Memorandum by South East England Development
Agency (HOU 30)
1. Will the funds in the Spending Review 2002
achieve the Government's target of a decent home for all by 2010?
1.1 Availability of affordable housing in
the South East is the prerequisite to a decent home for all by
2010. At present the future of Housing Corporation funding is
not clear, but it is evident that the current allocation of funding
will not be sufficient to tackle the depth of need in the region,
to provide for homeless households and to meet the housing needs
of those who are unable to secure accommodation through the market
due to the high costs in the region. The SE region will require
the highest number (over half a million) of new homes in the UK
to meet the demographic needs of the population. Around two thirds
of these new homes over the next 15 years are required for single
person, single parent households. The estimate derived from RPG
of the quantity of affordable housing needed in the SE is for
around 12,000 per annum.
1.2 The region has lower percentages of
unfit, difficult to let and empty properties than the English
average, but given the size of the region, the actual numbers
are high. The SE region has the fourth highest number of households
in unfit homes in the UK, and the third highest number of households
living in poor conditions. The quality of social housing in the
South East is generally reasonable, but there are still large
numbers of homes in the social sector in need of repair and updating.
Many homes in poor condition are in the private sector, for example
areas such as Slough in Berkshire and Rowner in Gosport; and areas
such as these need greater intervention to meet the Government's
decent homes target. Across the region 12 per cent of private
households are in poor housing against 8 per cent of social sector
households.
1.3 Whilst the SR2002 does provide for an
increase in Housing Corporation funding, the mechanics of how
this will be implemented, especially in conjunction with English
Partnerships' new role, has yet to be determined.
2. How spending of the new resources should
be balanced between social housing and options for owner occupation
for those who cannot afford to buy on the open market, and the
mechanisms for their distribution.
2.1 In the first quarter of this year there
were 3,380 households in the South East accepted as homeless and
in priority need, with 2,790 accommodated in bed and breakfast
or hostel accommodation. A significant increase in funding to
greatly increase the rate of supply of social housing is the only
real option if these needs are to be met by 2010. The current
rate of new homes being completed through the Approved Development
Programme (ADP) and Local Authorities Social Housing Grant (LASHG)
is barely keeping pace with the erosion of social housing stock
as a result of Right to Buy. RTB mitigates against being able
to build up the required number of affordable homes.
2.2 Additional resources are needed to tackle
homelessness through the provision of social housing. However,
there is also an urgent need for key worker accommodation, the
shortage of which affects the ability, particularly of the public
sector, to recruit. Many key workers such as nurses or police
officers early in their careers are unwilling to commit to home
ownership and therefore need affordable "sub-market"
rents. There is also a need to provide low cost ownership options
for the next stage of their lives in order to be able to retain
them. The supply of smaller homes to purchase on the open market
is not adequate, and often beyond financial reach, and there is
an insufficient supply of low cost ownership options.
Recent research commissioned by SEEDA, and carried
out by Roger Tym and Partners with Three Dragons, identifies that
the problem of affordable homes is particularly acute in the public
sector. The need is not only for the most readily identified categories
such as nurses, police etc but is across the whole of the public
services sector, and those in the private sector who provide public
services. Early indications are that if the provision of affordable
housing is not tackled, public services in the South East are
likely to deteriorate substantially. It is important that definitions
of key workers should be flexible to respond to local needs and
not be restricted to crime, health and education.
2.3 As a priority, adequate resources should
be targeted in those areas of greatest pressure in the SE to meet
social housing needs, below market rental or low cost ownership
options. It is important that there is a diversity of product
and that funding is available where it is most needed. In both
the social rented sector and shared equity schemes, issues of
perpetuity need to be addressed so that the first owner is not
the only beneficiary of subsidy.
2.4 Although growth should be encouraged
in areas of opportunity such as Thames Gateway, Milton Keynes
and Ashford, it would be unwise to build a disproportionate number
of social homes in these areas. New developments should be of
mixed tenure and mixed use, and should be managed to ensure that
the supporting infrastructure of jobs, services, schools etc is
put in place upfront.
