HEMINGFORD GREY PARISH COUNCIL I hereby give notice that as previously arranged, the Meeting of the Parish Council will be held on Monday 10 September 2018 in the Reading Room, High Street Hemingford Grey at 7.30pm The Public and Press are cordially invited to be present. The order of business may be varied at the Chairman’s discretion. All members of the Council are hereby summoned to attend for the purpose of considering and resolving upon the business to be transacted at the meeting as set out below.

Ben Stoehr, Acting Clerk 03/09/18 AGENDA Comments and observations on agenda items from members of the public and reports from the County & District Councillors 1. To approve apologies for absence 2. To receive declarations of interests from councillors on items on the agenda 3. To approve the minutes of the previous meeting 4. Appointment of Acting Clerk, & Admin Support Contract 5. Co-option to fill vacancies following election – to consider applications received including Sarah Jakes, Meadow View, 99 London Road, St Ives and Lisa Dickeson-Brand, 12 Tern Drive, St Ives 6. To consider matters arising from the last or a previous meeting for info only unless detailed 6.1 (5.1) Newsletter printing contract – to consider revised quotations 6.2 (5.2) To appoint Cllr Elmstrom as assistant webmaster 6.3 (5.4) Mitchell Close play area fencing – to consider quotations 6.4 (5.7) Bins at the Yes Development – to confirm locations and consider quotations 6.5 (7.3.1) Proposal that the Council considers sites to plant new trees 6.6 (7.8) Housing Needs Survey – to consider the next steps 7. Finance, procedure and risk assessment 7.1 To receive the financial report and approve the payment of bills 7.2 Clerk report on any actions taken using delegated powers or because of risk or health and safety 7.3 To consider any matter that is urgent because of risk or health and safety 7.4 To consider any applications for S137 applications 8. To receive reports and items from committees, working groups and members for information only unless stated 8.1 To consider the offer of a licence for the Yes Development and the terms of the licence (DD) 8.2 Proposal that the Parish Council considers using DIY Communities to help move the Yes Development play area project forward and to bid for funding (DD) 8.3 Proposal for weed spraying between the allotments and Sadlers Way and to consider quotation (JB) 8.4 Training report and recommendations including (AM) 8.4.1 Proposal that the Council sends two councillors to the CAPALC training day on 14 October 8.4.2 Proposal that the Council authorises the Chairman to attend appropriate Chairs’ training 8.4.3 Proposal that the Council authorises 2 councillors to attend an appropriate planning training session 8.4.4 Proposal that the Finance and Policy Working Group consider the training needs of the Council when drafting the 2019-2020 budget 8.4.5 Proposal that the Council asks HDC planning department if they can provide training for Parish Councillors and interested members of the public 8.5 Transport Task Group report and recommendations including (AM) 8.5.1 To consider if the Parish Council want to undertake the Community Bus Service Questionnaire initiated by Fenstanton Parish Council 8.6 Communications Working Group report and recommendations including (AM) 8.6.1 That the Council sees its role within the parish as a provider of general community information so that residents will look to the publications of the Parish Council (Newsletter, Website and Facebook) for up to date information about the parish and all that goes on within it. 8.6.2 That the following councillors are appointed to a permanent communications team; Elliot, Flint, Loader and Elstrom and that the team is given the authority to co-opt residents onto the team.

Mrs Gail Stoehr, Clerk to Hemingford Grey Parish Council, 30 West Drive, Highfields Caldecote, Cambridge, CB23 7NY Tel: 01954 210241Email: [email protected]

The Clerk: 8.6.3 That the Clerk to provide all councillors with yearly calendar of meeting dates for Council meetings and the 2 working groups. 8.6.4 That the Clerk will investigate and report back to Council on the use of a google drive or something similar for the posting and storage of Council documentation. 8.6.5 That the Clerk to will investigate and report back on the provision of WiFi for Council meetings 8.6.6 That the Clerk will establish a system whereby all councillors are informed on deadlines for the agenda items and recommendations to council 8.6.7 That the Clerk asks Electoral services at HDC as to whether HGPC can receive information on additions to the electoral roll. Notice boards: 8.6.8 That the Council should review the location of the of notice board on the YES estate 8.6.9 That the Council reviews the number and locations of the Parish notice boards (currently five) 8.6.10 That each notice board should contain information about councillors (photos and contact details), a yearly calendar for parish meetings and other regular events. 8.6.11 That the Council consider the continued posting of paper copies of agendas in each of the notice boards. Resident engagement: 8.6.12 That the Council continues with a presence at village market (except July) but to review stall site at the village market and to advertise two village markets (Sept and Jan) as new resident events 8.6.13 That the Council takes a stand for the Saturday of the Pavilion Family Festival with councillors attending for 4-6 hours. 8.6.14 That the Council takes a surgery session twice a year to the YES estate and invite others to attend ie District councillors, police, housing association. 8.6.15 That a Welcome letter and possible welcome pack is delivered to all new residents. Written material: 8.6.16 That the Council ends its contract with the Hemingfords’ Directory for the 2 page monthly with the last edition being October 2018. 8.6.17 That the Newsletter is developed (published 5 times a year and 12 pages maximum in size) 8.6.18 That the Newsletter is delivered by Hemingfords’ Directory but that checks are made that residents are receiving the Newsletter. 8.6.19 That Cllr Kim Loader is appointed to the editorial team for the Newsletter. Website and Facebook: 8.6.20 That the Council continues to develop the website so that it becomes the website for the village 8.7 Finance & Policy Working Group report and to consider any recommendations in the report (RA) 8.8 Environment Working Group report and to consider any recommendations in the report (RW) 8.9 Proposal that the Planning agenda is sent to the Tree Wardens (AM) 8.10 Neighbourhood Plan Working Group – to agree how to proceed (RW, AM) 8.11 Interactive Speed Sign (RW) 8.12 Streetlights – Proposal to do improvement works in one go with possible funding from PWLB (RW) 8.13 Village Maintenance Contract – To consider specification 9. To consider correspondence/communications received 9.1 St Ives Town Council – Formal request for consent to include land in Neighbourhood Plan designation area 9.2 MAGPAS – request for letter of support for Air Ambulance relocation to Alconbury Weald 9.3 CME Personnel Consultancy – withdrawal of service 9.4 Orchards East – Heritage Lottery Funded Project for community orchards 9.5 Resident – Parking issues and bins 9.6 Resident – Condition of Meadow Lane road surface 9.7 Resident – Complaint about speed of traffic in London Road 9.8 Resident – Request for information about Lake Ashmore water sports facility 9.9 Resident – Allotment fence 9.10 Resident – Marking of allotments 9.11 Resident – Complaint about bushes/hedges and safety surfacing at Mitchell Close POS 10. Closure of meeting

Mrs Gail Stoehr, Clerk to Hemingford Grey Parish Council, 30 West Drive, Highfields Caldecote, Cambridge, CB23 7NY Tel: 01954 210241Email: [email protected] CLERK REPORT TO HEMINGFORD GREY PARISH COUNCIL MEETING 10 SEPTEMBER 2018 Where I have info to support an agenda item this is below. 1. Apologies – any received will be reported to the meeting. 3. To approve the minutes of the last meeting on 9 July 2018 – attached. 4. Appointment of Acting Clerk & Admin Support Contract The Vice-Chairman (in the Chairman’s absence), using emergency powers has appointed Ben Stoehr as Acting Clerk in the Clerk’s absence until the September Council meeting. The Council needs to consider if it wants this arrangement to continue until the Clerk’s return or if it wishes to make alternative provision. The current admin support contract is due to end in September, details have been sent to the Chairman. The Parish Council has key worker insurance which it can claim from to cover up to £2500 of replacement staff costs. 5. Co-option to fill vacancies following election – to consider applications received including: Sarah Jakes, Meadow View, 99 London Road, St Ives Lisa Dickeson-Brand, 12 Tern Drive, St Ives 6. Matters Arising 6.1 (5.1) Proposal that the Council approves discretion to the newsletter editor for additional pages. Quotations have been obtained from Victoire Press for 12 and 16 pages respectively, as the quotation considered at the last meeting was for 8 pages. These will be brought to the meeting. 6.2 (5.2) To appoint Cllr Elmstrom as assistant webmaster Cllr Loader has accepted the appointment as Webmaster and Cllr Elmstrom has volunteered to assist him. 6.3 (5.4) Mitchell Close play area fencing – to consider quotations Quotations for the revised specification will be brought to the meeting. 6.4 (5.7) Bins at the Yes Development – to confirm locations and consider quotations 6.5 (7.3.1) Proposal that the Council considers sites to plant new trees Environment Working Group to bring a report and recommendation. 6.6 (7.8) Housing Needs Survey – to consider the next steps The Parish Council has written to Mark Deas and Frank Mastrandrea indicating the Council’s interest in undertaking a survey and the possibility that it might be done jointly with Hemingford Abbots. Other to note : (5.0.8) Donation to St Ives Volunteer Bureau The accounts provided are attached. 7. Finance, procedure and risk assessment 7.1 To receive the financial report and approve the payment of bills – attached. 7.2 Clerk report on any actions taken using delegated powers or because of risk or health and safety The Clerk has used delegated powers to contract RPM to install the zipline seat, which was dangerous as it was, at a cost of £100.00. 2 interments have been approved for plots NEW453 and NEW98. 7.3 To consider any matter that is urgent because of risk or health and safety None at the time of writing. 7.4 To consider applications for S137 donations 8. To receive reports and items from committees, working groups and members for information only unless stated 8.1 To consider the offer of a licence for the Yes Development and the terms of the licence Cllr Dew to report. 8.2 Proposal that the Parish Council considers using DIY Communities to help move the Yes Development play area project forward and to bid for funding

Cllr Dew to report. Draft contract attached. 8.3 Proposal for weed spraying between the allotments and Sadlers Way and to consider quotation Cllr Brasnell to report. A quotation will be brought to the meeting. 8.4 Training report and recommendations including : Cllr Meredith to report. Clerk’s note: All members have been allocated user names and passwords which contain CAPALC’s training packages. As and when we receive information from LCPAS with regards to training we send it out to members. Members may source training they feel useful to themselves and other members. 8.4.1 Proposal that the Council sends two councillors to the CAPALC training day on 14 October Two places have been provisionally booked for the Councillor Training on 14 October. 8.4.2 Proposal that the Council authorises the Chairman to attend appropriate Chairs’ training 8.4.3 Proposal that the Council authorises 2 councillors to attend an appropriate planning training session 8.4.4 Proposal that the Finance and Policy Working Group consider the training needs of the Council when drafting the 2019-2020 budget 8.4.5 Proposal that the Council asks HDC planning department if they can provide training for Parish Councillors and interested members of the public 8.5 Transport Task Group report and recommendations including: Cllr Meredith to report. 8.5.1 To consider if the Parish Council want to undertake the Community Bus Service Questionnaire initiated by Fenstanton Parish Co uncil Questionnaire attached 8.6 Communications Working Group report and recommendations including : Cllr Meredith to report. 8.6.1 That the Council sees its role within the parish as a provider of general community information so that residents will look to the publications of the Parish Council (Newsletter, Website and Facebook) for up to date information about the parish and all that goes on within it. 8.6.2 That the following councillors are appointed to a permanent communications team: Elliot, Flint, Loader and Elstrom and that the team is given the authority to co-opt residents onto the team. 8.6.3 That the Clerk to provide all councillors with yearly calendar of meeting dates for Council meetings and the 2 working groups. The Clerk advises that the Council’s schedule of meetings is as agreed at its May (first and annual meeting) meeting “RESOLVED that meetings should continue to be held on the second Monday of each month except for August and December.” The Planning Committee also meets before the Council meeting and on the fourth Monday if required. . The Clerk has no knowledge of the schedule of meetings for any working groups as the dates and times are decided by each Working Group Convenor. 8.6.4 That the Clerk will investigate and report back to Council on the use of a google drive or something similar for the posting and storage of Council documentation. Before the Clerk could action this more information is required about what documents are to be stored and for what purpose and who has access. 8.6.5 That the Clerk to will investigate and report back on the provision of WiFi for Council meetings 8.6.6 That the Clerk will establish a system whereby all councillors are informed on deadlines for the agenda items and recommendations to council Standing orders lays down the procedure for Councillors to send items to the Clerk for inclusion on the agenda. This is seven clear days before the meeting 8.6.7 That the Clerk asks Electoral services at HDC as to whether HGPC can receive information on additions to the electoral roll. HDC already provide electoral roll updates to the Clerk, Councillors may inspect the register, but can not receive a copy. Notice boards: 8.6.8 That the Council should review the location of the of notice board on the YES estate

8.6.9 That the Council reviews the number and locations of the Parish notice boards (currently five) 8.6.10 That each notice board should contain information about councillors (photos and contact details), a yearly calendar for parish meetings and other regular events. 8.6.11 That the Council consider the continued posting of paper copies of agendas in each of the notice boards. A paper copy of the agenda must be posted on its main notice board to comply with legislation. Posting on other notice boards is at the Council’s discretion. Resident engagement: 8.6.12 That the Council continues with a presence at village market (except July) but to review stall site at the village market and to advertise two village markets (Sept and Jan) as new resident events 8.6.13 That the Council takes a stand for the Saturday of the Pavilion Family Festival with councillors attending for 4-6 hours. 8.6.14 That the Council takes a surgery session twice a year to the YES estate and invite others to attend ie District councillors, police, housing association. 8.6.15 That a Welcome letter and possible welcome pack is delivered to all new residents. The Council needs to consider how it will know about new residents. The Clerk advises that this would be an inappropriate use of the electoral register. Written material: 8.6.16 That the Council ends its contract with the Hemingfords’ Directory for the 2 page monthly with the last edition being October 2018. 8.6.17 That the Newsletter is developed (published 5 times a year and 12 pages maximum in size) Please see item 6.1 8.6.18 That the Newsletter is delivered by Hemingfords’ Directory but that checks are made that residents are receiving the Newsletter. 8.6.19 That Cllr Kim Loader is appointed to the editorial team for the Newsletter. Website and Facebook: 8.6.20 That the Council continues to develop the website so that it becomes the website for the village 8.7 Finance & Policy Working Group report and to consider any recommendations in the report Cllr Allen to report. 8.8 Environment Working Group report and to consider any recommendations in the report Cllr Waters to report. 8.9 Proposal that the Planning agenda is sent to the Tree Wardens Cllr Meredith to report. 8.10 Neighbourhood Plan Working Group report Cllrs Waters and Meredith to report. 8.11 Interactive Speed Sign (RW) 8.12 Streetlights – Proposal to do improvement works in one go with possible funding from PWLB (RW) 8.13 Village Maintenance Contract – To consider specification Current contract and amendments, plus YES development spec attached Are there any changes required? Please note item 9.11. Is a contract for cemetery leaves collection required? 9. To consider correspondence/communications received 9.1 St Ives Town Council – Formal request for consent to include land in Neighbourhood Plan designation area “St Ives Town Council has resolved to produce a Neighbourhood Plan. Yesterday Cllr Nick Dibben and I met with HDC Planning Team to consider the area to be included in a ‘St Ives Neighbourhood Plan’ and we feel it would be beneficial to match the HDC Local Plan Spatial Area, which in respect of Hemingford Grey Parish boundary includes the land south west of A1096 to include London Road, Lime Park Estate, Dunnock Way development and Cullum Farm. If the Parish Council is minded to accept this area then we would require formal written consent to submit to HDC when the potential Neighbourhood Plan area is submitted. We would fully involve Hemingford Grey Parish Council in the plans and resultant policies and would hope that a representative of the village would be part of the Steering Group going forward.

