Understanding Use Classes for supported living schemes

There’s growing demand for supported living schemes and children’s homes. Planning policy has evolved in recent years to help meet demand but one tricky question remains: which Use Class applies?

Which Use Class applies?

Supported living schemes usually fall under Use Class C2 (residential institutions) or Use Class C3(b) – a single household of up to six residents where care is provided.

For traditional care models offering round-the-clock care, meals and communal facilities for residents, Use Class C2 applies. However, supported living schemes can vary greatly; proposed schemes that don’t fit within the traditional model may fall within Use Class C3, either where up to six individuals live as a household, or where residents live in self-contained homes with care provided as needed.

Courts have previously held that as little as two hours of care per week can qualify a scheme to fall within Use Class C2, so care hours alone don’t determine the Use Class.

There’s also case law regarding children’s homes and whether these can fall within Use Class C3. Children alone can’t form a household, so whether a children’s home falls under C3 often depends on staffing – whether there are live-in carers or a number of rotating carers on a shift pattern.

Planning implications for C2 and C3 schemes

There are pros and cons to each Use Class in terms of the planning application process and associated costs.

For small-scale schemes within Use Class C3 that involve changing the use of existing dwellings, express planning permission is typically not required, subject to local policies. This can result in significant time and cost savings. Meanwhile, larger Use Class C3 schemes or those falling within Use Class C2 need explicit planning permission, which can be a lengthy and expensive process.

When identifying sites for potential new developments, Use Class C2 schemes are typically not subject to the same site allocation policies as Use Class C3 schemes, which may face restrictions from local policies that designate areas suitable for housing.

For new developments meeting Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) thresholds, C2 schemes are more advantageous as they’re often exempt from CIL payments, which are calculated on a fixed rate per square metre of floor space. They can also avoid affordable housing contributions under a Section 106 agreement which is often triggered by larger Use Class C3 developments. However, both Use Classes may still require Section 106 agreements for matters like highways improvements.

All new developments must now deliver a 10% habitat uplift, referred to as biodiversity net gain (BNG). The existing BNG is calculated at the start of the planning application process before any development takes place. This can be secured by on-site provision or by acquiring credits to deliver off-site and can be a costly element of the planning process, particularly for small sites where on-site provision is not possible.

Conclusion

Depending on the type of scheme proposed, both Use Classes have their advantages when it comes to the planning process. The scale and nature of the scheme will usually determine the right classification.

The planning policy is ever-changing – it may well be the case that the position in relation to BNG requirements changes in the not too distant future, for example – but current flexibility within the planning system allows providers to deliver a wide range of schemes that meet residents’ needs while balancing business priorities.