According to an article in the Daily Telegraph, authored by Harry Wallop, Consumer Affairs Editor, tree houses face the chop due to new planning regulations. Interestingly the print edition differs from that on-line and contains a different picture.
The article states that the cost of applying for permission is usually at least £150 with further expense incurred by having to provide detailed drawings and Ordnance Survey maps plotting the exact location of such structures.
Phil Kirby, president of the Planning Officers Society is quoted as saying: "It is a perverse consequence of the rule changes that major projects, costing tens of thousand of pounds no longer need planning permission, but tree houses do." He continues: "It was understood that tree houses would fall foul of the new planning rules. The thinking was to prevent structures that overlooked a neighbour's garden. When this happens neighbours can be significantly annoyed."
Has it not crossed the minds of those who introduced this 'change' to planning laws that one needs a fair sized garden - with of course a tree - to have one of these structures? Have they considered that with such a large garden the possibility of 'overlooking' ones neighbour must be pretty remote? Do they not realize that the only usage of such structures would be by children? Has it not also crossed their minds that if one wanted to look into a neighbour's garden, then all that is usually necessary is to go to an upstairs back window in your house?
Perhaps the instigators of this, on the face of it, ridiculous legislation should be the ones facing the chop? At best let us hope that they 'twig' that 'root and branch' reform is required in this matter and that, maybe, it would have been better to just 'leaf' things alone?
Afterthought: Perhaps the entire newspaper article is a load of 'Cods'Wallop?
Snow walls of old Japan
2 hours ago