The reason behind looking to use the spatial area as defined in the Local Plan is that infrastructure deficits in St Ives impact on surrounding villages and so we are keen to kind mutually agreeable solutions for all. I look forward to a positive response.”

Kind regards Alison Benfield BA(Hons) FSLCC Town Clerk St Ives Town Council 9.2 MAGPAS – request for letter of support for Air Ambulance relocation to Alconbury Weald Attached. Competed grant form awaited. 9.3 CME Personnel Consultancy – withdrawal of service “Payment Services Regulations 2017 After a considerable amount of time trying to find advice on whether I am currently breaking the law by providing payment services to clients without being a registered organisation, I have finally been able to take legal advice via my professional body, CIPP. Unfortunately the advice is that despite the fact that I only provide this service to a limited number of small payroll clients, I am indeed breaking the law by not being registered. I could apply for registration but my estimate would be for the initial year £1060 in fees, plus probably money to a third party to assist with application, not to mention my time and possibly having to hire a Money Laundering Reporting Officer (although technically I do already wear that hat). On top of that we seem to be looking at on-going annual fees, audit costs and possibly something to my bank. It is therefore with regret that I will have to withdraw this service. I can continue to process the payroll and pension contributions on your behalf but the actual payments (salaries, HMRC and pension) will have to be made by yourselves. However, I will of course totally understand if you feel you would rather find an agent who is already registered and can provide the full service for you. It is unlikely that I will be detected by the FCA (at least at the moment) so we can probably sort things over the next couple of months.” 9.4 Orchards East – Heritage Lottery Funded Project for community orchards “The University East Anglia are heading up a project, funded by the Heritage Lottery Fund, called Orchards East The project aims both to research and record old orchards and to establish new community orchards, across the counties of Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex, Hertfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Bedfordshire. The initial survey work - which aims to establish the location and condition of surviving orchards - is being carried out by volunteers. We do not yet have any volunteers for your parish, and wondered whether you know of anybody who might be prepared to help? The work is straightforward and, we hope, enjoyable: volunteers are sent maps, a survey pack and full instructions. We also wondered whether you might know if anyone had considered establishing a new community orchard, on any spare land in your parish. We are able to provide advice, assistance - and fruit trees.” 9.5 Resident – Parking issues and bins “I am looking for assistance with a matter which is causing considerable inconvenience and danger, to both myself and other pedestrians. The issue is regarding vehicles parking on paths to the extent that I am unable to push my double, and in some cases even a single pushchair past the obstructions. I find I have to weave across the roads or just resort to walking in the roads. The issue would be the same for a person using a walking frame or particularly a wheelchair. Is this a matter you can help with through communication or is this something that I have to refer to the police? I’d rather the issue was resolved through people becoming more considerate rather than it becoming a hostile issue. I have attached some photos of the issues I took during a recent walk. I appreciate the roads are narrow and there are too many cars per property these days etc… but some consideration should be given to the safety and comfort of others.

The same relates to wheelie bins, in that many households block the paths with their bins. When walking to school I have seen one parent getting so angry that he has literally thrown the obstructing bins into driveways. Again, more consideration would resolve this issue also as families with bikes, scooters, prams and pushchairs are trying to use the paths.” Photographs attached. 9.6 Resident – Condition of Meadow Lane road surface “Could you take this up for residents down Meadow Lane? After about 17 years of trying HDC did some of the dreadful potholes but stopped short on some of them! They also ignored the rest of the lane near Meadow. Lots of runner and walkers down here so dodgy for them too.” Photographs attached. 9.7 Resident- Complaint about speed of traffic in London Road “It concerns me somewhat at the difficulty everyone experiences when emerging from Marsh Lane on to London Road. Views are restricted in both directions because of the bend towards the A14 and to the left to St Ives, you cannot hesitate when leaving Marsh Lane, because traffic can be travelling at 60 m.p.h.

In the Hunts Post last week the 40 m.p.h. From St Ives towards Houghton has been extended towards Huntingdon. I would have thought we have a clear case for London Road 40 m.p.h be extended to the A14.” 9.8 Resident – Request for information about Lake Ashmore water sports facility “It has come to my attention that there is arising opposition toward the existing water sports facility, Lake Ashmore, just off of Gore Tree Road. I hope that it will be possible for you to provide me with greater detail on this predicament as this is an issue of great importance to me.” 9.9 Resident – Allotment fence “Just back from the allotments (driven indoors by the thunderstorm) having had to chase some sheep off the allotments back into their field. The fence gap is at the NE corner, with lots of wool on the wire barbs. I’ve tried to block the gap with some old polythene and a branch, but this fence needs to be made stockproof, please!” 9.10 Resident – Marking of allotments and damage to items An allotment tenant has commented that the corner post(s) on their plot has gone missing and would like them reinstating. 9.11 Resident – Complaint about bushes/hedges and safety surfacing at Mitchell Close POS A resident has complained about the state of the hedges and bushes around the Mitchell Close POS, and also that the safety surfacing needs cleaning. 10. Closure of meeting

Cambridgeshire ACRE

Housing Need Survey Results Report for Great Gransden

Survey undertaken in June 2018

CONTENTS PAGE

CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY ...... 3 Background to Affordable Rural Housing ...... 3 Context ...... 3 Methodology ...... 4 Great Gransden Parish ...... 5 Local Income Levels and Affordability ...... 10

RESULTS FROM PART ONE: VIEWS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IDENTIFYING THOSE IN HOUSING NEED ...... 15 Views on Affordable Housing Development in Great Gransden ...... 15 Suitability of Current Home ...... 18

RESULTS FROM PART TWO: IDENTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES AND REQUIREMENTS ...... 20 Local Connection to Great Gransden ...... 20 Household Composition ...... 21 Property Type, Size and Tenure ...... 22

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...... 23 Pre-Existing Evidence from the Housing Register ...... 23 Findings from Housing Needs Survey ...... 23 Open market housing ...... 24 Conclusion ...... 24

APPENDIX 1 – CHOICE BASED LETTINGS AND LOW COST HOME OWNERSHIP ...... 25

Page 2 of 25 CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY

Background to Affordable Rural Housing

Affordable housing is housing made available for either rent or shared ownership, based on the evidence of need, to those unable to afford market prices. One approach to delivering affordable homes in rural areas is through rural exception site policy. A rural exception site is a site used specifically for affordable housing in a rural community that would not normally be used for housing because it is subject to policies of restraint.

Affordable housing benefits from certain protections in rural areas. Tenants of rented properties cannot exercise their Right to Acquire within ‘Designated Rural Areas’ (generally settlements with a population of less than 3,000). Likewise, shared ownership properties cannot be purchased outright in ‘Designated Protected Areas’ (a similar list of rural settlements). The housing association restricts the amount of equity that the resident can own to 80 per cent or commits to buying back the property if the tenant has 100% ownership. These protections are designed to protect the stock of affordable housing in rural communities. Great Gransden parish falls under both designations.

Planning conditions and legal agreements are used on rural exception sites to prioritise the occupation of property to people falling within categories of need and who can prove a local connection through family, residence or work. The Housing & Planning Act 2016 is likely to change some of the rules for rural affordable housing. For example the roll out of the voluntary Right To Buy for Housing Association tenants may limit the ability to retain affordable housing stock. However, until the Act is fully implemented the implications are not clear.

Huntingdonshire District Council has introduced a change to their rural exception site policy in the emerging Local Plan. Policy LP30 requires that at least 60 per cent of the site area must be for affordable housing for people with a local connection. This allows the introduction of some market housing to incentivise landowners to bring forward more sites.

To be eligible for rental properties, applicants must complete an application form to join the local Housing Register and they would then be able to bid for properties through the choice based lettings scheme. To be eligible for low cost shared ownership properties, applicants must apply directly through the local Homebuy Agent. You can read more about choice based lettings and low cost home ownership in Appendix 1.

Context

Cambridgeshire ACRE was commissioned to carry out a Housing Needs Survey of Great Gransden by Catesby Estates plc in agreement with Great Gransden Parish Council. Cambridgeshire ACRE is working with the Parish Council and a local working group to develop a Neighbourhood Plan for Great Gransden. Alongside this, Catesby Estates plc are working on a housing development proposal on the edge of the village. At the time of the survey no decision had been made about whether this scheme may come forward as a rural exception site or a ‘normal’ residential development.

Page 3 of 25 Discussions took place with Little Gransden Parish Council about undertaking a joint survey across the two parishes. This was linked to a discussion about a joint Neighbourhood Plan. However, no conclusion was reached.

The Housing Needs Survey is intended to inform both by assessing housing need within the community. However, the survey is not associated with any specific site. The aims of the survey were to gauge opinion on the value of developing affordable homes for local people in the parish and to determine the scale and nature of affordable housing need. The nature of the survey means that it also identifies wider market need such as, for example, downsizing. This is important because rural exception sites can now include an element of market housing to cross-subsidize the affordable houses. Therefore, the survey can also enable any market housing element to be tailored to local needs (though no controls will be applied).

Although the survey was funded by a private developer the editorial control of the report has remained with Cambridgeshire ACRE. Our standard questionnaire and approach have been used. The survey was carried out with the support of Huntingdonshire District Council who provided the address file for the mail out.

Methodology

Survey packs were posted to all 380 residential addresses in the parish on 18 May 2018. The survey packs included covering letters from Cambridgeshire ACRE and Great Gransden Parish Council, a questionnaire, a FAQ sheet on rural affordable housing and a postage paid envelope for returned forms.

The questionnaire was divided into two sections:  Part One of the survey form contained questions to identify those who believe they have a housing need. Respondents were also asked if they supported the idea of building a small affordable housing development in the village. All households were asked to complete this section.  Part Two of the survey form contained questions on household circumstances and housing requirements. This part was only completed by those households who are currently, or expecting to be, in need of housing.

The closing date for the survey was Friday 8 June 2018. In total, 136 completed forms were returned giving the survey a 36 per cent response rate. Most of our Housing Needs Surveys achieve a response rate of between 20 and 25 per cent. The higher than usual response rate may be due to survey being undertaken to support a Neighbourhood Plan, the survey being sponsored by a private developer which has aroused some suspicions and/or the high incidence of online returns. Over a quarter of all returns were completed online which is the highest proportion we have achieved.

Page 4 of 25 Great Gransden Parish

Great Gransden lies in the very south of Huntingdonshire District Council, adjoining the boundary with South Cambridgeshire District Council. In fact, its neighbour Little Gransden is situated in South Cambridgeshire.

Great Gransden is a couple of miles south of the A428 and connects via the B1040. St Neots lies about six miles north west of the village and Cambridge about 11 miles to the east. Closer to home, Great Gransden is surrounded by a cluster of villages including Little Gransden, Waresley, Abbotsley, Eltisley, Caxton and Bourn. The growing town of Cambourne is about four miles to the north east.

Great Gransden retains many of the key services that could be considered the cornerstone of village life. For example, Great Gransden has a village shop & post office, primary school, pub, village hall and church. Medical services and secondary schooling have to be accessed outside of the village.

The parish is relatively prosperous with high levels of employment and few people dependent upon income related benefits. Over half the adult population (52 per cent) are qualified to Higher Education level and 63 per cent work in managerial, professional and associate professional roles. The comparable figures for Cambridgeshire are 33 per cent and 46 per cent. Key sectors of employment are education, manufacturing and professional services. Although many will commute out of the village for work Great Gransden does

Page 5 of 25 retain some employment opportunities both within the village and on industrial sites around the edge of the village.

Great Gransden retains some key village facilities including a general stores & post office and a village hall

Great Gransden general stores and post office © Reading Room and Village Hall © Copyright Adrian Copyright Adrian Cable and licensed for reuse under Cable and licensed for reuse under this Creative this Creative Commons Licence Commons Licence

Great Gransden’s population has been relatively stable in recent years and stood at 1,000 in 2015. 1 There were only ten dwellings (net) built in Great Gransden between 2002 and 2016. This included eight in 2004-05.2 There are currently about 380 dwellings in the parish. The population experienced significant growth during the 1980s and 1990s and is now about 50 per cent higher than in 1981.3.

