Convert stables/barn to gym/home office (planning)

[MarkL73]

We are moving to a more rural location where the property we select will have outbuildings of some sort. Either stables or barn (or both) and these will almost certainly have restrictions that they are for equestrian or agricultural use accordingly.

We have no desire to cover anything like that to living accommodation but do need a large home gym and home office because we work/exercise at home as part of our job.

I know planning departments are sometimes hesitant to convert outbuildings to residential use – but are they likely to be more sympathetic for use that isn’t “living accommodation” ?

Basically, if I buy a house with a barn that has a horse in it today and when I move in turn it into The Rock’s home gym….. will I be allowed!

m

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

Basically, if I buy a house with a barn that has a horse in it today and when I move in turn it into The Rock’s home gym….. will I be allowed!

TL:DR version: it will depend on the precise nature of the property. The rules are complicated, and for the £few hundred it would cost you, it would be sensible to get a Planning Consultant to look at any specific property you're thinking of buying, to give you advice specific to that property.

Some basic rules, if you want the slightly longer version:

Be aware that equestrian use and agricultural use are two different things in Planning terms. Horses are funny creatures, in that so far as the Planning system is concerned, they can be 'livestock', 'equestrian animals' or 'domestic chattels', depending on whether they're just standing in a field eating grass, standing in a paddock supported by buildings or other development, or standing within the domestic curtilage of a house being little Georgina's best friend.

You also need to understand the concept of 'domestic curtilage' (basically: it's the land that is clearly, visually associated with a dwelling house as its domestic garden area for 'use incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse').

If the last use of a building was equestrian or agricultural, there is a good chance that it may also lie outside of the domestic curtilage, so your first problem may be seeking a 'change of use' of both the land and building(s) to domestic curtilage. The Planners may resist this, if they think that the resultant curtilage would be bigger than reasonable to serve the house, because they don't like the 'domestication' of open countryside.

If you can argue that the outbuldings already fall within the curtilage of the house (or if you can seek a change of use to include them in the curtilage), then Planning Permission to use them (if not to alter them externally) to serve as a gym or home office is actually automatic, since these uses are considered 'incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse', hence no change of use is taking place, hence there is nothing for Planning to control.

If you can't argue that the outbuildings already form part of the domestic curtilage, then ironically an agricultural barn (but NOT an equestrian stable) may actually be easier to gain permission for an independent dwelling than for use as a home office.
This is because whilst, as above, the Planners may be reluctant to see the curtilage of an existing house expanded, there are Permitted Development rights (subject to prior approval) under what is known as 'Class Q', to convert redundant agricultural dwellings to new dwellinghouses and there's little the Planners can do to resist it, provided the prior approval criteria (which are admittedly complicated, and are about to change) are met.

In all cases, the definitions are fraught with complications and trip-hazards, so I strongly recommend that you use a Planning Consultant to seek either Planning Permission or a Certificate of Lawfulness for whatever changes you intend.

Edited by Equus on Saturday 4th May 14:13

[LooneyTunes]

MarkL73 said:

Basically, if I buy a house with a barn that has a horse in it today and when I move in turn it into The Rock’s home gym….. will I be allowed!

Equus has given you a good answer, and if you want to do it properly is a good chap to have a chat to, but also worth being aware that a lot happens in the countryside that nobody ever notices.

I have a house where the barn next door (not owned by me I should add) was quietly turned into a home and has been lived in for probably 15+ years. The guy who lives in it is a nice chap, it’s a quiet lane, nobody has ever reported him.

To a passer by it wouldn’t be obvious what he’s done, which may hinder any attempt to get a certificate of lawfulness (or whatever would be needed for it to class as a house: https://www.fbcmb.co.uk/media-hub-area/hay-bale-ho...

[Equus]

LooneyTunes said:

...also worth being aware that a lot happens in the countryside that nobody ever notices.

True; on the one hand, I did a 'Certificate of Lawfulness' application recently for a lady who had converted and lived in a barn (and paid council tax on it!) since (IIRC) 1973 without permission and without anyone bothering her - she was just putting things in order for her son, in case she died - but on the other we get jobs all the time that result from malicious neighbours reporting the most trivial matters (often for no better reason than they don't like newcomers).

If you're thinking of spending £several hundred thousand on a property, and the ability to use it how you want to is in question, I'd still say that it's worth confirming the details before you commit yourself, though. Don't rely on your Solicitor checking this sort of stuff as part of the purchase - they won't (and usually lack the knowledge to do so properly, even if you ask them to).

