Clarification required for retirement living

Whilst the House of Lord Select Committee sought to clarify the position on retirement living, the Mayor takes the opposite stance.

The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) has been directed by the Deputy Mayor for Planning, Regeneration and Skills to refuse planning permission for a 142 extra care scheme in Kensington Square citing that it should be treated as C3 dwellings rather than C2 Residential Institutions.  The implications for this is that the proposals should be subject to the same policies as standard open market residential schemes as opposed to specialist housing.  The Deputy Mayor concluded that the application had not demonstrated that the maximum reasonable amount of affordable housing would be delivered, and directed the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to refuse the application.

This is in direct contrast to the House of Lord Select Committee on Intergenerational Fairness and Provision’s Report ‘Tackling Intergenerational unfairness’ considers ‘the housing challenge’ amongst non-planning related matters, where the government clarified that extra care retirement communities fall within the C2 use class “as these facilities can provide care it is not clear why they are not more consistently classified for the basis of planning in the same use case as care providers”.

Gareth Lyon, Head of Policy and Communications at the Associated Retirement Community Operators (ARCO) told the Select Committee that “the UK had much lower levels of people living in retirement communities than comparable countries. He stated that in “Australia, New Zealand and the US, between five per cent and six per cent of older people live in retirement communities. In the UK, that figure is 0.5 per cent to 0.6 per cent.”

Clearly there is a mismatch as to how these schemes are being assessed by decision makers.  Some clarity is required to ensure developers have certainty in the early stages of their schemes.  We will watch how this plays out and if Heythrop College decide to appeal the decision.