Development Proposals within the Built-up Area

A proposal that is located within a built-up area of a Small Settlement will be supported where the amount and location of development proposed is sustainable in relation to the: a. level of service and infrastructure provision within the settlement; b. opportunities for users of the proposed development to access everyday services and facilities by sustainable modes of travel including walking, cycling and public transport; c. effect on the character of the immediate locality and the settlement as a whole.

Development Proposals on Land well-related to the Built-up Area

A proposal for development on land well-related to the built-up area may be supported where it accords with the specific opportunities allowed for through other policies of this plan.

1 ‘Cambridgeshire County Council's Mid-2015 Population and Dwelling Stock Estimates’, Cambridgeshire County Council (spreadsheet downloaded from http://cambridgeshireinsight.org.uk/populationanddemographics) 2 ‘Table H1.2 Dwellings completed (NET) by Parish in Cambridgeshire (2002-2016)’, Cambridgeshire County Council (undated) 3 ‘Cambridgeshire Historic Population (1801-2011)’, Cambridgeshire County Council (undated)

Page 6 of 25 Great Gransden is classified as a ‘Small Settlement’ in the emerging Huntingdonshire Local Plan.4 This sets out the type of development that may be considered appropriate in small settlements. Policy LP10 is set out in the box above.

The latest monitoring data from Cambridgeshire County Council suggests there are commitments for a further seven dwellings. Some of these may have started or completed since the monitoring report was published.5

Great Gransden’s population has an age profile very typical of a rural Cambridgeshire community. There is a high proportion of people aged 44-69 and a commensurately low proportion aged 20-39. The proportion of school age children is slightly above average. The primary school is probably a key factor in attracting families with children whilst the lack of medical facilities possibly contributes to a tailing off of more elderly people post 75. 6

Great Gransden population by age, 2011

12%

10%

8%

6% Population

4%

2%

0% 0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 15 to 20 to 25 to 30 to 35 to 40 to 45 to 50 to 55 to 60 to 65 to 70 to 75+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 Age

Great Gransden Huntingdonshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Great Gransden Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

The lack of young adults and older people aged 75+ is consistent with the household structure in Great Gransden. There is a very low proportion of single person adults and a relatively high proportion of both couple households with and without dependent children.

Owner occupation is the dominant tenure in Great Gransden accounting for 84 per cent of all households (71 per cent in Huntingdonshire and 66 per cent in Cambridgeshire). In contrast, both social and private rented accommodation are in relatively scarce supply. Both account for about seven per cent of all households which is about half the Huntingdonshire

4 ‘Huntingdonshire Local Plan | Huntingdonshire's Local Plan to 2036: Proposed Submission 2017’, Huntingdonshire DC, (submitted 29 March 2018) 5 ‘Table H2.2 Dwelling Commitments by Parish in Cambridgeshire’, Cambridgeshire County Council (undated) 6 ‘Rural Community Profile for Great Gransden (Parish)’, Cambridgeshire ACRE/ OCSI, October 2013

Page 7 of 25 average. There are only two shared ownership properties in the parish (at the time of the 2011 Census of Population)

Great Gransden housing tenure, 2011 50% 45% 40%

35%

30% 25%

20% Households 15% 10% 5% 0% Owned outright Owned with a Shared Social rented Private rented Living rent free mortgage/ loan ownership

Great Gransden Huntingdonshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Great Gransden Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

Great Gransden’s housing stock is dominated by large detached houses. Almost 70 per cent are detached properties. All other types are under-represented in comparison with Huntingdonshire and Cambridgeshire.

Great Gransden housing type, 2011 80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% Detached Semi-detached Terraced Flat Temporary/mobile home

Great Gransden Huntingdonshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Great Gransden Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

Page 8 of 25 Fifty six per cent of all dwellings in Great Gransden have four or more bedrooms (compared with 29 per cent in Huntingdonshire and 26 per cent in Cambridgeshire). In contrast, smaller properties are relatively scarce: dwellings with two or less bedrooms account for only 15 per cent of stock compared with 28 per cent in Huntingdonshire and 35 per cent in Cambridgeshire. The shortage of smaller market housing and social housing in general has implications for low income families seeking to stay in Great Gransden.

Great Gransden dwellings by number of bedrooms, 2011 45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0% None One Two Three Four Five or more

Great Gransden Huntingdonshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Great Gransden Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

Page 9 of 25 Local Income Levels and Affordability

Buying on the Open Market

A review of property estate agent websites identified seven properties currently on the market in Great Gransden. The lowest price house was a 2 bed semi-detached property for sale @ £295,000. There was also a 3 bed bungalow for sale @ £450,000. All other properties had at least four bedrooms starting at £450,000 (4 bed bungalow) and ranging up to £1,595,000 for a six bed detached house.7

The lowest priced properties on the market in Great Gransden

2 bed semi-detached, Mandene Gardens, Great 3 bed detached bungalow, Sand road, great Gransden for sale @ £295,000 www.zoopla.co.uk Gransden for sale @ £450,000 www.zoopla.co.uk

Sales over the last year were also reviewed to draw a larger sample. This identified a further ten properties. The lowest priced sales were a 2 bed bungalow sold @ £310,000 and a detached bungalow (number of bedrooms unspecified) sold @ £360,000. Four properties sold for less than £400,000 and the average sale price was £540,350.

Lower priced properties sold in the last year in Great Gransden

2 bed detached bungalow, Winchfield, Great Gransden 3 bed semi-detached, Hall farm Lane, Great sold @ £310,000 (Nov 2017) www.zoopla.co.uk. Gransden sold @ £385,000 (Feb 2018) www.zoopla.co.uk.

7 www.zoopla.co.uk and www.rightmove.co.uk (as at 1 June 2018)

Page 10 of 25 The reliability of these prices can be further corroborated by considering them alongside published house price data by Hometrack (see Table 1) to provide an indication of entry level prices in the Great Gransden housing market. Hometrack data covers the larger area of Gransden & The Offords ward. This includes the parishes of Abbotsley, Great Gransden, Great Paxton, Toseland, Waresley-cum-Tetworth and Yelling.8

Table 1: Lower Quartile Property Prices by ward, October 2017 – March 20189

2-bed house 3-bed house 4-bed house Gransden & The Offords £205,000 £280,250 £422,500 Bourn £237,000 £277,000 £368,750 Gamlingay £228,750 £320,000 £455,000 Huntingdonshire £170,000 £216,000 £312,750 Note: Data are an average of house price sales and valuations over a six month period. Prices can fluctuate from one period to another due to the low level of sales involved. Nevertheless, the prices do reflect actual sales and valuations.

Even by widening the sample size to the ward there were only 26 sales and valuations undertaken over a recent six month period. Therefore, variations in prices could reflect low sample sizes as well as differences between villages within the same ward.

Several of the nearest villages to Great Gransden are actually in South Cambridgeshire so Bourn and Gamlingway wards have been used for comparison. Prices appear to be a little higher in Gamlingay ward (which includes, for example, Little Gransden and Longstowe). Larger houses tend to be lower priced in Bourn ward. However, this ward includes Cambourne where prices are likely to be lower and bring down the average.

Prices in Gransden & The Offords ward are significantly higher than in Huntingdonshire district as a whole across all size bands.

Taken together these data can be used to build a picture of local prices. Table 2 has been constructed from the discussion above. Affordability is assessed in the context of three price levels. Some standard assumptions about deposits and mortgages are applied to calculate the minimum salary needed to purchase these properties. A price of £205,000 reflects the lower quartile price for a 2 bed house in Gransden & The Offords ward. £280,000 represents the lower quartile price for a 3 bed house in Gransden & The Offords ward. £390,000 is the lowest price a 3 bed property has been sold for in Great Gransden parish in the last year (including any currently for sale).

Even at an entry level price of £205,000 an annual income of about £50,000 would be required on the assumptions used. To put this is context, a household with two people

8 There have been some ward boundary changes which mean this is not the current ward. However, it is the area for which the most up to date, local house price information is published. 9 Hometrack Intelligence Service (Gransden & The Offords ward includes the parishes of Abbotsley, Great Gransden, Great Paxton, Toseland, Waresley-cum-Tetworth and Yelling)

Page 11 of 25 working full-time and earning the ‘national living wage’ will earn about £30,000 per annum.10 An income of £68,000 would be required to purchase a property priced @ £280,000. It should also be remembered that the lowest price sold in the last year or currently for sale in Great Gransden parish is priced @ £295,000.

Table 2: Annual Income requirements for open market properties

House Price Deposit required Annual income required Monthly mortgage (assume 15% (based on mortgage payment11 required) lending principle of 3.5 x income)

£205,000 £30,750 £49,786 £826

£280,000 £42,000 £68,000 £1,129

£390,000 £58,500 £94,714 £1,572

A household’s ability to buy is also dependent on them having saved an appropriate deposit. The calculations presented here assume a mortgage to house value of 85 per cent. In other words, the purchaser can raise a deposit of 15 per cent. It may be possible to secure a mortgage with a lower deposit but this will require even higher income levels. Clearly, many existing owner occupiers in Great Gransden will have significant housing equity. However, young people seeking to leave the parental home or those in the rented sector may not.

Every household has its own set of unique circumstances. Therefore, the assumptions set out above are just that; working assumptions. Nevertheless, it seems reasonable to conclude that many low income households with a connection to Great Gransden have little chance of being able to set up home in their own community without some kind of support.

Buying in Shared Ownership Shared ownership gives the opportunity to 'part buy' and 'part rent' a home. This means if a household can't afford to buy a property outright they may be able to afford to buy a share in a property. The initial share purchased can be as low as 25 or 30 per cent. At a point when the household can afford to, they can choose to buy a further share of the property.

Where a property has been built on a rural exception site, the maximum percentage that can be owned is 80 per cent so that the property always remains available as affordable housing and can never be sold on the open market.

Shared ownership housing schemes are tailored for people who cannot afford to buy a suitable home by outright purchase, and who are in housing need. When someone moves out of a shared ownership property, their property will either be offered to the housing

10 http://www.livingwage.org.uk/. The national living wage currently pays £7.50 per hour but only applies to those aged 25 and older 11 Source: www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk – mortgage calculator based on 3% repayment mortgage repaid over 25 years

Page 12 of 25 association to find a buyer or it may be advertised in the local estate agents. On rural exception sites, people with a local connection to the parish will always have priority.

Shared ownership affordability will be heavily influenced by the share of the property purchased. The purchaser must provide an appropriate package of deposit and mortgage to cover the cost of the share purchased. Rent would be paid on the unsold equity at a rate of 2.75 to 3.00 per cent. It is also likely that a small service charge would be applicable. However, these charges represent a significant subsidy in comparison with comparable market rents which makes shared ownership an attractive option for some households. However, it should be noted that at the time of the 2011 Census of Population there were only two shared ownership properties in the parish.

Renting

Table 3 shows the typical cost for renting privately and compares this with the typical rental cost of a new Housing Association property. The Government has taken steps to bring social housing rents closer to private sector ones, with rents for new tenants set at up to 80 per cent of the amount you would have to pay in the private sector.

Table 3: Comparison of property rental costs in Gransden and The Offords ward, April 2017 – March 201812

No. of Typical market Entry level rent per Housing Association Local Housing Beds rent per week week Maximum Allowance (median rent) (30th percentile) affordable rent per (Huntingdon week BMRA) (80% of median 2018-19 market rent) (applicable from 1 April 2018)

1 N/A N/A N/A £108.04

2 £150 £150 £120 £129.78

3 £213 £201 £170 £154.91

4 N/A N/A N/A £198.11

Table 3 includes data for Gransden & The Offords ward. This suggests the likely ‘affordable rent’ charged by a Housing Association could be lower than the Local Housing Allowance rate for a 2 bed property but higher for a 3 bed property. The fact that no data is available for 1 bed and 4 bed properties highlights the lack of properties available in the private rental market. Our review found only one property currently available to rent in the private rental

12 Hometrack Intelligence Service (Gransden & The Offords ward includes the parishes of Abbotsley, Great Gransden, Great Paxton, Toseland, Waresley-cum-Tetworth and Yelling)

Page 13 of 25 market. This was a 5 bed detached house @ £577 per week. This is well above both the LHA rate and the maximum rent that would be charged as an affordable rent.13

Social rented properties are also in reasonably scarce supply. Between March 2008 and December 2013 there were five properties became available in Great Gransden (about one per year). They attracted an average of 24 bids each (compared with 41 per property across Huntingdonshire as a whole).14

13 www.zoopla.co.uk and www.rightmove.co.uk (as at 1 June 2018) 14 ‘Parish Profiles’, Cambridgeshire County Council Research Group, October 2014

Page 14 of 25 RESULTS FROM PART ONE – VIEWS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IDENTIFYING THOSE IN HOUSING NEED

Views on Affordable Housing Development in Great Gransden

All respondents to the survey were asked if they would be in favour of a small development of affordable homes for local people within the parish. Fifty four per cent of respondents supported the principle of such a development and 42 per cent were opposed. (Four per cent did not state an opinion) The results are illustrated in Figure 4. The level of support for affordable homes is a little lower than we have found in other local surveys in Cambridgeshire. Support is typically in the range of 55-75 per cent.

Figure 4: Attitude towards affordable housing development

4% In favour

Not in favour

Not stated 42% 54%

Many respondents chose to include additional comments to qualify their answers. A selection is presented here, grouped by theme. They highlight some of the key issues that concern local people.

