VIEWS: 12 PAGES: 78 POSTED ON: 7/17/2011
Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 CONTENTS 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................3 1.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................3 1.2 SURVEY RESPONSE .......................................................................................................................................4 1.3 BASINGSTOKE & DEANE HOUSING MARKET ................................................................................................4 1.4 CURRENT HOUSING IN BASINGSTOKE & DEANE ...........................................................................................5 1.5 FUTURE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ...............................................................................................................5 1.6 SINGLE PEOPLE .............................................................................................................................................6 1.7 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS .............................................................................................................................7 1.8 POPULATION GROWTH AND HOUSEHOLD FORMATION ................................................................................8 1.9 CONCLUSIONS ..............................................................................................................................................8 1.10 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................................10 2 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................12 2.1 PURPOSE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES ..............................................................................................................12 2.2 DEFINITIONS ...............................................................................................................................................12 2.3 METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................................................................13 2.4 SAMPLING...................................................................................................................................................14 2.5 PROMOTION ................................................................................................................................................15 2.6 RESPONSE RATE .........................................................................................................................................15 2.7 REPORT STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................................16 3 THE BASINGSTOKE & DEANE BOROUGH HOUSING MARKET ..................................................17 3.1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................17 3.2 NATIONAL PICTURE ....................................................................................................................................17 3.3 REGIONAL PICTURE ....................................................................................................................................17 3.4 THE HOUSING MARKET ..............................................................................................................................18 3.5 CAN „CONCEALED‟ HOUSEHOLDS AFFORD TO BE IN THE MARKET? ...........................................................19 3.6 CONCEALED HOUSEHOLDS‟ ACCESS TO THE MARKET ...............................................................................19 3.7 THE PRIVATE RENTED SECTOR ...................................................................................................................21 3.8 CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................22 4 CURRENT HOUSING IN THE BOROUGH ............................................................................................23 4.1 TENURE, TYPE AND AMENITIES ..................................................................................................................23 4.2 ADEQUACY OF PRESENT DWELLING / IMPROVEMENT REQUIRED ...............................................................27 4.3 HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION AND HOUSEHOLD PROFILE ..............................................................................31 4.4 COSTS OF PRESENT HOUSING AND INCOME ................................................................................................37 4.5 CAR AVAILABILITY ....................................................................................................................................40 4.6 RECENT MOVEMENT OF EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS .......................................................................................41 5 FUTURE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................42 5.1 MOVING HOUSEHOLDS ...............................................................................................................................42 5.2 HOUSING NEEDS OF EXISTING HOUSEHOLDS MOVING WITHIN THE BOROUGH ..........................................45 5.3 HOUSING NEEDS OF NEW / CONCEALED HOUSEHOLDS MOVING WITHIN THE BOROUGH...................................49 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS .....................................................................................................................57 6.1 NEEDS OF DISABLED PEOPLE ......................................................................................................................57 6.2 SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION AND HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE ...........................................................61 7 POPULATION GROWTH AND HOUSEHOLD FORMATION PROJECTIONS ..............................63 7.1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................................................................63 7.2 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ..........................................................................................................................64 7.3 POPULATION PROJECTIONS .........................................................................................................................65 7.4 AGE STRUCTURE FORECAST 1996 - 2011 ...................................................................................................65 7.5 FORECAST CHANGE IN HOUSEHOLDS 1996-2011 .......................................................................................66 7.6 SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................67 1 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8 NEEDS ASSESSMENT MODEL, PLANNING & DELIVERY ..............................................................68 8.1 AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS REQUIREMENT...........................................................................................68 8.2 CONCEALED HOUSEHOLDS AND HOUSING NEED ........................................................................................70 8.3 CONCEALED HOUSEHOLDS‟ ACCESS TO THE MARKET ...............................................................................70 8.4 LAND AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING DELIVERY ...........................................................................................72 8.5 PLANNING POLICIES FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.......................................................................................72 8.6 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ..............................................................................................................................73 8.7 LOW COST MARKET HOUSING....................................................................................................................74 8.8 SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING ...........................................................................................................................74 8.9 AFFORDABLE HOUSING NEEDS REQUIREMENT 2000 - 2006 .......................................................................75 8.10 OVERALL TARGET LEVELS ......................................................................................................................75 8.11 NEEDS DISTRIBUTION BY SUB-AREA .......................................................................................................76 8.12 LOCATION DEMAND ANALYSIS................................................................................................................76 2 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 Introduction 1.1.1 Government guidance on housing and planning has emphasised the requirement for local authorities to assess housing need, create complementary strategies to address it and to co-ordinate effort in a corporate approach to their strategic and enabling role. In January 2001 Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council commissioned DCA to carry out a detailed Borough-wide assessment and projection of housing need as the basic building block in informing housing, planning and care strategies for the future. 1.1.2 The assessment process has been conducted to ensure that it is rigorous and able to withstand scrutiny, as outlined in Circular 6/98 and in the Revision of Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 issued in March 2000. It also complies with the Good Practice guidance from DETR on local housing needs assessment. 1.1.3 The key aims of the study were:- to determine the levels of housing supply and demand in the Borough; to support the annual HIP bid; to provide robust information at a ward level in accordance with PPG3, to guide the location of new provision and development of the Housing Strategy; to support Local Plan Policies. 1.1.4 The objectives were:- to determine the levels of housing demand and supply in the Borough and furthermore determine the extent of the annual supply required to meet the demand throughout the planning period of 2001 - 2006; to ensure that the information on which resource allocation and planning decisions are taken is sound with respect to current and future housing need and the need for affordable housing in the Borough and its regional context; to assist the Council in its preparation and development of local housing strategies and other related strategies, in particular key workers; to provide data to support Local Plan housing policies. 1.1.5 This Executive Summary brings together the inter-related housing and planning issues identified in the separate elements of the research to assess their impact and implications for future housing and planning strategy. The key findings are summarised along with conclusions and recommendations for action. 3 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1.2 Survey Response 1.2.1 7,700 questionnaires were sent to respondents in the week commencing 22nd January 2001. 1.2.2 Response to the survey was good. In total 2,709 questionnaires were returned: 4.5% of all resident households in Basingstoke & Deane took part in the survey. 1.2.3 The overall response level for Basingstoke & Deane Borough was 35.2%. The Borough was divided into five sub-areas for analysis as detailed in the table below showing the response levels in each area. The highest response level was achieved in the North East returning 39.5%, the lowest rate was from the South East returning 33.2%. Table 1-1 Response Rate by Area Sub-area Households Sample Response Percentage Validity + Basingstoke 38,870 3,500 1,200 34.3 2.31 North West 4,650 1,000 336 33.6 4.36 South West 4,410 1,000 358 35.8 4.23 North East 10,600 1,350 533 39.5 3.47 South East 2,060 850 282 33.2 4.76 Total 60,590 7,700 2,709 35.2 1.54 1.3 Basingstoke & Deane Housing Market 1.3.1 The annual rate of house price inflation in the South East region in the year to 31st March 2000 was 8.6%, higher than the UK average of 5.7%. 1.3.2 The average price for all dwellings in Basingstoke & Deane during the year was around £142,000 which is 95% of Hampshire‟s standardised average house price of £148,000. The average conceals some diversity of price differentials between the various categories of dwellings. 1.3.3 The cheapest dwellings in Basingstoke & Deane Borough are flats (11% of sales) selling at average price of £74,853. There is a high supply of terraces (37.2% of sales) costing around £104,485. The data suggests that first-time buyers need household incomes of £35,000 p.a. to access the market through terraces and £25,000 to purchase flats. 1.3.4 There is an affordability problem in Basingstoke & Deane Borough for low-income households. The housing market excludes many families and single person households who are currently seeking access to local housing. Over three quarters of this new / concealed demand requiring affordable housing is in addition to Housing Register numbers. 1.3.5 Access to home ownership is beyond the reach of almost 77% of the new / concealed households identified in the survey. Additionally, the private rented sector makes little contribution to access to affordable housing and this almost certainly underlies the problem of concealment that exists in Basingstoke & Deane. 4 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1.4 Current Housing in Basingstoke & Deane 1.4.1 49% of households in Basingstoke & Deane are owner-occupiers with a mortgage, 27% own their homes outright - a total of 77% in owner occupation. Only 17% are renting from a housing association and 4% are in privately rented homes. 1.4.2 11% of households are in flats, maisonettes or bedsits, 32% are in terraces or terraced bungalows and 56% are in semi-detached or detached houses or bungalows (semi / detached). 1.4.3 89% of households say that their accommodation is adequate for their needs. 11% (6,700 implied) say that it is inadequate. The largest single issue for those reporting a problem was that the dwelling was too small (50%, 3,880 implied). 32% said that their dwelling needed improvement or repairs. 11% referred to unsuitability for older or disabled people. 1.4.4 Single adult households make up 25% of all households in Basingstoke & Deane, 6% below the UK average. Couples constitute 70% of Basingstoke & Deane households compared to 60% for the UK as a whole. The incidence of single parent households (5.7%) was slightly lower than the UK average. 1.4.5 Under-occupation affects approximately 20% of all households in Basingstoke & Deane and over-occupation affects only 4%. 1.4.6 30% of households renting pay less than £60 per week and 50% less than £70. Of owner-occupiers, 36% paid no mortgage (outright owners) with a further 25% paying less than £400 per month. Some 19% of owner-occupier households paid in excess of £600 per month. 1.4.7 15% of households have incomes below £10,000, which is far less than for UK as a whole (33%). 39% of households have incomes below the national average household income of £22-23,000. 47% of households in Basingstoke & Deane have incomes above £30,000, with 31% above £35,000. 1.4.8 22% of households were in receipt of financial support (13,600 implied), of whom 49% (6,682 implied) were in receipt of Housing Benefit. 1.5 Future Housing Requirements 1.5.1 21.3% of all households (12,840 implied) are currently seeking to move or will do so in the next five years. A further 6.8% (4,070 implied) wish to move, but are unable to do so. This implies an average of around 7.1% per annum, which is higher than other DCA surveys. This proportion would rise to 9.4% if all those wishing to move in the period were able to do so. 1.5.2 69% (4,222 implied) of those indicating a wish to move, but an inability so to do referred to affordability as a reason for not being able to move; 21% to the lack of suitable property. 1.5.3 4,900 existing households and 3,840 new households will be moving within the Borough. 1.5.4 Key Findings of Existing households wishing to move:- 41% intend to do so within one year; 54% would prefer a detached house or a bungalow, 30% would prefer a semi- detached house; 5 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Some 22% (1,070 implied) would be interested in supported accommodation; 66% would prefer two or three bedrooms; 69% would prefer owner occupation including shared ownership, 30% indicated a preference for Housing Association rented accommodation. 1.5.5 Key Findings of New or concealed households wishing to move:- 47% (2,150) are singles, 53% (2,400) are couples; 93% of concealment relates to children of the existing household, although 41% are 25 years old or above; 45% require flats, 22% require terraced houses, 27% semi-detached houses, and detached houses / bungalows less than 5%; 22% of new / concealed households are registered on a Housing Register; 55% could afford a weekly rent of no more than £60; 74% no more than £70; 77% could not afford a mortgage of more than £400 per month; 23% have household incomes below £10,000 per annum; 23% have household incomes at or above the UK average of £22-23,000 (the same as the average in DCA surveys). 1.6 Single People 1.6.1 Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council formally commissioned DCA in May 2000 to carry out a Borough-wide Single Persons Housing Survey. 1.6.2 At the time there was over 1,100 people single person households on the common Housing Needs Register, which represented nearly half of all those in affordable housing need. Over half of the single person households in identifiable need were over 30 years of age. The following are key issues that were identified in the 2000 study:- The housing needs of single people are very varied; future demand appears principally to be focused on smaller, flatted accommodation in Basingstoke town, primarily in the social rented sector. Over 60% of respondents prefer a flat, 4.7% a bedsit and 3.4% a maisonette. Terrace housing is the choice of over 14% and the combined preference for detached, semi-detached and bungalow accommodation is 11.7%; Low income is a key factor restricting the housing choices of single people. Those on low incomes are more likely to be in social rented accommodation. Although 63% of the sample were in employment, single people on low incomes are prepared to consider sharing with friends as a way to access the housing market; 68% of respondents earned less that £12,500, 22.6% between £12,500 and £20,000 and 8.6% in excess of £20,000; 56% want a property rented from a housing association, 19% prefer private rent and 19% wanted to buy. These preferences recognise of the costs of buying in the Borough but also reflect the impact of changing employment patterns and lifestyle changes in tenure choices; 6 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 82.4% of movers responding to the question said they would be willing to live within walking distance of a town centre and Basingstoke was the main. Town centres were valued for the proximity to leisure and shopping facilities and access to work; Local employers are struggling to fill posts in key sectors such as catering, hotels, retail, health and education. This is of major concern particularly in the light of the town centre development. If employees are priced out of the local labour market by the cost of housing the local economy will suffer. Basingstoke and Deane currently has a very buoyant local economy with very low levels of unemployment. However, if income levels and adequate stock supply are inadequate the current skill shortages will proliferate. 1.7 Special Housing Needs 1.7.1 17% of households in Basingstoke & Deane contain somebody with a disability, suggesting some 10,160 households. 1.7.2 In around 83% of cases only one household member was affected; in 17% two members were affected. 58% of all disabled people were over the age of 60; 22% under 45. 1.7.3 The largest group affected by a named disability was those with a walking difficulty of some kind, affecting 8% of all households in the Borough. 