Strategic Housing Market Assessment

Transcription

Salford City Council
Strategic Housing
Market Assessment
February 2012
CONTENTS
Page
Chapter 1 – Introduction
1
Page
Chapter 2 – The current housing market
3
Stage 1 – The demographic and economic context
3
Step 1.1: Demography and household types
Total population
Components of population change
Population change by area
Age profile
Recent changes in age
Ethnicity
Household composition
Household age profile
Household size profile
Household type profile
3
3
4
4
6
8
13
13
14
16
18
Step 1.2: National and regional economic policy
Economic output
Mortgage rates
Inflation rates
Government funding for affordable housing
19
19
20
21
22
Step 1.3: Employment levels and structure
Unemployment
Qualifications
Economic growth
Employment
Commuting patterns
22
22
24
26
27
30
Step 1.4: Incomes and earnings
Income
36
36
Stage 2 – The housing stock
37
Step 2.1: Dwelling profile
Tenure of dwellings
Type of dwellings
37
37
41
Size of dwellings
Housing completions
Page
44
45
Step 2.2: Stock condition
Decency in private sector housing
Decency in social rented housing
50
52
54
Step 2.3: Shared housing and communal establishments
55
Houses in multiple occupation
55
Stage 3 – The active housing market
56
Step 3.1: the cost of buying or renting a property
House prices
House prices and sales value areas
Council Tax bands
Rental market
Mortgages
56
56
61
65
67
70
Step 3.2: Affordability
House price to income ratios
Housing benefit
71
71
73
Step 3.3: Overcrowding and under-occupation
2001 Census
Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007
Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey 2010
74
74
75
77
Step 3.4: Vacancies, available supply and turnover
Vacancy levels
Length of time on the market
Property transactions
Turnover
79
79
80
87
89
Stage 4 – Bringing the evidence together
90
Economic Issues
Commuting patterns
Demographic issues
Housing stock issues
Housing market issues
City centre housing market
Edge of city centre housing market
Inner city housing market
Broughton Park
90
90
91
92
94
96
97
97
99
High value suburbs
Mixed suburbs
Little Hulton
Overview
Page
100
101
102
103
Page
Chapter 3 – The future housing market
104
Stage 1: Projecting changes in future numbers of households
104
Methodology A – Regional Spatial Strategy
Methodology B – Housing-led forecast
Methodology C – Department for Communities and Local Government
2008-based household projections
Methodology D – Greater Manchester Forecasting Model
Methodology E – Greater Manchester Forecasting Model with
additional growth
Methodologies F and G – The Chelmer Model (as submitted by The
Peel Group)
Methodology F – Average level of net in-migration remain at a rate of
1,100 per annum
Methodology G – Economic-led target of an increase of 34,700 jobs
over the period 2011-2031
Comparison of household growth estimates
Calculating the dwelling requirement from household growth
estimates
Comparison with the scale of housing proposed elsewhere in Greater
Manchester
Accuracy of population and household projections
Projected changes in the age of households
Projected changes in the type of households
104
105
106
109
113
117
119
120
122
122
126
129
135
136
Stage 2: future economic performance
138
National economic prospects
Employment growth
Occupation forecasts
Local economic proposals
Commuting patterns
Consumer preferences
138
138
139
141
142
145
Stage 3: Future affordability and housing market performance
158
Household incomes
Mortgage availability
158
159
House prices and transactions
Affordability
Development activity
Private rented sector
Capacity of the market to deliver new housing
Impact of new housing on local housing markets
Overview
Future housing supply
Page
160
160
161
161
162
163
164
165
Stage 4: Bringing the evidence together
168
Future scale of housing provision
Future housing affordability
168
170
Chapter 4 – Housing need
Page
172
Homelessness
Vulnerable households
Previous assessments of affordable housing need
Updated assessment of need
Stage 1: Current housing need (gross backlog)
173
173
174
175
176
Step 1.1: Homeless households and those in temporary
Accommodation
Step 1.2: Overcrowding and concealed households
Step 1.3: Other groups
Step 1.4: Total current housing need
176
Stage 2: Future housing need (gross)
178
Step 2.1: New household formation
Step 2.2: Proportion of households unable to buy or rent in the market
Step 2.3: Existing households falling into need
Step 2.4: Total newly arising housing need (gross per year)
178
179
180
181
Stage 3: Affordable housing supply
182
Step 3.1: Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need
Step 3.2: Surplus stock
Step 3.3: Committed supply of new affordable units
Step 3.4: Units to be taken out of management
Step 3.5: Total affordable housing stock available
Step 3.6: Annual supply of social re-lets
Step 3.7: Future annual supply of intermediate affordable housing
182
182
183
184
184
184
177
177
178
Step 3.8: Future annual supply of affordable housing units
Estimate of net additional affordable housing requirement
Page
185
186
Stage 4: The housing requirements of households in need
187
Step 4.1: choices within the existing housing stock
Existing stock
Turnover of local authority stock
Salix Homes stock turnover
Social housing sales
187
187
187
188
189
Step 4.2: requirement for affordable dwellings of different sizes
2007 housing needs assessment
Choice based lettings
Households on the housing register, by number of bedrooms
190
191
193
Step 4.3: the private rented sector
195
Stage 5: bringing the evidence together
195
Step 5.1: Estimate of net annual housing need
195
Step 5.2: Key issues for future policy / strategy
Homelessness
Overcrowding
Affordable housing need
Requirement for different sized affordable dwellings
Other housing that could address need
195
195
196
197
198
199
Step 5.3: Joining up across the assessment
201
Nat annual need and future annual change
Determining an appropriate level of affordable housing
201
201
Chapter 5 – Housing requirements of specific
household groups
Family housing
Housing provision in Broughton Park and Higher Broughton
Older people
Households with specific needs
Gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople
Student housing
Higher priced housing
Page
203
203
211
214
217
223
227
232
Salford Strategic Housing Market Assessment – February 2012
1.
Introduction
1.1
This strategic housing market assessment has been produced by
Salford City Council.
1.2
It is intended to provide an objective analysis of the varied housing
market issues affecting the city, assessing the existing housing market,
recent changes, and future needs. In doing so, it draws on information
from a wide range of sources, including nationally collated statistics,
projections and forecasts, local surveys and studies, development
monitoring, and published research.
1.3
The scope and detail of this strategic housing market assessment has
been based on the relevant Government guidance1. However, some
additional sections have been included, such as on the future potential
housing supply in the city and likely future market performance.
1.4
Two strategic housing market assessments covering Salford were
published in 2008, namely the:
•
North West Strategic Housing Market Assessment,
commissioned by 4NW and prepared by a consortium of Nevin
Leather Associates, Manchester Geomatics, the University of
Sheffield and Inner City Solutions
•
Greater Manchester Strategic Housing Market Assessment,
commissioned by the Association of Greater Manchester
Authorities and prepared by Deloitte MCS Ltd and GVA Grimley
1.5
These strategic housing market assessments sets Salford within a
broader context, and can be seen as complementary to this Salford
Strategic Housing Market Assessment although some of the data they
contain is now relatively old. Both the Greater Manchester and North
West assessments split Greater Manchester into four housing market
area, using the same boundaries, namely:
•
Greater Manchester Central, which consisted of Central Salford
and Central and East Manchester
•
Greater Manchester North West, which consisted of Salford
West, Bury, Bolton and Wigan
•
Greater Manchester North East, which consisted of North
Manchester, Oldham, Rochdale and Tameside
•
Greater Manchester South, which consisted of South
Manchester, Stockport and Trafford
1.6
Salford was therefore split across two housing market areas in these
previous assessments. Where possible, information in this assessment
has been provided for Central Salford and Salford West, enabling
comparisons to be made. More detailed information relating to areas
within Salford has generally used wards as the unit of analysis, as data
1
“Strategic Housing Market Assessments: Practice Guidance Version 2” – Department for
Communities and Local Government (August 2007)
1
tends to be most readily available at this level. However, other
geographies have also been used where appropriate or where data is
not accessible for wards.
1.7
Comments received on this assessment will be used to inform a future
update of it.
2
2.
The current housing market
2.1
This section of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment analyses a
broad range of demographic, housing and economic information that
helps to provide an understanding of Salford’s current housing markets
and recent changes in them.
2.2
The demographic and economic data is particularly useful in aiding an
appreciation of the variables that influence the demand for different
type of housing in different parts of the city. Information on commuting
patterns helps to understand the way in which Salford’s economy and
housing markets interact with those outside the city.
2.3
Detailed information on the type, condition, occupancy levels and
affordability of housing within Salford assists in explaining the
constraints and opportunities provided by the existing housing stock,
and how this influences the functioning of the city’s housing markets.
2.4
An analysis is then presented that considers the complex interaction of
these various factors, and some of the housing market challenges that
this sets for the city. How these variables may change in the future is
considered in detail in the next section.
Stage 1: The demographic and economic context
Step 1.1: Demography and household types
Total population
2.5
The table below identifies how Salford’s population has changed over
the last decade, and compares this with the position in 1921 when the
city’s population was close to its peak.
ONS Mid Year
Population
Estimate
1921
Total persons
341,267
Annual
Change
-
2001
217,000
2002
216,300
-700
2003
217,300
1,000
2004
218,100
800
2005
219,400
1,300
2006
220,900
1,500
2007
221,300
400
2008
223,000
1,700
2009
225,100
2,100
2010
229,000
3,900
Source: 1921 Census; ONS Mid Year Population Estimates 2001-10
3
2.6
The population of Salford in 2001 was 217,000, with this being 36.4%
lower than it was in 1921. However, since 2002 there has been a
continuous increase in population, with a total population gain of
12,700 people over the eight year period of 2002-2010. 60.6% of this
growth was in the three years between 2007 and 2010. Although the
population of the city is growing at a significant rate, it is still well below
that recorded in 1921.