Support for affordable housing tended to focus particularly on the needs of young people:  This would give children from Great Gransden a better opportunity to remain in the village when they want a home of their own. Current property prices make this impossible for many. Parking and public transport need to be adequate for any such developments.  The village needs to grow if is to keep a shop, school and bus service. We need young people not old WASPs  This is essential to avoid creating an unbalanced village community  Although our children have managed to buy locally - that is only because we gave them the money for their deposits. Other families are not in the same position to be able to come up with the funds. Two bedroomed properties are rare in the village - and they sell for over £300,000 - totally unaffordable for many people  Yes - we would completely support the development of more housing as long as it included affordable housing

Page 15 of 25  I was previously a trustee of the Little Gransden Alms Houses and found out then how essential affordable housing is

Some respondents were concerned about ensuring any affordable housing was secured for local people in perpetuity:  Yes conditionally: 1. That the homes are definitely only for people with local connections to our parish and a clear means of the village being able to participate in the governance of this is implemented. Priority should be given to people moving from within the village and to the children and parents of existing residents and the total number of houses built should not exceed this pool…..  But I would want to have a guarantee resales are also only to local people  Although I am in favour of affordable homes specifically for people with a local connection there are two possible consequences: 1. It has a detrimental affect upon the the value of privately owned properties close to the development, and 2. those people living in subsidised housing sometimes do not have the same standards as those living in their own privately owned property nearby. This can create local tensions

There were also several comments about design related issues. A common theme was the need to ensure both affordable and market housing was small and at a cost affordable to low income households and first time buyers:  Design of houses should be in keeping with village style and not built 'estate style' e.g Loves farm, where houses are built very close together. Houses should have gardens and sufficient parking spaces for at least 2 cars per household.  All the new/ relatively new housing developments in the village (last 40-45 years) are large, expensive houses. Only 6-7 are small. It is very obvious that the village needs more smaller, affordable homes for this to be a vibrant, mixed community  But please also include accessible housing, eg. to Lifetime Homes standards  In order to sustain the rural fabric of our village it is vital to cease building large detached properties and provide affordable housing that is accessible to first time buyers  The development must be sympathetic to the surroundings - and suitable for a rural community/ setting. I would not support intense, town-house style dwellings. The development should be targeted at young families to ensure the longevity of the community services (school, shop, pub, public transport etc)  Affordable should mean affordable! Not just a lower price but a price that is affordable in relation to what a person is earning or already paying in rent... Scale was another important concern although there was no clear consensus on an appropriate scale of development that would be acceptable:  Defining 'small development' would be helpful. Our school needs more children for sustainability but we do not need 4 large developments for this  But SMALL development of under 40 houses. We are too small for 100 house developments!  As long as it is not cover for a 'market housing' development. I would not support if market housing were more than 10-20% of the total  There is a need to increase affordable housing, however a small increase is required given there is already a good stock of affordable housing. Development should be small and well integrated. This would be best achieved by developing 2-5 houses on 5 plots as opposed to a single development of 20 houses.

Page 16 of 25  'small' should mean 10-12 homes

There was concern about the capacity of local infrastructure to cope with further development. The lack of public transport was noted:  But transport must be considered - we need a better bus service otherwise all households will need a car  Yes, in principle, but there is currently no public transport in Great Gransden. Nearly all bus routes have been stopped. The bus service should be reinstated  The homes would have to be priced realistically. Most "affordable housing" in this area is too expensive for young people. There is no public transport in this village which makes it unattractive to many families, and particularly teenagers. Our local roads do not have the capacity to take a significant increase in the number of cars using them

Those opposed to a small affordable housing development in principle cited a number of reasons. A common concern was the potential impact on the character and scale of Great Gransden:  We need to be careful not to change the special character of Great Gransden. Cambourne is close and is awash with affordable homes  Great Gransden is a village with generally detached properties and we don't believe that a development of affordable homes would be in keeping with this village  Define small development?!! There are already a number of so called "small developments" already underway within the village. I feel the village will lose it's small community feel if we over develop the village, there is simply not the infrastructure to sustain yet more "small developments". I also believe that "affordable housing" is not achievable in this area. For it to be truly affordable it would push down value of the rest of the properties already in the area.  It will spoil the character of the village  It will lead to lots of development to make the affordable housing feasible which will spoil the character of the village

For some, infrastructure constraints simply ruled out the feasibility of further development:  The infrastructure of the village is already under strain. Future development will place unbearable strain on resources. Improve the existing infrastructure first then look to build more properties  Schooling and doctor's not large enough  The village is already gridlocked with avoiding traffic from the A428 to Cambridge  I would only tick yes if I saw that infrastructure issues had already been researched and integrated into any development proposals. A holistic approach is essential. This includes: school pupil capacity, essential public transport needs, speed limits throughout the village, parking.  The infrastructure of the village does not lend itself to traffic increases. The school is not big enough to take more children. There is no Doctors' Surgery which means people will have to drive

Some argued that there was no need for more affordable housing in Great Gransden. Cambourne and St Neots were cited as better locations:

Page 17 of 25  I believe there is already a good mix of homes in our village. There is a good choice of affordable homes in the area, with on-going development around local towns, and larger villages  There are adequate affordable homes in Cambourne and St Neots which are very local. I can't see any need for further large scale development in Great Gransden  There is a lot of affordable housing within close proximity to the village. These areas have facilities to accommodate like shops etc  If people who grew up in the village cannot afford to live in the village, there is plenty of less expensive housing in neighbouring villages and nearby towns.  5 vacant bungalows and 2 houses owned by Housing group (Luminus) have been filled by people from outside of Gransden therefore more houses are not required

There was also a degree of scepticism about both the survey being funded by a developer and the whole process being an underhand way of developing more market housing:  New 'affordable' housing in this village should be built either by the local council or by a housing association and only be for rent, with no right to buy. Only in that way can we ensure accommodation for young people from the area. 'Affordable' homes have been provided on existing scheme here in the past - all have been extended, embellished etc. and are no longer affordable. The model proposed will not solve the problem - only enrich the developer. NB. Catesby Estates, who are funding this survey, control land in Great Gransden, which has received many objections on grounds of traffic problems, negative effects of local industrial estate etc. Their funding is a cynical attempt to bolster their case for this potential site  Because by your definition it is not wholly for local people but an opportunity for developers to build yet more large houses in this village. 100% affordable or not at all  This is not an independent survey as it is funded by a developer with a commercial interest in a site in the village  I think this is just an excuse to build lots of houses and the number of affordable homes will be relatively small

The survey has revealed a wide range of opinions. There is a small majority in favour of the idea of affordable homes for local people in principle. However, many of those in support have cited caveats and there is a significant minority opposed in principle. Many of the concerns raised could be ameliorated by a scheme of appropriate scale, design and location. However, for some, no scheme will be acceptable. The Parish Council will need to balance these views in deciding how to proceed.

Suitability of Current Home

Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not their current home was suitable for their household’s needs. Figure 5 shows that 85 per cent of respondents felt their current home is suitable for their household needs, with nine per cent indicating that their current home is unsuitable for their needs. (Six per cent did not answer the question) The nine per cent of respondents who indicated that their current home is unsuitable for their needs equates to 12 households.

Page 18 of 25 Figure 5: Suitability of current home

6% 9%

Suitable Not suitable Not stated

85%

Those stating their current home is unsuitable were asked to indicate the reasons why. Respondents were allowed to give more than one reason for unsuitability, so all responses are recorded. In total 23 reasons were reported.

Figure 6 illustrates the reasons respondents gave for their current home being unsuitable. The most commonly cited reason was ‘Family circumstances are changing’. This was followed by ‘want to move but there are no suitable homes available locally’, ‘Too large’ and ‘Too small’.

Figure 6: Reasons why current home is unsuitable

5

4 3 2 1 0

Page 19 of 25 RESULTS FROM PART TWO – IDENTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES AND REQUIREMENTS

Part Two of the Survey was only completed by those respondents who had indicated that their current home is unsuitable for their household’s needs and who are therefore potentially in housing need. Responses to Part Two were made on behalf of twelve households. One of these contained two potential new households in need of alternative housing giving a total of 13 households.

An assessment of each response has been undertaken by Cambridgeshire ACRE and a decision made regarding whether the household can be considered a potential candidate for affordable housing in Great Gransden based upon, for example:  evidence of local connection,  eligibility for affordable housing,  particular medical and welfare needs,  housing tenure and location preference.

Following this assessment, four households were considered to be potential candidates for affordable housing in Great Gransden. The remainder were excluded for a variety of reasons. The main reason was that the household was seeking to address their issues by purchasing a market property. A further three households did not provide sufficient information to enable an informed judgement to be made. One household was not seeking to stay in the parish.

The remainder of this section sets out the overall findings regarding those found to be in need of affordable housing in Great Gransden. It should be noted that the results are based on those households completing the Housing Needs Survey. In practice, the total level of housing need (set out in the Summary and Recommendation section) is usually greater due to the addition of Housing Register data. The composition of the households from the two sources may, and often does, vary.

Local Connection to Great Gransden

Residence and family connections Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they currently live in Great Gransden or whether they had family connections to the parish. Table 4 reveals that all respondents live in the parish. This is not surprising as the survey was only distributed to parish addresses. Those living outside of the parish, but with a local connection, were dependent on ‘word of mouth’ about the survey from family, friends or work colleagues. The Housing Register, considered later, is a better source of need from non-residents.

Three of the households have lived in the parish for over 15 years. Two of these also had family living in the parish. In one case this was parents. The other household did not state the connection.

Page 20 of 25 Table 4: Length of time living in the village

Frequency Less than 1 year 0 1-5 years 0 5-10 years 0 10-15 years 1 More than 15 years 3 Not stated 0 Don’t live in parish 0 Total 4

Household Composition

The survey sought to understand the gender, age and status of those who might potentially live in any affordable housing built as a result of this survey.

Number of people who will make up the household Table 5 sets out the number of people making up each household. Although only four households were identified these reflected a variety of need including two retired households, a family and a young couple without children.

Table 5: Number of people in the household

Frequency No of people 1 person 1 1 2 people 2 4 3 people 0 0 4 people 1 4 5 people 0 0 6 people 0 0 7 people 0 0 Not stated 0 0 Total 4 households 9 people

Gender and Age The households, in total, would accommodate nine people evenly split between males and females. (One household is expecting another child but the gender is not stated – or known) The varying composition of each household means that there is a wide age range from young children through to people of retirement age.

Page 21 of 25 Table 6: Age profile of residents

Frequency Under 16 2 16 - 24 years 2 25 - 29 years 1 30 - 39 years 0 40 - 49 years 1 50 - 54 years 0 55 - 59 years 0 60 - 64 years 0 Over 65 years 3 Not stated 0 Total 9 people

Status Table 7 shows the economic status of potential householders. All of those of working age are in employment (or on maternity leave). Two households contained only people retired from work.

Table 7: Status of people in the household

Frequency Employed 4 Unemployed 0 Economically inactive 3 Student 0 Child 2 Retired 0 Not stated 0 Total 9 people

Property Type, Size and Tenure

The survey allowed respondents to indicate the type (e.g. house, bungalow, flat, etc.), size (in terms of number of bedrooms) and tenure they would prefer. However, in concluding what type, size and tenure of properties should actually be built, this report’s recommendations are based on actual need rather than respondent aspirations. This analysis has been done by reference to Huntingdonshire District Council’s Lettings Policy Document.15 The results are presented in the next section.

15 ‘Lettings Policy’, Huntingdonshire District Council, November 2015

Page 22 of 25 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

This report has been informed by primary data (the Housing Needs Survey) and secondary data (local house prices, Census, Housing Register). The report has identified a small affordable housing need in Great Gransden parish.

Pre-Existing Evidence from the Housing Register

The local Housing Register was searched for households in need of affordable housing who either live in Great Gransden or stated they have a local connection to the Parish. There are two households on the Register that meet these criteria. Neither currently live in the parish so presumably qualify through family, work or previous residence. 16

This data has been combined with the results of the housing needs survey in order to calculate overall need.

The properties that would need to be built and then let out through a Housing Association to accommodate those households on the Housing Register are as follows17:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 2 1 1

Findings from the Housing Needs Survey

The Housing Needs Survey conducted in Great Gransden identified four households in need of affordable housing. One of these is already on the Housing Register so has been excluded to avoid double counting.

One household would require a rented property from a Housing Association. This need is captured below:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 1 1

The remaining two households were considered suitable candidates for shared ownership as follows:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 2 1 1

16 Housing Register data provided by Huntingdonshire DC, April 2018 17 Codes used are F (Flat), H (House) and B (Bungalow)

Page 23 of 25 Open market housing

The primary purpose of a Housing Needs Survey is to identify need for affordable housing. However, the survey does provide an opportunity to collect broader housing needs within the community. In practice, the identification of market housing need is probably less comprehensive as some households will not see the relevance of the survey. Nevertheless, the survey does give an insight into market demands and, usefully, illustrates the differences between affordable and market housing demand.

The survey identified four households interested in market housing. (There were a few more households indicating an interest in market housing but they did not provide sufficient information to allow a considered assessment to be made) All the identified need was for older households (age 50+) looking to downsize, partly due to children leaving the family home. They were seeking housing ranging from two to four bedrooms and two of the households would prefer a bungalow.

Conclusion

In aggregate, there are five households identified as being in need of affordable housing who either live in, or have a local connection to, Great Gransden:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 5 1 1 2 1

It is noticeable that three of the five households would be eligible for a bungalow which is indicative of the age cohorts of those households identified.

There is also a small need for market housing, largely among households aged 50+ seeking to downsize.

Page 24 of 25 APPENDIX 1: CHOICE BASED LETTINGS AND LOW COST HOME OWNERSHIP

Most people access affordable housing through either the Choice Based Lettings or Low Cost Home Ownership schemes. These prioritise people with the greatest level of need. Rural exception sites differ in that they prioritise local connections to a parish over level of need.

Choice Based Lettings

Home-Link is the Choice Based Lettings scheme for the Cambridge sub- region. Choice Based Lettings aims to make the application process for affordable rented housing easier and to give people more choice about where they live. Housing is allocated on a ‘needs basis’. In other words, those people that have the greatest level of need and have been in need for the longest time are given priority. Everybody on the Housing Register is assessed and placed into a band of need. Band A is the greatest level of need. Band D is the lowest.