10% of this group of households contained someone who was a wheelchair user, suggesting around 1,000 in Basingstoke & Deane as a whole. Of the 2nd members with a disability, 90 or so were also wheelchair users. 1.7.4 In 19% of cases someone using a wheelchair inhabited the homes that had been adapted for a wheelchair. This suggests some mismatch between houses adapted and those where wheelchair users live: it would appear that some 783 wheelchair user households do not live in suitably adapted premises. 1.7.5 27% of Housing Association rented homes were adapted for a disabled person and 10% in the owner occupied (no mortgage) sector were adapted. 1.7.6 In terms of the nature of adaptations 19% have wheelchair adaptations; 50% have handrails / grabrails and 43% have bathroom adaptations. 1.7.7 Only 33% of respondents were aware of Local Authority grants for aids, adaptations and home improvements:- There will be future provision requirements to address the changing needs from Care in the Community policies, but at this stage we believe that these are likely to be specific small developments and the Local Plan Policy H13 adequately addresses the requirement for special needs and accessible housing; It is however, important to recognise that 4,800 households have someone with a walking difficulty and 81% of wheelchair users do not live in an adapted dwelling. These matters are now principally dealt with by Part M of the Building Regulations. 7 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1.8 Population Growth And Household Formation 1.8.1 The population is forecast to increase by 13,257 people, 8.7% over the period to 2011. 1.8.2 However, this population increase will not occur uniformly throughout all age ranges. The net increase is concentrated entirely within the population aged 45 and over, which is expected to increase by more than 25% over the fifteen years 1996-2011. The profile of the local population is thus changing significantly. 1.8.3 The 20-29 age group is forecast to grow by only about 800 people between 1996 and 2011. This age range covers the main household forming group and will have implications for future affordable and market housing need both in the short and longer term. 1.8.4 The 30-44 age group declines by 1,300 people over the period 1996-2011. This age range covers the main house-moving and economically active group. 1.8.5 Both the 45-retirement age group and the “younger” retired group (those under 80) are projected to increase by more than 25% between 1996 and 2011. 1.8.6 The "older" retirement group, those aged 80 and over grows by more than 29% from 1996, by over 1,300 elderly people to approximately 5,800 people by 2011. This group is much more likely to have care and support needs which should now be assessed in detail. 1.9 Conclusions 1.9.1 The total affordable housing need annually is for 1,774 units. Re-lets of the existing social stock average 700 units and is the major means of addressing the scale of need identified. Even with a new delivery programme of 210 units there will still be an annual household need of 860 units which allows for elimination of the Housing Register of 4,034 at the rate of 807 units a year over a five year period to 2006. These figures however ignore 948 households planning to leave the area because of a lack of affordable housing by 2005. 1.9.2 It is not expected to be able to achieve this scale of supply in this timescale. However, even if no reduction in the current Housing Register was to be achieved, there would still be an annual requirement of 263 affordable units additional to existing stock supply from relets. 1.9.3 The survey provides valuable data on the needs and preferences of concealed households who intend to form and wish to remain in the Borough. The following key factors relating to their needs deserve to be highlighted:- 1,406 concealed households are projected to form new households per year; 45% require flats or bedsits, reflecting the predominance of single people or childless couples; 86% prefer small units with one and two bedrooms; 45% prefer owner-occupation; 37% want affordable rented accommodation and a significant interest from 12% in private rent. 6% are looking for shared ownership. 8 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1.9.4 93% of concealed households are young people wishing to set up their own household who are the children of Basingstoke & Deane residents. However, not all concealed households represent a household in need of subsidised affordable housing. 1.9.5 23% of households had incomes below the national average of £22-23,000. The Halifax House Price Survey revealed that any household with an income below £35,000 per annum would struggle financially to access the local housing market depending on location. An average of 91% of new households forming are in this position. 1.9.6 Table 1-2 reflects the differing levels of existing supply against demand from new households and the impact in actual sales levels created by stock availability and turnover. Flats are mainly found in the Council, RSL and private rented sectors, reflected in the very low proportion of all sales (10.9%). 1.9.7 Preference for flats is significantly higher than the stock level of 11%. New forming households at 45% of demand for flats, reflect the impact of changing formation and household preferences. New forming households show much lower levels of interest in terraced housing, but access the market through it because of limited flat supply and the cost of alternatives. Table 1-2 Dwelling Type Demand / Stock Supply / Sales House Type Demand Stock Sales (1991 New Census) Existing All buyers household % % % % Terraces 7.3 22.2 32.0 37.2 Flats 7.5 45.3 10.7 10.9 Semi-detached 30.0 27.1 23.5 20.7 1.9.8 All site briefs and regeneration projects should promote housing types which are under represented in the stock, in line with the principles in the PPG3 issued in March 2000. 1.9.9 There is a need for low-cost market housing and planning policies and site development briefs should continue to encourage more, smaller dwellings to meet current needs and address the shortage of flats in the existing stock. 9 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 1.10 Recommendations 1.10.1 Housing Strategy In its enabling role seeks to support the delivery agencies working in the area, either through input of land or grant resources or in the prioritisation of bids for the next five years to the Housing Corporation to provide mainly 1-bed and 2-bed flats and terraced houses to meet the needs of single adults and couples both with and without children and address the shortages in the stock; Develop a comprehensive older persons delivery strategy to address the current and future growth in elderly and frail elderly households across all tenures, and their related care and support needs to:- - assess and prioritise the need for support services and adaptation required to keep people in their own home for as long as is practical; - re-assess existing sheltered stock in meeting today‟s housing standards and preferences; - develop an adequate scale of „extra care‟ accommodation for the frail elderly population. 1.10.2 Disabled Households Continues to promote disabled adaptations in order to improve the ratio of suitably adapted properties for disabled people; Continues to promote a register of adapted property and disabled people needing adapted accommodation in order to facilitate better matching; 1.10.3 Single People Strategy The preferences of single people need to be taken into account when providing accommodation and their desire for accommodation that meets their needs holistically in terms of family and other networks; Although single people are prepared to share, issues of privacy and space need to be taken into account when sharing is proposed. Also although respondents would accept one bedroom accommodation, the space standards in the property should be generous enough to allow some flexibility to enable them to relax, live, work and have children / friends / relatives to stay; There appears to be scope for developing single person accommodation that does not cater for cars as almost half (47.4%) or respondents said they would consider such accommodation; Household preferences of those planning to move are principally for independent accommodation for sale and for rent. This will require future delivery of units, principally 1 and 2 bedroom flats in each sector to meet the range of needs expressed; 10 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 It will be necessary to investigate funding to support key workers locally to access the market; Further equity sharing solutions could be investigated either through developers or through employers. Free land from planning negotiation and mixed sites could be used to deliver units at less than market price where the land value could be retained on perpetuity. Similarly major employers could provide similar capital support to provide accommodation for their key employees not able to access the market. Housing associations should be involved in control and management process. 1.10.4 Planning Strategy Negotiate with prospective developers towards achieving a target of up to 30% subsidised affordable homes from the total of all suitable sites coming forward for planning consent over the period to 2011. Each site will need to be assessed individually, targets being subject to wider planning, economic priority and sustainability considerations; This will require a flexible approach to individual site negotiations, taking account of the very limited number of sites which will have 100% affordable housing and sites which may be unsuitable mainly due to the character of the area or the range of available services; Consideration should be given to the adoption of a 15 unit or 0.5 hectare threshold for affordable housing negotiation in all settlements outside Basingstoke Town; Use site development briefs to promote the additional delivery of 200 unsubsidised low-cost market units in the period to 2006 to meet the needs of new forming households with income levels adequate to access the local market. 11 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 2 INTRODUCTION 2.1 Purpose, Aims And Objectives 2.1.1 Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council formally commissioned DCA in January 2001 to carry out a Borough wide Housing Needs Assessment. 2.1.2 The purpose of the study was to examine the housing requirements (needs, aspirations and demands) for the communities and households of the Borough. 2.1.3 The aims were:- to determine the levels of housing supply and demand in the Borough; to support the annual HIP bid; to provide robust information at a ward level in accordance with PPG3, to guide the location of new provision and development of the Housing Strategy; to support Local Plan Policies. 2.1.4 The objectives were:- to determine the levels of housing demand and supply in the Borough and furthermore determine the extent of the annual supply required to meet the demand throughout the planning period of 2001 - 2006; to ensure that the information on which resource allocation and planning decisions are taken is sound with respect to current and future housing need and the need for affordable housing in the Borough and its regional context; to assist the Council in its preparation and development of local housing strategies and other related strategies; to provide data to support Local Plan housing policies. 2.2 Definitions 2.2.1 DETR have published Local Housing Needs Assessment: A Guide to Good Practice. This paper summarises the research undertaken by Glen Bramley and Hal Pawson of Heriot Watt University on local housing needs assessment. The Borough Housing Needs Study has been undertaken in line with this guidance in assessing people‟s preferences as well as their needs. 2.2.2 DCA work to a definition of housing requirements that encompasses demand, need and preferences. Households that can enter the general market without intervention of any sort can be defined as demand, whereas those households that are unable to enter the general market without some form of intervention can be defined as need. Our methodology enables us to identify this distinction by asking for both a household‟s characteristics in terms of size, current property condition and income and a household‟s views on suitability of current housing and preferences for moving or modification. 12 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 2.2.3 Affordability in our view is defined by the relationship between local incomes and the local general housing market. In terms of affordable housing we would say:- Affordable housing is that provided, with subsidy, for people who are unable to resolve their housing requirements, in the general housing market because of the relationship between local housing costs and incomes. 2.2.4 The issue of affordability is central to our approach. Within the project, we capture a range of data on actual incomes and costs of housing and the likely level of incomes and the accessible costs of housing for moving or newly forming households. We also examine secondary data on incomes, house prices and rent levels. Thus a reliable indicator of affordability is derived that leads towards the identification of real options for meeting housing need. 2.3 Methodology 2.3.1 The study consisted of the following elements:- i. A postal questionnaire to 7,700 households in 5 sub-areas; ii. A Dwelling Balance Analysis to determine shortfalls and surplus of property by location type and size; iii. A housing market survey utilising the Land Registry, Halifax a telephone survey of estate agents on the supply and cost of private rented housing; iv. Secondary data analysis drawing upon HIP and Housing Register data on the flow of social stock and need, 1991 Census, household and population projections and other national research. 2.3.2 The postal questionnaire was designed in consultation with officers of Basingstoke Borough Council based upon tried and tested research tools used in previous comparable assessments. 2.3.3 In our view, a large-scale postal survey is the most cost-effective means of identifying the general needs, aspirations and intentions of the population at ward level. Nearly all the housing needs studies undertaken by DCA have utilised postal questionnaire surveys as a means of primary data collection. 2.3.4 The questionnaire was in three parts and took no more than fifteen minutes to complete. Part One sought information about the existing housing situation including:- house type, number of rooms and facilities; adequacy of current housing; property repair and improvement requirements; forms of heating and energy efficiency levels; housing costs and income and equity; employment and travel; views about the area; special needs and adaptation needs; household composition by gender, age and ethnicity. 13 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 2.3.5 Part Two of the questionnaire collected information on the existing household‟s moving intentions and Part Three collected information on the moving intentions of new forming or concealed households. Questions in these two sections included:- when people expect to move; who is forming new households; how much they can afford; preferred tenure, type, size and location of the housing they require; special needs. 2.3.6 All questionnaires are provided as Appendices to this report. 2.4 Sampling 2.4.1 Sample size depends on two key factors: the degree of accuracy we require for the sample and the extent to which there is variation in the population with regard to key characteristics. The most important points to note about these issues are:- beyond a certain sample size, there is no benefit in a bigger sample in terms of accuracy; the size of the population is largely irrelevant for the accuracy of the sample. It is the absolute size of the sample that is important; samples are often limited to 2,000 because beyond this point the extra cost has insufficient payoff in terms of accuracy. 2.4.2 We assume a 95% confidence rate that our results reflect the population. Using simple random sampling, the degree of sampling error with a sample size of 2,000 households is in the region of 2%. 2.4.3 This means, for example, that if 53% of respondents in a survey do not have central heating then we can be 95% confident that 53% of households plus or minus 2% do not have central heating (i.e. 51% - 55%). Increasing the sample size at this level of sample has only a marginal effect on accuracy. 2.4.4 The main issue is whether non-respondents are different in some crucial way to responders (e.g. low education, older etc.). However, increasing the sample size does not necessarily alleviate this problem if some groups of people systematically do not respond. We do check for bias and re-weight where necessary by comparing known characteristics in the population with our findings. 2.4.5 The postal sample was stratified into 5 sub-areas and selected by random probability from the Council Tax Register. The sample was 12.7% of resident households, determined to ensure statistical validity within each sub-area. 14 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 2.5 Promotion 2.5.1 A comprehensive promotion campaign was agreed with the Council to create awareness of the survey, and its importance to the Council. All councillors and parish clerks in the Borough were contacted to inform them of the survey and enlist their assistance in publicising it. 2.5.2 Posters were prepared for display in public places in all wards throughout the Borough and a press release was issued to publicise the survey. 2.6 Response Rate Table 2-1 Response Rate by Area Sub-area Households Sample Response Percentage Validity + Basingstoke 38,870 3,500 1,200 34.3 2.31 North West 4,650 1,000 336 33.6 4.36 South West 4,410 1,000 358 35.8 4.23 North East 10,600 1,350 533 39.5 3.47 South East 2,060 850 282 33.2 4.76 Total 60,590 7,700 2,709 35.2 1.54 2.6.1 The sample survey of 7,700 questionnaires was dispatched for delivery week commencing 22nd January 2001. The return deadline was 14th February 2001, allowing respondents a period of seventeen days including three weekends for completion and return. 2.6.2 Whilst the overall response was statistically valid at sub-area level. The rate of response on closing was so high that the survey was kept open until 19th February 2001. 2.6.3 4.5% of all resident households in the Borough will have taken part in the survey. The response rate analysis by sub-area is detailed in Table 2-1. 2.6.4 The final overall response was 2,709, which is double the 1,250 minimum level recommended in the DETR Guidance. The highest response level was achieved in North East (39.5%) and the lowest in South East (33.2%). 2.6.5 All areas achieved responses over 33%, with 3 areas over 35%. A very high response rate. 2.6.6 All wards reached response levels based on household numbers adequate to ensure statistical validity at a confidence level of 95%. Validity ranged from + 2.31% to + 4.76% at ward level and was + 1.54% at Borough-wide level. 15 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 2.7 Report Structure 2.7.1 The Dwelling Balance Analysis has been provided as a separate report. 2.7.2 This report consists of the following sections:- 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 INTRODUCTION 3 THE BASINGSTOKE & DEANE HOUSING MARKET 4 CURRENT HOUSING IN THE BOROUGH 5 FUTURE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS 7 POPULATION GROWTH AND HOUSEHOLD FORMATION PROJECTIONS 8 NEEDS ASSESSMENT, PLANNING & DELIVERY 16 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3 THE BASINGSTOKE & DEANE BOROUGH HOUSING MARKET 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 The purpose of this section of the report is to describe the basic state of the housing market in the Borough as it was in the year ending 31st December 2000. The evaluation is based on specially prepared data taken directly from the records of the Halifax Plc given their high market share, the prices and other information included are felt to provide an accurate indication of the actual state of the housing market. Details of the Land Registry analysis were also examined, which give a wider picture covering all sales in the Borough. 