Components of population change
2.7
The following table identifies the different components that have
affected Salford’s population in recent years, namely migration in and
out of the city (both to other places within the UK and internationally),
and the number of births and deaths (the balance of which is referred
to as natural change).
Year
PopuInternational
lation
Internal UK Migration
Migration
change
In
Out
Net
In
Out
Net
2003/04
800 10,800 10,900 -100 2,100 1,300
800
2004/05
1,300 10,500 10,700 -200 2,800 1,700 1,100
2005/06
1,500 11,000 10,800 200 2,100 1,400
700
2006/07
400 11,000 11,900 -900 2,100 1,500
600
2007/08
1,700 11,700 11,400 300 1,800 1,300
500
2008/09
2,100 11,600 11,800 -200 2,700 1,200 1,500
2009/10
3,900 12,200 12,000 200 3,600 1,200 2,400
Source: ONS Mid Year Population Estimate 2001 and 2010
2.8
Natural Change
Births
2,700
2,800
3,000
3,100
3,300
3,300
3,500
Deaths
2,700
2,500
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,400
2,200
Net
0
300
600
700
900
900
1,300
The recent population growth in Salford has been driven by a
combination of international migration and natural change, with both
being particularly high in 2009-2010 (with net change of 2,400 and
1,300 people respectively). The gross figures for internal (UK)
migration are actually much higher than for international migration and
natural change, and so internal migration theoretically has the potential
to have a much more significant impact on population change.
However, in recent years it can be seen that it has alternated either
side of zero, and so has actually had relatively little impact on the city’s
population trend.
Population change by area
2.9
The next table provides details of how the city’s population has
changed since 2001, broken down by ward. Separate figures are set
out for 2007 as this marked a significant change in some of the
population trends affecting Salford, as can be seen by the comparison
of the overall population change figures for 2001-2010 and 2007-2010.
4
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central
Salford
Salford
West
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Population (number of people)
2001
2007
2010
11,991
12,079
12,428
Change 2001-10
Number
%
437
3.64
Change 2007-10
Number
%
349
2.89
9,831
12,045
9,162
10,491
10,374
9,972
9,802
12,207
9,788
10,167
10,709
9,953
9,718
13,196
10,297
10,248
11,304
9,940
-113
1,151
1,135
-243
930
-32
-1.15
9.56
12.39
-2.32
8.96
-0.32
-84
989
509
81
595
-13
-0.86
8.10
5.20
0.80
5.56
-0.13
12,036
11,238
12,639
12,549
11,604
11,310
13,616
12,185
11,790
1,580
947
-849
13.13
8.43
-6.72
1,067
581
480
8.50
5.01
4.24
12,885
6,732
11,382
12,820
8,317
11,882
12,981
11,624
12,613
96
4,892
1,231
0.75
72.67
10.82
161
3,307
731
1.26
39.76
6.15
10,983
10,962
11,152
169
1.54
190
1.73
10,971
10,939
10,994
23
0.21
55
0.50
11,193
11,318
11,450
257
2.30
132
1.17
10,158
9,955
9,993
-165
-1.62
38
0.38
10,920
12,147
9,831
10,872
12,111
9,834
11,171
12,291
10,001
251
144
170
2.30
1.19
1.73
299
180
167
2.75
1.49
1.70
76,101
77,026
83,830
7,729
10.16
6,804
8.83
140,880
142,152
145,162
4,282
3.04
3,010
2.12
216,300
221,300
229,000
12,700
5.87
7,700
3.48
2,518,000
6,776,900
49,649,100
2,565,500
6,863,700
51,106,200
2,629,400
6,935,700
52,234,000
111,400
158,800
2,584,900
4.42
2.34
5.21
63,900
72,000
1,127,800
2.49
1.05
2.21
Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates (experimental statistics at ward
level); 2001 and 2010 Mid-Year Population Estimates; 2007 Revised MidYear Population Estimates
2.10
There was an increase in population in Salford over the period 20012010 of 5.87%, with this slightly exceeding the national increase of
5.21% and significantly above the regional increase of 2.34%. This is
due to the relatively high growth in Salford during 2007-2010 (3.48%),
whereas there was lower growth than in England as a whole between
2001 and 2007.
2.11
Within the city, the population gain was primarily in Central Salford,
where there was a 10.16% increase, the majority of which was since
5
2007. There was still a reasonable level of population increase in
Salford West, but this was considerably lower than for Central Salford,
at 3.04%.
2.12
The scale of the increase in the ward of Ordsall clearly stands out, with
an increase of 73% over the period 2001-2010, accounting for 39% of
all population growth in Salford (and 49% over the period 2007-2010).
There has also been significant population growth in Irwell Riverside
(13%), Cadishead (12%) and Pendlebury (11%), and in the last three
years Broughton (8%). This population increase reflects the areas
where there have been significant levels of new housing completions,
and regeneration activity (particularly in parts of Central Salford) .
2.13
Conversely, the population in five of the city’s wards fell between 2001
and 2010. The biggest decrease was in Langworthy with a fall of 849
people, representing an overall decrease by 6.72%. This is likely to be
largely the result of a relatively high level of demolitions in this area
during that period, associated with the Housing Market Renewal
Pathfinder and Single Regeneration Budget funding.
Age profile
2.14
Experimental statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics
provides details of the age breakdown of the current population by
ward, and enable comparisons to be made with the sub-regional,
regional and national pictures. The proportion of people in each age
group is set out below.
Area
Barton
Boothstown and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
0-19
23.53
Proportion of population by age group
20-34
35-49
50-64
65-79
25.39
21.66
16.28
9.25
80+
3.89
23.97
28.81
25.80
21.23
20.05
25.70
20.72
32.24
18.58
28.56
12.77
22.43
22.70
23.16
25.26
20.70
17.84
26.71
21.98
22.20
23.13
20.91
45.95
24.07
30.03
22.16
54.55
25.51
21.74
21.22
23.21
18.65
23.95
17.88
22.20
20.62
20.41
20.92
16.24
15.60
20.42
19.06
16.22
21.29
20.58
21.74
20.54
20.76
20.58
13.73
15.45
19.02
18.54
15.65
9.82
14.75
15.91
15.86
9.78
16.36
16.69
18.14
16.66
20.31
10.50
9.00
10.88
12.41
11.87
13.16
5.59
8.29
11.03
10.21
5.28
10.62
14.06
11.22
9.69
14.38
3.17
3.88
3.69
4.52
5.99
3.66
1.69
5.05
4.04
4.16
1.40
3.78
4.23
4.52
4.64
5.18
21.87
27.59
21.64
24.49
23.20
15.95
19.20
21.07
22.33
17.40
15.26
19.30
11.82
9.45
14.97
5.22
3.42
5.82
6
Area
0-19
Proportion of population by age group
20-34
35-49
50-64
65-79
80+
Central Salford
Salford West
22.48
24.02
32.93
21.81
17.92
21.21
14.14
17.21
8.90
11.44
3.63
4.30
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
23.45
25.90
19.96
16.07
10.52
4.10
24.73
24.04
23.77
22.26
19.59
20.10
21.16
21.10
21.62
17.02
18.56
18.03
10.80
12.17
11.78
4.03
4.55
4.69
Source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates 2010 (experimental statistics at
ward level)
2.15
Within Salford 23.45% of the population is under the age of 20. This is
slightly lower than the proportions of 24.73%, 24.04% and 23.77% in
Greater Manchester, North West and England respectively. There is
relatively little difference between Central Salford and Salford West,
with the former slightly below the city average (22.48%) and the latter
slightly above it (24.02%). At a ward level there are some hot spots
where there is a notable divergence from the city average in this age
group. For example, there is a significantly above average proportion of
people under 20 in Broughton, Kersal, Little Hulton and Winton. The
proportion in Ordsall is very low at 12.77%, whilst it is also quite low in
nearby Langworthy (18.58%).
2.16
The proportion of people aged between 20 and 34 in Salford is
significantly above average (25.90% compared to averages of 22.26%,
19.59% and 20.10% for Greater Manchester, North West and England
respectively). Central Salford as a whole has an extremely high
proportion of adults between the ages of 20 and 34, particularly in the
wards of Ordsall (55%) and Irwell Riverside (46%). In these two wards
67% of residents are aged 34 or under, with very few older people
(around 7% of the population in these wards) over 65 as a result.
2.17
The proportion of people within the groups aged 35 and above in
Salford is below the national and regional averages, although this is
mainly due to the situation in Central Salford. Overall, the age
distribution in Salford West is similar to that nationally and regionally,
and the deviation at the citywide level is mainly due to Central Salford
and particularly the wards of Ordsall and Irwell Riverside which have a
very different age structure.
2.18
The proportion of people aged 65 and over in Salford (14.62%) is
around the Greater Manchester average (14.83%), but lower than the
North West (16.72%) and England (16.47) averages. The proportion in
Salford West is above the city average, whilst the average in Central
Salford is below the average. Worsley is the ward with the highest
proportion of people aged 65 and older, with Ordsall being the ward
with the lowest proportion.
7
Recent changes in age
2.19
The age structure of the city and its wards is not static, as is shown in
the following series of tables.
