Convert stables/barn to gym/home office (planning)
Discussion
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
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 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
Super useful!Edited by Equus on Saturday 4th May 14:13
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!
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 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 s
t was complicated and fraught with hazards? 
Sounds fun !!!! 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 s
t was complicated and fraught with hazards? 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"?
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.
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 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 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.
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.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?
Gassing Station | Homes, Gardens and DIY | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff