The housing crisis, shifting demographics and a rise in people living on their own represent major changes for how we live, yet town planning is slow to react to new forms of housing, argues WYG associate director Mark Westcott
Traditionally, the British property industry is slow to adapt and change; it is very much reactive rather than proactive. The housing crisis, the need to build more densely, issues of affordability and the changes in family sizes and general demographics are matters that have been emerging for many years. However, the property industry has been slow to take proactive measures; none more so than in town planning.
Shared living is an emerging sector of the housing industry and is a term often used to encapsulate a breadth of housing products. Student housing and care homes are now mainstream, Build to Rent is starting to gain acceptance but co-living (informally defined as non-self-contained units that share communal facilities such as kitchens, gyms, room service and concierge services) is still widely viewed with concern. The planning system is also slow to respond to transitional retirement products, notwithstanding the growing momentum and needs for such forms of living.
Many people in today’s society, whether or not by choice, and on a long- or short-term basis, live as singles. However, not all wish or can afford to live alone or in shared flats or houses. Instead, they seek community living, inhabiting private spaces while sharing communal areas for socialising, cooking, dining and working.
Such ventures act against loneliness and isolation, an increasing problem in our society, and also improve social mobility. The evidence shows that they are popular with all ages, from the newly graduated professional, to middle aged singles, through to the older generation who may have lost loved ones. Similarly, at a time when the elderly population is rising, retirement schemes, which include independent living, part care, full care and extra care, are becoming increasingly popular as they enable older people to move easily from facility to facility if their health worsens.
However, the planning system is slow to embrace such ways of living; they do not fall neatly within any land use classification, mostly not at all, and do not provide room sizes in accordance with traditional standards. As a result, such facilities cannot come forward easily, despite the need and evidence base for them growing over many years.
The government has only just published, in June of this year, new Planning Practice Guidance on housing for older people, following significant lobbying to do so. This is perhaps the only piece of guidance at the national level associated with shared-living schemes. It acknowledges that the planning system needs to give consideration to “the level of care and scale of communal facilities provided” and that the health and lifestyles of older people will differ greatly, as will their housing needs – ranging from “accessible and adaptable general needs housing to specialist housing with high levels of care and support”.
The government emphasis for plan-making purposes is that authorities “will need to determine the needs of people who will be approaching or reaching retirement over the plan period, as well as the existing population of older people”. However, it does not appear to go far enough to actively encourage and easily streamline delivery in the planning system as it is focused on just one piece of the shared-living jigsaw.
Looking at the capital, the Mayor of London has prepared a draft policy (H18) in his emerging new London Plan in relation to co-living, but despite it being written in 2017, it has still not yet been adopted. It is also specific to “large-scale” schemes comprising 50 units or more.
Nevertheless, the mayor’s acceptance that co-living schemes should count towards meeting housing targets on the basis of a 3:1 ratio, with three bedrooms/units being counted as a single home, does show a recognition for this type of housing and should certainly be welcomed as a step in the right direction.
At the London borough level, co-living is slow to be actively encouraged, despite its benefits and growing attraction to the population. Recent research has discovered that not a single London borough has an explicit co-living policy, either adopted or emerging, thus leaving it to the draft London Plan to lead the way. This is cause for alarm, not least because it gives the emerging sector a lack of certainty over acceptability, thus stifling a housing product that can clearly contribute towards the need for new housing packages to combat the city’s housing crisis.
That’s not to say some boroughs are not alive to the growing sector. Indeed, a select few are embracing and welcoming co-living. However, without recognition in policy terms, it is left to a case-by-case approach where each scheme is considered in a policy vacuum; an approach that only contributes to the slowdown of the emerging sub-sector and further restricts its growth.
The government authorities have been slow to respond in each instance and when they have, they are not actively setting out how the housing needs can be met in an acceptable manner; there is room for much more proactivity and support.
Mark Westcott
Associated Director
WYG
Tel: +44 (0)113 278 7111
Twitter: @wyggroup
LinkedIn: wyg-group
Instagram: wyggroup