The scheme means there is just one Housing Register for the Cambridge sub region with only one form to complete. When applicants are accepted onto the Register they are told what Band they have been assigned to, what size and types of property they can apply for and which areas they can apply in. Generally people can apply for properties within the Local Authority in which they reside. If the person has a local connection to other areas (through, for example, work) they may be able to apply in these areas as well. A small proportion of properties in every Local Authority are set aside for applicants living anywhere in the Cambridge sub region.

A distinctive feature of rural exception sites is that they have a ‘local connection’ condition attached to all affordable dwellings in perpetuity. This means that priority will always be given to people with a local connection to the parish even when their level of need is assessed to be lesser than other potential applicants.

Low Cost Home Ownership

bpha, the government-appointed Help to Buy Agent, responsible for marketing all low cost home ownership schemes in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, offers a Shared Ownership scheme called ‘Help to Buy Shared Ownership’.

People buy a share in a property built by a housing association and pay a subsidised rent on the part that they do not own. They can buy an initial share of between 25% and 75% of the property and pay rent on the remaining share.

In some shared ownership schemes, the householder can buy additional shares until they own the property outright. This is known as ‘staircasing’. However, on rural exception sites ownership is limited to 80% to ensure the dwellings remain ‘affordable’ in perpetuity. Again, priority is given to people with a local connection to the parish.

Page 25 of 25 This questionnaire can be completed online at http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/GreatGransden/

working on behalf of the Cambridgeshire Rural Affordable Housing Partnership

HOUSING NEEDS SURVEY FOR GREAT GRANSDEN

PART ONE – TO BE COMPLETED BY ALL HOUSEHOLDS

We are interested in your views on the principle of providing affordable homes for local people in your parish. Please use the comments section to explain your response.

Q1. Would you be in favour of a small development of affordable homes specifically for people with a local connection to your parish? (Any potential development would be wholly or largely affordable homes - rented or shared ownership. Under the emerging HDC Local Plan policy, up to 40% of the site area could be developed for market housing ) Yes No Please add any comments you would like to make here (These may be included, anonymously, in our report) :

Please indicate whether you or any member of your household (eg. older children or other dependents) is in housing need by answering Q2. You should look ahead up to the next five years when answering this question.

Q2. My current home is suitable for my household? Yes No If no, please tick all boxes that apply to your household:

Too small (overcrowded) Too expensive Too large In the wrong place Needs repairing Need own home Can’t manage the stairs and/or Family circumstances are changing needs adapting Want to build my own home Other (please specify) Want to move but there are no suitable homes available locally

If you answered ‘Yes’ to Q2 you do not need to complete Part two. Please return the form to us in the FREEPOST envelope provided. If you answered ‘No’ to Q2 please continue and complete Part Two.

This questionnaire can be completed online at http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/GreatGransden/

PART TWO – ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY HOUSEHOLDS WITH A HOUSING NEED

Q3. Who lives in your home? Please provide details of everyone living in your home at present including yourself Relationship Gender Status Age to self, eg. Male/ Employed/ Please 25 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 55 - 60 - 65+ partner, son Female Economically specify 29 39 49 54 59 64 inactive 1/ age if Unemployed/ under Student/ Child/ 25 Retired Self

Q4. What type of property do you currently live in? Type 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed House Bungalow Flat/maisonette/ apartment/ bedsit Sheltered/ retirement housing Caravan/ mobile home/ temp. structure Other (please specify):

Q5. What are your current living arrangements? Rent from Local Authority Rent from Housing Association Rent from private landlord Shared ownership (part own/ rent) Own with or without mortgage Other (please specify below) Live in tied accommodation

Q6. Who would be in the new household? Please tick this box if the household will be the same as in Q3a. If not, please complete the table overleaf.

1 Economically inactive includes: looking after home/ family, temporary or long term sick This questionnaire can be completed online at http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/GreatGransden/

Relationship Gender Status Age to self, eg. Male/ Employed/ Please 25 - 30 - 40 - 50 - 55 - 60 - 65+ partner, son Female Economically specify 29 39 49 54 59 64 inactive/ age if Unemployed/ under Student/ Child/ 25 Retired

Please answer questions 7 to 14 as/ on behalf of the household that are in need of new accommodation Q7. What type of property would best suit your new household’s needs? 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed House Bungalow Flat/maisonette/ apartment/ bedsit Sheltered/ retirement housing Other (please specify):

Q8. What living arrangements are you looking for? (You can choose more than one) Buy on the open market Buy in shared ownership Buy a ‘starter home’ Rent from a Housing Association or Rent from a private landlord Local Authority Build my own home (‘self build’)

Q9. Has anyone in the new household been accepted onto the local Housing Register? Yes No Q9a. If yes, what priority banding have you been given? Band A Band B Band C Band D Not sure

Q10. Have you been approved for Shared Ownership or any other Low Cost Home Ownership scheme by the Help to Buy Agent (bpha)? Yes No

This questionnaire can be completed online at http://www.smartsurvey.co.uk/s/GreatGransden/

Q11a. Do you live in Great Q11b. If yes, how long have you lived in Great Gransden? (tick): Gransden? Yes No Years Months Q12. Do you or another member of your household have close family (parents, children or siblings) living in Great Gransden? Yes Please specify the relationship: No

Q13. Is Great Gransden your preferred place to live? Yes No Please tell us more about your reasons for needing to live in Great Gransden.

When designing affordable housing schemes it is helpful to understand what people can afford. It is therefore important that you complete the following questions. This information is confidential and will not be published in any public report. Q14a. What is your new household’s combined annual income (before tax)? Tick one box only Less than £1 5,000 £30,000 - £39,999 £15,000 - £19,999 £40,000 - £59,999 £20,000 - £24,999 £60,000 - £79,999 £25,000 - £29,999 £80,000 or over Q14b. What is the maximum monthly payment your new household can afford for a mortgage and/or rent? Tick one box only Less than £200 £400 - £599 £200 - £399 £600 or over Q14c. What is the maximum initial payment your new household can afford as a deposit on a property? (Please include any equity you have in your current home) None £20,000 - £29,999 Below £ 5,000 £30,000 - £49, 999 £5,000 - £9,999 £50,000 - £69, 999 £10,000 - £19,999 £70,000 or over

Thank you for taking the time to complete this survey. Please return it in the pre-paid envelope provided by Friday 8 June 2018. If you do not have the envelope you can post it back to us for free by writing the address below on the envelope:

Freepost RTSX-TEBE-ZSRG, Cambridgeshire ACRE, 72 Market Street, ELY, CB7 4LS

Cambridgeshire ACRE

Housing Need Survey Results Report for Meldreth

Survey undertaken in October 2017

CONTENTS PAGE

CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY ...... 3 Background to Affordable Rural Housing ...... 3 Context ...... 3 Methodology ...... 4 Meldreth Parish ...... 4 Local Income Levels and Affordability ...... 9

RESULTS FROM PART ONE: VIEWS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IDENTIFYING THOSE IN HOUSING NEED ...... 14 Views on Affordable Housing Development in Meldreth ...... 14 Suitability of Current Home ...... 17

RESULTS FROM PART TWO: IDENTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES AND REQUIREMENTS ...... 19 Local Connection to Meldreth ...... 19 Household Composition ...... 20 Property Type, Size and Tenure ...... 21

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION ...... 22 Pre-Existing Evidence from the Housing Register ...... 22 Findings from Housing Needs Survey ...... 22 Open market housing ...... 23 Conclusion ...... 23 Recommendation ...... 23

APPENDIX 1 – CHOICE BASED LETTINGS AND LOW COST HOME OWNERSHIP ...... 24

Page 2 of 24 CONTEXT AND METHODOLOGY

Background to Affordable Rural Housing

Affordable housing is housing made available for either rent or shared ownership, based on the evidence of need, to those unable to afford market prices. One approach to delivering affordable homes in rural areas is through rural exception site policy. A rural exception site is a site used specifically for affordable housing in a rural community that would not normally be used for housing because it is subject to policies of restraint.

Affordable housing benefits from certain protections in rural areas. Tenants of rented properties cannot exercise their Right to Acquire within ‘Designated Rural Areas’ (generally settlements with a population of less than 3,000). Likewise, shared ownership properties cannot be purchased outright in ‘Designated Protected Areas’ (a similar list of rural settlements). The housing association restricts the amount of equity that the resident can own to 80 per cent or commits to buying back the property if the tenant has 100% ownership. These protections are designed to protect the stock of affordable housing in rural communities. Meldreh falls under both designations.

Planning conditions and legal agreements are used on rural exception sites to prioritise the occupation of property to people falling within categories of need and who can prove a local connection through family, residence or work. The Housing & Planning Act 2016 is likely to change some of the rules for rural affordable housing. For example the roll out of the voluntary Right To Buy for Housing Association tenants may limit the ability to retain affordable housing stock. However, until the Act is fully implemented the implications are not clear.

To be eligible for rental properties, applicants must complete an application form to join the local Housing Register and they would then be able to bid for properties through the choice based lettings scheme. To be eligible for low cost shared ownership properties, applicants must apply directly through the local Homebuy Agent. You can read more about choice based lettings and low cost home ownership in Appendix 1.

Context

Cambridgeshire ACRE was commissioned to carry out a Housing Needs Survey in Meldreth in August 2017 by Meldreth Parish Council. The survey was delayed until after the school summer holidays.

The specific aims of the survey were to gauge opinion on the value of developing affordable homes for local people in the parish and to determine the scale and nature of affordable housing need. However, the nature of the survey means that it also identifies wider market need such as, for example, downsizing. This is important because rural exception sites can now include an element of market housing to cross-subsidize the affordable houses. Therefore, the survey can also enable any market housing element to be tailored to local needs (though no controls will be applied).

Page 3 of 24 This survey was carried out with the support of Cambridge Housing Society (a local housing association) and South Cambridgeshire District Council. The survey costs have been met by Cambridge Housing Society.

Methodology

Survey packs were posted to all 840 residential addresses in the parish on 29 September 2017. The survey packs included covering letters from Cambridgeshire ACRE and Meldreth Parish Council, a questionnaire, a FAQ sheet on rural affordable housing and a postage paid envelope for returned forms.

The questionnaire was divided into two sections:  Part One of the survey form contained questions to identify those who believe they have a housing need. Respondents were also asked if they supported the idea of building a small affordable housing development in the village. All households were asked to complete this section.  Part Two of the survey form contained questions on household circumstances and housing requirements. This part was only completed by those households who are currently, or expecting to be, in need of housing.

The closing date for the survey was Friday 20 October 2017. In total, 182 completed forms were returned giving the survey a 22 per cent response rate. Most of our Housing Needs Surveys achieve a response rate of between 20 and 25 per cent.

Meldreth Parish

Meldreth is a mid-size village in south Cambridgeshire. It lies to the north of the A10 (which by-passed the village in 1988) about five miles north east of Royston. Cambridge is about 15 miles north east of Meldreth. Melbourn, a larger village, is separated from Meldreth by the A10. Other near neighbours include the villages of Whaddon, Kneesworth, Bassingbourn and Shepreth.

Meldreth retains a range of village facilities

Meldreth post office and shop © Copyright Meldreth village hall © Copyright Maggie Smith and licensed JThomas and licensed for reuse under this for reuse under this Creative Commons Licence Creative Commons Licence

Page 4 of 24 Meldreth retains most of the services normally associated with a mid-size village. These include a primary school, pub and shop/post office. Other retail outlets include a takeaway and butchers. The village also has a church and village hall, and more unusually, a railway station at the southern end of the village which lies on the London to King’s Lynn line. However, the village has no medical facilities and children travel to Melbourn or Bassingbourn for secondary education.1

The latest estimates suggest that Meldreth had a population of almost 2,000 in 2015.2 The village has experienced some rapid periods of development since the end of World War Two. In 1951 the population was only 636. However, until recently, the last 20 years or so have seen more muted growth. There are signs that growth has picked up a little in the last few years. Between 2011 and 2015 the population grew from 1,810 to 1,950. 3

1 www.meldrethhistory.org.uk 2 ‘Cambridgeshire County Council's Mid-2015 Population and Dwelling Stock Estimates’, Cambridgeshire County Council (spreadsheet downloaded from http://cambridgeshireinsight.org.uk/populationanddemographics) 3 ‘Cambridgeshire Population and Dwelling Stock Estimates: 1991-2010’, Cambridgeshire County Council (July 2011)

Page 5 of 24 This was matched by an increase in dwellings from 740 in 2011 to 800 in 2015.4 However, there are only commitments for a further eight dwellings which suggests recent growth levels may not be sustained.5 This is supported by the emerging Local Plan which identifies Meldreth as a ‘Group Village’. These are considered less sustainable locations for new development than ‘Major Rural Centres’ and ‘Rural Centres’ due to weaker local facilities.

“Development will not be permitted on sites capable of accommodating scheme sizes significantly larger than 8 or exceptionally 15 dwellings in Group Villages.”6

The parish is relatively affluent with low benefit dependency levels. There are particularly high levels of self-employment and public services employment among Meldreth residents. Health & Social Work and Education alongside Retail are the largest employment sectors. The proportions of people qualified to Higher Education level (34 per cent) and working in managerial and professional roles (46 per cent) are similar to Cambridgeshire as a whole.7 Meldreth is an attractive location for commuters due to the local railway station and easy access to Cambridge and Royston.

