What Planners get wrong with coliving
Little Valentines
Copyright: SHA Architecture & Design
Coliving is becoming one of the UK's most misunderstood housing typologies. Despite a growing number of professionally managed schemes, it is still frequently viewed through the lens of HMOs or micro-apartments with shared amenities. That misunderstanding shapes planning decisions, often creating barriers for well-designed schemes while doing little to distinguish them from poor-quality shared housing.
If we're serious about diversifying housing supply, it's time to rethink some of the assumptions.
The myth of noise and nuisance
One of the biggest misconceptions is that coliving inevitably creates noise, anti-social behaviour and neighbour disputes. The evidence from professionally managed schemes suggests otherwise.
Operators such as Folk and Gravity invest heavily in on-site management, resident engagement and community programming. These are not unmanaged shared houses; they are professionally operated residential communities where creating a positive living environment is fundamental to the business model.
In fact, research into purpose-built shared living consistently points to management quality—not simply building design—as the critical factor in resident satisfaction and neighbourhood integration. Many of the concerns raised during planning are based on perceived risks rather than reported operational issues.
Planning policy remains inconsistent
The planning landscape is equally fragmented. Authorities that have developed specific guidance on coliving—often those with experience of purpose-built student accommodation—tend to have a much clearer understanding of how the model functions. Elsewhere, applications are often assessed without any dedicated policy framework, leaving planners to make assumptions about what coliving actually is.
That uncertainty slows delivery and creates inconsistency across the country.
As housing need continues to outstrip supply, particularly for single professionals and key workers, a more consistent planning approach would provide greater certainty for both local authorities and developers.
Little Valentines
Copyright: SHA Architecture & Design
The opportunity planners are overlooking
Much of the conversation around coliving has focused on large, city-centre developments.
Yet one of the greatest opportunities may be smaller-scale schemes in suburban locations.
Scale matters. A community that is too small struggles to generate the social interaction that makes coliving successful. Too large, and high resident turnover can create an impersonal, hotel-like atmosphere.
Finding the right balance could bring affordable, professionally managed housing into the suburbs, where around 80% of UK homes are located. Rather than concentrating new housing in city centres, carefully designed suburban coliving could help tackle housing affordability while creating stronger local communities.
This also aligns with wider policy ambitions around the 20-minute neighbourhood, reducing commuting and encouraging more sustainable patterns of living.
The plans don't tell the whole story
Perhaps the biggest challenge for planners is that genuinely high-quality coliving can look remarkably similar on paper to a poorly conceived HMO.
Floor plans cannot show how a building will be managed.
Developers can easily draw attractive communal spaces and promise community events, but the long-term success of coliving depends on professional operation: resident engagement, maintenance, programming and active management. That is where planners should focus greater attention. A robust management plan often tells you far more about whether a scheme will succeed than another iteration of the floor plans.
Little Valentines
Copyright: SHA Architecture & Design
Judging coliving on what it actually is
The UK's housing challenges are changing. More people are living alone than ever before, while loneliness has become recognised as a significant public health issue. At the same time, affordability pressures mean many people are looking for housing that offers both value and a genuine sense of community.
Good coliving responds to those challenges.
The planning system should judge it not as an oversized HMO or a collection of small flats, but as a distinct housing model whose success depends as much on management and community-building as it does on architecture.
The question isn't whether coliving fits neatly into existing planning categories. It's whether planning policy is ready to evaluate it on the basis of how successful schemes actually operate, rather than how unsuccessful ones are imagined.
As more coliving schemes come forward, should planning decisions be driven by evidence from successful operations—or by assumptions about what might go wrong?
SHA Architecture & Design. If you’re exploring new ways to design or invest in residential living, now is the time to think beyond the unit and consider the experience as a whole. Feel free to get in touch by emailing us or booking in a call.
T: +44 207 267 9679
WhatsApp: +44 7547 955 989
E: info@sha.uk.com
We would be happy to discuss how your home can better support the way you live.