Maidstone Borough Council
Final report
March 2010
Foreword
Foreword
This report describes the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) undertaken in Maidstone Borough in 2009. It contains a wide ranging examination of the housing market, and it conforms to the major Government Guidance on the subject. It also provides part of the ‘evidence base’ on which a wide range of planning and housing policies can be based.
Acknowledgements
A large scale assessment of this nature is a collaborative effort and Fordham Research wish to thank all members of the SHMA Steering Group for their support, guidance and contributions. We would also like to thank those local stakeholders who participated in the discussion and whose local knowledge and views have been immensely helpful.
It is also important to recognise that this report would not have been possible without the co operation of the general public who gave up their time to take part in household surveys for Maidstone Borough. Their assistance is gratefully acknowledged.
Page i
Chapter Listing
Chapter Listing
Foreword ...... i
1. Introduction...... 1
2. Demographic and economic context ...... 9
3. The current housing market...... 21
4. The active market ...... 35
5. Housing need...... 47
6. Future housing demand ...... 55
7. Improving market balance over the longer term...... 65
8. Particular household groups ...... 75
9. Policy issues, compliance and updating ...... 91
Glossary ...... 99
Appendix A1. Primary data collection...... 105
Appendix A2. Housing need...... 113
Appendix A3. Updating the findings ...... 123
Appendix A4. Long-term market balance – results for urban and rural sub-areas...... 127
Appendix A5. Sub-area profiles ...... 133
Appendix A6. Stakeholder Consultation...... 149
Page iii
1. Introduction
1. Introduction
Overview
1.1 This report presents a comprehensive analysis of the Maidstone Borough Housing Market. It includes a review of the current local situation, a discussion of the housing market dynamics and recommendations as to the appropriate action in Maidstone Borough. The report follows the general structure of the CLG Strategic Housing Market Assessment Practice Guidance of August 2007. In addition the research carried out meets the requirements of Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) and also Planning Policy Statement 12 (PPS12) in ensuring that all necessary outputs are provided and that such outputs pass the prescribed tests of soundness.
1.2 A range of evidence was used to inform the outputs of this Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) report. This includes a range of data from a primary survey of local households, secondary sources and consultation with key stakeholders in the Borough.
1.3 It should be noted that due to the issue of rounding, the numbers in the tables and charts in this report will not always sum exactly to the totals given.
An introduction to Maidstone Borough
1.4 The Borough of Maidstone covers some 40,000 hectares and is located in the heart of Kent. It includes a substantial urban area and a diversity of villages, the countryside is of high quality, with a substantial part of the area to the north of the M20 falling within the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
1.5 Maidstone town is the ‘County Town of Kent’ and is an administrative, retail and leisure hub with a strong night time economy. Many of the villages also provide key local services for rural residents.
1.6 The Borough has generally high rates of employment. It has a very mixed business sector with large numbers of small and medium size businesses with particular strengths in professional services (law and accountancy) and construction. There is also a growing media industry.
1.7 Transport links are generally good. There are rail connections to central London as well as to north and east Kent and the Borough is well served by the motorway network with the 20 and M2 both providing links to the M25 and the Channel Ports.
Page 1 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 1.1 The location of Maidstone Borough
Source: Fordham Research 2009
1.8 Retail and leisure facilities include Maidstone town centre, which has approximately 700 shops, and Maidstone Leisure Centre, the largest leisure centre in Kent. The Borough also boasts the largest night time economy within Kent 1. The Borough’s green spaces include Mote and Whatman Parks, and numerous smaller parks and squares within the town and villages. Maidstone Borough is also home to Leeds Castle.
1.9 The Borough’s educational facilities include the University for the Creative Arts and Mid Kent (further education) College. Travel by rail to London is possible from the smaller market towns of Headcorn, Staplehurst and Marden as well as Maidstone itself. The M20 and M2 provide links to the M25 and the Channel Ports. A bus transport network serves Maidstone town.
1.10 The Borough was ranked 248th 2 of the 354 local authorities in England in the 2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation (with 1 being the most deprived local authority). It is estimated that at the time that this SHMA was produced (late 2009) there were 61,460 households in Maidstone Borough 3.
1 The Sustainable Community Strategy for Maidstone Borough 2009 2020 2 Rank of average score 3 This figure is based on the CLG household estimates. As per Audit Commission guidance, the Council uses an alternative figure based on Council Tax data as at 31/3 each year, which is not available in the public domain.
Page 2 1. Introduction
What is a Strategic Housing Market Assessment?
1.11 Strategic Housing Market Assessments were established by Government Guidance: Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (November 2006) and detailed Practice Guidance (Strategic Housing Market Assessment Practice Guidance) was published in March and August 2007. The aims of a Strategic Housing Market Assessment are to provide clear evidence as to what is going on in the housing market and what the future prospects for the market may be.
1.12 Important features of the SHMA process are:
i) Involvement of an authority or a group of local authorities representing a meaningful market area – Maidstone Borough has been identified as a single market area 4 and therefore appropriately forms the subject of an SHMA
ii) A process in which key stakeholders are involved throughout the production of the evidence as well as being consumers of it
iii) Inclusion in the process of all tenures of housing
iv) Higher standards of quality: the tests of rigour are more strict than before
v) It is an ongoing process, so that once the present reports are completed, the council and stakeholders keep updating the results and using them as the basis for housing and planning policy
vi) It forms part of the evidence base for the Local Development Framework, in particular the Core Strategy, and to inform the Council’s Housing Strategy and other housing policy work.
1.13 The most important output requirements of PPS3, as regards the SHMA are stated in paragraph 22:
‘Based on the findings of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment and other local evidence, Local Planning Authorities should set out in Local Development Documents:
The likely overall proportions of households that require market or affordable housing, for example, x% market housing and y% affordable housing
The likely profile of household types requiring market housing e.g. multi person, including families and children (x %), single persons (y %), couples (z %)
The size and type of affordable housing required.’
4 Identifying the Local Housing Markets of South East England, DTZ Pieda Consulting, 2004
Page 3 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
1.14 In addition PPS3 also requires that the following can be demonstrated:
understanding of the existing mix of housing types (para 24)
understand the demand for market housing (para 38)
understand local housing markets (para11)
1.15 In line with the Practice Guidance this project has been carried out under the supervision of a SHMA Expert Group. The project was jointly commissioned between housing and planning policy sections.
The evidence base
1.16 In accordance with Practice Guidance a range of data sources were used to create a robust and diverse evidence base. In addition to the use of data, information was gleaned from a number of important publications and through discussions with local stakeholders. Below we provide a brief summary of the main sources of information used in this report:
1.17 Secondary data: There are a range of data sources already available at the local, regional and national level which provide a good background to the housing market and how it is changing. Data sources considered in analysis include Land Registry data, the 2001 Census, the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE), Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) data and published household/population projections. In addition, a number of relevant documents were reviewed to inform the policy context in which the Maidstone Borough housing market exists, including the South East Plan, The Regional Housing Strategy, the Maidstone Borough Sustainable Community Strategy, the Maidstone Borough Economic Development Strategy and the Maidstone Borough Affordable Housing Development Plan Document.
1.18 Primary data: In addition to studying secondary data sources a local household survey for Maidstone Borough was conducted to provide primary data on the situation of households in Maidstone Borough. The survey data was obtained via a postal questionnaire (further details can be found in Appendix A1). The household survey complemented the range of other information sources used within the SHMA by providing robust current local data on a broad range of topics, to allow, in conjunction with the secondary data and the specialist views of stakeholders and letting and estate agents, a comprehensive analysis of the local housing market. Most notably the survey data found out in some detail households future demands and aspirations along with financial data on a household by household basis.
Page 4 1. Introduction
1.19 Estate agent information: A key part of the project was a series of face to face interviews with ten estate/letting agents in the local area. The dynamics of the housing market (e.g. what types of households are seeking properties) were discussed at these interviews, which provided a good overview of what has actually been happening locally. Agents covering all areas of the Borough were interviewed and agents from a range of locations were accessed. The interviews were supplemented by an internet property/rent price search to establish the costs of housing in the local area.
1.20 Stakeholder consultation: Throughout the project there were a number of opportunities for stakeholder input. A presentation was made to the Council’s multi disciplinary Housing Sounding Board in September information on the SHMA was disseminated and attendees were given the opportunity to express their views on the nature of the housing market. Consultation was expanded in December to include additional RSL partners and those on the SHLAA (Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment) Liaison Group, with these and the Housing Sounding Board being asked their perspective on issues such as the housing markets of the Borough, opportunities and challenges faced by different sectors of society with regard to housing. A further stakeholder consultation event took place in January. This presented the draft findings and encouraged a discussion of these initial outcomes, of any queries or areas for further research the stakeholders felt would be valuable. In addition the presentation was sent round to all stakeholders, including those unable to attend the event, for any further feedback. An event was held in March to discuss final findings of the SHMA with stakeholders. Input provided by stakeholders is summarised in Appendix A6, and also referenced throughout the report where appropriate.
1.21 The production of the SHMA has been an iterative process; the views of stakeholders have been necessary to help the research evolve. The resultant document addresses the particular situation in Maidstone Borough in addition to presenting the outputs required by both PPS3 and the Practice Guidance.
Policy context
1.22 This study should be understood within the context of other strategies that describe the plans for the future of the economic and housing markets at a regional and local level. A range of relevant documents have been reviewed and this section details the parts relevant to the Maidstone Borough housing market. The results of this SHMA will provide evidence for the development of Maidstone Borough’s Local Development Framework (LDF) and a number of other plans and strategies.
Page 5 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
1.23 The South East Plan – Regional Spatial Strategy for the South East was adopted in 2009 and sets out changes needed to improve the quality of life in the South East England region up to 2026. Whilst Maidstone Borough is not located in one of the nine ‘sub regional strategy areas’ identified within the Plan, Maidstone Borough has been allocated ‘regional hub’ status, that is, it has been identified as an accessible settlement of regional significance and as ‘having the potential to accommodate significantly higher levels of development during the Plan period than other urban settlements located outside the sub regional strategy areas’.
1.24 The South East Plan indicates that Maidstone Borough is expected to be a growth point for the sub region throughout the plan period. This status brings with it a relatively high rate of provision of new build housing. Maidstone Borough’s annual average net additional dwelling requirement is 554, a total of 11,080 dwellings between 2006 and 2026 5. The overall regional target is that 25% of all new housing should be social rented accommodation and 10% intermediate affordable housing.
1.25 The Regional Housing Strategy for the South East was published in 2008. It sets out the investment priorities for housing across the region in response to where action is most acutely required. The Strategy identifies that the delivery of affordable homes, particularly social rented is a priority, with intermediate rented products are an important area to develop. It also indicates that the financial support to Open Market Homebuy will be limited (although not unsubstantial). The Strategy acknowledges that greater priority should be given to affordable homes suitable for families (a certain portion of the budget is ring fenced for homes with three of more bedrooms) and properties that are capable of being easily extended and adapted. A further priority is to promote affordable housing in rural areas.
1.26 The Sustainable Community Strategy for Maidstone Borough 2009 2020 outlines the overall strategic direction and long term vision for the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of Maidstone Borough. Within the objectives set out under Homes and communities topic the Community Strategy include preventing homelessness, improving the condition of the dwelling stock, promoting independent living and ensuring sufficient affordable developments for the local population.
1.27 The Affordable Housing Development Plan Document adopted December 2006 sets out the current affordable housing policy in Maidstone Borough. The main policy is that on housing sites or mixed use development sites of 15 units or more, or 0.5 hectare or greater the council will seek a minimum of 40% of the total number of dwellings to be provided be affordable housing to meet the identified housing need. The document also sets out the policy of mixed tenure developments (both market and affordable) and a range of intermediate products to be provided.
5 As the Borough has achieved in excess of 554 new home completions each year between 2006 and 2009, the requirement for the remainder of the Plan period is 525 per annum.
Page 6 1. Introduction
Summary
i) The Borough of Maidstone covers 40,000 hectares and is located in the centre of Kent. The Borough comprises the large urban area of Maidstone town and a rural area containing a number of smaller villages and the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB). ii) The Borough was ranked 248th of the 354 local authorities in England in the 2007 Index of Multiple Deprivation (with 1 being the most deprived local authority). It is estimated that at the time that this SHMA was produced (late 2009) there were 61,460 households in Maidstone Borough. iii) This Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) is designed to provide a detailed analysis of the Maidstone Borough housing market. It is compliant with Government Practice Guidance and involves the consideration and analysis of a wide range of information sources as well as input from stakeholders.
Page 7 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 8 2. Demographic and economic context
2. Demographic and economic context
Introduction
2.1 Two of the main drivers of the housing market are the resident population and the local labour market. They affect the nature of housing demand including household formation rates and households’ investment in housing. This chapter documents the current socio economic profile in Maidstone Borough and recent trends that have occurred. The information presented compares the circumstances in the Borough to the regional and national situation.
Population
2.2 Since 1981, the population of Maidstone Borough has increased at a faster rate than England, but at a more gradual rate than the South East region. Maidstone Borough’s population increased during the 1980s, peaking in 1989, remaining steady during the 1990s and then increasing over the last 10 years. Between 1981 and 2008, Maidstone Borough’s population increased by 11.2%. Regionally, the increase was 15.7% and nationally 9.9%.
Figure 2.1 Population change in Maidstone Borough (1981-2008)
115%
110%
105%
100%
95% Maidstone South East England Change in population (1981 Index=100)
90% 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Source: ONS mid-year population estimates 1981-2008 (from Nomis)
Page 9 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
2.3 The 2001 Census indicates that 94.9% of the population are ‘White British’, higher than both the regional figure (91.3%) and the national figure (87.0%). The largest BME 6 group in Maidstone Borough is ‘White Other’7, accounting for 1.8% of the population, followed by ‘Asian or Asian British’ (1.1%).
2.4 ONS have produced some estimates of the changes in population by ethnicity to 2007, although these are classed as experimental statistics and should be treated with caution. They suggest that the BME population of Maidstone Borough increased from 5.1% to 9.0% of the total population since the Census. Figure 2.2 presents the ethnicity of the population in the Borough according to the latest (2007) estimates.
Figure 2.2 Ethnicity of the Maidstone Borough population, 2007
2.0% 1.2% 1.2% 0.9% 2.8% 0.8%
91.0%
White British White Irish White Other Mixed Asian Black Chinese or Other
Source: ONS Resident Population Estimates by Ethnic Group, June 2007
2.5 The population as a whole and the number of resident households in Maidstone Borough appears to have been increasing at a similar rate since 2001. The average household size in the Borough has therefore remained stable at 2.4 persons per household.
Table 2.1 Household and population change, 2001 to 2006
2001 2006 % change Households* 57,000 59,000 +3.5% Population** 139,100 142,800 +2.7% Average household size 2.4 2.4 Sources: *CLG household estimates **ONS mid-year population estimates
6 Defined as all ethnic groups other than ‘White British’ 7 White groups other than British or Irish
Page 10 2. Demographic and economic context
Tenure profile
2.6 Analysis of 2001 Census data reveals that 77.6% of households in the Borough were owner occupiers, higher than regional and national equivalents. Around 13% of households resided in the social rented sector, lower than the South East and national averages. The private rented sector houses a relatively small proportion of households, 6.6% compared to 8.8% both nationally and regionally.
Figure 2.3 Tenure (2001) 3.2% 8.8% Owner occupation (no England 29.2% 39.5% 19.3% mortgage)
Owner occupation (with mortgage) 3.3% 8.8% South East 31.3% 42.7% 14.0% Social rented
Private rented 6.6% 3.2% Maidstone 31.6% 46.1% 12.7% Other
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Source: Census 2001
2.7 The current tenure split in the Borough is estimated to comprise around 72% of households in the owner occupied sector, with 14% in the social rented sector and the remaining 13% in the private rented sector. This tenure split is recorded in the primary household survey undertaken as part of the SHMA 8. The private rented sector now accounts for 15% of market accommodation in Maidstone Borough compared to 10% in 2001.
2.8 The growth in this tenure relative to the owner occupied sector in the last decade mirrors national and regional trends and has been facilitated by a much larger number of buy to let mortgages available to would be landlords and less regulation of private landlords than has historically been the case. In addition the rapid increase in property prices recorded up till 2007, made it more difficult for prospective first time buyers to access owner occupation and therefore forced more households to remain in private rented accommodation. Conversely the property price falls since 2007 have discouraged owners from selling their home (as the market value is lower than a few years ago) resulting in them letting out their old property as they move, whilst the change in loan to value ratios available for mortgages has meant that households that could afford to purchase on income multiples now require a substantial deposit and has further reduced the number of first time buyers.
8 Split derived once an initial weighting has been applied to the dataset to take account of sample stratification and response bias.
Page 11 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 2.4 Tenure by ward
Owner occupied
© Crown copyright Social rented
© Crown copyright Private rented
© Crown copyright Source: Census 2001
Page 12 2. Demographic and economic context
2.9 The maps above show the proportion of households living in each of the three broad tenure groups (owner occupation, social rent and private rent) by ward. The north of the Borough appears to contain the highest proportion of owner occupiers, where as social rented households are more likely to be found towards the centre and west of the Borough. Private rented sector households appear to be more evenly dispersed across the Borough.
Employment
2.10 Measured by the most recent Annual Business Inquiry (ABI), there were 74,900 employee jobs 9 in Maidstone Borough in 2007. The number of jobs in Maidstone Borough has increased by 10.6% since 1997. This is similar to the level of increase seen in the South East (11.9%) and England as a whole (11.5%), although the level of jobs in Maidstone Borough has fluctuated somewhat over this time period.
Figure 2.5 Indexed employment growth in Maidstone Borough (1997-2007)
115% Maidstone South East England
110%
105%
100% 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007
Changein employee jobs (1997 Index=100) 95% Year
Source: ONS Annual Business Inquiry Employee Analysis 2007 (from Nomis)
2.11 In terms of industry of employment , the ‘public administration, education and health’ sector is by far the largest sector of employment, providing 33.3% of all jobs available in the Borough in 2008; this compares with 25.6% in the South East and 26.4% in England as a whole (data is from ONS’s Annual Business Inquiry). The next largest sector is ‘distribution, hotels and restaurants’, which accounts for 23.9% of employee jobs in the Borough, similar to regional and national proportions.
9 employee jobs excludes self employed, government supported trainees and HM Forces
Page 13 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
2.12 BERR (the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform) provides information about the number of VAT registered businesses in an area and how this has changed over time. This can provide a good indication of the state of the economy as an increase in VAT registered business would suggest either new companies moving to the area or an increase in local entrepreneurship. The number of VAT registered businesses in the Borough at the end of 2007 was 5,860; this is an increase of 1,265 since 1997 (27.5%). This proportional increase is higher than that recorded for the region (24.0%) and for England as a whole (22.4%).
2.13 ‘Job density’ is a measure of the number of jobs per person of working age in an area. According to ONS data, in 2007 there were 0.97 jobs per working age person in the Borough. This is a high ratio and compares with 0.86 for the South East region and 0.84 for England.
2.14 ONS publish the number of people claiming Jobseeker’s allowance (JSA) on a monthly basis. This provides a very up to date measure of the level of unemployment of residents in an area. The figure below shows the change in the proportion of the working age population claiming JSA in Maidstone Borough since September 2006. The figure indicates that although Maidstone Borough has had a relatively low unemployment level in recent years, since autumn 2008 the rate of unemployment in the Borough has shown a notable increase, mirroring the national and regional trends. Overall the number of people claiming job seekers allowance in Maidstone Borough in September 2009 was double the number recorded in the same month in 2008.
Figure 2.6 Level of unemployment in Maidstone Borough (2006-2009)
5%
Maidstone South East England 4%
3%
2%
1% claiming seekersjob allowance Proportion workingof age population 0% Sep 06 Jan 07 May 07 Sep 07 Jan 08 May 08 Sep 08 Jan 09 May 09 Sep 09 Year
Source: ONS Claimant count
Page 14 2. Demographic and economic context
2.15 The Annual Population Survey 10 provides information on employment by occupation , categorising all working people resident within an area into one of nine groups depending on the nature of the skills that they use. These nine groups are graded from managerial jobs (Groups 1 3) to unskilled jobs (Groups 8 9). As illustrated below, 41.2% of employed residents in Maidstone Borough are classified as being in groups 1 to 3, which is lower than both the regional and national averages, however the proportion in unskilled jobs is also lower than the regional and national equivalent. This would suggest that Maidstone Borough is not a low skill economy but there is a deficit of certain highly skilled people.
Figure 2.7 Occupation structure 2008/09
Group 1 3: Senior, Professional or Maidstone 41.2% 26.4% 16.2% 15.5% Technical
Group 4 5: Administrative, skilled South East 47.2% 21.4% 15.5% 15.7% trades
Group 6 7:Personal service, Customer England 43.8% 21.9% 15.7% 18.2% service and Sales
Group 8 9: Machine operatives, Elmentary 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% occupations
Source: ONS Annual Population Survey 2008/09
Income
2.16 Income has a crucial effect on the level of choice a household has in their future accommodation. The median earned income for full time employed Maidstone Borough residents in 2008 was £27,138 according to the ONS Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE), slightly lower than the South East median (at £27,876) but higher than the median for England as a whole (£25,558). Whilst the lower quartile and median figures recorded for the Borough are similar to the regional equivalents, the upper quartile figure is notably lower. This suggests that whilst Maidstone Borough does not have a low wage economy, it lacks a substantial number of individuals with very high earnings.
10 The Annual Population Survey run by the Office of National Statistics is a combined survey of households in Great Britain. Its purpose is to provide information on key social and socio economic variables between the ten yearly censuses, with particular emphasis on providing information relating to small geographical areas.
Page 15 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 2.8 Annual gross income of full-time employees (2008)
£45,000
£40,000 £40,184 £36,507 £36,189 £35,000
£30,000 £27,876 £27,138 £25,558 £25,000 £19,571 £19,403
£20,000 £18,079 £15,000
Annual Gross Income £10,000 £5,000 £0 Maidstone South East England Lower Quartile Median Upper Quartile
Source: ONS Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (2008)
2.17 ASHE data suggests that the median income in Maidstone Borough has increased by 37.3% over the last five years. The regional increase was 40.2% and the national increase was 42.6%.
2.18 It is possible to compare the incomes of full time employed Maidstone Borough residents with those of people working in jobs located in the Borough. The median income of the latter group is £24,374, which is about £3,000 lower than the median income of (employed) Borough residents. This reflects that Maidstone Borough is home to a notable number of people who work outside of the Borough and earn a higher income than is available locally, including a signficant proportion of these who commute to London.
2.19 The fact that the earnings of those who live in Maidstone Borough is greater than those that work there, means that there is the potential for those important for the local economy being marginalised from the housing market as they are less able to afford local properties. The high earnings from those commuting out of the Borough are distorting property prices in relation to local wage levels.
2.20 ASHE data enables a useful comparison between areas, but the data covers employees only and so cannot be used to provide a full profile of the area. Furthermore the data is presented at an individual level, rather than at a the household level, on which a Strategic Housing Market Assessment must be based. It is necessary to supplement this analysis of ASHE data with a profile of household income in Maidstone Borough recorded by the household survey. The primary survey obtained information from all types of household in the Borough and collected income information at the household rather than individual level.
Page 16 2. Demographic and economic context
2.21 Survey results for household income estimate the mean gross household income level to be £33,206 per annum, including households without any members in employment. The median income is noticeably lower than the mean, at £23,996 per annum.
2.22 The figure below shows the distribution of incomes in Maidstone Borough. It is clear that there is a wide range of incomes in the Borough, with more than 40% having an income of less than £20,000 and almost a quarter having an income in excess of £50,000.
Figure 2.9 Distribution of annual gross household income in Maidstone Borough
25% 22.2%
20% 18.8% 18.7% 16.6% 15% 10.2% 10% 6.8% 6.7% % of households of % 5%
0% 0 £10k £10 £20k £20 £30k £30 £40k £40 £50k £50 60k+ £60k+
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
2.23 More than half of households with incomes of less than £20,000 have a retired household reference person (HRP) 11 . Households where the HRP is in employment have a mean income of £44,162 (median of £36,535).
Dwelling stock
2.24 Analysis of the current stock of housing allows a broad assessment of the range and condition of properties currently within the Borough. The Council’s 2008/2009 Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) records that there are 63,781 dwellings in the Borough. The table below presents a summary of key information on the Maidstone Borough housing stock compared with regional and national equivalents.
11 For the purposes of our study the survey respondent is taken to represent the household reference person (HRP).
Page 17 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table 2.2 Dwelling stock profile in Maidstone Borough
Maidstone South East England Borough 10 year change in total stock (1997/8 – 2007/8)* 10.4% 9.1% 7.9% 10 year change in social rented stock (1997/8 – 2007/8)* 7.9% 4.0% 8.4% Proportion of dwellings that are flats** 12.0% 18.1% 19.3% Proportion of dwellings which contain 5 or more rooms** 73.4% 69.9% 67.4% Proportion of dwellings in lowest Council Tax Bands (A/B)*** 19.6% 25.2% 44.5% Vacancy rate in the private sector* 2.8% 2.7% 3.3% Proportion of household spaces in shared dwellings** 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% Sources: *HSSA/HIP data (1997/1998 & 2007/200812 ), ** 2001 Census, *** CLG (2007)
2.25 HSSA data indicates that the overall increase in the housing stock in Maidstone Borough over the period 1998 to 2008 was higher than experienced regionally and nationally. However, Maidstone Borough’s social rented stock has decreased over the same time period as a consequqnce of Right to Buy, in line with the national trend, although across the South East as a whole the social rented stock increased between 1998 and 2008 reflecting that large scale affordable house building has been achieved in parts of the region.
2.26 According to the 2001 Census, only 12.0% of the Borough’s dwellings are flats, lower than regional and national averages. The 2001 Census contains information about the size of properties (in terms of the number of rooms excluding bathrooms, toilets and hallways). The data shows that dwellings in the in the Borough tend to be larger than was the case regionally and nationally: almost three quarters of dwellings had five or more rooms.
2.27 A good indication of the quality and price structure of the housing stock is the distribution of dwellings by Council Tax Band. Less than 20% of properties in the Borough fall into the lowest Council Tax Bands, well below the national average and lower than the regional average, illustrating the relatively high property values in the Borough.