AGED 0-19
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central
Salford
Salford
West
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Number of people
2001
2007
2,970
2,877
2010
2,924
Change 2001-10
Number %
-46
-1.55
Change 2007-10
Number %
47
1.63
2,529
3,282
2,523
2,556
2,202
2,853
2,415
3,236
2,615
2,274
2,167
2,611
2,329
3,802
2,657
2,176
2,267
2,555
-200
520
134
-380
65
-298
-7.91
15.84
5.31
-14.87
2.95
-10.45
-86
566
42
-98
100
-56
-3.56
17.49
1.61
-4.31
4.61
-2.14
2,949
3,951
2,724
2,557
3,810
2,229
2,821
3,929
2,190
-128
-22
-534
-4.34
-0.56
-19.60
264
119
-39
10.32
3.12
-1.75
3,873
1,329
2,871
3,695
1,344
2,777
3,707
1,484
2,829
-166
155
-42
-4.29
11.66
-1.46
12
140
52
0.32
10.42
1.87
2,523
2,529
2,532
9
0.36
3
0.12
2,748
2,636
2,546
-202
-7.35
-90
-3.41
3,021
2,943
2,892
-129
-4.27
-51
-1.73
2,364
2,059
2,069
-295
-12.48
10
0.49
2,607
3,648
2,088
2,336
3,387
2,161
2,443
3,391
2,164
-164
-257
76
-6.29
-7.04
3.64
107
4
3
4.58
0.12
0.14
19,398
17,786
18,845
-553
-2.85
1,059
5.95
36,213
34,872
34,862
-1,351
-3.73
-10
-0.03
55,700
52,800
53,700
-2,000
-3.59
900
1.70
660,100
1,741,200
12,327,700
647,700
1,690,700
12,351,800
650,200
1,667,400
12,417,500
-9,900
-73,800
89,800
-1.50
-4.24
0.73
2,500
-23,300
65,700
0.39
-1.38
0.53
2.20
Salford, Greater Manchester and the North West saw a reduction in
young people aged 0-19 over the period between 2001 and 2010
compared to a slight increase nationally. There was a significant
8
reduction of 1,612 people aged between 0 and 19 in Central Salford
between 2001 and 2007, although around two-thirds of this was
regained in 2007 to 2010. The decline in Salford West was slightly
lower in 2001-2007 (1,341 people), but that area has only seen a
relative stabilisation in 2007-2010 rather than the recovery witnessed in
Central Salford.
2.21
It is notable that in Broughton, 566 of the 989 population increase in
2007-2010 was in the age group 0-19 (57%). In contrast, only 155 of
the 4,892 increase in Ordsall was in this age group (3%). Langworthy
saw a particularly large reduction in the number of young people in
2001-2010 (20%), with Claremont (15%), Walkden South (12%), Irlam
(10%) and Boothstown and Ellenbrook (8%) also quite significant. It is
notable that three of these wards (Claremont, Walkden South, and
Boothstown and Ellenbrook) are generally considered to be amongst
the more settled and prosperous areas of the city.
AGED 20-34
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central
Salford
Salford
West
Number of people
2001
2007
2,643
2,896
2010
3,156
Change 2001-10
Number %
513
19.41
Change 2007-10
Number %
260
8.98
2,100
2,787
1,812
1,965
1,986
1,944
1,774
3,044
2,007
2,116
2,261
1,962
1,734
3,524
2,263
2,275
2,615
2,078
-366
737
451
310
629
134
-17.43
26.44
24.89
15.78
31.67
6.89
-40
480
256
159
354
116
-2.25
15.77
12.76
7.51
15.66
5.91
4,554
2,076
3,375
5,505
2,478
2,973
6,256
2,933
3,540
1,702
857
165
37.37
41.28
4.89
751
455
567
13.64
18.36
19.07
2,466
2,400
2,307
2,674
3,660
2,654
2,876
6,341
3,218
410
3,941
911
16.63
164.21
39.49
202
2,681
564
7.55
73.25
21.25
2,172
2,207
2,424
252
11.60
217
9.83
2,103
2,135
2,333
230
10.94
198
9.27
2,232
2,478
2,658
426
19.09
180
7.26
1,728
1,849
1,864
136
7.87
15
0.81
2,193
2,415
1,629
2,546
2,710
1,531
2,736
2,852
1,595
543
437
-34
24.76
18.10
-2.09
190
142
64
7.46
5.24
4.18
19,350
22,322
27,605
8,255
42.66
5,283
23.67
27,537
29,138
31,666
4,129
14.99
2,528
8.68
9
AGED 20-34
Area
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Number of people
2001
2007
46,900
53,500
531,400
1,317,000
10,157,700
546,400
1,304,200
10,139,400
2010
59,300
585,300
1,358,600
10,500,500
Change 2001-10
Number %
12,400
26.44
Change 2007-10
Number %
5,800
10.84
53,900
41,600
342,800
38,900
54,400
361,100
10.14
3.16
3.37
7.12
4.17
3.56
2.22
The growth in people aged between 20 and 34 in Salford has been
very high during the period 2001-2010 compared to the national and
regional levels in particular. Indeed, it effectively accounted for almost
all population growth in Salford (12,400 out of a total of 12,700,
although clearly other age groups increased as well because some
others declined). The growth in Central Salford (8,255 people) was
nearly double that in Salford West (4,129 people), despite the lower
overall population (proportionately, this mean a 42.66% increase in
Central Salford compared to 14.99% in Salford West). Although the
growth in Salford West was less than in Central Salford, it is still
significantly above the level in England (3.37%) and the North West
(3.16%), and was also above the conurbation as a whole despite
Greater Manchester having relatively high growth rates (10.4%) in this
age group.
2.23
Between 2001 and 2010 in the Ordsall ward there was an increase of
4,892 people, with 3,941 (81%) of this being between the ages of 20
and 34. The very large population increase was therefore driven
primarily by young adults, reflecting the attractiveness of Salford Quays
to young professionals, and also regeneration activity focussed in other
parts of the Ordsall ward which has attracted first-time buyers. Indeed,
this age group has increased by 73% in just three years in this ward
(2007-2010). In Irwell Riverside, the growth in this age group (1,702)
has actually exceeded the total population growth for the area in the
period 2001-2010 (1,580). All other areas of Salford have seen an
increase, often significant, in this age group over the period 2001-2010,
except for Worsley (although this area has seen an increase in the last
few years) and Boothstown and Ellenbrook. It is possible that this
situation in Worsley and Boothstown and Ellenbrook could reflect
issues of affordability, or potentially the lifestyle associated with these
areas of the city. This contrasts with the role of much of South
Manchester, which is a similarly prosperous area to those two wards
but appears highly attractive to young adults.
10
AGED 35-64
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central
Salford
Salford
West
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Number of people
2001
2007
4,446
4,668
2010
4,715
Change 2001-10
Number
%
269
6.05
Change 2007-10
Number %
47
1.01
4,188
3,981
3,438
4,197
4,035
3,726
4,426
4,092
3,749
4,086
4,214
3,775
4,327
4,171
3,877
4,062
4,403
3,635
139
190
439
-135
368
-91
3.32
4.77
12.77
-3.22
9.12
-2.44
-99
79
128
-24
189
-140
-2.24
1.93
3.41
-0.59
4.49
-3.71
3,276
3,405
4,338
3,434
3,651
4,217
3,548
3,698
4,284
272
293
-54
8.30
8.60
-1.24
114
47
67
3.32
1.29
1.59
4,347
2,199
4,392
4,505
2,553
4,652
4,533
3,022
4,749
186
823
357
4.28
37.43
8.13
28
469
97
0.62
18.37
2.09
4,341
4,207
4,156
-185
-4.26
-51
-1.21
4,242
4,391
4,384
142
3.35
-7
-0.16
4,071
4,203
4,259
188
4.62
56
1.33
4,257
4,182
4,105
-152
-3.57
-77
-1.84
4,047
4,275
4,164
4,044
4,365
4,136
4,089
4,466
4,163
42
191
-1
1.04
4.47
-0.02
45
101
27
1.11
2.31
0.65
25,443
26,077
26,874
1,431
5.62
797
3.06
53,922
55,473
55,772
1,850
3.43
299
0.54
79,500
81,600
82,500
3,000
3.77
900
1.10
951,300
2,633,000
19,129,000
995,100
2,754,500
20,454,400
1,004,100
2,750,400
20,710,000
52,800
117,400
1,581,000
5.55
4.46
8.26
9,000
-4,100
255,600
0.90
-0.15
1.25
2.24
Growth in the age group between 35 and 64 has been slower in Salford
over the period 2001-2010 than at the national, regional and subregional levels, with a growth of 3.77% compared to Greater
Manchester (5.55%), North West (4.46%) and England (8.26%).
However, growth has been slightly higher over the last few years than
in Greater Manchester and the North West, possibly indicating a
change in trends. Salford West appears to be largely responsible for
this low growth rate, with Central Salford having a relatively high level
11
of growth in this age group in 2007-2010 of 797 people. Ordsall has
again seen a proportionately high increase in this age group (37%),
although this only accounts for 823 of a total increase of 4,892 people
in the ward during the period 2001-2010 (17% of the ward’s total
increase). Cadishead is the only area to see double digit growth in this
age group (13%), and several areas saw a decrease (including
Claremont and Langworthy within Central Salford).