3.1.2 The records include house price information by categories of dwellings, also included in the analysis is information about the volumes of sales of each type of dwelling, although for reasons of commercial confidentiality we are not able to report actual sample sizes for this part of the analysis. 3.1.3 This information sets the context for the key issue of the affordability of housing in the area, and in particular we can relate the analysis to the problems of low income evaluated through the household postal survey. 3.2 National Picture 3.2.1 Four increases in interest rates since September 1999 appear to be having an impact on demand as the slowdown in the quarterly rate of increase in prices in both the first and second quarter indicates. In addition, April 2000‟s abolition of mortgage interest tax relief will further curb demand. 3.2.2 Annual house price inflation fell from 11.5% in 1999; 8.1% in the third quarter and to 5.7% in the fourth quarter of 2000. 3.3 Regional Picture 3.3.1 The annual rate of house price inflation in the South East Region is now 8.6%, much higher than the UK average of 5.7%. 3.3.2 House prices in the South East slowed during the fourth quarter of 2000 the first quarterly fall since 1995, but still above the UK average. 3.3.3 Hampshire is 9th in an index of 58 UK counties (average semi-detached prices) showing that Hampshire is at the top of the UK house price spread. 17 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3.4 The Housing Market 3.4.1 The Regional Market Table 3-1 details the prices paid for the main categories of house types for the whole of the South East with comparisons of house price index data. 3.4.2 The Halifax data is based on actual sales mortgaged to the respective societies and the information is a real indication of actual prices and incomes prevailing in the purchases being made in the South East Region. The Land Registry data incorporates wider non-mortgaged sales. Table 3-1 Average Regional House Prices - All Buyers 2000 Property Type Land Registry Halifax Average Price Average Price Terraced 101,102 112,403 Semi-detached 128,490 143,000 Detached 239,315 256,244 Bungalows* * 146,730 Flats & maisonettes 82,041 85,141 All properties 139,840 152,358 Source: Halifax House Price Index, 4th Quarter 2000. Land Registry Residential Property Price Report, 4th Quarter 2000. *Land Registry and Nationwide figures do not identify bungalows separately. 3.4.3 Prices vary between the different data sources, we would expect the Land Registry figures to be lower in all cases given that these figures include non-mortgaged sales. 3.4.4 The table below examines regional against average house prices for the Borough recorded by the Land Registry against Hampshire prices and also compares the volume of sales for both Borough and County. Table 3-2 Average House Prices and Sales - All Buyers 2000 Property Type Land Registry Land Registry Land Registry Land Registry Basingstoke & % of sales in Hampshire % of sales in Deane Basingstoke & Average Price Hampshire Average Price Deane Terraced 104,485 37.2 102,456 28.8 Semi-detached 132,060 20.7 124,939 24.5 Detached 217,012 31.2 231,564 33.6 Flats & maisonettes 74,853 10.9 78,137 13.1 All properties 142,005 100.0 148,014 100.0 Source: Land Registry Residential Property Price Report, 4th Quarter 2000. 18 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3.4.5 The largest volume of sales in the Borough was for terraced houses, which is principally modern 3-bed units, selling at an average price of £104,485. We would consider this to be the access price for first time buyers in the Borough as the incidence of sales of flats is low at 10.9%, however these sales are for all buyers and it is expected that the incidence of sales for first time buyers would be greater than 10.9%. 3.4.6 Based on a maximum multiplier of 3 times income, to access the market through flats a first time buyer would require an income of £25,000 per annum. To access terraced housing would require an income of £35,000 per annum. Those earning £25,000 - £35,000 could access cheaper flats but these are dependent upon availability and condition. 3.4.7 However, the Land Registry data does not identify first time buyer sales separately and in order to identify how much a first time buyer can access for we have looked at the 1997 house price data and have spoken to Estate Agents operating in the area. We estimate flat prices to be about the same for first time buyers and terraced prices to be 6% lower. We assess that a first time buyer can access flats with an income of £25,000 and terraces at £25,000 - £32,000 depending on location. 3.5 Can ‘Concealed’ Households Afford to be in the Market? 3.5.1 This is a potentially very complicated question because it depends on the relationship of the supply of average and below average priced houses compared to the income profile of the area. In some areas where the income distribution is weighted towards people with above average earnings, and where there is an under-supply of above average priced houses, below average priced houses may be bought by households in these higher income brackets. The effect is that low-income households are squeezed out of the market. There is a strong indication that a considerable affordability problem may arise in the Borough from the relationship between local income and the supply of average and below average priced properties. 3.6 Concealed Households’ Access to the Market 3.6.1 The key issue is whether the concealed households identified in the postal survey have incomes which might provide access to the local housing market. If there is a problem it can be supposed that there is a demand for affordable rented housing. The data collected in the postal survey provides a good picture of the general income levels of the concealed households and we now use that information in the context of the Land Registry data on local house prices. 3.6.2 As can be seen from Table 3-3 below, 83% of the concealed households had incomes under £25,000, the average of the sales for the lowest part of the market where there is any substantial volume of sales taking place. On the face of it, very few of these people will be able to enter the local market without gaining access to a significant amount of capital (which is unlikely to occur). 3.6.3 These households exist in addition to the demand for new housing generated by demographic and net migration factors and are significant because they are by definition candidates for „non-market‟ accommodation or low cost housing with an element of subsidy support such as the Homebuy initiative. 19 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3.6.4 Some of the households in the £25,000 - £35,000 income band may be able to purchase cheaper flats and terraces in some areas but some of them will be at the margin if we compare with the first-time purchaser income levels and the nature of their employment will be a factor in acquiring a mortgage. Table 3-3 Annual Income of ‘New / Concealed’ Households Income All new households moving New households moving within 1 year os % Cum N % Cum Nos responses % implied responses % implied Below £10,000 12.3 12.3 559 17.9 17.9 251 £10,001 - £15,000 34.1 46.4 1,552 25.3 43.2 354 £15,001 - £20,000 25.6 72.0 1,165 32.1 75.3 449 £20,001 - £25,000 10.9 82.9 496 5.6 80.9 78 £25,001 - £27,500 4.7 87.6 214 2.7 83.6 38 £27,501 - £30,000 2.7 90.3 123 4.6 88.2 64 £30,001 - £32,500 1.8 92.1 82 0.0 88.2 0 £32,501 - £35,000 2.9 95.0 132 2.7 90.9 38 £35,001 - £40,000 1.5 96.5 68 3.9 94.8 55 £40,001 - £45,000 0.0 96.5 0 0.0 94.8 0 £45,001 - £50,000 1.3 97.8 59 1.7 96.5 24 Above £50,000 2.2 100.0 100 3.5 100.0 49 Total 4,550 1,400 Source: DCA Survey. 3.6.5 First-time buyers need to have a deposit and are likely to be restricted to a maximum mortgage of three time‟s annual income plus the annual income of the lower second income, if appropriate. 3.6.6 A household with an income of, say, about £25,000 would be able to achieve a maximum mortgage of around £75,000. Assuming capital was available to meet the deposit and costs, the property range of such a buyer is limited to prices up to a maximum of £80,000. 3.6.7 People with incomes below £25,000, 83% of these „new‟ households, probably could not afford to buy above the £80,000 - £90,000 range. 3.6.8 The average price paid by buyers of terraced housing in the Borough in the quarter to 31st December 2000 was £104,485 with just over a third of all sales. 3.6.9 Access to the market is clearly dependent on availability, a factor which is particularly critical for low-income households, who can only enter the market in any numbers where there is an adequate supply of affordable dwellings. 20 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3.7 The Private Rented Sector 3.7.1 We offer below a few comments on the private rented sector but must stress that the evidence available is largely empirical. We approached some of the main private renting agencies operating in the Borough. 3.7.2 All agencies interviewed agreed that demand for rented property in the Borough was high. 57% said that the supply of properties available was adequate to meet the demand. 43% stated that supply is too low to meet the high demand, especially highlighted were shortages of 1 and 2 bed properties being in short supply. 3.7.3 Only 14% of the respondents indicated that their clients would accommodate Housing Benefit / Income Support cases. 3.7.4 A range of property types is available in the sector as a whole and are found in a variety of locations within the Borough. It would appear that the difference in rent level between furnished and unfurnished property is marginal with 42% of respondents indicating they charge only slightly more for furnished accommodation. 57% indicated that the difference in cost was marginal. 3.7.5 Private Rent Sector Levels From the various sources approached, we set out below the prevailing private sector rent levels. Table 3-4 Average Rent Levels Property Type £ pm £ pw New Household Ability to Pay (%) 1-bed flat 535 120 0 2-bed flat 665 150 0 2-bed terraced 675 150 0 3-bed terraced 765 175 0 2-bed semi-detached 710 160 100% 3-bed semi-detached 775 170 No Demand Expressed Detached 865 190 No Demand Expressed Source : DCA Survey. 3.7.6 We then ran a series of cross-tabulations to see if those new concealed households who had specified their preferred tenure as Private Rent could actually access the market price levels that were identified in the Estate Agents Survey. 3.7.7 We found demand for rented housing in concealed households very low. Of those concealed households who preferred private rent we found gaps in average weekly rental prices and the affordability for the concealed households. Of those seeking a 1- bed flat, 87% could only afford up to £70 per week, while a further 13% could pay between £80 - £100 pw. The same was apparent for 2 bed flats with 56% only being able to afford between £51 - £70. For a 2-bed semi-detached, all respondents could afford market rent levels, stating £151 - £200 pw. 21 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 3.7.8 The ability of new households to pay the weekly rent levels is shown as a percentage of those in this group who can pay the relevant level or above and in the case of 3 bed semi-detached and detached housing, no demand was expressed for these house types. We conclude that the private sector makes very little contribution to access to affordable rented housing where available. The sector is not accessible to lower paid workers unless they contribute a very high proportion of their disposable income. Demand expressed in the survey was also very low. 3.8 Conclusions 3.8.1 The key fact is that, based on conservative assumptions, access to home ownership is beyond the reach of 83% of the concealed households identified in the DCA survey on any realistic assessment of availability of properties. Additionally, the private rented sector makes little contribution to access to affordable housing and this almost certainly underlies the problem of concealment that exists in the Borough. 3.8.2 The analysis shows that the housing market excludes many families and single person households who are currently seeking access to local housing. There clearly is an „affordability‟ problem in the Borough for low-income households. Prices in the UK increased on average by 5.7% in the year to December 2000, 8.6% in the South East. 3.8.3 People who cannot enter the market under these circumstances may never be able to do so, short of some collapse in the market or a significant change in their income level. Further house price increases above wage inflation in 2001 would make access to market housing more difficult to achieve and would impact on households with marginal incomes most significantly. 22 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4 CURRENT HOUSING IN THE BOROUGH 4.1 Tenure, Type and Amenities 4.1.1 This section deals with the analysis of the survey data on existing households and issues relating to their current accommodation. Given the nature of the random sample of households within agreed sub-areas embodied in the postal survey, we would expect tenure type to provide some broad validation of the representativeness of the sample. 4.1.2 It should be noted that in all cross-tabulations data is included only where the respondent has answered each element (question) involved, hence there are some small discrepancies when compared with the tables relating to a single data source. 4.1.3 In practice, the results clearly understated the number of Housing Association rented properties when compared with the Council‟s HIP data at 1st April 2000. A process of re-weighting was felt to be necessary to address this imbalance in tenure. 4.1.4 The Council provided DCA with a schedule of Housing Association rented and shared-ownership properties by ward which could be identified to the given ward groups. For each ward group - in the absence of further objective evidence - we adjusted the figures derived from our survey data upwards to the correct Housing Association figure provided. The „balancing‟ adjustment to the total households per ward group provided by the Council was made by reducing the owner occupation figures by the same amount. The split between owner-occupier with mortgage and without mortgage was calculated pro rata to the incidence of the two categories in our survey data. The underlying assumption - borne out by other DCA surveys - is that the shortfall in Housing Association tenure implied by the survey data is caused in the main by a tendency from a higher proportion of owner occupiers to respond to the questionnaire than those in the social rented sector. 4.1.5 The data set out on tenure at Table 4-1 below is in line with the HIP data and is the basis for the calculation of all the subsequent tables i.e. all responses are given the weight appropriate to the actual tenure balance in Basingstoke & Deane. Table 4-1 Tenure of Present Households (Question 1) Tenure % Group Nos UK Local Area DCA % implied Census Census HNS 1991 1991 1997 HA rented 17.4 17.4 10,549 22.0 20.2 15.3 Privately rented 4.1 2,455 Rented tied to employment 1.2 5.5 702 10.0 8.6 7.3 Other 0.2 92 Owner occupier - mortgage 49.4 29,971 Owner occupier - outright 27.2 77.1 16,448 68.0 71.2 77.4 Shared ownership 0.5 289 Total 100.0 100.0 60,506 100.0 100.0 100.0 23 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.1.6 The UK Census figures for 1991 are now ten years out of date and relate to a total dwelling figure of around 54,000 as compared with around 61,800 in the Council‟s HIP statistics at 1st April 2000. (The latter figure includes around 1,000 vacant dwellings). 4.1.7 Given the further move towards owner occupation through „Right to Buy‟ legislation since 1991 and the tendency of dwellings created since 1991 to be predominantly in the owner occupied sector, the survey results appear compatible with the Local Area Census 1991. 4.1.8 The proportion of owner-occupiers without mortgage has increased in 2001 to around 27% as compared with 21% in 1997 with a corresponding decrease in those with mortgages. The same trend towards paying off mortgage as tax incentives decrease appears to apply in Basingstoke & Deane as has been evidenced in most of our recent surveys. Again the increase in dwellings since 1997 (around 2,900) must largely relate to owner occupation and therefore have some impact on any comparison with the 1997 data. 4.1.9 Table 4-2 below indicates the types of accommodation occupied by the households responding to the question. Table 4-2 Type of Accommodation (Question 2) Type % Group Nos UK Local Area DCA % implied Census Census HNS 1991 1991 1997 Semi-detached house 23.5 14,128 Detached house 30.5 65.2 18,371 53.0 56.4 63.7 Bungalow -semi / detached 11.2 6,722 Bungalow -terraced 2.0 1,184 24.7 27.0 32.0* 26.0 Terraced house 22.7 13,681 Flat / Maisonette 9.3 9.3 5,624 20.0 10.7 9.7 Bedsit / Room only 0.5 331 0.8 0.0 0.9 0.6 Mobile home 0.3 206 Total 100.0 100.0 60,247 100.0 100.0 100.0 (*NB: Approximately 2% has been taken from „Terraced‟ and added to other houses to allow like for like comparison on terraced bungalows which would be included in the Census as terraced in the absence of a „bungalow‟ heading). 24 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.1.10 The Census data shows a higher proportion of terraced houses than in our sample (over 32% as compared with the survey figure of under 25%) with a correspondingly lower proportion of non-terraced houses. The additional properties in the Council area since 1991 referred to at 4.1.6 above (likely in the main to have been non- terraced properties) will have had a significant impact on the proportion of non- terraced properties overall. Even allowing for the impact of new stock, the total number of terraced houses is likely to be understated in our sample but we do not feel that any skew towards non-terraced properties would have an impact on results sufficient to merit special weighting, especially in view of the representative tenure referred to above. The difference between the present survey and that carried out by DCA in 1997 did not appear significant but it did endorse a more marginal understatement of terraced properties in the 2001 survey. The categorisation of some bungalows as terraced did not apply in the 1997 survey. Table 4-3 Form of Tenure by Property Type (Question 2 by Q.1) Type Owner Owner Private HA shared Tied to occupier occupier rented rented owner- employ- with no ship* ment* mortgage mortgage Semi-detached 27.0 21.5 26.8 15.3 35.0 22.1 Detached 38.0 37.2 15.8 2.8 1.6 30.7 Terraced 25.1 13.6 24.1 31.3 20.0 4.6 Flat / Maisonette 3.0 4.4 23.8 31.1 22.4 13.0 Bungalow -semi / detached 6.6 20.4 6.0 10.5 10.7 20.1 Bungalow -terraced 0.2 1.7 0.6 7.8 0.0 1.0 Bedsit / room only 0.1 0.2 2.6 1.2 0.6 8.5 Mobile home 0.0 1.0 0.3 0.0 9.7 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 (* Low volume of data). 4.1.11 A cross-tabulation relating form of tenure to property type also indicated that 70% of flat / maisonette accommodation was in the rented sector; 48% of bungalow accommodation in the owner occupied no mortgage sector. 