rushcliffe - shelter englandengland.shelter.org.uk/.../pdf_file/0004/119623/rushcliffereport.pdf ·...

RushcliffeEco-town – the facts

Rushcliffe Eco-town, Nottinghamshire

Rushcliffe Eco-town – the facts 3

Rushcliffe, Nottinghamshire

SummaryEco-town proposals have been put forward for three potential sites in Rushcliffe. The eco-towns debate has generated plenty of media interest, and Shelter has written a series of leaflets to help clarify the facts. This leaflet sets out the key housing issues for Rushcliffe and Nottingham, and the impact on housing that an eco-town could have locally.

There are more than 15,000 households on council housing waiting lists in Nottingham and Rushcliffe. The number of affordable homes being rented out each year is nowhere near adequate to meet local need.

Over the five-year period from 2002/03 to 2006/07, around 4,500 social rented homes were lost in Nottingham and Rushcliffe, mainly through demolitions and the Right to Buy scheme, but only 430 new social rented homes (what we used to call council housing) were provided.

House prices have risen far more quickly than earnings in Nottingham and Rushcliffe. In 2007, an average-priced home cost five times average earnings in Nottingham and nine times average earnings in Rushcliffe – this is a substantial increase on the 1990s. The current market slowdown has had very little impact on this picture so far.

In the East Midlands, 151,000 households are constantly struggling to pay, or falling behind with, their mortgage or rent payments. People struggling with high housing costs tell Shelter that these costs cause them depression and anxiety, forcing them to sell possessions and reduce spending on essentials such as clothing for their children.

Three potential sites in Nottinghamshire have been proposed for a new eco-town. Proposals for these sites have provided for between 5,000 and 6,000 new homes, of which 30–50 per cent would need to be affordable, including homes for social rent and intermediate housing.

We hope you’ll use the information in this booklet to decide whether an eco-town could help meet local needs.

Make your voice count. Take part in the consultation processes and make sure your views are heard about whether an eco-town should go ahead in this region.

Introduction

■

■

■

■

■

Rushcliffe Eco-town – the facts �


In July 2007, the Government made an historic commitment to tackle Britain’s housing crisis by delivering three million additional homes by 2020. The proposal to build a series of eco-towns is part of the government’s strategy to achieve this housing commitment and deliver the homes that are needed. Eco-towns are not the only option for increased housebuilding but they offer the potential to develop sustainable homes within mixed communities that respond to the core challenge of climate change, while also helping to tackle high utility bills. However, for these towns to achieve their potential, and avoid the many mistakes made in the past, it is essential that serious social and environmental concerns are addressed.

Eco-town public consultations are now underway and it is vital that local people take the opportunity to contribute their views and opinions, so that a wide range of perspectives are considered. Very often, members of local communities know far better than the developers what new housing developments need to include, and what type of public services, particularly transport links, need to be provided. These views need to be heard.

What is an eco-town?When the Government set out proposals for eco-towns, it outlined how these new towns should be different from previous developments.

Significant requirements are that the eco-town should:

have a zero carbon impact as a whole

contain employment opportunities and a full range of amenities, such as schools, health clinics and public transport, to ensure that it is as self-contained as practicable

achieve high standards of architecture and urban design

empower the new community; for example, through ownership of community assets and active involvement in the life of the town

contain a full range of housing by size, tenure and type, so that residents can continue to live affordably in the town throughout their life, helping to maintain a sustainable community.

Rushcliffe: the proposalsThree potential eco-town sites in Rushcliffe have been proposed at Newton, Kingston or Cotgrave. In April, no eco-town scheme was shortlisted; instead the Government announced a further review of the potential sites in consultation with Rushcliffe Borough Council. In response, the Newton and Cotgrave schemes were submitted, while the Kingston scheme had previously been submitted in 2007.

The proposed site at Newton is being promoted by the Crown Estate, Defence Estates and Newton Nottingham LLP. It is a former RAF base, on a brownfield site, situated to the north-west of Bingham, and could accommodate approximately 6,000 homes, of which it is proposed that 1,500 would be affordable homes (this is 25 per cent of the new housing, which is below the lower threshold of 30 per cent set by the Government for eco-towns). It is proposed that the Robin Hood

■

■

■

■

■

�

railway line should be extended from Nottingham to Bingham to facilitate car-free travel in the new town and to ease congestion on the A52.