AGED 65+
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central
Salford
Salford
West
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Number of people
2001
2007
1,932
1,638
2010
1,633
Change 2001-10
Number %
-299
-15.48
Change 2007-10
Number %
-5
-0.31
1,014
1,995
1,389
1,773
2,151
1,449
1,187
1,835
1,417
1,691
2,067
1,605
1,328
1,699
1,500
1,735
2,019
1,672
314
-296
111
-38
-132
223
30.97
-14.84
7.99
-2.14
-6.14
15.39
141
-136
83
44
-48
67
11.88
-7.41
5.86
2.60
-2.32
4.17
1,257
1,806
2,202
1,053
1,665
1,891
991
1,625
1,776
-266
-181
-426
-21.16
-10.02
-19.35
-62
-40
-115
-5.89
-2.40
-6.08
2,199
804
1,812
1,946
760
1,799
1,865
777
1,817
-334
-27
5
-15.19
-3.36
0.28
-81
17
18
-4.16
2.24
1.00
1,947
2,019
2,040
93
4.78
21
1.04
1,878
1,777
1,731
-147
-7.83
-46
-2.59
1,869
1,694
1,641
-228
-12.20
-53
-3.13
1,809
1,865
1,955
146
8.07
90
4.83
2,073
1,809
1,950
1,946
1,649
2,006
1,903
1,582
2,079
-170
-227
129
-8.20
-12.55
6.62
-43
-67
73
-2.21
-4.06
3.64
11,910
10,841
10,506
-1,404
-11.79
-335
-3.09
23,208
22,669
22,862
-346
-1.49
193
0.85
35,000
33,500
33,500
-1,500
-4.29
0
0.00
373,200
1,081,700
7,835,600
376,500
1,114,700
8,160,600
390,000
1,159,500
8,606,300
16,800
77,800
770,700
4.50
7.19
9.84
13,500
44,800
445,700
3.59
4.02
5.46
12
2.25
In relation to people aged over 65 in Salford, there is a notable contrast
with the national, regional and sub-regional trends. Salford has actually
seen a reduction in this age group over the period 2001-2010 of 1,500
people, although the population level stabilised over the last three
years of that period. The loss of people aged over 65 is an issue for the
whole of the city, but particularly Central Salford which saw a 12%
reduction in residents in this age group despite a 10% increase in the
overall population.
2.26
Ordsall actually saw a small reduction in this age group, despite its
population increasing by 73%, and Irwell Riverside saw a more
significant reduction of 266 people in this age group despite an overall
population increase of 1,580 people. However, there were also some
significant decreases elsewhere in the city including Langworthy (20%),
Barton (15%), Little Hulton (15%), Broughton (15%), Winton (13%) and
Walkden North (12%). It is notable that all of these areas are relatively
deprived. In contrast, Boothstown and Ellenbrook saw a 31% increase
in this age group (compared to a reduction in the number of people in
both the 0-19 and 20-34 age groups), and there was a 15% increase in
Irlam (compared to a reduction in both the 0-19 and 35-64 age groups).
Ethnicity
2.27
The table below provides a brief summary of the relative ethnic
diversity of Salford.
Proportion of population (%)
Salford
North West
England
White Minority White Minority White Minority
Year
British
Ethnic
British
Ethnic
British
Ethnic
2001
92.6
7.4
92.0
8.0
86.8
13.2
2009
86.5
13.5
88.4
11.6
82.8
17.2
Source: ONS Mid Year Population Estimates 2010
2.28
In 2001, the vast majority of the population in Salford was of White
British ethnicity (92.6%), with 7.4% being classed as Minority Ethnic.
The proportion of White British people in Salford was higher than in the
North West and England in 2001. Updated figures from 2009 show that
the proportion of Salford’s population that is White British has fallen to
86.5%, with this below the North West average (88.4%), but above the
England average (82.8%).
Household composition
2.29
Data on household composition from the 2001 Census is shown below.
13
Household type
One person - pensioner
One person - non pensioner
Family - pensioner only
Family - couple
Family - couple with children
Family - lone parents
Other - with children
Other - all students
Other - all pensioners
Other
Source: Census 2001
Proportion of population (%)
Salford
North West
England
16.8
15.1
14.4
19.9
15.9
15.7
7.3
8.5
8.9
14.2
16.4
17.8
23.6
27.4
27.1
12.5
11.1
9.5
2.0
2.2
2.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.4
3.0
2.7
3.7
2.30
Although the data is now more than a decade old, it suggests that
Salford has an above average proportion of single person households
(accounting for around 37% of all households, compared to the
average of around 31% in the North West and England). 58% of
households in Salford are classed as being families, compared to the
average of 63% in the North West and England.
2.31
Data earlier in this section on the age of the population indicated that
Salford has a relatively low proportion of people aged 65 and over.
However, this does not appear to translate into households, as the
table above suggests that the city actually has a slightly higher
proportion of all pensioner households (combination of the “One person
– pensioner”, “Family – pensioner only” and “Other – all pensioners”
groups) than at the national and regional level. This is solely down to
the relatively high proportion of single person pensioner households. It
is possible that this situation may have changed since the Census
given the population age changes discussed above, and this seems to
be borne out by the household age profile data in the next sub-section.
Household profile
Age profile
2.32 The table below is taken from the Department for Communities and
Local Government’s 2008-based household projections, which provide
a reasonably detailed breakdown of households based on the age of
the household head, and compares the situation in Salford with that for
the North West region as a whole.
Age of
household
head
24 or less
25-34
35-44
45-54
Salford
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
5,586
5.69
17,267
17.58
18,925
19.27
16,649
16.95
14
North West
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
119,428
4.07
396,576
13.51
580,849
19.79
544,966
18.57
Age of
household
head
55-59
60-64
65-74
75-84
85+
Salford
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
7,417
7.55
7,401
7.54
12,544
12.77
9,018
9.18
3,412
3.47
North West
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
249,245
8.49
255,263
8.70
402,527
13.71
287,408
9.79
98,691
3.36
Total
98,219
100.00
2,934,953
Source: DCLG 2008-based household projections
100.00
2.33
When considering the age of the household head, it is apparent that
Salford has a higher proportion of young households under the age of
35 than the North West as a whole (23.3% compared to 17.6%).
However, for all other age groups, except for those aged over 85, the
proportion in Salford is less than that for the North West. As would be
suggested by the population age data, the number of households with
a household head aged 65 or over is lower in Salford than for the
region overall (25.42% compared to 26.86%).
2.34
The household projections data also enables an analysis to be made of
how the age structure of households has changed in recent years, as
shown below.
Age of
household
head
24 or less
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-59
60-64
65-74
75-84
85+
Number of households in
Salford
2001
2008
4,575
5,586
16,014
17,267
18,535
18,925
15,652
16,649
7,071
7,417
6,608
7,401
12,944
12,544
9,658
9,018
2,852
3,412
Change in number of
households in Salford
2001-2008
% increase
1,011
22.10
1,253
7.82
390
2.10
997
6.37
346
4.89
793
12.00
-400
-3.09
-640
-6.63
560
19.64
Total
93,909
98,219
2.35
4,310
4.59
Between 2001 and 2008 there was a 4.59% increase in the total
number of households from 93,909 to 98,219. Of this overall increase,
a major element was the 22.10% increase in households where the
age of the household head was 24 or less. There was also a large
proportionate increase in the number of households aged over 85
(19.64%) although there was a big decline of 1,040 households in the
65-84 age group. There was a proportionally lower increase in the 35-
15
59 groups, although there was a significant numerical increase of 997
households in the 45 to 54 age band.
2.36
Overall, therefore, there has been quite a mixed picture, but this data
suggests increasing pressures particularly for the youngest and oldest
age groups. It would seem likely that such households are most likely
to be affected by issues of affordability.
Size profile
2.37 The DCLG household projections can also be used to provide a
general indication of the size of households in Salford. However, the
categories available mean that the exact size of households cannot be
determined in all cases, only the minimum size (for example, there are
three sub-groups that refer to “a couple and one or more other adults”,
and several that refer to “3+ dependent children”).
Size of
household
Single
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
Other
Salford
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
40,841
41.58
25,370
25.83
13,701
13.95
8,124
8.27
3,818
3.89
260
0.26
6,101
6.21
North West
Households
% of total
in 2008
households
1,020,529
34.77
866,954
29.54
445,236
15.17
299,264
10.20
120,804
4.12
12,983
0.44
169,182
5.76
Total
98,219
100.00
2,934,953
100.00
2.38
According to the DCLG 2008-based household projections, the
household size most common in Salford is that containing a single
person, with this category accounting for 41.58% of all households,
compared to 34.77% at the North West level. When examining the
other sizes of households, is striking that for all other household size
categories Salford is below the North West averages. The most notable
differences between Salford and the North West are in the proportion
of 2 person households, with such households accounting for 25.83%
of the stock in Salford, compared to 29.54% across the North West as
a whole, although the differences for the 3+ person and 4+ person
household sizes are also quite significant.
2.39
The next table uses the DCLG 2008-based household projections data
again to identify the change in household size in recent years.
16
Size of
household
Single
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
Other
Salford
2001
2008
34,844
40,841
23,736
25,370
14,891
13,701
9,289
8,124
4,214
3,818
387
260
6,549
6,101
Total
93,909
98,219
Change in number of
2001-2008
% increase
5,997
17.21
1,634
6.88
-1,190
-7.99
-1,165
-12.54
-396
-9.40
-127
-32.82
-448
-6.84
4,310
4.59
2.40
This suggests that although there was only a moderate increase in the
overall number of households between 2001 and 2008 (4,310
households), there has been a significant increase of 5,997 single and
1,634 two-person households (although this may be affected by
welfare reform changes which are likely to result in an increase in
larger shared households). Over the same period however there was a
fall in all other household sizes, particularly 6+ persons when
considering the proportionate change (a fall of 32.82%), and 3+ person
households numerically (a loss of 1,190 households).
2.41
The map below (using 2001 Census data) shows that the proportion of
single person households is relatively high across large parts of the
city, with particular concentrations in parts of Central Salford and most
of Eccles (although not in north Eccles). To some extent the distribution
of single person households reflects the concentration of apartments in
these areas. The proportion of single person households is low within
the Boothstown and Ellenbrook and Worsley areas (less than 20% of
all households).
17
Type profile
2.42 The DCLG 2008-based household projections provide a detailed
breakdown of household types, but these can be grouped together to
identify the balance between households with dependent children and
those without. This suggests that Salford has a higher proportion of
adult only households than the region as a whole, and a lower
proportion of households with dependent children.
