... wrote on Aug 15^th, 2012 at 12:24pm:


do you have any building skills? and those building codes you so hate are there to protect your family and anyone who visits.

As tree houses go, it's pretty basic: a few pine planks bolted to the sprawling branches of a box tree, a rope ladder, a hoist with a plastic container on the end and a swing.

But the builder, Stuart Pether, is pretty happy with his handiwork on the verge outside his home in Barrett Street, Wembley - and his three children are rapt.

"The kids had been hassling me for two years: 'Dad, can we have a tree house'," Mr Pether said. "So one Sunday in February, I said OK and we grabbed some scraps of wood and built quite a robust structure.

"The kids love it. In the afternoon, there'll often be six or eight kids playing out on the tree. It's just good, clean adventure."

Three weeks after it was finished, he said, council rangers told him it had to be taken down.

City of Cambridge mayor Simon Withers has a dilemma. He is sympathetic to the idea of kids enjoying themselves but the problem is the public liability risk to the council.

"As soon as you raise 'public liability' everyone runs for the hills, and that's what's happened here," Mr Withers said. "We have no means of insuring against the liability."

Mr Withers has previously railed against "the unstoppable steamroller of the nanny State" and said he was in favour of such natural playgrounds.

And though he hasn't visited Mr Pether's construction, he described it from photographs he had seen as "fairly innocuous".

Mr Withers believes the trend to swings and tree houses on verges stems from bigger houses on smaller blocks.

Trees on blocks have to be cleared, so parents turn to the street trees to create play areas. But because verges are council property, such structures are a council's responsibility.

Mr Withers said his council had decided to allow swings on street trees because the public liability risk was deemed so small. "We said 'we can live with that risk'," he said.

"In my view, councils need a policy - they need to get an insurance broker to get a policy for tree houses on verges."

Then, they could pass on the cost of premiums to residents like Mr Pether who want to build tree houses for their children. He said he would like local government to explore such solutions to the impasse.

The future of the Pether tree house will come before the full council on Tuesday.

small problem... he built a tree house in someone elses tree ie the councils. He had no right to do so in the first place. Build it in your OWN tree and then take your OWN risks.

its not a nanny state. It is a silly man making a silly decision to do something he never had the right to do.

... wrote on Aug 15^th, 2012 at 5:02pm:


If you build a tree house in MY tree on my property I dont care how good it is or how cute your kids are. it comes down.

He can build it on his own property.

... wrote on Aug 15^th, 2012 at 12:24pm:


do you have any building skills? and those building codes you so hate are there to protect your family and anyone who visits.

As tree houses go, it's pretty basic: a few pine planks bolted to the sprawling branches of a box tree, a rope ladder, a hoist with a plastic container on the end and a swing.

But the builder, Stuart Pether, is pretty happy with his handiwork on the verge outside his home in Barrett Street, Wembley - and his three children are rapt.

"The kids had been hassling me for two years: 'Dad, can we have a tree house'," Mr Pether said. "So one Sunday in February, I said OK and we grabbed some scraps of wood and built quite a robust structure.

"The kids love it. In the afternoon, there'll often be six or eight kids playing out on the tree. It's just good, clean adventure."

Three weeks after it was finished, he said, council rangers told him it had to be taken down.

City of Cambridge mayor Simon Withers has a dilemma. He is sympathetic to the idea of kids enjoying themselves but the problem is the public liability risk to the council.

"As soon as you raise 'public liability' everyone runs for the hills, and that's what's happened here," Mr Withers said. "We have no means of insuring against the liability."

Mr Withers has previously railed against "the unstoppable steamroller of the nanny State" and said he was in favour of such natural playgrounds.

And though he hasn't visited Mr Pether's construction, he described it from photographs he had seen as "fairly innocuous".

Mr Withers believes the trend to swings and tree houses on verges stems from bigger houses on smaller blocks.

Trees on blocks have to be cleared, so parents turn to the street trees to create play areas. But because verges are council property, such structures are a council's responsibility.

Mr Withers said his council had decided to allow swings on street trees because the public liability risk was deemed so small. "We said 'we can live with that risk'," he said.

"In my view, councils need a policy - they need to get an insurance broker to get a policy for tree houses on verges."

Then, they could pass on the cost of premiums to residents like Mr Pether who want to build tree houses for their children. He said he would like local government to explore such solutions to the impasse.

The future of the Pether tree house will come before the full council on Tuesday.

... wrote on Aug 15^th, 2012 at 5:44pm:


well when you ask it like that it suddenly becomes a different question. However, 'minor addition' is hardly a detailed thing. Ive done extensions and three times had to get council approval and never find it even remotely difficult. Only one required a licensed builder but unless you REALLY know what you are doing then why is that a problem?

details...

Soren wrote on Aug 8^th, 2012 at 10:08pm:


What's your 2nd guess, Soren?