Late last year, the Government published People at the Heart of Care. The White Paper recognised the crisis that the social care sector faces, but despite a £300m commitment for housing, it is on supporting care in individuals’ homes rather than in residential care homes.

Simultaneously the UK has a chronic shortage of suitable housing for older people. In 2019 around one fifth of the UK population (19%) was aged 65 – up from 7% in 2009.

Unfortunately planning policy has had the effect of thwarting the provision of residential homes. Recently amendments to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order have allowed for greater change of use between use classes, in creating the all-encompassing Class E. This not only allows for change of use between a wide range of ‘commercial, business and services’ (those as diverse as offices, health centres, creches, gyms and even light industrial use) but also allows for these uses to be converted to homes under Permitted Development Rights.
But Use Class C2, under which residential homes fall, remains a very narrow use class and the system fails to recognise the wide variety of residential care models that are now available.

Class E was clearly a response to the ‘perfect storm’ that was engulfing the high street: not only the pandemic, but also the long-term effects of out-of-town retail parks and online shopping. Back in 2018, the retail expert Bill Grimsey published The Vanishing High Street which concluded that high streets could no longer rely solely on retail, and that they ‘need to be repopulated and re-fashioned as community hubs, including housing, health and leisure, entertainment, education, arts, business/office space and some shops’.

Post-pandemic, that argument is stronger than ever. And yet while medical/health services and day centres and are seen as benefiting the high street, social care and retirement homes are not. The refusal, in October 2020, to allow Guild Living to build 222 retirement homes in Walton on Thames town centre suggests that some local authorities and communities are yet to be convinced of these benefits: the planning application was rejected on the basis that the development would damage the vitality of the town centre.

More specifically, the local planning authority stated that, ‘The proposed development fails to make efficient use of land by providing the type of accommodation (C2 Use Class) for which there is no short or medium term need,’ and that, ‘The application fails to demonstrate whether any alternative mixed use would be viable and feasible to support diversity in the town centre…it fails to add to the centre’s competitiveness and would undermine the vitality and viability of the town centre.’

At the time of the decision, the developer accused the Council of ageism, winning support from Age Concern, and in June 2021 Guild Living won an appeal on the basis of the social, economic and environmental benefits that the scheme would bring, along with its significant contribution to the supply of housing and specialist accommodation both locally and nationally.

The benefits of providing residential homes and housing in sustainable locations are multiple: for those who reside there and can enjoy both local amenities and essential facilities, but also for the town and city centres which benefit from the enhanced vitality and viability that such schemes bring.

The Government’s investment in social care is of course welcomed, but to be successful the approach must be joined up – not only within housing, health and social care, but with the planning sector too.