4.1.12 Respondents were asked to indicate the number of bedrooms in their current home. 25 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 4-4 Number of Bedrooms (Question 5) Bedrooms % Nos implied DCA HNS 1997 % Bedsit 0.8 457 0.5 One 8.2 4,950 6.6 Two 17.7 10,696 19.4 Three 46.3 27,895 46.2 Four 21.9 13,222 22.6 Five or more 5.1 3,045 4.7 Total 100.0 60,265 100.0 4.1.13 The average across the stock in the Borough was 2.96 bedrooms, somewhat higher than that found in other recent DCA surveys in which 2.70 has been around average. The breakdown of size by bedroom in percentage terms as between the ownership and rental sectors was accessed by cross-tabulation with the following results:- Table 4-5 Number of Bedrooms by Tenure Tenure Bedsit One Two Three Four Five+ Total Properties owned 0.2 3.4 14.2 48.7 27.3 6.2 100.0 Properties rented 2.6 24.5 29.7 38.2 3.7 1.3 100.0 HA rented only 1.9 27.9 28.3 39.8 2.1 0.0 100.0 4.1.14 As might be expected, some 96% of four (or more) bedroom properties were in the owner occupied sector; 69% of bedsit / one-bedroomed properties in the rented sector. Table 4-6 Access to Basic Facilities (Question 6) Heating Insulation All Owner Owner Private HA Shared Tied to Facilities tenures occupier occupier rented rented owner- employ- % with no ship* ment* mortgage mortgage CH-F 91.2 93.9 88.6 72.7 93.1 99.1 66.5 CH-P 5.1 3.3 7.6 14.6 4.0 0.6 16.5 HWTI 81.5 85.0 88.0 64.2 66.4 68.5 71.3 LI 77.6 84.1 85.4 42.6 57.5 47.2 50.6 DG-F 68.3 69.7 70.7 30.0 72.6 43.3 21.6 DG-P 13.7 14.0 15.8 17.6 8.7 21.0 16.2 WPI 55.7 63.6 63.7 25.8 29.5 43.5 31.3 CWI 42.2 39.0 53.3 15.7 42.1 26.0 13.1 DP 25.0 25.3 29.1 3.9 24.0 21.0 3.8 (* Low volume of data). Heating / Insulation facilities:- CH-F (central heating -full), CH-P (central heating -partial), HWTI (hot water tank insulated), LI (loft insulation). DG-F (double-glazing -full), DG-P (double-glazing -partial), WPI (water pipes insulated), CWI (cavity wall insulation), DP (draught proofing). 26 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.1.15 Households with central heating at around 96% were far above the national average in the 1991 Census (78%) and well above the average of 88% found in the 1996 English House Condition Survey (EHCS). At local area level, the 1991 figure was 92%; that in the 1997 survey 94%. Full double-glazing at 68% was also well above the UK average of 60% (EHCS 1996). 4.1.16 In the case of Housing Association rented accommodation alone, over 97% had some form of central heating, 1% above the all tenure average, and 93% had full central heating as compared with the all tenure level of 91%. The Housing Association rented sector generally performed far below the all tenure average in loft, hot water tank and water pipes insulation. 4.1.17 The comparison between tenure types revealed one particularly significant pattern. Private rented accommodation appeared to have a far lower level of access to all the nominated facilities than the all tenure average. 4.1.18 Only 217 implied households (0.4%) indicated shared facilities. The 1991 Census data indicated 191 households in non self-contained dwellings, 134 of which were living in bedsits. Of the 217 cases above, some 200 shared at least 4 of the 5 facilities nominated. The corresponding figure in the 1997 DCA survey was 280. 4.2 Adequacy of Present Dwelling / Improvement Required 4.2.1 Respondents were asked if their current accommodation was adequate for their needs. 89% indicated that their accommodation was adequate; 11% (6,700 implied) that it was inadequate. A level in the region of 88% has been a typical result in recent DCA surveys. From a cross-tabulation some discrepancy in satisfaction was evident but largely consistent with results in other DCA surveys. The satisfaction level for Housing Association rented accommodation (86%) was higher than the average emerging for Council rented accommodation from similar DCA surveys (75-80%). Satisfaction in the private rented sector was markedly lower than the all tenure average, as might be expected from the comment at 4.1.17 above. Table 4-7 Adequacy by Tenure (Question 8a by Q.1) Tenure % adequate Owner occupied with mortgage 88.9 Owner occupied no mortgage 95.3 Private rented 62.5 Housing Association rented 86.1 Shared ownership* 89.7 Tied to employment* 75.5 (* Low volume of data). 27 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.2.2 Table 4-8 shows the reasons for any inadequacy as a percentage based on responses to a multiple choice question. Responses were received from a number of households, which had not stated that overall the property was inadequate -viz. from some 7,790 implied household responses rather than the 6,700 referred to at 4.2.1 above. The % households column below is based on the former figure which is taken to include all respondents who can identify at least some measure of inadequacy. On average each respondent made 1.8 choices. Table 4-8 Reason for Inadequacy of Present Accommodation (Question 8b) Reasons % % Nos implied responses households (all choices) Too small 27.7 49.8 3,878 Needs improvement / repairs 17.6 31.6 2,459 Poor public transport 9.9 17.7 1,382 Rent / mortgage too expensive 7.1 12.7 992 Too costly to heat 6.4 11.6 900 Lack of local facilities 6.3 11.3 879 Unsuitable for disabled person 6.0 10.8 844 Too large 4.9 8.8 682 Unsuitable for elderly person 4.8 8.5 664 Housing affecting health 4.5 8.1 627 Tenancy insecure 3.0 5.5 425 Too isolated 1.8 3.3 258 Total 100.0 179.7 4.2.3 The largest single issue was that the dwelling was too small, referred to by around 50% of households with a problem and implying around 3,880 cases in the Borough as a whole - slightly above the level commonly found in our experience. 32% or so of the group mentioned that their dwelling needed improvement / repairs. Some 11% of households referred to unsuitability for the disabled - 10% or so have been around the average in DCA surveys. Interestingly, a relatively high proportion of households (around 18%) identified poor public transport. We set out in the next few paragraphs some inadequacy issues relating to specific respondent groups. 28 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.2.4 Condition / Disability 14% of all reasons given for inadequacy (525 implied) by households affected by a disability related to repair need - second only in importance to unsuitability for a disabled person (16%). 4.2.5 Tenure / Repair Of the reasons for inadequacy, repair need was identified by 32.5% of those in Housing Association rented accommodation (798 implied); 19.8% (487) of those in private rented accommodation. and 43% (1,063) in the owner occupied sector. 4.2.6 Tenure / Size 66% (2,557 implied) of all those households giving „too small‟ as a reason for inadequacy were in the owner occupied with mortgage sector; 16% in the Housing Association rented sector; 8% in the private rented sector and only 7% in the owner occupier no mortgage sector; 69% of households in the owner-occupier with mortgage sector gave „too small‟ as a reason. 4.2.7 Condition / House Type 34% of the need for repair was in terraced dwellings (846 implied) but as a proportion of house types the results were similar for semi-detached, terraced, flat / maisonette and bungalow (semi / detached) at between 35-40%. 4.2.8 Condition / Household Income We could establish no correlation between low household income and the need for repair which has emerged in other surveys. The proportion of responses on the need for repairs was well spread across income band. The highest proportion of any given income band indicating need for repairs was the £15-20K band at 48%. 4.2.9 Condition / Age Groups 51% (1,111 implied) of all need for repairs fell within the 25-44 age group and represented 34% of that age group indicating inadequacy. 24% fell into the 45-59 age band (35% of that age group); The corollary of the above figures is that the need for repairs was not unduly prevalent in the 60+ age groups. A similar pattern applied to responses in the „too costly to heat‟ category with 40% of all such responses attributable to the 25-44 age group. 4.2.10 Condition / Ethnicity The condition of the property did not appear to be a significant issue for Black & Minority Ethnic households but responses were arguably too low to offer any valid comment. 4.2.11 It should be borne in mind that arguably the main finding from this question is the high degree of satisfaction expressed but some caveat has to be drawn in relation to the degree which respondents maybe reluctant to describe their accommodation as unsuitable. The large group saying their current dwelling was too small may to some extent represent a natural demand in market terms (i.e. people looking to move „up- market‟). 29 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.2.12 The next question in the section sought to identify which aspects of a given range of work respondents felt were required on their property. 4.2.13 Just over 39% (23,870 implied) of the sample responded to the question. Responses were again on multiple choice basis with respondents making around 1.6 choices on average. Table 4-9 Work Required on the Property (Question 8c) Improvements % % Nos responses households implied Window repairs 23.7 37.4 8,933 Insulation 21.6 34.1 8,128 Improved heating 17.4 27.5 6,555 Re-wiring 15.3 24.2 5,768 Roof repairs 13.5 21.3 5,091 Damp proofing 8.5 13.5 3,213 Total 100.0 158.0 4.2.14 37% of households indicated a need to carry out window repairs, the largest single item as is usually the case in our surveys and to the extent commonly found. A breakdown by tenure is offered at Table 4-10 below. Table 4-10 Work Required on the Property by Tenure (Question 8c by Q.1) Work required Owner Owner Private HA Shared Tied to occupier occupier rented rented owner- employ- with no ship* ment* mortgage mortgage Improved heating 27.5 21.0 42.5 30.4 0.0 38.8 Re-wiring 24.4 26.5 25.8 20.5 0.0 24.0 Damp proofing 8.1 7.1 37.5 32.5 0.0 28.3 Roof repairs 24.6 26.4 10.2 7.0 0.0 18.7 Window repairs 36.6 31.2 66.3 33.4 68.1 76.3 Insulation 36.6 25.7 40.8 33.1 31.9 49.9 (* Low volume of data). 4.2.15 The most significant issues arising were probably the high percentage of private rented households indicating the need for window repairs (66%) and improved heating (over 42%), endorsing the comments at 4.1.17 and 4.2.1 above. Damp proofing was a low priority in the owner occupier sector; roof repairs were low priority (only 7% indicated such a requirement) in the Housing Association rented sector. 30 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.2.16 We followed up with a parallel question on what repairs / improvements were intended over the next three years. Responses to a multiple-choice question were in this case received from around 25% of the sample (14,953 implied), each making around 1.3 choices. The implication of the results might on the face of it be that only around two thirds of those identifying a requirement intended to take action in the next three years. However, the cross-tabulation by tenure indicated that few respondents in the rented sector replied presumably because action would be the responsibility of the landlord. Consequently, Table 4-11 below is essentially about owner-occupiers (95%). Table 4-11 Work Intended in the Next Three Years (Question 8c) Improvements % responses % households Nos implied Window repairs 30.6 41.0 6,125 Roof repairs 20.4 27.4 4,097 Insulation 18.2 24.4 3,643 Improved heating 14.4 19.3 2,893 Re-wiring 12.5 16.8 2,511 Damp proofing 3.9 5.2 784 Total 100.0 134.1 4.2.17 41% of households indicated a need to carry out window repairs, by some margin the largest single item. At the other end of the scale only 5% of households intended to carry out damp proofing work. 4.3 Household Composition and Household Profile 4.3.1 Large amounts of data were collected about the structure of the households and we have constructed a summary table to show the basic pattern of household types. It is based on the categories used by the ONS to construct their „Social Trends‟ statistical series but is not exactly congruent due to the manner in which the different data sets are collected. Table 4-12 Family Composition (Question 14b&c) Family Composition % Group UK Census Local Area DCA HNS % 1991 Census 1991 1997 1 adult >60 10.7 1 adult <60 11.2 23.2 31.0 25.3 19.6 1 adult + other 1.3 Couple no child 36.3 Couple 1-2 children 26.9 60.0 69.9 74.8 71.1 Couple 3+ children 6.1 Couple + others 1.8 Single parent - dep child 5.7 9.0 4.8 5.6 5.7 Other single parent 0.0 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 31 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.3.2 Our survey gave a profile very close to the Local Area Census 1991 results. The split between adult and couple households differed by around 3½ percentage points in each case. Single parent households were only marginally more than the 1991 level, whereas most of our recent surveys have produced quite significant increases in this category. Table 4-13 Number in Household (Question 14a) Number in household % Nos implied One 24.0 14,441 Two 39.3 23,639 Three 13.3 7,986 Four 16.7 10,073 Five 5.3 3,208 Six 1.1 650 Seven or more 0.3 142 Total 100.0 60,139 4.3.3 The profile emerging from our survey equated to 2.45 persons per household on average - marginally above the UK average of around 2.40 persons and below the Borough 1991 Census figure of 2.66. The breakdown by tenure is set out at Table 4-14 below. Table 4-14 Numbers in Household by Tenure (Question 13a by Q.1) Tenure Nos in household Owner occupier with mortgage 2.89 Owner occupier no mortgage 1.98 Private rented 2.15 Housing Association rented 1.78 Shared ownership* 2.46 Tied to employment* 2.15 Other* 1.65 (* Low volume of data). 4.3.4 The owner occupied with mortgage sector would be expected to have a relatively high proportion of families. The Housing Association rented sector figure was around the level found in other DCA surveys for Council rented with 45% single person households. 84% of the owner-occupier no mortgage households contained no more than two persons, reflecting the higher average age in this form of tenure and the fact that children will in the main have left home. Some 13% of the owner-occupier with mortgage households were single person households, in line with 12-15% in most DCA surveys. 32 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.3.5 If total household numbers in our survey (60,500) are grossed up by 2.45, the population figure implied would be around 148,000. The best Council estimate of current population would appear to be around 156,000 (1998), suggesting that the average number in household for the Borough as implied in our survey is 2.58. 4.3.6 We offer below a broad assessment of „under-occupation‟ based on a modified form of bedroom standard viz. more than one spare bedroom is taken as a benchmark of „under-occupation‟. We also offer a broad assessment of „over-occupation‟ on two bases. Firstly as a modified form of bedroom standard viz. insufficient bedrooms to sleep individual occupants but allowing for one shared bedroom. 4.3.7 On this basis, „under-occupation‟ affects 20.1% of all households in the Borough; „over-occupation‟ affects only 3.6%. However, the specific ages of children in particular could be a factor in under-assessing under-occupation and, more importantly, over-assessing overcrowding. The over-occupation figure was well below the average UK figure produced by the English Housing Survey 1998 (6%). 4.3.8 The assessment of under / over occupation by tenure revealed some quite wide disparity between tenure types as indicated at Table 4-15 below. Table 4-15 Under / Over Occupation by Tenure (Question 14a by Q.5 & Q.1) Tenure % under % over occupied occupied Owner occupied with mortgage 16.6 4.4 Owner occupied no mortgage 35.7 0.4 Private rented 11.2 3.2 Housing Association rented 7.7 6.0 Shared ownership* 33.9 20.8 Tied to employment* 19.8 1.0 Other* 21.7 0.0 (* Low volume of data). 4.3.9 In general, under- all occupation at around 20% was higher than the average level found in recent DCA surveys (15%). Under occupation within the owner occupied no mortgage sector (some 36%), which will include a high proportion of elderly households, was also above that found in similar DCA surveys in which 25% or so have on average appeared to be under occupied in the sector. Housing Association rented under occupation was relatively low against the all-tenure average as has been evidenced in most DCA surveys. 33 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.3.10 Housing Association rented over-occupation at 6% was the same as the UK average over-occupation figure (6%) quoted above but above the overall level in the Borough on the basis of our survey (3.6%). 4.3.11 The particularly low incidence of over-occupation amongst owner-occupiers without a mortgage was a key factor in producing an overall level of over-occupation well below the national average as referred to above. Table 4-16 Population Age Groups (Question 14c) Age group % Local Area Census 1991 0 - 10 14.4 21.0 11 - 15 6.3 16 - 24 8.7 13.8 25 - 44 27.8 32.3 45 - 59 21.7 17.1 60 - 74 15.3 10.9 75 - 84 4.4 3.9 85 + 1.4 1.0 Total 100.0 100.0 4.3.12 The figures show some deviation between the sample and the 1991 Census local area data on a category by category basis as far as comparable figures are available. There was a greater concentration of persons in our data in the 45 -74 age groups (37%) as compared with around 28% in the Census. The 16-44 age groups in our data showed 36.5% against 46% in the Census. The 0-15 age group was the same in our survey as in 1991. The over 75 age group had increased by around 18% and within the latter category the 85+ population had increased by 40%. The profile overall appears to indicate some ageing of the population similar to that found in many of our other recent surveys in which the percentage by which the 45-74 age groups increase and the 16-44 age groups decrease has commonly been 6-8 percentage points. 34 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 4-17 Employment Status of Head Of Household (Question 14e) % Nos implied Full-time employee (30+ hours) 46.7 25,297 Wholly retired 25.7 13,853 Part-time employee (up to 30 hours) 11.1 5,973 Self-employed 6.7 3,637 Looking after the home 6.4 3,429 Permanently sick / disabled 2.1 1,117 Unemployed / available for work 1.1 608 On Government training scheme 0.1 44 In full-time education 0.1 43 Total 100.0 54,001 4.3.13 Only 89% of Heads of Households responded to the question on employment. Some 47% of households specifically indicated full-time (30+ hours per week) employment -a high proportion in our experience. Only 1% or so indicated that they were unemployed and available for work. The position for all household members responding is set out at Table 4-18 below, the percentage relating to the 80% or so of the total implied population actually offering a reply. The proportion in full-time education was around 16%. Table 4-18 Employment Status of All Household Members (Question 14e) % Nos implied Full-time employee 41.1 49,081 Wholly retired 18.1 21,648 In full-time education 15.6 18,561 Part-time employee 9.7 11,549 Looking after the home 6.6 7,861 Self-employed 5.6 6,702 Permanently sick / disabled 2.1 2,509 Unemployed / available for work 1.0 1,236 On Government training scheme 0.2 200 Total 100.0 119,347 35 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 4-19 Occupation of Head Of Household (Question 14f) % Nos implied Professional 27.6 14,221 Retired 26.9 13,874 Managerial / Technical 18.3 9,430 Skilled - manual 7.2 3,731 Skilled - non-manual 4.6 2,345 Unskilled 3.9 1,990 Partially skilled 3.7 1,897 Other 7.8 4,040 Total 100.0 51,528 4.3.14 28% or so of the Heads of Household specifically described themselves as professional; 46% or so as professional / managerial / technical. The result for all household members set out at Table 4-20 was broadly similar. (Overall, around 83% of those responding on employment status answered the question on occupation status). Table 4-20 Occupation of All Household Members (Question 14f) % Nos implied Professional 24.9 24,543 Retired 22.9 22,518 Managerial / Technical 17.2 16,946 Skilled - manual 8.5 8,378 Skilled - non-manual 6.6 6,522 Unskilled 4.3 4,224 Partially skilled 4.3 4,192 Other 11.3 11,172 Total 100.0 98,495 4.3.15 In the case of ethnic origin the breakdown at Table 4-21 below refers only to „Self‟ which we take in the main to be the Head of Household. The response level to the question was around 89%. 