Don’t forget to find us on social media:
Don’t forget to find us on social media:
Class Q Barn Conversion.
Recent changes to Planning Legislation and Guidance has changed what’s considered ‘feasible’ under this Permitted Development Right.
At Daintree, we have detailed experience of projects carried out under Permitted Development.
The majority of the time, for us, these projects have related to private single residences, however, we are building quite an in-depth knowledge and experience in a lesser known form of Permitted Development that allows for the conversion of Agricultural buildings into Residential properties. These buildings don’t necessarily have to be barns, they can be almost any building in Agricultural use, so long as they meet some set criteria, and are able to be converted within the parameters set out in the legislation.
This last point, referring to the “parameters set out in the legislation”, raises an interesting issue though – the way the original legislation was written lead to considerable inconsistent interpretation so, in many cases, different Local Authorities had different views of what was and wasn’t considered acceptable under Class Q.
In the years since, there have been numerous appeal cases that have helped to clarify some of the more ambiguous points, however, in the early part of 2018 the powers that be offered some relief, by clarifying definitions and increasing the allowances further.
The new changes allow for the creation of up to 5 new ‘small’ residential units or 3 ‘larger’ units with a maximum cumulative floor space of 465sqm.
The major change, in our opinion, seeks to clarify the building work allowed under Class Q. There has always been an allowance for partial demolition and rebuilding (the extent of which remains an ambiguous point, sadly), insertion of new windows/doors, upgrading external fabric (i.e. insulating etc) to make the building habitable as well as including the installation of utilities and drainage. The main ‘issue’ frequently seems to revolve around ‘Structure’ – specifically, what is or isn’t considered to be ‘structural works’. In one case we read about, the installation of a screed was a reason for refusal on the basis of ‘structure’. Indeed, we have had to argue the case for installation of ‘internal partitions’ on grounds of ‘structure’. We were successful in that instance.
Another instance of ‘Structure’ becoming an issue was a proposal for the installation of a first floor within a barn building. Thankfully, the new guidance clarifies these issues specifically stating:
“Internal works are not generally development. For the building to function as a dwelling it may be appropriate to undertake internal structural works, including to allow for a floor, the insertion of a mezzanine or upper floors within the overall residential floor space permitted, or internal walls, which are not prohibited by Class Q.”
For us and our clients, this clarification is fantastic news and has prompted us to submit a revised application , including the insertion of a first floor, for the creation of three new homes.
These changes mean it should now be possible to utilise the full volume of these buildings, without the need for a secondary planning application and potential appeal. That’s the theory according to the updates, but time will tell if we’ll be successful. To be continued…