Type of household
Adult only
households
Households with
dependent children
Salford
Households
% of total
in 2008 households
North West
Households
% of total
in 2008 households
73,752
75.09
2,126,044
72.44
24,463
24.91
808,908
27.56
Total
98,219
100.00
2,934,952
100.00
2.43
In terms of the change in the number of households in these groups, as
shown below, Salford has seen a significant increase in adult only
households, compared to a reduction in the number of households with
dependent children.
18
Type of household
Adult only
households
Households with
dependent children
Change in number of
Salford
2001
2008
2001-2008 % increase
68,072
73,752
5,680
8.34
25,838
24,463
-1,375
-5.32
Total
93,909
98,219
4,310
4.59
2.44
The map below shows that there is a relatively even distribution of
households with dependent children across the city (according to the
2001 Census), suggesting that most areas of the city are reasonably
attractive to families. The lowest levels are generally in the south-east
corner of the city, although even in this area there are parts which do
have quite high proportions of households with dependent children.
Step 1.2: National and regional economic policy
Economic output
2.45
The graph below shows recent data relating to national economic
output (GDP) and the labour market. It can be seen that all three
measures have seen a reduction since the first quarter of 2008, with
19
quite a significant drop in GDP. The limited decline in employment
masks a greater fall in the total hours worked.
GDP, employment and total weekly hours worked
102
Index (2008 Q1 = 100)
100
98
Employment
96
Total hours worked
94
GDP
92
90
2011 Q4
2011 Q3
2011 Q2
2011 Q1
2010 Q4
2010 Q3
2010 Q2
2010 Q1
2009 Q4
2009 Q3
2009 Q2
2009 Q1
2008 Q4
2008 Q3
2008 Q2
2008 Q1
88
Date
Source: ONS
Mortgage rates
2.46
The graph below shows monthly standard variable rate mortgage
interest rates that households have typically being paying. It can be
seen that there has been a significant reduction to around 4% since
early 2009. This should have made housing more affordable,
particularly for those already with a mortgage, but other pressures on
household incomes and requirements for larger deposits are likely to
have more than offset this for many households looking to move into
owner occupation.
20
Standard variable rate mortgage
10
9
8
7
6
% 5
4
3
2
1
Jan-12
Jan-11
Jan-10
Jan-09
Jan-08
Jan-07
Jan-06
Jan-05
Jan-04
Jan-03
Jan-02
Jan-01
Jan-00
Jan-99
Jan-98
Jan-97
Jan-96
Jan-95
0
Date
Source: Bank of England (Monthly interest rate of UK monetary financial
institutions (excluding Central Bank) sterling standard variable rate mortgage
to households (in percent) not seasonally adjusted)
Inflation rate
2.47
The next graph provides data on the Retail Price Index (RPI), which
includes housing costs within the measure of inflation. The
Government has set the Bank of England a target rate of 2% for the
Consumer Price Index (CPI), which is generally slightly lower than the
RPI.
2.48
It can be seen that the RPI measure of inflation was high and relatively
volatile between 1973 and 1993, but has since remained low and
reasonably stable. However, after a negative rate of inflation in 2009,
the rate has increased to around 5%.
21
Retail Price Index
30
Annualised inflation rate (%)
25
20
15
10
5
Ye
ar
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
19
98
20
00
20
02
20
04
20
06
20
08
20
10
0
-5
Year
Government funding for affordable housing
2.49
In the Comprehensive Spending Review of October 2010, the
Government announced that there would be more modest capital
investment in social housing over the spending review period, with the
emphasis in the future on ‘affordable rent’2.
Step 1.3: Employment levels and structure
Unemployment
2.50
The table below compares the unemployment rate in Salford with the
regional and national rates, expressed as the number of unemployed
people as a proportion of the economically active population.
Unemployment rate
(% of economically active population)
Year
Salford
North West
England
Apr 2004-Mar 2005
5.0
4.8
4.7
Apr 2005-Mar 2006
6.0
5.1
5.0
Apr 2006-Mar 2007
5.9
5.5
5.4
Apr 2007-Mar 2008
5.9
5.8
5.2
Apr 2008-Mar 2009
7.6
6.9
6.3
Apr 2009-Mar 2010
11.2
8.8
7.9
Apr 2010-Mar 2011
9.3
7.8
7.5
Sources: Annual Population Survey Data, and Model Based Estimates. ONS
2
“Spending Review” – HM Treasury (October 2010), p.49
22
2.51
Within Salford, the unemployment rate between 2005 and 2008 was
consistently around the 6% level (of the economically active
population). However, there was a big increase in the next two years,
associated with the prevailing difficult economic conditions, followed by
a reduction in 2010/11 but to a level still significantly above the prerecession levels. The pattern at the regional and national levels was
similar, but it appears that the increase in unemployment rates has
been greater in Salford.
2.52
The proportion of the working age population (16-64) claiming out-ofwork benefits shows a slightly different picture, as set out in the table
below, with levels in Salford reasonably constant around the 17% to
18% level since 2005. There is a significant gap between Salford and
the national average although this has reduced slightly over that period
(in contrast to the unemployment rate data above). The proportion
claiming working age benefits in Salford is also higher than the Greater
Manchester and North West averages.
Proportion of working age population (16-64) claiming outof-work benefits (%)
Greater
Date
Salford
Manchester
North West
England
February 2005
17.7
15.4
14.8
11.4
February 2006
17.6
15.3
14.8
11.4
February 2007
17.3
15.1
14.5
11.2
February 2008
16.6
14.6
14.0
10.7
February 2009
18.4
16.3
15.6
12.3
February 2010
18.4
16.4
15.6
12.4
February 2011
17.6
15.6
15.0
11.9
Source: ONS/ NOMIS
2.53
The proportion of the working age population that is claiming Jobs
Seekers Allowance or National Insurance Credits is also a useful
measure of economic deprivation, as set out below. This is not the
official measure of unemployment but provides information about
disparities between different parts of Salford. The data is based on the
old wards from 2003 rather than the current wards.
Area (2003 wards)
Barton
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Proportion of working age
population claiming Job Seekers
Allowance or National Insurance
Credits (September 2011) (%)
6.5
6.0
9.8
4.2
3.1
4.9
23
Area (2003 wards)
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and Seedley
Winton
Worsley and Boothstown
Proportion of working age
population claiming Job Seekers
Allowance or National Insurance
Credits (September 2011) (%)
4.1
4.5
8.3
8.7
6.1
4.4
6.7
5.1
3.3
7.3
3.9
6.3
6.0
1.8
Salford
Greater Manchester
North West
England
Source: ONS/ NOMIS
5.2
4.8
4.4
3.8
2.54
The proportion of the working age population claiming Job Seekers
Allowance or National Insurance Credits in Salford is significantly
above the national average (5.2% compared to 3.8%). However, at a
ward level, Worsley and Boothstown, Claremont and Swinton South
are all below the national average, and Walkden South is only just
above it, reflecting the relative prosperity of these areas. Interestingly,
all of these areas saw a reduction in the number of people aged 0-19
over the period 2001-2010.
2.55
In contrast, Broughton, Little Hulton, Langworthy and Walkden North
have the highest proportionate levels of claimants. These are amongst
the areas that have the highest proportion of single person households
and that have seen the largest decline in the number of older people
over the period 2001-2010. It is unclear whether there is any
relationship between these variables.
Qualifications
2.56
The map below shows 2001 Census lower super output area (lower)
data for the proportion of people aged 16 to 64 with no qualifications. It
indicates that the main concentrations of people with no qualifications
are primarily in the inner city areas outside the Regional Centre (such
as Broughton, Ordsall and Pendleton). There are also reasonably large
proportions of people with no qualifications in Salford West (particularly
24
Little Hulton), although there is a band running through the middle of
Salford West where the general level of people with no qualifications is
low. Broughton Park also stands out as an area in Central Salford
where there is a low proportion of people with no qualifications.
2.57
The next map shows the distribution of people aged 16-74 with level
4/5 qualifications at the time of the 2001 Census (i.e. people with the
equivalent of a degree or diploma). The map shows that the distribution
of people with such qualifications is the opposite of that in the map
above in relation to those people with no qualifications. As such the
band running through the middle of Salford West and Broughton Park
are characterised by very high proportions of people with level 4/5
qualifications. It is also apparent that parts of the Regional Centre
(such as Salford Quays and Greengate) and some of the areas
immediately around the Regional Centre (such as Trinity) have high
levels of educational attainment.
25
Economic growth
2.58
The table below provides productivity data from the last decade,
measured as gross value added (GVA) per head at current basic
prices. Salford lies within the Greater Manchester South area, along
with Manchester, Stockport, Tameside and Trafford.
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
GVA per head at current basic prices (£ per head)
Greater
Greater
Greater
North
England
Manchester Manchester Manchester
West
South
North
16,354
9,883
13,353
12,629
14,745
17,274
10,245
14,010
13,225
15,459
18,222
10,608
14,688
13,838
16,281
19,231
11,172
15,500
14,544
17,218
20,107
11,746
16,247
15,192
18,073
20,636
12,195
16,753
15,655
18,678
21,372
12,691
17,395
16,382
19,642
22,229
13,197
18,108
17,165
20,649
22,403
13,110
18,177
17,344
20,962
21,709
12,562
17,567
16,884
20,498
% change
Source: ONS
2.59
32.74
27.11
31.56
33.69
39.02
GVA per head is higher for Greater Manchester South, within which
Salford lies, than for Greater Manchester as a whole (£21,709
26
compared to £17,567 in 2009), the North West (£16,884) and England
(£20,498). This suggests that the wider economic area within which
Salford lies is relatively prosperous. However, the economic disparity
between the north and south of the conurbation is exacerbated in these
statistics by the fact that the Regional Centre which drives sub-regional
economic growth is located wholly within the Greater Manchester
South area although its benefits are felt much more widely.