36 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 4-21 Ethnic Origin of Households (Question 13d) % Nos implied White 96.5 51,809 Irish 0.6 361 Bangladeshi 0.6 301 Black Caribbean 0.3 164 Pakistani 0.3 143 Indian 0.3 142 Chinese 0.3 139 Black African 0.2 93 Black Other 0.2 93 Other 0.7 395 Total 100.0 53,640 4.4 Costs of Present Housing and Income 4.4.1 The next group of tables relate to the cost of accommodation and household incomes, beginning with a question on weekly rent paid which was answered by around 21% of households (13,000 implied) - some 94% of renters only in the tenure profile at Table 4-1 above. Table 4-22 Weekly Rent Paid for Present Accommodation (Question 16a) Weekly rent % Cum % DCA HNS 1997 Below £50 pw / £215 pm 19.6 19.6 24.2 £51 - £60 pw / £216 - £260 pm 10.5 30.1 25.2 £61 - £70 pw / £261 - £300 pm 20.1 50.2 23.9 £71 - £80 pw / £301 - £350 pm 22.5 72.7 6.5 £81 - £100 pw / £351 - £430 pm 11.7 84.4 £101 - £150 pw / £431 - £650 pm 7.5 91.9 £151 - £200-pw / £651 - £865 pm 5.1 97.0 20.2 £201 - £250 pw / £866 - £1,080 pm 1.4 98.4 Above £251 pw / £1,080 pm 1.6 100.0 4.4.2 The table indicates that some 30% of renters in the sample paid less than £60 per week; 50% less than £70 per week; 73% less than £80 per week. (NB: Over three quarters of those renting were in the Housing Association sector). The 1997 survey indicated some 73% below £70 per week but account has to be taken of subsequent rent rises. 37 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.4.3 From cross-tabulation the percentage breakdown of rent levels for the two main rental tenures was as follows:- Table 4-23 Rent Level / Tenure (Question 16a by Q.1) Weekly rent Private rent HA rented Below £50 pw / £215 pm 9.6 19.4 £51 - £60 pw / £216 - £260 pm 5.4 11.8 £61 - £70 pw / £261 - £300 pm 5.0 25.5 £71 - £80 pw / £301 - £350 pm 4.0 29.3 £81 - £100 pw / £351 - £430 pm 12.7 11.5 £101 - £150 pw / £431 - £650 pm 30.7 1.1 £151 - £200-pw / £651 - £865 pm 24.3 0.6 £201 - £250 pw / £866 - £1,080 pm 2.4 0.4 Above £251 pw / £1,080 pm 5.9 0.4 Total 100.0 100.0 4.4.4 Only 24% of private sector rents appeared to be relevant to households on lower incomes (i.e. under £80 per week). 4.4.5 The next table shows that, of the 72% responding as homeowners in the sample (94% of owner occupiers in Table 4-7 above), some 36% paid no mortgage (outright owners) with a further 25% or so paying less than £400 per month. The latter figure compares with 43% in 1997, although again house price rises since 1997 have to be taken into account. Table 4-24 Monthly Mortgage Paid for Present Accommodation (Question 16b) Monthly mortgage % Cum % DCA HNS 1997 Nil 36.4 36.4 28.2 Below £200 6.3 42.7 15.8 £201 - £250 4.3 47.0 £251 - £300 5.0 52.0 9.9 £301 - £400 9.7 61.7 17.5 £401 - £500 10.0 71.7 11.1 £501 - £600 9.0 80.7 6.9 £601 - £750 7.7 88.4 £751 - £1,000 7.4 95.8 10.6 Above £1,000 4.2 100.0 38 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.4.6 The next question probed for information about household income and the results are set out in Table 4-25. Table 4-25 Gross Annual Income of Households (Question 16c) Annual income % Cum % UK 1997- DCA HNS 1998 * 1997 Below £5,000 4.4 4.4 33.4 37.0 £5,001 - £10,000 10.5 14.9 £10,001 - £15,000 9.4 24.3 14.1 15.0 £15,001 - £20,000 10.0 34.3 13.1 13.0 £20,001 - £25,000 9.4 43.7 £25,001 - £30,000 9.5 53.2 £30,001 - £35,000 7.9 61.1 39.4 35.0 £35,001 - £40,000 8.3 69.4 £40,001 - £50,000 11.1 80.5 Above £50,000 19.5 100.0 (* Derived from weekly earnings levels per key data 1997/98 National Office of Statistics). 4.4.7 The response rate to the income question was around 75% and should give a good picture of the income levels in the Borough. The table shows that only 15% or so of households based on the sample had incomes below £10,000, far lower than the corresponding UK figure (33%). The total proportion earning below the approximate national average household income of £22-23,000 in the Borough (around 39%) was also far below the UK average of around 64%. Some 47% of households in the Borough on the basis of the survey data had incomes above £30,000. 4.4.8 Cross-tabulation produced the following split of income levels of the whole household by Tenure for the main four tenure types. Table 4-26 Annual Household Income by Tenure (Question 16c by Q.1) Tenure Below £5k- £10k- £15k- £20k- £25k- £30k- £35k- £40k- Above Total £5k £10k £15k £20k £25k £30k £35k £40k £50k £50k OO-M 0.6 2.7 4.0 7.7 8.9 11.5 10.8 11.5 16.0 26.3 100.0 OO-O 5.5 18.1 17.4 12.9 10.4 8.3 4.4 4.3 5.7 13.0 100.0 PR 7.9 9.7 11.1 13.5 5.7 7.5 10.7 5.0 7.8 21.1 100.0 HAR 20.2 33.8 17.2 12.1 10.3 3.6 0.7 2.0 0.0 0.1 100.0 Tenure:- OO-M (Owner Occupier -with Mortgage), OO-O (Owner Occupier -Outright), PR (Privately Rented), HAR (Housing Association Rented). 39 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.4.9 The profiles were largely as would be expected as between owner-occupiers and renters, especially bearing in mind that a significant proportion of owner-occupiers without mortgage would be people with limited pension income. Housing Association rented sector incomes were concentrated (71%) below £15,000 per annum and were generally much lower than private rented sector incomes. The latter were more broadly spread across the income bands but some 29% were still below £15,000 per annum. 4.4.10 22% or so of households were in receipt of financial support (13,600 implied in total), a relatively low level in our experience where up to 30% has been common. The results from those responding to a multiple-choice question are set out in Table 4-27 below. On average, each respondent indicated 1.8 forms of financial support. Table 4-27 Financial Support (Question 16d) Responses % Households % Nos implied Council Tax Benefit 30.1 55.5 7,561 Housing Benefit 26.6 49.1 6,682 Disability Allowance 14.9 27.5 3,741 Income Support 14.7 27.2 3,698 Working Family Tax Credit 4.9 9.1 1,239 Job Seekers Allowance 1.3 2.5 336 Other 7.5 13.7 1,869 Total 100.0 184.6 4.5 Car Availability 4.5.1 Respondents were asked how many cars were available within the household. The results are set out in Table 4-28 below. Table 4-28 Car Availability (Question 15) Local Area DCA HNS % Census 1991 1997 % One 41.0 43.3 41.8 Two 34.1 30.5 35.7 Three or more 7.9 7.1 7.6 None 17.0 19.1 14.9 Total 100.0 119.91.0 2097.0 4.5.2 Our survey figures imply a minimum number of 76,600 cars in the Borough (Census 1991: 68,200). However, the results suggested a higher number with no car than in 1997. 40 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 4.6 Recent Movement of Existing Households 4.6.1 As part of the process of establishing some data on the movement of households, largely covered in Section 5 as it relates to future movement, we asked existing households which had moved in the last 5 years where they previously had lived and why they had moved. Some 38% (22,790 households implied) indicated that they had been involved in such a move. 63% had previously lived within the Borough. Table 4-29 Location of Previous Dwelling (Question 4b) % Nos implied Within Basingstoke & Deane 62.8 14,310 Elsewhere in South East 16.2 3,682 Elsewhere in UK 9.7 2,216 Elsewhere in Hampshire 8.9 2,029 Outside UK 2.4 549 Total 100.0 22,786 4.6.2 This group of respondents was then asked what the most important reason was for moving home. 94% or so of the group gave a reason. Table 4-30 Reason for the Move (Question 4c) % Nos implied Move to a better home 26.0 5,601 More desirable area 9.7 2,081 Local employment 9.1 1,963 To be near relative 8.9 1,920 Wanted to buy 8.4 1,808 Size of family 8.2 1,751 Family breakdown 6.8 1,465 Health reasons 6.5 1,396 Easier to commute to work 5.8 1,239 New relationship 5.3 1,131 Move to a cheaper home 3.5 744 Education 1.8 379 Total 100.0 21,478 4.6.3 A move to a better home was by some margin the main single choice, as is commonly found in our surveys. Only 9% cited local employment as a reason. 41 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5 FUTURE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS 5.1 Moving Households 5.1.1 Moving intentions and behaviour were tested in several sections of the questionnaire with an emphasis on future plans to move and also a more focused study on „new‟ and concealed households who represent an existing pent up demand for housing. 5.1.2 Respondents were asked to say whether they or any members of the household are currently seeking to move or will do so in the next three years. The result was that 21.3% of all households responding (12,840 implied) planned a move. Breakdown by tenure is set out in Table 5-1 below. A further 6.8% (4,070 implied) indicated that they wished to move but were unable to do so. 5.1.3 The majority (71.9%) was not intending to move in this time scale, whether able or not to do so. The scale of movement implied, at an average of around 7.1% per annum, was higher than the results of other recent surveys carried out by DCA in which an average figure of 4-5% has emerged but in most cases relating to a 5 year period. This proportion would rise to 9.4% if all those wishing to move in the period were able to do so. Table 5-1 Percentage of Each Form of Tenure Intending to Move (All Movers) (Question 17a by Q.1) Tenure % of tenure % of all moving movers Owner occupier with mortgage 24.8 67.5 Owner occupier no mortgage 15.7 20.0 Private rented 42.2 8.1 Housing Association rented 15.7 2.8 Shared ownership* 11.3 0.4 Tied to employment* 21.1 1.2 Total 100.0 (* Low volume of data). 5.1.4 The percentage of Housing Association rented tenants intending to move (around 16%) was higher than the average for the social rented sector in our recent surveys (around 12%) but well below the all sector average of 21.3%. 5.1.5 Those indicating a wish to move but an inability so to do offered the following reasons for not being able to move. Respondents offered around 1.3 choices on average. However, the number of implied households responding was 6,120, not 4,070 as indicated by the basic responses on moving referred to at 5.1.2 above. The difference probably lies in the fact that some respondents who see a difficulty to moving in the shorter-term answer this question even though they feel that they will be able to move within three years. 42 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.1.6 It would seem clear from Table 5-2 below that cost was by far the most important factor. Table 5-2 Reasons Preventing a Move (Question 17d) % % Nos responses households implied Unable to afford move / buy home 53.0 69.0 4,222 No suitable property in desired location 16.4 21.4 1,309 Family 11.3 14.7 900 Do not qualify for Council / HA property 9.1 11.8 724 Location of employment 5.9 7.6 468 Local education choices 2.2 1.9 119 Cannot sell home 1.5 3.0 183 Current lease / rental agreement 0.6 0.8 48 Total 100.0 130.2 5.1.7 Out migration accounted for some 36% of all moves. A question was asked on the reasons for moving outside the Borough, the results of which are shown in Table 5-3. Responses were received from 4,280 implied households (around 92% of those indicating a move outside the Borough), each offering on average 1.5 choices. Table 5-3 Reason for Moving Out of the Borough (Question 17c) % % Nos responses households implied Employment 27.5 39.9 1,707 Lack of affordable housing 15.3 22.1 948 Family 12.5 18.1 777 Poor quality neighbourhood 10.9 15.8 675 Education 10.3 15.0 641 Lack of suitable shops/leisure 8.7 12.7 543 Lack of high quality housing facilities 6.8 9.9 422 Anti social behaviour/neighbour problems 4.1 5.9 254 Safety/fear of crime 3.9 5.6 241 Total 100.0 145.0 43 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.1.8 Employment was by some margin the main reason for leaving the Borough, as is usually found in DCA surveys. Lack of affordable housing was indicated by 22% of households responding - a high level in our survey experience but obviously more prevalent in surveys in the London / South East area. Table 5-4 Nature of Move by Tenure I (Question 17b by Q.1) Tenure Total* Existing New Existing New Total* households households households households (individual (all within the within the outside the outside the households) moves) Borough Borough Borough Borough Owner occupied 7,284 2,297 2,608 1,792 1,033 15,014 with mortgage (31.5) (35.8) (24.6) (14.2) (106.1) Owner occupied 2,546 856 608 738 427 5,175 no mortgage (33.6) (23.9) (29.0) (16.8) (103.3) Private 984 502 109 352 32 1979 rented (51.0) (11.1) (35.8) (3.2) (101.1) HA 1,656 1,052 513 214 0 3,435 rented (63.5) (31.0) (12.9) (0.0) (107.4) Shared 33 33 0 0 0 66 ownership* (100.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (100) Tied to 133 113 0 20 0 266 employment* (85.0) (0.0) (15.0) (0.0) (100) Total 12,636 4,853 3,838 3,116 1,492 13,299 (38.3) (30.3) (24.8) (11.8) (105.2) (* Low volume of data). 5.1.9 The total number of moves (13,299) implied, being the sum of the four types of move columns in Table 5-4 above, exceeds the number of households involved (12,636) at 5.1.2 and the number of individual respondent households in Table 5-4 (12,840) above for the following reasons:- More than one type of move (i.e. existing household or new household inside / outside the Borough) within a respondent household was anticipated by a number of the households responding to the question on nature of move. The impact of factorisation (grossing up) on marginal differences in response levels between the general question on moving and the more detailed question on the nature of the move. 9 raw data respondents indicating a basic intention to move did not give details of the nature of the move (i.e. the difference between 12,636 at Table 5-4 and 12,840 in 5.1.2). 44 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.1.10 From the same cross-tabulation above we derive the following breakdown by tenure type of moves within the Borough only. Table 5-5 Nature of Move by Tenure II Tenure Existing New household household Owner occupier with mortgage 46.8 53.2 Owner occupier without mortgage 58.5 41.5 Private rented 82.3 17.8 Housing Association rented 67.2 32.8 Shared ownership* 100.0 0.0 Tied to employment* 100.0 0.0 (* Low volume of data). 5.1.11 Table 5-4 above indicates that there were some 4,850 existing households moving as a whole and 3,840 existing households containing new / concealed households moving within the Borough. However, in the various data tables (attached as appendices) relating to existing and new / concealed households moving the number of respondents varies marginally because not all respondents answered every question or because in a few cases respondents completing Section B and / or Section C of the questionnaire may not have filled in the nature of move question. 5.1.12 We have used 4,900 as a form of „control‟ total for existing households moving in the tables below in so far as they relate to questions addressed to the whole group (i.e. excluding cross-tabulations and questions relevant to only a part of the group). The percentages found in the detailed data tables have been applied to the control total to give implied numbers. The „control‟ total for new households moving is discussed separately at 5.3.1 below. 5.2 Housing Needs of Existing Households Moving Within the Borough 5.2.1 This section concentrates on our analysis of the findings in relation to the 4,900 existing households moving within the Borough (i.e. excludes new / concealed households). They constituted some 56% of the total of existing households indicating a move of some kind within the Borough. 5.2.2 The total of 8,700 existing and new households moving within the Borough in the next three years was only two thirds of the level identified in the DCA Housing Needs Survey 1997 (12,900) looked at a 5 year period. No further comparisons are made for existing households moving with the 1997 survey because the survey was geared to all households and new households moving rather than existing households and new households moving. 45 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.2.3 The first question to existing households moving related to the time when accommodation was required. Table 5-6 When is the Accommodation Required (Question 18) Time Accommodation Required % Nos implied Within three months 13.9 681 Within l year 27.1 1,328 1 to 2 years 29.4 1,441 2 to 3 years 29.6 1,450 Total 100.0 4,900 5.2.4 The table shows that 41% of these potential movers sought to do so within one year; some 69% within 2 years. Around 30% of the respondents indicated an intention to move in the longer term (i.e. 2-3 years from now). Table 5-7 Type of Accommodation Required (Question 19) Type % Nos Implied Detached house 42.6 2,087 Semi-detached house 30.0 1,470 Bungalow - semi / detached 11.0 539 Flat / Maisonette 7.5 368 Terraced house 7.3 358 Bungalow - terraced 1.6 78 Bedsit 0.0 0 Mobile home 0.0 0 Total 100.0 4,900 5.2.5 Table 5-7 indicates that around 43% or so of these respondents felt that they required detached houses - well above the average level in our experience for this group for which 25-35% would be around average in DCA surveys. 30% selected semi- detached houses. Interest in flats was low at under 8% but in DCA surveys interest in flats from existing households moving has typically been low (5 - 10%). In general, existing households moving leant towards non-terraced houses and bungalows which has often been evidenced in our surveys for this group. 46 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.2.6 Around 66% of existing household moving respondents indicated that they required two or three bedroom accommodation. Table 5-8 Number of Bedrooms Required (Question 21) Bedrooms % Nos implied One 5.6 274 Two 28.5 1,397 Three 37.6 1,842 Four 26.0 1,274 Five or more 2.3 113 Total 100.0 4,900 5.2.7 The requirement for one bedroom accommodation (under 6%) was lower than in other recent surveys carried out by DCA where 10% has been around the average. Requirement for four + bedroom properties amounted to some 28% in the Borough as a whole, both these issues reflecting the property type requirement profile referred to at 5.2.5 above. 5.2.8 We ran a cross-tabulation relating type of property required to size required in terms of bedrooms with the following results. (It might be noted again that in this, as in other cross-tabulations below, data is included only where the respondent has answered each element (question) involved, hence some small discrepancies with the tables from a single data source. Additionally, the numbers involved in each source are not linked directly to the control total for the group (4,900) referred to at 5.1.11 above as in the case of the whole group single source totals). Table 5-9 Type Required by Size Required (Question 19 by Q.21) Type 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed 4-bed 5 bed+ Total % Nos % Nos % Nos % Nos % Nos Nos Semi-detached 0.0 0 37.1 534 55.9 806 7.0 100 0.0 0 1540 Flat/maison. 37.5 124 62.5 207 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 431 Terraced 0.0 0 31.9 112 56.3 197 11.8 41 0.0 0 450 Detached 0.0 0 4.2 85 33.9 675 56.1 1,117 5.8 116 2,093 Bungalow -s/d 0.8 4 69.0 365 30.2 160 0.0 0 0.0 0 629 Bungalow -terr 52.0 41 48.0 38 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 179 Total 169 1,341 1,838 1,258 116 5,322 5.2.9 66% of bungalow demand was for 2-bed property as compared with around 4% of detached demand, of which some 62% favoured 4+-bed accommodation. 56% of semi- detached demand was for 3-bed accommodation; 37% for 2-bed. (NB: There was no demand for bedsit / room only or mobile home). 47 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.2.10 Existing moving households were next asked if they were looking to rent or buy. The results are set out in Table 5-10. Table 5-10 Preferred Tenure of Existing Households Moving (Question 22) Tenure % Nos implied Owner occupation 66.3 3,249 Housing Association rented 30.5 1,494 Shared ownership 2.3 113 Private rented 0.9 44 Tied to employment 0.0 0 Total 100.0 4,900 5.2.11 Around 69% (3,360 implied) saw owner occupation including shared ownership as their priority. Some 30% of the group indicated a preference for Housing Association rented accommodation - slightly above the level found for Council rented accommodation in other DCA surveys in which a figure of 20% - 25% would be closer to the average. Interest in private rented accommodation was minimal. 