2.28 A certain level of vacant dwellings is necessary to ensure the housing market is dynamic. HSSA data indicates that the proportion of market dwellings vacant in Maidstone Borough is the similar to the regional average. The figure of 2.8% is consistent with what has been historically been found in Maidstone Borough, although information from the Council suggests that the number of long term vacant properties has decreased recently, with unsold flats representing an increasing proportion of vacant properties.
12 2007/2008 HSSA data has been used here (as opposed to 2008/2009), as national and regional data from the 2008/2009 HSSA no longer contain this level of detail
Page 18 2. Demographic and economic context
2.29 Shared dwellings are a household space within ‘part of a converted or shared house' in which a household does not have exclusive use of a part of the dwelling (including bathroom and toilet). Households may reside in shared dwellings as a result of an inadequate supply of affordable housing in a local area. The level of shared dwellings in the Borough was low (0.6%), similar to the regional and national situation.
2.30 In terms of stock condition, 2008/2009 HSSA data suggests that 6.3% of all dwellings in Maidstone Borough have a Category 1 Hazard under the Housing Heath and Safety Rating System (HHSRS). This is lower than both the regional average (8.0%) and the national average (8.9%). In terms of energy efficiency, the mean SAP rating (used to measure energy efficiency) for private sector dwellings (not including RSLs) was 56 in 2008/2009, according to HSSA data. This compares with an average private sector SAP of 47 for England in 2006 (according to the Survey of English Housing). The higher the figure the better the standard, suggesting that (private sector) dwellings in Maidstone Borough are more energy efficient than dwellings nationally, as well as being less likely to contain a Category 1 hazard. A Private Sector House Condition Survey has recently been completed – this will provide further information on the condition of the Borough’s stock and form part of the evidence base for housing strategy.
Page 19 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Summary
i) Mid–year population estimates suggest that the population of Maidstone Borough increased by 11.2% between 1981 and 2008. This is a less marked increase in population than was seen regionally over the same time period but a greater increase than nationally.
ii) Maidstone Borough has a smaller BME population than regionally and nationally; the 2001 Census recorded that some 94.9% of the population are ‘White British’. The largest BME group in the Borough is ‘White Other’, accounting for 1.8% of the population. More recent (2007) experimental statistics from ONS suggest that the BME population has increased since the Census.
iii) According to the 2001 Census, owner occupation in Maidstone Borough is higher than regional and national equivalents. The current tenure split in the Borough is estimated to comprise around 72% of households in the owner occupied sector, with 14% in the social rented sector and the remaining 13% in the private rented sector. The private rented sector has increased in significance since 2001, partly due to increased demand from would be first time buyers unable to afford the high property prices prior to 2007, and more recently, the substantial deposits required in order to secure home ownership, forcing such households to remain in private rented accommodation.
iv) The number of employee jobs in the Borough increased by around 10% between 1997 and 2007. The ‘public administration, education and health’ sector accounts for a third of employment within the Borough. The job density ratio is relatively high, suggesting that there are 0.97 jobs per working age person living in the Borough. The level of unemployment has shown a marked increase over the last year, in line with regional and national trends.
v) Survey results for household income estimate the mean gross household income level to be £33,206 per annum, including households without any members in employment. There are a wide range of incomes in the Borough, with more than 40% having an income of less than £20,000 and almost a quarter having an income in excess of £50,000. ASHE data suggests that people working in jobs located in the Borough earn on average £3,000 less than (employed) Borough residents. This means that there is potential for those important for the local economy being marginalised from the housing market, as they are less able to afford local properties.
Page 20 3. The current housing market
3. The current housing market
Introduction
3.1 This chapter initially considers the issues of migration and travel to work which are relevant to the Maidstone Borough housing market. The cost of housing in the Borough is then examined via Land Registry data and a survey of entry level house prices, drawing on information from interviews with estate and letting agents regarding the current housing market. A comparison of the cost of different tenures is used to identify the housing market gaps that exist – this enables the suitability of products within these gaps to be assessed.
Defining the Housing Market Area
3.2 PPS3 defines housing market areas as “ geographical areas defined by household demand and preference for housing. They reflect key functional linkages between places where people live and work ”.
3.3 As recognised by the CLG advice note ‘Identifying sub regional housing market areas’ (March 2007) there is no single preferred methodology to defining housing market areas and a range of information sources should be considered. The most frequently adopted methodologies have been based upon household migration patterns and Travel to Work areas. The advice note suggests the adoption of a pragmatic approach to identifying housing market areas, following local authority boundaries.
3.4 According to 2001 Census data, Maidstone Borough has a relatively high level of self containment 13 in terms of migration: 54% of households moving into a dwelling in the Borough moved from another dwelling in the Borough, and 56% of households moving out of a dwelling in the Borough moved to another dwelling within the Borough 14 . The household survey suggests a similar level of self containment, with 57% of households moving to a dwelling in the Borough within the last two years moving from a dwelling within the Borough, and 62% of households planning a move within the next two years expecting to move within the Borough.
13 Defined as the proportion of household moves taking place within the Borough 14 The outflow does not include households moving out of the UK
Page 21 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
3.5 Both Census and household survey data suggests that there are links in terms of migration with the neighbouring authorities of Medway and Tonbridge and Malling (households from these local authorities each comprise around 5% of households moving into Maidstone Borough), and to a lesser extent, Tunbridge Wells, Swale and Ashford. Household survey data indicates that almost 7% households moving to the Borough move from London. Household moves out of the Borough were most likely to be to Medway (6%), followed by Tonbridge and Malling. The household survey reported that almost 85% of future movers expected to stay in Kent.
3.6 In terms of commuting flows, data from the 2001 Census indicates that 60% of all the people who work in Maidstone Borough also reside in the Borough and 60% of (working) Maidstone Borough residents work within the Borough. The household survey suggests that 55% of (working) Household Reference Persons (HRPs) work within the Borough.
3.7 Both Census and household survey data suggests that around 10% of (working) Maidstone Borough residents work in Tonbridge and Malling, with 5% working in Medway and 3% in Tunbridge Wells. Household survey data also suggests that just over 10% of (working) Maidstone Borough residents commute to London. Census data suggests that 12% of those employed in jobs located in Maidstone Borough commute from Medway, followed by Tonbridge and Malling (8%), Swale (4%) and Ashford (4%).
3.8 Data from both the household survey and the Census suggests that the level of self containment in Maidstone Borough is relatively high (particularly given its’ South Eastern location and proximity to London), purporting that Maidstone Borough may be seen as a ‘housing market area’ in its own right. For the purpose of this report, the boundary of the housing market will follow the recommendation of the advice note and is based on the Local Authority boundary.
Relative prices
3.9 According to data from the Land Registry, the mean house price in Maidstone Borough in Q4 of 2009 was £232,379. This compares to the South East average of £259,426 and the national average of £222,127. Please note that these figures are based upon preliminary data (including about 95% of all sales), adjusted by Fordham Research in line with the differences found between preliminary and final Land Registry data in the previous four quarters.
3.10 In Q4 of 2009, Maidstone Borough had the fourth highest average house price of the 11 local authorities in Kent, with Sevenoaks having the highest (£361,183) and Thanet the lowest average price (£170,937). Medway had a lower average price than any of the Kent local authorities (£162,942).
Page 22 3. The current housing market
3.11 The figure below shows the change in mean prices over the last ten years in the Borough, region and across England as a whole. The data shows that significant price increases were experienced in all three cases. Over the last ten years (since Quarter 4 1999), the average price in Maidstone Borough more than doubled, rising by 107%. This is slightly lower than the national increase over the same time period (117%), but slightly higher than the regional increase (106%). The graph also illustrates the drop in house prices in the most recent two years, and a recent rebound.
Figure 3.1 Land Registry price changes 1999-2009 (mean)
£300,000
£250,000
£200,000
£150,000
Average price £100,000 England
£50,000 South East Maidstone £0 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Sources: Land Registry / CLG (Q1 1999-Q3 2009), Land Registry / Fordham Research (Q4 2009)
3.12 There is some degree of variation in house prices within the Borough itself. The map below illustrates that prices are lower in Maidstone town compared with the surrounding rural areas.
Page 23 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 3.2 Distribution of house prices within Maidstone Borough
Sources: Land Registry (Q4 2008-Q4 2009)
3.13 Land Registry data suggests that the fall in house prices over the last two years has had the greatest effect on smaller dwelling types in Maidstone Borough – the average price of a flat decreased by 13%, compared to a decrease of 4% for detached houses and 7 8% across all dwelling types, between 2007 and 2009 (fourth quarters). Flats also experienced the sharpest decrease in terms of the number of sales taking place – sales of flats fell by 36%, compared to an average of 26% across all dwelling types.
3.14 It is difficult to predict future market trends with any degree of certainty. There is emerging evidence that house purchase enquiries are starting to slow after an upturn in the second half of 2009. However, this could be seasonal. If this continues there is a prospect of a ‘double dip’ in property prices, although as sales remain low in historical terms it is likely to be a relatively small fall. Fordham Research envisage that overall the market will remain stable at a low level for the remainder of the year and will only start to rise again if unemployment stabilises before interest rate go up. A full market recovery will not occur until credit availability issues for first time buyers are resolved.
Interviews with Estate and Letting Agents
3.15 A number of interviews were conducted with estate agents dealing with sales and/or lettings side during October 2009. The interviews were conducted in order to better understand the housing dynamics that currently operate in Maidstone Borough and to ensure report findings remain relevant to the local context.
Page 24 3. The current housing market
Sales of residential property
3.16 Agents felt that in general, a high proportion of the asking price was being achieved between 90 97%. Information from Hometrack (2009) similarly suggested that properties in Maidstone Borough achieved an average of 95.3% of their asking price, and that properties took an average of 7.2 weeks to sell. One agent reported achieving sales above the asking price. Agents reported that very few sales were falling through. Buyers are usually required to have at least a 10% deposit, usually between 15 20%.
3.17 High deposit requirements are believed to be a significant barrier to owner occupation, which particularly affects first time buyers, who have less access to capital. The result was that in 2008, 194,000 home loans were granted to first time buyers in England compared with 357,800 in 2007 15 , while the average deposit put down by a new entrant to the market rose to 22%, the highest level since 1974. The average multiple of income that first time buyers borrowed in 2008 was 3.1 times their earnings compared with 3.4 times in 2007.
3.18 Most agents reported that the supply of properties for sale is relatively low currently one reported a 50% decrease since last year. Most said that there is a shortage of available properties across the board, but of 2 3 bedroom/family homes in particular. Availability of 1 2 bedroom properties is better, with one agent mentioning that there are still lots of flats available.
3.19 Agents reported that there was still some house building taking place, both in the town and on the outskirts. This was a mixture of apartments (1 2 bedrooms) and townhouses (3 bedrooms). These were mainly purchased by first time buyers and some were offered as shared ownership. Figures provided by the Council suggest that in the 3 years from 2006/07 to 2008/09 almost half of completions were two bedroom properties, 20% were three bedroom properties, 18% one bedroom properties and the remainder four or more bedroom properties.
3.20 Some agents said that movers were mostly local, whereas others said that up to half were from outside the Borough. Most reported a significant proportion of non local buyers – mostly from London and South East London/Kent borders (Orpington, Dartford etc) in particular. Major employers in the town (hospital, college) have recently run recruitment drives outside the Borough, so there have been people moving in from other parts of the UK for employment reasons.
3.21 Most agents reported that there were a wide range of buyers, including first time buyers, Buy to Let investors and families looking to upsize their current housing. First time buyers tended to favour two bedroom terraced houses and flats (which have recently dropped in price), particularly in the town centre which has good access to the train station and tended to be cheaper. One agent reported that there were few first time buyers apart from those buying through Shared Ownership schemes.
15 The Council of Mortgage Lenders, 2009
Page 25 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
3.22 Investors favoured 1 and 2 bedroom houses in the town centre (close to train station), although some were buying larger properties and splitting them up into flats. Families and upsizers went for 3 and 4 bedroom houses. Bearsted was popular area amongst this group. Access to train station and schools is an important factor.
Lettings of residential property
3.23 Two agents reported a slight increase in rental costs and two a slight decrease, although it was felt that prices were levelling out. Potential tenants are negotiating over prices (even where prices are increasing), which is a fairly new phenomenon.
3.24 In terms of the effects of the economic downturn on the private rented sector, more people are now letting accommodation property price falls in recent years have discouraged homeowners from selling their own home, resulting in owners letting out their old property as they move. More people are renting accommodation, in particular would be first time buyers unable to afford the necessary deposit to be able to afford to purchase their own home.
3.25 In terms of the availability of properties to rent, it was felt that availability was generally limited at the moment one agent believed this to be because of the time of year (October) and an increase in employment in the Borough. There had been an influx of lower end, 1 and 2 bedroom properties, mainly flats (new build and buy to let).
3.26 It generally takes two to three weeks to let a property. This is shorter than usual, because of time of year. It tends to be the smaller properties going quickly, but they need to be well priced. Most agents reported that there were few vacant properties one commented that it was because of the time of year rather than the market.
3.27 Tenants are generally staying longer in rented properties than they used to, with agents reporting that there was not as much ‘churn’ in the market. One agent suggested tenants were staying longer to save on the cost of moving. Those in family homes (3 to 4 bedrooms) tended to stay longer than those in 1 2 bedroom properties.
3.28 Most agents think that the size of the private rented sector has increased. Prior to 2007, this was facilitated by a much larger number of buy to let mortgages available than has historically been the case. Additionally the rapid increase in property prices recorded up till 2007 forced would be first time buyers to remain in private rented accommodation. Since 2007, the change in loan to value ratios available for mortgages has meant that households that could afford to purchase on income multiples now require a substantial deposit, which has further reduced the number of first time buyers, and increased demand for private rented sector accommodation. Property price falls since 2007 have discouraged owners from selling their home resulting in them letting out their old property as they move – estate agents referred to this as a rise in ‘unwilling landlords’.
Page 26 3. The current housing market
3.29 There are a whole range of people renting, including sharers, young professionals, families, and would be first time buyers. Sharers/young professionals tend to go for a town centre location, with access to the train station Queen’s Road is popular location. First time buyers tend to go for two bedroom Victorian terraces or flats. Families tend to look out of town (e.g. Linton, Bearsted) where schools are better and there’s more space. Generally parking and gardens are important factors.
The cost of housing in Maidstone Borough
3.30 To fully understand the affordability of housing in an area it is necessary to collect data on the cost of housing by bedroom size. This allows the ability of households to be able to afford market housing of the appropriate size (determined by the statutory bedroom standard) to be assessed.
3.31 Entry level prices 16 were obtained by bedroom size for all areas of the Borough via an online search of properties advertised for sale and to let during October 2009. These costs were qualified by the qualitative research with estate and letting agents in the area. An average of the entry level prices across the Borough was calculated, so that a single price regime could be applied across the Borough as a whole.
3.32 The entry level price for owner occupied property in Maidstone Borough is presented in the figure below.
Figure 3.3 Entry-level purchase price by size of dwelling
£300,000 £250,000 £250,000
£200,000 £175,000
£150,000 £129,000 £90,000 £100,000
£50,000 Entry level purchase Entry level price
£0 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Survey of entry-level house prices, Fordham Research October 2009
3.33 The entry level weekly cost of private rented accommodation is presented in the figure below.
16 In accordance with the Practice Guidance entry level costs are based on lower quartile prices.
Page 27 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 3.4 Entry-level private rents by size of dwelling (per week)
£250 £219
£200 £178
£143 £150 £121
£100
£50 Entry levelcost rental weekly £0 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Survey of entry-level house prices, Fordham Research October 2009
3.34 The cost of social rented accommodation by dwelling size in Maidstone Borough can be obtained from Continuous Recording (CORE) which is a national information source on social rented lettings. Table 3.1 illustrates the cost of recent social rented lettings in Maidstone Borough. As can be seen the costs are significantly below those for private rented housing indicating a significant potential gap between the social rented and market sectors.
Table 3.1 Social rented costs in Maidstone Borough
Bedrooms Rent (per week) 1 bed £65 2 bed £76 3 bed £89 4 bed £104 Source: CORE LA Area Lettings Report 2008/2009
Page 28 3. The current housing market
3.35 PPS3 defines intermediate housing as housing at prices and rents above those of social rent but below market prices or rents. A wide variety of intermediate products available in Maidstone Borough were analysed, based upon data provided by Maidstone Borough Council. It has not been possible to evaluate all bedroom sizes for all types of intermediate scheme, due to the very small number of large intermediate dwellings made available so far.
3.36 The first product considered is Homebuy, a product which offers selected groups of residents (primarily key workers and social housing tenants) an opportunity to buy property at a discount. Homebuy for social rented tenants is considerably lower cost than for other groups and is therefore shown separately in the price chart below.
3.37 Information from the Zone Agents (Moat) indicates that as of December 2009, there were almost 760 active applications for HomeBuy in Maidstone Borough – this is the highest number of registered, eligible applicants within Kent, with the exception of Medway. More than 70 of applications were from social tenants. Almost two thirds of applicants required a minimum of one bedroom. Applicants had an average income of around £33,000 and an average deposit of around £9,600.
Figure 3.5 Cost of intermediate housing: Homebuy
£200,000 £175,000 £180,000 £160,000 £136,500 £140,000 £120,000 £101,500 £100,000 £93,800 £100,000
Price £78,000 £80,000 £53,600 £58,000 £60,000 £40,000 £20,000 £0 Homebuy Homebuy for social renters Homebuy type 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Maidstone Borough Council, Fordham Research 2010
Page 29 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
3.38 The second type of intermediate housing considered here is shared ownership. This involves an equity stake. This means that part of the property is bought by the occupier, with a mortgage, and the remainder is rented from the owner of the other portion of the property (usually an RSL). For the purposes of this analysis the overall cost of mortgage and rent together has been reduced to a weekly costs figure. It should be borne in mind that the level of subsidy required for a shared ownership product is higher if the equity stake is lower.
Figure 3.6 Cost of intermediate housing: Shared ownership, 25% and 50% equity stakes
£250 £210 £202 £200 £181
£148 £150 £131
£100 £100 Weeklycost
£50
£0 25% 50% Equity stake 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Maidstone Borough Council, Fordham Research 2010
Page 30 3. The current housing market
3.39 Finally, Maidstone Borough also offers some intermediate rent schemes, which are dwellings let at a subsidised rent, below market rates but above that charged for social housing. This tenure requires a lower level of subsidy than ordinary social housing. Stakeholders commented on the very high level of demand for intermediate rent.
Figure 3.7 Cost of intermediate housing: Intermediate rent
£160 £137 £140 £122 £120 £110
£100
£80
£60 Weeklycost
£40
£20
£0
1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Maidstone Borough Council, Fordham Research 2010
Analysis of housing market ‘gaps’
3.40 Housing market gaps analysis has been developed to allow easy comparisons of the costs to access properties on the tenure range, in order to facilitate the testing of different newbuild proposals, and to show generally the nature of the housing ladder in a particular locality.
3.41 The table and figure below show a comparison of the weekly costs of housing of different tenures shown throughout the chapter. Measurement of the size of the gaps between these ‘rungs of the ladder’ helps assess the feasibility of households moving between the tenures the smaller the gaps, the easier it is for a household to ascend the ladder.
Table 3.2 Weekly costs by tenure
Shared Shared HomeBuy Inter- Entry-level Entry-level Social rent ownership* ownership* (for social HomeBuy* mediate rent private rent purchase* (25% equity) (50% equity) renters)* 1 bed £65 £110 £100 £181 £68 £120 £121 £115 2 bed £76 £122 £131 £202 £74 £130 £143 £165 3 bed £89 £137 £148 £210 £100 £174 £178 £224 4 bed £104 - - - £128 £223 £219 £320 Source: Survey of entry-level house prices, Fordham Research October 2009; CORE LA Area Lettings Report 2008/2009 *weekly costs are based on 25 year repayment mortgage at an interest rate of 4.49% (Nationwide 2009)
Page 31 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 3.8 Weekly cost of housing in Maidstone Borough
£350
£300
£250
£200
£150 Weekly cost
£100
£50
£0 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed Social rent Intermediate rent Shared ownership (25% equity) Shared ownership (50% equity) Homebuy (for social renters) Homebuy Entry level private rent Entry level purchase
Source: Fordham Research survey of house prices (April 2009), Maidstone Borough Council (2010), CORE (2007/08)
3.42 For all sizes of accommodation, the cost of entry level market accommodation is more than 80% higher than the cost of social rented accommodation (with the gap increasing the larger the dwelling). This indicates that intermediate housing could potentially be beneficial to a number of households, particularly in the case of four bedroom accommodation where the gap so large. Unfortunately, there is little four bedroom intermediate accommodation available at present.
3.43 However, in the case of smaller properties (of one or two bedrooms), some intermediate products cost more than open market housing – this is true of shared ownership with a 50% equity stake for both one and two bedroom properties.
3.44 In the case of two, three and four bedroom properties, the weekly cost of owner occupation is between 15 45% higher than for private rented accommodation – again, the gap increases the larger the dwelling. In the case of one bedroom properties, the weekly cost of owner occupation is similar to the cost of private renting. It should be noted that no account has been taken for the need for a deposit in these figures, which is likely to be a further barrier to purchasing a home, particularly in the case of first time buyers.
Page 32 3. The current housing market
Summary
i) The level of self containment in the Borough in terms of migration and travel to work is relatively high (particularly given its’ South Eastern location and proximity to London), suggesting that Maidstone Borough may be seen as a ‘housing market area’ in its own right. For the purpose of this report, the boundary of the housing market will follow the recommendation of the advice note and is based on the Local Authority boundary. ii) According to Land Registry data, the mean house price in the Borough in Q4 of 2009 was £232,379. The average price in Maidstone Borough has more than doubled over the past ten years, although prices have decreased within the last two years, and a recent rebound, in line with the regional and national trend. There is some variation in house prices with the Borough itself the average price of housing Maidstone town is lower than in the surrounding rural area. iii) A number of Estate and Letting Agents were interviewed across the Borough. Most reported a drop in the supply of dwellings available to purchase, and an increase in the number of people renting properties. The current high deposit requirements were believed to be a significant barrier to owner occupation. iv) Entry level purchase prices in the Borough ranged from £90,000 for a one bedroom property and £250,000 for a four bedroom property. Private rental costs at the entry level ranged from £121 per week for one bedroom accommodation and £219 per week for a four bedroom property. v) The analysis of housing market gaps suggests that entry level market housing is more than 80% higher than the cost of social rented accommodation (with the gap increasing the larger the dwelling). This indicates that intermediate housing could be beneficial to a number of households. Intermediate housing products currently available in the Borough include HomeBuy, shared ownership and intermediate rent.
Page 33 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 34 4. The active market
4. The active market
Introduction
4.1 This chapter provides an understanding of how the housing market functions in Maidstone Borough. Initially, affordability is assessed for different groups of resident households. The chapter then examines evidence for pressure in the housing market in terms of households living in overcrowded accommodation. The chapter also considers turnover rates and how different tenures facilitate mobility; the role of the private rented sector is then considered in more detail.
Affordability
4.2 Assessing the affordability of market housing in an area is crucial to understanding the sustainability of the housing market. Poor affordability can result in the loss of employees from an area, an increase in poverty and a high number of households requiring assistance with their housing either via a social rented property or through Local Housing Allowance (LHA). This can also result in a loss of mix and balance in the population within the area.
4.3 Although price/income ratios alone tell us relatively little about affordable housing requirements in an area with affordability more properly taking into account the full range of financial information they are an established measure of affordability. It is therefore of interest to briefly chart how this ratio has been changing over time as this provides a useful historical perspective.
4.4 The figure below shows that there has been an increase in price/income ratios In Maidstone Borough between 2003 and 2006 with a decrease since – the highest level reached was 9.51 and the figure for 2009 is 7.53. The figure also shows that the price/income ratios In Maidstone Borough started falling earlier than nationally (2007) and regionally (2008).
Page 35 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 4.1 Price: income ratio 2003-2009 (median price to median income)
10.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
Price: income ratio England
6.0 South East Maidstone
5.0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year
Source: Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, Land Registry/CLG
4.5 Price/income ratios do not enable a proper study of housing markets, as they omit two essential elements of affordability that affect most households: savings and owned equity. Since over half of households in the Borough have owned housing for at least a decade, the dynamics of the housing market can only be understood by looking at all three elements; this is termed ‘financial capacity’ by Fordham Research.
4.6 Financial capacity is calculated as: income (x3.5) + savings + equity. The income is multiplied by 3.5 as this is the typical multiplier used to assess a households’ ability to purchase a home. The table below provides the median financial capacity figures by tenure.
4.7 The data shows that owners without a mortgage (often retired) have a much higher overall ability to buy than those (typically younger) with a mortgage, but the latter have much higher incomes. Both have a far greater financial capacity than households in the rented sector. It is clear that the financial capacity of both social renters and private renters will prohibit the majority from being able to consider buying a home.
Page 36 4. The active market
Table 4.1 Median financial information by tenure
Median annual Median Financial Tenure gross household Median equity savings capacity income Owner occupied (no mortgage) £20,975 £23,262 £236,796 £333,469 Owner occupied (with mortgage) £44,525 £1,760 £90,791 £248,387 Social rented £9,079 £58 £31,832 Private rented £23,594 £431 £83,010 All households £23,996 £4,032 £183,245 £271,262 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
4.8 The table below splits considers how the financial situation of households varies between the urban and rural areas. As can be seen, although there is only about a £4,500 difference in incomes between rural and urban areas, the average ability to purchase a property (as measured by financial capacity) is much lower in the urban area, largely due to the much higher levels of equity possessed by owner occupiers in attractive rural areas.
Table 4.2 Median financial information: rural and urban areas
Median annual Median equity Median Financial Classification gross household (owner savings capacity income occupiers) Urban £22,197 £1,673 £154,323 £233,686 Rural £26,711 £8,061 £214,699 £316,249 All households £23,996 £4,032 £183,245 £271,262 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
4.9 The household survey contains an estimate of the overall financial capacity of each household in the Borough. This information can be used to examine the ability of households to afford entry level market housing of the appropriate size (determined by the statutory bedroom standard) locally, based on the affordability criteria set out in the Practice Guidance and presented below.
Assessing whether a household can afford home ownership: A household is considered able to afford to buy a home if it costs 3.5 times gross household income. Allowance is also made for any access to capital that can be used towards home ownership (e.g. savings or equity).
Assessing whether a household can afford market renting: A household is considered able to afford market rented housing in cases where the rent payable would constitute no more than 25% of gross income.
Page 37 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Affordability of market housing
4.10 The figure below shows the current affordability of households by household type and location of employment of household head. This is the theoretical affordability of households as the analysis considers all households in the Borough and does not take into account their intention of moving. The figures shown combine the separate affordability tests for home ownership and market renting to show only households that can afford neither tenure of market housing. Overall 23.9% of households are theoretically unable to afford any market housing, with 55.8% unable to afford entry level market rents and 25.4% unable to afford entry level owner occupation The figure for owner occupation is much lower because many households who own their home outright but have low incomes (because they are retired) do not have the level of income required to rent, but would be able to use the equity in their current home to purchase outright an entry level home.
Figure 4.2 Theoretical affordability – percentage unable to afford market housing
Single pensioner 26.2% 2+ pensioners 11.8% Single non-pensioner 34.1% Couple, no children 8.5% Other multi adult 26.7% Lone parent 67.1% 2+ adults, 1 child 16.1% 2+ adults, 2+ children 26.6%
Household head employed within Maidstone area 22.6% Household head employed elsewhere 7.2% Household head not in employment 31.1%
Urban 29.0% Rural 17.7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
4.11 The data indicates that around two thirds of lone parent households in the Borough would be unable to afford market housing (if they were to move home now). Childless couple households and those containing two or more pensioners are most likely to be able to afford market housing in Maidstone Borough.
4.12 Some 22.6% of households headed by someone employed in Maidstone Borough would be unable to afford market housing in the Borough (if they were to move now) compared to 7.2% of households headed by someone employed outside Maidstone Borough.
Page 38 4. The active market
4.13 There is also a significant urban/rural divide, with 29.0% of households in the urban area of Maidstone Borough unable to afford market housing, compared to only 17.7% in the rural area.
Affordability of intermediate housing
4.14 The figure below compares the theoretical affordability of the intermediate housing products described in chapter three to the affordability of open market home ownership and open market rent. It should be noted that Homebuy is the only product that should be compared directly with home ownership as this is assessed using the same affordability criteria. The other products should be compared to the cost of open market rent.
4.15 The figure shows that more households are able to afford a Homebuy product than open market home ownership and that intermediate rent and shared ownership (with a 25% equity share) are affordable to more households than open market private rent, but shared ownership (with a 50% equity share) is affordable to fewer households.
Figure 4.3 Theoretical affordability – Summary
Open market home ownership 25.4%
Open market rent 55.8%
Homebuy 24.2%
Shared ownership (50% equity) 72.2%
Shared ownership (25% equity) 49.7%
Intermediate rent 52.3%
Social rent 29.1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
The following figures provide detail on the affordability of these various intermediate products for different household groups.
Page 39 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 4.4 Theoretical affordability – Homebuy
Single pensioner 26.8%
2+ pensioners 11.8%
Single non-pensioner 34.7%
Couple, no children 8.5%
Other multi adult 26.2%
Lone parent 65.8%
2+ adults, 1 child 14.7%
2+ adults, 2+ children 23.1%
Urban 28.8%
Rural 16.6%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Figure 4.5 Theoretical affordability – Shared ownership (50% equity)
Single pensioner 26.4%
2+ pensioners 11.8%
Single non-pensioner 35.1%
Couple, no children 11.0%
Other multi adult 27.8%
Lone parent 67.1%
2+ adults, 1 child 19.5%
2+ adults, 2+ children 30.8%
Urban 30.7%
Rural 18.8%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 40 4. The active market
Figure 4.6 Theoretical affordability – Shared ownership (25% equity)
Single pensioner 26.2%
2+ pensioners 11.8%
Single non-pensioner 31.9%
Couple, no children 7.7%
Other multi adult 26.1%
Lone parent 65.7%
2+ adults, 1 child 15.4%
2+ adults, 2+ children 24.4%
Urban 28.0%
Rural 16.5%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Figure 4.7 Theoretical affordability – Intermediate rent
Single pensioner 26.2%
2+ pensioners 11.8%
Single non-pensioner 32.9%
Couple, no children 8.3%
Other multi adult 26.1%
Lone parent 65.7%
2+ adults, 1 child 15.4%
2+ adults, 2+ children 24.4%
Urban 28.3%
Rural 16.7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Households unable to afford
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 41 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Overcrowding and under-occupation
4.16 Using data from the household survey it is possible to study levels of overcrowding based on the bedroom standard. Essentially this is the difference between the number of bedrooms needed to avoid undesirable sharing (give the number of household members and their relationships to each other) and the number of bedrooms actually available to the household. The bedroom standard also provides the opportunity to look in more detail at households who under occupy their dwelling.
4.17 The standards used to check for overcrowding/under occupation were as follows:
• Overcrowding : each household was assessed as to the number of bedrooms required. Any household without enough bedrooms was deemed to be overcrowded. • Under-occupation : households with more than one spare bedroom are deemed to be under occupied.
4.18 The household survey indicates that in Maidstone Borough some 1.9% of households are overcrowded (lower than the latest national and regional estimates from the Survey of English Housing of 2.7% and 2.0% respectively) and 39.5% of households are under occupied.
4.19 Overcrowding is more significant in the urban area, with 2.6% of households overall in this area overcrowded, whereas in the rural area this falls to just 1.1%. Under occupation shows the reverse pattern, with nearly half (45.4%) of all properties in rural parts of Maidstone Borough under occupied compared to 34.7% in the urban area.
4.20 Survey data further suggests that overcrowded households are more likely to be living in private and social rented accommodation. Overcrowded households are particularly likely to state a need or likelihood of moving home over the next two years.
4.21 Information from the survey indicates that just 6.8% of under occupied households in Maidstone Borough intended to move to a smaller property within the next two years.
Turnover
4.22 It is important to measure the flow of dwellings available for residence in an area. This indicates how market activity in Maidstone Borough compares with other areas and demonstrates the role of the different tenures within the Borough.
4.23 A range of data sources provide information on the rate of turnover across the three main tenures in Maidstone Borough:
• Information on the number of property sales according to the Land Registry can be compared against the current owner occupied stock estimate to derive a turnover rate for owner occupation.
Page 42 4. The active market
• Data on the number of re lets and the total occupied stock recorded in the HSSA is used to calculate a turnover rate in the social rented sector. • There is no source of secondary data on the turnover rate in the private rented sector at a local or regional level; the Survey of English Housing only contains a national estimate. Data from the household survey (specifically the number of households within the private rented sector that moved into their home within the last year) is used to estimate the turnover rate in the private rented sector in Maidstone Borough.
4.24 The annual turnover rates obtained from these sources are presented in the figure below. It is clear that private tenants are much more mobile than social renters or owner occupiers. This implies that the private rented sector is important for the fluidity of the housing market. The rate of turnover in the private rented sector is lower than national average. In the social rented and owner occupied sectors, turnover levels are similar to regionally and nationally.
Figure 4.8 Annual turnover by tenure
45.0% England 39.5% South East 40.0% Maidstone 35.0% 30.6% 30.0%
25.0%
20.0%
Annual turnover 15.0%
10.0% 7.7% 7.3% 7.4% 4.8% 5.0% 3.0% 3.5%
0.0% Owner occupation Private rented Social rented
Sources: Land registry/CLG; HSSA 2008/9 & 2007/2008; Survey of English Housing; Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
The private rented sector
4.25 The high turnover recorded in the private rented sector shows the importance of the sector in facilitating mobility in the market. Analysis of the household survey dataset shows that overall 48.6% of moves occurring in the Borough within the last two years involved private rented accommodation.
Page 43 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
4.26 It is important to note that as well as accommodating those who choose and can afford to live in the sector, private rented properties also accommodate those that technically require affordable housing. As the supply of affordable accommodation is insufficient to house all those who need an affordable home, some households rent privately with financial support towards their housing costs via Local Housing Allowance (LHA) (formerly Housing Benefit).
4.27 Nationally, the size of the benefit supported private rented sector has increased since the end of the Council house building programmes of the late 1980s. The survey estimates that there are about 2,300 households in the private rented sector claiming LHA in Maidstone Borough, and these households constitute 28.6% of all households in this tenure. The proportion of households in the private rented sector claiming LHA in Maidstone Borough is higher than the national average of a fifth recorded in the 2006 Survey of English Housing. The characteristics of these households are quite distinct from other households within the tenure; therefore it is valuable to briefly illustrate the difference between the two sets of households within the private rented sector.
4.28 The table below shows that 48.0% of private rented households claiming LHA are households with children (the majority being lone parent households); households with children constitute only 26.8% of those in the private rented sector not receiving LHA. Single pensioner households are also over represented amongst private sector households claiming LHA. Single (non pensioner) households and couples without children comprise 55.6% of non LHA private rented sector households.
Table 4.3 Private renters: household types
LHA No LHA Total Household type H’holds % H’holds % H’holds % Single pensioners 364 15.8% 226 3.9% 590 7.3% Two or more pensioners 82 3.6% 219 3.8% 301 3.7% Single non pensioners 297 12.9% 1,656 28.8% 1,953 24.3% Couple, no children 139 6.0% 1,544 26.8% 1,683 20.9% Other multi adult 313 13.6% 565 9.8% 878 10.9% Lone parent 829 36.0% 177 3.1% 1,006 12.5% Two or more adults, one child 178 7.7% 611 10.6% 789 9.8% Two or more adults, two or more children 98 4.3% 753 13.1% 851 10.6% Total 2,300 100.0% 5,751 100.0% 8,051 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
4.29 Information from the survey indicates that the median annual household income of those in the private rented sector claiming LHA is £9,374, whilst for those resident in the private rented sector not claiming LHA the figure is £27,633. A similar disparity is recorded for median household savings (£147 in debt for households claiming LHA and £662 for other households in the private rented sector).
Page 44 4. The active market
4.30 The table below shows the turnover in the private rented sector. The turnover for private rented households claiming LHA is lower than the turnover for non LHA private rented households.
Table 4.4 Turnover of private renters
LHA No LHA Total Number moving in past year 458 2,005 2,463 Number of households 2,300 5,751 8,051 Estimated annual turnover rate 19.9% 34.9% 30.6% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
4.31 In terms of planned future moves, data from the survey indicates that 28.3% of private rented households claiming LHA need and/or are likely to move within the next two years. This compares to 22.8% of non LHA private rented sector households.
4.32 The table below shows the tenure preferences of private rented sector household who need and/or are likely to move within the next two years. The table shows that the majority of moving private rented households claiming LHA wish to move to the social rented sector (70.3%), whilst the majority of non LHA private rented households wish to move to owner occupation (79.8%).
Table 4.5 Tenure preferences of moving private rented households
LHA No LHA Total Owner occupied 14.6% 79.8% 60.9% Social rented 70.3% 12.4% 29.2% Private rented 15.1% 7.8% 9.9% Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 45 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Summary
i) Lone parent households are by far the least likely to be able to afford market accommodation locally – this is of concern as it is important to have mixed and balanced communities within all tenures. Households headed by someone employed within the Borough are less likely to be able to afford market housing in the Borough than households headed by someone employed outside the Borough.
ii) The rate of overcrowding in the Borough at 1.9% is lower than the national average (2.7%). Overcrowded households are most likely to be found in the private and social rented sectors, and in the urban rather than rural area. The Council may wish to take steps to reduce overcrowding in these areas, whilst offering under occupying households incentives to downsize.
iii) The annual rate of turnover in the private rented sector in the Borough at 30.6% is much higher than that recorded in both the social rented and owner occupied sectors (7.4% and 3.5% respectively). Private rented households are therefore the most mobile, with the implication being that the private rented sector is important for the fluidity of the housing market.
iv) The survey estimates that around 29% of private rented sector households are recipients of Local Housing Allowance (LHA). The composition of these households is quite distinct, with almost half of these households containing children, compared to just over a quarter of non LHA private rented sector households. In terms of future tenure preferences, the majority of the majority of moving private rented households claiming LHA wish to move to the social rented sector, whilst the majority of non LHA private rented households wish to move to owner occupation.
Page 46 5. Housing need
5. Housing need
Introduction
5.1 Housing need is a term created in the mid 1990s to help provide a means tested estimate of the requirement for affordable housing in an area. It is defined in PPS3 as “ the number of households who lack their own housing or who live in unsuitable housing and who cannot afford to meet their housing needs in the market ”. This chapter will calculate the size of the housing need in Maidstone Borough and the type of accommodation most appropriate to meet this need.
Estimate of net annual housing need
5.2 The Practice Guidance outlines the 16 steps that must be completed to obtain all of the information required to calculate the annual estimate of housing need. The table below presents the results at each of these 16 steps (a detailed explanation of how each of these figures was calculated is presented in Appendix A2).
Page 47 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table 5.1 Housing needs assessment model for Maidstone Borough
Stage and step in calculation Notes Number STAGE 1: CURRENT NEED (Gross) 1.1 Homeless households and those in temporary accommodation 7 17 1.2 Overcrowding and concealed households Two steps taken 1,689 1.3 Other groups together 1.4 Total current housing need (gross) 1.1+1.2+1.3 1,696 STAGE 2: FUTURE NEED 2.1 New household formation (gross per year) 1,303 2.2 Proportion of new households unable to buy or rent in the market leaves 563 43.2% 2.3 Existing households falling into need 968 2.4 Total newly arising housing need (gross per year) (2.1x2.2)+2.3 1,531 STAGE 3: AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY Current supply 3.1 Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need 599 3.2 Surplus stock 0 3.3 Committed supply of affordable housing 587 3.4 Units to be taken out of management 0 3.5 Total affordable housing stock available 3.1+3.2+3.3 3.4 1,186 Future supply 3.6 Annual supply of social re lets (net) 521 3.7 Annual supply of intermediate housing available for re let or 31 resale at sub market levels 3.8 Annual supply of affordable housing 3.6+3.7 552 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009; various secondary sources
5.3 The Practice Guidance states that these figures need to be annualised to establish an overall estimate of net housing need. The first step in this process is to calculate the net current need. This is derived by subtracting the estimated total stock of affordable housing available (step 3.5) from the gross current need (step 1.4). This produces a net current need figure of 510 (1,696 1,186).
5.4 The second step is to convert this net backlog need figure into an annual flow. The Practice Guidance acknowledges that this backlog can be addressed over any length of time although a period of less than five years should be avoided. For the purposes of this study the quota of five years proposed in the Practice Guidance will be used. Therefore to annualise the net current need figure, it will be divided by five. This calculation results in a net annual quota of 102 (510/5) households who should have their needs addressed.
17 For the purpose of this model, where the objective is to produce a minimum estimate of housing need, concealed households have not been included as part of the current need. This is because they are assessed within step 2.1 and excluding them from step 1.2 removes the prospect of any these households being double counted.
Page 48 5. Housing need
5.5 The final step is to sum the net annual quota of households who should have their needs addressed with the total newly arising housing need (step 2.4) and subtract the future annual supply of affordable housing (step 3.8). This leads to an annual need estimate of 1,081 (102+1,531 552). These figures are summarised in the table below.
Table 5.2 Summary of housing needs assessment model
Element Number Current need (Step 1.4)/5 339 Current supply (Step 3.5)/5 237 Net current need 102 Future need (Step 2.4) 1,531 Future supply (Step 3.8) 552 Net future need 979 Total net annual need 1,081 Total gross annual need 1,870 Total gross annual supply 789 Total net annual need 1,081 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009; various secondary sources
5.6 The figure of 1,081 reflects the scale of housing need in Maidstone Borough at this ‘point in time'. It represents an increase from the figure of 962 recorded in the previous Housing Needs Survey in Maidstone Borough completed in 2005 . This increase since the last housing needs survey reflects that since 2005 the cost of entry level market housing has risen faster than the level of local incomes and that unemployment is now higher relatively than in 2005.
5.7 The requirement of 1,081 affordable homes per year equates to 206% of the planned total annual supply of all housing. The Practice Guidance needs assessment model however does not fully reflect how the market operates and it is worth giving further consideration to two particular groups encompassed within the need figure.
5.8 The first group are those who have moved to market accommodation (principally the private rented sector) and pay more than the recommended proportion (25%) of their gross household income on housing and indicate that this is not a problem. These households are classified in housing need, however choose their accommodation in spite of the cost to achieve a particular type or location of housing. Data from the household survey suggests that this group amounts to approximately 280 households a year.
Page 49 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
5.9 Secondly, the Practice Guidance needs assessment model includes those that move to the private rented sector (via Local Housing Allowance/Housing Benefit) as being in housing need as they are usually unable to afford entry level market accommodation. In Maidstone Borough the supply of lettings to the private rented sector (through the Local Housing Allowance system) according to the household survey is 460 per annum (average over the past two years).
5.10 Whilst the LHA supported private rented sector will continue to exist out of necessity, to meet a proportion of need as this tenure is effectively used as substitute affordable housing, it is not a desirable long term solution for households in need of affordable housing either for those resident or the Council. This is because it does not offer the same security of tenure for the resident household as a social rented let, tenants are unable to contribute to management decisions relating to their home and generally the stock is of poorer quality. Also compared to the affordable sector, the LHA supported private rented sector represents poorer value for money for the public purse. A further problem is that it is hard for households in the LHA supported private rented sector to move to a social rented property unless they are in greatest need according to the criteria used on the Council’s waiting list.
5.11 These two assumptions help explain why the actual amount of affordable housing required in reality in the Borough is not automatically the same as the amount of affordable housing needed according to the Practice Guidance needs assessment model. The Practice Guidance needs assessment model is geared to an ideal state of affairs, not the current reality. The Practice Guidance needs assessment model is a technical exercise that presents a local assessment of the requirement for affordable housing. It does therefore not easily relate to an RSS figure, which is dictated from a regional level considering a range of social, economic and infrastructure considerations.
Type of affordable accommodation required
5.12 A range of households 18 were tested for their ability to afford the range of intermediate housing products available in Maidstone Borough (described in chapter 3), in order to obtain the most robust profile of their suitability for households defined as being in need according to CLG guidance. Any household unable to afford any of the intermediate housing options is assumed to require social rented accommodation. Account was also taken of the likely supply of these products and a net requirement for each product type was calculated. This information is presented in the table below.
18 The groups tested were all households unable to afford market housing, future moving households unable to afford market housing, households in current need and households in future need. A crude average of the proportion able to afford intermediate housing across these groups was derived, which was then applied pro rata to the gross annual need figure. This method was used in order to compensate for the small sample sizes involved when considering intermediate affordability of households in need.
Page 50 5. Housing need
Table 5.3 Social rented and intermediate housing requirements in Maidstone Borough
Shared ownership Homebuy Social rented Total at 25% Total gross annual need 145 183 1,542 1,870 Total gross annual supply 59 8 722 789 Net annual need 86 175 820 1,081 % of net shortfall 7.9% 16.2% 75.9% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009; various secondary sources
5.13 The table shows that only 328 (17.5%) households in housing need are able to afford intermediate housing in the Borough. The vast majority of affordable supply comes from the social rented sector (91.5%).
5.14 The table suggests that of the total additional affordable housing to be provided in Maidstone Borough to meet housing need, 8% should be shared ownership accommodation at a 25% equity share, 16% a Homebuy product and 76% social rented housing.
Size of affordable housing required
5.15 Having established the overall need for affordable housing in the Borough it is necessary to consider the sizes of accommodation (i.e. number of bedrooms) required. Net need estimates for different sizes of accommodation are shown in the table below – these have been derived from household survey data.
5.16 The gross need figures (the first column) are based on the size of home required by the 1,870 households (gross) in need per year. In order to obtain a net need figure by size of accommodation, the likely supply of accommodation by size also needs to be taken into account. Data from the household survey dataset indicating the number of bedrooms secured by households who have recently moved into affordable accommodation has been applied pro rata to the gross supply figure of 789.
Table 5.4 Estimated size requirement for additional affordable housing (net)
As a % of Supply as a Gross annual Gross annual Net annual total net % of gross need supply need annual need need 1 bedroom 492 338 154 14.2% 68.7% 2 bedrooms 663 343 321 29.7% 51.7% 3 bedrooms 534 109 426 39.4% 20.3% 4+ bedrooms 181 0 181 16.7% 0.0% Total 1,870 789 1,081 100.0% 42.2% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009; various secondary sources
Page 51 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
5.17 The table suggests that there is a net need for affordable housing of all sizes. Smaller (one and two bedroom) units account for almost 45% of the net need with larger (three and four bedroom) homes comprising over 55% of the net need. The final column shows that the need relative to supply is by far the greatest for four bedroom accommodation, meaning that households requiring this size dwelling are least likely to have their needs met.
Location of affordable housing required
5.18 The table below shows where the households in housing need are located in Maidstone Borough. It also shows the prospective supply of affordable housing in the Borough based on the household survey dataset – the location of households who have recently moved into affordable accommodation has been applied pro rata to the gross supply figure of 789. In addition the implied net annual requirement in the two areas is presented.
Table 5.5 Estimated requirement for additional affordable housing (net), split between urban and rural areas
As a % of Supply as a Gross annual Gross annual Net annual total net % of gross need supply need annual need need Urban 1,223 710 513 47.5% 58.1% Rural 647 79 568 52.5% 12.2% Total 1,870 789 1,081 100.0% 42.1% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009; various secondary sources
5.19 The table indicates that there is a net need for over 500 affordable dwellings per year in both parts of the Borough. Overall the net need is fractionally higher in the rural part of the Borough; some 52.5% of the 1,081 homes needed are required in the rural area. The final column shows that the need relative to supply is much greater in the rural part of the Borough, meaning that households in this area are least likely to have their needs met.
5.20 It is important to note that the table shows where the need for affordable housing is likely to arise, it does not however mean that the need should be met there.
Page 52 5. Housing need
Summary i) Following the steps of the needs assessment model specified by the Practice Guidance results in a net need estimate of 1,081 affordable dwellings per year in Maidstone Borough. This represents an increase since the previous (2005) Housing Needs Survey, reflecting that the cost of entry level market housing has risen faster than the level of local incomes since 2005, and that unemployment levels are higher. ii) Once the role of the private rented sector to meet need (via local Housing Allowance) and households that do not have a problem spending over a quarter of their income renting their home privately have been taken into account, the net annual requirement for affordable housing reduces by around two thirds. This illustrates that the Practice Guidance needs assessment model is geared to an ideal state of affairs rather than the current reality. iii) In terms of the type of affordable accommodation required, further analysis considered households’ ability to afford different types of intermediate housing, along with the likely supply of such housing. The results suggest that 8% of the housing need could be met by shared ownership accommodation at a 25% equity share and 16% by a HomeBuy product. The majority (76%) would need to be met by social rented housing. iv) An analysis of net need for affordable housing by dwelling size (number of bedrooms) suggests that there are shortages of affordable housing of all sizes. Smaller (one and two bedroom) units account for almost 45% of the net need with larger (three and four bedroom) homes comprising over 55% of the net need. The need relative to supply is by far the greatest for four bedroom accommodation, meaning that households requiring this size dwelling are least likely to have their needs met. v) There is a net need for over 500 affordable dwellings per year in both parts the urban and rural parts of the Borough. Overall the net need is fractionally higher in the rural part of the Borough; some 52.5% of the 1,081 homes needed are required in the rural sub areas. The need relative to supply is much greater in the rural part of the Borough, meaning that households in this area are least likely to have their needs met.
Page 53 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 54 6. Future housing demand
6. Future housing demand
Introduction
6.1 This chapter considers the likely demand for housing in the near future in Maidstone Borough, beginning with an analysis of the type of households moving through the market. Propensity and reasons for moving are considered and suggestions are made as to the tenure and dwelling size requirements likely to result from different types of households moving. The types of household requiring market housing is examined (in accordance with one of the requirements of PPS3), and finally a range of scenarios are presented relating to the impact of the housing market of local affordability relationships changing.
Current dynamics of the housing market
6.2 In terms of understanding how the demography of an area affects the housing market, it is necessary to examine the nature of households that move. The figure below presents a graphic illustration of the flow of households within the housing system in Maidstone Borough. This illustrates household change through migratory change.
6.3 The diagram shows the estimated movement of households into, out of and within the Borough (based on annualised household survey data over a two year period). The flows are distinguished according to the types of household. Data for in migration is based on past trends whilst information about out migration is based on households’ future expectations.
Page 55 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 6.1 Annual flow of households in Maidstone Borough
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
6.4 The figures presented are only approximations as the sample sizes do not permit very exact estimates. They should be taken to indicate the general magnitude of flows in the market. At that level they provide useful indications of housing market dynamics. The profile of in and out migration presented in the figure above suggests that there will be a small net inflow of households with children (i.e. more households of this type moving into the Borough than out of the Borough) with the reverse being true of other groups. Households with children also represent the largest group moving within the Borough.
6.5 The net change in households due to migration does not provide the necessary information for indications of the likely net change in the number of households in the Borough. This will also be influenced by the function between the number of new households and the number of household dissolutions (i.e. death). The demographic projections compiled for the South East Plan strategy based forecasts (September 2009) suggest that migration will make up only about 35% of net change in household numbers in Maidstone Borough.
6.6 To fully understand how changes in demography drive the market it is appropriate to examine the propensity of different household groups to move. The figure below presents the proportion of households in each group who moved within the last two years.
Page 56 6. Future housing demand
Figure 6.2 Propensity of different household groups to move
35% 30.3% 30%
25% 21.8%
20% 15.4% 15%
10% 5.8% 5%
0% Older person Single (non Multi adult (no Households with pensioner) children) children Proportion of household group moving each year each moving group of household Proportion Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
6.7 The data shows that across the Borough, older person households are by far the least likely to move home. Of the other three groups, single non pensioners are the most likely to move. As was shown in Chapter 4 (Figure 4.3), private rented households are much more likely to move than both owner occupied and social rented households.
6.8 Households in rural areas showed a significantly lower propensity to move, with only 16.0% intending to move within the next two years, compared to an overall Borough average of 20.3%, and 23.9% in the urban part of the Borough.
6.9 Although the reasons for moving are unique to each household, it is useful to understand the main motivations cited by different household groups. These illustrate the drivers for household moves experienced locally. The most frequently cited reason for past moves cited by households with children was to find a larger property, closely followed by wanting to move to a better environment. Multi adult households without children had the same top two reasons for moving, but placed greater importance on a move to a better environment.
6.10 Single non pensioners were most likely to have moved in order to live independently, or due to relationship breakdown, while older person households, in contrast, were more likely to have moved in order to live closer to friends or family, or to move out of a property they considered too large.