2.60
GVA growth between 2000 and 2009 has been much higher in Greater
Manchester South (32.4%) than in the north of the conurbation
(27.11%), although it was slightly lower than for the North West
(33.69%) as a whole and quite significantly less than the increase at
the national level (39.02%).
2.61
The table below compares the recent change in the number of active
enterprises (defined as a business that has reported employment or
turnover during the period) in Salford with the situation at the regional
and national levels. Encouragingly, the growth in the number of active
between 2007 and 2009 was greater in Salford than at the North West
and England levels.
Year
2007
2008
2009
% change
Source: ONS
Number of active enterprises
Salford
North West
England
7,015
231,680
1,987,590
7,145
235,315
2,024,990
7,255
236,095
2,040,150
3.4%
1.9%
2.6%
Employment
2.62
The table below provides details of how the number of employees has
changed in Salford during the last decade, comparing this with the subregional, regional and national positions.
Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
% Change 2000-2008
Salford
111,000
107,500
113,900
112,800
115,600
115,200
114,300
115,800
117,500
5.9%
Total employees
Greater
Manchester North West
1,121,900
2,835,000
1,130,500
2,894,700
1,145,000
2,968,400
1,161,600
2,973,100
1,187,600
3,035,700
1,163,100
2,987,800
1,160,100
3,016,300
1,169,600
3,039,300
1,161,100
3,004,100
3.5%
6.0%
27
England
21,900,000
22,100,900
22,216,800
22,286,300
22,565,300
22,908,700
22,790,200
23,005,100
23,073,700
5.4%
(Employees are defined as people employed by a business, and excludes the
self-employed, Government-supported trainees and Her Majesty’s Forces)
* data is rounded to the nearest 100
Source: ABI
2.63
Annual Business Inquiry data can be highly variable on a year on year
basis, and comparisons of short-term trends should therefore be
treated with caution. However, over the period 2000 to 2008, Salford
has seen a proportionate increase in employee jobs similar to that at
regional and national levels, and in excess of that for Greater
Manchester as a whole. The ABI data suggests that in 2008 just over
10% of the total number of employee jobs in Greater Manchester were
provided in Salford.
2.64
The next table provides details of the proportion of jobs in different
economic sectors in Salford, and compares this with the proportion of
the city’s working residents employed in those sectors. The data sets
for jobs and working residents are derived from different surveys and
so are not directly comparable numerically. However, they do give a
general indication of the sectors that jobs in Salford are concentrated
in, and the sectors where Salford residents are mainly employed.
Jobs in Salford
2008
2009
2010
2010
Working Residents
in Salford
2010
2010
(%)
(%)
(%)
No.
(%)
Sector
A: Agriculture and fishing
!
0.1
0.1
0.1
100
B,D,E: Energy and water
1.9
0.7
0.6
0.7
900
C: Manufacturing
11.3
7.1
6.7
5.8
7,100
F: Construction
8.3
7.4
6.7
5.3
6,500
G,I: Distribution, hotels and restaurants
19.5
19.3
19.8
25.0 30,800
H,J: Transport and communications
7.2
6.2
6.3
5.7
7,000
K-N: Banking, finance and insurance
14.3
28.4
27.6
28.1 34,600
O-Q: Public admin. education and health
29.4
28.1
26.2
26.0 32,000
R-U: Other services
7.2
2.8
3.2
3.3
4,000
Source: Business Register and Employment Survey/ Annual Population Survey/ SIC2007
No.
!
1,900
11,300
8,300
19,500
7,200
14,300
29,400
7,200
2.65
It can be seen that Salford residents are more focused within the
manufacturing, construction, transport and communications, public
administration, education and health, and other services sectors
compared to the proportion of jobs in the city. In contrast, there is a far
higher proportion of jobs in the banking, finance and insurance sector,
which is the largest sector in Salford, than working residents in such
jobs. There is also a relatively low proportion of working residents in
the distribution, hotels and restaurants sector compared to the number
of jobs in that sector in Salford.
2.66
The following table focuses on the number of jobs in each sector, and
compares the Salford position with those for Greater Manchester and
England.
28
Jobs by industry (2010)
Greater
Manchester
England
%
No.
%
No.
0.1
700
1.4
338,700
1.2
13,700
1.1
254,300
8.5
101,000
8.6
2,066,600
5.0
59,500
4.8
1,152,300
Salford
Sector
%
No.
0.1
100
0.7
900
C: Manufacturing
5.8
7,100
F: Construction
5.3
6,500
G,I: Distribution, hotels and
restaurants
25.0
30,800
22.9
271,300
22.9
5.7
7,000
7.6
90,300
8.5
28.1
34,600
22.7
268,800
21.2
O-Q: Public admin. education and
health
26.0
32,000
27.4
325,100
26.8
R-U: Other services
3.3
4,000
4.6
54,100
4.7
5,527,900
2,060,000
5,104,500
6,461,900
1,137,900
2.67
Salford’s economy can be seen to have a relatively low proportion of
jobs in manufacturing, transport and communications, and other
services compared to the Greater Manchester and national levels. It is
notable that these are also sectors where the proportion of Salford
residents working in them is higher than the proportion of jobs in the
city as discussed above. The banking, finance and insurance sector is
significantly more dominant in Salford than at the Greater Manchester
and national levels, whereas this is a sector where the city’s working
residents have a much lower level of representation.
2.68
Although the distribution of jobs in the Salford economy shows some
notable deviations from the Greater Manchester and England positions,
the distribution of Salford’s working residents between the various
economic sectors is much more similar to the sub-regional and national
positions, as shown below. None of the sectors has a noticeably higher
or lower proportion of working residents than at the Greater
Manchester or England levels.
Salford
%
No.
!
!
1.9
1,900
11.3
11,300
8.3
8,300
Working residents
Greater
Manchester
%
No.
0.2
2,100
1.3
14,700
11.1
129,600
7.4
86,000
England
%
No.
1.0
251,300
1.4
344,300
10.0 2,440,200
7.5 1,825,300
Sector
C: Manufacturing
F: Construction
G,I: Distribution, hotels and
restaurants
19.5
19,500
19.6
229,100
18.4
7.2
7,200
8.5
99,100
8.7
14.3
14,300
14.9
173,900
16.5
O-Q: Public admin. education and
health
29.4
29,400
31.3
366,100
30.2
R-U: Other services
7.2
7,200
5.1
59,700
5.6
29
4,476,700
2,122,800
4,022,100
7,335,800
1,364,500
Note:
Note:
Note:
Note:
‘!’ = Restricted data
All figures have been rounded to the nearest 100
Total employment includes anyone aged 16+ that an organisation pays from its
payroll(s), in return for carrying out a full-time or part-time job or being on a training
scheme. It also includes working proprietors, defined as sole traders, sole proprietors,
partners and directors
The two datasets used in this table are collected as part of separate surveys, one of
households (Annual Population Survey) and one of businesses (Business Register
and Employment Survey), their results are not therefore directly comparable. ‘Jobs’ is
the total number of employment opportunities in the city, whereas ‘working residents’
is the number of people residing in Salford who work in particular Industries (but do
not necessarily work in Salford).
Commuting patterns
2.69
Commuting data is very important for understanding the role of
Salford’s housing markets, and how its economy interacts with the
housing markets of surrounding areas.
2.70
The diagram below uses 2001 Census data to show the pattern of
commuting movements in and out of Salford. Around 54% of the city’s
working residents can be seen to work within the city, with the
remaining 46% commuting to other districts for employment. There are
some significant numbers of people commuting across local authority
boundaries, particularly to and from Manchester, Trafford, Bolton, Bury
and Wigan. It can be seen that there is a net outflow of commuters to
Manchester and Trafford, with the level of commuting to Manchester
being around double that to Trafford, and a net inflow from the rest of
Greater Manchester and Warrington.
2.71
Following the diagram are two tables setting out details of the
movements in and out of Salford’s wards, again using 2001 Census
data. The first table identifies the proportion of each ward's workers
who reside in different locations within and outside the city, and the
second table sets out the proportion of each ward’s residents who work
in different locations.
