The Old Granary Penstock Hall Farm East Brabourne … · Istead Rise Housing Needs Survey July 2012 Tessa O’Sullivan Rural Housing Enabler The Old Granary Penstock Hall Farm East

Istead Rise Housing Needs Survey

July 2012

Tessa O’Sullivan Rural Housing Enabler

The Old Granary Penstock Hall Farm East Brabourne TN25 5LL

Tel: 01303 813790

2

Contents Page

1. Executive Summary 3

2. Introduction to the Istead Rise Housing Needs Survey 4

3. Background Information 4

4. Method 5

5. Results 6

6. Local Housing Costs 16

7. Assessment of Housing Need 19

8. Summary of Findings 26

9. Appendix IR1 – Question 7 comments 27

10. Appendix IR2 – Letter to householders and housing needs survey 48

3

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Rural Housing Enabler (RHE) undertook a housing needs survey in Istead Rise to ascertain if there are shortfalls in affordable housing provision within the village. This report provides overall information as well as analysis of housing need.

A survey was delivered to every household within Istead Rise in June 2012. Approximately 1430 surveys were distributed with 599 surveys being returned, representing a 42% response rate.

Analysis of the returned survey forms identified that 97% of all respondents are owner occupiers. 74% of respondents have lived in Istead Rise for over 10 years.

High property prices and a predominance of privately owned homes means that some local people are unable to afford a home within Istead Rise. This problem is exacerbated at present as tighter restrictions are being placed on mortgages by lenders; the result of the current economic climate. For a first time buyer an income of £46,143 per annum and a deposit of £28,500 are needed to buy the cheapest property available within Istead Rise, which, at the time of writing the report, was a 2 bed semi detached bungalow for £190,000; there were no 1 beds available. To be able to afford to rent privately an income of approximately £42,000 is required for the cheapest property available which was a 2 bed semi detached bungalow for £875pcm. Only three properties were found to rent privately in the area; there were no 1 bed houses or flats available.

Our analysis has also identified that: • A total of 13 adults and 10 children have a housing need • The ages of respondents in housing need range from 09 to 4559. • 7 respondents with a housing need currently live in Istead Rise and 1 lives outside; they used to

live there and currently have family living there.

Overall, a need for up to 8 affordable homes, for the following local households was identified: • 3 single people • 1 couple • 4 families

4

2. INTRODUCTION TO THE ISTEAD RISE HOUSING NEEDS SURVEY

Istead Rise is a village approximately 3 miles south of Gravesend in the Borough of Gravesham with a population of 3,505 (2001 Census). The nearest railway station is 2 miles away at Meopham (34 minutes from London Victoria) and Ebbsfleet International railway station is 4 miles away. Facilities in Istead Rise include a primary school, community centre, medical practice and 2 small shopping parades.

Rural Housing Needs Surveys aim to investigate and establish the affordable housing needs of people who live in or have close ties to a parish or rural area, and provide an independent report of that need, if any, using a transparent and robust methodology.

The Rural Housing Enabler worked with Gravesham Borough Council to determine the format of the housing needs survey to be used in the Gravesham area; this was then sent to all Parish Councils in the borough for consultation. It is intended that all the rural areas of the Borough will be surveyed on a rollingout programme.

A survey was undertaken in Istead Rise to establish the level of need for affordable housing.

The aim of this survey is to identify in general terms if there is, or is not, a housing need from local people. It is not to provide a list of names and addresses of individuals requiring a home. If a need is identified, then a further Registration of Interest survey may be undertaken to update the levels of housing need. At this stage, further details such as name and address, income, housing need and details of local connection will be taken. The identification of potential sites, e.g. infill sites, to meet the identified need would then be undertaken, preferably with the assistance of the Istead Rise Community Association.

3. BACKGROUND INFORMATION

In a report published in October 2010, the National Housing Federation’s Rural Housing Alliance has stated that ‘The average rural house price in England is now more than twelve times the average salary of people living in rural areas. In order to obtain a mortgage, a person living and working in the countryside would need to earn £66,000 per year’. * They state that the average rural salary is approximately £20,000.

Small developments of local needs housing schemes can provide affordable housing for local people, thereby enabling them to stay in their community and contribute to village life. This can make a real difference to the vitality of village services.

In 2007 Matthew Taylor, then MP for Truro and St Austell, was asked by the then Prime Minister to conduct a review on how land use and planning can better support rural business and deliver affordable housing. Many rural communities are faced by a combination of higher than average house prices and lower than average local wages. This can create challenges for individual families, the local economy and the wider sustainability of the community.

On July 23 rd 2008 Matthew Taylor presented his Review to the Government. Caroline Flint, Housing Minister at the time, indicated that the Government agreed with the core principles of the report and would take further measures to boost rural enterprise and affordable housing.

* Affordable Rural Housing: A practical guide for parish councils. October 2010. National Housing Federation

5

Caroline Flint said: “Matthew Taylor has provided a comprehensive and authoritative report into the issues that our rural communities face, as well as a number of practical recommendations. He has been talking to people right across the country and his report will have a lasting impact on policy that will help their communities prosper. I thank him for that hard work.”

"It's simply not fair that people in rural communities struggle to afford a place of their own. I am determined that we do everything we can to further help people in rural communities into home ownership, by for example helping landowners to establish community land trusts and by ensuring councils deliver the sustainable homes their communities need."

Rural Affairs Minister Jonathan Shaw said: “Everyone should have the chance of a decent home at a price they can afford in a place they want to live and work in, and that goes for rural people too.”

The Government issued their response to the review in March 2009 where they accepted the majority of Matthew Taylor’s recommendations (DCLG: 2009).

The Rural Housing Enabler Programme, which is delivered in Kent through Action with Communities in Rural Kent – the Rural Community Council for Kent and Medway, is supported by Local Authorities across Kent and Medway including Gravesham Borough Council.

Action with Communities in Rural Kent is a registered charity (No. 212796) whose purpose is to improve the quality of life of local communities, particularly for disadvantaged people, and to facilitate the development of thriving, diverse and sustainable communities throughout rural Kent. Since March 1998 Action with Communities in Rural Kent has employed a Rural Housing Enabler whose role is to provide independent support, advice and information to Parish Councils and community groups concerned with the lack of local needs housing in their rural communities.

The RHE will assist with carrying out a housing needs survey, analyse the results and help identify suitable sites in conjunction with the local authority and others, for local needs housing schemes. Once a partnership has been established between the Parish Council, the chosen housing association and the local authority to develop schemes, the independent role of the RHE helps to ensure the projects proceed smoothly and to the benefit of the community.

4. METHOD

The Rural Housing Enabler from Action with Communities in Rural Kent posted a copy of the survey to every household in Istead Rise in June 2012.

Surveys were returned in prepaid envelopes to Action with Communities in Rural Kent. Copies of the survey were available for anyone to complete who had left Istead Rise and wished to return, they were held by the Rural Housing Enabler. It was asked that completed survey forms were returned by 20 th

June 2012. All surveys received at Action with Communities in Rural Kent by the 20 th June are included in this report.

Approximately 1430 surveys were distributed with 599 returned by this date representing a return rate of 42%.

Some surveys were not fully completed therefore the results are shown for the total answers to each question.

6

5. RESULTS

Section 1

Listed below are the results of each question asked by the housing needs survey.

Question 1. How would you describe your home? ∗

Frequency 200 0

House

Flat/maisonette/bedsit Sheltered/retirement housing*

Bungalow

Caravan/mobile home/temporary structure

Other

355 House 1 Flat/maisonette/bedsit 0 Sheltered/retirement housing*

219 Bungalow 0 Caravan/mobile home/temporary structure 3 Other

Question 2. How many bedrooms does your current home have?

1 2 3 4 5+

Frequency

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

3 1 117 2 341 3 115 4 8 5+

∗ Retirement housing includes Extra Care Accommodation which consists of purpose built accommodation in which varying amounts of care and support can be offered, and where some facilities are shared

7

Question 3. Who owns your home?

Frequency 300 200 100 0

Owned outright by a household member(s) Owned with mortgage by a household member(s)

Rented from a Housing Association Tied to a job

Shared ownership (part owned/part rented) Rented from the local council Rented from a private landlord

Other

374 Owned outright by a household member(s) 179 Owned with mortgage by a household member(s) 1 Rented from a Housing Association 1 Tied to a job 1 Shared ownership (part owned/part rented) 0 Rented from the local council 12 Rented from a private landlord 2 Other

97% of respondents who answered the question are owner occupiers; 66% own their homes outright and 31% have a mortgage.

Question 4. How many years have you lived in Istead Rise?

Frequency 250 200 150 100 50 0

less than 1 year

1 5 years

6 10 years

11 15 years

16 25 years

26+ years

22 less than 1 year 58 1 5 years 66 6 10 years 59 11 15 years 97 16 25 years 286 26+ years

442 respondents (74%) have lived in Istead Rise for over 10 years.

8

Question 5. Have any of your children/parents/brothers/sisters moved away from Istead Rise in the last 5 years, due to difficulties in finding a suitable home locally?