6.11 Information on where households planning a move would both like and expect to move to was obtained through the household survey. Overall, the rural area of Maidstone Borough was more popular than the town among prospective movers, despite containing less than half (44.8%) of the existing households in the Borough.
Page 57 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 6.3 Preferred and expected destinations of households planning to move
40% Location preferred 35% 33.0% Location expected 31.6% 30.6%
30% 29.2%
25%
20% 14.4% 15% 14.1% 12.9% 11.9% 10.2% 10% 9.2%
5% 1.6% 1.2% 0% Maidstone Maidstone Surrounding Elsewhere in London Elsewhere Town Rural District Kent UK/Abroad
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
6.12 Further analysis suggests that of households planning a move, households with children were the most likely of the four main household groups to expect to stay within the Borough (69.8% of moving households with children) and older person households were the least likely to expect to stay within the Borough (46.6% of moving older person households), although it should be remembered that this group were also the least likely to move overall.
6.13 In terms of tenure, social rented households planning a move were the most likely of the three main tenure groups (owner occupied, private rented and social rented) to expect to stay within the Borough (82.8% of moving social rented households); owner occupied households were the least likely (52.4% of moving owner occupied households).
6.14 It is worth noting that in contrast to all other tenure groups, well over half of those social rented households intending to move in the next two years would prefer accommodation in Maidstone Town (55.0%), while only 29.5% would prefer to live in other parts of Maidstone Borough.
Impact of moving households
6.15 Now that the nature of the household moves that occur within the market have been identified and the main motivations for moving have been discussed, the impact of these moves on housing demand can also be assessed.
6.16 This is achieved by comparing the expected tenure of the 12,489 existing households that need and/or are likely to move home in the next two years with their current tenure. This information is presented in the figure below. The figure illustrates how people expect to move through the housing ladder; it does not imply a requirement for additional housing.
Page 58 6. Future housing demand
Figure 6.4 Tenure change by household group, existing households
Household with children: future 33.4% 19.0% 47.6%
Household with children: current 24.3% 31.2% 44.5% 2.2% Multi adult (no children): future 14.3% 18.3% 65.2% 5.0% Multi adult (no children): current 7.8% 36.2% 51.0% 6.0% 3.5% Single (non pensioner): future 42.3% 48.2% 1.4% Single (non pensioner): current 29.7% 34.6% 34.3% 3.7% Older person: future 27.6% 68.7% 3.3% Older person: current 25.3% 71.3%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Social rented Intermediate rented Private rented Owner occupied
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 N.B. The number of moving older person households is small therefore findings for this group should be viewed with caution
6.17 The figure suggests that proportionally more households in all groups expect to move to social rented housing than currently reside in it; the shift is largely from the private rented sector, for all groups except older person households. Multi adult (no children) households, households with children and to a lesser extent single non pensioner households show planned increases in owner occupation; older person households show little change.
6.18 An equivalent analysis can be presented to show the impact on dwelling size. The size of accommodation expected by existing households that need and/or are likely to move home in the next two years is shown compared to their current accommodation size.
6.19 The figure below indicates that all moving household groups (except older person households) show, in general, an intention to upsize their current home, a trend most clearly shown among households with children. Single non pensioners living in very large properties (3 or 4 bedroom) tended to show an inclination to downsize, as did older person households. This does not imply any shortage of larger housing, but rather reflects the progress of individual households through the market, typically starting with a small home and working their way up the housing ladder. At all stages, except for older people who may consider downsizing, the household will typically (if moving) be looking for a larger home.
Page 59 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
6.20 Any shortages and surpluses of particular dwelling sizes and types, alongside the implications of the changing mix of households in the Borough for the sizes and types of newbuild accommodation required, are fully explored in the next chapter of this report.
Figure 6.5 Property size change by household group, existing households 3.2% Household with children: future 22.4% 52.8% 21.6% 1.4% Household with children: current 48.0% 39.6% 11.0% 6.4% Multi adult (no children): future 40.5% 39.1% 14.1%
Multi adult (no children): current 11.5% 42.4% 29.7% 16.5% 2.8% Single (non pensioner): future 25.1% 58.4% 13.7% 5.1% Single (non pensioner): current 37.2% 36.9% 20.7%
Older person: future 23.2% 34.9% 34.4% 7.5%
Older person: current 17.4% 29.2% 27.6% 25.7%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 N.B. The number of moving older person households is small therefore findings for this group should be viewed with caution
6.21 In addition to the 12,489 existing households that need and/or are likely to move home in the next two years, there are also 6,782 newly forming or concealed households that need and/or are likely to move to their own separate accommodation within the next two years. The majority of these households (76.0%) are single adults without children, with only 12.2% having children.
Profile of household types requiring market housing
6.22 The information presented in the previous section showed the changes resulting from existing households moving through the market. This analysis can be used alongside data from the survey on the housing demand arising from the other two groups of households moving in the market in the future – newly forming households and in migrant households to establish the type of households requiring market housing in the future. This is one of the outputs required by PPS3.
Page 60 6. Future housing demand
6.23 PPS3 requires the likely profile of household types requiring market housing to be considered. The figure below shows that the three main groups requiring market housing are households with children (31.6%), couples without children (28.9%) and single non pensioners (24.9%). These figures comprise existing households who are planning a move within the Borough within the next two years and who are currently able to afford market housing, as well as recent in migrant and newly forming households. It is worth noting here that most stakeholders consulted for the SHMA considered that the main unmet demand in the Borough was for family housing (see Appendix A6).
Figure 6.6 Household types requiring market housing
Single pensioners 4.5%
2 or more pensioners 3.3%
Single non pensioners 24.9%
Couple, no children 28.9%
Other multi adult 6.9%
Lone parent 6.1%
2+ adults 1 child 12.1%
2+ adults 2+children 13.4%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% % of households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
6.24 The figures below replicate this information for the urban and rural parts of the Borough. There are clear differences between the areas with the rural area likely to record a greater proportion of pensioner households moving to market accommodation than in the urban part of Maidstone Borough. Single non pensioners represented the largest group in the urban area.
Page 61 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 6.7 Household types requiring market housing - urban
Single pensioners 3.1%
2 or more pensioners 1.1%
Single non pensioners 32.8%
Couple, no children 25.9%
Other multi adult 4.5%
Lone parent 8.7%
2+ adults 1 child 10.4%
2+ adults 2+children 13.5%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% % of households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Figure 6.8 Household types requiring market housing - rural
Single pensioners 6.8%
2 or more pensioners 7.1%
Single non pensioners 11.0%
Couple, no children 34.1%
Other multi adult 11.2%
Lone parent 1.4%
2+ adults 1 child 15.1%
2+ adults 2+children 13.4%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% % of households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
6.25 Some 70.0% of these households moving to market housing across the Borough would be able to afford either to rent or to buy a home. A quarter (24.5%) would only be able to afford to purchase a property – these are households who do not have high enough income levels to be able to afford private rented housing, but who have sufficient equity to purchase outright an entry level home (a fuller explanation of the affordability test can be found in Chapter 4). The remaining 5.5% would only be able to afford private rented accommodation.
Page 62 6. Future housing demand
Summary vi) The profile of in and out migration suggests that slightly more households with children are entering the Borough than are leaving; the reverse is true for other household groups. Households with children also represent the largest group moving within the Borough. The number of new households and the number of household dissolutions will also influence the likely change in the number of households in the Borough the demographic projections compiled for the South East Plan strategy based forecasts suggest that migration will make up only about 35% of net change. vii) Single non pensioners are the most likely to move home, with older person households being the least likely. Households in the rural area were also less likely to move. There was some variation in the reasons cited for moving by different household and tenure groups. Single non pensioners were most likely to move in order to live independently, or due to relationship breakdown, where as households with children most commonly stated the need for larger accommodation as a reason for moving. viii) More than 60% of households planning a move stated that they would like to move within the Borough, similar to the proportion that expected to move within the Borough. Households with children were the most likely of the household groups and social rented households were the most likely of the tenure groups to expect to stay within the Borough. Overall, the rural area of Maidstone Borough was more popular than the town among prospective movers as a whole, although the reverse was true for social rented households planning a move. ix) An analysis of the tenure demand resulting from households intending to move in the near future illustrates how people expect to move through the housing ladder. Across most groups there are notable planned increases in ownership as well as social rented housing. A similar analysis based on dwelling size suggests that most groups show an intention to upsize their current home, particularly households with children. This does not imply a shortage of larger housing, but rather reflects the progress of individual households through the market. x) The type of households likely to require market housing in the future was examined, as requested by PPS3. The three main groups requiring market housing are households with children (31.6%), couples without children (28.9%) and single non pensioners (24.9%). These figures take into account existing, as well as in migrant and newly forming households. Most stakeholders consulted for the SHMA considered that the main unmet demand in the Borough was for family housing.
Page 63 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 64 7. Improving market balance over the longer term
7. Improving market balance over the longer term
Introduction
7.1 The previous chapters have identified the accommodation required to respond to short term market pressures, this chapter considers what accommodation is required to provide housing market balance over the long term. This is an important exercise because there is a lag in the planning system, which means that it is not possible to respond immediately to imbalances between the nature of accommodation required and the stock currently available. It is therefore appropriate to consider the intervention required to the housing stock over the long term to enable future action to be planned effectively.
7.2 Although there is not a housing market model in the Practice Guidance, there is comment on the importance of studying mix and balance. This is summarised below before carrying out the analysis. The following extract from paragraph 20 of PPS3 addresses the issue of mixed communities:
‘Key characteristics of a mixed community are a variety of housing, particularly in terms of tenure and price and a mix of different households such as families with children, single person households and older people.’
7.3 The SHMA Practice Guidance (August 2007) emphasises, as its second core output, the analysis of balance as can be seen from the following extract from page 10 (repeated on page 34):
‘Analysis of past and current housing market trends, including balance between supply and demand in different housing sectors and price/affordability.’’
7.4 This chapter describes a model that uses secondary data in combination with the household survey dataset to compare the current housing stock against the stock of housing required in the future. The purpose of this model is to identify the new accommodation required to adequately house the future population in the Borough and ensure that the housing market is balanced. It is appreciated that this is an idealistic goal; however the model is carried out on the basis that it is better to move toward that goal than away from it, and that the information gained in the process on the nature of the imbalances in the market is still likely to be useful for policy.
7.5 This chapter initially presents the relevant population projections for Maidstone Borough and describes the predicted changes in both the population size and composition. The chapter then introduces a model which identifies the adjustment required to provide a sufficient range of accommodation to adequately house each household type and balance the housing stock, culminating in suggested profiles for new housing in terms of tenure and dwelling size.
Page 65 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Demographic projections
7.6 The South East Plan population projections indicate that the population within Maidstone Borough is projected to increase by 13.2% between 2010 and 2026 (an increase of 19,520 people).
7.7 Figure 7.1 shows the projected change within each 5 year age cohort between 2010 and 2026. The South East Plan projections do not provide information with this degree of detail, using much wider age groupings; therefore the ONS 2006 based demographic projection data has been used to interpolate the likely distribution of ages within these groups.
7.8 The largest percentage increase is expected to be in the number of people aged 75 and over, while there are likely to be absolute decreases in the proportion of people aged 40 49 and 25 29. These changes may have implications in terms of the proportion of economically active people living in the Borough.
Figure 7.1 Forecast population change by age group in Maidstone Borough, 2010 - 2026
100% 90.9%
80% 64.8% 59.8% 60%
40% 22.9% 20.8% 22.2% 23.9% 21.3% 10.4%
20% 17.0% 10.8% 8.5% 8.1% 3.1% 2.8% 15.8% 7.6%
0% 10.1% 0 4 5 9 85+
20% 10 14 15 19 20 24 25 29 30 34 35 39 40 44 45 49 50 54 55 59 60 64 65 69 70 74 75 79 80 84 %age changepopulation 2010 2026
40%
Source: South East Plan Strategy-based Forecasts (Sep 2009), ONS 2006-based sub-national population projections
7.9 The ONS population projections have been applied to the household survey dataset to provide an estimated household profile for 2026. Before the accommodation requirements of the future population are calculated it is important to describe the approach used to create an accommodation profile adequate for each of these household types.
Page 66 7. Improving market balance over the longer term
A whole stock model
7.10 Unlike many other housing market models, the market balance model used here is not flow based but stock based; it does not take into account the likelihood that an individual household will move, or consider supply from turnover. Instead, it considers the total stock in the area, and matches this to the stock that would be needed to house every household in the area adequately. It is assumed that the market (and social housing allocation system) will continue to function as now to allocate housing to the appropriate households.
7.11 This is not to say it naively assumes that all properties will be ‘efficiently’ allocated. Because it projects forward from the current housing circumstances of existing households, it incorporates the results of existing ‘inefficiencies’ in the market or allocation system (e.g. under occupation by households whose children have left home) and assumes that these trends will remain largely unchanged into the future. There are some exceptions to this, intended to reduce the proportion of the population living in housing inadequate for their needs, as explained in the next section of this chapter.
7.12 The whole stock approach offers some great advantages in terms of robustness and statistical reliability over a flow based model which attempts to estimate both likely demand and likely supply. Whether a household will move in the future (even in the short term) is always subject to uncertainty, particularly in the current rapidly changing housing market; considering the stock as a whole leaves much less room for error.
7.13 Unlike a flows based model, the model used here also fully integrates future expected demographic changes into the outputs; this is an advantage because when planning newbuild housing it is important to ensure that it is useful not just now but well into the future. Flows models can at best only predict future household moves for two or three years in advance, and may be heavily influenced by recent short term trends. By incorporating the best estimates of future household growth for the area from population and household projections, the model here gives the Council an insight into the types of housing that could be useful to residents in the long term.
7.14 Please note that in the interests of simplicity, unlike the CLG model, this model does not subtract any estimate of likely newbuild property over the next two years. As a result, any new build housing that is to be (or has already been) constructed from the point of the survey forward can be counted as contributing to the total requirements produced by the model.
Adequacy of the housing stock
7.15 For the purpose of this model, the housing market is considered balanced if the local population is adequately accommodated. It is therefore initially appropriate to assess the adequacy of the current accommodation to house the residents of Maidstone Borough. This is determined through responses to the household survey.
Page 67 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
7.16 A household is considered adequately housed currently unless:
• They are in unsuitable housing (as defined by CLG Guidance) and cannot resolve this unsuitability without moving to a new property. • Their property is overcrowded (according to the bedroom standard).
7.17 In each of these cases the household is allocated to a property with characteristics more suitable for their needs, of a different size, type or tenure. For example, if a household were found to be in an overcrowded property, it would be allocated a larger property of a tenure which it could afford. The model is designed such that at the end point (2026), there should theoretically be no households remaining in unsuitable housing.
7.18 In addition, if a household states that they need to move now due to their accommodation’s size, cost or the services available within the property being currently unsuitable for the resident household, their size, type and tenure of housing is adjusted to fit the property they shortly expect to move to.
7.19 Some further adjustments are also made to remove over the long term any undesirable elements of market imbalance that exist currently:
• Households living in social rented accommodation that can afford market or intermediate accommodation are re allocated to these tenures to ensure that the stock is being most appropriately and efficiently used. • Households resident in the private rented sector on Local Housing Allowance (LHA) are assumed to move into the form of affordable accommodation that they can afford (intermediate or social rented) as this is the tenure they would be more appropriately housed in. The private rented sector on LHA is not generally viewed as an adequate long term equivalent to affordable housing by households resident in it (see Chapter 4). In addition, it is typically more expensive to the public purse than providing affordable housing.
7.20 The table below shows the proportion of each household type currently requiring alternative accommodation in order to be adequately housed. The table shows that some 5.5% of households are classified as inadequately housed currently. Lone parent households are the household group least likely to reside in adequate accommodation, with multiple pensioner households the most likely.
Page 68 7. Improving market balance over the longer term
Table 7.1 Types of households inadequately housed currently
Number Proportion Household type inadequately All households inadequately housed housed Single pensioners 171 8,601 2.0% Two or more pensioners 0 7,443 0.0% Single non pensioners 718 9,267 7.7% Couple, no children 86 10,961 0.8% Other multi adult 430 8,860 4.9% Lone parent 694 3,209 21.6% Two or more adults, one child 615 5,717 10.8% Two or more adults, two or more children 642 7,284 8.8% Total 3,356 61,342 5.5% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Model outputs
7.21 The model outputs presented here are not policy recommendations in themselves; they must be viewed in conjunction with other information, for example viability, as detailed in Chapter 9. In addition, if there are large imbalances found in a housing market (particularly in combination with a low build rate), this may lead the model to suggest a very narrow mix of housing tenures and sizes. There is also a need for mix and balance within neighbourhoods. This is especially the case where very large areas of newbuild housing are involved. Arguably, in the cases of such developments, it may even be appropriate to build some housing of types that are in surplus in the Borough as a whole, in order to achieve a mixed and balanced community locally.
7.22 It should also be borne in mind that where negative requirements are shown for larger bedroom sizes, some properties of this size can reasonably to cater to households requiring smaller properties; it does not necessarily imply that demolition or subdivision of existing housing is necessary.
Tenure of housing required
7.23 Rather than prescribing the accommodation required to address the current mismatch between the household population and the current stock, the profile of adequate accommodation for each household type is applied to the expected household population in 2026 years time. The model therefore assumes that the pattern of accommodation required by each household type remains constant. It is recognised that this assumption is unlikely to hold true until 2026, since cultural preferences and the ratio of households’ financial resources to house prices will change over time. This constitutes the major limitation of the model. However, this remains a considerable advance on most flows based models, which assume the continuation of past trends in housing turnover, household migration and household formation.
Page 69 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
7.24 In order to be relevant to local policy, the model also takes into account the build rate required by the South East Plan, and so the total number of households at 2026 is fixed at the level envisaged by the plan throughout. After taking account of construction that has already taken place (2,147 dwellings built at 1 st April 2009), the residual requirement to meet the South East Plan target of 11,080 homes is 525 units of newbuild housing per annum to 2026 (8,933 over the 17 year period 2009/10 to 2025/26).
7.25 The table below shows the ideal tenure profile in the Borough in 2026 years time (if all households are to be adequately housed).
Table 7.2 Ideal tenure profile 2026
Tenure Number of households Percentage of households Market 55,726 83.2% Intermediate 2,053 3.1% Social rented 9,234 13.8% Total 67,013 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
7.26 The table below shows the tenure profile required by households resident in the Borough in 16 years time in comparison to the tenure profile recorded currently. The difference between these two distributions is the change required to the housing stock over this period.
7.27 The resulting table indicates that for the remaining period to 2026, around 62% of new dwellings should be market accommodation, around 21% social rented dwellings and around 17% intermediate housing, making a total of 38% affordable housing.
Table 7.3 Tenure of new accommodation required: adjusted to South East Plan*
Current tenure Tenure profile % of change Tenure Change required profile 2026 required Market 51,149 55,726 +4,578 61.9% Intermediate 792 2,053 +1,261 17.0% Social rented 7,672 9,234 +1,562 21.1% Total 59,612 67,013 +7,401 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excluding sheltered housing, nursing homes etc.
7.28 The model is able to also provide detail on the size of new dwellings required within each of these three tenures. This analysis is presented in the following section.
Size of housing required within each tenure
7.29 The table below presents the size of market accommodation required by households resident in the Borough in 2026 in comparison to the size profile recorded in the sector currently. The quantity of
Page 70 7. Improving market balance over the longer term
newbuild housing required to move the housing stock from the current size profile to the ‘ideal’ 2026 profile is also presented. The table shows that 90.1% of new market dwellings should be three or four bedroom properties, with an especially small requirement shown for one bedroom housing. This matches the emphasis put on the provision of family housing by stakeholders (see Appendix A5).
Table 7.4 Size of new market accommodation required*
Current size % of change Dwelling size Size profile 2026 Change required profile required One bedroom 2,665 2,993 +328 7.2% Two bedrooms 12,596 12,723 +127 2.8% Three bedrooms 22,879 25,733 +2,854 62.3% Four or more bedrooms 13,008 14,278 +1,269 27.7% Total 51,149 55,726 +4,578 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excluding sheltered housing, nursing homes etc
7.30 This analysis can be repeated for intermediate housing and is presented in the table below. It shows that the majority of the long term requirement for this type of housing is for smaller dwellings, nearly half for properties with two bedrooms.
Table 7.5 Size of new intermediate accommodation required*
Current size % of change Dwelling size Size profile 2026 Change required profile required One bedroom 150 567 +417 33.1% Two bedrooms 392 1,000 +608 48.2% Three bedrooms 182 403 +222 17.6% Four or more bedrooms 68 83 +14 1.1% Total 792 2,053 +1,261 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excluding sheltered housing, nursing homes etc
7.31 The table below shows the equivalent results for the social rented sector. The table shows that nearly all new social housing (90.4%) should have three or more bedrooms, while there is very little requirement for one bedroom properties (9.6%), and a small negative requirement for properties with two bedrooms. This is largely because of the low relative cost of these sizes of intermediate housing in the Borough; as a result only people in a very narrow range of financial situations were found to be unable to afford intermediate housing.
7.32 It should be noted that there is still a significant requirement for additional two bedroom affordable housing overall, including intermediate (567 units overall to 2026); if providing the low cost intermediate housing in the quantities suggested proved impractical, the requirement for social rented housing of this size would increase correspondingly.
Page 71 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table 7.6 Size of new social rented accommodation required*
Current size % of change Dwelling size Size profile 2026 Change required profile required One bedroom 1,832 1,986 +153 9.6% Two bedrooms 3,296 3,256 −41 Three bedrooms 2,410 3,377 +968 60.4% Four or more bedrooms 134 615 +481 30.0% Total 7,672 9,234 +1,562 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excluding sheltered housing, nursing homes etc
Provision of flats in Maidstone Town
7.33 The SHMA brief required specifically that an analysis should be undertaken of whether the proportion of small flats in the town of Maidstone, particularly in the centre, is appropriate to local need and demand. In order to analyse this particular issue, a further partial analysis was run, carrying out the same model shown above, but only for the Maidstone Town area.
7.34 The results found only a small negative requirement for one bedroom market accommodation within the town as a whole. There remained a significant requirement for affordable housing of this size (at 19.9% of the total affordable housing requirement). The whole requirement for one bedroom market accommodation therefore arises from households in the rural part of the Borough, although this is not to say it should not be met at the town of Maidstone itself, given the likely distribution of newbuild across the Borough (see Appendix A4 for further discussion of this issue).
7.35 There was also strong stakeholder agreement that there was an oversupply of small flats in the town generally. However this did not necessarily apply to social rented housing; stakeholders from RSLs and those dealing with homelessness suggested that there remained an insufficient supply of social rented property for single households.
7.36 While we would not recommend setting widely differing targets at a subarea level within the Borough generally, this could support a policy limiting the development of small flatted accommodation within the urban area. However, it is worth noting that developers felt that brownfield sites in the centre of Maidstone could not provide any other type of property, and that greenfield sites on the periphery of the town would be required for other types of development.
7.37 A full summary of the sub area analysis can be found in Appendix A4.
Page 72 7. Improving market balance over the longer term
Summary
i) The population of the Borough is projected to increase by 13.2% over the period 2010 2026. The profile of the population is expected to change, with a large increase in the numbers of residents aged 75 and over and an absolute decrease in the number of 40 49 and 25 29 year olds. ii) In terms of the accommodation required to provide housing market balance over the long term, our model, which is based on secondary data in combination with the household survey data and considers a range of factors including the adequacy of current housing, suggests that:
• Around 62% of the requirement for new housing is for market accommodation • About 90% of new market housing should have three or more bedrooms • More than three quarters of new intermediate housing should have one or two bedrooms, accounting for most of the requirement for property of this size • Around 90% of new social rented housing should have three or more bedrooms
Page 73 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 74 8. Particular household groups
8. Particular household groups
Introduction
8.1 This chapter considers particular groups of households, as requested by Practice Guidance. Some groups may be disadvantaged, and some may not, but the additional detail of their circumstances should be of value in considering policy options for them. The groups considered in this chapter are:
• Households with support needs (including those with physical, learning or sensory disabilities, mental health problems, a medical condition or the frail elderly) • Older person households • Key worker households • BME households • Families with children • Gypsies and Travellers • Students
8.2 The Council’s brief also required the needs of lesbian, gay and transsexuals, and people at risk of violence to be assessed as part of the SHMA. It is not appropriate to assess the latter two groups via postal questionnaires (the primary research method used in this SHMA), due to the sensitive nature of the issues involved.
8.3 Unlike elsewhere in the report, the small number of student only households surveyed are included in the analysis in this chapter, hence the total number of households under consideration is 61,460 (see Appendix A1 for more details).
Households with support needs
8.4 The household survey collected information about households who said that one or more people needed support for one or more of the reasons listed below:
• Frail older person • A medical condition • A physical disability • A learning disability • A mental health issue • A sensory disability • Other
Page 75 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
8.5 Overall there are an estimated 10,399 households in Maidstone Borough with one or more members in one of the support needs groups listed above this represents 17.0% of all households. It should be noted that households with a support need do not necessarily require a move to alternative accommodation. In many cases the support need can be catered for within the household’s current home whilst for others the issue may be the need for support rather than any specific type of accommodation. Having said this, one stakeholder felt that there was lack of supported housing available for people with medium to high support needs across West Kent.
8.6 Overall, support needs households tend to be more likely than average to live in urban parts of the Borough. In total, more than two thirds (64.2%, or 6,718) live in urban areas, compared to just over half (53.3%) of households without support needs. As a result, support needs households account for nearly a fifth (19.8%) of all households in the urban area of Maidstone Borough, but just 13.6% of households in the rural area.
8.7 The table below shows that households with a ‘medical condition’ are the predominant support needs group. The next largest group is ‘physically disabled’. These two categories represent the majority of all support needs households. The numbers of households in each category exceed the total number of support needs households because people can have more than one category of support need.
Table 8.1 Support needs categories
% of support needs Category Number of households % of all households households Frail older person 2,705 4.4% 26.0% Medical condition 6,533 10.6% 62.8% Physical disability 5,043 8.2% 48.5% Learning difficulty 1,649 2.7% 15.9% Mental health problem 2,283 3.7% 22.0% Sensory disability 977 1.6% 9.4% Other 387 0.6% 3.7% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.8 Support needs households most commonly reside in the social rented sector, as shown in the figure below. Further analysis suggests that older person households were most likely to contain someone with a support need.