A site at Kingston could accommodate 6,000 homes and is located between Kingston-on-Soar, Kegworth and West Leake. This proposal from Banks Developments would include 1,800 affordable homes (30 per cent), and there is potential for a new mainline railway station.

An eco-town of approximately 5,000 homes has been proposed by Crown Golf for Cotgrave Golf Club. It would provide a minimum of 30 per cent (at least 1,500) affordable homes, although the precise number is not yet available. There is a former mineral railway which the developers indicate could be reopened to provide a link to the city centre.

These proposals cover green belt and non-green belt land – any development on green belt land raises issues that will need to be addressed and on which the public will need to be consulted.

Figure 1: Proposals for an eco-town for Rushcliffe

Each of the proposed eco-towns would be approximately twice the size of Keyworth or Radcliffe-on-Trent.

You may have heard arguments against the eco-towns being proposed for Rushcliffe. Concerns expressed have included traffic congestion, risk of flooding, increased crime, whether the homes will be affordable and an imposition of these plans from national Government. Many of these issues will have to be addressed if the eco-town is to meet the requirements laid out by the Government.

All of the sites proposed would provide housing needed by people in Nottingham and Rushcliffe. They might also meet the needs of people from other districts in the Nottingham area (or, if a Kingston location was considered to be a viable option, potentially also from areas around Derby). While much of the housing need is in Nottingham, it is clear that surrounding boroughs, including Rushcliffe, will need to play their part in providing space for new homes if the housing problems in this county are to be solved. In this booklet we concentrate on housing need and supply in Nottingham and Rushcliffe, while recognising that, depending on location, the eco-town could meet need from other surrounding districts as well.

Rushcliffe Eco-town – the facts

A606

A46

A52

M1

A60

A52

Ruddington

Nottingham

East Bridgford

Beeston

Long Eaton

West Leake

A6200

IIkeston

general areas for locating proposed eco-towns

Cotgrave proposal

Kingston proposal

Newton proposal


Do we really need more homes in Rushcliffe?The number of households in Nottingham and Rushcliffe keeps growing, mainly due to an increase in life expectancy, people choosing to live alone and smaller family sizes. In addition, house prices have spiralled, rents have risen, and an increasing proportion of households cannot afford to pay market prices, but there are not enough affordable homes being built as an alternative. As a result, council housing waiting lists remain long, and homelessness is a constant worry for those households with the least resources.

There has been a debate about how much housing is needed in Nottinghamshire and what type of housing should be provided. It is currently proposed by the Government that the East Midlands Plan (a 20-year plan for housing and other developments in the East Midlands, developed in consultation with local people) should increase its level of housing provision for the period 2006–2016 in Nottingham and Rushcliffe to 1,675 new homes per year. This would represent a 20 per cent increase on the number of homes built (net housing completions) on average each year over the last six years.

Is there enough land allocated for new homes?Studies by the Nottingham and Rushcliffe councils (published in their annual monitoring reports) suggest that between now and 2016 there is not enough land currently identified for development to meet the housing targets proposed by the Government for these two areas. As stated above, the target is for 1,675 new homes each year, but over the period from 2007/08 to 2015/16 there is only enough land identified to build 1,272 new homes a year. By 2016, there will be a shortfall of 5,300 homes unless more land can be found from somewhere. The eco-town proposals are not the only possible locations where additional land could be found, however, even if none of the eco-town proposals are used, there will still be a requirement to identify land to accommodate more than 5,000 additional homes by 2016.

Figure 2: Land supply relative to housing targets in Nottingham and Rushcliffe

Sources: East Midlands Regional Plan, Schedule of Proposed Changes; Nottingham Annual Monitoring Report, December 2007; and Rushcliffe Annual Monitoring Report, April 2007–March 2008.

�

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

'15/16'14/15'13/14'12/13'11/12'10/11'09/10'08/09'07/08'06/07

no. o

f hom

es

Land supply Target


How many more affordable homes are needed in Rushcliffe and Nottingham?Recent research from B. Line (for the local authorities) suggests that more than 500 new affordable homes are needed each year in Rushcliffe and Nottingham. This would represent 36 per cent of the total number of new homes built. The research estimated that, of these 500 homes, 440 (or 82 per cent) should be social rented homes. Earlier research for the Regional Assembly by Cambridge University suggested that 30 per cent of all new homes in the Nottingham core area should be affordable.

