Over the past year, new permitted development rights to convert barns to houses have failed to deliver. Most LPAs have taken advantage of the ambiguous wording to refuse applications, against the spirit of the legislation. However, new guidance has now been issued which clarifies the rules in favour of conversion.
“This is excellent news for farmers and landowners looking to utilise redundant building resources” reports Gareth Rowe of Smiths Gore, Truro office. “These changes should help local planning authorities in interpreting permitted development rights and lead to more rural homes without building in the countryside, which is the name of the game.”
To recap, in April 2014 the Government introduced new permitted development rights, which allowed for the conversion of agricultural buildings to residential use (under Class MB of the GPDO). Broadly speaking, the new rights allow up to 450m2 of floor space to be converted, up to three dwellings to be created and allow a ‘reasonable’ amount of rebuilding work as necessary to create a functional dwelling house.
Under Class MB, development is permitted subject to ‘prior approval’ being granted by the LPA. In considering such applications the LPA is entitled to take account of certain matters including highway impacts, noise impacts, contamination and flood risk. The final consideration is ‘whether the location or siting of the building makes the change of use otherwise impractical or undesirable’.
Unfortunately the loose wording of this final consideration has left it open to interpretation. As such, LPAs across the country have taken the view that it would be ‘impractical or undesirable’ to allow residential conversions in the countryside, outside of settlements, where people are more reliant on the use of cars. What is worse is that Planning Inspectors have been supporting this interpretation of the legislation at appeal. Of course, with the vast majority of agricultural buildings in countryside locations, this has severely limited the success of such applications and seemed to render the new legislation largely ineffective.
In response to this Fenella Collins (Head of Planning at the CLA), supported by the Taunton planning team, has been lobbying the Government to provide clarification on how the Class MB legislation should be interpreted.
This work has now born fruit. On 5th March 2015 the Government published new guidance within the National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) which provides further explanation as to what is meant by ‘impractical or undesirable’, requiring LPAs to “apply a reasonable ordinary dictionary meaning in making any judgement”. The guidance sites a number of examples of where this might apply including where buildings have no road access, or where they sit next to buildings containing dangerous chemicals or machinery. It specifically states that the ‘sustainability’ of the location should not be a factor taken into account by the LPA in determining these applications.
It is also important to note that the guidance does not restrict the permitted development rights to more traditional buildings. It simply states that prior notifications should be supported as long as “the building is structurally strong enough to take the loading which comes with the external works to provide for residential use”. Such works can include the installation of replacement windows, doors roofs, exterior walls, water, drainage, electricity, gas or other services to the extent reasonably necessary for the building to function as a dwelling.
“This new guidance is really useful to anyone who is considering converting agricultural buildings to residential use” reports Steve Briggs of Smiths Gore, Taunton office. “Whilst the original criteria still apply, there is now far clearer guidance on exactly how the permitted development rights should be interpreted and means that LPAs will have to view proposals much more positively from this point forwards.”