Page 76 8. Particular household groups
Figure 8.1 Proportion of households within tenure containing a support needs member
50.0% 43.9%
40.0%
30.0%
16.4% 20.0% 11.2% 7.6% 10.0%
0.0% Owner occupied Owner occupied Social rented Private rented (no mortgage) (with mortgage)
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.9 Support needs households record a median annual household income of £13,275 compared to £26,961 for non support needs households (although this is linked to the fact that older people are more likely to have a support need). Support needs households are less likely to be able to afford market housing than other households – some 52.3% are unable to afford market housing, compared to 19.1% of non support needs households and 23.9% of all households across the Borough as a whole.
8.10 Support needs households are more likely to be in unsuitable housing than other households – almost 15.7% of support needs households are unsuitably housed compared to 4.4% of non support needs households. Support households are also more likely to be in housing need than non support needs households – 4.1% of support needs households were in housing need compared to 2.8% of non support needs households. Almost a quarter (23.1%) of all households in housing need had a support need.
8.11 Support needs households were asked to indicate if there was a need for improvements to their current accommodation and/or services. The responses are detailed in the figures below. In terms of improvements to accommodation, households most commonly required a low level access shower unit, car parking space near to the front door, or alterations to their bathroom or toilet facilities.
Page 77 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 8.2 Support needs households - improvements to accommodation
Low level shower unit 1,684
Car parking space near to front door 1,684
Alterations to the bathroom / toilet 1,644
Lift or stairlift 1,513
Extra handrails outside your home 1,476
Emergency alarm 1,046
Downstairs WC 1,031
Other alterations to improve accessibility 927
Alterations to the kitchen 615
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 Number of households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.12 In terms of improvements to services, a total of 2,650 support needs households indicated a requirement for help maintaining their home via a handyperson service. This provides support for the Council’s decision to enhance their handyperson’s service.
Figure 8.3 Support needs households - improvements to services
Help maintaining home (e.g. handyperson service) 2,650
More support services to present home 1,266
Support with finances, forms etc. 1,213
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Number of households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Older persons
8.13 Older people are defined as those over the state pension eligibility age (currently 65 for men, 60 for women). The household survey suggests that 16,043 households in Maidstone Borough contain only older people (26.1%) and a further 8.7% contain both older and non older people.
Page 78 8. Particular household groups
8.14 Households containing only older people tend to be more likely to live in rural areas than average. In total, 52.2% of households containing older people (7,676 households in total) are in rural parts of the Borough, compared to 42.3% of other household types. As a result, 30.4% of the households in rural areas are older person households, compared to 22.6% in urban areas.
8.15 The South East Plan’s population projections, covered in detail in the previous chapter of this report, indicate that the number of people over the age of 60 will increase by around 33% across the Borough between 2010 and 2026; almost three times the rate of increase expected in the population as a whole. The largest change is expected in the number of people aged 85 and over, where an increase of around 93% is predicted.
8.16 According to the household survey, more than three quarters of older person only households are owner occupiers without a mortgage. Only 13.8% of older person households live in social rented accommodation, but overall they make up a quarter (25.1%) of all households in that tenure.
Figure 8.4 Tenure of older person households
5.6% 13.8%
2.0%
78.7% Owner occupied (no mortgage) Owner occupied (w/ mortgage) Social rented Private rented
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.17 Almost all older person only households (99.8%) comprised just one or two people yet more than half (60.5%) of older person households reside in accommodation with three or more bedrooms. This suggests that there could be potential scope to free up larger units for younger families if older person households should chose to move into suitable smaller units. A large majority of older person households under occupying their home live in the owner occupied sector, however, suggesting the opportunity to reduce under occupation may be limited. Furthermore, according to the household survey, older person only households are less likely than other household types to move home. Older person households tend not to state an expectation to move but in reality, in time, some will need to because of care needs.
Page 79 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
8.18 Just 12.9% of older person only households who were likely to move over the next two years stated a preference for specialist accommodation such as a sheltered housing scheme. A similar proportion of moving older person only households (14.7%) expected to move to specialist accommodation. The number of moving older person only households is small, however, therefore these results should be viewed with caution. Some stakeholders perceived that there was a lack of sheltered housing available either to purchase or rent within the Borough.
8.19 In terms of tenure preferences, 68.7% of moving older person only households wished to move to owner occupied accommodation and the remaining 31.3% to social rented accommodation. In terms of dwelling type, some 45.9% wished to move to a bungalow, 43.7% to a house, and 10.3% to a flat. Once again, the small number of moving older person households needs to be taken into account.
8.20 Only 3.5% of older person only households were found to be in unsuitable housing, compared to 6.4% of households across the Borough as a whole. Older person households are also under represented amongst households in (gross) need for affordable housing, with older person households comprising only 13.0% of households in need despite making up 26.1% of households overall.
8.21 In terms of affordability, just under a fifth of older person households (19.5%) are unable to afford market housing in Maidstone Borough. This compares to 23.9% of households across the Borough as a whole.
8.22 Stakeholders highlighted older person households as a priority group, suggesting that those with support needs had particular difficulty finding appropriate accommodation. This was thought to be a particular problem in rural areas, where older people needed sheltered or supported housing available very locally to avoid having to move away from their social networks.
Key workers
8.23 Census data suggests that 23.5% of Borough residents who are working are employed in public administration, education or health. This proportion is closely in line with the wider South East of England region (23.6%).
8.24 The household survey collected information on the sector of employment of working household heads. This included information on two ‘key worker’ categories – ‘education’ and ‘health and social work’. The nature of the survey means that the key workers identified within the survey are those that are resident in the Borough. In total, the survey estimates that 8,528 households are headed by a key worker (the head of the household was taken to be the survey respondent).
8.25 The distribution of key workers between urban and rural areas is not significantly different to other household types, with 43.8% (3,740) of such households found in rural areas, close to the average of 44.9% for all types of household. In total, 14.1% of urban households were key worker households, compared to 13.6% in rural areas, indicating only a very small difference.
Page 80 8. Particular household groups
8.26 The tenure distribution recorded by the household survey indicates that key worker households are slightly less likely to be owner occupiers than non key worker households (73.6% compared to 76.3%). Key worker households are less likely than non key worker households to be living in the social rented sector (5.9% compared to 8.7%).
8.27 The data indicates that the median income of key worker households, at £35,257, is only slightly lower than the figure for non key worker households in employment (£37,049), perhaps indicating that Maidstone Borough does not have a particularly high wage local economy. Median household savings amongst key worker households are however higher (£2,930 compared to £1,789 for non key worker households).
8.28 The figure below presents the ability of key worker households to afford a range of housing options in comparison to non key worker households. The data indicates that key worker households are slightly more likely to be able to afford market housing than non key worker households.
Figure 8.5 Ability of key workers to afford local housing 4.7% Non key worker 81.8% 13.5% 3.6% Key worker 83.2% 13.2%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Can afford market housing Can afford intermediate housing Social housing only
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) households
8.29 As discussed in Chapter 2, the latest data from ONS suggests that around 9% of people resident in the Borough are from an ethnic group other than White British. The figure below shows the spatial distribution of the BME 19 population in the Borough at ward area level, based on data from the 2001 Census. The map shows that most of the BME population in the Borough is found in the town of Maidstone, particularly in the western and northwestern parts of the town.
19 Defined as all ethnic groups other than ‘White British’
Page 81 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 8.6 Location of the BME population
© Crown Copyright Source: 2001 Census
8.30 The household survey collected information on the (self defined) ethnic origin of the survey respondent. The table below shows the number of households (and the sample size obtained) within three broad ethnic groups. The table below shows that BME households were slightly under represented amongst survey respondents 4.1% of survey returns received were from BME households, whilst BME households were estimated to comprise 6.9% of households in Maidstone Borough as a whole. Due to the small number of responses gained from BME households, results should be treated with caution. For the remainder of the analysis, households have been split only into the White British group and a BME group covering all other ethnicities.
8.31 Note that due to the varying size of households between ethnic groups, the proportion of households in each ethnic group is not the same as their proportion of the population.
Page 82 8. Particular household groups
Table 8.2 Household numbers and survey sample by broad ethnic group
Number of % of Number of Ethnic group % of returns households households returns White British 57,208 93.1% 1,657 95.9% White Other / Irish 2,463 4.0% 44 2.5% Other Groups 1,789 2.9% 27 1.6% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.32 In terms of tenure, White British households are much more likely to live in owner occupied housing, with 73.6% living in this tenure compared to just 55.4% of BME households. They were also more likely to live in social rented housing, at 15.1% compared to 4.4%. The largest difference was in the private rented sector; 40.2% of BME households live in this sector, compared to just 11.3% of White British households. A total of 20.9% of private rented properties are estimated to contain BME households. BME households have a higher average number of people per household (2.6 people) than White British households (2.0 people).
8.33 The survey suggested that, as the Census suggests, most BME households are found in urban areas. According to the survey, 70.2% of BME households live in the urban area of the Borough (a total of about 3,004, leaving an estimated 1,248 in the rural area), compared to 54.0% of non BME households. This suggests that about 8.9% of households in Maidstone Borough have a household head in a BME group, compared to only 4.5% in the rural area.
8.34 BME groups were not identified by stakeholders in Maidstone Borough as particularly in need; most stakeholders suggested that issues such as income, age and support needs were more important factors in the marginalisation of a household in the housing market. However, the figure below based on survey data does indicate that BME households are much more likely to be living in unsuitable housing, with 18.2% in this situation compared to just 5.5% of White British households.
Page 83 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 8.7 Proportion of households resident in unsuitable housing
20.0% 18.2%
10.0%
5.5%
0.0% White British BME
Ethnicity of household head
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Families with children
8.35 The Practice Guidance acknowledges the importance of providing suitable housing for families, especially those with children, to ensure that communities are appropriately mixed. Their needs were also given particular emphasis by stakeholders consulted for the SHMA (see Appendix A5). For the purposes of this analysis children are defined as those aged under 16.
8.36 The household survey estimates that there are 16,210 households which contain at least one child in Maidstone Borough, 26.4% of all households in the Borough. Within this group, 19.8% are lone parent families, 42.3% are families with younger children (the children’s age is under 8 or the average age of the children is under 8) and 37.9% are families with older children (the children’s age is 8 or over or the average age of the children is 8 or over).
8.37 Lone parent families were found to be far more likely than average to live in the urban area, with the survey suggesting 74.3% of such households (2,385) live within Maidstone town, compared to 59.9% of families with young children, and less than half (47.8%) of families with older children.
8.38 As can be seen in the table below, rural areas contain a smaller proportion of households containing children overall than urban areas, but also contain a slightly larger proportion of two parent families (21.6% compared to 20.8%).
Page 84 8. Particular household groups
Table 8.3 Household numbers by family type
Number of % of all % of urban % of rural Family type households households households households Lone parent 3,209 5.2% 7.0% 3.0% Two parent: younger children 6,864 11.2% 12.1% 10.0% Two parent: older children 6,137 10.0% 8.7% 11.6% No children 45,249 73.6% 72.2% 75.4% Total 61,460 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.39 The figure below shows the tenure of the three groups of family households. The results suggest that lone parent families are by far the most likely to be living in social rented accommodation. Lone parent households are also the most likely to reside in the private rented sector. More than half of families with older children have a mortgage (55.8%), rising to almost three quarters (70.9%) among families with younger children.
Figure 8.8 Tenure of families with children
Lone parent families Families with young children Families with older children
12.7% 8.1% 12.5% 31.3% 8.4% 23.3% 8.3% 8.4% 21.6%
38.7% Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 70.9% 55.8% Owner-occupied (w/ mortgage) Social rented Private rented
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
8.40 Survey data indicates that lone parent families in Maidstone Borough are much more likely than average to reside in unsuitable housing, with 14.4% in this situation, compared to 6.4% of all households in the Borough. Families with older children also had an above average level of unsuitable housing, at 11.8%, while families with younger children showed no difference from the Borough average.
8.41 The figure below considers the propensity of family households to move over the next two years and the preferred destination of these moving households. The data indicates that lone parent families and to a lesser extent families with young children are the most likely to plan to move over the next two years.
Page 85 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
8.42 For all three family groups, more than half of those moving would like to move to a different home within the Borough, although families with younger children were most likely to prefer to move elsewhere (45% of those moving). The data suggests that the proportion of moving households expecting to move within the Borough is generally slightly higher than the proportion who would like to move within the Borough, in the case of all three family groups.
8.43 The most common reason for moving amongst all family groups was the need for larger accommodation, in particular for households with young children where this factor was involved in 70% of moves. The second most common reason (again amongst all groups, but particularly lone parents, with 35% citing this reason) was to move to a better environment.
Figure 8.9 Moving family households
60% Total planning a move 53.7% Would like to move within Borough 50% 42.7% Expect to move within Borough 40.9% 40%
28.8% 30%
17.5% 18.8% % % households of 20% 15.7% 13.4% 13.2%
10%
0% Lone parent families Families with younger Families with older children children
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Gypsies and Travellers
8.44 The SHMA Practice Guidance requires the requirements of Gypsies and Travellers to be considered alongside the other household groups in this chapter. This requirement has been met via a separate, specialist, study of this population (which follows separate practice guidance), and which is summarised below.
8.45 The most recent Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA) for Maidstone Borough was published in 2006, carried out as part of a wider study involving three neighbouring Local Authorities: Ashford Borough Council, Tonbridge and Malling Borough Council and Tunbridge Wells Borough Council. The GTAA covered a wide range of Gypsy and Traveller groups found in Maidstone Borough, including English Gypsies and Irish Travellers. It drew on data sources including:
Page 86 8. Particular household groups
• Secondary data, including a literature review and secondary data • A specially commissioned series of 200 interviews with Gypsies and Travellers across the four local authorities (including 113 in Maidstone Borough, including five in housing) • A stakeholders seminar
8.46 The study’s aim was to gather information and to propose a target number of pitches to build in each Local Authority. Among the key findings relating to site provision were:
• Only 51% of respondents on existing sites across the four local authority areas found their pitch adequate, although 77% found their site generally adequate • Privately owned sites had higher satisfaction levels • Harassment was reported to be a significant problem for interviewees when finding a place to live, with 21% reporting harassment at their current site • Only 14% of those living on sites had plans to move, compared to 31% in permanent accommodation
8.47 It was recommended that 32 new pitches should be built in Maidstone Borough in the 2006 2011 period, in addition to the existing 168 legally authorised pitches. Although a preference was expressed by most interviewees for private sites, most families were found to have very low incomes, suggesting a limited ability to finance such sites in practice.
Students
8.48 The Council’s brief also required the needs of students to be assessed as part of the SHMA. As explained in Appendix A1, only two returns were received from student households, hence analysis of this group via household survey data is not possible. However, the University for the Creative Arts (UCA) has provided some information on the housing needs of their students. UCA has an aspiration to be able to accommodate all “new” students, who do not live at home, in university managed accommodation; and also wants such accommodation to house students with particular needs/disabilities.
8.49 The University has over 800 students studying at its Maidstone campus in 2009/2010 – this covers Further Education (FE), Higher Education (HE) i.e. degree courses and post graduate (PG) courses. Of those, approximately 460 are “new” i.e. this is their first year of study at UCA. However, approximately 200 of those are students on Further Education (FE) courses who live at home. Moreover, approximately 100 “new” HE students live at home. While some of the PG students would probably not choose to live in university managed accommodation, there are at least 15 non UK “new” PG students. As a result, even before taking account of those “non new” students who have particular needs/disabilities who need to stay in university managed accommodation, there is a minimum of approximately 180 “new” students in 2009/2010 who do not live at home.
Page 87 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
8.50 UCA only has 134 university managed bed spaces in Maidstone, with the result that there is currently a shortfall of at least 46 bed spaces just to house “new” students: given the need to house students with particular need/disabilities in such accommodation, the need is in excess of 50 bed spaces. UCA announced its intention (in 2008) of developing a new Kent campus. Based on the very preliminary work that has been carried out, it is likely that such a campus would generate an initial need for approximately 500 – 750 student bedspaces.
8.51 UCA currently receives a number of requests for accommodation from “non new” students, but does not offer accommodation to “non new” students owing to the relatively small amount of university managed accommodation. UCA believe that there has been increasing regulatory control over the type of private rented sector accommodation that students traditionally inhabit, and that there is an imminent tightening of planning control over such accommodation, with the result that the supply of that type of housing may well reduce, perhaps significantly, in the immediate future. This will result in there being an increased demand from “non new” students to live in university managed accommodation.
Page 88 8. Particular household groups
Summary
i) Some 10,399 households in Maidstone Borough contain a member with a support need. The most common support need was a ‘medical condition’. Households with support needs indicate that a range of adaptations and services are required to enable them to continue living in their home; the most commonly cited were low level shower units and car parking closer to the front door. Some 2,650 support needs households indicated a requirement for a handyperson service, providing support for the Council’s decision to enhance their handyperson’s service.
ii) The household survey suggests that 16,043 households in Maidstone Borough contain only older people (26.1%). More than three quarters are owner occupiers although the social rented sector also contains a relatively high proportion of older person only households. Just over 12.9% of older person only households who were likely to move over the next two years stated a preference for specialist accommodation such as sheltered housing. Only 3.5% of older person only households were found to be in unsuitable housing, compared to 6.4% of households across the Borough as a whole.
iii) Census data suggests that across the Borough, 23.5% of (employed) residents are employed in public administration, education or health. Survey data indicates that the median income of key worker households, at £35,257, is only slightly lower than the figure for non key worker households in employment (£37,049), perhaps indicating that Maidstone Borough does not have a particularly high wage local economy. iv) Around 93% of households in Maidstone Borough have a White British household head. Households headed by someone in a BME group were much more likely than average to rent privately, and 18.2% lived in unsuitable housing, compared to just 5.5% of White British households. BME households tended to be larger, with an average size of 2.6 people, compared to 2.0 people for other households.
v) The household survey estimates that there are 16,210 households which contain at least one child in Maidstone Borough. Lone parent households were more likely than other households to reside in rented housing (either social or private); families with younger children were very likely to have a mortgage.
Page 89 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
vi) The needs of Gypsies and Travellers in the Borough were assessed via a separate Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (GTAA). The study drew on a range of sources including interviews with 200 Gypsies and Travellers across four Boroughs including Maidstone. In Maidstone Borough there was found to be a need for 32 new residential pitches over a five year period (2006 2011).
vii) Although the needs of students could not be assessed via analysis of household survey data, the University for the Creative Arts (UCA) reports a current shortfall of in excess of 50 bed spaces to house new students in university managed accommodation. UCA expects an increased demand for university managed accommodation from non new students. Should the UCA develop a new Kent campus in Maidstone preliminary work undertaken by the university suggests that this could potentially generate an additional need for approximately 500 – 750 student bed spaces.
Page 90 9. Policy issues, compliance and updating
9. Policy issues, compliance and updating
Introduction
9.1 PPS3 is clear that the ultimate aim of a Strategic Housing Market Assessment is to provide robust evidence that will inform local housing strategy and planning policies. The evidence base must take account of the full range of data sources and include the involvement of key stakeholders. This chapter presents the policy suggestions resulting from evidence presented within this SHMA, which will be used to base a wider discussion on the appropriate policy outputs for the Maidstone Borough housing market.
9.2 A further requirement of a SHMA is that the results should be presented in a transparent manner and that it should be a dynamic piece of work that can be updated to ensure it remains relevant as the market changes. Within this report each result presented contains information on the source and any assumptions used, however this chapter will provide an overview of where the core outputs required by the Practice Guidance are presented. In addition it will outline the method that can be used to update the results in the future by the steering group.
Outputs required by PPS3
9.3 Figure 9.1 presents the results obtained from this SHMA for the three output requirements of PPS3 within Maidstone Borough.
Mix of housing required: Output 1 and Output 3(ii)
9.4 The high level of housing need evidenced by the CLG needs assessment model in Chapter 5 of 1,081 dwellings per annum could, at face value, support any level of affordable housing target, particularly when this is viewed in the context of the South East Plan target for 554 dwelling completions per annum of all tenures in Maidstone Borough.
9.5 However, as stated in Chapter 5, the CLG model does not reflect how the housing market operates. In particular it is unable to consider the possibility that a proportion of households are happy to spend more than 25% of their gross income on housing. It also attempts to address all problems of housing need within a very short timescale (5 years).
9.6 The model presented in Chapter 7, which aims to improve market balance over the longer term (to 2026), suggests an affordable housing target of about 38%. This is close to the target of 35% specified in the South East Plan 2009. On balance, the results of the model would therefore support a continuation of the South East Plan policy of building 35% affordable and 65% market housing, although an increase to 40% affordable might be considered desirable in order to reduce housing need within a shorter timescale.
Page 91 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
9.7 The Council will wish to view these results in the context of economic viability before deciding on an appropriate affordable housing target, however. This is particularly important given stakeholder concern about the viability of newbuild housing development in the Borough (see Appendix A5).
9.8 Within the affordable sector, the analysis in Chapter 5 suggests that about 24% should be intermediate with the remainder social rented. The initial results of the long term market balance model presented in Chapter 7 indicate, however, that up to 45% of new affordable housing could be of intermediate tenures.
9.9 However, it should be borne in mind that the model in Chapter 7 (by its nature) assumes the movement of all those currently in social housing that are able to afford intermediate housing into these newly established tenures. While in the long term this is quite possible, as new and moving households able to afford it are allocated intermediate tenures in preference to social renting, the low turnover rates and long term tenancies in the social rented sector mean that this process is likely to take place very slowly, over decades rather than months or years.
9.10 Therefore, in line with the figure from the housing needs model (which is more established in the Guidance), it is recommended that at least initially 24% of new affordable housing in the Borough be intermediate. This target is dependent on intermediate housing being priced at the ‘usefully affordable’ point; if this is not possible then social rented housing would need to be provided instead. When setting policy on provision of newbuild intermediate housing, the difficulties recently faced by social landlords in providing shared equity tenures in a climate of falling equity values (as evidenced by the stakeholder consultation in Appendix A5) should be taken into account.
Profile of household types requiring market housing: Output 2
9.11 PPS3 requires the likely profile of household types requiring market housing to be considered. This is derived in Chapter 6. The results show that the three main groups requiring market housing are households with children (31.6%), couples without children (28.9%) and single non pensioners (24.9%).
9.12 The findings from the estate and letting agents’ interviews suggest that there were a range of potential buyers seeking housing in the Borough, including first time buyers, Buy to Let investors and families looking to upsize their current housing. There was similarly reported to be a range of household types looking to rent property, including sharers, young professionals, families, and would be first time buyers. Stakeholders emphasised the need for the availability of family housing on the market to increase, to appeal both to local people and to affluent professionals from elsewhere in the South East who might regenerate the local economy.
9.13 It is also of interest to consider the findings of the longer term market balance model in chapter 7 in relation to this; the model suggests that in the period to 2026, the majority of new market dwellings should contain three or more bedrooms. Estate and Lettings agents, and many stakeholders, suggested that there was currently a shortage of family sized homes to purchase in the Borough.
Page 92 9. Policy issues, compliance and updating
Affordable housing size mix: Output 3 (i)
9.14 The analysis of net need for affordable housing by bedroom size in Chapter 5 suggests that 44% of the net need is for smaller (one and two bedroom) dwellings. However, the supply relative to need is greatest for four bedroom accommodation, thus households requiring this size accommodation will be less likely to have their needs met. Provision of larger units could therefore be argued to be a short term priority.
9.15 The long term market balance model presented in Chapter 7 suggests that a range of sizes of affordable accommodation are required in the future, but that even so about 60% should have three or more bedrooms. The model suggests that the vast majority of the requirement for smaller dwellings could be met through intermediate housing, while the requirement for larger dwellings should be primarily met using social rented housing.
9.16 There was still a small requirement for one bedroom units of social rented housing, reflecting the fact that despite the strong agreement with the prioritisation of family housing generally, some stakeholders (see Appendix A5) still found that there was a shortage of one bedroom social housing, especially for specific groups such as those requiring supported or sheltered accommodation.
9.17 Considering the evidence presented, the Council may wish to pursue a split of 40% smaller (one and two bedroom) dwellings and 60% larger (three and four bedroom) properties in the affordable sector.
The SHMA as an ‘evidence base’
9.18 These findings form part of the ‘evidence base’ for policy, but do not form policy in itself. It is manifestly clear in a Borough such as Maidstone that the level of housing need is far too high to be met by any foreseeable supply of newbuild affordable housing. It is therefore a policy issue for the Council to decide what types of affordable housing to build. The Council will want to consider its priorities in the light of this evidence, but not in any way be dictated by it.
9.19 It is recommended that the outputs from this report should also be viewed alongside the latest information on the economic viability of housing development when determining policy. This is particularly important considering the high level of need for affordable housing found in Maidstone Borough by this study, and the difficulties for delivery likely to be generated by the economic downturn.
Page 93 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Figure 9.1 Summary of PPS3 requirements resulting from the analysis
Mix of housing required: Output 1 and Output 3(ii)
Inter mediate 8% New housing should be 35% affordable and 65% market.
Affordable Market 65% 35% Social rent Within the affordable sector, about 76% 27% of the need is for social rented, and the remaining 24% for intermediate housing.
More detail is provided in Chapter 5 of the specific types of intermediate housing required.
Profile of household types requiring market housing: Output 2 Single pensioners 4.5% 2 or more pensioners 3.3% Single non pensioners 24.9% Couple, no children 28.9% Other multi adult 6.9% Around a third of the demand comes Lone parent 6.1% from households with children and more than a quarter from couples without 2+ adults 1 child 12.1% children. Almost a quarter of the 2+ adults 2+children 13.4% demand is from single non pensioners.
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0%
Affordable housing size mix: Output 3 (i)
3 – 4 bed 1 – 2 bed The Council may wish to pursue a split 40% 60% of 40% smaller (one and two bedroom) dwellings and 60% larger (three and four bedroom) properties
Compliance with Guidance
9.20 Both PPS3 and the Practice Guidance specifically describe what the SHMA evidence base should yield. The results addressing the three specific PPS3 output requirements were presented above. The Practice Guidance contains an additional set of outputs required from an SHMA report.