Yes No

Frequency

500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0

39 Yes 541 No

Question 6. Depending on location, would you be in favour of a small development of affordable housing for people from Istead Rise if there is a proven need?

Yes No

Frequency

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

111 Yes 460 No

81% of respondents who answered the question (77% of all respondents) would not be in favour of a small development of affordable housing for people from Istead Rise.

Question 7. Please provide any further comments that you would like to make

There were 364 responses to this question; a full list of comments can be found in Appendix IR1.

9

Question 8. Do you or a member of your household need separate or alternative accommodation either now or in the next 3 years?

Yes , now Yes, next 3 years No

Frequency

500

400

300

200

100

0

9 Yes , now 17 Yes, next 3 years 565 No

26 respondents (5%) said they have a housing need either now or in the next 3 years.

10

Section 2 – Housing Needs

Question 9. Are you completing this form for someone else?

Self Someone else

Frequency

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

17 Self 8 Someone else

Question 10. If you are completing this form for someone else please state their relationship to you and where they currently live e.g. with parents, private renting etc.

Respondents who were completing the form for someone else were doing so for their adult children who were still living in the parental home.

Question 11. Do you currently live in Istead Rise?

Yes No

Frequency

25

20

15

10

5

0

25 Yes 1 No

11

Question 12. What is your connection with Istead Rise? Respondents were asked to indicate all connections that applied to them.

Local connection FREQUENCY Currently live in Istead Rise and have done so continuously for the last 10 years

18

Currently live in Istead Rise and have done so continuously for the last 5 years

4

Do not currently live in Istead Rise but have previously lived there for 5 out of the last 10 years

2

Do not currently live in Istead Rise but have close family who currently live there and have done so continuously for the last 10 years

2

Do not currently live in Istead Rise but have previously lived there continuously for at least 10 years and, in my opinion, was forced to move away due to a lack of suitable accommodation

1

Question 13. What is your current housing situation?

Frequency 10 8 6 4 2 0

Owner occupier with/without mortgage Living with relatives Renting from council

Shared ownership/new build homebuy Renting from Housing Association

Tied tenancy Renting privately

Other

8 Owner occupier with/without mortgage 10 Living with relatives 0 Renting from council 1 Shared ownership/new build homebuy 0 Renting from Housing Association 0 Tied tenancy 6 Renting privately 0 Other

Question 14. How many bedrooms do you have in your current home?

1 2 3 4 5+

Frequency

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

0 1 4 2 13 3 7 4 2 5+

12

Question 15. Are you registered on the Council’s Housing Register?

Yes No

Frequency

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

3 Yes 22 No

Question 16. Which of the following options would be most suitable for you in alternative accommodation? ∗

Frequency 8 6 4 2 0

Rent from council/housing association*

New build homebuy **

Rent from a private landlord

Owner occupation

Other (please specify)

5 Rent from council/housing association* 8 New build homebuy ** 3 Rent from a private landlord 9 Owner occupation 0 Other (please specify)

Question 17. Do you have any comments on the above options?

The following comments were made: • I would like one/two bed bungalow/ground floor flat with access to outside. • Would prefer to live nearer work. Bexley x 1. Hammersmith x 1. • Would like a low priced starter home. • Home suitable for blind person. • Would never consider buying a newbuild on a development primarily because of the social

housing content. • Preference for owner occupation if low priced. • My daughter private rents in Gravesend – she has three under 5s in one bedroom. • Need bungalow on flat site due to disability.

* To be considered for this type of accommodation, you need to be registered on Gravesham Borough Council’s Housing Register. Tel: 01474 564422

** Government scheme which enables people to buy a share in a newly built property (also known as shared ownership)

13

• There is a need for sheltered/gated private accommodation for the elderly. • Live with my sister, her partner and child, so would eventually like to set up on my own, but not

far due to elderly parents being in Istead Rise.

Question 18. What type of accommodation would meet your needs? ∗

Frequency 10 5 0

House

Flat/maisonette

Bungalow

Sheltered/retirement housing*

Other

14 House 9 Flat/maisonette 11 Bungalow 4 Sheltered/retirement housing* 0 Other

Question 19. Do you have any specific requirements?

Yes No

Frequency

22 20 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

4 Yes 22 No

Question 20. If you answered ‘Yes’ to Question 19, please give details

Two respondents who answered ‘Yes’ to Question 19 said they have the following requirements: • Wife registered blind. I retired early to take care of her. • Need for ground floor or lifts to accommodation.

∗ Retirement Housing includes Extra Care Accommodation which offers independent living in a home of your choice with other services on hand if you need or want them.

14

Question 21. Why do you need to move from your current home and what do you need in a new home?

Frequency 10 5 0

Need smaller home

Present home too expensive inc. major repairs and maintenance costs

Need to change tenure

Need physicallyadapted home

Need larger home

Need to set up independent home

Need to be nearer work

Need for better access to public transport

Need to be close to a carer or dependent, to give or receive support

Other

The respondents who answered ‘Other’ gave the following reasons for needing to move: • 2 x divorce. • Can’t afford private rent. • Living with relative at the moment.

Question 22. Please indicate the number of people in each age group (male or female) needing to move

AGE 0 9 10 15 16 19 20 24 25 44 45 59 60 74 75+ Male 1 3 2 7 5 6 4 1 Female 2 1 1 5 3 0 0 2 Total 3 4 3 12 8 6 4 3

Question 23. What type of household will the new household become?

Frequency 12 10 8 6 4 2 0

Oneperson household

Loneparent family

Twoparent family

Couple

Other

8 Oneperson household 2 Loneparent family 3 Twoparent family 12 Couple 0 Other

15

Question 24. Please indicate the total gross annual income of the household in housing need

Frequency 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Under £10,000 (less than £190 pw)

£10,000 £20,000 (£190£380 pw)

£20,000 £30,000

£30,000 £40,000

£40,000 £50,000

£50,000 £60,000

£60,000 £70,000

More than £70,000

16

6. LOCAL HOUSING COSTS

To fully assess local housing need it is important to look at open market prices in the private sector of houses both to rent and buy.

Property for sale

Searches of www.rightmove.co.uk which markets property for a number of leading local estate agents, in June 2012, showed the following cheapest properties for sale in Istead Rise. No 1 bed properties were found.

Type of Property Number of Bedrooms

Price £

Semi detached bungalow 2 190 000 Semi detached bungalow 2 219 995 Semi detached house 3 225 000 Semi detached house 3 230 000 Detached bungalow 4 235 000 Detached house 4 240 000

Property to rent

A similar search for rental property found only the following three properties to rent; no 1 bed properties were found:

Type of Property Number of Bedrooms

Price £pcm.

Semi detached bungalow 2 875 Semi detached house 3 950 Detached house 6 1950

Household income required to afford current market prices

Using local information, the table below shows gross income level needed to purchase a property in the area. The figures are calculated assuming a 15% deposit and using 3.5 x gross income. Monthly repayment is based on a 2 year fixed rate with HSBC at 4.99% (June 2012) 25 year mortgage term and is calculated using HSBC’s mortgage calculator.

It should be noted that in the current economic climate lenders have made the borrowing criteria for potential mortgagees far stricter by requiring at least a 15% deposit, making securing a mortgage difficult for some first time buyers, especially those on lower incomes.

Type of Property Price £ Deposit (15%)

Gross Income Level

Monthly Repayment

2 bed semi detached bungalow

190 000 28 500 46 143 943

2 bed semi detached bungalow

219 995 32 999 53 427 1092

3 bed semi detached house 225 000 33 750 54 643 1117 3 bed semi detached house 230 000 34 500 55 857 1142 4 bed detached bungalow 235 000 35 250 57 071 1167 4 bed detached house 240 000 36 000 48 286 1191

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/

17

To gauge the income level required to afford to rent privately, Government guidance states that a household can be considered able to afford market house renting in cases where rent payable was up to 25% of their gross household income (DCLG Strategic Housing Market Assessment Guide 2007)

Type of Property Price £ pcm

Approx. Gross Annual income £

2 bed semi detached bungalow 875 42 000 3 bed semi detached house 950 45 600 6 bed detached house 1950 93 600

Using HM Land Registry data on house sales (www.mouseprice.com) using postcode area DA13 which lies within or includes part of the following towns, counties, localities, electoral wards and stations: Cobham, Downs, Gravesend, Hartley and Hodsoll Street, Istead Rise, Kent, Longfield, New Barn and Southfleet, Luddesdown, Meopham, Meopham North, Meopham South and Vigo, Northfleet Green, Shorne, Cobham and Luddesdown, Snodland West, Sole Street, South Street, Southfleet, Vigo, Woodlands, the average house prices in the last 3 months are

1 bed properties £159,500 2 bed properties £254,100 3 bed properties £285,500 4 bed properties £410,700 5+ bed properties £494,700

To afford the average cost of a 1 bed property using the mortgage calculation previously shown, a salary of £38,736 would be required. To afford the average cost of a 2 bed property a salary of £61,700 would be required.

Information provided by ‘mouseprice’ states that the average property in the DA13 area costs £304,900 with average earnings being £27,037. This means that the average property costs over 11 times more than the average salary. The source used by ‘mouseprice’ to assess price to earnings ratio is Calnea Analytics proprietary price data and earnings data – updated quarterly.