30
Commuting patterns in and out of Salford
Source: 2001 Census
31
% of ward's workers residing in different locations
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
Winton
Worsley
Location
where
workers
live
At home
Barton
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
Winton
Worsley
Salford
Barton
Location of jobs (% of ward's workers residing in different locations)
11.91
16.01
0.75
0.32
1.93
1.82
4.85
3.49
0.82
0.57
1.40
0.93
3.19
1.25
0.57
2.72
1.65
0.78
1.51
1.65
12.79
0.61
2.84
15.70
0.00
1.76
0.81
0.20
9.81
0.61
6.23
1.70
0.13
0.21
22.10
0.84
1.19
11.97
0.67
0.31
14.48
1.37
0.73
0.69
0.36
21.26
1.82
1.37
0.73
1.73
6.23
5.51
0.74
0.53
1.72
2.74
10.22
2.59
0.45
0.89
16.92
1.58
0.33
0.00
9.96
0.71
1.63
30.96
0.33
0.16
19.82
0.14
0.68
5.36
0.27
0.72
0.54
0.27
25.50
0.14
11.97
0.50
0.91
0.75
0.50
4.66
1.58
0.50
2.16
15.54
7.58
0.23
0.11
0.34
0.23
1.05
0.83
0.38
0.38
0.34
0.75
1.09
1.12
0.67
0.61
1.91
1.33
0.90
0.70
1.43
6.05
0.79
0.40
0.46
0.43
2.33
1.13
0.63
1.06
0.79
3.89
1.18
2.06
2.04
0.65
4.50
1.85
1.06
3.44
3.42
6.54
0.82
0.70
0.36
0.47
1.74
1.20
0.50
0.45
0.36
8.13
1.15
0.55
0.51
0.81
3.15
2.60
1.08
0.83
0.90
6.69
0.69
0.22
0.49
0.43
0.67
0.60
0.27
0.45
0.07
18.68
0.76
0.27
0.18
0.67
0.91
1.01
0.46
0.18
0.37
2.73
2.16
0.82
0.51
1.01
4.84
2.96
1.69
0.78
2.06
14.80
6.12
0.69
0.27
2.06
1.83
3.97
2.88
0.59
0.55
23.55
0.68
0.20
0.00
0.10
0.85
1.59
0.61
0.41
0.00
0.82
0.00
1.21
0.39
0.56
0.80
2.45
1.78
0.41
0.88
1.15
2.30
0.40
0.00
0.65
0.34
0.52
1.01
2.99
2.10
0.89
0.48
2.20
0.72
0.65
0.00
0.76
0.33
0.27
0.00
1.13
0.90
0.00
1.75
1.91
2.41
15.61
0.00
0.90
0.34
0.49
2.64
1.47
1.31
0.83
0.40
15.96
0.83
0.84
1.04
3.08
7.54
1.92
0.27
5.88
0.38
1.40
0.44
5.69
0.67
7.21
0.07
1.39
0.20
3.41
0.09
1.25
0.37
0.83
0.77
2.47
1.34
0.87
0.18
0.96
0.14
1.05
0.00
1.49
0.10
1.43
1.45
1.96
0.65
2.34
2.42
0.87
0.54
1.08
1.58
1.33
7.02
1.94
13.10
5.27
2.10
1.89
2.27
1.69
1.26
2.53
1.96
0.81
0.63
3.55
3.24
1.03
0.95
2.99
1.35
1.77
5.64
3.08
4.78
12.24
1.48
1.89
3.13
2.56
2.17
1.14
1.02
0.47
0.67
0.85
1.45
0.65
0.54
0.25
8.29
0.74
2.06
1.30
4.35
2.02
16.22
5.45
1.13
1.32
2.00
1.85
1.57
6.77
2.17
62.35
1.54
1.45
1.01
1.50
31.15
1.15
0.74
1.35
1.08
57.44
0.59
0.46
1.55
1.09
52.37
1.53
3.55
1.37
2.42
66.76
2.51
2.06
6.68
2.71
56.99
0.38
0.49
3.65
1.47
72.85
0.45
0.59
0.81
0.77
60.36
2.00
4.57
1.08
2.08
59.19
6.45
0.34
0.98
2.48
49.76
1.35
1.53
1.34
1.34
25.82
2.62
0.70
0.76
1.92
52.80
1.73
3.20
1.55
1.51
50.90
5.03
0.65
1.27
3.89
54.65
3.87
1.20
1.61
4.40
58.53
9.26
0.31
0.76
2.93
52.52
24.28
0.49
0.64
3.66
66.91
2.16
6.23
2.57
2.54
44.98
2.65
1.10
21.70
3.29
70.21
4.14
0.31
1.49
22.60
64.61
32
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
Winton
Worsley
Barton
Location
where
workers
live
total
Bolton
3.28
5.64
Bury
2.25
8.66
Manchester
3.85 11.38
Oldham
1.28
3.86
Rochdale
1.64
3.22
Stockport
2.32
5.22
Tameside
1.71
4.22
Trafford
8.81
6.91
Wigan
3.64
5.43
Warrington
1.82
1.46
Source: Census 2001
Broughton
Blackfriars
Location of jobs (% of ward's workers residing in different locations)
3.52
12.52
11.77
1.22
1.83
1.42
1.08
2.64
2.50
1.22
2.45
1.72
4.72
1.07
0.84
2.98
0.92
7.95
4.93
7.36
2.42
3.67
5.37
1.21
1.69
2.22
2.54
3.99
3.59
0.73
4.88
3.61
4.53
1.36
2.03
2.83
1.78
7.12
4.49
1.52
2.12
2.45
2.45
1.14
1.31
1.47
1.47
3.75
2.45
3.97
3.51
13.42
7.93
1.22
1.08
1.49
1.08
2.30
2.61
0.81
3.99
5.65
8.48
1.75
2.00
2.49
1.75
5.24
2.99
0.75
21.46
2.96
2.03
0.75
0.56
0.60
0.45
2.14
12.53
1.46
4.83
6.05
11.05
3.57
2.75
5.20
4.51
10.73
4.68
2.25
9.30
6.51
4.03
1.73
1.89
2.17
1.69
2.86
4.79
1.26
4.60
7.50
8.56
2.53
2.93
3.04
2.26
4.16
3.59
1.16
10.46
3.98
2.92
1.04
1.63
1.43
1.18
2.72
7.38
1.11
7.27
5.36
4.70
1.36
2.12
2.37
1.41
3.93
5.48
1.75
18.21
2.80
1.61
1.12
1.10
1.43
1.03
1.90
10.23
1.07
8.20
2.22
2.77
0.82
0.88
1.58
0.64
1.98
7.40
0.73
5.28
6.03
6.44
2.72
2.35
2.83
2.04
6.89
5.46
2.33
3.43
3.02
3.11
0.55
0.82
2.60
1.64
5.12
4.29
0.82
4.21
2.17
2.65
1.02
1.12
1.32
0.71
2.54
11.16
1.15
% of ward's residents working in different locations
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
Winton
Worsley
Location
where
residents
work
At home
Barton
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Barton
Location of jobs (% of ward's residents working in different locations)
7.72
10.37
2.70
0.21
1.87
0.79
8.46
0.67
5.76
0.69
13.10
1.38
0.20
0.59
1.60
0.20
7.91
0.38
6.57
9.71
0.42
0.71
1.47
0.00
7.38
1.34
1.76
0.00
26.19
0.22
2.83
4.55
6.19
0.88
5.88
0.45
0.69
9.09
3.14
0.22
8.21
2.70
4.11
0.24
1.13
0.89
13.47
0.60
6.77
2.13
2.13
0.07
12.44
0.74
3.75
12.39
10.40
0.54
4.47
3.43
0.76
0.43
0.71
0.14
5.43
0.60
7.80
0.34
0.57
1.62
2.22
0.11
6.28
0.71
2.17
0.19
0.59
0.40
1.83
0.37
5.48
0.00
3.89
0.51
0.00
0.97
1.24
0.00
6.94
0.56
5.03
0.28
0.51
1.21
2.39
0.23
6.17
0.36
7.23
1.10
0.52
1.68
1.55
0.19
7.14
0.78
3.56
0.57
0.61
1.13
3.15
0.31
7.55
1.17
4.04
0.20
0.49
1.44
3.53
0.31
6.49
0.69
2.78
0.15
0.69
0.46
2.08
0.26
8.21
0.70
2.58
0.23
0.37
0.51
2.24
0.09
6.82
1.18
4.89
0.30
0.59
2.36
3.68
0.24
6.62
3.88
2.59
0.41
1.51
0.69
9.07
1.37
9.50
0.84
2.57
0.22
0.71
0.82
2.46
0.37
33
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste
Winton
Worsley
Barton
Location
where
residents
work
Kersal
0.07
0.49
Langworthy
0.14
0.36
Little
Hulton
0.14
0.10
Ordsall
4.71
6.88
Pendlebury
1.27
0.92
Pendleton
1.34
3.31
Swinton
North
1.06
1.28
Swinton
1.50
1.02
South
Walkden
North
0.72
0.33
Walkden
South
0.58
0.29
Weaste
4.64
2.49
Winton
3.10
0.49
Worsley
0.46
0.20
Salford
total
52.52 41.65
Bolton
2.22
1.51
Bury
0.88
1.05
Manchester 12.41 34.61
Oldham
0.42
0.49
Rochdale
0.74
0.69
Stockport
1.52
1.47
Tameside
0.51
1.08
Trafford
23.82
9.07
Wigan
0.65
0.69
Warrington
0.76
0.59
Source: Census 2001
Broughton
Blackfriars
Location of jobs (% of ward's residents working in different locations)
4.98
0.38
0.15
0.15
0.28
0.97
0.24
0.38
0.13
0.13
13.38
0.61
0.11
7.05
0.19
0.00
0.00
0.82
0.41
0.38
0.65
0.94
0.23
0.25
0.34
0.59
0.26
0.07
0.13
0.32
0.35
1.48
0.37
0.27
0.23
0.34
0.38
5.23
1.34
4.19
0.15
2.83
0.75
0.80
0.48
6.16
2.81
3.81
0.44
4.94
1.57
1.80
0.22
3.68
0.96
1.13
0.24
3.07
1.75
4.00
0.34
10.06
2.07
6.33
12.92
2.86
1.80
1.27
0.00
19.15
1.09
1.98
0.39
4.49
18.30
2.48
0.29
7.91
1.87
11.94
0.82
4.85
9.60
1.86
0.59
5.42
6.47
2.48
4.80
3.00
3.13
1.39
2.30
3.37
2.45
1.14
0.24
7.68
1.32
4.22
0.53
5.13
1.08
1.55
0.90
3.44
1.83
1.01
0.84
0.65
1.67
1.33
0.61
0.59
0.75
3.32
0.58
5.38
0.68
14.30
4.38
5.28
3.76
0.97
1.45
2.97
1.21
1.14
3.07
2.92
1.33
1.11
1.92
2.45
0.97
5.28
1.23
5.83
11.36
2.48
2.93
1.83
1.86
3.41
0.92
0.47
0.52
0.54
0.26
0.47
0.11
10.00
0.12
1.02
0.29
1.84
1.08
15.74
5.54
0.38
0.69
1.79
0.25
1.97
0.25
0.00
0.55
2.34
1.12
0.07
0.52
7.76
0.69
0.43
0.65
5.45
1.73
0.93
0.33
3.42
1.37
0.39
0.14
1.73
0.31
0.28
0.45
7.23
0.45
0.00
3.48
2.39
0.59
0.96
0.12
2.80
0.16
0.00
0.67
3.77
0.34
0.72
0.39
4.03
0.10
0.10
1.21
4.13
0.72
0.72
1.02
4.78
0.92
1.05
3.89
2.28
0.63
1.28
10.67
2.69
0.78
1.63
0.43
15.58
0.64
0.24
0.43
4.88
9.70
0.90
1.64
3.23
0.99
9.12
49.10
1.63
2.47
30.14
0.75
1.13
1.00
0.88
7.74
0.54
0.42
55.43
1.64
1.09
10.48
0.30
0.67
0.84
0.37
13.99
1.34
6.83
55.70
1.81
1.78
17.93
0.67
1.12
1.50
0.86
10.97
0.95
1.05
54.24
2.54
1.05
16.66
0.83
0.69
1.65
0.95
13.03
0.85
1.27
54.39
1.35
0.81
11.30
0.39
0.59
1.52
0.48
19.26
0.41
3.96
48.56
0.92
7.85
26.71
0.73
0.85
1.35
0.92
6.62
0.71
0.50
55.58
1.13
1.39
20.99
0.68
1.13
1.13
0.90
11.87
0.68
0.57
54.80
13.45
1.80
10.13
0.93
0.93
1.43
0.47
7.95
2.86
1.18
39.86
0.97
1.90
29.14
0.70
0.70
2.60
1.05
13.21
0.93
1.63
60.79
4.18
1.69
13.87
1.05
0.95
1.18
0.69
7.84
1.46
0.89
49.19
1.23
2.39
23.56
0.77
0.97
0.87
1.39
9.04
1.26
0.61
63.62
3.91
1.60
13.38
0.66
0.88
1.13
0.59
7.45
1.19
0.82
59.23
3.73
1.81
14.07
0.66
0.90
1.51
1.05
9.46
1.08
1.30
57.82
12.51
1.74
