We have now received the data from Hart District Council to show how many properties have been built or permitted since 2011 by the number of bedrooms. This shows that we have built only about half of the number of 1-bed properties we need and we haven’t built enough 3-bed properties. We have built nearly twice as many 4+bed properties than we need.
Hart District Housing completions by number of bedrooms compared to target
Outstanding permissions show that we will continue to over-build 4+bed properties and under-build 3-bed properties, although we will build about the right proportion of 1 and 2-bed properties.
This shows that of the remaining homes we need to build to meet our overall target of 7,534 homes, we need to increase the proportion of smaller 1, 2 and 3-bed properties to meet the needs of local people.
Overall we think that Hart Council needs to get smarter about how it monitors planning permissions so the Hart Local Plan gets as close as possible to meeting the needs of local people set out in the SHMA, as opposed to simply building houses that will maximise developer profits. It is also clear that we need to keep up the focus on brownfield development as that is much more likely to deliver more of smaller properties we need to help the younger generation on to the housing ladder.
The analysis to support these conclusions is shown below.
First, according to the current Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), Hart needs to build 7,534 dwellings in the plan period running from 2011-2032. The SHMA is also very clear on the sizes and types of housing that needs to be built, including the number of affordable homes for the young and specialist housing for the elderly.
Hart Surrey Heath and Rushmoor SHMA Figure 9.8
Working through the arithmetic, and using HArt’s target of 40% affordable homes, we need to build in total the following number and proportion of properties by number of bedrooms:
| Target Housing Need by number of bedrooms | |||||
| Number of beds | 1-bed | 2-bed | 3-bed | 4+bed | Total |
| % need as affordable | 40.8% | 33.2% | 23.5% | 2.5% | 100.0% |
| % need as market | 6.7% | 28.0% | 44.4% | 20.8% | 100.0% |
| Affordable Need | 1,230 | 1,001 | 708 | 75 | 3,014 |
| Market Need | 304 | 1,267 | 2,008 | 941 | 4,520 |
| Total Need | 1,533 | 2,268 | 2,717 | 1,016 | 7,534 |
| % Total Need | 20.4% | 30.1% | 36.1% | 13.5% | 100.0% |
We can compare these proportions to the dwellings that have been built since 2011:
| Gross Completions by year and number of bedrooms | |||||
| Year | 1-bed | 2-bed | 3-bed | 4+bed | Grand Total |
| 2010-11 | 35 | 43 | 14 | 25 | 117 |
| 2011-12 | 58 | 159 | 79 | 39 | 335 |
| 2012-13 | 5 | 42 | 92 | 96 | 235 |
| 2013-14 | 4 | 91 | 94 | 84 | 273 |
| 2014-15 | 22 | 94 | 121 | 103 | 340 |
| Grand Total | 124 | 429 | 400 | 347 | 1,300 |
| % of Total | 9.5% | 33.0% | 30.8% | 26.7% | 100.0% |
| Target % | 20.4% | 30.1% | 36.1% | 13.5% | |
This shows that we have built less than half of the proportion of 1-bed properties and have built nearly twice as many 4+bed properties compared to the target.
If we now look at the outstanding planning permissions, we can see there are over 3,000 dwellings permitted but not yet built as at 20 April 2016:
| Gross Outstanding permissions by year of decision and number of bedrooms | |||||
| Year | 1-bed | 2-bed | 3-bed | 4+bed | Grand Total |
| 2003-4 | 4 | 1 | 5 | ||
| 2004-5 | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2006-7 | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2008-9 | 1 | 1 | |||
| 2009-10 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 2010-11 | 1 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 14 |
| 2011-12 | 4 | 13 | 22 | 23 | 62 |
| 2012-13 | 68 | 115 | 234 | 176 | 593 |
| 2013-14 | 132 | 207 | 78 | 58 | 475 |
| 2014-15 | 140 | 302 | 274 | 242 | 958 |
| 2015-16 | 273 | 309 | 221 | 166 | 969 |
| 2016-17 | -1 | 2 | 4 | 5 | |
| Grand Total | 623 | 949 | 838 | 676 | 3,086 |
| % of Total | 20.2% | 30.8% | 27.2% | 21.9% | 100.0% |
| Target % | 20.4% | 30.1% | 36.1% | 13.5% | |
This shows the outstanding permissions will deliver about the right proportion of 1 and 2-bed properties, but not enough to make up the shortfall of those already built and will continue to under-build 3-bed properties and over-build 4+bed properties.