Page 94 9. Policy issues, compliance and updating
Table 9.1 Providing the Practice Guidance core outputs
Item Source (Chapter) 1) Estimates of current dwellings in terms of size, type, condition and tenure 2 2) Analysis of past and current housing market trends, including balance between supply and demand in different housing sectors and price/affordability. Description of 3,4,6 key drivers underpinning the market
3) Estimate of the total future number of households, broken down by age and type 7 where possible
4) Estimate of current number of households in housing need 5 5) Estimate of future households that will require affordable housing 5 6) Estimate of future households requiring market housing 6 7) Estimate of size of affordable housing required 5 8) Estimate of household groups who have particular housing requirements e.g. families; older people; key workers; Black, Minority and Ethnic groups; disabled 8 people; young people etc.
9.21 The Practice Guidance also requires a list of process requirements to be met through the SMHA process. The table below presents these process requirements alongside a demonstration of how they have been fulfilled within the course of this project.
Page 95 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table 9.2 Meeting the SHMA process requirements
1) Approach to identifying housing market area(s) is consistent with other approaches to identifying housing market areas within the region
The report follows the CLG Advice Note ‘Identifying sub regional housing market areas’ in taking a practical decision when determining the housing market boundary. In line with other recent Borough level SHMAs, the housing market boundary is assumed to coincide with the extent of the Council area.
2) Housing market conditions are assessed within the context of the housing market area
A detail profile of the local housing market in Maidstone Borough is presented throughout the report in comparison to the regional and national situation. Further analysis of the dynamics of the housing market is framed by this contextual understanding of the Borough.
3) Involves key stakeholders, including house builders
A key part of this SHMA process has been the involvement of stakeholders, this dialogue provides an important input for the analysis of the housing market and the subsequent report. It is an iterative process with results being relayed to the stakeholders to help determine the further areas that the SHMA should consider.
4) Contains a full technical explanation of the methods employed, with any limitations noted
Chapter 1 describes the data sources used within this SHMA report and further detail on the approach used to ensure that the primary data is robust and truly reflective of the local population is presented in Appendix A1. The housing needs calculation methodology follows the CLG Practice guidance as detailed in Appendix A2. The methodology used for the long term market balance model presented in chapter 7 is explained and justified within that chapter.
5) Assumptions, judgements and findings are fully justified and presented in an open and transparent manner
The assumptions made in the report are clearly set out next to the analysis to which they relate, alongside reference to other relevant material. Further details of the workings behind some of the calculations are presented in the Appendix A2. Furthermore transparency is assured because the household survey dataset that is used to produce many of the results contained within this report is provided to the steering group, alongside a demonstration of how the results are derived from it.
6) Uses and reports upon effective quality control mechanisms
Fordham Research uses detailed quality control mechanisms. These apply to fieldwork, through model building and analytical scrutiny, to cross review of report output.
7) Explains how the assessment findings have been monitored and updated (where appropriate) since it was originally undertaken
The report sets out how the findings presented in this report can be updated in the future in the following section. Source: Fordham Research 2009
Monitoring and updating the results
9.22 The Practice Guidance is clear that one of the products of an SHMA should be the capacity of steering group members to monitor and update the report results.
Page 96 9. Policy issues, compliance and updating
9.23 There are a number of secondary data sources that present relevant information on the Maidstone Borough housing market that were used in this report. A full list of these sources is presented in Appendix A3, which details how frequently they are published so that the steering group will be able to monitor the changes in the market that they indicate.
9.24 The simplest way of monitoring the housing market is to periodically update the cost of the different tenures of housing in Maidstone Borough, as is presented in Chapter 3. This will provide an indication of the housing market gaps and how they have changed since the original survey. In addition it will provide a visual guide as to how the ability of households to ascend the housing ladder has altered.
9.25 Entry level market purchase prices and rents can be ascertained via websites such as Rightmove. For each settlement in the Borough, it is possible to undertake an internet search to identify the number of properties of each size (number of bedrooms) available in that settlement. The Practice Guidance indicates entry level prices should be approximated by the lower quartile value: if the total number of properties of a particular size is quartered and then the properties are sorted by cost in ascending order, then the property at the quartered value is the lower quartile point. The overall lower quartile cost for a particular dwelling size in the Borough is the mean of the individual lower quartile prices identified in each constituent settlement.
9.26 Analysis of the household survey has provided a range of data that has informed the understanding of the local housing market. A training session on how to use and update the survey dataset will be provided to steering group members at the conclusion of the project. This will include instructions on how new entry level prices/rents can be entered into the survey dataset in order to determine changes in affordability levels in the Borough.
9.27 Short term market responses will be catered for by the procedures listed in this chapter. Longer term structural changes are likely to require monitoring only at much longer intervals such as five yearly. In that longer perspective it is not unreasonable to expect to have to do a further household survey. Many of the households in the original survey will have changed by the time of a second one, and only new survey work can find out about them.
Page 97 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Summary
i) The purpose of this SHMA is to provide robust evidence that will inform local housing strategy and planning policies. This SHMA contains the outputs required by PPS3 paragraph 22 and the core outputs required by the SHMA Practice Guidance.
ii) The high level of housing need evidenced by the CLG needs assessment model and the longer term market balance model suggest an affordable housing target of 35%, consistent with the regional target in the South East Plan. Within the affordable sector, it is suggested that 24% of the requirement could be met by intermediate housing.
iii) The three main groups requiring market housing are households with children (31.6%), couples without children (28.9%) and single non pensioners (24.9%).
iv) In terms of the size of affordable housing required, evidence suggests that a split of 40% smaller (one and two bedroom) dwellings and 60% larger (three and four bedroom) properties could be pursued by the Council.
v) A further requirement of a SHMA is that it should be a dynamic piece of work that can be updated to ensure it remains relevant as the market changes. The chapter outlined possible methods that can be used by the steering group to update the results in the future.
Page 98 Glossary
Glossary
Affordability
A measure of whether households can access and sustain the cost of private sector housing. There are two main types of affordability measure: mortgage and rental. Mortgage affordability assesses whether households would be eligible for a mortgage; rental affordability measures whether a household can afford private rental. Mortgage affordability is based on conditions set by mortgage lenders – using standard lending multipliers (3.5 times household income). Rental affordability is defined as the rent being less than a proportion of a household’s gross income (in this case 25% of gross income).
Affordable housing
Affordable housing includes social rented and intermediate housing, provided to specified eligible households whose needs are not met by the market. Affordable housing should be at a cost which is below the costs of housing typically available in the open market and be available at a sub market price in perpetuity (although there are some exceptions to this such as the Right to Acquire). [There is an ambiguity in PPS3: Housing, where ‘intermediate housing’ is defined as being below market entry to rent, while ‘affordable housing’ is defined to be below the threshold to buy (normally much higher than the private rental one). But in principle the Guidance defines affordable housing as below the market threshold, and rationally speaking, that includes the private rented as well as purchase sectors].
Annual need
The combination of the net future need plus an allowance to deal progressively with part of the net current need.
Bedroom standard
The bedroom standard is that used by the General Household Survey, and is calculated as follows: a separate bedroom is allocated to each co habiting couple, any other person aged 21 or over, each pair of young persons aged 10 20 of the same sex, and each pair of children under 10 (regardless of sex). Unpaired young persons aged 10 20 are paired with a child under 10 of the same sex or, if not possible, allocated a separate bedroom. Any remaining unpaired children under 10 are also allocated a separate bedroom. The calculated standard for the household is then compared with the actual number of bedrooms available for its sole use to indicate deficiencies or excesses. Bedrooms include bed sitters, box rooms and bedrooms which are identified as such by respondents even though they may not be in use as such.
Page 99 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Current need
Households whose current housing circumstances at a point in time fall below accepted minimum standards. This would include households living in overcrowded conditions, in unfit or seriously defective housing, families sharing, and homeless people living in temporary accommodation or sharing with others.
Disaggregation
Breaking a numerical assessment of housing need and supply down, either in terms of size and/or type of housing unit, or in terms of geographical sub areas within the District.
Entry-level market housing
The survey of prices and rents is focussed on ‘entry level’ prices/rents. That is to say the price/rent at which there is a reasonable supply of dwellings in reasonable condition. The purpose of this approach is to ensure that when assessments are made of say first time buyers, that the prices are the appropriate ones for the typical members of this group.
Financial capacity
This is defined as household (incomex3)+savings+equity (the value of the property owned by owner occupiers, typically the family home, net of mortgage). This provides an indication, when put on a capital basis, of the amount which the household could afford to pay for housing. Since equity is now a substantial part of the overall financial capacity of the large fraction of owner occupiers it is essential to use this measure rather than the old price/income ratio to measure the activity of a housing market.
Forecast
Either of housing needs or requirements is a prediction of numbers which would arise in future years based on a model of the determinants of those numbers and assumptions about (a) the behaviour of households and the market and (b) how the key determinants are likely to change. It involves understanding relationships and predicting behaviour in response to preferences and economic conditions.
Headship rates
Measures the proportion of individuals in the population, in a particular age/sex/marital status group, who head a household. Projected headship rates are applied to projected populations to produce projected numbers of households.
Household
One person living alone or a group of people who have the address as their only or main residence and who either share one meal a day or share a living room.
Page 100 Glossary
Household formation
The process whereby individuals in the population form separate households. ‘Gross’ or ‘new’ household formation refers to households which form over a period of time, conventionally one year. This is equal to the number of households existing at the end of the year which did not exist as separate households at the beginning of the year (not counting ‘successor’ households, when the former head of household dies or departs).
Household reference person
For the purposes of our study the survey respondent is taken to represent the household reference person (HRP).
Housing Market Area
The geographical area in which a substantial majority of the employed population both live and work, and where most of those changing home without changing employment choose to stay.
Housing need
Housing need is defined as the number of households who lack their own housing or who live in unsuitable housing and who cannot afford to meet their housing needs in the market.
Housing Register
A database of all individuals or households who have applied to a local authority or RSL for a social tenancy or access to some other form of affordable housing. Housing Registers, often called Waiting Lists, may include not only people with general needs but people with support needs or requiring access because of special circumstances, including homelessness.
Intermediate Housing
PPS3 defines intermediate housing as ‘housing at prices and rents above those of social rent but below market prices or rents and which meet the criteria set out above. These can include shared equity products (e.g. HomeBuy), other low cost homes for sale and intermediate rent.’
Lower quartile
The value below which one quarter of the cases falls. In relation to house prices, it means the price of the house that is one quarter of the way up the ranking from the cheapest to the most expensive.
Mean
The mean is the most common form of average used. It is calculated by dividing the sum of a distribution by the number of incidents in the distribution.
Page 101 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Median
The median is an alternative way of calculating the average. It is the middle value of the distribution when the distribution is sorted in ascending or descending order.
Migration
The movement of people between geographical areas primarily defined in this context as local authority Districts. The rate of migration is usually measured as an annual number of households, living in the District at a point in time, who are not resident in that District one year earlier.
Net need
The difference between need and the expected supply of available affordable housing units (e.g. from the re letting of existing social rented dwellings).
Newly arising need
New households which are expected to form over a period of time and are likely to require some form of assistance to gain suitable housing together with other existing households whose circumstances change over the period so as to place them in a situation of need (e.g. households losing accommodation because of loss of income, relationship breakdown, eviction, or some other emergency).
Newly forming households
Adult individuals, couples or lone parent families living as part of other households of which they are neither the head nor the partner of the head and who need to live in their own separate accommodation, and/or are intending to move to separate accommodation rather than continuing to live with their ‘host’ household.
Occupancy rating
This is used in the 2001 Census as a measure of under occupancy and overcrowding. It relates the actual number of rooms in the dwelling to the number of rooms required by the members of the household (based on relationships between them and their ages). An occupancy rating of 1, for example, implies that there is one room too few and that there is overcrowding in the household.
Overcrowding
Definition used by Fordham Research (in analysis of household survey data) and the Survey of English Housing: a dwelling which is below the ‘bedroom standard’ (see above).
Definition used by the 2001 Census: a dwelling with a negative ‘occupancy rating’ (see above).
Page 102 Glossary
Primary data
Information that is collected from a bespoke data collection exercise (e.g. surveys, focus groups or interviews) and analysed to produce a new set of findings.
Projection
Either of housing needs or requirements is a calculation of numbers expected in some future year or years based on the extrapolation of existing conditions and assumptions. For example, household projections calculate the number and composition of households expected at some future date(s) given the projected number of residents, broken down by age, sex and marital status, and an extrapolation of recent trends in the propensity of different groups to form separate households.
Relets
Social rented housing units which are vacated during a period and become potentially available for letting to new tenants.
Sample survey
Collects information from a known proportion of a population, normally selected at random, in order to estimate the characteristics of the population as a whole.
Secondary data
Existing information that someone else has collected. Data from administrative systems and some research projects are made available for others to summarise and analyse for their own purposes (e.g. Census, national surveys).
SHMA (Strategic Housing Market Assessment)
SHMA derives from government guidance suggesting that the ‘evidence base’ required for the good planning of an area should be the product of a process rather than a technical exercise.
Social rented housing
PPS3 defines social rented housing as ‘rented housing owned by local authorities and registered social landlords, for which guideline target rents are determined through the national rent regime’, the proposals set out in the Three Year review of Rent Restructuring (July 2004) were implemented in policy in April 2006. It may also include rented housing owned or managed by other persons and provided under equivalent rental arrangements to the above, as agreed with the local authority or with the Housing Corporation as a condition of grant’.
Support Needs
Relating to people who have specific needs: such as those associated with a disability.
Page 103 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Specialised housing
Refers to specially designed housing (such as mobility or wheelchair accommodation, hostels or group homes) or housing specifically designated for particular groups (such as retirement housing).
Supporting People
This term refers to a programme launched in 2003 which aims to provide a better quality of life for vulnerable people by aiding them to live independently and maintain their tenancies/current home life. The programme covers a wide variety of vulnerable people from travellers, to young people at risk, to those with HIV or AIDS. Supporting People provide housing related support in many different forms but include enabling individuals to access their correct benefits entitlement, ensuring they have the correct skills to manage their tenancy and providing advice on property adaptations.
Under-occupation
An under occupied dwelling is one which exceeds the bedroom standard by two or more bedrooms.
Unsuitably housed households
All circumstances where households are living in housing which is in some way unsuitable, whether because of its size, type, design, location, condition or cost. Households can have more than one reason for being in unsuitable housing.
Page 104 Appendix A1. Primary data collection
Appendix A1. Primary data collection
Data collection and weighting procedure
A1.1 The primary data was collected via postal questionnaires. The sample for the survey was drawn, at random, from the Council Tax Register covering all areas and tenure groups in the Borough.
A1.2 In total, 1,728 postal questionnaires were returned. The number of responses provides sufficient data to allow complete, accurate and detailed analysis of need and demand across the Borough as a whole.
A1.3 Although the number of responses represents a small percentage of the total household population, this does not undermine the validity of the survey as paragraph 18 of Strategic Housing Market Assessment Practice Guidance Annex C states:
A common misconception when sampling is that it should be based on a certain percentage of the population being studied. In fact, it is the total number of cases sampled which is important. As the number of cases increase, the results become more reliable but at a decreasing rate Approximately 1,500 responses should allow a reasonable level of analysis for a local authority area.
A1.4 It was necessary for the total number of households in the Borough to be estimated, in order for the data to be grossed up to represent the entire household population. It was estimated that at the time of the survey there were 61,460 households living in the Borough.
A1.5 The table below shows an estimate of the current tenure split in the Borough along with the sample achieved in each group. The data shows that around 72% of households were owner occupiers with 14% in the social rented sector and the remaining 13% in the private rented sector. It should be noted that the private rented sector includes those renting from a friend/relative or living in accommodation tied to a job.
Page 105 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A1.1 Number of households in each tenure group
Total number % of Number of Tenure % of returns of households households returns Owner occupied (no mortgage) 25,484 41.5% 710 41.1% Owner occupied (with mortgage)* 18,999 30.9% 707 40.9% Social rented 8,807 14.3% 162 9.4% Private rented 8,170 13.3% 149 8.6% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 *includes shared ownership/shared equity
A1.6 Survey data was weighted to match the suggested tenure profile shown above. An important aspect of preparing data for analysis is ‘weighting’ it. As can be seen from the table above, social survey responses never exactly match the estimated population totals. As a result it is necessary to ‘rebalance’ the data to correctly represent the population being analysed via weighting.
A1.7 Weighting is recognised by the Strategic Housing Market Assessment Guidance as being a way of compensating for low response amongst certain groups. Although response rates were lower amongst certain groups of the population (e.g. private rented in the table above) the application of a sophisticated weighting process, as has been used in this survey, removes any bias.
A1.8 In addition to tenure, which is shown above, data was also weighted to be in line with the estimated number of households in each of the various groups listed below. These are variables for which the Borough wide profile is known or can be confidently estimated, and which are relevant to the survey analysis.
• Ward • Sub area • Council Tax band • Household type • Car ownership • Ethnicity of household head • Dwelling type
A1.9 The population surveyed was also weighted to reflect the Borough’s age profile as recorded by the South East Plan’s population projections.
Page 106 Appendix A1. Primary data collection
A1.10 Household survey data was collected for two student only households residing in ordinary accommodation. Student only households raise their own housing issues and although most have low incomes, they do not generally qualify for affordable housing due to the short term nature of their residence. Since student households do not directly impact on the need for affordable housing, they have been removed from the household survey based information presented in the SHMA report, including the assessment of housing need. Removing these households means the total number of households considered in the majority of the primary survey analysis in the SHMA report is 61,342.
A1.11 The tables below show the final estimates of the number of households in each group (for the seven different variables used for weighting) along with the number of actual survey responses (data for tenure can be found in the table above). Although in some cases it is clear that the proportion of survey responses is close to the ‘expected’ situation there are others where it is clear that the weighting of data was necessary to ensure that the results as presented are reflective of the household population in Maidstone Borough.
Page 107 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A1.2 Ward profile
Estimated % of Number of Ward % of returns households households returns Allington 2,897 4.7% 66 3.8% Barming 1,012 1.6% 27 1.6% Bearsted 3,310 5.4% 124 7.2% Boughton Monchelsea & Chart Sutton 1,170 1.9% 41 2.4% Boxley 3,218 5.2% 164 9.5% Bridge 2,620 4.3% 72 4.2% Coxheath & Hunton 2,935 4.8% 89 5.2% Detling & Thurnham 1,167 1.9% 58 3.4% Downswood & Otham 1,153 1.9% 30 1.7% East 3,600 5.9% 95 5.5% Fant 3,921 6.4% 93 5.4% Harrietsham & Lenham 2,248 3.7% 76 4.4% Headcorn 2,017 3.3% 64 3.7% Heath 2,227 3.6% 41 2.4% High Street 3,739 6.1% 99 5.7% Leeds 959 1.6% 35 2.0% Loose 919 1.5% 33 1.9% Marden & Yalding 3,131 5.1% 94 5.4% North 3,646 5.9% 73 4.2% North Downs 995 1.6% 46 2.7% Park Wood 2,191 3.6% 42 2.4% Shepway North 3,260 5.3% 58 3.4% Shepway South 2,488 4.0% 37 2.1% South 3,303 5.4% 66 3.8% Staplehurst 2,249 3.7% 73 4.2% Sutton Valence & Langley 1,087 1.8% 32 1.9% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 108 Appendix A1. Primary data collection
Table A1.3 Sub-area profile
Estimated Sub area % of households Number of returns % of returns households Central Maidstone 8,270 13.5% 265 15.3% Maidstone Town 25,622 41.7% 477 27.6% Rural North East 5,379 8.8% 268 15.5% Rural East 10,774 17.5% 361 20.9% Rural South 11,415 18.6% 357 20.7% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Table A1.4 Council Tax band profile
Estimated Number of Council Tax band % of households % of returns households returns A 3,860 6.3% 84 4.9% B 7,711 12.5% 186 10.8% C 16,628 27.1% 380 22.0% D 16,100 26.2% 450 26.0% E 8,493 13.8% 299 17.3% F 4,861 7.9% 186 10.8% G+H 3,806 6.2% 143 8.3% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Table A1.5 Household type profile
Estimated Number of Household type % of households % of returns households returns Single 17,867 29.1% 454 26.3% Couple or family 35,506 57.8% 1,133 65.6% Lone parent 3,209 5.2% 46 2.7% Other 4,878 7.9% 95 5.5% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Table A1.6 Car ownership
Estimated Cars owned % of households Number of returns % of returns households None 10,062 16.4% 239 13.8% One 25,624 41.7% 725 42.0% Two or more 25,775 41.9% 764 44.2% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 109 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A1.7 Ethnicity of household head
Ethnicity Estimated h’holds % of h’holds Number of returns % of returns White British 57,208 93.1% 1,657 95.9% White Other / Irish 2,463 4.0% 44 2.5% Asian 762 1.2% 8 0.5% Black 314 0.5% 6 0.3% Mixed / Other 713 1.2% 13 0.8% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Table A1.8 Dwelling type profile
Estimated Number of Dwelling type % of households % of returns households returns Detached house 17,999 29.3% 562 32.5% Semi detached house 19,828 32.3% 567 32.8% Terraced house 13,612 22.1% 385 22.3% Flat 10,021 16.3% 214 12.4% Total 61,460 100.0% 1,728 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 110 Appendix A1. Primary data collection
Table A1.9 Age profile*
Estimated no. of Number of people % of people % of people (from Age range people (from survey (weighted) survey returns) (weighted) returns) 0 4 9,014 6.3% 187 4.8% 5 9 8,507 6.0% 187 4.8% 10 14 8,627 6.0% 214 5.5% 15 19 8,408 5.9% 196 5.0% 20 24 7,684 5.4% 169 4.3% 25 29 8,579 6.0% 185 4.7% 30 34 8,297 5.8% 182 4.6% 35 39 9,469 6.6% 252 6.4% 40 44 10,919 7.6% 265 6.8% 45 49 10,528 7.4% 296 7.5% 50 54 9,364 6.6% 317 8.1% 55 59 8,581 6.0% 255 6.5% 60 64 9,831 6.9% 387 9.9% 65 69 7,294 5.1% 283 7.2% 70 74 6,028 4.2% 198 5.0% 75 79 4,667 3.3% 159 4.0% 80 84 3,404 2.4% 102 2.6% 85+ 3,354 2.3% 83 2.1% Total 142,830** 100.0% 3,923** 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 *Individual persons in each household surveyed were weighted in this instance, rather than whole households **The number of people in each age band does not quite add up to the total number of people, as the household survey only recorded the ages of the first six members of each household
Non-response and missing data
A1.12 Missing data is a feature of all housing surveys: mainly due to a respondent’s refusal to answer a particular question (e.g. income). For all missing data in the survey imputation procedures were applied. In general, throughout the survey the level of missing data was minimal. The main exception to this was in relation to financial information, where there was an appreciable (although typical) level of non response. The overall response rate for the income question was 84.0%, and for the savings question 81.7%.
Page 111 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A1.13 Non response can cause a number of problems:
• The sample size is effectively reduced so that applying the calculated weight will not give estimates for the whole population • Variables which are derived from the combination of a number of responses each of which may be affected by item non response (e.g. collecting both respondent and their partners income separately) may exhibit high levels of non response • If the amount of non response substantially varies across sub groups of the population this may lead to a bias of the results
A1.14 To overcome these problems missing data was ‘imputed’. Imputation involves substituting for the missing value, a value given by a suitably defined ‘similar’ household, where the definition of similar varies depending on the actual item being imputed.
A1.15 The specific method used was to divide the sample into sub groups based on relevant characteristics and then ‘Probability Match’ where a value selected from those with a similar predicted value was imputed. The main sub groups used were tenure, household size and age of respondent.
Page 112 Appendix A2. Housing need
Appendix A2. Housing need
Current need
A2.1 The first half of this chapter considers Current Need: the first stage of the needs assessment model. This begins with an assessment of housing suitability and affordability and also considers homeless households before arriving at a total current need estimate (gross). An assessment of the stock available to offset this need follows, which then enables the net current need estimate to be calculated.
Unsuitable housing
A2.2 A key element of housing need is an assessment of the suitability of a household’s current housing. The CLG guide sets out a series of nine criteria for unsuitable housing which has been followed in this report. In Maidstone Borough it is estimated that a total of 3,909 households are living in unsuitable housing (this represents 6.4% of all households in the Borough).
A2.3 The figure below shows a summary of the numbers of households living in unsuitable housing (ordered by the number of households in each category). It should be noted that the overall total of reasons for unsuitability shown in the figure will usually be greater than the total number of households with unsuitability, as some households have more than one reason for unsuitability.
A2.4 The main reason for unsuitable housing is ‘overcrowding’ followed by ‘special needs/mobility’.
Figure A2.1 Summary of unsuitable housing categories
Overcrowding 1,185
Support needs/mobility etc 1,040
Home difficult to maintain 897
Accommodation too expensive 631
Harassment 415
Repairs 327
Lack facilities 259
Tenancy ending etc 172
Sharing facilities 0
0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400 Households
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 113 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A2.5 The table below shows unsuitable housing by tenure. The patterns emerging suggest that households living in social and private rented accommodation are most likely to be in unsuitable housing. Almost 60% of unsuitably housed households reside in the social or private rented sectors.
Table A2.1 Unsuitable housing and tenure
Unsuitable housing % of h’holds in As a % of all h’holds Tenure In unsuitable Number of h’holds in group in unsuitable in unsuitable housing Borough housing housing Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 818 26,275 3.1% 20.9% Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 787 18,208 4.3% 20.1% Social rented 1,273 8,807 14.5% 32.6% Private rented 1,031 8,051 12.8% 26.4% Total 3,909 61,341 6.4% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
‘In-situ’ solutions
A2.6 The survey has shown that 3,909 households are in unsuitable housing. However it is most probable that some of the unsuitability can be resolved in the households’ current accommodation. Households living in housing deemed unsuitable for the following reasons were considered not to have an in situ solution: end of tenancy, accommodation too expensive, overcrowding, sharing facilities, harassment. These households therefore require alternative accommodation to resolve their unsuitable housing.
A2.7 The survey data therefore estimates that of the 3,909 households in unsuitable housing, 2,324 (or 59.4%) do not have an in situ solution and therefore require a move to alternative accommodation.
Affordability
A2.8 Based on the test for affordability, it is estimated that there are 1,689 existing households that cannot afford market housing and are living in unsuitable housing (and require a move to alternative accommodation). This represents 2.8% of all existing households in the Borough – these households are considered to be in housing need.
A2.9 The table below shows the tenure of the households currently estimated to be in housing need. The results show that households living in the private rented sector are most likely to be in housing need, with 10.8% in this situation. More than half of households in need live in the private rented sector and more than a third in the social rented sector.