2.5 Care must also be taken to regenerate
and refurbish the towns adjacent to the new growth areas to ensure
that there is no displacement that would lead to the "hollowing
out" of the present towns and subsequently greater social
dislocation. Building homes where there is currently no housing
pressure alone will not necessarily reduce demand in areas of
high pressure. The South East Regional Economic Strategy seeks
to promote sustainable economic growth in the areas of economic
success as well as to provide alternative and attractive locations
for the predicted growth in the South East to take place.
3. Role of planning obligations
3.1 Affordable housing coming forward as
a result of planning obligations is not adequate to meet the scale
of demand and is likely to remain a marginal mechanism for dealing
with the affordable housing problem. However, improvements to
the present arrangements can always be made. For example, simplified,
quicker and more transparent processes for Section 106 agreements
are needed to secure implementation once the planning permissions
are granted. Local authorities often lack negotiation skills and
knowledge of development economics. Clear and streamlined procedures
are required, based on an improved skills base (planning/housing
policy and practices, funding law, development economics etc),
together with clear targets linked to robust and up-to-date assessments
of local housing need. These assessments of need must go beyond
social rented housing and take into account key workers and the
mix of affordable housing "products" that is required
locally. In addition, structure and local plans should have a
presumption for high density in urban areas and for the provision
of smaller units.
3.2 The recently established power enabling
RDAs and EP to provide gap funding to private sector housing schemes
where these are uneconomic is potentially of considerable significance.
This could well remove some of the pressure on the planning system
to deliver affordable housing through a process which was never
designed for that purpose.
4. Ensuring the quality of affordable housing
4.1 It is important that future house building
programmes are well planned and designed. Wherever public sector
influence can be leveraged, design should be written into the
brief. Wherever Government finance is provided, agencies, departments
or other public bodies should only support high quality design
for large developments. Support would also be welcome to encourage
such standards on smaller developments, as many of these do not
reach those thresholds especially in rural areas. For example,
SEEDA and the Housing Corporation have agreed that they will not
support any projects in the South East unless they reach appropriate
BREEAM standards. SEEDA has just established with CABE the first
Regional Design Panel to review all major schemes. Local Authorities
and developers will be encouraged to approach the panel early
in the process (at development brief stage) for advice on planning
and to build-in quality (design, materials, technology, master-planning)
from the inception of the scheme.
4.2 New housing should be directed to town
centres where possible. New developments should be in highly accessible
locations, close to jobs, transportation hubs and services. Social
and physical infrastructures should be developed to create sustainable
communities. Housing developments should reflect a mix of tenures
and provide for market and affordable homes to promote mixed communities.
Design and density should be key considerations for a long-term
vision of delivery that includes excellence in design, the use
of sustainable materials and construction, and long term recognition
of the management and maintenance costs. Regional design panels
should be established across the country to review all significant
developments—not only in relation to size but those significant
in their own location.
4.3 Public attitudes are a barrier to the
provision of affordable housing. This is based on a perception
that affordable housing comprises large single tenancy estates,
poor quality design, environments that are out of keeping with
surrounding areas and with high levels of unemployment and crime.
This must be addressed through good planning and design if these
perceptions are to be challenged.
4.4 Consideration should be given for gap
funding to support demonstration, benchmarked projects to provide
economies of scale for innovation/environmentally sustainable
construction eg photovoltaics, triple glazed units. Government
could also assist by funding research into building technology
for sustainable construction.
4.5 SEEDA is also in the process of launching
a regional "Brownfield Land Assembly Trust" to bring
forward small sites for affordable housing. This will assemble
and procure quality affordable homes, on a critical mass programme
basis, using sites that are too small and/or complex for the private
sector to bring forward. These homes will act as demonstrations
of what can be achieved on a commercial basis without compromising
design and quality.
4.6 There needs to be a greater supply of
affordable "below market" rented and low cost home ownership
options. However, treating this as purely a supply issue is unlikely
to solve the problem. For example, in the SE the level of public
sector pay, and the fact that it does not allow workers to purchase
on the open market, is a contributory factor. Therefore, there
is a need to look wider than the much needed additional funding
and to look at pay levels in the public sector, land availability
for housing and new mechanisms for bringing forward sites. New
approaches are needed to address current departmental regulations
for disposal of land held by public sector landowners such as
the MOD.
| 
