By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.


Build-to-rent 'must be exempt' from minimum space requirements

One of UK’s leading developers of homes for private rent is calling on the government to exempt the build-to-rent sector from new rules on minimum space requirements.

Under new measures designed to target ‘rogue’ landlords, the government is proposing a mandatory standard of 70 sq ft for rooms and a wider licensing of rental properties, which it says will stop the exploitation of tenants.

At the moment, the suggested regulations are only targeted at houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) in the buy-to-let market, but Dominic Martin, head of operations and strategy at Westrock, the investor and developer behind regional rental brand PLATFORM_, said it was important for the government to recognise the different offerings between buy-to-let and build-to-rent.


PLATFORM_ focuses on key regional commuter towns and employment hubs and aims to deliver professionally managed, high quality buy-to-let flats in central locations.

Dominic Martin, head of operations and strategy at Westrock, said: “It’s important when considering space requirements the government recognises the difference between traditional buy-to-let market and the new amenity and service led build to rent sector. This one size all approach just doesn’t work and doesn’t reflect this new and better offer to renters.

“Our initial schemes have been office-to-residential conversions, and while the unit sizes are smaller than a conventional new build, this means we have been able to deliver more much needed homes for private rent. As a counter however, this is compensated by the provision of quality amenity space and a greater investment in smart technology like underfloor heating, as well as onsite staff offering a new customer focused service.”

But there are question marks over the government’s plan to introduce minimum space requirements for rooms in the private rented sector even when it comes to HMOs, with property consultancies like Daniel Watney LLP insisting that it “will ultimately harm renters”.

Julian Goddard, head of residential at Daniel Watney LLP, cautioned that the suggested regulations would adversely impact on renters willing to compromise on space in order to save money, and also did not reflect recent technological changes.

He said: “While well intentioned, these minimum space requirements for the rental market will do little to help people looking for cheaper options to live, especially in ultra-competitive locations like London.

“They also fail to recognise the huge shifts in technology that mean we are increasingly asset lite.  

“From streaming music on Spotify to watching films on Netflix, people - especially the younger generations who see more likely to rent - are owning less and less physical copies and relying more and more on digital services, reducing the need for storage space. Housing policy should be made for the future, not the past.” 

Want to comment on this story? If so...if any post is considered to victimise, harass, degrade or intimidate an individual or group of individuals on any basis, then the post may be deleted and the individual immediately banned from posting in future.

  • icon

    Build to rent will eventually become buy to rent so minimum room sizesd must be maintained.

  • icon
    • 26 June 2019 09:22 AM

    Let's face it GR can get their lives in a lap top and a suitcase
    Not much storage space required.
    Become a family and lots of storage required!!

  • icon

    Best they start making the required donations to the Conservative Party then.

  • icon

    It is very annoying that they say they have a 'better offer' than traditional landlords. There is no proof of this alleged superior provision. The only big differences which could clearly be evidenced is that they only cater for a certain category of tenant - and are not interested in providing much needed homes for the wider market - and they charge loads more, with the justification that they sometimes provide things like gyms, which are not essential aspects and which many tenants would not use after an initial honeymoon period. They want traditional landlords to be targeted by the Government, but they want to be let off. Why should there be one rule for them and one rule for the rest?

  • icon
    • 26 June 2019 10:04 AM

    Ultimately most tenants will become families and desire houses with gardens.

    Anything else is simply a stepping stone.
    So let BTR have the GR stuff and LL can provide the rental houses.
    Flats tend to be very poor LL investments anyway.
    Proper houses will always be in demand.
    Family creation makes this so.
    The day I see BTR building mass residential sites is the day that the small LL should be concerned.
    Won't happen in my lifetime!
    I'm surprised the BTR merchants just don't buy up existing blocks.
    I'd willingly sell if a decent price was offered.


Please login to comment

MovePal MovePal MovePal
sign up