treehouse poll - should homeowner be allowed to keep this?

[pnwmom]

1. It was built in a city right-of-way without a permit -- according to the city.

So, under those circumstances, I don't think he has a right to the treehouse in that location.

http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2014/03/13/3527468/washington-homeowner-fighting.html

The City Council, Mayor Frank Kuntz, city staff and the city attorney's office all view it as a liability and a threat to public safety. It overhangs a public sidewalk on Pennsylvania Avenue, is built in a softwood tree, and it was built in city right-of-way without a required permit.

"If something happens, the city is liable for the damages," Kuntz said. "The council was unanimous in directing me to do what we're doing. It has to come down."

But Postelwait, owner of LeMolo Cafe & Deli, said he doesn't believe the tree house violates any city codes because it is not obstructing the sidewalk. He said city codes don't prevent something from obstructing the air space some 30 feet above the sidewalk.

SNIP

Smith said his primary concern is that the tree house isn't safe. He said it's built in an exotic tree species called a tree of heaven. It's a softwood tree that the attorney described as a "big weed".

"I'm worried about that thing coming down in a windstorm," he said. "I wouldn't let my kids play in it." Postelwait agreed with the "weed" description for the tree. But added, "It's a pretty sturdy weed, and a healthy one."


Read more here: http://www.bellinghamherald.com/2014/03/13/3527468/washington-homeowner-fighting.html#storylink=cpy