However, recent provision of affordable housing has come nowhere near meeting identified need. Figure 3, below, shows the number of affordable homes that were built in Nottingham and Rushcliffe from 1999/2000 to 2006/07. At its peak in 2005/06, taking the two districts together, new affordable housing completions reached 282 units (or 19 per cent) of total new housebuilding. However, the average for the eight years leading up to 2006/07 was 95 units (or 9 per cent) of total new housebuilding in the area. A recent ‘State of the region’ report put Nottingham at the bottom of the region for delivering affordable housing.

Figure 3: New affordable homes built in Nottingham and Rushcliffe

Source: CLG Live Table 253

Why are more affordable homes needed?House prices have risen steeply in Nottinghamshire in recent years and the county’s stock of affordable homes has not kept pace with demand. While it is now more expensive to obtain your home on the open market, the lack of supply of affordable homes means it is also harder to get access to subsidised housing if you need it.

In the late 1990s, a mortgage three times the average earnings would have enabled someone to buy an average-priced house in Nottingham, and a mortgage five times earnings was required in Rushcliffe. By 2007, prices in Nottingham had grown to five times average earnings and, in Rushcliffe, a mortgage of nine times average earnings was required to buy an average-priced house – see Figure 4, opposite. The current market slowdown has had very little impact on this picture so far, and the credit crunch has led to a significant increase in mortgage repossession orders in Nottingham.

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

'06/07'05/06'04/05'03/04'02/03'01/02'00/01'99/00

no. o

f new

hom

es

Rushcliffe Nottingham


Figure 4: Average* earnings compared with average house prices

This is a snapshot of April 1 of each year. *The average median is the mid-point of the earning and house price distribution. Source: CLG Live Table 577

As housing costs have risen, the need for affordable housing, to own or rent, has increased, yet not enough affordable homes have been built to meet this need. The size of local council housing waiting lists gives some insight into the level of current need for affordable housing. At the end of March 2007, there were more than 15,000 households on the waiting list in Nottingham and Rushcliffe, the vast majority of them (over 14,000) in Nottingham. Although the housing waiting list peaked in the early 1990s in Rushcliffe, it continued to rise in Nottingham in both 2006 and 2007.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

20072006200520042003200220012000199919981997

Nottingham Rushcliffe

ratio

of e

arni

ngs

to h

ouse

pric

es


Figure 5: Households on council housing waiting lists in Rushcliffe and Nottingham

This is a snapshot of March 31 each year. Source: CLG Live Table 600

Not everyone on these waiting lists represents a need for additional housing. For example, some will be looking to move from one rented property into a larger one. Nonetheless, where people are living in unfit properties, or are forced to share with other households, these are real needs that can only be addressed through additional homes being made available.

At the most severe end of the spectrum, are those who are actually homeless. Between 2003/04 and 2007/08 an average of 1,300 households per year approached the councils and were accepted as homeless in Nottingham and Rushcliffe. While these people are typically given priority for vacant homes over those on the waiting lists, the shortage of vacancies can mean that homeless households have to be housed in temporary accommodation. As a result, at the end of March 2008, 120 homeless households were living in temporary accommodation in these two boroughs.

Every day, Shelter sees first hand the impact that living in this situation has on people’s lives. A recent study by Shelter found that in the East Midlands there are 151,000 households who are constantly struggling to pay, or falling behind with, their mortgage or rent payments. People struggling with high housing costs tell Shelter that these costs cause them depression and anxiety, forcing them to sell possessions and reduce spending on clothing for their children. Living in temporary accommodation can be particularly unsettling, especially for children, as it can cause health problems, affect schoolwork, and sometimes lead to family breakdown.

Local councils and housing associations have been working to house those in need by more effectively managing the stock of social rented homes available, but total lettings in Nottingham and Rushcliffe of just over 4,300 a year are nowhere near adequate to meet local need. Social lettings in Rushcliffe in 2006/07 were only just over 300 homes despite the fact that there were more than 1,500 households on the housing waiting list (ie, there were five households for each vacancy). In Nottingham, social lettings were 4,155 despite more than 14,000 households on the waiting list (ie, there were more than three households for each vacancy) – see Figure 6, overleaf.

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

20072006200520042003200220012000199919981997

no. o

f hou

seho

lds


10


Figure 6: Lettings of social rented housing in Rushcliffe and Nottingham

Lettings data taken from local authority HSSA returns, total local authority dwellings let and CORE data on RSL lettings of general needs housing Source: Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix and CORE data.