Meldreth population by age, 2011

10% 9% 8%

7%

6% 5%

Population 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to 15 to 20 to 25 to 30 to 35 to 40 to 45 to 50 to 55 to 60 to 65 to 70 to 75+ 14 19 24 29 34 39 44 49 54 59 64 69 74 Age

Meldreth South Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Meldreth Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

The age profile of Meldreth’s population has some significant differences from the South Cambridgeshire average. The proportion of school age children is broadly similar. However, the drop in numbers of people aged in their 20s which is typical of rural Cambridgeshire parishes appears a little later in Meldreth and isn’t apparent until the 25-29 cohort. It

4 ‘Table H1.2 Dwellings completed (NET) by Parish in Cambridgeshire (2002-2016)’, Cambridgeshire County Council (undated) 5 ‘Table H2.2 Dwelling Commitments by Ward/Parish in Cambridgeshire (2002-2016)’, Cambridgeshire County Council (undated) 6 ‘South Cambridgeshire Local Plan – Proposed Submission’, South Cambridgeshire DC, July 2013 7 ‘Rural Community Profile for Meldreth (Parish)’, Cambridgeshire ACRE/ OCSI, October 2013

Page 6 of 24 remains noticeable until the 40-44 age cohort. Meldreth also has a particularly high proportion of people aged 65+. Twenty one per cent are aged 65+ compared with only 17 per cent in South Cambridgeshire. The high incidence of single person households in Meldreth is partly related to the high levels of older people. 8

Owner occupation is the dominant tenure in Meldreth accounting for two-thirds of all households. The private rented sector in comparison is relatively small. Meldreth has retained a significant affordable housing stock. Most of this is rented although there is a significant minority of shared ownership accommodation. Some of the affordable housing has been developed as rural exception sites and will therefore prioritise people with a local connection to Meldreth. However, it should be noted that the majority of affordable housing will be allocated on a ‘needs basis’ to any applicants with a connection to South Cambridgeshire.

Meldreth housing tenure, 2011 40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

Households 15%

10%

5%

0% Owned outright Owned with a Shared Social rented Private rented Living rent free mortgage/ loan ownership

Meldreth South Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Meldreth Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

The number of affordable properties (rented or shared ownership) has risen slightly in the last few years from 167 in 2011 to 188 in 2016. In 2016 there were 19 shared ownership properties owned by Housing Associations and a further seven properties retained by South Cambridgeshire DC on an equity share basis.

Three quarters of dwellings in Meldreth are detached or semi-detached. However, there remains a significant element of terraced housing (15 per cent) in the parish. There is also a small element of flats (six per cent) in the parish. Many Cambridgeshire parishes are more dependent upon detached and semi-detached properties.

8 ‘2011 Census Profile: Meldreth’, Cambridgeshire County Council via www.cambridgeshireinsight.org.uk (undated)

Page 7 of 24 This relatively low dependence on detached properties (43 per cent) compared to other parishes means that the shortage of smaller properties is less marked. Twenty nine per cent of properties have two bedrooms or less (30 per cent in South Cambridgeshire). In contrast, 36 per cent have four bedrooms or more (34 per cent in South Cambridgeshire). Smaller properties play an important role in helping new entrants into the property market and older people to downsize.

Meldreth housing type, 2011 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Detached Semi-detached Terraced Flat Temporary/mobile home

Meldreth South Cambridgeshire Cambridgeshire

Source: ‘Meldreth Parish Profile’, Cambridgeshire County Council (October 2014)

Page 8 of 24 Local Income Levels and Affordability

Buying on the Open Market

A review of property estate agent websites identified eight properties currently on the market in Meldreth. The lowest priced property is a 2 bed end terrace @ £250,000 followed by a 3 bed semi-detached house @ £310,000. The remaining properties ranged from £350,000 to £1,200,000.9

The lowest priced properties for sale in Meldreth

3 bed terrace, Gables Close, Meldreth for sale @ 3 bed semi, Elin Way, Meldreth for sale @ £250,000 www.zoopla.co.uk £310,000 www.zoopla.co.uk

Sales over the last year were also reviewed to draw a larger sample. This identified a further 15 properties. The lowest price sales were on Housing Association schemes and were believed to involve shared ownership properties (where the price only reflects the share of the property purchased) and have been excluded. As a result the lowest priced sale was a 2 bed bungalow @ £141,000 and a 3 bed semi @ £248,000. There were only four properties sold for less than £300,000 with five sold for over £500,000.

Lower priced properties sold in the last year in Meldreth

2 bed bungalow, Whitecroft Road, Meldreth sold 2 bed semi, Elin Way, Meldreth sold @ £248,000 @ £141,000 (May 2017) www.rightmove.co.uk. (January 2017) www.rightmove.co.uk.

The reliability of these prices can be further corroborated by considering them alongside published house price data by Hometrack (see Table 1) to provide an indication of entry level

9 www.zoopla.co.uk and www.rightmove.co.uk (as at 6 December 2017)

Page 9 of 24 prices in the Meldreth housing market. Hometrack data covers the larger area of Meldreth ward. This includes the parishes of Meldreth and Shepreth.

The unavailability of a lower quartile price estimate for a 2-bed house in Meldreth highlights the shortage of smaller properties on the market. Overall, the data suggests that prices in Meldreth ward are broadly similar to nearby villages and probably a little higher than South Cambridgeshire as a whole.

Table 1: Lower Quartile Property Prices by ward, April 2017 – September 201710

2-bed house 3-bed house 4-bed house Bassingbourn £235,750 £300,000 £427,500 Fowlmere & Foxton £272,500 £411,713 £765,000 Melbourn £288,125 £316,500 £427,500 Meldreth n/a £310,000 £467,500 Orwell & Barrington £310,000 £320,000 £463,750 South Cambridgeshire £235,000 £300,000 £400,000 Note: Data are an average of house price sales over a six month period. Prices can fluctuate from one period to another due to the low level of sales involved. Nevertheless, the prices do reflect actual sales and valuations.

Taken together these data can be used to build a picture of local prices. Table 2 has been constructed from the discussion above. Affordability is assessed in the context of three price levels. Some standard assumptions about deposits and mortgages are applied to calculate the minimum salary needed to purchase these properties. A price of £140,000 is the lowest price sale in the last 12 months for a property that does not appear to a shared ownership sale. A price of £235,000 is the lower quartile price for a 2-bed house in South Cambridgeshire. And £310,000 is the lower quartile price for a 3 bed house in Meldreth.

Table 2: Annual Income requirements for open market properties

House Price Deposit required Annual income required Monthly mortgage (assume 15% (based on mortgage payment11 required) lending principle of 3.5 x income)

£140,000 £21,000 £34,000 £564

£235,000 £35,250 £57,071 £1,287

£310,000 £46,500 £75,286 £1,698

10 Hometrack Intelligence Service (Meldreth ward includes the parishes of Meldreth and Shepreth) 11 Source: www.moneyadviceservice.org.uk – mortgage calculator based on 3% repayment mortgage repaid over 25 years

Page 10 of 24 Even at an entry level price of £140,000 an annual income of £34,000 would be required on the assumptions used. To put this is context, a household with two people working full-time and earning the ‘national living wage’ will earn about £30,000 per annum.12 An income of about £75,000 would be required to purchase a 3 bed property.

It should be remembered that a household’s ability to buy is also dependent on them having saved an appropriate deposit. The calculations presented here assume a mortgage to house value of 85 per cent. In other words, the purchaser can raise a deposit of 15 per cent. It may be possible to secure a mortgage with a lower deposit but this will require even higher income levels. Clearly, many existing owner occupiers in Meldreth will have significant housing equity. However, young people seeking to leave the parental home or those in the rented sector may not.

Every household has its own set of unique circumstances. Therefore, the assumptions set out above are just that; working assumptions. Nevertheless, it seems reasonable to conclude that many low income households with a connection to Meldreth have little chance of being able to set up home in their own community without some kind of support.

Buying in Shared Ownership Shared ownership gives the opportunity to 'part buy' and 'part rent' a home. This means if a household can't afford to buy a property outright they may be able to afford to buy a share in a property. The initial share purchased can be as low as 25 or 30 per cent. At a point when the household can afford to, they can choose to buy a further share of the property.

Where a property has been built on a rural exception site, the maximum percentage that can be owned is 80 per cent so that the property always remains available as affordable housing and can never be sold on the open market.

Shared ownership housing schemes are tailored for people who cannot afford to buy a suitable home by outright purchase, and who are in housing need. When someone moves out of a shared ownership property, their property will either be offered to the housing association to find a buyer or it may be advertised in the local estate agents. On rural exception sites, people with a local connection to the parish will always have priority.

Shared ownership affordability will be heavily influenced by the share of the property purchased. The purchaser must provide an appropriate package of deposit and mortgage to cover the cost of the share purchased. Rent would be paid on the unsold equity at a rate of 2.75 to 3.00 per cent. It is also likely that a small service charge would be applicable. However, these charges represent a significant subsidy in comparison with comparable market rents which makes shared ownership an attractive option for some households.

As already noted, there were estimated to be 19 shared ownership properties in Meldreth in 2016 in addition to seven shared equity properties. The review of recent sales has highlighted that sales do occur. The actual cost of purchasing a shared ownership property will be dependent upon the size of share purchased which will in turn affect the level of rent

12 http://www.livingwage.org.uk/. The national living wage currently pays £7.50 per hour but only applies to those aged 25 and older

Page 11 of 24 payable. However, shared ownership is likely to be a cheaper alternative to outright purchase.

Renting

Table 3 shows the typical cost for renting privately and compares this with the typical rental cost of a new Housing Association property. The Government has taken steps to bring social housing rents closer to private sector ones, with rents for new tenants set at up to 80 per cent of the amount you would have to pay in the private sector.

Table 3 includes data for Meldreth and neighbouring Melbourn as data is not available for Melbourn for some property sizes due to the low levels of transactions. Using Melbourn as a proxy suggests that the Local Housing Allowance would not be sufficient to cover the cost of any sized property at an ‘affordable rent’. Our review found only one property currently available to rent in the private rental market. This was a 3 bed detached house @ £288 per week. This is well above both the Local Housing Allowance rate and the maximium rent that would be charged as an affordable rent.13

Table 3: Comparison of property rental costs in Meldreth and Melbourn wards, October 2016 – September 201714

No. of Typical market Entry level rent per Housing Association Local Housing Beds rent per week week Maximum Allowance (median rent) (30th percentile) affordable rent per 2017-18 week (applicable from (80% of median 1 April 2017) market rent)

1 na/ na/ na/ £126.05

2 £253/ £208 £253/ £203 £202/ £166 £144.96

3 na/ £225 na/ £220 na/ £180 £168.45

4 na/ £323 na/ £318 na/ £258 £224.70 Note: Melbourn figures have been included as data is not always available for Meldreth due to low sample sizes. The Meldreth figure is presented first followed by the Melbourn figure.

Social rented properties are also in reasonable scarce supply. Between March 2008 and December 2013 there were 59 properties became available in Meldreth (about 10 per year). They attracted an average of 39 bids each (compared with 54 per property across South Cambridgeshire as a whole).15 Turnover may have increased slightly in recent years. Between

13 www.nestoria.co.uk, www.zoopla.co.uk and www.rightmove.co.uk (as at 6 December 2017) 14 Hometrack Intelligence Service. Meldreth ward includes the parishes of Meldreth and Shepreth. Mebourn ward includes the parishes of Great Chishill, Little Chishill, Heydon and Melbourn) 15 ‘Parish Profiles’, Cambridgeshire County Council Research Group, October 2014

Page 12 of 24 April 2013 and March 2016 there were 21 Local Authority rented properties and 21 Housing Association rented properties relet .16

16 ‘Housing Statistical Information Leaflet’, South Cambridgeshire District Council, October 2016

Page 13 of 24 RESULTS FROM PART ONE – VIEWS ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AND IDENTIFYING THOSE IN HOUSING NEED

Views on Affordable Housing Development in Meldreth

All respondents to the survey were asked if they would be in favour of a small development of affordable homes for local people within the parish. Eighty one per cent of respondents supported the principle of such a development and 17 per cent were opposed. Two per cent did not state an opinion. The results are illustrated in Figure 4. The level of support for affordable homes is slightly higher than we have found in other local surveys in Cambridgeshire. Support is typically in the range of 55-75 per cent.

Figure 4: Attitude towards affordable housing development

2% 17% In favour

Not in favour

Not stated

81%

Many respondents chose to include additional comments to qualify their answers. A selection is presented here, grouped by theme. They highlight some of the key issues that concern local people.