5.2.12 We ran a cross-tabulation to compare type of property required with type of tenure preferred with the following results. Table 5-11 Type Required by Preferred Tenure (Question 19 by Q.22) Type HA Private Owner Shared Total Rented Rented Occupation Ownership % Nos % Nos % Nos % Nos Nos Semi-detached 31.8 442 0.0 0 62.9 873 5.3 73 1,488 Flat/Maisonette 42.7 141 9.3 31 48.0 158 0.0 0 430 Terraced 89.1 312 0.0 0 10.9 38 0.0 0 450 Detached 5.0 96 0.7 14 93.9 1,784 0.4 8 2,002 Bungalow -semi/det 40.5 197 0.0 0 53.2 259 6.3 31 587 Bungalow -terraced 100.0 79 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 179 Total 1,267 45 3,112 112 5,136 5.2.13 Demand in the Housing Association rented sector was predominantly (60%) for semi- detached and terraced properties. Only 11% required flats / maisonettes. 57% of owner-occupation demand was for detached houses, 28% for semi-detached houses. 5.2.14 Some 30% (1,480 implied) were registered on a Housing Register - 82% indicating registration on the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council list; 42% (620 implied) on a Housing Association list. (Around 28% indicated more than one list). Of those registered on the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council list 74% (902) were already Housing Association tenants and 90% of those on the Housing Association Housing Register were already Housing Association tenants (562). 48 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.2.15 Existing households moving were asked where accommodation was required. Up to two choices were permitted. On average each respondent offered around 1.3 choices. Table 5-12 Where Accommodation is Required (Question 23) Location % % Nos implied responses households (all choices) Basingstoke 40.8 55.0 2,775 Anywhere in the Borough 15.9 21.4 1,080 In another village 9.8 13.3 670 Old Basing 7.9 10.6 535 In existing village 7.8 10.6 534 Oakley 5.0 6.8 341 Tadley 4.8 6.5 327 Whitchurch 3.1 4.2 210 Overton 2.8 3.7 188 Kingsclere 2.1 2.9 145 Total 100.0 135.0 5.2.16 Interest was overwhelmingly in Basingstoke itself with 55% of households responding indicating Basingstoke as one of their choices - 61% of all responses for a specific location. Around 16% were flexible on location anywhere in the Borough. 5.3 Housing Needs of New / Concealed Households Moving Within the Borough 5.3.1 In this section we look in detail at those people living in an existing household but described as a „new‟ household and which we take as a proxy for the extent of „concealment‟ of housing need in the Borough because these households represent a pent up and unmet demand. We found that 6.3% of all existing households in the Borough (3,840 as indicated at 5.1.11 above) contained such households, based on a three year projection, somewhat higher than the level evidenced in the majority of recent surveys carried out by DCA in which figures in the region of 4-5% were about average. In our 1997 survey, based on a five year period projection, the number of existing households with a new / concealed household was 4,340 or 7.5% of all existing households. In the case of new households moving, however the questionnaire in this survey allowed for up to three such households for any one existing household. 5.3.2 The 2001 survey data tables (attached as appendices) give marginally different response levels as discussed at 5.1.11 above. Various paragraphs in this section below refer to a „control‟ total of all such households of 4,550 being approximately 3,840 1st households; 670 2nd households and 40 3rd households. We also identify from Table 5-17 onwards another „control‟ total of 1,400 which refers only to new households intending to move within one year. 5.3.3 The total figure of 4,550 new / concealed households was composed of 47% (2,150) single person (all) households; 53% (2,400) couple households. In the 1997 survey the proportion of single households involved was 68%. 49 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.3.4 The vast majority (over 93%) of the total of 4,550 new households consisted of people described as „children‟ (16+) of the household as set out in Table 5-13 below, as compared with 87% in the 1997 survey (in which „children‟ were 18+). Table 5-13 Person Looking to Form New / Concealed Households (Question 26) Persons forming household % Nos implied Children 16 + 93.5 4,254 Lodger 1.0 46 Parent 3.1 141 Grandparent 0.8 36 Other 1.6 73 Total 100.0 4,550 5.3.5 The age question refers to individual household members. The number in Table 5-14 below equates to that implied by the single / couples split at 5.3.3 above. Table 5-14 Age Structure of New / Concealed Households (Question 27b&c) Age % Nos implied 16 - 24 59.5 4,126 25 - 44 35.1 2,429 45 - 64 4.1 281 65 - 74 1.0 68 75 + 0.3 24 Total 100.0 6,928 5.3.6 Table 5-14 above suggests that 60% of concealment related to young adults (70% in the 1997 survey), an increase an „older‟ new forming households. Table 5-15 Number of Children (Question 27d) Children % Nos implied None 91.3 4,154 One 4.9 223 Two or more 1.7 77 Child due 2.1 96 Total 100.0 4,550 5.3.7 The survey found that children (under the age of 16) were involved in less than 9% of these households, suggesting only 400 or so cases in total. The proportion in the 1997 survey was 12%. 50 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.3.8 We asked if the new / concealed household was being formed with a partner currently living in a separate household elsewhere in the Borough. Overall, 26% (1,120 implied) indicated that this was the case. Table 5-16 When Accommodation is Required (Question 28) When required % Nos implied Within three months 8.7 396 Within one year 22.2 1,010 1 to 2 years 27.2 1,238 2 to 3 years 41.9 1,906 Total 100.0 4,550 5.3.9 31% or so of the new household moving group required accommodation within one year; 58% within two years. Around 42% of the group saw their requirement as longer-term (2-3 years) - a higher proportion than for existing households moving (30%). In the 1997 survey, 45% indicated a move within one year. Table 5-17 Type of Accommodation Required (Question 29) Type All new households New households moving moving within 1 year % Nos implied % Nos implied Flat / maisonette 45.3 2,061 38.7 542 Semi-detached 27.1 1,233 31.0 434 Terraced 22.2 1,010 19.9 279 Detached 2.7 123 2.6 36 Bungalow -semi / detached 1.3 61 4.6 64 Mobile home 0.7 30 2.2 31 Bedsit / room only 0.4 19 0.0 0 Bungalow -terraced 0.3 13 1.0 14 Total 100.0 4,550 100.0 1,400 5.3.10 The results from the survey showed a very different profile from existing households moving, as might be expected for a generally younger group. Around 45% required flats / maisonettes; 22% terraced houses. Aspiration to detached houses / bungalows was less than 5%. Those households who requested a mobile home were all current Housing Association tenants aged between 25-44. 51 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.3.11 The demand for a higher proportion of smaller dwellings was also reflected in the number of bedrooms required as can be seen in Table 5-18. Table 5-18 Number of Bedrooms Required (Question 30) Bedrooms All new households New households moving moving within 1 year % Nos implied % Nos implied One 26.4 1,201 20.5 287 Two 59.6 2,712 57.0 798 Three 12.8 582 21.1 295 Four or more 1.2 55 1.4 20 Total 100.0 4,550 100.0 1,400 5.3.12 We ran a cross-tabulation for all new households moving relating type of property required to size required in terms of bedrooms with the following results. Table 5-19 Type Required by Size Required (Question 29 by Q.31) Type 1-bed 2-bed 3-bed 4+-bed Total os os os os % N % N % N % N Nos Semi-detached 7.5 84 62.7 706 29.8 335 0.0 0 1,225 Detached 0.0 0 45.9 51 7.2 8 46.9 52 211 Terraced 5.7 57 78.6 773 15.7 154 0.0 0 1084 Flat / maisonette 50.9 1,010 49.1 976 0.0 0 0.0 0 2,086 Bungalow -semi / det 0.0 0 0.0 0 100.0 61 0.0 0 161 Bungalow -terraced 0.0 0 100.0 13 0.0 0 0.0 0 113 Mobile home 0.0 0 100.0 30 0.0 0 0.0 0 130 Total 1,151 2,549 558 52 5,010 5.3.13 51% or so of flatted accommodation demand was for 1-bed units; 49% for 2-bed. 88% of all 1-bed demand was in the form of flats. 63% of semi-detached house demand and around 79% of terraced demand was for 2-bed property. Table 5-20 Preferred Tenure of New / Concealed Households (Question 32) Tenure All new households New households moving moving within 1 year % Nos implied % Nos implied Owner occupation 45.5 2,070 34.6 484 HA rented 36.6 1,666 48.4 678 Private rented 12.4 564 14.1 197 Shared ownership 5.5 250 2.9 41 Total 100.0 4,550 100.0 1,400 52 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.3.14 45% or so of all new households moving expressed preference for owner-occupation; 45 - 55% has been around average in DCA surveys. Interest in Housing Association rented accommodation was relatively high at around 37%. Preference for Housing Association rented property was even higher (some 48%) amongst those indicating an intention to move within one year. 5.3.15 We ran a cross-tabulation for all new households moving to compare type of property required with form of tenure preferred with the following results. Table 5-21 Type Required by Preferred Tenure (Question 29 by Q.32) Type HA Private Owner Shared Total Rent Rent Occupation Ownership % Nos % Nos % Nos % Nos Nos Semi-detached 28.5 335 5.0 59 54.9 646 11.6 136 1,276 Detached 0.0 0 0.0 0 92.7 102 7.3 8 210 Terraced 27.8 265 13.6 129 54.5 519 4.1 39 1,052 Flat/maisonette 48.0 993 15.0 310 34.0 703 3.0 62 2,168 Bungalow -semi/det 50.0 31 0.0 0 50.0 31 0.0 0 162 Bungalow -terraced 0.0 0 0.0 0 100.0 13 0.0 0 113 Bedsit/room only 0.0 0 100.0 19 0.0 0 0.0 0 119 Total 1,624 517 2,014 245 5,100 5.3.16 61% of the interest in Housing Association rented accommodation was for flats. Interest in owner occupation was well spread across semi-detached, terraced and flats / maisonettes. 55% of interest in semi-detached and 55% of the interest in terraced property was for owner-occupation. 5.3.17 Some 22% of all new concealed / households moving (990 implied) were registered on a Housing Register, 93% (920 implied) being on the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council list. (Only 3% offered more than one list). In the case of those moving within 1 year, around 41% (576 implied) were registered, all on the Council list. 5.3.18 New / concealed households were asked the same questions on location as existing households moving. The table below indicates all preferences for all households taken together and those for new households moving within one year. (Two choices offered). Respondents gave around 1.3 choices on average in both cases. 53 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 5-22 Choice of Location (Question 35) Location All new households moving New households moving within 1 year % % Nos % % Nos responses households implied responses households implied Basingstoke 45.5 60.1 2,769 44.6 60.5 791 Anywhere in Borough 17.9 23.5 1,083 12.3 16.7 219 Oakley 8.0 10.6 487 7.7 10.4 136 Tadley 7.9 10.4 480 8.9 12.0 157 In existing village 5.5 7.2 334 5.4 7.3 95 Overton 4.0 5.3 245 5.6 7.6 99 Old Basing 3.2 4.3 197 6.2 8.4 110 Whitchurch 3.2 4.2 193 2.7 3.7 48 In another village 2.5 3.3 152 3.7 5.0 65 Kingsclere 2.3 3.1 141 2.9 4.0 52 Total 100.0 132.0 100.0 135.6 5.3.19 In both cases some 60% of households opted for Basingstoke itself as one of their choices. Otherwise, it was hard to determine any clear trend. The proportion of new households indicating „Anywhere in the Borough‟ was relatively low in our experience. New households moving tend to be more flexible on location than existing households moving but in this survey there was little difference. 5.3.20 A similar group of questions was posed as for existing households on cost of accommodation and household income beginning with the maximum weekly rent that those electing to rent might be able or prepared to pay. Table 5-23 Maximum Weekly Rent of ‘New / Concealed’ Households (Question 37a) Weekly / monthly rent All new households New households moving moving within 1 year % Cum % % Cum % Below £50 pw / £215 pm 25.9 25.9 27.4 27.4 £51 - £60 pw / £216 - £260 pm 29.0 54.9 26.8 54.2 £61 - £70 pw / £261 - £300 pm 18.7 73.6 22.0 76.2 £71 - £80 pw / £301 - £350 pm 9.0 82.6 6.4 82.6 £81 - £100 pw / £351 - £430 pm 8.5 91.1 7.6 90.2 £101 - £150 pw / £431 - £650 pm 6.2 97.3 3.4 93.6 £151 - £200-pw / £651 - £865 pm 2.7 100.0 6.4 100.0 £201 - £250 pw / £866 - £1,080 pm 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 Above £251 pw / £1,080 pm 0.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 54 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 5.3.21 Responses were received from some 2,580 implied cases (around 57% of all new / concealed households). Of those, over 55% could afford a weekly rent of no more than £60; 74% or so no more than £70 (as compared with around 50% in the existing household profile). In the case of the movers within 1 year responses were received from 900 implied cases, around 65% of that group. The profile was much the same as for all new households moving. Table 5-24 Maximum Monthly Mortgage of ‘New / Concealed’ Households (Question 37b) Monthly rent All new households New households moving moving within 1 year % Cum % % Cum % Below £200 13.2 13.2 6.0 6.0 £201 - £250 12.0 25.2 6.6 12.6 £251 - £300 28.5 53.7 44.8 57.4 £301 - £400 23.3 77.0 17.2 74.6 £401 - £500 11.6 88.6 12.1 86.7 £501 - £600 6.4 95.0 2.4 89.1 £601 - £750 3.5 98.8 10.9 100.0 £751 - £1,000 0.0 98.8 0.0 100.0 Above £1,000 1.5 100.0 0.0 100.0 5.3.22 For those seeking to buy a dwelling, 77% could not or would not pay a mortgage of more than £400 per month; 89% or so no more than £500. Again, the profile for new households moving within one year was much the same as that for the whole group. The mortgage bands selected might reflect to some degree perceptions of the actual cost of access to home ownership. 5.3.23 The „new / concealed‟ households were asked for a further information on their financial position via a question on annual income. These findings are presented in Table 5-25 below. 55 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 5-25 Annual Income of ‘New / Concealed’ Households (Question 37c) Income All new households moving New households moving within 1 year % Cum Nos % Cum Nos responses % implied responses % implied Below £10,000 12.3 12.3 559 17.9 17.9 251 £10,001 - £15,000 34.1 46.4 1,552 25.3 43.2 354 £15,001 - £20,000 25.6 72.0 1,165 32.1 75.3 449 £20,001 - £25,000 10.9 82.9 496 5.6 80.9 78 £25,001 - £27,500 4.7 87.6 214 2.7 83.6 38 £27,501 - £30,000 2.7 90.3 123 4.6 88.2 64 £30,001 - £32,500 1.8 92.1 82 0.0 88.2 0 £32,501 - £35,000 2.9 95.0 132 2.7 90.9 38 £35,001 - £40,000 1.5 96.5 68 3.9 94.8 55 £40,001 - £45,000 0.0 96.5 0 0.0 94.8 0 £45,001 - £50,000 1.3 97.8 59 1.7 96.5 24 Above £50,000 2.2 100.0 100 3.5 100.0 49 Total 4,550 1,400 5.3.24 The actual response level was around 86% of all new / concealed household respondents (well above our average level for this question of around 60%). The percentages derived have been applied to the figure of 4,550 being the approximate total number of all new households forming within the Borough. The proportion of new / concealed households with annual incomes at or above the approximate average UK annual household income of £22-23,000 was 23% or so as compared with 21% on average in recent DCA surveys. The proportion in the sub £10,000 per annum category (12%) was significantly lower than in other recent DCA surveys in which 25-35% has been around the average range for new / concealed households. For the new households moving within one year the profile was much the same. 5.3.25 On the basis of a 91% response, only 8% (330 implied) of the potential new households would be likely to claim Housing Benefit. Over 20% has been common in our recent surveys. Of those moving within one year the level was 10% (140 implied). 56 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 6 SPECIAL HOUSING NEEDS 6.1 Needs of Disabled People 6.1.1 Issues relating to households with one or more member affected by a disability or long-term illness term were addressed through a series of questions. This section draws together the findings from these questions. 6.1.2 We found that some 17% of households in the area did contain somebody with a disability, suggesting some 10,160 households in the Borough were affected in some way. In our 1997 survey, the figure was under 10%. 6.1.3 Assessment of a UK average for the percentage of households affected is difficult both because of the impact of multiple disability and the tendency to express statistics in terms of population rather than household population. The Department of Social Security report of 1998 (based on a 1996 / 97 survey) suggested as many as 8.6 million disabled adults in private households - around 14 - 15% of the population. 6.1.4 From cross-tabulation we established that the comparative figures for the various tenures were as per Table 6-1 below. The Housing Association rented figure was very high in relation to other forms of tenure (ignoring the few in the „other‟ category) and higher than that found in most DCA surveys, although it should be stressed that the Council figure data is commonly well above the all tenure average. Table 6-1 Incidence of Disability by Tenure (Question 9 by Q.1) Tenure % Nos implied Owner occupied with mortgage 8.2 2,463 Owner occupied without mortgage 20.5 3,353 Private rented 11.7 289 Housing Association rented 36.7 3,866 Shared ownership* 12.6 37 Tied to employment* 14.8 104 Other* 56.8 52 (* Low volume of data). 6.1.5 In around 83% of cases only one household member was involved; in 17% two members were involved. 58% of all disabled household members were over the age of 60; 22% under 45. 57 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 6.1.6 The next table addresses the nature of the disability of members of the household. The results reflect the fact that more than one choice was offered, based respectively on 9,890 and 1,660 implied cases for 1st and 2nd members respectively. Table 6-2 Households with a Disabled Person (Question 10c) Disability 1st Member 2nd Member % % Nos % % Nos responses households implied responses households implied (all choices) (all choices) Walking 34.2 48.5 4,801 26.7 31.6 523 difficulty Asthmatic/respira- 15.2 21.5 2,128 25.3 29.9 496 tory problem Visual / hearing 12.6 18.0 1,777 9.7 11.4 190 impairment Wheelchair user 7.1 10.1 995 4.4 5.2 86 Mental health 6.6 9.3 920 5.5 6.4 107 problem Learning 3.5 5.0 493 8.9 10.5 174 difficulty Other disability 20.8 29.5 2,923 19.5 23.0 382 Total 100.0 141.9 100.0 118.0 6.1.7 The largest group affected by a named disability was those with a walking difficulty of some kind, affecting around 8% of all households in the Borough. Just over 10% of households with a disabled person contained someone who was a wheelchair user, suggesting around 1,000 in the Borough as a whole. Of the 2nd members with a disability, 90 or so were also wheelchair users. Some 22% indicated that they were affected by respiratory problems but over 29% indicated the „other physical disability‟ category. 6.1.8 We ran a cross-tabulation to see if the houses which had been adapted for a wheelchair were indeed the dwellings where people using a wheelchair lived and found this to apply in only 19% or so of cases (212 of the 1,123 at Table 6-5 below), suggesting a mismatch between houses adapted and those where wheelchair users live. By extension, it would appear that 783 wheelchair user households (79%) did not live in suitably adapted premises (viz. 995 in Table 6-2 above less 212). Of those 212 households who lived in adapted dwellings 61% were from the owner-occupied sector and 39% from Housing Association rented sector. 6.1.9 Only 34% of households indicating a member with a disability also indicated a need for care / support. Of those, 66% were receiving sufficient care / support. 