my house to tell me what I can and can't do in my own garden!

 

 

Hurrah!

[Chris at eden]

Not necessarily definitely requiring planning - just depends on how you go about it.

 

I am part way through a build of a tree house for my kids, and despite formerly good relationships with my neighbours, the tree house seems to have caused them some disquiet. I shan't give all the gory details, but there was a 'meeting' at my house where it turns out that my neighbour doesn't like to be looked at by my children! As such, she threatened reporting me to planning etc. unless I cease building the tree house immediately. So, I did what any reasonable person would do, I told her to stop being so ruddy stupid and to have a rethink about coming round to my house to tell me what I can and can't do in my own garden!

 

Anyhow, back to the point. I followed all this up with the local planning office and have emails confirming this information. Basically, yes it would be a structure over 300mm above ground, which under the new regs would normally would require planning permission - but as long as the tree house ridge (if it has a roof) does not exceed 4m and the eaves are not above 2.5m, then it is an outbuilding and not subject to full planning. The guidance is here: http://www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/miniguides/outbuildings/Outbuildings.pdf

 

Not much of a tree house at 2.5m - shrub house maybe. Good point though. Like your approach to the nosey neighbour.

 

What are your thoughts on the building regs?

[10 Bears]

Well, some people just need to be told!

 

I drew up some plans for my 'shrub' house and have attached them for your viewing pleasure. To be honest, its really more of a stilt house as it straddles a low fork in a cherry, is not fully secured in the tree and is on sloping ground so it will have the appearance of being higher than it really is.

 

These were the plans that I sent to my LPA to make sure I was OK, and they said there would be no need for building regs as it is not a permanent dwelling and not intended for inhabitation. Interestingly, they also said that they had never even had an enquiry about planning/building regs for tree houses before and it certainly took them some time to get back to me as no-one really knew the answer immediately.

 

I got the impression that tree houses only fall foul of planning when they are monstrous builds, over the usual permitted development/outbuilding specification. The other issue I would think, would be local interpretation of the planning regs, which does seem to differ region to region. So, getting the local TO/PO involved at some point would be beneficial.

D-Size Layout.pdf

[Chris at eden]

Well, some people just need to be told!

 

I drew up some plans for my 'shrub' house and have attached them for your viewing pleasure. To be honest, its really more of a stilt house as it straddles a low fork in a cherry, is not fully secured in the tree and is on sloping ground so it will have the appearance of being higher than it really is.

 

These were the plans that I sent to my LPA to make sure I was OK, and they said there would be no need for building regs as it is not a permanent dwelling and not intended for inhabitation. Interestingly, they also said that they had never even had an enquiry about planning/building regs for tree houses before and it certainly took them some time to get back to me as no-one really knew the answer immediately.

 

I got the impression that tree houses only fall foul of planning when they are monstrous builds, over the usual permitted development/outbuilding specification. The other issue I would think, would be local interpretation of the planning regs, which does seem to differ region to region. So, getting the local TO/PO involved at some point would be beneficial.

 

Cheers. That was my interpretation, with it not being a permanent structure or fit for habitation then no building regs. If you check the PD rights for temp structures though (which you would think is essentially not permanent), they are defined as those not being in place for more than 28 days.

 

I think the terminology adds to the confusion sometimes. Probably why your PO had no idea what to do.

[Chris at eden]

Cheers. That was my interpretation, with it not being a permanent structure or fit for habitation then no building regs. If you check the PD rights for temp structures though (which you would think is essentially not permanent), they are defined as those not being in place for more than 28 days.

 

I think the terminology adds to the confusion sometimes. Probably why your PO had no idea what to do.

 

Sorry, not PD rights. I meant building regs exemption.