[MarkL73]

Equus said:

TL:DR version: it will depend on the precise nature of the property. The rules are complicated, and for the £few hundred it would cost you, it would be

Edited by Equus on Saturday 4th May 14:13

Super useful!

Our two possibles so far are:

1- A house that has a large garden and orchard with stables they use (and have for 20 years) as DIY tool storage, spare space, etc (never had horses) - The stables were built in the 90's before the current owners and I expect the orchard was the horse padock. The planning I found for the original stable build said "build it - but for equestria use only). I dont suppose the stables not having seen a horse in 20 years helps? Annoyingly, if we couldnt do the stables to gym switch - we'd use PD on the large actual garden to build one anyway - what a waste and would look worse in terms of messing up the country side!

2 - A house with a BIG barn that was clearly once a regular farm barn but has been used to hold a "fun pet horse" for years. Its right on a bridal way (dont know if that makes it worse) - from what I gather, it might be easier to convert that to a new house (that we dont need!) than a home gym

I assume you have a professional interest in this stuff? You sound like the man to talk further to!

[LooneyTunes]

Equus said:

LooneyTunes said:

...also worth being aware that a lot happens in the countryside that nobody ever notices.

True; on the one hand, I did a 'Certificate of Lawfulness' application recently for a lady who had converted and lived in a barn (and paid council tax on it!) since (IIRC) 1973 without permission and without anyone bothering her - she was just putting things in order for her son, in case she died - but on the other we get jobs all the time that result from malicious neighbours reporting the most trivial matters (often for no better reason than they don't like newcomers).

If you're thinking of spending £several hundred thousand on a property, and the ability to use it how you want to is in question, I'd still say that it's worth confirming the details before you commit yourself, though. Don't rely on your Solicitor checking this sort of stuff as part of the purchase - they won't (and usually lack the knowledge to do so properly, even if you ask them to).

Agree completely!

MarkL73 said:

1- A house that has a large garden and orchard with stables they use (and have for 20 years) as DIY tool storage, spare space, etc (never had horses) - The stables were built in the 90's before the current owners and I expect the orchard was the horse padock. The planning I found for the original stable build said "build it - but for equestria use only). I dont suppose the stables not having seen a horse in 20 years helps? Annoyingly, if we couldnt do the stables to gym switch - we'd use PD on the large actual garden to build one anyway - what a waste and would look worse in terms of messing up the country side!

By coincidence, the other side of the barn that someone lives in is a house that got planning permission for stables.

The stables were built the wrong way round, facing the road not the fields, unusually well constructed, and never saw a horse in them. Then they got turned into accommodation (without PP) They’ve eventually been signed off, in spite of much local opposition (unlike the bloke who lives in the barn, the owner was not well liked), as an annex… that particular LA has shown time and time again that they will shy away from a fight, so people take the piss.

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

1- A house that has a large garden and orchard with stables they use (and have for 20 years) as DIY tool storage, spare space, etc (never had horses) - The stables were built in the 90's before the current owners and I expect the orchard was the horse padock. The planning I found for the original stable build said "build it - but for equestria use only). I dont suppose the stables not having seen a horse in 20 years helps? Annoyingly, if we couldnt do the stables to gym switch - we'd use PD on the large actual garden to build one anyway - what a waste and would look worse in terms of messing up the country side!

Orchards (and paddocks) are one of the classic trip-hazards.

Basically, if it 'reads' as being separated from the garden (by a fence, hedge or whatever) then there is every possibility that the Planning Authority will judge that it does not form part of the domestic curtilage.

If you can evidence the fact that it has been used only 'incidental to the enjoyment of the dwellinghouse' for at least 10 years, then you can apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness to confirm that as (guess what?) its lawful use, BUT be aware that a Certificate of Lawfulness isn't quite the same as a Planning approval for a change of use: it confirms that the existing used is now lawful, but it does not give you Permitted Development rights to undertake further work, and the 'lawful' use has to remain continuous and unbroken, otherwise it will lapse.

MarkL73 said:

A house with a BIG barn that was clearly once a regular farm barn but has been used to hold a "fun pet horse" for years. ...from what I gather, it might be easier to convert that to a new house (that we dont need!) than a home gym

No, as I said in my first post, Class Q (the Permitted Development right to convert a barn to a dwelling) only works if the last (and exclusive) lawful use of the barn was agricultural, and keeping a horse in it is 'equestrian' use, so technically dobbin has 'killed' its Class Q PD rights*. Whether that is disclosed to the LPA is a different matter, of course (but again you'd need to be aware of the risk that some busy-body would come out of the woodwork and grass you up, if you applied for Class Q).


