Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

24. I absolutely agree it is unsound

Reply to pnwmom (Reply #10)

Fri Mar 14, 2014, 08:58 PM

Mar 2014

It seemed like a "cute" idea to do, no doubt, but one that is a major hazard for him, his family and everyone in the area. With the lift wind could achieve, it could either rip the "house" out of the tree, or just plain take the tree with it.

It's not safe at all, and clearly wasn't built by someone with public safety or the safety of his family in mind.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

34 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

treehouse poll - should homeowner be allowed to keep this? [View all] Liberal_in_LA Mar 2014 OP

It was built in a city right-of-way without a permit -- according to the city. pnwmom Mar 2014 #1

i'm pretty sure the codes don't let you build a building in a tree... but i'm not an expert. dionysus Mar 2014 #4

If it doesn't meet code, and a variance isn't approved, it's a dangerous attractive nusance HereSince1628 Mar 2014 #20

Wow. What a story. And then there are all the kids who've drowned in pnwmom Mar 2014 #21

"City officials say he can keep it if he takes out a $1 million insurance policy" dionysus Mar 2014 #2

It's true that million dollar policies don't have to be expensive, but I doubt pnwmom Mar 2014 #14

Nobody with a grain of sense Aerows Mar 2014 #25

yeah no kidding.. it still IS an awesome treehouse :P dionysus Mar 2014 #28

I would have loved it when I was 10. n/t pnwmom Mar 2014 #29

If it was inside the fence, I would say "yes." OnyxCollie Mar 2014 #3

If it falls over on the sidewalk it could crush someone or damage adjacent property Aerows Mar 2014 #5

Definitely a hazard. Too close to sidewalk and functioning_cog Mar 2014 #6

I don't see any tie downs, either. I just see support structures to keep it to the tree. Aerows Mar 2014 #8

And what will keep the tree in the ground in a windstorm? pnwmom Mar 2014 #13

Exactly part of the point Aerows Mar 2014 #23

What a godawful thing. Unsightly and probably dangerous. Make him remove it. (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #7

It's kind of cute actually Aerows Mar 2014 #9

And it's built in a softwood tree that both he and the city say is basically a "weed." n/t pnwmom Mar 2014 #10

I absolutely agree it is unsound Aerows Mar 2014 #24

No, THIS would be a "cute" treehouse: Nye Bevan Mar 2014 #15

love it but more it's like a house Liberal_in_LA Mar 2014 #19

That would be a cute house period. n/t pnwmom Mar 2014 #30

The city is generous IMO marions ghost Mar 2014 #11

As others have brought up... Scootaloo Mar 2014 #12

He should have contracted it out to some Ewoks. baldguy Mar 2014 #16

He didn't even put in any diagonals. 5X Mar 2014 #17

If it wasn't so poorly constructed, I might be inclined to agree that it should stay. Gravitycollapse Mar 2014 #18

Tear it down (nt) bigwillq Mar 2014 #22

It's an unattractive nuisance. MADem Mar 2014 #26

Municipalities have "Rights of Way," and his tree-house IS encroaching that zone. WinkyDink Mar 2014 #27

+1 Historic NY Mar 2014 #32

And I thought the whole point of a treehouse was to be in a woodsy or at least private pnwmom Mar 2014 #31

And over-hanging the sidewalk Aerows Mar 2014 #33

Did anyone mention that since it's outside of his fence... TreasonousBastard Mar 2014 #34