Affordable Rent

The Government has introduced changes relating to rents charged to new tenants of social housing from April 2011. Affordable Rent properties allow landlords to set rents anywhere between current social rent levels and up to 80% of local market rents. It is expected that Housing Benefit will support those on a lower income who are unable to pay Affordable Rents although this is not guaranteed.

As there were only 3 properties advertised to rent in Istead Rise, figures are calculated taking the private sector average monthly rent found in nearby Meopham into consideration.

Size of Property Open Market Rent Levels £pcm

Affordable Rent Levels £pcm

1 bed 600 480 2 bed 794 635 3 bed 1165 932 4 bed 1895 1516

http://www.mouseprice.com/

18

The table below shows income needed to afford the affordable rent levels using 25% of gross income as the indicator of what is affordable.

Property Price £ pcm

Gross annual Income £

1 bed 480 23 040 2 bed 635 30 480 3 bed 932 44 736 4 bed 1516 72 768

Shared ownership

To give an indication of respondents’ ability to afford shared ownership, levels of income and rent/mortgage have been taken into consideration on purchasing a 40% and 70% share of a property with estimated values of £122,500 for a 1 bed property, £168,000 for a 2 bed property and £207,000 for a 3 bed property. These values take into consideration average prices found in Istead Rise and nearby Meopham. Affordability is calculated using Moat’s mortgage and rent calculator http://homebuyoptions.co.uk/calculator/index.html and are approximate.

Calculations are made assuming a 10% deposit of mortgage share.

Property price £

Share Deposit Required £

Monthly mortgage £

Monthly rent £

Monthly Service charge

Monthly total £

Gross Income required

122 500 40% 4 900 263 172 80 515 17 585 122 500 70% 8 595 462 86 80 628 26 056 168 000 40% 6 720 357 234 80 671 22 735 168 000 70% 11 760 626 117 80 823 34 255 207 000 40% 8 280 430 282 80 792 26 780 207 000 70% 14 490 743 141 80 975 40 632

http://homebuyoptions.co.uk/calculator/index.html

19

7. ASSESSMENT OF HOUSING NEED

Assessment of the 9 households seeking housing now

Five respondents were excluded from this final assessment for the following reasons: • 1 x owner occupier who wanted sheltered/retirement housing to buy on the open market only • 1 x owner occupier who did not answer Q16 which asks what type of tenure would be most

suitable for them • 1 x respondent currently living with relatives who only wants to buy on the open market • 1 x private tenant who wants smaller and cheaper accommodation to rent privately only • 1 x incorrectly completed form; unable to make an assessment of housing need

The 4 households in need of affordable housing now are – • 1 couple • 3 families

Couples – there was 1 couple

Age Frequency 2024 1 2544 1

Current housing:

Current Housing Frequency Living with relatives 1

Current number of bedrooms:

No of bedrooms Frequency 4 1

Tenure best suited:

Tenure Frequency New build homebuy 1

Type of housing needed:

Type of housing Frequency House 1

Specific requirements:

Requirement Frequency None

Reason for seeking new home:

Reason Frequency Need to set up independent home

1

20

Household’s joint gross annual income:

Income Frequency £20,000 £30,00 1

The respondent indicated at least one of the local connection criteria. They currently live in Istead Rise.

The respondent is not currently registered on Gravesham Borough Council’s Housing Register.

The following table shows the respondent’s ability to afford the various forms of tenure available; private rent, affordable rent, shared ownership and open market.

It should be noted that actual affordability of open market purchase depends on the ability to pay at least a 15% deposit and other finances necessary to buy a home. Actual affordability of shared ownership also depends on having the necessary finances.

Shared ownership has only been assessed where a desire for it has been indicated.

Income Number of respondents

Affordable rent

Private rent

Shared ownership

Open market

£20,000 £30,000

1 1 0 1 x 40% share 2 bed

0

Families there were three families

Ages

Adult Age

Adult Age

Child Age

Child Age

Child Age

Child Age

Child Age

Family 1 4559 1015 1015 Family 2 2024 09 09 09 Family 3 4559 2544 2024 2024 1619 1619 1015

Current housing:

Current Housing Frequency Owner occupier 1 Renting privately 2

The above owner occupier wants newbuild homebuy due to needing to set up an independent home following divorce.


No of bedrooms Frequency 2 1 3 2

21

Tenure best suited:

Tenure Frequency New build homebuy 1 Rent from council/housing association

2


Type of housing Frequency House 2 House/flat/maisonette/ bungalow

1





2

Need larger home 1 Other (divorce and can’t afford private rent)

2


Income Frequency Under £10,000 1 £10,000 £20,000 1 £30,000 £40,000 1

The respondents indicated at least one of the local connection criteria. Two currently live in Istead Rise and one does not but has close family living there who have done so for the last 10 years.

Two respondents are currently registered on Gravesham Borough Council’s Housing Register.

The following table shows the respondents’ ability to afford the various forms of tenure available; private rent, affordable rent, shared ownership and open market.


22



Affordable rent

Private rent

Shared ownership

Open market

Under £10,000

1 0 0 0 0

£10,000 £20,000

1 0 0 0 0

£30,000 £40,000

1 0 0 Not wanted 0

Assessment of the 17 households seeking housing in the next 3 years

Thirteen respondents were excluded from this final assessment for the following reasons: • 1 x couple living with relatives who only want to rent privately • 2 x couples living with relatives who only want to buy on the open market • 2 x owner occupiers who require more suitable housing for their needs on the open market only • 1 x owner occupier who requires shelter/retirement housing on the open market only • 1 x owner occupier with a 4 bedroom property who wants to rent from the council/housing

association; as they may have equity in their home they may not be eligible for affordable housing

• 1 x owner occupier who wants to move to be nearer work but only wants to buy on the open market

• 1 x single person living with relatives who wants to rent privately only • 1 x owner occupier who wants to buy a bungalow on the open market • 1 x respondent with shared ownership tenure who wants alternative new build homebuy but did

not give enough information to make an assessment of their need • 1 x did not want to stay in Istead Rise • 1 x couple who were renting privately and wanted to rent from a housing association/council but

had an income of £50,000 £60,000 so would not be eligible for this form of tenure

The 4 households in need of affordable housing in the next 3 years are – • 3 single people • 1 family

Single people – there were 3 single people

Age Frequency 2024 2 2544 1

Current housing:

Current Housing Frequency Living with relatives 3


No of bedrooms Frequency 3 2 4 1

23

Tenure best suited:

Tenure Frequency Rent from council/housing association

1

New build homebuy 2


Type of housing Frequency Flat/maisonette 2 House/bungalow 1





3

Need larger home 1


Income Frequency £10,000 £20,000 2 £20,000 £30,000 1

The respondents indicated at least one of the local connection criteria. They all currently live in Istead Rise.

None of the respondents are currently registered on Gravesham Borough Council’s Housing Register.





Affordable rent

Private rent

Shared ownership

Open market

£10,000 £20,000

2 0 0 1 x 40% share 1 bed

0

£20,000 £30,000

1 1 0 1 x 40% share 2 bed

0

24

Families there was one family

Ages

Adult Age

Adult Age

Child Age

Child Age

Child Age

Child Age

Family 1 4559 4559 1619 1015

Current housing:

Current Housing Frequency Private renting 1


No of bedrooms Frequency 4 1

Tenure best suited:

Tenure Frequency New build homebuy/rent from council/housing association

1


Type of housing Frequency House 1




Reason Frequency Present home too expensive 1


Income Frequency £50,000£60,000 1

The respondents indicated at least one of the local connection criteria. They currently live in Istead Rise.

They are not currently registered on Gravesham Borough Council’s Housing Register.


25




Affordable rent

Private rent

Shared ownership

Open market

£50,000 £60,000

1 1 1 70% share 3 bed

0

26

8. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

The Housing Needs Survey has found a need for up to 8 homes for local people who are in need of affordable housing; they are 3 single people, 1 couple and 4 families.

4 of the households need housing now and 4 in the next 3 years.

The 8 respondents who are in need of affordable housing indicated strong local connections to Istead Rise; 7 currently live there and 1 used to live there and currently has close family members living there.

There are a total of 13 adults and 10 children in housing need.

4 respondents are currently living with relatives, 3 are renting privately and 1 is an owner occupier who needs affordable housing due to divorce and is therefore included in the assessment for affordable housing.

4 respondents said the type of accommodation that would meet their needs was a house, 2 said a flat/maisonette and 2 said a house/flat/maisonette or bungalow.

6 respondents said they need to move from their current home because they need to set up an independent home, 2 respondents said they need a larger home, 1 said their present home is too expensive and 2 respondents gave ‘Other’ reasons; ‘divorce’ and ‘can’t afford private rent’. Respondents were able to indicate more than one option for needing to move.

In total, 5 respondents indicated an interest in new build homebuy. 4 of these households indicated the ability to afford a 40% or 70% share of the size of property they require (1 x 1 bed, 2 x 2 bed and 1 x 3 bed). More detailed analysis of their income, amount of deposit they have available and actual cost of the shared ownership property would be required to confirm affordability.