The data does not show the proportion of open-market versus affordable housing, nor does it show the proportion of specialist homes for the elderly. Overall we think this means that Hart needs to get smarter about how it monitors planning permissions so that we get as close as possible to meeting the needs of local people set out in the SHMA, as opposed to simply building houses that will maximise developer profits.
Thanks to Hart Council for putting in the effort to dig the raw data out of their systems, which I know has been a difficult task.
See today’s post Louise Shipman. Berkeley Homes amongst the developers calling for a big increase in Hart’s housing target, even though they aren’t even building at today’s required rate despite having thousands of unbuilt permissions.
All about the money David isn’t it? Money at the expense of our planet. I know Hart isn’t alone in this issue but all the more need for a total re-think in my opinion. I hate to think what the future holds.
As you can tell, I’m very frustrated. I love our countryside, I love seeing green spaces, and Wildlife. I feel saddened at the destruction of it but I feel that the government doesn’t really care, it’s all about houses, houses and more houses. Appreciate people need a home but seriously how is the future demand for housing going to look like at this rate?! And where will it go?!
Size? More like cost. 3bed in Hartley Row circa 450k what a joke.
The new 2 bed houses will be 375k , now that’s a nice low price for a new couple starting out NOT
My wife and I are 35 we have two children under two. We currently live in Oldfield view just off green lane. At some point we will have to move, but we’ll never be able to afford to move within the village
this is what’s so wrong in my opinion, I moved to yateley in the 80’s from parents home in Sandhurst, not far because we love the area but our kids are now in that position but can’t afford to do the same. Not their fault they were brought up in a sort after and now expensive area
All of the large houses are not “needed” in the sense that they aren’t meeting the housing needs of the district. However, they will sell because as you say they attract people selling up and moving from London.
David, Berkley homes have sent a flyer round about Netherhouse Copse. More destruction of our beautiful countryside. It pains me. It needs to stop. Hart need to look at what damage has been done and where this is all heading. How much more can this go on? The entire local area is getting busier all the time, affecting all surrounding areas and all of those in turn are building as well.
The beautiful area is turning into a vile concrete jungle with no where for our wildlife to go and all we have to show is big, ugly, expensive houses for those who can afford them. I’d love to know how many locals are affording to move within Hart or forced to leave.
All of the large houses are not “needed” in the sense that they aren’t meeting the housing needs of the district. However, they will sell because as you say they attract people selling up and moving from London.
I’m getting very frustrated with Hart Council. I have loved living here for many years but I feel that the area is being pushed to Londoners and locals and local wildlife don’t matter. The area is becoming more and more congested and forget going out of Zebon Copse at Redfields end during the school run! What sort of legacy are we leaving to future generations? They won’t be able to get /afford a 1 bed let alone a 5 bed house so then we should ask, will all these large houses be needed?!
I’m getting very frustrated with Hart Council. I have loved living here for many years but I feel that the area is being pushed to Londoners and locals and local wildlife don’t matter. The area is becoming more and more congested and forget going out of Zebon Copse at Redfields end during the school run! What sort of legacy are we leaving to future generations? They won’t be able to get /afford a 1 bed let alone a 5 bed house so then we should ask, will all these large houses be needed?!
Let’s hope the forces that be look at this and act on it, we need more 1 and 2 bed properties
Let’s hope the forces that be look at this and act on it, we need more 1 and 2 bed properties