58 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 6.1.10 Two questions sought information of the degree to which the home had been built or adapted to meet the needs of disabled persons. Table 6-3 Adaptations for the Disabled (Question 11a) Adaptations % Nos implied Adapted 9.6 5,792 Not adapted 90.4 54,529 Total 100.0 60,321 6.1.11 As can be seen from the above, around 10% of properties had been so adapted. Recent DCA surveys suggest an average of only 7%. Our survey in 1997 suggested only 4%. 6.1.12 The split by tenure is set out in the next table below. Table 6-4 Adaptations by Tenure (Question 11a by Q.1) Tenure % Nos implied Owner occupied with mortgage 3.8 1,135 Owner occupied no mortgage 9.5 1,546 Private rented 4.8 118 Housing Association rented 27.1 2,850 HA shared ownership* 13.6 39 Tied to employment* 7.4 52 (* Low volume of data). 6.1.13 Adaptation in the Housing Association rented sector was, as might be expected, considerably higher (around 27%) than e.g. in the mortgage paying owner occupied sector where adaptation levels were very low (under 4%). Adaptation in the owner occupied no mortgage sector was only at the average for the Borough, even though a higher proportion of elderly persons tends to be within that sector. 6.1.14 6,039 implied households actually responded to the question on which adaptations had been provided. The following adaptations were identified based on responses to a multiple-choice question, respondents making around 2.2 choices on average. 59 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 6-5 Types of Adaptations Provided (Question 11b) Adaptations % % Nos implied responses households (all choices) Handrails / grabrails 22.4 49.9 3,015 Bathroom adaptations 19.4 43.1 2,606 Access to property 18.2 40.4 2,439 Ground floor toilet 17.0 37.8 2,285 Wheelchair adaptations 8.4 18.6 1,123 Stairlift / Vertical lift 7.7 17.2 1,037 Extension 2.2 4.9 297 Other 4.7 10.5 633 Total 100.0 222.4 6.1.15 Some 19% of these households had had wheelchair adaptations carried out - significantly higher than the average in DCA surveys (9-10%) which appears to suggest that many adapted homes are no longer occupied by a disabled person in the light of the comments at 6.1.8 above. Around 50% had had handrails / grabrails adaptations; 43% bathroom adaptations, the most commonly chosen items in DCA surveys, but in the Borough ground floor toilets (38%) and improved access to property (40%) also featured prominently. 6.1.16 Only 4,790 implied households responded to a further question on what facilities still needed to be provided to meet the needs of a current member of the household. Respondents made around 1.4 choices on average. Table 6-6 Types of Adaptations Required for Current Member (Question 12a) Adaptations % % Nos implied responses households (all choices) Bathroom adaptations 29.1 41.2 1,973 Ground floor toilet 14.9 21.1 1,012 Handrails / grabrails 14.4 20.4 979 Stairlift / Vertical lift 11.6 16.4 785 Access to property 9.6 13.6 654 Extension 6.4 9.0 433 Wheelchair adaptations 5.6 8.0 382 Other 8.4 11.9 572 Total 100.0 141.6 60 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 6.1.17 Handrails / grabrails adaptations, greater access to property and ground floor toilets featured less prominently, presumably reflecting levels of work completed as indicated in Table 6-5 above. However, demand for bathroom adaptation remained high as a proportion and in implied numbers, even though considerable adaptation work appears to have been carried out in that area. The apparent demand for wheelchair adaptation would appear very low if the comments at 6.1.8 above are taken into account but would appear compatible with the comment at 6.1.15 about the level of wheelchair adaptations completed in comparison with other DCA surveys. 6.1.18 Of the 79% replying to a question on awareness of Local Authority grants for aids, adaptations and home improvements, only 33% of respondents indicated that they were aware of such grants. 6.2 Supported Accommodation and Housing For Older People 6.2.1 Some 22% of existing households moving (1,070 implied) indicated an interest in supported accommodation. Of those, only 21% (227 implied) gave Housing Association sheltered housing with warden support accommodation as a requirement. Over 48% (520 implied) opted for independent accommodation with external support. Table 6-7 Type of Supported Accommodation (Question 20) Type % Nos implied Independent accommodation with external support 48.5 521 HA sheltered with warden support 21.1 227 Private sheltered with warden support 19.2 206 Hostel / group home 6.7 72 Residential housing home 4.6 49 Independent accommodation live-in carer 2.9 31 6.2.2 In addition to elderly housing needs from the existing population, some 8% of existing households (4,720 implied) indicted that they had elderly relatives who would need to move to the Borough in the next three years. 93% of those responded to a further multiple choice question on the type of accommodation required (4,371 implied). 61 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 6-8 Accommodation Required by Elderly Relatives in Next 3 Years (Question 13b) Adaptations % % Nos implied responses households (all choices) Private housing 23.7 29.2 1,275 (warden assisted) Housing Association 22.7 27.9 1,219 (warden assisted) Residential care 14.5 17.8 779 Live with respondent 13.4 16.5 721 (need extension / annexe) Housing Association 11.4 14.0 613 (not warden assisted) Private housing 10.1 12.4 540 (not warden assisted) Live with respondent 4.2 5.2 226 (existing home adequate) Total 100.0 123.0 6.2.3 Some 42% of households indicated Housing Association accommodation as one of their options. 62 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 7 POPULATION GROWTH AND HOUSEHOLD FORMATION PROJECTIONS 7.1 Introduction 7.1.1 In this section of the report we provide a short background commentary to the demographic element in housing demand in the Borough. The purpose is twofold. First, to provide a context in which the results of the postal questionnaire can be interpreted. Secondly, to give a more specific focus on the demand for affordable housing provision and to make projections for five and ten year periods. 7.1.2 Modelling housing needs is a very complex procedure and it is only very recently that attempts have been made to model local housing needs. Most of the established procedures are aimed at the provision of national level estimates of housing need, including:- simple estimates such as those provided by the DETR, which measured the crude dwelling to household surplus (and concluded no additional building was necessary to meet need); a second approach by the Audit Commission measured household growth minus expected private sector output; Glen Bramley‟s work focused on local supply and demand to calculate for a particular point in time the proportion of new households unable to buy in the market (minus social sector re-lets); Steve Wilcox described a „Net Stock‟ approach which calculates net household increase and adds a factor for concealed households before deducting new private sector output to arrive at estimates of need in the social sector. 7.1.3 Kleinman and Whitehead have devised a so called „Gross Flows‟ approach which looks at gross household formation, tenure choice, demand from in-migrants and deducts these from new social output and re-lets to yield a measure of social housing requirements. 7.1.4 How these national models translate to the local level is not at all clear. Kleinman and Whitehead have attempted a „Gross Flows‟ analysis for Cambridge but relied entirely on secondary data for their estimates. This is a problem in the model particularly for the incorporation of measures of concealed households and factors relating to affordability are not considered directly but by modelling the tenure propensities of new households. 7.1.5 Our method emphasises the affordability issue and gives much greater weight to the issue of concealment of households than most of the „national‟ level studies. 7.1.6 The affordability measure is derived from primary data collected in the household survey, from access to local house prices, and the concealment issue is also addressed through the survey findings. 63 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 7.1.7 However, without a major study of local housing market conditions it is simply not possible to say with entire certainty the extent to which the local market caters for households at different levels of income; for example, where there are more households who can afford the median house price than the available supply of that type of house. 7.2 Demographic Analysis 7.2.1 There are four basic components to changes in the number and composition of households. The aim of this section of the report is to highlight the issues, which are relevant to the evaluation of housing needs in the Borough particularly the changes in:- the age distribution of the population arising from births, deaths and ageing of the indigenous population; family units such as marriage, divorce and child bearing patterns; the number and composition of households arising from migration, particularly due to employment opportunities in the area; the probabilities that family units form a separate household, particularly in response to changes in incomes in the labour market area. 7.2.2 In local area forecasting new household formation is mainly due to responses to income and employment opportunities. New household formation is also affected by life cycle patterns. This purely demographic influence on the number of households contributes to about 40% of the growth in the number of new households at any one time (Dicks, 1988; Ermisch, 1985). 7.2.3 The long term Population Projections in the tables in this section follow the DETR household formation rates (1996 based). The data has been provided by Hampshire County Council Planning Department. 7.2.4 The Long-Term Population Projections are based on a set of assumptions which accord as closely as possible to the latest Government projections of household formation rates applied to the latest national population forecasts. 7.2.5 The distribution and phasing of development acceptable to the Government is indicated in Regional Planning guidance and in approved structure and unitary development plans. 7.2.6 Thus, the Long-Term Population Projections produced by the County Planning Department incorporate the most recent DETR household formation rates (expressed as age, sex, marital status specific household representative rates), and the adopted County Structure Plan dwellings proposals, phased broadly evenly over the plan period but taking account of relevant local factors. 7.2.7 The household formation rates determine the likely number of households which will be formed from the resident population, and thus the demand for dwellings. The difference between the supply of dwellings, as given by the structure plan proposals, and the demand indicates the number of dwellings available for in-migrants and ultimately the level of net migration. 64 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 7.2.8 Hampshire County Council would recommend that these should be used bearing in mind that they are likely to define the lower end of the range of possible outcomes. 7.2.9 Difference between the forecasts and the projections should be largely confined to differences in the scale of population growth. We would not expect substantial differences in age distributions. 7.3 Population Projections 7.3.1 The projections in Table 7-1 are based on County predictions (1996 based). These figures are based on the assumptions regarding mortality, fertility and migration etc, and are contained in population and household projections for the Borough for the period 1996-2011, prepared by Hampshire County Council using the baseline scenario from the Structure Plan Review. Table 7-1 Projected Population Change in the Borough, 1996 - 2011 Mid Year 2001 2006 2011 Change 1996 Total 151,593 158,563 161,363 164,850 Population Change +6,970 +2,800 +3,487 +13,257 % Change +4.6 +1.8 +2.2 +8.7 7.3.2 The table shows a rise in the population of the Borough of about 13,257 over the forecast period. 7.4 Age Structure Forecast 1996 - 2011 7.4.1 The next stage in the forecast is to disaggregate the population and household data into age bands because there may be changes in the population structure with significant housing implications. Table 7-2 Population Age Band Forecast, the Borough, 1996 - 2011 Age Bands 1996 2001 2006 2011 Change (Years) 0 - 19 39,979 40,720 40,477 39,678 -301 20 -29 21,411 21,706 20,940 22,213 +802 30 - 44 36,158 37,609 37,322 34,825 -1,333 45 - 64 35,463 38,968 41,964 44,864 +9,401 65+ 18,582 19,560 20,660 23,270 +4,688 Total 151,593 158,563 161,363 164,850 Population Change +6,970 +2,800 +3,487 +13,257 % Change +4.6 +1.8 +2.2 +8.7 NB. Percentage change is measured between 5-year bands, not the base population. This is a better representation of the incremental change. 65 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 7.4.2 As we show above there will be a rise in the population of the Borough of about 8.7% over the forecast period according to the model. There is projected to be around 13,257 more people in the Borough in 2011 than in 1996. 7.4.3 Currently there is a growth of population in the 45-64 and the over 65 age groups, so that between 1996 and 2011 they increase by 14,089 people, 26.5% and 25.2% respectively. 7.4.4 The other significant feature here is the small decline in ages in the 20-29 age group between 2001 and 2006. On balance the Borough continues to be an ageing population. Indeed the detailed figures in Table 7-3 show that the number in the 80+ age group increases by 1,314 people, 29.4% between 1996 and 2011. Given the resource demands often associated with very elderly people, these are significant figures. Table 7-3 Numbers of 80+ in the Borough, 1996-2001 Numbers Mid Year 2001 2006 2011 Change 1996 80 + 4,475 4,896 5,338 5,789 Change +421 +442 +451 +1,314 % Change +9.4 +9.0 +8.5 +29.4 7.5 Forecast Change in Households 1996-2011 7.5.1 Table 7-4 outlines the household formation forecasts for the Borough in 15-year period from 1996 to 2011. It is based on the statistics provided by Hampshire County Council, and we consider it the best available forecast on currently available data of household change in the Borough. Table 7-4 Forecast Change in Households in the Borough 1996-2011 1996 2001 2006 2011 Change 1996-2011 57,607 62,486 65,996 69,370 Change +4,879 +3,510 +3,374 +11,763 % Change +8.5 +5.6 +5.1 +20.4 7.5.2 There have been significant changes in household formation over the last decade which result in much higher household numbers compared to population growth, with lowering average household size. There is a large increase in single person households through elderly people living longer, separation and divorce and young people forming single person households. 66 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 7.6 Summary The population is forecast to increase by 13,257 people, 8.7% over the period to 2011. However, this population increase will not occur uniformly throughout all age ranges. The net increase is concentrated entirely within the population aged 45 and over, which is expected to increase by more than 25% over the fifteen years 1996- 2011. The profile of the local population is thus changing significantly. The 20-29 age group is forecast to grow by only about 800 people between 1996 and 2011. This age range covers the main household forming group and will have implications for future affordable and market housing need both in the short and longer term. The 30-44 age group declines by 1,300 people over the period 1996-2011. This age range covers the main house-moving and economically active group. Both the 45-retirement age group and the “younger” retired group (those under 80) are projected to increase by more than 25% between 1996 and 2011. The "older" retirement group, those aged 80 and over grows by more than 29% from 1996, by over 1,300 elderly people to approximately 5,800 people by 2011. This group is much more likely to have care and support needs which should now be assessed in detail. 67 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8 NEEDS ASSESSMENT MODEL, PLANNING & DELIVERY 8.1 Affordable Housing Needs Requirement 8.1.1 In this section, we calculate the overall affordable housing needs requirement, so that the Council can assess the level for target setting for negotiations for new residential planning consents. The need requirement calculation is structured to take account of the key demand sources, the Housing Register, homeless and concealed households and those emanating from future demographic change. 8.1.2 Each category has been adjusted to ensure that proper account is taken of households who can access market rent or owner occupation without assistance (income >£25,000) and to eliminate any double counting between categories (those on a Housing Register and those forming a two-person household). 8.1.3 This section assesses the overall scale of need and supply of affordable housing in the Borough, calculated on an annual flow of need and supply in accordance with Guidance. 8.1.4 DEMAND D1 The Backlog of existing housing need is that registered on the Housing Register. times a quota to convert it into an annual flow and to eliminate it over a 5 year period. D2 New need arising annually:- D2.1 Concealed / New forming households identified in the 2001 HNS adjusted to eliminate double counting:- D2.2 Concealed households identified in the survey, annualised at the level of those forming in the first year. D2.3 Those already recorded on the Housing Register. D2.5 Two person household formation (see Para 5.3.12) and those with incomes adequate to access the housing market (depending on location). (See Para. 5.3.22) D2.6 The total net affordable is the number of units required over a five-year period. D3 The change in the Housing Register position from new registrations, re-instatements and cancellations. D4 The total affordable need each year. 8.1.5 SUPPLY S1 Existing Social stock relets from RSL‟s (net of transfers). New Programme (average of 3 years 1999 – 2001). 8.1.6 DS The net annual affordable stock shortfall. 68 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.1.7 Affordable Housing Assessment D1 Backlog of Need (existing households) Housing Register in need at 1/4/2001 4,034 Quota to reduce over 5 years to 2006 = 20% Annual need to reduce backlog = 807 D2 New Need D2.2 Concealed Households per annum 1,406 D2.3 less on Housing Register (22%) 309 1,097 D2.4 less two person formation (26% x 0.5) 143 954 D2.5 less household income > £25k (19%) 181 773 773 D3 Housing Register Annual Change 1999 - 2000 New Registrations 2,344 Less Cancelled registrations 2,150 Annual change excluding relets 194 D4 Total Affordable Need per annum 1,774 S1 Affordable Supply Social relets average per annum 704 New Programme Delivery 210 914 914 DS1 Net Annual Shortfall 860 Notes 1. *The Housing Register Annual Flow shows a consistent pattern over the last two years with an average increase of 450 households, after allowing for re-lets. Position at 1/4/98 2,678 Position at 1/4/99 3,045 (+367) Position at 1/4/00 3,064 (+19) Position at 1/4/01 4,034 (+970) 2. These figures do not take into account 948 households planning to leave the area because of a lack of affordable housing by 2006. 69 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.2 Concealed Households and Housing Need 8.2.1 This section now examines the findings of our Survey in terms of concealed households, which are not included in our projections based on secondary data. The survey asked specifically where the accommodation was required and about 3,790 respondents intended to move out of the Borough. It should be noted that 948 of those leaving the area are doing so because of the lack of affordable housing. In quantifying total need, these households could be incorporated in the demand figures, although we have not done so. 8.2.2 Key issues for the concealed households who wish to remain in the Borough are that:- There is a strong demand from 45.3% of households for flats / bedsits, reflecting the predominance of single people or childless couples in current and future new formation. 