27

9. APPENDIX IR1

Question 7. Please provide any further comments that you would like to make (to Q6).

If you can't afford to live here you find somewhere else to live.

I do not wish to increase the size of Istead Rise. It needs to be kept separate from both the A2 and Meopham or Southfleet.

Gravesend has affordable housing in tens of thousands of 'two up two down houses' and is only 2 miles away.

The only development I would like to see is retirement bungalows/low level flats for people on Istead Rise who need to downsize or who can't upkeep the homes they have but don't want to move far. People on low or subsidised income would find it hard to live here.

It all depends on what you call a small development, for there is no place on Istead Rise that I know of for further building in numbers.

I don't believe affordable housing is needed within Istead Rise; I have worked my way up the property ladder to be able to live here, and moved here when I was 24 years old.

I think affordable housing is a priority and should be available throughout the country.

I would normally vote yes to Q6, however as I feel politicians either local or national and irrespective of party cannot be trusted. What to most people constitutes a small development (e.g. 2025 properties) would mushroom to 100+, and this cannot be catered for locally.

What do you mean by small amount, 10, 50, 100 or hundreds? As thousands were proposed I suppose hundreds would be a small amount. How could you say that only Istead Rise residents would be able to buy these houses?

Only if small scale development not on greenbelt land

Want to keep Istead Rise as a village and not to become a town.

Due to the immigration issue in the country and the potential problems that can occur, I don't want that in Istead Rise. Also the issue that occurs with some council tenants. No, I don't want a small development in Istead Rise. Also with the large number of empty properties in the UK which could be used instead.

We are against affordable housing in Istead Rise and signed to state this fact.

Facilities on Istead Rise and roads in the area will not benefit from additional housing.

I live on the east side of Wrotham Road, i.e. not the Istead Rise area as such. Re. Q6 I would not support any development on greenbelt land

I refer to the last sentence in paragraph one of your letter who is kidding who?

This is a rural area which requires a car and expensive transportation needs to access shops and other facilities. Economy housing should be in the towns where good facilities exist to cater for their needs.

28

I am very much against any housing association/affordable housing development in Istead Rise. Despite guarantees this would not be used purely for existing residents and bring trouble to our doorstep.

I strongly oppose the development of affordable housing as I don't see how you can ensure it's for people from Istead Rise, thereby leaving it open to the possibility of persons being provided with housing that could lead to Istead Rise becoming a less desirable area to live.

I thought that after attending the meeting at the community hall we have been through this already. Did you not listen to what residents were saying?

Istead Rise is fully developed and we do not think this village needs anymore houses. It would be better if the council were to develop brown field sites and also build over shops in Gravesend town centre. Also concentrate on the restoration of houses that have been boarded up in the Kings Farm area.

Istead Rise is not particularly expensive. All three of my children have left home and chose not to stay here because of poor transport links and the fact there is nothing to do socially here.

Having just been part of the consultation against the council regarding building on Istead Rise I now find them trying to build again. Istead Rise is not big enough and does not have the facilities for more properties. I feel this form is another council scam to get more properties built in Istead Rise.

Congestion, crime, young offenders.

I answered no to Q6 because the phrase 'small development' is very ambiguous. I might have said yes to a 'small development not to exceed 10 properties'. I am not in favour of enlarging the envelope of Istead Rise yet again (see the Drover Way and Worcester Close).

Newbuild homebuy only, not council/housing association rental.

Population density across this area of rural land is already high enough. Access to docs, dentists and hospital facilities already stretched. Should the nature of Istead Rise change we would move away ourselves exactly the opposite effect you hope to make by pursuing this policy, please leave our area alone.

Istead Rise is becoming more crowded without a new development. More families have older children hence more vehicles which leads to problems parking and congestion. Anti social behaviour is increasing on Istead Rise in my experience (professional) anti social behaviour increases more with introduction of affordable housing.

Would very much depend on location as Istead Rise has grown over the years taking much of farmland and orchards.

Definitely not, it will bring the area down. We moved here to be in a semi rural area with nice neighbours and amongst people who look after their houses. Build it in other lower class areas. Don't ruin our community.

Most of the people living here area elderly or young families, therefore they do not have children ready to move out and set up their own homes. We do not see a need for affordable housing in the area. The people living here would benefit from more to do in the community e.g. pub or restaurant.

Association always require a lot of compliances for a property and pay below value for it they want too much and population already in sufficient numbers per houses already here.

29

There is only green belt land available and there are plenty of brown field sites locally in Gravesend.

I do not feel that there are adequate services to support further housing in Istead Rise, i.e. schools, doctors etc. With all the new developments going up in the nearby area I cannot see how we could possibly need more.

We don't need anymore houses on Istead Rise, this is a village, leave it that way.

There is no sheltered/retirement housing in Istead Rise. We feel this is the type of housing needed most so elderly people (many of whom will not drive) do not have to move away from friends/families, local clubs etc.

Enough houses in Istead Rise already.

I do not believe a development would only be used for people from Istead Rise

Istead Rise will lose its village status if anything else is built here. Already lots of houses have been crammed into very small areas. We need our green spaces.

The people of Istead Rise moved here to live a life that is correct and civilised with regard to law and order and proud of their gardens and surroundings. This includes those that were born here. Just look at Margate and Thanet to see where your plan will end.

An influx of DSS could account for recent cases of yobbish behaviour including the smashing of drivers door window on my car and dumping of empty drink cans etc. in front of gardens. Any further development of affordable housing could not be guaranteed for Istead Rise people only.

The general opinion of current residents is that more development may encourage undesirable individuals and destroy the pleasant communal spirit that exists here.

Disruption for 10 years rail ink, similar period of disturbance with A2 moving into fields. Istead Rise basically full to capacity any additional housing would impact of schools plus extra car for new residents would cause many problems.

There is a need for sheltered accommodation in Istead Rise to avoid long term residents having to move away in old age.

GBC tried to get planning permission to build a lot of homes within the area of Istead Rise earlier this year and failed so what makes them think that they will be more successful this time? Most residents were against it then.

I do not feel Istead Rise facilities can support any additional housing. In my experience as a former housing officer I am aware that housing associations can attract custom from exoffenders. Istead Rise is not suitable.

No more building around Istead Rise. We need our greenbelt area. Do not ruin it. But not on green belt land. Alongside Istead Rise.

Istead Rise has been developed to its maximum without becoming 'joined' with its neighbouring communities. The type of housing that would be truly affordable would change the character of the community and the reason many live here and not Gravesend.

30

Istead Rise would be spoilt with more housing. There is no room at the school, dentist and doctors. We have a very good balance at the moment with our amenities. Build your housing on land opposite Morrisons supermarket.

Depends on location. If a need is confirmed then all the usual arguments over where to build will arise, the same as previous applications.

If you build any affordable housing on Istead Rise it will devalue all existing properties on Istead Rise. The greenbelt land around Istead Rise should remain as greenbelt land.

Istead Rise has always been a rural village and should remain so.

Infrastructure, roads, access, parking, schools insufficient. Any new homes can't happen.

Do you people not get it? Only a few months ago the council was going to build extra homes on greenbelt land in Istead Rise are you trying to ruin our area?

I do not think the infrastructure could tolerate more housing in Istead Rise. Also public transport for the area needs greatly improving.

If further housing is built at Istead Rise it would put a further strain on already stretched doctors and dentists services. The road network around Istead Rise will not be able to cope with more traffic.

The current infrastructure i.e. doctors, schools, Darenth Valley Hospital cannot support any extra population in this area.

You cannot accept defeat with housing. No building on greenbelt land as per Istead Rise Action Group 2011.

Not enough amenities.

Istead Rise does not lend itself to any further development unless you change Istead Rise itself. Any affordable housing built would make me consider moving.

Affordable housing should be provided in appropriate brownfield sites, we are a flexible, transient society able to move, sentiment should not dictate housing.

Istead Rise is just right at the moment, schools, roads etc will not take anymore homes.

People choose to lie here partly because there is no affordable housing. Leave Istead Rise alone.

This is a small community the residents like it the way it is as per our objections in 2011/12. We do not want buildings on greenbelt land. Use the brownfield sites as rest is fast going under concrete. The infrastructure is also totally swamped now.

Leave the area semirural. The local school is already full enough taking in people from Gravesend. More people would put too much pressure.

We have already rejected additional housing in Istead Rise.

Istead Rise is a good size and should remain so. There is no need for new properties. If you add more properties it will ruin the semi rural area we have.

31

Answered No. Insufficient information on which to base an objective assessment of the proposal.

We have 5 adult children, 2 of which are still at home, however there are plenty of under subscribed new developments nearby that are within their price bracket.

I moved to Istead Rise because of the greenbelt, I strongly disagree with this development not only because the council is set on destroying our greenbelt when there are more than enough brownfield sites to use. I don't accept that the developers seem to have control of Gravesham council because they don't want to build on brownfield. How can this be? Use the sites on the river front and/or car park site in the town centre. Not here.

Absolutely not in Istead Rise. Would turn it into an extension of Gravesend.

