Tree house in the curtilage of a listed building

[overlander matt]

I am about to start building a tree house (albeit not in a tree because there are none suitable) for our children and suspect that I want to avoid any planning infringements... We live in a grade 2 listed house in a conservation area. The structure will not be in front of the house but will be up against a boundary to a public footpath and our neighbour to the other side of the footpath has no objection.

The structure was going to be a raised platform 1m off the ground with a souped-up shed on it to provide the house element. The approximate size of the platform is 2x4m with around half of this occupied by the house. I will keep the height below 3m which means it will be 1m taller than the wall on the boundary. I noticed that constructing a raised deck higher than 300mm requires permission in a conservation area and wondered whether my raised platform could be construed as a deck given I will use similar materials etc. I do tend to over-engineer some of these projects so it will probably look a bit better than a pallet stuck up a tree but it's ultimately for our children rather than a glamping treehouse and won't be there forever.

Any thoughts much appreciated. A house over the road has a treehouse right up against their boundary of a similar height but with no deck element.

Thanks in advance.

Matt

 

[steveb]

I would put this firmly in the "what is the worst that could happen" category - someone complains and after a long and drawn out process they ask you to take it down.

If it's not causing irreversible harm to anything or anyone, I would just do it. Your attitude to potentially antagonising the local planning office may vary to mine :0)

The biggest risk is that due to its location it is spotted and reported, is it possible to relocate away from the footpath?

 

[paulc]

If an outbuilding (shed, tree house, etc) is within 2m of a boundary, you are limited to a height of 2.5m under permitted development rules. Any decking or platform must be no more than 300mm above the natural ground level. Building regulations required the structure to be built from substantially non-combustible materials (so no thatched roof). And to cap it off, planning permission is required if within the curtilage of a listed building.

Council chiefs order tree house to be torn down

A FATHER who built his daughters a surprise tree house has been ordered to tear it down.

www.gazette-news.co.uk

Family in 14-month 'farcical' battle with council over treehouse

Francis Peters, built the treehouse in the garden of his now ex-wife's house for their children to enjoy

www.getsurrey.co.uk

If you can build the structure more than 2m from a boundary and it is well screened from footpaths & roads, I'd go with steveb, but be prepared to take it down the minute you get any interest from the council. You do not want to get involved in a lengthy battle with the authorities.

 

[Kearn]

before buying our place, we trawled and snooped through the LBC apps as part of our research. There was a hilariously petty drawn out debate about a kids timber climbing frame, as it was a bit close to an elderly neighbour's boundary and the kids would be snooping on her / she would lose all her quality of enjoyment.... they had to apply for retrospective PP, but more to the point wasted time, energy and money because one nosey person got the hump and rallied the villagers to the 'defence' of the neighbour, who hadn't actually complained themselves! beware the power of retired small villagers...

 

[mardinor]

By the time they enforce anything your kids will be at Uni.

 

[CliffordPope]

About 25 years ago I built a small tree house in the chinese style, the shape of a phone box, in a willow tree. Just for the children you understand. The floor is about 9 feet off the ground, the total height about 20 feet. I pruned the willow so that it sprouted in tufts, just like a willow-pattern plate, so the elegantly shaped and painted house appears to be floating in the tree like a painting. There are no unsightly steps or ladders, just blocks of wood attached to the trunk as footholds, access through a hatch in the platform.
It's still there, uncommented on by any officialdom, although visible from the road and remarked on by the odd passer by who chooses to look up.

 

[overlander matt]

I would put this firmly in the "what is the worst that could happen" category - someone complains and after a long and drawn out process they ask you to take it down.

If it's not causing irreversible harm to anything or anyone, I would just do it. Your attitude to potentially antagonising the local planning office may vary to mine :0)

The biggest risk is that due to its location it is spotted and reported, is it possible to relocate away from the footpath?

Thanks Steve. I suspect that I will construct this with a view to potentially taking it down in due course. There is another tree house over the road that is right on the boundary and probably taller. I'm pleased to see that nobody has felt the need to complain. Perhaps it meets regs!

It is going to be spotted from the road through the village so one of the reasons for checking the regs.

 

[overlander matt]

If an outbuilding (shed, tree house, etc) is within 2m of a boundary, you are limited to a height of 2.5m under permitted development rules. Any decking or platform must be no more than 300mm above the natural ground level. Building regulations required the structure to be built from substantially non-combustible materials (so no thatched roof). And to cap it off, planning permission is required if within the curtilage of a listed building.

Council chiefs order tree house to be torn down

A FATHER who built his daughters a surprise tree house has been ordered to tear it down.

www.gazette-news.co.uk

Family in 14-month 'farcical' battle with council over treehouse

Francis Peters, built the treehouse in the garden of his now ex-wife's house for their children to enjoy

www.getsurrey.co.uk

If you can build the structure more than 2m from a boundary and it is well screened from footpaths & roads, I'd go with steveb, but be prepared to take it down the minute you get any interest from the council. You do not want to get involved in a lengthy battle with the authorities.

Thanks Paul. The listed building part really is the icing on the cake! I was a bit surprised to learn of the planning permission requirement for a raised deck over 300mm - there must be an awful lot of people that are not compliant with this. I will have a chat with the council to find out a few more details, I find it difficult to believe there's no scope to put in a kids play area.

Interestingly, the second article you linked to has a few similarities with what I was thinking about albeit the platform would not be as tall.

Hopefully I can find a sensible compromise!

 

[overlander matt]

By the time they enforce anything your kids will be at Uni.

Maybe! I hope it won't come to that!

 

[overlander matt]

About 25 years ago I built a small tree house in the chinese style, the shape of a phone box, in a willow tree. Just for the children you understand. The floor is about 9 feet off the ground, the total height about 20 feet. I pruned the willow so that it sprouted in tufts, just like a willow-pattern plate, so the elegantly shaped and painted house appears to be floating in the tree like a painting. There are no unsightly steps or ladders, just blocks of wood attached to the trunk as footholds, access through a hatch in the platform.
It's still there, uncommented on by any officialdom, although visible from the road and remarked on by the odd passer by who chooses to look up.

View attachment 10916

What a great treehouse. Good to hear nobody has troubled you to take it down - it would appear from the links that Paul posted that complaining neighbours are the biggest worry. Sadly we don't have a proper tree for the job at this house so it will need a platform.

 

[overlander matt]

before buying our place, we trawled and snooped through the LBC apps as part of our research. There was a hilariously petty drawn out debate about a kids timber climbing frame, as it was a bit close to an elderly neighbour's boundary and the kids would be snooping on her / she would lose all her quality of enjoyment.... they had to apply for retrospective PP, but more to the point wasted time, energy and money because one nosey person got the hump and rallied the villagers to the 'defence' of the neighbour, who hadn't actually complained themselves! beware the power of retired small villagers...

This does appear to be the biggest threat. Our neighbour has no objection but perhaps anyone who uses the footpath might see it as the end of the world and find cause to complain.

 

[mattyb]

Honestly, I would just go for it. As another poster puts. In the worst case you just have to take it down and sell it.

NOTE: I wouldn't recommend this if there was any risk to damage anything.

 

[mattyb]

Also, can we get some photos when this is complete?

I'm hoping to build one for my son in the next couple of years...so keeping an eye out for inspiration.

 

[overlander matt]

Yes Matty I will post a few pics. The project has stalled by a couple of weeks. I must admit to feeling a bit deflated by discovering the planning requirements - I'm going to be compromising on the design somewhat but whatever I do I, know I won't comply with a raised deck height of 300mm. Perhaps the best option is not to call it a raised deck and just adhere to the height limitations.