Edited to add:

* Though I should add the - fairly crucial - information that this is changing on 21st May, though still not to include barns that were in equestrian use.

Sorry! That's a fairly important omission on my part... there have been so many changes to PD rights recently that even I struggle to recall them all, when I need to!

LINK

Edited by Equus on Saturday 4th May 15:42

[MarkL73]

Equus said:

Orchards (and paddocks) are one of the classic trip-hazards.

Interesting - the layout is that there is a very clear "house and garden" section one side and orchard with stables section the other - and a woodland area/stream section below both.

So I could get a cert to say the use of the stables as "not stables" is lawful if it continues as is - but dont be making any changes to the building (which is useless to me) or I apply to get change of use to the stables/open barn beside it - or I use regular PD and stick a garden office/gym in the actual garden and the stables just sit un-used.

The Picture is probably self-explanatory but the house/garden is the section with a house in it! The orchard is the section with 12 little trees in it and the stables/barn are towards the top of this section. There is then woodland/stream below both. The field in the foreground/bottom left of the photo is neighbouring farmland.

Edited by MarkL73 on Saturday 4th May 15:30

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

So I could get a cert to say the use of the stables as "not stables" is lawful if it continues as is - but dont be making any changes to the building (which is useless to me) or I apply to get change of use to the stables/open barn beside it - or I use regular PD and stick a garden office/gym in the actual garden and the stables just sit un-used.

See edit to above post, in case you missed it - for which I apologise... I really should have remembered that!

But yes, the above is broadly correct (as I read it), subject to the point that if you established the 'lawful use' of the not-stables as a domestic outbuilding, incidental to the use of the dwelinghouse, then internal alterations to form a home office or gym would be OK - it would be external changes that require PP. Section 55(2a) of the Town and Countyr Planning Act specifically excludes internal alterations from the meaning of 'development' as it applies to Planning (though not to Building Regulations, so be careful there!): LINK.

Common sense does usually eventually prevail,. but what we'd normally do in this situation is to seek a Certificate of Lawfulness to establish that the domestic use of the land or building is 'lawful', as a fallback position, then once you've got that, follow it up with a Planning Application for Change of Use, to make the change permanent (and potentially gain PD rights, but they do have a habit of withdrawing these when they grant the permission).

I told you this st was complicated and fraught with hazards?

[MarkL73]

Equus said:

See edit to above post, in case you missed it - for which I apologise... I really should have remembered that!

But yes, the above is broadly correct (as I read it), subject to the point that if you established the 'lawful use' of the not-stables as a domestic outbuilding, incidental to the use of the dwelinghouse, then internal alterations to form a home office or gym would be OK - it would be external changes that require PP. Section 55(2a) of the Town and Countyr Planning Act specifically excludes internal alterations from the meaning of 'development' as it applies to Planning (though not to Building Regulations, so be careful there!): LINK.

Common sense does usually eventually prevail,. but what we'd normally do in this situation is to seek a Certificate of Lawfulness to establish that the domestic use of the land or building is 'lawful', as a fallback position, then once you've got that, follow it up with a Planning Application for Change of Use, to make the change permanent (and potentially gain PD rights, but they do have a habit of withdrawing these when they grant the permission).

I told you this st was complicated and fraught with hazards?

Sounds fun !!!!

So if you got an application for change of use approved that would mean it would now be allowed to be used as an extension of the house (and so be a gym/office/whatever) but if they removed PD rights it would just mean that anything I wanted to do to it that was development would require planning – it would just be the planning would not be rejected on the grounds of the use being "wrong"?

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

So if you got an application for change of use approved that would mean it would now be allowed to be used as an extension of the house (and so be a gym/office/whatever) but if they removed PD rights it would just mean that anything I wanted to do to it that was development would require planning – it would just be the planning would not be rejected on the grounds of the use being "wrong"?

Yes, more or less... and they shouldn't reject the Planning application for further changes unless they are actually harmful to the character of the building or its rural setting, so (for example) introduction of discrete doors and windows ought to be fine... it would be any big extensions or anything that made it look blatantly like a non-agricultural/equestrian building that they probably won't like. For example, I've seen many applications rejected where people wanted to add a dormer to a former barn - because dormers are not characteristic of agricultural buildings - but conservation-style 'Velux' rooflights are usually accepted.