Istead Rise is currently a fantastic community to live in and affordable housing encourages a very different sect of society to the area. There area should be maintained not developed. It would be my preference to keep green areas green.

Not on greenbelt, SSI or other designated land. Cooperatives would be best.

We do not want any building developments on or around Istead Rise. If you want to build new homes build them on brownfield sites not greenbelt.

Istead Rise does not have the infrastructure to accommodate more houses. Doctors already serving wide area. Meopham Road (A227) often over busy especially during rush hour and school travel times.

Istead Rise is sufficiently populated and does not have sustainable facilities for an increase in housing population

We need to preserve our countryside. Greenbelt land should not be built upon, as originally specified.

No further development of Istead Rise.

Schools, surgery, roads etc. would be unable to cope with more houses.

I have lived in social priority areas before and their ownership of their home and environment can be very poor. This is greenbelt land that needs to be preserved.

Istead rise is large enough and any additional housing would overload doctors, school and local traffic.

Prior to moving to Istead Rise we lived in Huxley Village in Benvedere. This sweet village had a very small housing association community who wreaked havoc for the other hundreds of residents. We decided we would not tolerate feeling scared in our own home and so researched north Kent to find a community we could join with a good school and low crime rate. We discovered Istead Rise and paid a premium to buy a small home here. Please don't risk taking this peaceful community away from my children.

I think that Q6 is unhelpful. You need information from residents to give numbers of local people/family members who need accommodation on Istead Rise firstly before moving on to identifying location then secondly to canvas support.

I was born in East London but upon marriage could not afford to buy in east London and was forced to move further afield. I have never regretted moving to Kent. It is not a bad thing to fly the nest.

32

No further development as we are surrounded by green belt land.

Istead Rise is large enough.

I feel that Istead Rise has been developed to its maximum extent. Any further development will overload existing infrastructure.

The village is large enough at present.

I don't feel that affordable housing is appropriate if it means building on the greenbelt. The reason I want to live in Istead Rise is due to the people already living here. It has a community feel to it, I don't feel that adding affordable housing will benefit the area.

I am worried adding a development in Istead would cause problems with anti social behaviour etc. We moved to Istead to create a safe place to bring up small children and already there is overcrowding at preschools and Istead School so more people would cause more issues.

There are sufficient brownfield sites to satisfy local requirements ref. old cement factory and electrical sites at Northfleet and the likes.

Istead Rise needs affordable housing for young families, couples starting to look at housing and also older couples and individuals after retirement. The houses in Istead Rise can be seen as expensive. These would bring a social mix to the village.

Do not want affordable housing.

No one of my generation was able to live where we were born and brought up. We moved to where we could afford to live and moved on until we could afford to move back to this area. I feel this is another ploy of GBC to build on greenbelt or to destroy the pleasant community that we worked so hard to move back to.

Istead Rise is on the greenbelt. It does not need to be any bigger. Should 'affordable' housing be built it would mean building on the greenbelt which would then no doubt mean the beginning of the end of our country location. People who wish to live in Istead Rise need to start off in areas that provide affordable homes and then work up the ladder just as we did.

I do not believe that Istead Rise needs this type of accommodation in addition to that in Gravesend and Northfleet. The accommodation in those areas should be better used.

The expansion of Istead Rise is unnecessary and if it is preceded would necessitate massive improvements to a presently inadequate infrastructure. There's no useful bus service, train station and these would need to be built aswell as dual carriage way on A227.

Is limited space, infrastructure etc. Apart from greenbelt land and do not want to see building on there for any reason.

We are not in favour of building any affordable housing on greenfield or greenbelt.

We moved to this area because the village was small and compact. Also, being surrounded by green belt, if this development went ahead it would ruin Istead Rise.

33

No to any building on greenbelt in Istead Rise. Re. petition presented to GBC by IRAG in December 2011 GB Council should accept this as per their statement 'That it dropped its plans to build on greenbelt in Istead Rise'.

We moved to Istead Rise because there were no council/affordable housing and want it to remain that way we worked hard and saved to achieve our move here.

Against affordable housing.

Sheltered/retirement housing is needed as local 'Istead Risers' have to move away from the area.

The village was designed and has stayed the same for many years; local shops can cope very well with the size of the village and also the doctor's work OK. Istead Rise is an island paradise in an ocean of despair, please do not alter it.

A227 too busy now.

Istead Rise is a village community making it larger will hold less appeal and force happy residents into moving elsewhere. Why do you have to make village bigger, why not use a town where affordable housing would barely be noticed?

No building in the green belt.

Istead Rise has more than enough houses on the available land. More housing will mean using greenbelt land which we are against. There is non greenbelt land in the area on which to build additional affordable housing.

I do not support affordable housing if it means building in the greenbelt.

We have worked hard to be able to afford to live in Istead Rise we do not want the area to be bought down. (Why not try New Barn).

I object most strongly to any kind of future housing development in Istead Rise.

Strongly oppose any development.

We have moved into this area because of the nice green spaces and for peace and quiet. We moved here to get away from 'affordable housing'. We are totally against the proposed housing development.

Medical centre already overstretched.

Istead Rise is a small and pleasant village which people aspire to live and therefore save towards a mortgage. That is what I did to buy my house. Residents have already said no to building development in Istead Rise. Why raise the subject again?

We do not support affordable housing if it means building on greenbelt land. The current services would not cope i.e. electricity, telephone etc Traffic on Wrotham Road always queuing in the mornings.

We would not be in favour of building on greenbelt land or on existing amenity land such as recreational grounds.

Would not wish to see any houses built on greenbelt land.

34

I do not support a development if it means building in the greenbelt.

Should this survey highlight the need for affordable housing in Gravesham, I trust that the areas more available to building will be considered before encroaching onto valuable greenbelt land.

This survey is somewhat inappropriately timed for its cause, given that Istead Rise has recently been dropped by GBC for building on its greenbelt land. Consequently this initiative embarrassingly undermines the building options in this locality to which this survey may allude. The instigation of this survey irresponsibly overlooks or fails to address the building provisions and cost required to provide additional schooling, GP and main drainage services needed by additional community from the said homes that may be added to Istead Rise.

I don't feel Istead Rise to be a rural community given its close proximity to Gravesend (3 miles) where there is affordable housing. I am quite sure families will not be broken up by travelling a few miles away. Istead Rise doesn't even quality as a parish and as such is part of Gravesham. One of the reasons people live here is the quality of life and the amenities available and more housing will not improve that. This looks a back door way to build on greenbelt land.

We do not support any type of building on greenbelt land; there are sufficient brownfield sites in and around Gravesham to facilitate any required building.

Go to any other space or area plenty around.

We would not like to see any building on the greenbelt land at Istead Rise.

We do not support any affordable housing in the greenbelt.

We do not agree to any housing development if it means building on greenbelt. Fill in the brownfield land first. There is insufficient infrastructure in Istead Rise.

Provided the houses are sympathetically sited and there are not too many, it seems an excellent idea.

Affordable housing is often brought by the buy to let market bringing people from all areas; this is a quiet area with low burglary. Our doctor’s surgery is overstretched already and cannot take another influx of people.

Istead Rise is a relatively safe environment in which to live. We would not want the problems affordable housing often brings with it.

Re. Q6 development of land should be for general development and not for means tested people, that is when every kind of fiddle is used. I think if land is released the roads should be put in and plots sold to individual people, one plot per person to build a property of their desire (3 years time my needs may change re. Q8)

Istead Rise is already affordable for the people who live here that is what makes it the respectable and peaceful 'island' it is. Its character would be destroyed by allowing housing association homes. Leave Istead Rise alone.

I do not feel it is necessary for low cost housing. The area is already over populated. The infrastructure for health and education is overstretched. I work hard and have to give up certain things to live here, why should other people be able to live here at a discount. It's simply not fair.

Disagree with building affordable homes on Istead Rise.

35

The only land available for housing in Istead Rise is greenbelt land; therefore we do not want housing built on greenbelt land. We wish to retain the rural outlook.

Totally against any further development in the area.

No more building in Istead Rise.

I do not wish to see houses built on greenbelt land.

Q6 I consider to be a trick question by the people who are seeking the development. Because there would be no guarantee that any relative/family member would or should qualify from Gravesham council list.

Not on greenbelt land.

Istead Rise is surrounded by greenbelt land. I therefore object to this proposal on the grounds it would almost certainly encroach onto the existing greenbelt.

The infrastructure in Istead Rise could not cope with further expansion (doctors, roads, recreation facilities).

There seems to be a constant clamour to expand Istead Rise (recent greenbelt erosion and housing expansion) which does not seem to be linked to need. There are plenty of brownfield sites in Gravesham which should be developed.

Not needed. My husband and I do not wish to see any more housing on Istead Rise or surrounding countryside. We have lived in our house for 41 years in Istead Rise. Do not spoil the feel good of living in (a village) for us.

Concerns about putting our local GP surgery and schools under pressure if more houses were built. Also I would not like the views from my house of fields and trees spoilt by new housing.

This questionnaire is a joke. No one has the right to live anywhere. You need to separate need and desire. Q5 should be removed. Do not want building in greenbelt for any reason.

