King Charles must "not expect" to upsize his home to Buckingham Palace once renovations are complete, a royal expert has warned.
Since becoming monarch last September, Charles and Queen Camilla have continued to use Clarence House as their London residence.
A multi-million-pound renovation project is currently underway to revamp the palace - although the couple does use it as an office and for functions.
It is believed that within time, Charles and Camilla will make the move down The Mall to the palace - but royal historian Dr Tessa Dunlop believes we shouldn't expect the 74-year-old "grandad King" to get an upgraded property.
She told the Mirror: "After divorce and the death of a loved one, apparently the most stressful thing you can do is move house.
"Our King has been through the first two, why is it even a question that he might have to endure the third?
"Charles has made it clear that he does not want to swap his official London residence, Clarence House, for enormous, impractical Buckingham Palace.
"Nor should we entertain the idea of the King moving, irrespective of the romantic associations attached to the world's most famous address.
"If we want a more modern functional royal family we can't expect a 74-year-old 'grandad' King to upsize from his home of 20 years into a 775-room palace."
Tessa also argued that the Palace is not a place that monarchs in the past have relished living at - not even the late Queen.
She added: "It might look fancy from the outside, (the building was re-fronted in 1913 to keep up with royal Europe) but Buckingham Palace has always been a nightmare to live in.
"After Edward VIII's abdication in 1936, George VI's family moved in and were less than impressed: it was like camping in a museum, and should have been turned into one years ago.
"Unlike Andrew and Edward, Charles' early years were not spent in Buckingham Palace but in his current residence, Clarence House.
"That's where Elizabeth and Philip enjoyed their first real home; the Duke rewired the building to the highest spec, fitting intercom phones between rooms while Charles and Anne took their first steps in the nursery.
"It was Prime Minister Churchill who insisted the family moved across to Buckingham Palace when Elizabeth became Queen in 1952.
"Nobody wanted to swap cosy Clarence House for 'the gloomy palace'. But precedent dictated; Elizabeth and Philip were an institution first and a family second. Their marriage suffered as a result.
"It's ironic that Andrew is refusing to budge from the 30-bedroom Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park, while Charles wants to stay put in Clarence House. Let's not pretend this is about a 'frugal King'.
"Clarence House (combined with Charles' numerous other abodes) is not frugal.
"But it is the right decision. Even the Queen was glad to escape the palace for the relative peace of Windsor Castle when the pandemic hit. And the optics of one old couple rattling around in Buckingham Palace after its multi-million-pound refurb would not look good – who would pay for their heating bill?"
And Tessa believes that a better use of the palace is to open it up to the public more.
She added: "Far better to open up more doors for a longer season, and let the real foot soldiers of monarchy – the paying public – enjoy the sumptuous treasures of Buckingham Palace.
"It's a 'museum' we'd all love to 'camp' in just once. As for the King – he's had quite enough turbulence for one year.
"Leave him and Camilla alone with their creature comforts in Clarence House."
Tessa Dunlop is talking about her book 'Elizabeth and Philip' on Wednesday (May 17) at 18.30 in Orpington, Bromley. Book your free ticket here.