Page 114 Appendix A2. Housing need
Table A2.2 Housing need and tenure
Housing need Tenure Number of h’holds % of h’holds in As a % of all In need in Borough group in need h’holds in need Owner occupied (no mortgage) 70 26,276 0.3% 4.1% Owner occupied (with mortgage) 151 18,207 0.8% 8.9% Social rented 599 8,807 6.8% 35.5% Private rented 868 8,051 10.8% 51.4% Total 1,689 61,341 2.8% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A2.10 For the purposes of the housing needs assessment, households considered to be in housing need have been split into two categories: current occupiers of affordable housing in need (this includes occupiers of social rented and shared ownership accommodation), and households from other tenures in need. It is estimated that some 599 households in need currently live in affordable housing.
Homeless households
A2.11 The assessment of housing need is a ‘snapshot’ that assesses housing need at a particular point in time. There will, in addition to the existing households in need, be some homeless households who were in need at the time of the survey and should also be included within any assessment of backlog need.
A2.12 To assess the number of homeless households we have used information contained in the Councils’ P1(E) return. The main source of information used is Section E6 which shows the number of households accommodated by the authority at the end of the quarter. The important point about this information is the note underneath: “This should be a ‘snapshot’ of the numbers in accommodation on the last day of the quarter, not the numbers placed in accommodation during the quarter.” This is important given the snapshot nature of the survey. Data compiled from the second quarter of 2009 is shown in the table below.
Page 115 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A2.3 Applicant households accommodated by authority (Section E6, P1(E) form)
Category Number of households Bed and breakfast 6 Other nightly paid 1 Hostel 0 Private sector accommodation leased by authority 7 Private sector accommodation leased by RSLs 0 Directly with a private sector landlord 0 Within Council’s own stock 0 Within RSL stock 26 Other 0 Total 40 Source: Borough of Maidstone P1(E) return (Quarter 2 2009)
A2.13 Not all of the categories in the above table are added to our assessment of existing and newly forming households in need. This is because, in theory, they will be part of our sample for the household survey. For example, households housed in Council accommodation should already be included as part of the housing need – such household addresses should appear on the Council Tax file from which the sample was drawn. After considering the various categories, we have decided there are three which should be included as part of the homeless element. These have been underlined in the table above. Therefore of the temporarily accommodated households identified in the P1E form, seven shall be considered as in housing need.
Total current need (gross)
A2.14 The table below summarises the first stage of the overall assessment of housing need as set out by the CLG. The data shows that there are an estimated 1,696 households in need in Maidstone Borough.
Table A2.4 Backlog of housing need
Step Notes Number 1.1 Homeless households and those in temporary accommodation 7 20 1.2 Overcrowding and concealed households Two steps 1,689 1.3 Other groups taken together 1.4 equals Total current housing need (gross) 1.1+1.2+1.3 1,696 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
20 20 For the purpose of this model, where the objective is to produce a minimum estimate of housing need, concealed households have not been included as part of the current need. This is because they are assessed within step 2.1 and excluding them from step 1.2 removes the prospect of any these households being double counted.
Page 116 Appendix A2. Housing need
Available stock to offset current need
A2.15 The next stage in the backlog considers the stock available to offset the current need. This includes stock from current occupiers of affordable housing in need, surplus stock from vacant properties and committed supply of new affordable units. Units to be taken out of management are removed from the calculation.
A2.16 Firstly, it is important when considering net need levels to discount households already living in affordable housing. This is because the movement of such households within affordable housing will have an overall nil effect in terms of housing need. As stated in paragraph A2.10, there are currently 599 households in need already living in affordable housing.
Surplus stock
A2.17 A certain level of vacant dwellings is normal as this allows for transfers and for work on properties to be carried out. The CLG Guide suggests that if the vacancy rate in the affordable stock is in excess of 3% then some of the vacant units should be considered as surplus stock which can be included within the supply to offset needs. Since Maidstone Borough records a vacancy rate in the social rented sector of 0.9%, there is little scope for bringing vacant units back into use.
Committed supply of new affordable units
A2.18 The CLG Guidance recommends that this part of the assessment includes ‘new social rented and intermediate housing which are committed to be built over the period of the assessment’. For the purposes of analysis we have taken 2009 HSSA data showing the number of planned and proposed affordable units for the period 2009/10 2010/11 as a guide to new provision.
A2.19 In total, the HSSA data suggests that there are 587 affordable dwellings planned or proposed for 2009/10 and 2010/11 (of which 407 are social rented, 142 are shared ownership/shared equity, and 38 are intermediate rent).
Units to be taken out of management
A2.20 The Guide states that this stage ‘involves estimating the numbers of social rented or intermediate units that will be taken out of management’. The main component of this step will be properties which are expected to be demolished (or replacement schemes that lead to net losses of stock). At the time of reporting the proposed number of affordable dwellings expected to be ‘taken out of management’ in the future was unknown and hence a figure of zero has been used in this step of the model.
Total available stock to offset current need
A2.21 The table below brings together the information from the above stages; the data shows that in total there are an estimated 1,186 properties available to offset the current need in Maidstone Borough.
Page 117 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A2.5 Current supply of affordable housing
Step Notes Number 3.1 Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need 599 3.2 Surplus stock 0 3.3 Committed supply of affordable housing 587 3.4 Units to be taken out of management 0 3.5 Total affordable housing stock available 3.1+3.2+3.3+3.4 1,186 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Total current need
A2.22 It is estimated that there are currently 1,696 households in need of affordable housing. There are an estimated 1,186 properties available to offset this current need.
Future need
A2.23 In addition to Current Need, there will also be Future Need. This is split, as per CLG guidance, into two main categories. These are as follows:
• New households formation ( × proportion unable to buy or rent in market) • Existing households falling into need
A2.24 There will be a flow of affordable housing to meet this need. Calculation of the future supply of affordable units follows this analysis; this consists of the annual supply of social re lets and intermediate housing. The following sections deal with these points in detail.
New household formation
A2.25 The estimate of the number of newly forming households in need of affordable housing is based on an assessment of households that have formed over the past two years. Such an approach is preferred to studying households stating likely future intentions as it provides more detailed information on the characteristics of these households contributing to this element of newly arising need.
A2.26 The tables below show details of the derivation of new household formation. The tables begin by establishing the number of newly forming households over the past two years – an affordability test is then applied.
Page 118 Appendix A2. Housing need
Table A2.6 Derivation of newly arising need from new household formation
Aspect of calculation Number Sub total Number of households moving in past two years 10,217 Minus households NOT forming in previous move −7,611 2,606 Times proportion unable to afford 43.2% ESTIMATE OF NEWLY ARISING NEED 1,125 ANNUAL ESTIMATE OF NEWLY ARISING NEED 563 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A2.27 The table above shows that an estimated 2,606 households are newly formed within the Borough over the past two years (1,303 per annum). Of these it is estimated that 563 (per annum) are unable to afford market housing without some form of subsidy – this represents the annual estimate of the number of newly forming households falling into need.
Existing households falling into need
A2.28 This is an estimate of the number of existing households who will fall into housing need over the next two years (and then annualised). The basic information for this is households who have moved home within the last two years and affordability. A household will fall into need if it has to move home and is unable to afford to do this within the private sector (examples of such a move will be because of the end of a tenancy agreement). A household unable to afford market rent prices but moving to private rented accommodation may have to either claim housing benefit or spend more than a quarter of their gross income on housing, which is considered unaffordable (or indeed a combination of both).
A2.29 Households previously living with parents, relatives or friends are excluded as these will double count with the newly forming households already considered in the previous table. The data also excludes moves between social rented properties. Households falling into need in the social rented sector have their needs met through a transfer to another social rented property, hence releasing a social rented property for someone else in need. The number of households falling into need in the social rented sector should therefore, over a period of time, roughly equal the supply of ‘transfers’ and so the additional needs arising from within the social rented stock will be net zero.
A2.30 The table below shows the derivation of existing households falling into need.
Page 119 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A2.7 Derivation of newly arising need from existing households
Aspect of calculation Number Sub total Number of households moving in past two years 10,217 Minus households forming in previous move −2,606 7,611 Minus households transferring within affordable housing −748 6,863 Times proportion unable to afford 28.2% ESTIMATE OF NEWLY ARISING NEED 1,937 ANNUAL ESTIMATE OF NEWLY ARISING NEED 968 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A2.31 The table above shows that a total of 6,863 existing households are considered as potentially in need (3,432 per annum). Using the standard affordability test for existing households it is estimated that 28.2% of these households cannot afford market housing. Therefore our estimate of the number of households falling into need excluding transfers is 1,937 households over the two year period. Annualised this is 968 households per annum.
Total future need (gross)
A2.32 The data from each of the above sources can now be put into the needs assessment table below. It indicates that additional need will arise from a total of 1,531 households per annum.
Table A2.8 Future need (per annum)
Step Notes Number 2.1 New household formation (gross per year) 1,303 2.2 Proportion of new households unable to buy or rent in the market leaves 563 43.2% 2.3 Existing households falling into need 968 2.4 Total newly arising housing need (gross per year) 2.1x2.2+2.3 1,531 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Future supply of affordable housing
The future supply of social rented housing
A2.33 The guidance suggest that Step 3.6 of the estimate of likely future relets from the social rented stock should be based on past trend data which can be taken as a prediction for the future.
A2.34 Information on RSL lettings can be sourced from the Council’s HSSA return. The table below shows the number of lettings (excluding RSL to RSL transfers) over the past two years. The average for the two year period is 521 per annum.
Page 120 Appendix A2. Housing need
Table A2.9 Analysis of past housing supply (RSL sector)
2007/08 2008/09 Average 434 608 521 Sources: Maidstone Borough Council HSSA return 2008 & /2009
Intermediate supply
A2.35 In most local authorities the amount of intermediate housing available in the stock is fairly limited (as is the case in Maidstone Borough). However, it is still important to consider to what extent the current supply may be able to help those in need of affordable housing.
A2.36 Therefore we include an estimate of the number of shared ownership units that become available each year, based upon assuming a similar rate of turnover in the intermediate stock as in the social rented stock. Due to the small sample of such households in the dataset, the estimate of the total households living in this tenure is based upon secondary data, acquired from the latest Tenant Services Authority Regulatory and Statistical Return (2009).
A2.37 This source estimates that there are 50 units of Low Cost Home Ownership and 437 of Shared Ownership in Maidstone Borough. Figures for intermediate rented housing were not available at the time of writing. It is therefore estimated that around 31 units of intermediate housing will become available to meet housing needs from the existing stock of such housing.
Total future supply
A2.38 The total future supply is estimated to be 552, comprised of 521 units of social re lets and 31 units of intermediate housing.
Table A2.10 Future supply of affordable housing (per annum)
Step Notes Number 3.6 Annual supply of social re lets (net) 521 3.7 Annual supply of intermediate housing available for relet or 31 resale at sub market levels 3.8 Annual supply of affordable housing 4.1+4.2 552 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Total future need
A2.39 The data suggests that on an annual basis there will be 563 newly forming households requiring affordable housing and a further 968 existing households. The total future need for affordable housing is therefore estimated to be 1,531 units per annum.
A2.40 The supply of affordable housing to meet this need has also been estimated from past trend data. This data suggests that the current stock of affordable housing is likely to provide around 552 units.
Page 121 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 122 Appendix A3. Updating the findings
Appendix A3. Updating the findings
A3.1 There are a wide range of data sources from which the general (secondary data) findings of this SHMA can be updated. A useful list will be found in Annex B of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment Practice Guidance. The following table takes it a stage further by outlining the strengths and weaknesses of the key sources. This is something which the non professional user may not know, and so it may be useful to provide some guidance.
Table A3.1 Secondary data sources: strengths and weaknesses
Topic and source Frequency/scale Strengths and Weaknesses
(1) Survey of Annual; national Excellent contextual source on all aspects of housing. Its English Housing : a and regional weakness is that no further cross tabulation is possible wide range of socio (sample c 20,000) and supply and demand issues are not covered. In economic data on addition its scale does not permit accurate analysis at housing SHMA level
(2) English House Annual; national Very good for provision of housing stock numbers at Condition Survey. and regional regional scale; also provides much detail on the ‘decency’ Mainly useful for (sample 10,000) and general state of housing. Not as directly relevant to housing stock housing market analysis as (1) but valuable for the overall evidence. Due to be evidence base combined with (1).
(3) 2001 Census 10 years; available The best source for many background purposes: e.g. at very local areas migration as it shows everyone moving to and from everywhere. It is now somewhat out of date. The main weaknesses for SHMA purposes are that it contains neither financial capacity information (not even income) nor indications of movement intentions. It is therefore of little use in producing plausible modelling of a housing market
(4) General Annual; down to Excellent descriptive source. Of little practical use in Household Survey regional scale SHMA analysis for similar reasons to the Census. It does (GHS). not provide data for individual households containing housing and financial data, essential for modelling housing market behaviour
Page 123 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
(5) NOMIS website Available all the The best ready source for most secondary data; [contains many other time and at many weaknesses are as per the above sources. It does not general data scales provide the analytical inputs to a SHMA process, but much sources] valuable background.
(6) Population Annually updated; They are conveniently detailed, but are not of much direct projections (ONS) regional and use in SHMA analysis, since they are not based on Borough level households (see below)
(7) Household Due to be every 2 Much more useful than population, and a vital background projections (CLG) years; regional and series. The only commonly available projections for 15 20 usually Borough year horizons. The price of this long view is that the data level availability; does not reflect housing markets. Although sometimes annual mid year wrongly referred to as a ‘demand’ forecast, it is not. It is estimates are based on assumptions about household formation drawn produced for from the current socio economic situation. This may Boroughs change both nationally and locally if socio economic situations change (as they normally do. Hence these projections must be treated as ‘guesses’ or ‘policy led’ (i.e. what it is hoped may happen, not as any guide to what the housing market may do).
(8) English Bi annual; national Valuable background source. Useful for health; general Longitudinal economic situation and quality of life. Not of practical Survey of Ageing value for SHMA analysis due to scope and sample size (NCSR)
(9) National Health Quarterly or annual; Extremely useful as it is the best source for migration in Service (NHS) national, regional between the 10 year censuses. Of very limited use for Central Register and Borough checking primary data, unfortunately, as it is biased by the fact that younger men and more mobile people are less likely to register. As it is collected at an individual rather than household level there are further limitations to its use in SHMA analysis.
(10) Inland Annual; regional Valuable as background; very limited usefulness in SHMA Revenue income and Borough work as it is personal (not family) and cannot be correlated data with other information (such as equity and household characteristics)
Page 124 Appendix A3. Updating the findings
(11) Annual Survey Annual; regional The best source for individual income, but it is of Hours and and some Borough employment and individual, not home and household Earnings (ASHE) level data based. Moreover it is not possible to relate the data to housing and other financial data for SHMA analysis.
(12) CORE (U of St Annual; Borough The best source for social rents Andrews
(13) Rightmove Continuous; very By far the best source for both local house prices and (and other similar local rents. It is quicker to scan this than to look at other websites) secondary sources and much more up to date
(14) Land Registry Quarterly; postcode By far the best background source on value of dwellings. It Sales of all sector does not contain information on size of property nor on housing repairs costs, and so it cannot be directly used in SHMA analysis. However it provides the only reliable dynamic source for past price changes
(15) Housing Annual; Borough A good source for current housing at borough level, Strategy Statistical especially figures for the Housing Register and new build Annex (HSSA) CLG affordable housing. It is dependent on forms returned by borough, and is of very variable accuracy. Many boroughs, when approached directly, produce different statistics to the HSSA.
(16) Annual survey Annual; regional The most comprehensive source for overall mortgage of mortgage amounts and types. It does not (and nor do those of lenders particular lenders) provide the full range of financial capacity for the households concerned, and so it cannot be used in SHMA analysis.
(17) Valuation Quarterly; postcode Excellent source, now subject to a charge though; it Office Agency: sector simply provides valuation for the stock of housing and value of properties again cannot be cross tabulated reliably with other data. sold
(18) Council Tax Annual; borough The best source for value of properties in a borough; can Band data (from be rendered of little value if there are wide areas of for boroughs) example low priced housing, all in Band A
(19) Labour Force Quarterly; borough The best source for employment trends; cannot be related Survey ONS usefully to housing market statistics
Page 125 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
(20) Index of 4 5 years; borough Key reference as a general description of the multiple or lower circumstance of the population, with obvious focus on deprivation CLG deprivation (income, health, education, disabilities, barriers to housing.
(21) Economic Regular; regional Forecasts exist (e.g. Oxford Economic Forecasting) in forecasts Treasury and borough considerable detail at borough level showing changes in and commercial types of employment, and migration for decades ahead. sources They are highly speculative, but do provide useful background to an SHMA Source: Annex B to the CLG Practice Guidance (August 2007); and Fordham Research 2008
A3.2 There are many other possible sources, and the list in the Annex is longer than this one. However the other sources are more minor, and are more readily accessed through such sites as NOMIS (by topic).
Page 126 Appendix A4. Long term market balance – results for urban and rural sub areas
Appendix A4. Long-term market balance – results for urban and rural sub-areas
Introduction
A4.1 This appendix presents the results of the long term market balance model (with adjusted assumptions) for Maidstone Town and for the surrounding rural sub area, using area classifications defined by Maidstone Borough Council.
A4.2 These are calculated on the basis of applying the results from the population and household projections shown in Chapter 7 to the existing population and household profile in each sub area. A more localised ‘ideal’ tenure profile is then calculated, and the newbuild required to reach this profile by 2026 is then calculated. The results here are adjusted to the build rates envisaged in the South East Plan, in line with the policy that 90% of new residential properties will be built in the urban area.
A4.3 Inevitably, this policy encourages a substantial proportion of the housing requirements that would otherwise arise in the rural area to be met in the urban area. To take this into account in the model, 80% of the requirement arising in the rural area has been transferred into the urban area.
Limitations
A4.4 This approach has some limitations; in particular there is the issue of whether need should be met where it arises on a local scale, or should be met more broadly over a whole housing market.
A4.5 Clearly it is true that an individual household’s need for housing can only be met within a reasonable distance of their existing employment or social networks. However, attempting to meet all need arising on a very local basis would result in nearly all affordable housing being built in local areas with existing concentrations of low income households, and almost none in other areas, reinforcing existing social and economic divisions within the Borough.
A4.6 In practice therefore, although the results below provide useful background information and highlight particular imbalances, they should not be taken to determine policy. We would recommend setting a single set of Borough wide targets, as outlined in the policy chapter.
A4.7 Separately, it should also be borne in mind that where negative requirements are shown for larger bedroom sizes, some properties of this size can reasonably to cater to households requiring smaller properties; it does not necessarily imply that demolition or subdivision of existing housing is necessary.
Page 127 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Sub-area model outputs: Urban Area
A4.8 The table below shows the results for the urban area of Maidstone, consisting of the town of Maidstone and its suburbs. As can be seen, the proportion of affordable housing suggested by the model is 39.1% of the total, slightly above the level of 38.1% found across the Borough generally. This is largely due to the high proportion of housing need arising in the town. The proportion (although not the total amount) of affordable housing required has been substantially reduced by the transfer of 80% of the rural requirement into the town.
Table A4.1 Tenure of new accommodation: Urban Area*
Tenure Tenure Transfer Total % of Tenure Change profile 2009 profile 2026 from Rural Change change Market 26,221 28,050 +1,830 +2,199 +4,029 60.9% Intermediate 536 1,382 +846 +332 +1,178 17.8% Social rented 5,989 6,800 +811 +600 +1,411 21.3% Total 32,745 36,232 +3,487 +3,131 +6,618 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excludes sheltered housing
A4.9 The profile of sizes required in the town, shown below, finds some interesting trends. Prior to the transfer of the rural requirement, the model suggests a negative demand for small market properties within the town. However, there remains a requirement for one bedroom affordable housing, although very little for two bedroom properties.
A4.10 This closely reflects the findings from the stakeholder consultation (see Appendix A5), where there was agreement that there was an excess of one bedroom properties, but with some stakeholders (particularly those dealing with vulnerable groups such as the homeless) suggesting that this oversupply did not apply to the social rented sector.
Page 128 Appendix A4. Long term market balance – results for urban and rural sub areas
Figure A4.1 Profile of accommodation: Urban: locally arising requirement only Tenure split Size and type profile
811, 23% 2 bed 47 4 bed 444 1 bed 188 3 bed 1,622 1,830, 53%
846, 24% 2 bed 19 1 bed 489 3 bed 663 4 bed 488 Affordable size* Market size Market Intermediate Social rented 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * includes both social rent and intermediate housing
A4.11 After the transfer of the rural requirement, there is a small overall long term requirement for one bedroom market properties, but the model continues to recommend that the majority of newbuild market housing in the area (64.7%) should have three bedrooms, and most of the remainder four bedrooms.
A4.12 In contrast, in the affordable sector all sizes of housing are clearly represented, although the majority of the requirement (60.9%) is for three and four bedroom housing.
Figure A4.2 Profile of accommodation: Urban: total after transfer of rural requirement Tenure split Size and type profile
1,434, 21% 2 bed 92 1 bed 224 4 bed 1,105 3 bed 2,607
973, 14% 4,400, 65% 2 bed 458 1 bed 554 4 bed 494 3 bed 1,084 Affordable size* Market size Market Intermediate Social rented 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * includes both social rent and intermediate housing
Page 129 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Sub-area model outputs: Maidstone Rural
A4.13 The table below shows the results for the rural sub areas of Maidstone Borough. Overall the requirement here for affordable housing is relatively low, at just 29.8%. As shown, 80% of the requirement for housing is transferred to the urban area, but since requirements for all types of property are transferred equally, this does not affect the overall proportions of different types of housing required in the rural area.
Table A4.2 Tenure of new accommodation: Rural Area*
Tenure Tenure Transfer to Total % of Tenure Change profile 2009 profile 2026 Urban Change change Market 24,928 27,677 +2,749 −2,199 +550 70.2% Intermediate 256 671 +415 −332 +83 10.6% Social rented 1,683 2,433 +750 −600 +150 19.2% Total 26,868 30,782 +3,914 −3,131 +783 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * excludes sheltered housing
A4.14 As shown below, the model recommends that almost all market housing in the rural area (74.9%) should have three or four bedrooms. Unlike in the urban area, there is a significant (18.8%) requirement for one bedroom housing, reflecting the fact that relatively few small flats have been built in the rural sub area compared to in the town of Maidstone.
A4.15 The requirement for affordable housing is substantially different to that for market housing, with the model indicating that 92.1% of newbuild should have two or three bedrooms, and very little with one or four bedrooms.
Figure A4.3 Profile of accommodation: Maidstone Rural: locally arising requirement Tenure split Size and type profile
750, 19% 4 bed 827 1 bed 516 2 bed 174 415, 3 bed 1,232 11%
2,749, 70% 4 bed 9 1 bed 81 3 bed 527 2 bed 547 Affordable size* Market size Market Intermediate Social rented 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * includes both social rent and intermediate housing
Page 130 Appendix A4. Long term market balance – results for urban and rural sub areas
Figure A4.4 Profile of accommodation: Maidstone Rural: after transfer of requirements to urban area Tenure split Size and type profile
150, 19% 2 bed 35 4 bed 165 3 bed 246 1 bed 103
83, 11%
550, 70% 4 bed 2 1 bed 16 2 bed 109 3 bed 106 Affordable size* Market size Market Intermediate Social rented 25% 0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009 * includes both social rent and intermediate housing
Page 131 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Page 132 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
Appendix A5. Sub-area profiles
Introduction
A5.1 This summary provides a more detailed description of each of the five sub areas of Maidstone Borough. It uses data from the household survey to show the geographical differences of the Borough. The five sub areas used are shown on the map below. At the end of the chapter there is a summary of the rural area as a whole (which comprises the three rural sub areas).
Figure A5.1 Sub-areas of Maidstone Borough used for analysis
Source: Maidstone Borough Council, Fordham Research 2010
Central Maidstone
A5.2 This sub area covers only the central part of the town of Maidstone, broadly within walking distance of the centre, and is considered separately due to its differing characteristics, specifically its urban rather than suburban nature.
Page 133 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Household profile
A5.3 The table below shows key statistics for the Central Maidstone sub area compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. This area has a distinctive tenure composition, with a much smaller proportion of owner occupation, at 48.6% compared to the Borough average of 72.4%. The single largest tenure is private renting, which contains nearly a third of households (31.1%), compared to just 13.3% in the Borough as a whole.
A5.4 In terms of the type of households living within Central Maidstone, the sub area has a much larger proportion of non pensioner households without children (61.5%) than Maidstone Borough as a whole (47.5%) but a lower proportion of all other household types except lone parent families. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing in the sub area (9.1%) is considerably higher than the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). The level of overcrowding in the sub area at 2.0% compares to 1.9% across Maidstone Borough.
A5.5 Households in Central Maidstone are slightly more likely to contain an employed person than Maidstone Borough as a whole, as might be expected given the high proportion of households containing only people of working age. However, the proportion of households classified as unemployed is also higher, at 8.7% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 59.5% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough, 5.4% work from home, and 9.7% work in London.
A5.6 Households in Central Maidstone sub area are more likely than households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs. Further analysis of support need households in the sub area reveals that 696 (47.6%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 438 (29.9%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.7 The table below indicates that 36.3% of households in the Central Maidstone sub area need or expect to move home in the next two years, a very high proportion compared to the average of 20.3% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The rate of new household formation, at 5.9%, is also higher than the Borough average (5.5%).
Page 134 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
Table A5.1 Key statistics: Central Maidstone sub-area
Central Maidstone Central Maidstone
Maidstone Borough Maidstone Borough Tenure Total number of households 8,270 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 20.8% 41.5% Average household size 1.97 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 27.8% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 0.97 1.35 Social rented 20.4% 14.3% per household Private rented 31.1% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 9.1% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 12.8% 14.0% Households containing someone 68.3% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 5.3% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 30.7% 15.1% Older person only households 18.1% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 30.8% 32.4% Lone parent 8.6% 5.2% Households containing a person 17.7% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 5.3% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 6.6% 11.9% Households containing a key 20.8% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 5.6% 28.8% Proportion of households 36.3% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 49.3% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (3,004) (12,489) Flat 45.1% 16.8% * of which bungalows 1.6% 12.2% Number of households forming 983 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (5.9%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 2.0% 1.9% Under-occupied 18.1% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 2.23 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Financial situation of households in the Central Maidstone sub-area
A5.8 The table below presents the financial situation of households in the Central Maidstone sub area. The table indicates that households in the sub area record a median income slightly below the Borough wide level and a median savings level well below the figure for Maidstone Borough. The median equity of owner occupiers is £114,484 in the Central Maidstone compared to the Borough average of £183,245.