There was a clear recognition of the affordability challenges faced by young people and families:  I am in favour of affordable homes, rented or shared, co-operative ownership for families who cannot afford private housing on the open market, particularly single parents with children under 5  Having been able to remain local myself, having bought a house 20 years ago, I appreciate how difficult the situation is now. It seems unfair that young people can't so easily buy locally now. So, if the housing really will be affordable, then it seems right to approve  We strongly support small sustainable developments which are affordable  Definitely. Mainly for village people or their very close relatives who might want to move nearer for mutual support

Page 14 of 24  I would happily support affordable housing also for people outside of the parish moving in. Cambridge is a high growth area and immigration needs to be supported for those moving here for work

Some respondents were able to relate the issue to their own family circumstances. These focused specifically on the challenges facing young people:  Our children are currently teenagers but may possibly be in need of local housing in the next 8 years. Local affordable homes for local young adults is the only way of ensuring the continuing success of villages like Meldreth  What is the definition of 'small' development? I have 8 grandchildren locally 4 of whom live in Meldreth. I would love them to be able to 'afford' to buy or rent here when the time comes for them to leave home  This has come too late for my family who moved away some years ago, due to the high cost of housing in this area. Now widowed, I live here alone. I hope that other families can now benefit from truly 'affordable' housing  My son moved to Suffolk many years ago as housing was cheaper there

Some support was caveated around issues such as scale, location, and long term affordability. There was no consensus on a definition of ‘small’ but there was a clear expectation that any scheme should not have an adverse impact on the character of the village or its infrastructure by virtue of its size:  Key words here are a small development for people with a local connection. Meldreth is a village that has kept a friendly village atmosphere and culture. This will be unbalanced if not a small development and for local connections  As long as it's small and is wholly affordable  'Small' is the operative word. Infrastructure in mind. Also, housing should not be 'stuck out on a limb' but integral to the village

For some, location was simply a generic factor to take into account. Others made specific suggestions of potential sites or constraints that should be considered in considering different locations:  Depending where located  In practice, support depends on the location of any rural exception site. It is not possible to say 'yes' or 'no' without knowing this  There is a plot between Meldreth and Shepreth that if the council allowed it to have change of use for housing it would be a good place to build homes  Affordable homes should be on mains gas supply in order that the tenants/ owners can choose their supplier. Burtons, in Meldreth, is on flo gas which is expensive and it is not possible for the occupiers to change to another supplier. Very unfair that low income folk have to pay more

A number of concerns were expressed about affordability, ensuring homes remained affordable in perpetuity and the need for market homes to cross-subsidize:  These properties should remain within an 'affordable homes' market not sold on into the general housing market. No more homes should be built than schools and doctors can cater for locally  The devil is in the detail (Note: ref to private houses in the question)

Page 15 of 24  Whilst recognising the need for affordable housing I would like to see more developments for rental only as I feel this is the greater need at present  As long as they are not sold off like council homes which would defeat the object of homes for local people  I am in agreement only if the small development is wholly affordable homes: there is far too much private housing going on for the profit of developers leading to unwanted expansion from outside area  Only if the houses are actually affordable ie. social rent. 'Affordable' housing is not where Housing Associations are asking for £600+ a month for rent  They must be very affordable and at a sensible rent

It was also important to some that any ‘local priority’ system should be strictly adhered to:  Provided they are only for local people with connections with Meldreth  So long as it stays for local people only and only a small development

Infrastructure constraints were also a concern to some. Respondents highlighted a wide range of issues including the train station and its car park, the lack of medical facilities and the primary school capacity:  Only provided amenities are developed to cope and roads are made safer, footpaths more available etc etc. Currently I don't believe our village infrastructure can cope with more houses, cars etc  But I would be nervous about parking facilities at Meldreth and Royston train stations  Within the village envelope as long as there are school places available and other facilities, eg. doctor, can cope  Any scheme would need to ensure that the local infrastructure could support the number of homes to be developed  In principle I am not against the provision of affordable homes but I think that infrastructure and facilities need to be improved if there is to be any significant development. The village has no doctor's or dentist's. There are no local buses and although there is a railway station, the car park is now too small to meet demand. Some roads lack pavements and speeding traffic is a problem  What is 'affordable'? Would links to the railway station be considered? What services are to be included in the planning?

Those opposed to the idea of a development of affordable homes for local people focused on three issues: the adverse impact on the scale and character of Meldreth; infrastructure capacity issues; and the lack of need for this housing:  No, I moved to this village as it is a nice small local community and schools good. More houses would certainly ruin this village. We have one small shop, one pub and one primary school - it would put strain, and even if they did put towards schooling it would ruin primary school as a nice small village school. Meldreth would not be the village it is so loved to be  We already have several developments and would like to keep Meldreth a small village  Meldreth is already over-developed and threatened with an even larger development which will ruin Meldreth as a village  Not enough amenities, eg. school, doctors - traffic already overloading roads!

Page 16 of 24  There is a significant strain on local services, specifically doctors and schools. The large development already progressing in Melbourn is already providing these perceived 'needs' of the local community. There is no need to develop Meldreth  There are not enough schools and shops here for more people. There would be more cars, Drs surgery are full and not able to take any more people and Dentists  There is enough housing of all types in the area now. The school is beyond capacity and there are not enough facilities to support any further residents  There is already one/two such developments and affordable homes are involved in planning applications of which there are already too many in the village  The village has its fair share of affordable homes. Bartons, Melrose, Elin Way, Whitecroft Road, St Mary's Way. It is not always the case that people with Meldreth connections are offered these houses

There were also some negative comments about the impact of affordable housing on local communities:  Our experience of living on a mixed tenure housing estate was not good. The affordable and social housing tenants did not look after their properties and displayed a high level of anti-social behaviour. It would be a shame for this to happen in such a lovely village as Meldreth  1. Would bring down value of privately owned homes. 2. why?  My husband and I have worked extremely hard and stewarded our finances wisely such that we could afford a home. There are very many people I know, like myself, who are hardworking professionals who cannot afford to get on the market. And yet, schemes like this one allow people who have not worked as hard, or taken care of their finances, to purchase homes. This scheme is proposing to be biased towards people with 'local connections'. The council should be encouraging developers to build and sell in the market to meet needs of people who actually have earned it! I am personally disgusted by this proposal!

The survey has revealed a wide range of opinions. There is strong support for the idea of affordable homes for local people in principle. However, respondents have flagged a number of valid concerns that will have to be taken into account if a scheme is to be progressed. These concerns can often be ameliorated with a well-designed scheme in a suitable location and of an appropriate scale. However, for some, no scheme is likely to be acceptable. The Parish Council will need to balance these views when deciding how to proceed.

Suitability of Current Home

Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not their current home was suitable for their household’s needs. Figure 5 shows that 83 per cent of respondents felt their current home is suitable for their household needs, with 14 per cent indicating that their current home is unsuitable for their needs. (Three per cent did not answer the question) The 14 per cent of respondents who indicated that their current home is unsuitable for their needs equates to 26 households.

Page 17 of 24 Figure 5: Suitability of current home

3% 14%

Suitable Not suitable Not stated

83%

Those stating their current home is unsuitable were asked to indicate the reasons why. Respondents were allowed to give more than one reason for unsuitability, so all responses are recorded. In total 53 reasons were reported.

Figure 6: Reasons why current home is unsuitable

30 25 20 15 10 5 0

Figure 6 illustrates the reasons respondents gave for their current home being unsuitable. The most commonly cited reason was ‘want to move but there are no suitable homes available locally’. The next most common reasons were ‘Too small’ and ‘Family circumstances are changing’. This range of reasons particularly reflects the challenges faced

Page 18 of 24 by young people. (In parishes where the predominant issue is older people looking to downsize factors relating to health issues and the property being too large come to the fore)

RESULTS FROM PART TWO – IDENTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES AND REQUIREMENTS

Part Two of the Survey was only completed by those respondents who had indicated that their current home is unsuitable for their household’s needs and who are therefore potentially in housing need. Responses to Part Two were made on behalf of 26 households.

An assessment of each response has been undertaken by Cambridgeshire ACRE and a decision made regarding whether the household can be considered a potential candidate for affordable housing in Meldreth based upon, for example:  evidence of local connection,  eligibility for affordable housing,  particular medical and welfare needs,  housing tenure and location preference.

Following this assessment, 11 households were considered to be potential candidates for affordable housing in Meldreth. The remainder were excluded for a variety of reasons. The most common reason was that people were looking to resolve their housing issues through the open market (within Meldreth). A few households were seeking to leave the parish or were not considered eligible for affordable housing. Lastly, a couple of respondents provided insufficient information to allow a reasonable judgement to be made.

The remainder of this section sets out the overall findings regarding those found to be in need of affordable housing in Meldreth. It should be noted that the results are based on those households completing the Housing Needs Survey. In practice, the total level of housing need (set out in the Summary and Recommendation section) is usually greater due to the addition of Housing Register data. The composition of the households from the two sources may, and often does, vary.

Local Connection to Meldreth

Residence and family connections Respondents were asked to indicate whether or not they currently live in Meldreth or whether they had family connections to the parish. Table 4 reveals that all respondents bar one live in the parish. This is not surprising as the survey was only distributed to parish addresses. Those living outside of the parish, but with a local connection, were dependent on ‘word of mouth’ about the survey from family, friends or work colleagues. The Housing Register, considered later, is a better source of need from non-residents. Half of the households had lived in the parish for more than 15 years.

Eight out of 11 households have family living in the parish. In most cases this includes parents although in a couple of instances the local connection is through children or siblings.

Page 19 of 24 Table 4: Length of time living in the village

Frequency Less than 1 year 0 1-5 years 3 5-10 years 0 10-15 years 2 More than 15 years 5 Don’t live in parish 0 Total 10

Household Composition

The survey sought to understand the gender, age and status of those who might potentially live in any affordable housing built as a result of this survey.

Number of people who will make up the household Table 5 sets out the number of people making up each household. The survey identified a mix of need spanning single person households and families including, in two cases, a family of six people.

Table 5: Number of people in the household

Frequency No of people 1 person 5 5 2 people 0 0 3 people 2 6 4 people 2 8 5 people 0 0 6 people 2 12 7 people 0 0 Not stated 0 0 Total 11 households 31 people

Gender and Age The gender balance of the new households with be broadly balanced with slightly more males than females. This is due to more of the children in the family households being male. The family composition of some of the households means that many of the inhabitants will be relatively young. About a third will be children aged under 16 and, in total, half will be aged under 24. In contrast, only two inhabitants would be aged over 50.

Page 20 of 24 Table 6: Age profile of residents

Frequency Under 16 11 16 - 24 years 5 25 - 29 years 4 30 - 39 years 3 40 - 49 years 6 50 - 54 years 0 55 - 59 years 1 60 - 64 years 1 Over 65 years 0 Not stated 0 Total 31 people

Status Table 7 shows the economic status of potential householders. All bar two of the working age are currently in employment. One household includes a disabled person with a partner who acts as a carer. In labour market terms, both are classified as economically inactive.

Table 7: Status of people in the household

Frequency Employed 16 Unemployed 0 Economically inactive 2 Student 2 Child 11 Retired 0 Not stated 0 Total 31 people

Property Type, Size and Tenure

The survey allowed respondents to indicate the type (e.g. house, bungalow, flat, etc.), size (in terms of number of bedrooms) and tenure they would prefer. However, in concluding what type, size and tenure of properties should actually be built, this report’s recommendations are based on actual need rather than respondent aspirations. This analysis has been done by reference to South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Lettings Policy Document.17 The results are presented in the next section.

17 ‘Lettings Policy Document’, South Cambridgeshire District Council, 2015

Page 21 of 24 SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION

This report has been informed by primary data (the Housing Needs Survey) and secondary data (local house prices, Census, Housing Register). The report has identified a significant affordable housing need in Meldreth parish.

Pre-Existing Evidence from the Housing Register

The local Housing Register was searched for households in need of affordable housing who either live in Meldreth or have a local connection to the Parish. There are 40 households on the Register that meet these criteria.18 Twenty-eight of these households live in Meldreth. The remaining 12 have a local connection through family, employment or previous residence.

This data has been combined with the results of this survey in order to calculate overall need.

The properties that would need to be built and then let out through a Housing Association to accommodate those households on the Housing Register are as follows19:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 40 15 3 19 2 1

Findings from the Housing Needs Survey

The Housing Needs Survey conducted in Meldreth identified 11 households in need of affordable housing. Six of these households stated that they were already on the Housing Register and have therefore been excluded from the tables below.

Three of the remaining five households would require a rented property from a Housing Association. The properties that would need to be built to accommodate these households are as follows:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 3 1 2

Another two households were considered suitable candidates for shared ownership as follows:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 2 1 1

18 Housing Register data provided by South Cambridgeshire DC, November 2017 19 Codes used are F (Flat), H (House) and B (Bungalow)

Page 22 of 24 Open market housing

The primary purpose of a Housing Needs Survey is to identify need for affordable housing. However, the survey does provide an opportunity to collect broader housing needs within the community. In practice, the identification of market housing need is probably less comprehensive as some households will not see the relevance of the survey. Nevertheless, the survey does give an insight into market demands and, usefully, illustrates the differences between affordable and market housing demand.

The survey identified six households seeking to find a market home in Meldreth. There was no particular pattern to this demand which included families seeking larger accommodation, older people seeking to downsize and younger people wanting to leave the parental home. The majority were seeking relatively large dwellings – 3 or 4 bed houses.

There were also a couple of households seeking to address their needs through the private rental market. It is not known why they were not prepared to consider an affordable housing option. These households, plus one other, did express an interest in Starter Homes. However, no Starter Homes have yet been built (anywhere in the UK). Interestingly, the survey found no evidence of a demand for downsizing from older people. (One couple were looking to downsize by leaving the parish).

Conclusion

In aggregate, there 45 households identified as being in need of affordable housing who either live in, or have a local connection to, Meldreth:

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed 5+ bed Total F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B F/H B 45 16 5 20 3 1

Recommendation

To fulfil all current and immediate housing need in Meldreth, 45 new affordable homes would have to be built. This is significantly greater than a typical rural exception site in Cambridgeshire. However, schemes are usually designed to be smaller than the estimated need to improve the chances of all homes being allocation to a household with a local connection.

Furthermore, the scale, design and location of any scheme will need to adhere to the planning policy contained within the Local Development Framework and draft Local Plan for South Cambridgeshire District Council on rural exception sites. Further discussions between the parish council, Cambridge Housing Society and South Cambridgeshire District Council should help inform the proposals for any potential scheme and to ensure that local lettings are maximised.

Page 23 of 24 APPENDIX 1: CHOICE BASED LETTINGS AND LOW COST HOME OWNERSHIP

Most people access affordable housing through either the Choice Based Lettings or Low Cost Home Ownership schemes. These prioritise people with the greatest level of need. Rural exception sites differ in that they prioritise local connections to a parish over level of need.

Choice Based Lettings

Home-Link is the Choice Based Lettings scheme for the Cambridge sub- region. Choice Based Lettings aims to make the application process for affordable rented housing easier and to give people more choice about where they live. Housing is allocated on a ‘needs basis’. In other words, those people that have the greatest level of need and have been in need for the longest time are given priority. Everybody on the Housing Register is assessed and placed into a band of need. Band A is the greatest level of need. Band D is the lowest.

The scheme means there is just one Housing Register for the Cambridge sub region with only one form to complete. When applicants are accepted onto the Register they are told what Band they have been assigned to, what size and types of property they can apply for and which areas they can apply in. Generally people can apply for properties within the Local Authority in which they reside. If the person has a local connection to other areas (through, for example, work) they may be able to apply in these areas as well. A small proportion of properties in every Local Authority are set aside for applicants living anywhere in the Cambridge sub region.