There is nowhere to build this type of accommodation in Istead Rise short of destroying the greenbelt land surrounding us and completely changing the semirural and quiet community we currently enjoy.

After working all our lives we have recently bought our bungalow in Istead Rise for our retirement, because of its lovely greenbelt location and would be very disappointed to see new buildings on that greenbelt.

Would prefer to keep Istead Rise as a small community not expanding outwards towards Gravesend, Meopham or Southfleet/New Barn. Being a small community is why I moved here. There are a lot of bungalows here which are normally occupied by older/retired people. Already around community centre/shop is inviting younger louts which cause problems in the area.

I will not support any housing on greenbelt land. Istead Rise facilities and services are to their limit and no further development should be considered.

I am very sceptical of the practicality of proving who was 'local' to Istead Rise how could you ever decide who was going to make a contribution to the local community.

36

In my opinion the residents of Istead Rise have already indicated that they do not want any further developments in this area be it for relatives or not.

Providing it is affordable houses and not on greenbelt land.

We do not support affordable housing if it means building in the greenbelt.

We would strongly oppose any further development of IR as this would only encroach into greenbelt land. The added traffic would only cause further congestion to roads that are already extremely busy and prone to gridlock at peak times.

We feel that IR has already been developed appropriately and would be against any future proposed affordable housing especially if it means building on greenbelt land.

We do not want any greenbelt land used for building. The reason we moved to IR was because of the beauty of the area and the fact that it is not crowded and is surrounded by fields and greens. There are thousands of acres of land available in the Milton/Shorne Marshes that could be used for housing. Why hasn't that been considered? Leave greenbelt alone.

We are not in favour of affordable housing at IR or on any of the greenbelt land. Also in the Q24 you quote £40,000 upwards to need housing. I am sorry but in those brackets they don't need affordable housing.

Istead Rise is large enough.

I am not in favour of any such development of affordable housing being provided on greenbelt or greenfield sites at Istead Rise.

My family and I think it is absolutely disgusting that this is even being thought of; we have worked so hard for years to earn the right to live in Istead Rise. Why should cheap property be built to accommodate yet more foreigners to ruin our village. Once land is gone it is gone forever. I would love to live in Chelsea but I can't afford it, I accept that. Will property be built there for me to afford? I doubt it. Leave our village alone.

Istead Rise is big enough. When you have used up the greenbelt, how are we going to feed ourselves? What about the large barren 'car park' in Gravesend. You have more infrastructure there. Greenbelt option is put forward by people who don't want to have to think i.e. easy option.

Parents need to downsize. I have moved back with my parents and saving for a house deposit.

The residents of Istead Rise have already made it quite clear to GBC that we want no development here.

Our son moved away to London due to high transport costs, not high housing.

Absolutely not, try Shorne, Meopham, Clybeston, Vigo they have more space. There area is not suitable for further development, Downs Road is a rabbit run for traffic to the A2 and Bluewater and Ebbsfleet as it is.

With the amount of people coming to the UK it will not stop with just families form Istead Rise. If you keep building on greenbelt you will be living on state of houses. That's not good.

We do not agree with any building on greenbelt land. Housing is always affordable if one works and saves. House prices are self levelling.

37

Providing there is no building on greenbelt land, however there is housing in Gravesham centre which is more affordable and I question the need to make a special case for people who want to stay in Istead Rise. We all had to make steps up the housing ladder.

The only proven need apparent to me is for sheltered housing. There are many elderly people, both single and married who would like to move into smaller units with an overseer. Their houses could then be vacated for the younger family members wishing to return to Istead Rise.

Istead Rise is big enough as it is. Any development that makes it larger would be to the detriment of existing residents unless the present infrastructure was improved.

Under no circumstances would we be in favour of any development of any nature, be it affordable housing or otherwise, being allowed on greenbelt land in Istead Rise or elsewhere in the Borough. If a need for affordable housing is established we suggest that the area for providing such housing isn't confined to the immediate locality of Istead Rise, it is a Borough wide issue.

Question 6 answer is yes, but not on greenbelt land.

Affordable housing means council tenants from any other area and is not guaranteed for local residents. Large private rent buildings bring crime and anti social behaviour as property is not owned and therefore people do not care about other residents or the properties. This is our actual experience.

One of the reasons I moved to the area was the fact that crime was very low. Building affordable housing will increase the social deprived to the area, increasing crime.

As a resident for over 50 years, having been born in IR I worked hared and saved to move back. My parents worked hard to build their home here and so it should be kept for people who can afford to live in such an area.

Affordable housing will reduce the value of my property and these people are not up to the standard of what is expected on Istead Rise.

We do not support any building on greenbelt land in Istead Rise. We do not think that if reopening the debate on building in Istead Rise affordable, or not a) is a good use of council money b) necessary as the debate re building in IR has only recently been closed.

1) Greenbelt land is sacrosanct. 2) Current weather aside the SE is too dry to allow for sufficient water per head of population as it is. 3) Insufficient facilities and infrastructure.

We don't want any developments whatsoever.

We are not in favour of any development on greenbelt.

Gravesham council need to spend money looking after verges, weeds, grass areas as our area looks appalling.

Istead Rise has not got the infrastructure to have more homes built, parking is very poor and the drive onto the A227 from Istead Rise is very dangerous.

Istead Rise has more than the roads and services can cope with as it is.

38

Strongly object to any new builds and especially social housing on Istead Rise particularly on greenbelt land. We chose to buy in IR because of the size and the fact there is no social housing. We feel there is much more suitable housing and sites in Gravesend to utilise.

Chose IR as no planning had been lodged for social housing. We are pensioners wanting a quiet environment; social housing is needed but feel that the location for such housing should be the main criteria. Keeping greenbelt is so important.

We do not believe that there is any available land within the existing boundaries of IR and therefore any construction would be on greenbelt land which we would actively oppose. Nor do we believe existing services have room for expansion.

With only greenbelt land available, no to this. In my opinion Gravesham planning favours builders over residents, and can't be trusted to be sympathetic especially to older residents. Plus the A227 is very busy already.

My answer to Q6 would be yes if I felt housing would only be for people from IR but I feel this would be doubtful.

The doctors and school is full, any further increase will make waiting times at the doctors more than a few days and the size of classes in the school too large to handle.

Leave things along. IR is a lovely place to live. This would be the thin edge of the wedge, before we knew it families of Somalis would be housed, stealing from us and spoiling everything forever.

IR is a nice place to live because it is surrounded by greenbelt not cheap housing.

No new developments in IR, would spoil village and countryside, lower house values and attract crime.

I feel sure exIR residents would be usurped by others from outside areas if their social need was greater and of potentially more urgency.

People from IR only. But not to build on any greenbelt land at IR. How much is this survey costing? Who is paying for it? Rate payers? A waste of our money.

There is a lack of facilities at IR i.e. doctors, transport, water, schools, hospitals. If immigration was stopped in Gravesham area there would be no lack of housing.

Whole scheme open to abuse.

If we wanted to live in an affordable housing area we would have moved to a town but we worked hard to be able to live in a rural area. We could not afford to live where our parents lived when we first started on the housing ladder that's life you work your way up gradually if you can be bothered if you can't then it's tough luck.

This is just another ploy by the government to build on greenbelt land. Leave IR alone. We are hard working decent people who do not wish to live next to a council estate. Do not ruin this peaceful village by filling it with people who do not want to work and would rather pillage from those that do work.

All three of our children would be more than happy to move back to IR buy only if no more building takes place. The whole point is that IR is a reasonably desirable place to live build a load more houses and it won't be.

39

Only a few months ago GBC said it had dropped its plan to build on greenbelt. Why are GBC wasting my council tax money sending out yet more useless surveys? I do not support any further building in IR. Look to Springhead Park and all the empty property trying to be sold on part buy. They cannot sell them.. No to anymore housing being built in IR. GBC are already aware of the huge problem of overcrowded schools, doctors surgery, lack of public transport.

Not to build on greenbelt land.

Leave us alone and use brown belt.

There is a need for starter homes and retirement homes.

It would never be a 'small' development because of infrastructure required to make it worthwhile.

I would not support affordable housing if it meant building in the greenbelt.

Where will all these extra houses go? My opinion is that I don't want to support people who are not prepared to help themselves. I have no objection to helping people who are genuinely poor but contribute positively to a community. I have had to live next door (previously) to the type of people who are better off financially if they don't work. They were unpleasant, alcoholic, bad parents and a drain on the community. I do not want to suffer that again. I moved away from Gravesend to move away from people like that and it is unfair that you consider housing these types near me.

Istead Rise is a quiet, safe, enjoyable place to live. Why would anyone with half a brain want this to change with an influx of outsiders who don't share the same views.

After living in South London and working 12 hours a day to be able to afford to buy a house in this area, I do not wish to see so called affordable housing in IR. I managed to escape that and the problems it brings by moving away from Thamesmead in 1977 to live here, by working all the hours I could, sometimes 7 days a week on 12 hour shifts for near on 40 years.

We came to IR as it is a quiet community. We feel that if affordable houses were to happen all our local schools and amenities would be stretched.

The volume of traffic around the parade of shops and the schools is already at saturation point so additional housing in the area will only make things worse.