Part of the problem is that councils and housing associations are losing their social rented homes much faster than new social rented homes are supplied. Over the five-year period from 2002/03 to 2006/07 a total of around 4,500 social rented homes were lost in Nottingham and Rushcliffe, mainly through demolitions and the Right to Buy scheme, but only 430 new social rented homes were provided.

Intermediate housingFor those who cannot afford to buy their own home, or who face a long wait for a social rented home, or are concerned about the security of a tenancy and the cost of renting in the private rented sector, the intermediate market, including low-cost home ownership schemes, may be a solution. Both Nottingham and Rushcliffe district councils have sought to increase the supply of intermediate housing for low-cost home ownership. As Figure 7 (below) shows, their efforts have met with some success, but total provision has never exceeded 160 homes per year and the average is closer to 70 homes per year. The study by B. Line suggests that there is a need for 100 intermediate homes each year and supply has consistently fallen below this level since 1997, apart from in 1999/2000 and 2005/06.

Figure 7: Supply of intermediate affordable homes in Rushcliffe and Nottingham

Source: CLG Live Table 1002

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

'06/07'05/06'04/05'03/04'02/03'01/02'00/01'99/00'98/99'97/98

figure 2

no. o

f new

hom

es


0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

2006/072005/062004/052003/04

figure 2

no. o

f let

tings



How can we be sure that local people will be able to get a home in the new town?The proposed eco-towns could help to accommodate the projected household growth within the area. This projection of growth is based on a continuation of the present trends, which include people moving both into and out of the area. People relocating from outside the area may add to the pressures for housing, but some change in the local population is inevitable with today’s mobile workforce.

If the numbers of new homes were not sufficient to meet total need, the pressure to move into the area would continue, and the competition for housing in the market would be even keener – pricing local people out of the market even further. By ensuring a sufficient housing supply in the future, the competition for housing is reduced.

How can we be sure that affordable homes will be provided?The three proposals for an eco-town in Rushcliffe offer differing levels of affordable housing, from 1,500 in Newton, at least 1,500 in Cotgrave and up to 1,800 in Kingston. Given the levels of need, the area would clearly benefit from a higher proportion of affordable homes, most of which should be social rented housing.

If planning permission was granted for the development of an eco-town in Rushcliffe it would be subject to a lengthy list of conditions, including an agreement by the developer to fulfil formal obligations relating to the provision of facilities, infrastructure and affordable housing. This agreement would usually include a commitment of money from the developer to fund the affordable homes.

You can help ensure this happens by getting involved in the consultation processes.

Rushcliffe Eco-town – the facts 1�

What will make Rushcliffe an eco-town?Since the proposal that will move forward has still to be selected, much has yet to be determined. However, it is possible to make some observations now on the three eco-town proposals for Rushcliffe.

Efforts will need to be made to ensure that the significantly higher standards of design and materials to meet eco-standards do not result in housing in the eco-town being less affordable than existing homes in the area.

The environment outside the home is as important as the one within. Therefore the design of residential areas and their residents’ access to employment and amenities in the town must receive as much attention as the ‘eco-friendly’ status of their individual homes. Residents need to look upon the town itself as their ‘home’ too, with all the sense of place and belonging that goes with this.

The proposed share of affordable housing in the three proposals is towards the bottom end of the 30–50 per cent range indicated by the Government. In the case of the Newton Eco-town, it is below the lower threshold, at 25 per cent, so this proportion would have to be raised for the eco-town to meet minimum government requirements. It has been shown that the needs of the area would benefit from a larger share of affordable housing than any of the proposals are currently offering, and that the majority should be social rented homes. It will also be important to ensure that the intermediate housing is affordable for people on lower incomes.

Does the rest of the country have these problems?

Home ownership out of reach for manyOver the last ten years, the cost of the average home in England has tripled, to more than £200,000. This has left most first-time buyers priced out of the market. Although house prices are now falling, the credit crunch means that home ownership remains out of reach for many, largely because it is getting harder to secure mortgages. In addition, mortgage repossessions are expected to rise – more than 45,000 homeowners could lose their homes in 2008.

Cost of renting homes too highThe lack of affordable housing hasn’t just been felt by aspiring homeowners.People living in the private rented sector are more likely to struggle to pay for housing costs than those with a mortgage. In turn, the lack of affordable homes on the market has put mounting pressure on the social sector. Nearly 1.7 million households in England are currently on housing waiting lists (an increase of almost two-thirds in the past ten years). Unfortunately, those lucky enough to have a social rented home are more likely to be overcrowded, because there are not enough family-sized homes in this sector.