A distinctive feature of rural exception sites is that they have a ‘local connection’ condition attached to all affordable dwellings in perpetuity. This means that priority will always be given to people with a local connection to the parish even when their level of need is assessed to be lesser than other potential applicants.

Low Cost Home Ownership

bpha, the government-appointed Help to Buy Agent, responsible for marketing all low cost home ownership schemes in Cambridgeshire and Peterborough, offers a Shared Ownership scheme called ‘Help to Buy Shared Ownership’.

People buy a share in a property built by a housing association and pay a subsidised rent on the part that they do not own. They can buy an initial share of between 25% and 75% of the property and pay rent on the remaining share.

In some shared ownership schemes, the householder can buy additional shares until they own the property outright. This is known as ‘staircasing’. However, on rural exception sites ownership is limited to 80% to ensure the dwellings remain ‘affordable’ in perpetuity. Again, priority is given to people with a local connection to the parish.

Page 24 of 24 HEMINGFORD GREY PARISH COUNCIL FINANCIAL STATEMENT

£ Sep-18 Balance B/ Forward 206522.48

ADJ'S + Chq's Approved at Previous Meeting Adjustments

Payments ICO DPA -40.00 VICTOIRE PRESS NEWSLETTER -390.00 CAPALC TRAINING -30.00 K&M STREETLIGHTS MOVE SPEED SIGN -60.00 K&M STREETLIGHTS STREETLIGHT MAINTENANCE -98.10

Receipts SANTANDER INTEREST 10.72 SANTANDER INTEREST 10.37 PLOT 18A ALLOTMENT RENT 33.94 GAMLINGAY PC TRAINING 105.00 PLOT NEW430 INTERMENT FEE 140.00

Total Fund movement -318.07 Balance revised after adjustments 206204.41

Bank Reconciliation Item Funds Statement Outstanding Current Acc 164124.15 168,690.43 -4,566.28 Deposit Acc 42080.26 42,080.26 Total 206204.41 210770.69 -4566.28

Expenditure for month Amount (£) Chq/ref HUNTS VOLUNTEER CENTRE S137 500.00 2612 RPM ZIPLINE SEAT 360.00 2613 WAVE ALLOTMENTS WATER 42.45 2614 K&M STREETLIGHTS STREETLIGHT MAINTENANCE 87.88 2615 RPM ZIPLINE SEAT INSTALL 120.00 2616 RPM DAINTREE GREEN WET POUR REPAIR 3012.00 2617 HDC BIN EMPTYING 132.00 2618 ST IVES TREE TRIMMING RIVERBANK WALL 135.00 2619 K&M STREETLIGHTS STREETLIGHT MAINTENANCE 87.88 2620 EASTERN TREE SURGERY MEDIUM PRIORITY TREE WORKS 2934.00 2621 K&M STREETLIGHTS SPEED SIGN BATTERY REPLACMENT 60.00 2622 HEMINGFORDS DIRECTORY NEWSLETTER 285.00 2623 SALARY 628.24 2624 CME SALARIES 211.00 2625 LGS SERVICES ADMIN SUPPORT 2247.64 2626 LGS SERVICES ADMIN SUPPORT 2186.19 2627 P LARTER BIN INSTALLATION 108.00 2628

Total Expenditure 13137.28

Balance c/f 193067.13

Notes: Late invoices will be brought to the meeting. HEMINGFORD GREY PARISH COUNCIL BUDGET 2018/19 Income Approved DRAFT budget budget FY2018/19 Actual YTD Variance FY2019/20 INCOME SEP 2018 PRECEPT 99,000.00 49,500.00 49,500.00 MISC. 105.00 -105.00

BANK INTEREST 80.00 42.17 37.83 BURIAL/CEMETERY FEES 1,500.00 932.00 568.00

ALLOTMENTS incl water 765.00 33.94 731.06

TOTAL 101,345.00 50,613.11 50,731.89 0.00

PAYMENTS

Approved DRAFT budget budget FY2018/19 Actual YTD Variance FY2019/20 Advertising

Newsletter/publications & other 3,000.00 1,185.00 1,815.00

Website 1,125.00 775.00 350.00 Total Advertising 4,125.00 1,960.00 2,165.00 0.00

General Admin

Insurance 1200.00 1,187.09 12.91

Affiliation Fees (CAPALC, FIT, ICO, LCPAS, SLCC) 800.00 636.61 163.39 Audit Fees 800.00 0.00 800.00

Post, tel, copying, stationery, mileage etc 3000.00 1,557.61 1,442.39 Election costs 2200.00 0.00 2,200.00

Meeting room hire 600.00 135.00 465.00

Training 200.00 30.00 170.00

Salaries Clerk&RFO& Handyman & associated costs 18208.00 6,498.28 11,709.72 Admin support 20800.00 9,696.29 11,103.71 Total General Admin. 47,808.00 19,740.88 28,067.12 0.00

Village improvements

Cycling & transportation 1,000.00 0.00 1,000.00 Replacement streetlights 11,208.00 0.00 11,208.00

Section 137 Donations 2,900.00 500.00 2,400.00 Neighbourhood Plan seed funding 2,000.00 New litter bins 960.00 Minor Improvements Bid Project 5000.00 3,186.00 1,814.00 Total Village Improvements 23,068.00 3,686.00 16,422.00 0.00

Village Assets and maintenance Allotments( Water & grasscutting ) 1150.00 85.23 1,064.77 Cemetery (skip hire, tree works & grass cutting) 5000.00 2,560.00 2,440.00 Ditch maintenance 500.00 0.00 500.00

Street Lights maintenance 972.00 473.46 498.54 Streetlight Electricity 2700.00 600.00 2,100.00 Play equipment Inspection (RoSPA) 0.00 147.00 -147.00

Grasscutting and village maintenance 8000.00 0.00 8,000.00 HMPF grant to be agreed 2100.00

Tree and Hedge work 7000.00 3,485.00 3,515.00 Daintree Green rent, play equipment & grass cutting 2150.00 2,947.50 -797.50

Assets Maintenance 1500.00 588.80 911.20 Handyman equipment 500.00 0.00 500.00 Misc/other 0.00 Total Village Assets and Maintenence 31,572.00 10,886.99 20,685.01 0.00

Contingency @ 5% 5,619.71 0.00 5,619.71 3,225.00 Totals 112,192.71 36,273.87 75,918.84 3225.00

Surplus/deficit relase from general reserves to balance budget

RESERVES / FUNDS B/F RECEIVED SPENT Balance c/f

Pinders Green fund 875.54 875.54 Insurance Claim Contingency 5,000.00 5,000.00 Parish Paths Partnership 300.00 300.00 Cemetery 30,000.00 30,000.00 LHI Scheme 2014/2015 - Ped Crossing School 5,000.00 5,000.00 CIL - Innisfree (10/14) 954.49 954.49 CIL - Innisfree (04/15) 1,127.63 1,127.63 CIL - 1 Hemingford Rd 6,682.65 6,682.65 Transportation 5,750.00 5,750.00 Ditch Maint. 1,000.00 1,000.00 Trees 1,090.00 1,090.00 Memorial Bench 20.00 20.00 Training 50.00 50.00 General reserves 125,571.83 135,216.82 Total 183,422.14 0 0.00 193,067.13

Total Payments YTD 36,273.87 Total Receipts YTD 50,613.11

Contract between DiY Communities and Hemingford Grey Parish Council

For DiY Communities to provide 10 hours of Community Engagement to support the Yes Community. The tasks include:

• Engaging with stakeholders including residents, Parish Councillors, officers from Huntingdon District Council and anyone else as relevant. • Working with residents to consult on play equipment at the Yes Estate • Sourcing funding and supporting applications to gain funding for play equipment at the Yes Estate.

Rate at £35.00 ph Travel time to be charged from St Ives Mileage to be charged at .45pm from St Ives No travel time or mileage to be charged for visits to the Yes Estate.

Please pay by BACS to: DiY Communities 08 92 99 65608832

Terms 30 days from date of invoice 10 days late + 5% 20 days late + 10% Every 10 days late thereafter + 10%

5, The Quay, St Ives, Huntingdonshire, Cambridgeshire PE27 5AR Registered No. 08179234

Engage, Inform, Inspire St Ives and Surrounding Area Bus Survey Deadline: Wednesday 31 ststst October 2018

Imagine that we have great bus services that connect us to the guided busway and local rail stations. Imagine having reliable and timely bus routes that help us get to work, school, and the other facilities that matter – health, welfare, shopping and leisure. In March 2019, it is likely that St Ives and the surrounding area will see either a reduction in or removal of the existing bus routes. We want to establish what the future needs are of our communities regarding bus routes to inform all parties so that they make sound decisions that work for all. This survey is to find out what those bus services would look like.like. It seeks to understand the needs of each complete family from children attending school, to adults getting to work and those attending medical appointments and so forth. If you live with others, please have each person, residing at the address, answer separately. Please answer the following questions as if you did not own or use a car and access to public services is only to the guided bus and trains.

ABOUT YOUR HOUSEHOLD Question 1 Where do you live? *List of all areas taking part in the survey*

Question 2 What age group are you in? 12 – 17 years old □ 18 – 24 years old □ 25 – 34 years old □ 35 – 44 years old □ 45 – 54 years old □ 55 – 64 years old □ 65 – 74 years old □ 75+ □ Question 3 How many in your household?

Please indicate number of: Adults over pension age

Adults under pension age

School aged children (inc those in tertiary education

Pre-school aged children TRAVEL NEEDS Question 4 Why do you need to travel? Work □ (Tick as many as relevant) Education (school/college/university) □ Health matters □ Family care duties □ Shopping □ Entertainment/social □ Connecting with others □ Other (please specifiy)

Question 5 How often would you/members of your household travel by bus: At least 5 days a week Once or twice a week Two or three times a month Once a month Once or twice every 3 months Once or twice every 6 months Less than once every 6 months

Question 6 When would you/members of your household likely use the bus (tick as many as relevant) 6.00am to 7.30am 7.30am to 9.00am 9.00am to 12.00 noon 12.00noon to 3.00pm 3.00pm to 4.30pm 4.30pm to 6.00pm 6.00pm to 9.00pm 9.00pm to midnight Midnight to 6.00am

Question 7 Which day(s) would you/members of your household be likely to use the bus (tick as many as relevant Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Question 8 Would you or any members of your household have specific access needs (tick as many as relevant Pushchair/pram Fold up bicycle Wheelchair Mobility scooter Walking frame Guide dog Large musical instruments (eg cello) Large sports equipment (eg surfboard) Other (please specify)

Question 9 Would your trips be (tick as many as relevant) To a destination along the bus route For onward travel within the region by public transport For onward travel outside of the region by public transport For onward travel by private transport

Question 10 What are your most frequent destinations? Bar Hill □ Cambridge (inc train station) and Addenbrookes □ Hinchingbrooke □ Huntingdon (inc train station) □ Oakington Park & Ride □ Peterborough □ St Ives (inc Park & Ride) □ Swavesey (inc Park & Ride) □ Other Guided Bus Stop (please state which)

Other (please specify) Question 11 Do you or would you use the guided busway if shuttle buses were made available from your village? Yes No

Question 12 If yes, do/would you purchase a fixed term ticket? Weekly Monthly Annually

Question 13 Would you be willing / able to pay a commercial price for bus services? YesYesYes No

ANY OTHER COMMENTS (please keep these brief or contact your local council to offer more information)

The Neighbourhood Plan WG: Notes of meeting on 25 th July 2018

The Neighbourhood Plan WG has the following ToR:

To make a recommendation to the Parish Council on whether the Parish Council should develop a Neighbourhood Plan and if so how expectations should be managed, what area it should cover and how it should be financed and managed and its terms of reference. We have also been tasked with recommending 'community assets' that should be registered with HDC and identifying possible sites for a new cemetery in the parish.

Attending: Cllrs Waters and Meredith (joint convenors), Brasnell, Burke Apologies: Cllr Puttick

1. Proposal that HGPC initiate the NP process by applying to HDC to register the whole of the current parish of HG as the NP area. This would cost nothing and would not irrevocably commit the PC to the next stages of the NP process. Agreed to propose this to the PC in September but also to consider any representation from neighbouring parishes.

2. Proposal that HGPC approach Cambridgeshire ACRE to initiate a Housing Needs Survey for the Parish. This would be a very useful input to the NP. Agreed to propose this to the PC in September and to establish which Housing Associations might be approached for sponsorship as well as whether extra questions might be added . There will be no cost to the PC .

Housing Associations are Luminus (various locations); Bedford Pilgrims (YES estate); Hundred Houses Society (Turberville Court). ACRE would be very reluctant to add any extra questions. The WG has no preference for a particular HA.

Hemingford Abbots PC has now asked for HG to be included in this survey – which ACRE originally suggested.

3. Proposal that HGPC approach the owners of any possible sites for a new cemetery in the parish to make them aware of the need and to establish whether any suitable land might be available in the immediate future. Apart from our immediate need for a cemetery this will also be an important input to the NP We agreed that we should first establish the viability of any sites within the Parish because of our flood plain status. This turns out to be a difficult question with unclear information from national guidance, HDC and the EA. HDC would make a decision on a case by case basis and EA would not have a veto (any more than they do on housing applications on the flood plain!). It is proposed that the PC should publicise the requirement to see if any suitable land is offered.

4. Consider how best to proceed with registering Assets of Community Value that would also be important factors in the NP. The current HDC list includes 22 pubs, 4 shops and 12 ‘green’ spaces: www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/media/1545/list-of-assets-of-community-value.pdf Hemingford Abbots have registered the Axe and Compass and have failed to register the old golf course. Potential ACVs in HG include Hemingford Stores and The Cock. We might also consider Daintree Green (including the allotments) which is owned by HDC but leased to the PC. Owners would be notified by HDC if the PC applies and so it would probably be sensible to approach them about any application in advance. The application process is straightforward but the reaction of owners cannot be taken for granted. The PC must decide how to proceed

Meadow Lane

Meadow Lane