This week The Collective launched its second co-living scheme in Canary Wharf, E14, taking the crown from Old Oak as the world’s largest purpose-built shared living development.
The 705-room scheme offers stays from a single night to one year, under a hotels use class, with extended stays negotiated with Tower Hamlets planning authority.
“There’s a bit of misperception in London about what co-living is,” says The Collective’s planning director James Penfold.
“For us co-living as a product is evolving, and we are now looking to provide a mix of short-stay and long-stay. Ultimately, the product we deliver really depends on the site location and the specific needs and demand of an area and the priorities of the borough we are working with,” he adds.
“In planning land use terms this means we will deliver and operate co-living schemes under sui generis shared living and hotel use, and in some instances we will have a mix of both in the same schemes.”
A rush of co-living schemes have arisen in recent months, but getting approval for them is somewhat of a lottery, with local planning authority preferences, politics and whether it will go to the GLA all affecting a developer’s chances of winning.
As one London-based land director put it: “It’s difficult. You’re relying on politics, rather than policy.”
Local nuances
Many co-living developers will avoid sites that have been recommended for housing as, despite the name, several councils say co-living is not residential.
Last month, Hackney planning officers threw out plans by Rainbow Properties to develop the London borough’s first co-living scheme, stating that the 146-bedroom project failed to comply with its local plan. The plan prioritises residential development over alternative forms of housing such as co-living.
However, in the same month, the London Legacy Development Corporation approved another scheme by The Collective. This development, like the firm’s most recently opened scheme in Canary Wharf, utilises a hotel use class to get planning.
The scheme in Hackney Wick, E9, will provide a 240-bedroom hotel, allowing stays of up to 90 days, and 7,800 sq ft of co-working space.
But two years after the LLDC recommended The Collective’s 222-bedroom co-living scheme in Stratford, E15, for approval under the sui generis use class, the GLA is yet to sign it off. The GLA is concerned that the 14-24 sq m rooms do not reflect London space standards, despite being a sizeable boost from the 10 sq m rooms at Old Oak.
Policy in mayor Sadiq Kahn’s draft London Plan sets out a prescriptive guideline for co-living schemes, defined as “large-scale purpose-built shared living”, but does not specify space standards. Minimum space standards for traditional London homes are 37 sq m.
New policy
“The GLA doesn’t want to set a figure and have that be the lowest common denominator,” says Ian Fergusson, planning associate at design consultant Barton Willmore.
“The issue that it is creating within the development industry is that they’re not providing enough clarity. That means local authorities are innovating in a vacuum, which is great news if you’re in one borough, but not great news if you’re in another.”
Ealing, Tower Hamlets, Harrow and Lewisham have all been receptive to co-living schemes, and LLDC has said it is open to this form of housing.
Catherine Smyth, head of development management at LLDC’s planning team, says it is developing its own local plan guidance.
“If you are considering a [co-living] scheme you should direct it towards the town centres, where there’s good public transportation,” explains Smyth, adding that developments need to “relate positively to the aim of that inclusive neighbourhood”.
She adds that the LLDC’s guidance would include an expectation for “high residential design standards” and 35% affordable housing contribution for off-site delivery. However, like the mayor’s London Plan, there is no definition of minimum space standards. They will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Swerving planning
Another route that co-living developers are taking, is utilising permitted development rights. PDR has been used extensively by residential developers seeking to turn unused office blocks into flats.
Newcomer to the market Mason & Fifth used the system to get the go-ahead for its 28-bedroom scheme in Bermondsey, SE1.
“Planning was a massive hurdle,” says founder David Silver. He says PDR allows the developer to tap into more conventional assets without the need to go through this stringent, arduous planning process.
But as local authorities seek to clamp down on the use of PDR, the clock is ticking on how long this could be utilised as a route for developers, instead of relying on individual local authority co-living preferences.
Until planning policy rather than local politics and preferences is established for co-living, it seems developers will have to keep playing the lottery.
“It comes down to whether [local authorities] believe in it,” says Fergusson.
“The challenge for all of us is to help local authorities understand they’re not being hoodwinked, and that this is actually a desirable kind of housing typology that addresses a need that exists.”
To send feedback, e-mail emma.rosser@egi.co.uk or tweet @EmmaARosser or @estatesgazette