IR has enough problems as it is, we don't need any more.

I had to move away from this area until I could afford to return. We do not need any more houses being built out here.

Feel that we do not need more housing on IR. Reason: I feel that our medical centre is far too busy now and it would not be a suitable area for building.

There are insufficient facilities to support more housing. Cheap housing breeds higher crime rates. Will resist proposals for these reasons and others.

Only people with connection to IR, all matters must be discussed, for the future of this area.

Local residents have recently made their complete opposition to further development in IR, especially to building on greenbelt land, crystal clear. I share this opposition to any further building in or around IR.

40

Strongly opposed to the idea. I would not move to an area with such housing and chose this area because of that. There's other areas with such housing.

No building on Istead Rise greenbelt.

My daughter has lived in Istead Rise all her life but has to rent in Gravesend due to lack of housing.

Is this just another route to building on greenbelt land? We are vehemently opposed to any building beyond the confines of IR village. There are already properties for sale within IR. Buy these and subsidise if you need to. Better still build on the brownfield sites in Gravesend that have been designated for housing (but never built on).

Depending on size (how big is 'small'). Depending on location.

I do not support affordable housing on IR. This is a small community and should remain so.

Our 3 children have moved from IR in the last 15 years. 2 of them would like to move back, but can't afford the prices.

Will drag area down to the 'council estate'.

This seems to be a rehash of the recent application to build on greenbelt land. My children who have left home are quite content to live in Gravesend and are within easy reach. Most adult children who leave home prefer to be away a little.

There is a need for older people who live in large accommodation, who require a smaller property, but want to live in IR where their friends are still.

I do not wish for any affordable on IR because the local amenities, roads, doctors etc. cannot withstand any more people.

Building on greenbelt sites is wrong. We need no more housing on Istead Rise.

Re Q5 moved away but returned to IR after saving to return.

I disagree entirely building on land at the back of the memorial hall. There is no suitable access and the much loved hall cannot be pulled down I understand. However, these days, I don't trust some decisions taken by the government or local authority.

Myself and my wife started off with a small flat we bought in an area we did not want but over the years we have worked hard and after a few more moves we could afford to move here. Normal people need to work for what they want, not handed to them on a plate.

Not in favour of building on greenbelt, only land already in existence such as land opposite water works.

No more building locally on greenbelt land.

I would not want to see greenbelt land used for building.

No further developments should be made at the expense of greenbelt land.

All services are already stretched. Once one set of new buildings get the go ahead we fear others will follow.

41

We decided to move to IR due to it being an original development with no housing association or council houses and being surrounded by countryside.

I am not for building on greenbelt land as there are other options, plenty of empty buildings that could be renovated to affordable flats etc.

Unless the council are going to provide additional amenities to the area we don't want any extra housing and only then privately owned houses. We do not want any type of housing built on greenbelt land.

There is plenty of waste land in and around Gravesend. This would prove better services, e.g. major bus routes for these people that need affordable housing. This is a semi rural area not a town, we do not want more people, more crime, more rubbish and more traffic.

I generally agree that greenbelt should not be built on but the area behind the Memorial is not very user friendly (sloping site) and would be ideal site for affordable houses provided Memorial Hall is retained or new one provided in any development.

In my opinion IR is already congested and would not be beneficial for any more.

'Affordable housing' means housing association/council housing for the less desirable people who live in them who care not about the property and soon appears to be untidy and uncared for, with loud music, loutish behaviour, drug takers etc. The present IR inhabitants own their houses knowing that the values must be maintained hence it is an excellent place to live.

I do not support affordable housing as it would mean building in the greenbelt and GBC have said only a few months ago that plans had been dropped. Is this a way of reopening this debate? There are lots of fields opposite Morrisons which is in the town itself.

By building affordable homes you will be inviting the wrong type of people, we have just moved from Old Bexley to get away from that type of people. Also IR is already affordable.

Nor more houses in this location.

The traffic on IR and adjacent roads are already at maximum capacity. Particularly to and from the A2.

Thought all this building on our greenbelt has been put to bed. We all protested about more housing on IR back to square 1.

This is a very friendly close community and it would be a shame to spoil it with any disruptive elements.

A small development of sheltered housing, not affordable housing would be an asset.

Another attempt to force social housing on to our community.

Not in favour of any further development and loss of green spaces.

There are plenty of brownfield sites around Gravesham without destroying our rural setting. We also need to see older and derelict property put back into service.

Istead Rise is bursting at the seams, leave this hamlet alone. Having seen the eyesore built where the ex doctors surgery was, I can only assume the overcrowding of houses there will happen elsewhere on the Rise. Development via the back door.

42

This is a private estate and should remain so. People have bought their properties on this assumption. Move importantly I do not support, in any way, building on greenbelt land.

I scrimped and saved to buy my house on a low wage, don't see the need for the development let others save and work 3 jobs the same as me.

Do not support affordable housing being built on greenbelt land.

IR not big enough area for any more properties and Wrotham Road couldn't cope with more traffic as result of more residents.

Provided the housing is affordable and for residents (existing) families only.

We worked hard to buy a house in the area with balanced amenities, why can't others? Runs the risk of losing earnings. Residents will put greater strain on the benefit system as earning families move out.

I am concerned that low cost housing will reduce the value of our home, and worry about the calibre of persons who would stay there.

We are not in favour of this proposed scheme in its entirety.

Keep it a semirural location, with surrounding farm land don't spoil the area with over crowding it with properties.

We have seen IR develop in the 48 years we have lived here. Any more would be too much for the area.

For older people thus releasing property for others.

IR is big enough as it is. Do up and repair old and existing buildings in surrounding towns and areas. Should build on existing brownsites not green or agricultural land.

This questionnaire is obviously aimed at getting around the plans that have already been kicked out and reflected what the residents wanted 'No more building'.

A fine balance is required, affordable housing must be a requirement, but not an overwhelming volume of housing to spoil the area.

A better bus service is needed.

There is insufficient supporting infrastructure to sustain further development. Poor transport links.

The areas around IR are either farmland or woodland. I would not wish either to be developed for housing when there are areas already marked for housing between Gravesend and Bluewater which are not currently being developed.

Yes, but not on greenbelt.

From a quiet rural community it has become a messy crime and drug ridden townie area. No thought has ever been extended to the country people who once did and still do live in the area. There seems to be no end to developers who want to ruin yet more country land, but I expect there will be a few big back handers, if this is successful, so who exactly cares?

43

The reason we moved to IR is because of its 'small' community so as a family we will be devastates if it is to change.

IR is a friendly family community of people who have worked hard to be able to afford to live there. IR has a certain high standard and affordable housing would ruin IR.

IR is a village and wouldn't be able to cop with any more houses. There is other location where houses could be built, why build here?

Not on greenbelt or green field sites. Your letter does not explain what an affordable house is. Remember, a high proportion of IR residents do not have access to the internet.

At present we do not have enough properties to allow for downsizing moves. A development in the 'Orchard' of the Droveway (on the flat to shops) would make a special small estate especially designed for the purpose.

There are not the facilities for further development on IR. Is this an alternative way for you to build on IR as you have failed once didn't you get the message then keep off our greenbelt.

Having lived in IR for a number of years, in our opinion it has the maximum number of housing for a village of its size. Any more housing would put a severe strain on already overworked GP surgery, nursing and dentist. The sewage system underground and water would be compromised too.

I think there is lack of small dwellings accessible to shops for older people. If they were able to downsize, younger members of family could move to their property.

It would devalue all other properties in the area. Would there be compensation package if the proposed scheme went ahead?

Any affordable housing would surely be available to the general public. How can you restrict to people from IR.

The village remains well kept. Gardens, houses, roads, no rubbish or mess is seen. People take pride in their homes as they have worked hard and choose to live surrounded by likeminded people.

Affordable housing always seems to be full of people who are not compatible with the existing community. Never offered to people with real connections to existing residents.

I grew up in IR and my first home had to be out of the area. I think this was good for me, as I worked hard and saved hard to rejoin this community which is an affluent middle class! The real community will be lost because people will just move as has been proved with the school. This has had an influx of out of area people and the mums of Istead have just moved their children to other schools.

Istead Rise has grown considerably over the years and any further development would encroach on the greenbelt/farmland. Areas, which in turn would detract from the natural beauty of the area, affecting detrimentally the price of property belonging to residents who paid premium prices for their homes to live in such surroundings.

I would also like some form of retirement housing at IR.

I approve of a small development of homes for rent. Providing it does not encroach on farmland or any green spaces.

44

IR is a lovely place to live; we would not want it to become overcrowded. This is why we moved her, so we definitely would not want extra social housing and problems it can bring.

Been here before. No affordable housing in Istead Rise.

This would be the thin edge of the wedge to join us up to Gravesend and Meopham. We moved here when it was an unmade road and farms and smallholdings. There has been too much land lost already. Keep us a village please.

The thoughts of residents were clearly shown to the council at a previous meeting held at the local community centre. We do not want council homes or affordable homes built on or near IR, nor do we want sites for travellers.

No we don't want any more homes built here. We have enough.

