Planning permission for a co-living scheme

Co-living is sui generis. A large-scale purpose-built shared living scheme is not Class C3, because the units are not self-contained dwellinghouses, and it is not Class C4, because C4 covers small houses in multiple occupation of three to six people. That leaves it outside every class in the Use Classes Order, which means express planning permission is always required and no permitted development route exists.

Sui generis status is more helpful than it sounds. It means the scheme is assessed on its own terms rather than squeezed into standards written for flats, and it also means the council has wide discretion over what standards to apply. Both of those things cut in the applicant's direction and against it.

How co-living is classified in planning terms

Describe the development accurately in the application. The usual formulation is large-scale purpose-built shared living accommodation, sui generis, with the number of rooms, the communal floorspace and the management arrangements stated in the description.

Three features distinguish the use from anything else. Rooms are private but not fully self-contained in the way a studio flat is, communal facilities and services are shared and substantial, and the whole building sits under single ownership and management. Take any one of those away and the classification argument gets harder.

Minimum tenancy length matters too. Short stays push a scheme towards Class C1 hotel use, which changes the policy tests, the parking assessment and often the local politics. A minimum tenancy period, typically expressed in months and secured by planning obligation, is the standard way of drawing that line.

Set all of this out in the Planning Statement, with the operational model described in enough detail that an officer can see how the building will actually run.

Policy tests for large-scale shared living

In London, the London Plan contains a specific policy on large-scale purpose-built shared living, and it is the most developed policy framework in the country. It sets a minimum scheme size, requires single management, requires communal facilities and services proportionate to the number of residents, expects a contribution towards conventional affordable housing, and requires the scheme to be in a location with good access to services and public transport.

Outside London there is no national policy for the use at all. Some authorities have adopted local policies, some apply their houses in multiple occupation policies by analogy, and some assess each scheme against general amenity and design policies. Find out which before you design anything, because the standards applied to room sizes and communal space vary widely between those approaches.

Where the authority has no policy, the argument has to be built from first principles: the identified housing need the scheme addresses, the household types it serves, the effect on the local housing market, and the quality of the living environment offered. An authority that has never determined a co-living application will be nervous, and a pre-application meeting is worth the fee.

Room sizes, shared amenity and management

The design questions that decide these applications are consistent.

Private room size is the first. There is no nationally described standard for shared living, since the space standard applies to Class C3 dwellings, so the reference points are the authority's own policy where one exists and the layouts of consented comparable schemes. Show a furnished layout for every room type, at scale, including storage.

Communal provision is the second. Officers look for the ratio of communal floorspace to residents, the range of spaces provided, and whether they are usable rather than notional. A single large lounge is weaker than a mix of a dining kitchen, quiet working space, laundry and outdoor amenity. Show how residents on the top floor reach communal space without a lift journey through the building.

Management is the third, and it is where obligations bite. Expect commitments on 24-hour staffing or a defined staffing presence, minimum tenancy length, a resident management plan, and restrictions on subletting. Councils secure these by planning obligation because they are what distinguishes the use from a hotel or a badly run HMO.

Affordable housing and obligations

Because the units are not C3 dwellings, conventional affordable housing requirements framed around dwellings do not apply directly. In London the policy answer is a cash in lieu contribution towards conventional affordable housing, calculated by the borough. Elsewhere the position varies, and the range of approaches runs from a contribution to no requirement at all.

Do not assume the absence of a policy means the absence of a requirement. Where an authority is being asked to approve a use it has no policy for, a contribution is often the price of the officer recommendation, and it is better negotiated early than discovered at committee.

Other obligations that appear regularly are a car-free agreement excluding residents from parking permits, a travel plan with monitoring, contributions to public open space, and an employment and skills plan on larger schemes.

Daylight, ventilation and single aspect issues

Co-living plans concentrate small rooms along corridors, and that produces a lot of single-aspect units. Single aspect is not fatal, but single aspect facing north, or facing a light well of poor proportions, is hard to defend.

Test daylight early using the BRE approach and be honest about the results. A Daylight and Sunlight Assessment that shows a proportion of rooms below the guideline values, with a clear explanation of why the design cannot reasonably do better and what compensating quality the scheme offers, reads far better than one that quietly omits the worst rooms.

Overheating is the paired issue. Small rooms with a single opening, high internal gains and limited cross ventilation are the classic overheating risk, and Approved Document O sets the compliance route for new residential buildings. Design the ventilation strategy before the elevations are fixed rather than adding mechanical cooling at technical design.

Acoustic separation between rooms and between rooms and communal space deserves the same early attention. Complaints about noise through partitions are the fastest way to a bad management reputation.

Transport, cycle parking and servicing

Co-living residents in a well-connected location typically have low car ownership, and schemes are usually promoted as car-free or car-capped. The evidence for that has to be more than an assertion.

Cycle parking is the pressure point. Provision has to be at the standard set by the development plan, at ground or basement level, accessible without carrying a bike up steps, and secure. Long-stay and short-stay provision are counted separately.

Servicing is underestimated on almost every scheme. A building of several hundred residents generates constant parcel deliveries, food deliveries at unsocial hours, laundry, waste and moving-in traffic at the start of each tenancy cycle. Show a servicing area off the highway, a refuse strategy with adequate bin capacity for the collection frequency, and a delivery management arrangement. Where the site is constrained, expect the highway authority to look hard at this.

Documents for a shared living application

A scheme of any scale should expect to submit a planning statement covering the classification and policy case, a design and access statement, transport evidence with a servicing and delivery strategy, daylight and sunlight studies, an overheating assessment, energy and sustainability documents, drainage and flood risk information, ecology and biodiversity net gain material, and a management plan.

Where the building is 18 metres or more in height, or seven storeys or more, the Building Safety Act 2022 framework and Planning Gateway One apply, and a Fire Statement is required under Article 9A of the Development Management Procedure Order 2015. That document must be prepared by someone with the necessary fire engineering competence, and any AI-assisted draft is a starting point for that professional rather than a substitute. The Building Safety Regulator is a statutory consultee at that stage, and its involvement adds time to the programme.

Explain the design rationale for the room mix, communal offer and circulation in the Design and Access Statement, and be specific about who the scheme is for. A vague answer to that question is the most common reason a co-living application struggles at committee.

Browse the 66 report types by category to build the document list for your site, then check it against the council's local validation requirements before you submit.

This is general guidance, not legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.