Barn Conversions and Planning Permission

The English have a romantic attachment to ruins. Well, you may say, everyone does. But, while the French or Irish will happily picnic in a field overlooking a pile of collapsed stone and go home afterwards, only the English want to buy the rubble and spend the rest of their lives trying to make something from it. It is a form of madness. What Guillaume and Marie Claire see as a potentially useful car park with perhaps a small barbeque at one end, Bert and Sandra see as a sacred place which they must (if their lives are to have meaning) rebuild and restore.

Welcome to the world of Barn Conversions. So, let us imagine your situation. You are in love with a barn, dewy-eyed at the sight of the happy, bleating lambs, and you have rejected whatever psychiatric help your GP can offer. You are determined to go ahead. What planning law obstacles lie in your path?

First, consider the National Planning Policy Framework. The barn is probably not in South Kensington; it is more likely to be in ‘Open Countryside’. That being so, the NPPF imposes a presumption against development. This means that unless there is some extraordinary reason to the contrary, there will be a presumption against allowing any new residential building.

So how does one get planning permission for a barn conversion? One must first surmount the presumption against development. There are three broad routes to goal.

An Existing Residential Use

In this case, part of the plot of land in question will already have residential use. Once this is established, then the application will be treated differently. It will be a Full Planning Application but, since part of the land already has residential use, it will be treated (in reality) as an extension to an existing house.

Redundant Agricultural Building

In this case the building will have had some past commercial or agricultural use. The applicant must demonstrate that the building - as of now - has no practical agricultural use. For example: it is too small for modern tractors or machinery; it lacks adequate ventilation for the storage of farm products; or its position relative to other buildings means that access is problematic etc. Note the test is objective: it does not turn just on the building’s utility to the applicant, but on its potential for other agricultural enterprises in the locality. Proving that the building is agriculturally redundant will therefore require an agricultural consultant’s report. This will analyse the building, its limitations, the applicant’s business, and the building’s potential use within another local enterprise. Once the LPA is satisfied that the building has no practical agricultural purpose then it will usually be regarded as suitable for conversion.

Accommodation for Agricultural Employee

This is perhaps the most involved method of obtaining permission for residential use. The essence of the application will be to show that a new residence is required for an employee within the applicant’s business. The employee can be the applicant himself. What is required is fourfold:

(1) First, existence: the business must already exist. It can’t be just a pipe dream. On the land in question, or next to it, must be a viable agricultural business. (‘Agricultural’ here will include forestry or equestrian businesses.)

(2) Second, viability: the business must be capable of continuing. The purpose here is to rule out an uneconomic enterprise being used as a way of getting planning permission. So, turnover, expenses and profits for a decent period – say 3 years – will have to be shown to exist.

(3) Third, need: it must be shown that the enterprise has a business need for an employee to live on site. Note: not a desire but an economic need.

(4) Fourth (and the most problematic), profitability: it must be shown that the profits of the business itself can justify the new residence.

The Trojan Horse Application

Profit, whether you like it or not, drives development. Building in the countryside we know is particularly profitable. Because of this, historically there has been a use of the Hobby Farm as a Trojan Horse application. So a property owner might buy a paddock, put in some chicken sheds, and then apply for an on-site three-bedroom house with a S.106 condition that it be used for a future employee. Once granted (with the S.106 condition) the applicant might build the house, run the chicken farm for a year or so, then close the farm and apply for the removal of the S.106 condition. Planning authorities are deeply suspicious of this. One method of weeding out the Trojan Horse application is to insist on some linkage between the profitability of the business and the cost of building. So, if the desired house has a build cost of say £250,000, the profits from the business will have to be sufficient to service the loan required.

If you are about to buy a barn to convert, take legal advice.