86% of households would prefer small units with one or two bedrooms. 46% of households would prefer owner-occupation. 6% are looking for shared ownership. 37% of households want affordable rented accommodation and there is a significant interest from 12% in private renting reflecting changed attitudes to initial tenure from rent households. The locational preferences of both existing and new forming households follows a similar pattern. Of specific areas the order of preferences in Basingstoke & Deane were:- 1. Basingstoke 2. Oakley 3. Tadley 4. Overton 5. Old Basing 6. Whitchurch 7. Kingsclere. 8.2.3 The Survey reveals that the predominant category, 93% of concealed households are young people wishing to set up their own household who are the children of Basingstoke & Deane residents. However, not all concealed households represent a household in need of subsidised affordable housing. 8.3 Concealed Households’ Access to the Market 8.3.1 The key issue is whether the concealed households identified in the postal survey have incomes, which might provide access to the local housing market. If there is a problem it can be supposed that there is a demand for affordable rented housing. The data collected in the postal survey provides a good picture of the general income levels of the concealed households and we now use that information in the context of the Land Registry data. 8.3.2 As can be seen from Table 8-1 below, 83% of the concealed households had incomes under £25,000, the average of the sales of flats (the lowest part of the market, where there is any substantial volume of sales taking place). On the face of it, very few of these people will be able to enter the local market without gaining access to a significant amount of capital (which is unlikely to occur). 70 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.3.3 These households exist in addition to the demand for new housing generated by demographic and net migration factors and are significant because they are by definition candidates for „non-market‟ accommodation or low cost housing with an element of subsidy support such as the Homebuy initiative. 8.3.4 Some of the households in the £25,000 - £35,000 income band may be able to purchase cheaper flats and terraces in some areas but some of them will be at the margin if we compare with the first-time purchaser income levels and the nature of their employment will be a factor in acquiring a mortgage. Table 8-1 Annual Income of ‘New / Concealed’ Households Income All new households New households moving moving within 1 year os % Cum N % Cum Nos responses % implied responses % implied Below £10,000 12.3 12.3 559 17.9 17.9 251 £10,001 - £15,000 34.1 46.4 1,552 25.3 43.2 354 £15,001 - £20,000 25.6 72.0 1,165 32.1 75.3 449 £20,001 - £25,000 10.9 82.9 496 5.6 80.9 78 £25,001 - £27,500 4.7 87.6 214 2.7 83.6 38 £27,501 - £30,000 2.7 90.3 123 4.6 88.2 64 £30,001 - £32,500 1.8 92.1 82 0.0 88.2 0 £32,501 - £35,000 2.9 95.0 132 2.7 90.9 38 £35,001 - £40,000 1.5 96.5 68 3.9 94.8 55 £40,001 - £45,000 0.0 96.5 0 0.0 94.8 0 £45,001 - £50,000 1.3 97.8 59 1.7 96.5 24 Above £50,000 2.2 100.0 100 3.5 100.0 49 Total 4,550 1,400 Source: DCA Survey. 8.3.5 First-time buyers need to have a deposit and are likely to be restricted to a maximum mortgage of three time‟s annual income plus the annual income of the lower second income, if appropriate. 8.3.6 A household with an income of, say, about £25,000 would be able to achieve a maximum mortgage of around £75,000. Assuming capital was available to meet the deposit and costs, the property range of such a buyer is limited to prices up to a maximum of £80,000. 8.3.7 The average price paid by buyers in the Borough in the period was £142,005 with just over a third of all sales generated from terraced housing. 8.3.8 People with incomes below £25,000, 83% of these „new‟ households, probably could not afford to buy above the £80,000 - £90,000 range. 71 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.3.9 Access to the market is clearly dependent on availability, a factor which is particularly critical for low-income households, who can only enter the market in any numbers where there is an adequate supply of affordable dwellings. 8.4 Land and Affordable Housing Delivery 8.4.1 Land supply is crucial to the provision of housing. Land available at a discount is often the key to making a social housing scheme viable, particularly given the limited funding available and the Housing Corporation‟s emphasis on value for money. Therefore, local authority housing and planning strategies need to ascertain the availability of sites and propose ways of bringing sites forward. 8.4.2 The Housing Corporation is more likely to allocate funding for schemes developed on sites acquired at discounted value in its quest for value for money. The inter- relationship of the land and subsidy issues is important in the negotiation process provided for within planning guidance on affordable housing, even for authorities, which are free of debt. 8.4.3 Private Landowners / Developers It is clear from the scale of affordable need identified in the survey that the Council will need to negotiate with private landowners and developers to be able to deliver the scale of housing required. 8.4.4 The economics of the scale of support, which can be provided by the land itself and the need for available grant resources, are also major factors determining target levels. It is extremely difficult to achieve high affordable housing ratios from small, infill sites and generally, larger sites are needed to provide free or discounted land of any meaningful scale. 8.4.5 Whilst the survey data provides identified demand levels in each strategic housing area, the Council must apply its own judgement as to the suitability of sites for affordable housing for low income families, particularly related to the nature of the area and provision of services, and other planning requirements. 8.5 Planning Policies for Affordable Housing 8.5.1 Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 on Housing gives the planning system a role in affordable housing provision in urban areas, recognised in Policy H10 of the Local Plan. The Local Authority has identified a need for 3,000 affordable houses to built within the Plan period 1991 – 2001 and it is a material consideration in determining applications at or above the site thresholds as recommended in Circular 6/98. 8.5.2 Provision of affordable housing in rural areas is more complex to deliver and longer term control of access is a key issue. This is recognised in Policy H12 in relation to exception sites. 8.5.3 The Council recognises that the basis of the agreed affordable housing, and any other provisions are clearly drafted into a Section 106 Agreement so that delivery can be controlled and guaranteed. 72 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.6 Affordable Housing 8.6.1 Circular 6/98 emphasises the need for local authorities to provide a local definition of affordable housing. A basis for a definition of affordable housing, which would assist within the context of the Local Plan, is discussed in section 8.6.3 below. 8.6.2 The term affordable has gradually come to replace “social” in every day usage. It is interesting to note that affordable housing is defined by the DETR as “the range of both subsidised and market housing designed for those whose incomes generally deny them the opportunity to purchase houses on the open market as a result of the local relationship between income and market price”. This bears a close resemblance to our definition below. 8.6.3 The Council needs to define affordable housing in setting future planning policy and we would suggest that as simple a definition as possible be provided. We have attempted to provide policy text, which identifies the requirement but leaves the percentage to be achieved as an issue for negotiation on a site by site basis. Our definition is:- “Affordable housing is that provided, with subsidy, for people who are unable to resolve their housing needs in the local private sector market because of the relationship between housing costs and incomes”. 8.6.4 The types of affordable housing which comply with our definition are as follows:- „Units for rent (the main group), shared ownership with grant or shared equity where land value is retained to provide housing for sale at below market levels and where control of the „equity discount‟ can be retained in perpetuity‟. 8.6.5 The policy guidance gives the Council the power to negotiate with developers on all new permissions, subject to the ability to provide defensible data to justify need following a rigorous assessment and the suitability of individual sites for affordable housing. In the light of the findings of the number of concealed households revealed by the 2001 Survey, the provision of affordable units on all suitable development sites above the threshold of 25 or 1 hectare, as set out in Circular 6/98 should be sought. 8.6.6 We have no issues to raise regarding Policy H10, but are including the following policy suggestion purely to reflect our thinking:- “Planning permission will only be granted for residential development which provides affordable housing to meet local needs, the scale of which will be negotiated on a site by site basis after taking into account site conditions and the economics of provision.” 8.6.7 Perpetuity To ensure the delivery and long term occupation of subsidised affordable housing, it will be necessary for a specialist organisation such as a RSL to be involved in the ownership and management of the dwellings to be provided. These arrangements would be formalised within a legal agreement to ensure that provision meets with the Council‟s affordability criteria. 73 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.7 Low Cost Market Housing 8.7.1 We disagree with some aspects of the recent Guidance Note 6/98 particularly regarding low cost market housing. We do not accept that “low cost market housing”, provided without subsidy, satisfies DETR‟s own definition of affordable housing and have always questioned the illogicality of the Guidance definition, particularly in areas with high house prices relative to local income levels. 8.7.2 Low cost market housing is taken to relate to small units which are provided without subsidy to meet the needs of households with income levels just adequate to access the housing market. Access prices should relate to the local average of terraced houses or flats subject to local supply levels. Low cost market housing can on occasion be provided with subsidy and if this is the case it would be incorporated within our definition and target for affordable housing. 8.7.3 Affordable housing should include subsidised units only, whether for rent or sale, but there is also an additional need for the provision of 200 unsubsidised low cost market housing units to address the requirements of households earning in excess of £30,000 p.a. and able to access the market for new units. 8.8 Special Needs Housing 8.8.1 There will be future provision requirements to address the changing needs from “Care in the Community” policies, but at this stage we believe that these are likely to be specific small developments and the Local Plan Policy H13 addresses the requirement for special needs and access for alterations and extensions, although not new build housing. 8.8.2 The nature of planning policies to address special needs requirement relate principally to mobility housing. The issue of percentages does not apply in this area. A small proportion of residents who are wheelchair users would require the provision of housing built to standards to accommodate internal wheelchair use. Additionally the economics of accessible standards are marginal in new build compared to the cost of future adaptation. 8.8.3 Whilst the numbers identified in the survey are small it is clear that there is always likely to be a mismatch between adapted property and wheelchair occupants and that there is a need to provide an excess of adapted dwellings over wheelchair user households. It is not possible to be precise regarding the percentages of mobility and wheelchair standard dwellings within new schemes. 8.8.4 It is however, important to recognise that over 4,800 households have someone with a walking difficulty and particularly in the light of the fact that 81% of wheelchair users do not live in an adapted dwelling. These matters are now principally an issue dealt with by Part M of the Building Regulations. 74 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.9 Affordable Housing Needs Requirement 2000 - 2006 8.9.1 The total affordable housing need annually is for 1,774 units. Re-lets of the existing social stock average 700 units and is the major means of addressing the scale of need identified. Even with a new delivery programme of 210 units there will still be an annual household need of 860 units which allows for elimination of the registered Housing Register of 4,034 at the rate of 807 units a year over a five year period to 2006. 8.9.2 These figures however ignore 948 households planning to leave the area because of a lack of affordable housing by 2005. 8.9.3 It is not expected to be able to achieve this scale of supply in this timescale. However, even if no reduction in the current Housing Register was to be achieved, there would still be an annual requirement of 263 affordable units additional to existing stock supply from relets. Currently there is a new delivery programme of 210 units a year which is expected to be sustained, but will result in increasing levels of need. 8.10 Overall Target Levels 8.10.1 The annual level of need of 860 units not met by existing supply and new programme is clearly not economically deliverable or sustainable. Despite the evidence of the scale of need from existing and new forming households, there are wider issues to consider when setting targets for delivery of affordable housing from new developments. Primarily there is a need to build viable, sustainable developments. 8.10.2 Essentially planning should be providing for balanced communities, which acknowledge the need for social compatibility if the problems of housing in the past are not to be repeated. 8.10.3 The Council should set its own „target‟ for each site taking into account existing supply, survey demand and other planning sustainability and economic factors. In view of the high level of total need and the scale of land available to address it, particularly in the period to 2006, the maximum level of subsidised affordable housing of 30% of all units should be applied. 8.10.4 Site Thresholds The new threshold level in Circular 6/98 is set at 25 units or 1 hectare but the lack of units achieved on sites above this level could have a severe impact on delivery of affordable housing if this level is to be applied. Whilst large sites exist in Basingstoke Town, this is not the case in the larger rural settlements and we believe that the significant level of need identified is unlikely to be met even at the lower threshold of 15 units. We would recommend therefore that consideration is given to adopting 15 units or half a hectare as the threshold for affordable housing negotiation in all settlements outside Basingstoke Town with a population of below 3,000. In view of the Housing Corporation‟s commitment to double it‟s programme nationally in rural areas, an even lower threshold may be considered in some locations. 75 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.11 Needs Distribution by Sub-Area 8.11.1 There will be variance at local level between demand and existing stock supply and the localised supply / demand analysis report will be valuable in setting site targets, both to address affordable housing and in particular by house type and size. Some future development may be undertaken on Council owned land but as this supply is running out, future subsidy through land provision will need to be negotiated with private landowners and developers in the provision of planning permission. 8.11.2 The survey data disks contain a breakdown of the whole of the future housing needs section of the questionnaire, which can be used by officers to identify specific needs by sub-area by cross-tabulation. 8.11.3 The data tables provided give a sub-area breakdown of each question, analysed both by existing households planning to move and the newly forming “concealed” households and facilitates the preparation of localised housing needs which will be useful for site development briefs. 8.12 Location Demand Analysis 8.12.1 The locational preferences (up to two) expressed by whole households moving and new households in each area are listed below:- Table 8-2 Location Preferences and Affordable Need New / Net Affordable Need Location Concealed Households % Nos Implied** Basingstoke 2,769 83 2,298 Oakley 487 88 429 Tadley 480 100 480 Existing villages- North West 118 60 71 Existing villages- South West 62 100 62 Existing villages- North East 176 50 88 Existing villages- South East 46 0 0 Overton 245 67 164 Old Basing 197 74 146 Whitchurch 193 79 152 Kingsclere 141 100 141 In another village 152 100 152 Total 5,066 83 4,183 * Figures based on 1st choice location preferences. ** Net actual affordable need by area to 2006. 76 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 8.12.2 Preference patterns are similar between existing and new households, although a high proportion of new forming households will live anywhere in Basingstoke & Deane Borough. We estimate that 1,040 of these 1,083 households would require affordable housing. 8.12.3 We have run a number of cross-tabulations to check on the actual income capacity of households expressing preference to live in the areas outlined in the table above. In all specific locations, the proportion earning below £25,000 is between 50% and 100% of new households. Generally, around 83% of all concealed households by location need affordable housing. 8.12.4 The net affordable requirements of all new forming households is in the region of 4,183. Table 8-3 Existing Households Wanting To Move to Another Village Moving From Moving To Basingstoke Chineham / Hatch Warren (1) Cliddesden / Preston Candover (1) Lychpit (1) Chineham (1) Sherborne St John / Bramley (1) Dummer / North Waltham (1) Sherfield (1) Hatch Warren (1) Kempshott (1) Bramley / Chineham / Sherfield (1) North West Woolton Hill (1) North East Preston Candover (1) South East Cliddesden (2) North Waltham (1) Preston Candover / Ellisfield / Farleigh (1) 8.12.5 This schedule provides in alphabetical order of the current ward location and the village location (where indicated) of preferences for existing households wanting to live in „another village‟. These could be grossed by a factor relevant to the current ward from the data tables schedule. Clearly they can be added to the „existing village‟ demand but are a guide to demand only as freed up properties also need to be assessed. There is a mismatch factor between supply and demand by house type and size which also needs to be considered. 77 DCA Basingstoke & Deane Housing Needs Survey - 2001 Table 8-4 New Households Wanting To Move to Another Village Moving From Moving To Basingstoke Chineham / Up Nately (1) North West Burghclere (1) North East Pamber / Baughurst (1) South East Alresford (1) 8.12.6 New forming households wanting to live in another village are a very small sample and not all who ticked this choice provided a named location. We would however urge caution on making grossed estimates of samples of one from another parish and these numbers should be viewed as of interest value only. 78 DCA
"1 - Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council"