Table A5.2 Financial profile of households in the Central Maidstone sub-area
Central Maidstone Maidstone Borough Median household income £22,743 £23,949 Median savings £729 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £114,484 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 135 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A5.9 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 36.3% of households in the Central Maidstone sub area would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in Central Maidstone sub-area
A5.10 The table below shows the extent of housing need in the Central Maidstone sub area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the sub area are adequately housed, with an estimated 599 households in need of affordable housing each year in the sub area.
Table A5.3 Estimated gross need (per annum) in the Central Maidstone
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Central Maidstone 599 8,270 7.2% 32.0% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Maidstone Town
A5.11 This sub area covers the majority of the town of Maidstone. It should be noted that the area considered here excludes the Central Maidstone area examined in the previous section, and therefore is predominantly suburban in character.
Household profile
A5.12 The table below shows key statistics for Maidstone Town sub area compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. The tenure composition of the stock in the area is close to the Borough average, although with a higher proportion of social renting, at 19.3% compared to the Borough average of 14.3%, and a smaller proportion of private renting, at 9.3% compared to 13.3%.
A5.13 In terms of the type of households living in Maidstone Town, the sub area is again fairly typical of the Borough, although the proportion of households containing children, at 30.2%, is above the Borough average of 26.4%. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing in the sub area (7.5%) is slightly higher than the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). The level of overcrowding in the sub area at 2.8% compares to 1.9% across Maidstone Borough.
A5.14 Households in Maidstone Town are slightly less likely to contain an employed person than Maidstone Borough as a whole. In line with this finding, the proportion of households classified as unemployed is slightly higher, at 4.4% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 49.5% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough, 7.7% work from home, and 9.4% work in London.
Page 136 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
A5.15 Households in the Maidstone Town sub area are more likely than households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs. Further analysis of support need households in the sub area reveals that 2,583 (49.2%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 1,803 (34.3%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.16 The table below indicates that 19.9% of households in the Maidstone Town sub area need or expect to move home in the next two years, similar to the average of 20.3% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The rate of new household formation, at 5.1%, is also slightly lower than the Borough average (5.5%).
Table A5.4 Key statistics: Maidstone Town sub-area
Maidstone Maidstone Maidstone Maidstone
Town Borough Town Borough Tenure Total number of households 25,622 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 39.9% 41.5% Average household size 2.37 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 31.5% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 1.28 1.35 Social rented 19.3% 14.3% per household Private rented 9.3% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 7.5% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 11.9% 14.0% Households containing someone 63.3% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 12.2% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 14.1% 15.1% Older person only households 24.1% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 31.5% 32.4% Lone parent 6.5% 5.2% Households containing a person 20.5% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 11.0% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 12.7% 11.9% Households containing a key 19.3% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 22.7% 28.8% Proportion of households 19.9% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 59.6% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (5,095) (12,489) Flat 17.7% 16.8% * of which bungalows 10.2% 12.2% Number of households forming 2,610 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (5.1%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 2.8% 1.9% Under-occupied 40.1% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 2.80 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Financial situation of households in Maidstone Town sub-area
A5.17 The table below presents the financial situation of households in Maidstone Town sub area. The table indicates that households in the sub area record a median income well above the Borough wide level but a median savings level well below the figure for Maidstone Borough. The median equity of owner occupiers is £177,550 in Maidstone Town compared to the Borough average of £183,245.
Page 137 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A5.5 Financial profile of households in Maidstone Town sub-area
Maidstone Town Maidstone Borough Median household income £36,857 £23,949 Median savings £183 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £177,550 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A5.18 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 15.1% of households in the Maidstone Town sub area would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in Maidstone Town sub-area
A5.19 The table below shows the extent of housing need in Maidstone Town sub area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the sub area are adequately housed, with an estimated 624 households in need of affordable housing each year in the sub area.
Table A5.6 Estimated gross need (per annum) in Maidstone Town sub-area
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Maidstone Town 624 25,622 2.4% 33.4% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Rural North East
A5.20 This sub area covers much of the North of the Borough, traversed by the North Downs, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The majority of the population of this sub area is found along the southern and northern edges of the sub area, either side of the range of hills.
Household profile
A5.21 The table below shows key statistics for the Rural North East sub area compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. The key difference in terms of tenure between this area and the Borough as a whole is the small proportion of social rented property, at just 5.2% compared to the Borough average of 14.3%. A total of 80.0% of all dwellings in the area are owner occupied, with nearly half of households being owner occupiers without a mortgage.
Page 138 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
A5.22 In terms of the type of households living within the Rural North East, the sub area has a larger proportion of two parent families with two or more children (17.0%) than Maidstone Borough as a whole (11.9%) but otherwise is close to the Borough averages. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing in the sub area (3.5%) is considerably lower than the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). The level of overcrowding in the sub area at just 0.5% compares to 1.9% across Maidstone Borough.
A5.23 Households in the Rural North East are more likely to contain an employed person than Maidstone Borough as a whole. The proportion of households classified as unemployed is considerably lower, at 2.5% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 33.1% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough (the lowest proportion of any sub area), 6.2% work from home, and 15.2% work in London.
A5.24 Households in the Rural North East sub area are considerably less likely than households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs. Further analysis of support need households in the sub area reveals that 282 (47.2%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 277 (46.4%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.25 The table below indicates that 16.6% of households in the Rural North East sub area need or expect to move home in the next two years, a relatively low proportion compared to the average of 20.3% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. However, the rate of new household formation, at 8.1%, is much higher than the Borough average (5.5%).
Page 139 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A5.7 Key statistics: Rural North East sub-area
Rural North Maidstone Rural North Maidstone
East Borough East Borough Tenure Total number of households 5,379 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 46.7% 41.5% Average household size 2.28 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 33.3% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 1.70 1.35 Social rented 5.2% 14.3% per household Private rented 14.7% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 3.5% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 11.9% 14.0% Households containing someone 70.3% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 10.2% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 15.0% 15.1% Older person only households 22.0% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 36.8% 32.4% Lone parent 2.9% 5.2% Households containing a person 11.1% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 6.1% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 17.0% 11.9% Households containing a key 21.1% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 59.0% 28.8% Proportion of households 16.6% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 38.0% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (895) (12,489) Flat 3.0% 16.8% * of which bungalows 14.4% 12.2% Number of households forming 869 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (8.1%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 0.5% 1.9% Under-occupied 49.1% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 3.17 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Financial situation of households in the Rural North East sub-area
A5.26 The table below presents the financial situation of households in the Rural North East sub area. The table indicates that households in the sub area record a median income well above the Borough wide level and a median savings level also above the figure for Maidstone Borough. The median equity of owner occupiers is £243,071 in the Rural North East compared to the Borough average of £183,245.
Table A5.8 Financial profile of households in the Rural North East sub-area
Rural North East Maidstone Borough Median household income £33,340 £23,949 Median savings £9,850 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £243,071 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 140 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
A5.27 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 14.7% of households in the Rural North East would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in the Rural North East sub-area
A5.28 The table below shows the extent of housing need in the Rural North East sub area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the sub area are adequately housed, with an estimated 103 households in need of affordable housing each year in the sub area.
Table A5.9 Estimated gross need (per annum) in the Rural North East sub-area
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Rural North East 103 5,379 1.9% 5.5% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Rural East
A5.29 This sub area covers the eastern and central part of the Borough of Maidstone, including the settlements of Headcorn, Lenham and Bearsted. The sub area has strong transport links, including railway links to London and, in the north, access to the M20 motorway.
Household profile
A5.30 The table below shows key statistics for the Rural East sub area compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. A total of 83.5% of properties in this area are owner occupied, compared to 72.4% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The proportion of social rented dwellings, at 7.0%, is less than half the Borough average (14.3%).
A5.31 In terms of the type of households living in the Rural East sub area, there are a much larger proportion of pensioner households (32.8%) than found in Maidstone Borough as a whole (26.1%), but a lower proportion of single non pensioner households and lone parent families. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing in the sub area (2.5%) is much lower than the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). No respondents to the survey in the area lived in overcrowded dwellings, compared to a Borough average of 1.9%.
Page 141 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A5.32 Households in the Rural East are slightly less likely to contain an employed person than Maidstone Borough as a whole, as might be expected given the high proportion pensioner households. The proportion of households classified as unemployed is far lower than average, at just 1.6% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 45.0% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough, 8.8% work from home, and 11.0% work in London.
A5.33 Households in Rural East sub area are less likely than households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs, despite the higher proportion of older person households. Further analysis of support need households in the sub area reveals that 672 (53.3%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 476 (37.8%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.34 The table below indicates that 17.4% of households in the Rural East sub area need or expect to move home in the next two years, a little lower than the average of 20.3% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The rate of new household formation, at 5.7%, is also similar to the Borough average (5.5%).
Table A5.10 Key statistics: Rural East sub-area
Maidstone Maidstone Rural East Rural East Borough Borough Tenure Total number of households 10,774 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 47.9% 41.5% Average household size 2.34 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 35.6% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 1.51 1.35 Social rented 7.0% 14.3% per household Private rented 9.4% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 2.5% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 17.0% 14.0% Households containing someone 62.9% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 15.8% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 10.2% 15.1% Older person only households 32.7% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 33.3% 32.4% Lone parent 2.2% 5.2% Households containing a person 11.7% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 9.5% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 12.0% 11.9% Households containing a key 21.8% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 40.1% 28.8% Proportion of households 17.4% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 53.7% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (1,884) (12,489) Flat 6.2% 16.8% * of which bungalows 17.5% 12.2% Number of households forming 1,222 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (5.7%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 0.0% 1.9% Under-occupied 46.7% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 3.01 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 142 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
Financial situation of households in the Rural East sub-area
A5.35 The table below presents the financial situation of households in the Rural East sub area. The table indicates that households in the sub area record a median income well above the Borough wide level and similarly a median savings level well above that for Maidstone Borough. The median equity of owner occupiers is £206,126 in the Rural East compared to the Borough average of £183,245.
Table A5.11 Financial profile of households in the Rural East sub-area
Rural East Maidstone Borough Median household income £30,047 £23,949 Median savings £8,620 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £206,126 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A5.36 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 14.7% of households in the Rural East sub area would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in the Rural East sub-area
A5.37 The table below shows the extent of housing need in the Rural East sub area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the sub area are adequately housed, with an estimated 102 households in need of affordable housing each year in the sub area.
Table A5.12 Estimated gross need (per annum) in the Rural East sub-area
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Rural East 102 10,774 0.9% 5.5% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Rural South
A5.38 This sub area covers the southern and south western parts of the Borough of Maidstone, including the settlements of Staplehurst, Marden, Claygate and Yalding.
Page 143 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Household profile
A5.39 The table below shows key statistics for the Rural South sub area compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. This area has a tenure composition close to the Borough average, with only a slightly higher proportion of owner occupation, at 77.6% compared to the Borough average of 72.4%. There are fewer social rented dwellings than average, at 10.0% of the stock compared to 14.3% across the Borough.
A5.40 In terms of the type of households living in the Rural South sub area, the sub area has a larger proportion of pensioner households than Maidstone Borough as a whole (32.0% compared to 26.1%) and a lower proportion of single non pensioner households. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing in the sub area (6.8%) is close to the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). The level of overcrowding in the sub area at 2.5% is slightly above the 1.9% found across Maidstone Borough.
A5.41 Households in the Rural South sub area are slightly less likely to contain an employed person than Maidstone Borough as a whole, as might be expected given the high proportion of households containing people of retirement age or above. The proportion of households classified as unemployed remains lower than average, at 2.2% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 42.2% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough, 10.9% work from home, and 11.1% work in London.
A5.42 Households in the Rural South sub area are about equally as likely as households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs. Further analysis of support need households in the sub area reveals that 881 (46.6%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 907 (48.0%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.43 The table below indicates that 14.1% of households in the Rural South sub area need or expect to move home in the next two years, considerably below the average of 20.3% found in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The rate of new household formation, at 4.8%, is also lower than the Borough average (5.5%).
Page 144 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
Table A5.13 Key statistics: Rural South sub-area
Maidstone Maidstone Rural South Rural South Borough Borough Tenure Total number of households 11,415 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 51.3% 41.5% Average household size 2.38 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 26.3% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 1.48 1.35 Social rented 10.0% 14.3% per household Private rented 12.3% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 6.8% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 17.8% 14.0% Households containing someone 61.6% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 14.2% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 10.5% 15.1% Older person only households 32.0% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 32.8% 32.4% Lone parent 3.7% 5.2% Households containing a person 16.6% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 9.8% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 11.2% 11.9% Households containing a key 21.3% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 36.9% 28.8% Proportion of households 14.1% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 54.9% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (1,611) (12,489) Flat 8.2% 16.8% * of which bungalows 14.5% 12.2% Number of households forming 1,098 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (4.8%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 2.5% 1.9% Under-occupied 42.4% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 2.98 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Financial situation of households in the Rural South sub-area
A5.44 The table below presents the financial situation of households in the Rural South sub area. The table indicates that households in the sub area record a median income slightly below the Borough wide level but a median savings level well above the figure for Maidstone Borough. This would be consistent with a large population of retired households. The median equity of owner occupiers is £212,331 in the Rural South sub area compared to the Borough average of £183,245.
Table A5.14 Financial profile of households in the Rural South sub-area
Rural South Maidstone Borough Median household income £22,979 £23,949 Median savings £7,044 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £212,331 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 145 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A5.45 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 22.1% of households in the Rural South sub area would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in the Rural South sub-area
A5.46 The table below shows the extent of housing need in the Rural South sub area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the sub area are adequately housed, with an estimated 442 households in need of affordable housing each year in the sub area.
Table A5.15 Estimated gross need (per annum) in the Rural South sub-area
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Rural South 442 11,415 3.9% 23.6% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Rural Maidstone
A5.47 Rural Maidstone combines the three rural sub areas in the Borough: Rural North East, Rural East and Rural South.
Household profile
A5.48 The table below shows key statistics for Rural Maidstone compared to the figures for Maidstone Borough as a whole. This area has a lower proportion of households living in social rented accommodation (7.9%) than the Borough as a whole (14.3%) and higher proportion of owner occupiers, at 80.4% compared to the Borough average of 72.4%. The proportion of private rented households is similar to the Borough wide proportion.
A5.49 In terms of the type of households living within Rural Maidstone, the area has a larger proportion of pensioner households (30.3%) than Maidstone Borough as a whole (26.1%) but a lower proportion of lone parent and single non pensioner households. The proportion of households in unsuitable housing (4.5%) is lower than the average for the whole Borough (6.4%). The level of overcrowding at 1.1% compares to 1.9% across Maidstone Borough.
A5.50 Households in Rural Maidstone are almost as likely to contain an employed person as households across Maidstone Borough as a whole. The proportion of households classified as unemployed is lower than the Borough average, at 2.0% compared to 3.9%. Further analysis of the data reveals that 41.2% of employed household heads work within Maidstone Borough, 9.0% work from home, and 12.0% work in London.
Page 146 Appendix A5. Sub area profiles
A5.51 Households in Rural Maidstone are less likely than households in the Borough as a whole to contain a member with support needs. Further analysis of support need households in the area reveals that 1,834 (48.9%) require some form of adaptation to their home and 1,660 (44.3%) require additional services to help them manage in the home.
A5.52 The table below indicates that 15.9% of households in Rural Maidstone need or expect to move home in the next two years, lower than the average of 20.3% in Maidstone Borough as a whole. The rate of new household formation, at 5.8%, is slightly higher than the Borough average (5.5%).
Table A5.16 Key statistics: Rural Maidstone
Rural Maidstone Rural Maidstone
Maidstone Borough Maidstone Borough Tenure Total number of households 27,569 61,460 Owner-occupied (no mortgage) 49.1% 41.5% Average household size 2.38 2.32 Owner-occupied (with mortgage) 31.3% 30.9% Average number of cars/vans 1.54 1.35 Social rented 7.9% 14.3% per household Private rented 11.7% 13.3% Households in unsuitable 4.5% 6.4% Household Type housing Single pensioner 16.3% 14.0% Households containing someone 63.8% 64.2% 2+ pensioners 14.0% 12.1% in employment Single non-pensioner 11.3% 15.1% Older person only households 30.4% 26.1% 2+ adults, no children 33.8% 32.4% Lone parent 3.0% 5.2% Households containing a person 13.6% 17.0% 2+ adults, 1 child 9.0% 9.3% with support needs 2+ adults, 2+ children 12.6% 11.9% Households containing a key 21.5% 20.5% Accommodation type worker Detached* 42.5% 28.8% Proportion of households 15.9% 20.3% Semi-detached/Terraced* 51.1% 54.4% moving in the next 2 years (number of households moving) (4,389) (12,489) Flat 6.4% 16.8% * of which bungalows 15.8% 12.2% Number of households forming 3,189 6,782 Overcrowding in the next 2 years (household formation rate) (5.8%) (5.5%) Overcrowded 1.1% 1.9% Under-occupied 45.4% 39.5% Average number of bedrooms 3.67 2.83 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Financial situation of households in Rural Maidstone
A5.53 The table below presents the financial situation of households in Rural Maidstone. The table indicates that households in the area record median income and savings levels above the equivalent figures for Maidstone Borough. The median equity of owner occupiers is £214,699 in Rural Maidstone is also higher than the Borough average of £183,245.
Page 147 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Table A5.17 Financial profile of households in Rural Maidstone
Rural Maidstone Maidstone Borough Median household income £26,711 £23,949 Median savings £8,061 £4,021 Median equity of owner occupiers £214,699 £183,245 Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
A5.54 Using information on the financial situation of households alongside the cost of market accommodation in the Borough (presented in the main report) it is possible to examine the ability of households to afford housing in Maidstone Borough. Overall some 17.7% of households in Rural Maidstone would be unable to afford market accommodation of a suitable size in Maidstone Borough if they were to move home now. This compares with 23.9% of all households in the Borough.
Extent of housing need in Rural Maidstone
A5.55 The table below shows the extent of housing need in the Rural Maidstone area following the CLG housing needs assessment model set out in the Practice Guidance. The table shows that most households in the area are adequately housed, with an estimated 647 households in need of affordable housing each year in Rural Maidstone.
Table A5.18 Estimated gross need (per annum) in Rural Maidstone
No. of h’holds in Total no. of % of h’holds in As a % of all Area need (gross) households need h’holds in need Rural Maidstone 647 27,569 2.3% 34.6% Maidstone Borough 1,870 61,460 3.0% 100.0% Source: Maidstone Borough household survey, Fordham Research 2009
Page 148 Appendix A6. Stakeholder Consultation
Appendix A6. Stakeholder Consultation
Introduction
A6.1 This appendix summarises the consultation with stakeholders which took place in the production of this SHMA report. It should be noted that input provided by stakeholders, while summarised below, is also referenced throughout the report where appropriate.
A6.2 Throughout the project, there were a number of opportunities for stakeholder input. These include:
• September 2009 presentation to the Council’s multi disciplinary Housing Sounding Board, where information on the SHMA was disseminated and attendees were given the opportunity to express their views on the nature of the housing market. • December 2009 consultation was expanded to include additional RSL partners and those on the SHLAA (Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment) Liaison Group, with these and the Housing Sounding Board being asked via e mail their perspective on issues such as the housing markets of the Borough, opportunities and challenges faced by different sectors of society with regard to housing. • January 2010 – presentation of draft SHMA report findings, including a discussion of these initial outcomes, of any queries or areas for further research the stakeholders felt would be valuable. In addition, the presentation was sent round to all stakeholders, including those unable to attend the event, with an invitation to provide written feedback. • March 2010 – presentation of final findings of the SHMA to stakeholders.
Summary of e-mail consultation responses (December 2009)
What are the challenges / opportunities in your housing market, including affordable housing?
A6.3 Respondents from RSLs drew attention particularly to the financial difficulties currently affecting the market, which both made it more difficult to supply affordable housing and simultaneously increased demand for it from households whose financial situation had worsened. All stakeholders who commented on the issue agreed that there was a current difficulty in delivering additional affordable housing, and indeed housing generally. Some stakeholders suggested this was having an impact in terms of homelessness. Multiple stakeholders believed that because public funding was likely to decrease in the near future, there would be increased difficulties in providing affordable housing, and also in funding the maintenance of existing housing.
Page 149 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A6.4 The key mechanisms preventing the delivery of new affordable housing were thought to be through the decline in viability of open market provision and therefore in delivery of affordable housing via section 106; RSLs also cited the lack of availability of direct finance, particularly for new supported housing, and continuing high land values. Even though the downturn has brought opportunities to buy private sector properties that are no longer saleable, some RSLs felt they were not able to take full advantage due to their own exposure to the losses in the housing market via their shared equity stock.
A6.5 A developer suggested that the main prospect of restarting the provision of housing was to get away from the model of providing housing on previously developed land in urbanised areas, and toward provision on green field sites, which were more viable and could provide a wider mix of housing. Another suggested that gaining planning approval for new developments in the Borough took too long, resulting in excessive delays in supply. However, another stakeholder (a land agent) suggested that the key reason for the lack of supply in the housing market locally was not newbuild policy, but that those selling properties second hand were continuing to wait before selling in expectation of a market recovery, causing a knock on effect of a lack of supply and demand right across the market.
Which household groups are most marginalised from the housing market?
A6.6 Stakeholders suggested a variety of groups as being marginalised from the market, principally those on lower incomes. Many stakeholders, both developers and Housing Associations, highlighted the shortage of housing for families; however those stakeholders with remits focusing on acute need (e.g. providers of homelessness services, supported housing) tended to highlight a shortage of social housing for single people.
A6.7 It was also suggested by some that retired and elderly households were increasingly marginalised from the market, as well as those younger adult households with support needs.
What sort of housing is most acutely required in Maidstone Borough and why?
A6.8 Many stakeholders felt that family housing should be the priority, including RSLs and developers. Both developers and some RSLs felt policy had favoured small dwellings excessively in recent years, due to for example policies requiring high density development and use of brownfield sites. Developers were particularly keen to promote mixed developments with a wide range of housing types, believing that the great uncertainty in the market made these the best type of development. However, they felt that this was not possible on sites in inner urban areas where high density development was expected. They therefore suggested that a policy change to allow more greenfield sites to be developed would be required to realise this aim.
Page 150 Appendix A6. Stakeholder Consultation
A6.9 There were dissenting views, however: one RSL suggested that the need for larger social rented properties had been partly addressed in recent years, at least in relative terms (the overall number of social rented homes had, however, fallen significantly due to Right to Buy), and that the balance had shifted so that there was a greater shortage of smaller properties. Other stakeholders were concerned that not enough supported and older person housing was being provided to meet need. Two stakeholders highlighted rural affordable housing as an issue, although there was concern from one RSL that there should not be excessive provision of social housing in areas with few amenities or without public transport.
What different housing markets exist in the Borough, if any, and where?
A6.10 Those stakeholders with an opinion on this issue generally agreed that there was an urban/rural split, although some drew a distinction between the rural/urban fringe suburbs of Maidstone and other rural areas well away from the urban area. Developers highlighted a split within the rural area, principally between settlements with nearby access to rail services to London and the rest of the rural area. The Headcorn, Staplehurst and Lenham area was considered to be significantly different from the rest of the Borough in character by multiple stakeholders.
A6.11 One stakeholder highlighted that the housing markets in the Borough were very diverse and difficult to classify; even within urban areas standards of living vary dramatically.
Is there an oversupply of flats in the Central Maidstone?
A6.12 Almost all stakeholders agreed there was a significant oversupply. Developers felt this would inevitably continue unless more greenfield sites suitable for other types of housing were made available.
A6.13 However, two RSL stakeholders stated that the oversupply applied principally to market housing, rather than social housing, and that it was still difficult for single low income people to find appropriate housing in many parts of the Borough.
What are the key sectors/locations for Maidstone Borough’s economic growth and how can new housing provision assist this growth?
A6.14 Some stakeholders highlighted road infrastructure as a means of attracting employment, in particular improving access to the M20 for the south of Maidstone. The recent increase in rail capacity to Kent was also felt to be an opportunity to promote Maidstone as a location for employment development. One stakeholder highlighted that Maidstone needed a strong retail centre in order to continue to attract people and employers.
A6.15 In terms of housing, developers felt that Maidstone Borough could best attract professional people to the town by building a variety of housing types, requiring greenfield development; however some RSLs would prefer to focus on attracting these types of households to existing urban regeneration areas.
Page 151 Maidstone Strategic Housing Market Assessment
A6.16 Stakeholders who mentioned the issue generally agreed that attracting affluent households from other parts of the South East was desirable, although some sounded a note of caution, suggesting that new residential development, particularly in rural areas, needed to avoid catering excessively to long distance commuters. One developer felt that the key method of combating this would be to release land for an equivalent scale of commercial and/or industrial developments; another stakeholder suggested that housing developments had to fit the needs of existing local people as well as newcomers to the area.
What other questions or issues should be considered (if not already mentioned)?
A6.17 One stakeholder suggested there was an urgent need for additional provision to be made for elderly households to stay in their home villages through suitable sheltered accommodation, rather than being removed from their support networks to live in larger towns due to a lack of suitable housing. However, it should not be assumed that older people all have the same needs and preferences.
Summary of written responses to draft report presentation (January/February 2010)
A6.18 One stakeholder felt that there was lack of supported housing available for people with medium to high support needs across West Kent, and was interested to see how the Council would work with local landlords and developers to encourage them to free up/build more properties for those people on low income, especially single homeless people.
A6.19 The conclusions of this SHMA identify that a mix of both tenures and dwelling sizes are required. One stakeholder emphasised the importance of monitoring to ensure that the correct type and size of housing is being delivered in the correct locations, and suggested that an indicator could be added to the Annual Monitoring Report to give a quick reference to how housing delivery is performing against the other recommendations of the SHMA.
A6.20 One stakeholder, the University for the Creative Arts (UCA), provided some information on the housing needs of their students. This is discussed in more detail in the latter part of Chapter 8.
Page 152