Similarly big windows or large areas of glazing are often resisted - though not always, if they fill an obvious existing 'barn door' opening in the structure, and one trick I've used successfully quite a few times is to have a big glazed opening hidden behind a sliding barn door.

[MarkL73]

hmmm - ok - so that sounds like a few hoops to jump through rather than any serious issues.

Our intention was that the buildings would remain looking, from the outside, almost exactly as they do. We quite like the idea of the existing stable doors remaining and then glass doors behind them to both preserve the look and also improved security so we can lock the building up at night and it looked like a regular stable again! Same with the open pole barn that is next to the stables. The idea was to just install a large roller door in the entrance and it looked like a big barn from the outside but able to open it up, for training use. It is quite literally supposed to be a barn gym and not a barn that has been turned into a gym – if that makes sense.

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

Our intention was that the buildings would remain looking, from the outside, almost exactly as they do. We quite like the idea of the existing stable doors remaining and then glass doors behind them to both preserve the look and also improved security so we can lock the building up at night and it looked like a regular stable again! Same with the open pole barn that is next to the stables. The idea was to just install a large roller door in the entrance and it looked like a big barn from the outside but able to open it up, for training use. It is quite literally supposed to be a barn gym and not a barn that has been turned into a gym – if that makes sense.

I don't see any fundamental issues with that - the first and main hurdle will simple be getting them to accept that it is lawful as a domestic outbuilding (because from your photo, I'd say the LPA would have very good grounds to say that the land is a separate orchard/paddock outside the current domestic curtilage, so you'd be relying on established use under the 10 year rule).

[MarkL73]

and if they did say that it was not part of the house - then we have to jump to "change of use" application?

Do they put the sensible hat on and say-it has not seen a horse in 20 years and will likely never see one again – so let's go ahead and approve?

[MarkL73]

Alternative is to turn either of the two (in pink) disused (aside from the pet horse) barns into a gym to rival The Rock's

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

and if they did say that it was not part of the house - then we have to jump to "change of use" application?

But unless you can show that it has lawful use as an domestic outbuilding (as an outcome of having been continuously used for that purpose for >10 years) the CoU application is likely to be refused. As I said, they don't like spreading 'domestication' of what they class as open countryside.

And no, they may very well take the view that even if the previous owner and yourself did not want to use it for equestrian use, there are plenty of others out there who might, and once they permit the CoU to domestic garden, the loss of open countryside is likely to be permanent.

[Equus]

MarkL73 said:

Alternative is to turn either of the two (in pink) disused (aside from the pet horse) barns into a gym to rival The Rock's

Certainly on the right hand building, there's a post-and-rail fence that very clearly (IMO) separates it from the domestic curtilage. I wouldn't fancy your chances much on the left hand building, either, again unless you can demonstrate lawfulness as a domestic outbuiling has already been established under the 10 year rule.

If you can pretend the pet horse never existed, either may have potential for conversion as an independent dwelling under class Q, but you'd need to do a detailed feasibility study against the rules for Class Q, 'cos they're complicated.

[MarkL73]

Equus said:

Certainly on the right hand building, there's a post-and-rail fence that very clearly (IMO) separates it from the domestic curtilage. I wouldn't fancy your chances much on the left hand building, either, again unless you can demonstrate lawfulness as a domestic outbuiling has already been established under the 10 year rule.

If you can pretend the pet horse never existed, either may have potential for conversion as an independent dwelling under class Q, but you'd need to do a detailed feasibility study against the rules for Class Q, 'cos they're complicated.

Fair to say I would be better finding a barn conversion with a massive double garage that I can use as a gym (and seen a couple of those)! Although that one had bats

[MarkL73]

Equus said:

MarkL73 said:

and if they did say that it was not part of the house - then we have to jump to "change of use" application?

But unless you can show that it has lawful use as an domestic outbuilding (as an outcome of having been continuously used for that purpose for >10 years) the CoU application is likely to be refused. As I said, they don't like spreading 'domestication' of what they class as open countryside.

Having given it some thought-I suppose the sensible solution is just to use the stables as a home gym but keep any conversion required to do this (rubber floor, maybe a fake ceiling, to a relatively low cost) That way, if it never gets pulled up, it’s fine and if it does, it is very cheap to revert back to being standard and then just stick the gym under PD in the regular garden.

Out of interest, what is the power they hold? – for example, let’s say you were storing your lawnmower in the stable – you are not using it for the intended purpose. Can they make you take your lawnmower out of the stable?