■

■

■


Why are homes unaffordable?The rate of housebuilding has not kept pace with rapidly increasing demand, and, in conjunction with easy-access mortgages, has led to steep house price rises.

The amount of affordable housing, such as local authority and housing association homes, has been gradually reduced by the sell-off of council housing under the Right to Buy scheme, and by successive governments’ failure to replace these homes.

House prices are now falling, but the underlying issues have not changed. There are still too few homes being built.

The impact of the affordability crisisThe lack of affordable homes in Britain has hit millions of people hard. People are struggling to meet housing costs and, in some cases, are at severe risk of homelessness as a result. Many more are trapped in overcrowded, dilapidated, damp or temporary housing, unable to afford to rent or buy a secure, comfortable home. The consequences of this situation can be devastating. Children living in bad housing are almost twice as likely as other children to suffer from poor health, nearly twice as likely not to get any GCSEs, and more likely to be bullied and excluded from school. Parents fear that things may be much harder for their children.

■

■


What happens now?There is general acknowledgment that the UK has consistently failed to build enough homes for a number of years. With the fall in house prices, housebuilders are limiting production even further, and empty homes will not be sufficient to satisfy housing need.

In April 2008, 15 of the proposed eco-towns were selected for detailed consideration. Only when all aspects of each town have been carefully scrutinised will any decision be taken to go ahead with the development, and even then the proposals will be fully vetted through the local planning process.

It is vital that local people take the opportunity to have their say and actively participate in the consultation process.

A national government consultation on the general principles of eco-towns and initial reactions to the 15 suggested locations closed on June 30.

Local exhibitions are being held in August and September by the Crown Estate in the area surrounding the proposed Newton site to give local residents an opportunity to share their views. There is also an opportunity to lodge your opinions on the Newton website.

There are plans for a series of consultation events to be held by the Government in the region of each potential eco-town location – including Rushcliffe should one of these proposals move forward – to take place in the Autumn.

There will also be the opportunity to provide feedback on the Rushcliffe proposals online.

If the plans for Rushcliffe move forward and enter the local planning system there will be additional meetings and further online opportunities for people to express their views.

How can I get involved?Attend a local consultation event and make your views known.

Discuss this information with your family, friends, neighbours and colleagues at work.

Contact Shelter to find out more about our work in this area and other ways to help.

■

■

■

■

■

■

■


Further informationThe Newton proposal: www.newtonecotown.com

Proposers of a Kingston eco-town: www.banksdevelopment.com

Rushcliffe District Council: www.rushcliffe.gov.uk

Communities and Local Government: www.communities.gov.uk/ecotowns

GlossaryAffordable housing This includes social rented homes and intermediate housing.

Brownfield Previously developed land, includes anything from old factory sites to suburban gardens.

East Midlands Plan A 20-year plan for housing and other developments, decided in consultation with local people.

Green belt A land use policy which retains areas of largely undeveloped, wild, or agricultural land that surrounds urban areas.

Greenfield Undeveloped land, either currently used for agriculture or left fallow.

Housing shortfall This indicates too few homes being built, and is the difference between the number of homes built and the number of homes needed or planned.

Intermediate housing Homes offered for shared ownership, shared equity, purchased at a discount, or available at a below-market rent.

Low-cost home ownership This includes homes available under shared ownership and shared equity schemes. Shared ownership homes are offered to people who cannot afford to buy their own home, individuals purchase a portion of their home and pay rent on the rest. Under shared equity schemes people take out a mortgage loan for the majority of the property, with a low-cost equity loan from a mortgage lender or the Government covering the remainder.

Social rented housing Formerly called council housing, these homes are provided to people in housing need by councils and housing associations at affordable rents.

Everyone should have a home

Shelter helps more than 170,000 people a year fight for their rights, get back on their feet, and find and keep a home.

We campaign for decent housing for all.

RH 1848

88 Old St London EC1V 9HU

0845 458 4590 www.shelter.org.uk [email protected] Registered charity number 263710

Cover Image by Corbis. Photos by Nick David, Sophie Laslett, Amy Wallace, Getty Images and Dreamstime. Printed on 100% recycled paper, made in a totally chlorine-free process.

This leaflet has been produced with the support of the Department for Communities and Local Government as part of a programme to ensure that people potentially affected by eco-towns have information about housing need in their area and how to take part in the consultation.

rushcliffe - shelter englandengland.shelter.org.uk/.../pdf_file/0004/119623/rushcliffereport.pdf ·...

Documents