IR is overcrowded as it is we do not need further development. There is also a problem with vandalism at the parade of shops @ Drove Way. Why is it not sorted? Wrong type of people are selected for the property and drag down the area as proved on other developments.

We feel that by building cheap housing on IR it will devalue our property. We work hard and long for our home and its value is important.

We feel the Dr Surgery the IR school and the infrastructure around IR could not cope with more residents. There are other sites close to the railway network which are perfectly suitable. There is no industry in the area so no jobs.

I moved to IR from Dartford. Unfortunately in Dartford, my old house backed on to a new development of social housing this development was completed 6 months before I moved out. There were a lot of problems with some of the residents who moved in. I have no objection to people with an attachment to the area but not as a 'dumping ground'.

I, we believe there is plenty of housing that is affordable already in Istead Rise.

This is not a 'not in my back yard statement'. I am not against affordable housing but believe there are more suitable brownfield sites that ought to be developed in the first instance.

No, unless it were sheltered/retirement housing only. In IR there is a need for sheltered/retirement housing as there are a lot of elderly struggling to stay in their own homes. If there was a way for them to stay in IR I believe they would move into smaller accommodation therefore freeing up their houses for the younger generation.

I am completely against any building on greenbelt land.

Young people should aspire to live in a location, not expect a right to through accident of birth or marriage.

Traffic on A227 out of IR bad enough now without extra housing.

If housing was only for people of IR then I may have answered yes to Q6 but I doubt if this would be the case.

Too much traffic now don't need any more.

45

It would be a great shame to build on what is greenbelt land. Surely there is scope to develop affordable housing in the town.

I do not agree with building on the greenbelt, there are other places.

Do not agree to any building on greenbelt at IR, if this is what affordable housing means.

I feel that affordable housing would be idea in IR so much so that were the offer acceptable, I would be and willing to sell my house to a housing association.

Hopefully IR will not become too compact, closed in.

We pay inflated house prices and rates to live in a nice quiet, safe area. Housing association houses attract immigrants who do not contribute to our country and get everything for nothing while we all go to work and earn a living. Send them all home as our country is dying.

The area is populated enough without further housing. I am actively against any proposals.

We find IR is already affordable in comparison to many other areas in South East England. We do not under any circumstances condone building on greenbelt land around IR we though this issue was now closed. We could only buy where we found affordable and expect others to do the same, according to their means.

Yes, there is a need for affordable housing, no to expanding IR, you should use brown field sites or very run down areas, but also stop Building Societies offering more than 3 time salary on mortgages, this will lower housing costs.

The whole point of living in IR is that it is a small limited community which by and large has low incidence of anti social behaviour.

The answer to Q6 does not include building on adjacent greenbelt land. This debate has already taken place and, I thought, had been concluded.

School, doctors, local transport is stretched with the amount of people already living in IR. The community would not benefit by building more housing. We are strongly against any new building plans.

Not in favour of affordable housing gin the greenbelt area.

We moved to IR for peace and quiet. We like the village feel and don't want it changed.

Some sheltered housing for elderly would be good.

Any development must not be located in the established greenbelt surrounding IR and needs to respect and preserve open spaces within the community.

I support a limited amount of affordable housing but if possible not on greenbelt.

No, we do not feel we need any affordable housing in Istead Rise, especially not on greenbelt land.

Affordable housing is not suitable for our area because school, doctors and amenities are stretched already, and would lower prices of existing houses.

46

Completely against any forms of affordable housing, do not believe young people have moved away because of unaffordable properties.

The local school has limited intake and it is not good for the environment, for parents to travel miles to drop off children.

We have paid to live in a private residential area.

The only land around IR is greenbelt and the council has stated they will not build on greenbelt land.

This depends on a) the definition of 'small' i.e. number houses and b) location.

Only a few months ago GBC said it had dropped its plans for building on the greenbelt at IR. This surely is a back door way or reopening the case. I and many others are opposed to further development on Istead Rise.

I am opposed to building on greenbelt land in IR. GBC said recently it had dropped plans for doing this. If affordable housing was built in IR this would open the door for immigrants. We don't want this.

We must preserve our greenbelt and the local greens in Istead Rise.

I do not think any houses are needed or wanted in IR and affordable houses would only attract the dross of society and I do not think any residents of IR would want that.

Planning permission has already been declined for building new homes in IR now it looks like you are trying to get in the back door to build houses.

Provided they are in keeping with the and for local people not an excuse for moving people into the area for cheap housing.

Please keep Istead Rise rural

There is not enough facilities to accommodate anymore people on IR e.g. doctors, schools, etc.

We do not need this type of housing built in this area as it is not an expensive area to live in and affordable housing devalues the rest of the housing and creates its own problems.

Recently it was announced that no social housing was planned for IR due to opposition from residents.

Not if it affects the existing greenbelt.

This is a greenbelt area and tends to be for mature families not young couples looking for affordable housing and amenities. The infrastructure is not suitable for young people.

You wanted to expand IR which was defeated by council and we were assured no further developments would take place.

We do not support affordable housing especially if building in the greenbelt.

I do not think there is a need for affordable housing in IR and certainly not if it means building on greenbelt.

Istead Rise does not need any more houses of any kind as it will disturb the greenbelt.

47

There may well be a need for affordable housing but until more doctors, buses and school places are available it cannot happen. One bus an hour. My doctor says I must see him one week but cannot get an appointment. And my grand children in different years are put in one class because of resource shortage No.

If they are people from Istead Rise.

Reason IR is a nice place to live is because of a lack of affordable housing in the area which will attract undesirable residents, lowering the price of the houses already here.

With regard to movement away from IR from my experience is driven to obtain appropriate employment and nothing to do with housing needs.

Several very small developments of affordable housing scattered around IR preferable to just one.

Gravesend is not far away, if people wish to stay in the local area. Most young people go to Gravesend for their entertainment in any case and would be closer if they lived there.

Road infrastructure is incapable of dealing with an increase in traffic volume. Already at capacity.

What is the matter with GBC? Didn't all the meetings tell them something? We say definitely no. We moved from an area with affordable housing, it wasn't very nice socially, a lot of undesirable people moved in. This is the reason we moved to IR, where there is greenbelt.

Would like it to remain a small community.

IR is a village type community and should remain as such. Any development should be strictly for Istead Risers or persons coming to work in the area not outsiders because it is financially in their favour or communal living.

Don't support any type of housing affordable or otherwise, being built on greenbelt land.

Why spoil it, it’s had enough properties built here.

You do not know what type of people will move to the area. For example families who do not want to integrate with neighbours etc.

I paid a premium to live in IR (house price). The infrastructure would not take anymore people or traffic. I don't believe the housing would be for relations of the people who live here.

You should look at empty housing/neglected properties in Gravesend before ruining the countryside.

Istead Rise doesn't need more homes; we don't have the facilities, for instance water.

My answer to Q6 being No as I do not trust GBC or housing associations. GBC will fill these houses with non Istead Rise people, i.e. benefit people etc. The Rise is a private estate and that's how we want to keep it.

48

APPENDIX IR2 – Letter to householder and housing needs survey

Housing Strategy and Development Services Ask for: Sharon Donald Telephone: 01474 337652 Fax: Email: [email protected] My ref: sd Your ref: Date: June 2012

Dear Householder

Owing to the high cost of housing in this area, the Council is considering whether there might be a need for additional affordable housing in Istead Rise, so that residents who cannot afford to buy or rent locally will not be forced to move away. Affordable housing means homes that can be rented or part bought (shared ownership) from a Housing Association. The reason for providing new affordable housing is to help local people of all ages who would like to stay or return to their community and contribute to the services that still exist.

The enclosed Housing Needs Survey is being sent out on behalf of the Council by Action with Communities in Rural Kent (ACRK) to assess the demand and gauge the level of support a small scheme might have in your community. The survey will be analysed by a Rural Housing Enabler from ACRK, with all information being kept confidential. The Rural Housing Enabler will then provide a summary report to the Istead Rise Community Association and Borough Council.

Depending on the outcome of this survey, the Council and ACRK may try to find a suitable site within Istead Rise. If a site is found a consultation event will be held so that residents can view and discuss the proposals and put their views forward.

This is a very important issue, so please take time to fill in this survey. Even if no one in your household has a housing need, we want to know your views.

Please return this form using the FREEPOST envelope provided by 20 th June 2012.

If any further information or additional questionnaires are required please contact the Rural Housing Enabler on 01303 813790.

More information is available on housing needs surveys in Gravesham via the following link http://www.gravesham.gov.uk/index.jsp?articleid=5624. Alternatively if you want more information on how ACRK enables rural housing, please use the following link http://www.ruralkent.org.uk/ourwork/ruralhousing.htm

Yours faithfully Sharon Donald Housing Strategy and Development Manager

http://www.gravesham.gov.uk/index.jsp?articleid=5624

http://www.ruralkent.org.uk/ourwork/rural-housing.htm

49

50

51

52

Documents

The Old Granary Penstock Hall Farm East Brabourne … · Istead Rise Housing Needs Survey July 2012 Tessa O’Sullivan Rural Housing Enabler The Old Granary Penstock Hall Farm East