Does the freeholder of a house converted into flats have PD rights?

[JamesHopeful]

I'm aware that the owners of individual flats do not generally have any Permitted Development rights. However, I am considering buying a whole house which has been split into two flats. It's on a single freehold and no long leaseholds have been granted (the current owner just lets out both flats, each on an Assured Shorthold Tenancy). I'd like to extend these flats with a loft conversion and a single-storey ground floor extension (I would not create any more flats, just make the existing two bigger).

If this property were still a single house, the work I would like to do would definitely be within PD rights. Does the fact that that it's been split into two flats mean that these rights are gone, even for me as freeholder of the whole house?

I'd be very grateful indeed for any help. (I should also mention that I have already posted this on the LandlordZone web forums, but this forum seems a livelier forum so I hope no one minds me posting here as well).

 

[tony1851]

A C3 dwelling converted to flats loses its permitted development rights.

 

[Nakajo]

Where is it? Outside of London (and maybe Birmingham) the re-amalgamation of a residential unit is PD. London is an odd case, where it has recently been established that this can be construed as a material change of use.

 

[Doggit]

So he'd have to go for planning permission Tony, but do you think it's likely to get refused. I know, daft question in some ways.

It might be worthwhile taking a few pictures, and looking to see if any other houses have been done, and then have a chat with the local planning officers James.

 

[JamesHopeful]

A C3 dwelling converted to flats loses its permitted development rights.

Thank you for your reply. I've now examined this a bit further and now understand that "standard" residential permitted development rights only apply to C3 and C4 use-class houses. As this house has been converted into two flats it is no longer a C3/C4 house, and although each flat is use class C3/C4 unfortunately flats and maisonettes do not individually benefit from the standard residential PD rights.

As such, I understand that even the smallest single-storey rear extension would need full planning permission. However, I have found a glimmer of hope here, where (if I have read it correctly) it is suggested that I could do a loft conversion within PD rights provided the works are "internal" (i.e. no dormer window I assume): https://www.planningportal.co.uk/info/200130/common_projects/21/flats_and_maisonettes/4

Am I reading that correctly? And would Velux windows count as "internal"? (If not it's a pretty illusory permission, given that no one is going to want a windowless loft conversion!).

Where is it? Outside of London (and maybe Birmingham) the re-amalgamation of a residential unit is PD. London is an odd case, where it has recently been established that this can be construed as a material change of use.

Just to be clear, I do not intend to re-amalgamate the building into a single house. It'd remain two flats, they'd just be bigger.

So he'd have to go for planning permission Tony, but do you think it's likely to get refused. I know, daft question in some ways.

It might be worthwhile taking a few pictures, and looking to see if any other houses have been done, and then have a chat with the local planning officers James.

Thank you for the reply. For various reasons I think the Council would be quite tight on planning with the property I'm looking at, which is why I was hoping to do as much as possible within PD rights or equivalent. I will get in touch with Council officers though.

 

[Nakajo]

But you can see that there's a sort of paradox here; the re-amalgamation of the property is (normally) PD, and works to a re-amalgamated unit are PD. So, now you have a rear extension and a loft conversion, without the planning department ever having been informed. So, when you come to re-subdivide the property, you're effectively just putting it back to how they always thought it was.

 

[JamesHopeful]

But you can see that there's a sort of paradox here; the re-amalgamation of the property is (normally) PD, and works to a re-amalgamated unit are PD. So, now you have a rear extension and a loft conversion, without the planning department ever having been informed. So, when you come to re-subdivide the property, you're effectively just putting it back to how they always thought it was.

I can see how that looks like an elegant solution, but I think it fatally falls down due to the fact that the final element -- i.e. re-sub-dividing the property after the extension -- would not be within PD. If I was then asked by the planning dept how my two flats had come to be enlarged without planning permission, and I explained this, I am pretty sure they'd spot this missing link in the planning process.

 

[tony1851]

Where is it? Outside of London (and maybe Birmingham) the re-amalgamation of a residential unit is PD. London is an odd case, where it has recently been established that this can be construed as a material change of use.

I think there is controversy over this, as it seems unclear whether or not a declared housing shortage by an LPA can be a matrial change of use if the net number of dwellings is reduced. Martin Goodalls' planning blog has some recent commentary on this.

 

[^woody^]

A flat does not have PD rights, even if it looks like a house. Simple.

 

[napoleondynamite]

As per Woody- PD rights apply for extensions and external alterations do not apply. Installation of a rooflight is an external alteration which requires planning permission.

Amalgamation of units may require permission anywhere in the country (London or not is irrelevant). This is a judgement for each council to make based upon their present circumstances; some councils take the view that permission is required, some take the contrary view. In short- it's a bit complicated- so if anyone is looking at this maybe just check with the relevant council for their view.