9.57
0.74
0.91
1.17
0.78
6.80
2.06
1.22
52.67
8.14
1.69
13.74
0.88
0.94
1.53
0.64
8.46
2.88
1.61
55.43
1.69
1.61
17.84
0.64
0.81
1.59
0.86
12.25
0.91
0.73
54.97
2.39
0.92
12.68
0.41
0.55
1.27
0.67
19.54
0.92
1.25
48.41
5.01
2.23
15.76
0.92
0.79
1.96
0.68
10.99
3.42
1.97
34
Cross-boundary movements
2.72 Salford’s gross out-commuting is dominated by Manchester and then
Trafford, and, although they may be important for individual areas, the
districts of Bolton, Bury, Warrington, Stockport and Wigan are well
behind for the city as a whole.
2.73
The significant flows into Manchester extend across the whole of
Salford, with at least 9.5% of the working residents of every ward
travelling to Manchester to work. At least 6.5% of working residents of
every ward travel to Trafford. Trafford’s pull is only stronger than
Manchester’s for Barton, Cadishead, Irlam and Winton. Manchester
and Trafford’s pulls are exceeded by Bolton in the case of Little Hulton
and Walkden North. Trafford is pushed into third place by Bury in the
case of Kersal, and is only just ahead of Bolton for Walkden South.
2.74
Salford’s gross in-commuting is much more dispersed. No districts
dominate in the way that Manchester and Trafford do as destinations
for Salford residents to work, but there is significant gross incommuting from Manchester, Bolton, Trafford, Wigan and Bury. Bolton
is the largest external source of workers for Little Hulton, Walkden
North, Swinton North, Pendlebury, Walkden South and Swinton South
(6 wards), Bury for Kersal and Broughton (2 wards), Manchester for
Blackfriars, Ordsall, Pendleton, Claremont, Langworthy (5 wards),
Trafford for Barton, Cadishead, Eccles, Weaste and Winton (5 wards),
Warrington for Irlam (and just pushed into second by Trafford for
Cadishead), and Wigan for Worsley (it also provides a large proportion
to Little Hulton and Walkden North).
2.75
Gross commuting flows out of Salford only exceed 1,900 to three
districts, but inflows exceed 1,900 from ten districts. Manchester and
Trafford are similar, in terms of a much wider spread of in-commuting
compared to more focused out-commuting. The impacts of commuting
on the city are not just related to people working and/or residing in the
city, and there are potentially significant commuting flows through
Salford from Bolton, Bury and Wigan into Manchester and Trafford.
East-West and North-South movements within Salford
2.76 Overall there is a net flow within Salford of 6,159 from Salford West to
Central Salford. Gross outflows from Central Salford to Salford West
are small, and the large majority are to the Eccles and Swinton and
Pendlebury community committee areas. Every Salford West
community committee area has a net outflow to each Central Salford
community committee area.
2.77
Central Salford has very significant net inflows from the rest of Greater
Manchester (12,986), exceeding 1,000 for all districts except
Manchester, 2,000 for Wigan and Bolton, and 3,000 for Bury. The
largest flows in both directions are to Manchester, which is also the
only district to which there is a net outflow from Central Salford (1,551).
The next highest flows in both directions are to Trafford, which has net
35
inflows to Central Salford (1,200). Manchester accounts for more than
half of the flows from Central Salford to the rest of Greater Manchester.
2.78
In contrast, Salford West has very significant net outflows to the rest of
Greater Manchester (7,252). Net outflows exceed 6,000 to Manchester
and 5,000 to Trafford. There are net inflows from everywhere else
except Warrington, with those from Wigan exceeding 2,000. Flows to
and from Bolton are more significant than for Wigan, but are more
evenly balanced (net inflow to Salford West of 937).
2.79
The net flow from North Salford (Walkden and Little Hulton, Swinton
and Pendlebury, Pendleton, Kersal and Broughton) to South Salford of
4,703 is almost as significant as that from Salford West to Central
Salford (6,159). South Salford has very significant net inflows from the
rest of Greater Manchester (10,641), with the highest levels from
Wigan, Bury and Bolton, although there are net outflows to Manchester
and Trafford. The relationship of South Salford to Manchester is very
similar to that with Trafford, with these districts being most important for
both inflows and outflows.
2.80
In contrast, North Salford has quite high net outflows to the rest of
Greater Manchester (4,907). Net outflows exceed 6,000 to Manchester
and 3,000 to Trafford. There are moderate net inflows from Wigan,
Bolton and Bury. Gross inflows are largest from Bolton, Wigan and
Bury, but the gross outflows are very much larger to Manchester,
Trafford and to a lesser extent Bolton.
Step 1.4: Incomes and earnings
Income
2.81
Household income data for 2011, set out in the table below, shows that
Salford has a higher proportion of households in the £0 to £20,000
income band than Greater Manchester does (38.6% compared to
36.0%). There are slightly lower proportions in Salford in all of the other
bands, with the biggest difference in the £40,000-80,000 bands
(although this is still not a particularly large deviation). The data
suggests that overall Salford households are slightly poorer than the
Greater Manchester average.
Household income
£0-20,000
£20,000-40,000
£40,000-60,000
£60,000-80,000
£80,000-100,000
£100,000 and above
Number of households
% of households
Salford
Greater
Salford
Greater
Manchester
Manchester
39,185
406,810
38.6
36.0
34,439
383,819
33.9
34.0
15,584
185,726
15.3
16.4
6,766
83,750
6.7
7.4
3,063
38,611
3.0
3.4
2,501
31,657
2.5
2.8
36
Total
101,547
1,130,474
100.0
Source: CACI PayCheck 2011 household income data
Figures do not add up due to rounding
2.82
100.0
The data for individual wards in Salford is shown below.
Ward
Barton
Boothstown and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Median household income
£22,724
£46,578
£17,772
£26,337
£31,142
£28,298
£26,811
£21,128
£24,539
£19,435
£20,418
£30,479
£25,690
£25,226
£27,058
£23,413
£30,101
£24,785
£23,696
£40,546
Salford
£25,360
Source: 2011 CACI PayCheck household income
2.83
This data from CACI shows that the average household income in the
city is £25,360. The Central Salford wards of Broughton and
Langworthy have average household incomes significantly below the
city average, although the neighbouring wards of Ordsall and
Claremont are both significantly above average. The highest average
household incomes by far are in Boothstown and Ellenbrook and
Worsley in Salford West. However, five out of the thirteen wards in
Salford West are below the average citywide median income, reflecting
a relatively complex pattern of household incomes across the city.
Stage 2: The housing stock
Step 2.1: Dwelling profile
Tenure of dwellings
37
2.84
The table below identifies the current distribution of tenures within the
housing stock.
Housing Stock by tenure as at 31 March 2011
Tenure
Number of dwellings
Private Sector
75,735
Housing Associations
21,170
Local Authority
10,522
Total
107,427
Source: Housing Flow Return 2010/11
2.85
% of total
70.6%
19.7%
9.8%
100.0%
This shows that the housing stock within the city is predominantly in the
private sector. Directly comparable data is not available at higher or
lower geographical levels for 2011, so there is a reliance on older data
from the 2001 Census as set out in the table below.
Area
Barton
Boothstown & Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste & Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
Proportion of dwellings by tenure (%)
Registered
Private
Social
rented
Landlord
Private
and
(RSL) /
(owner
other
Local
Housing
occupied)
rented Authority Association
54.3
13.3
26.6
5.8
90.9
4.5
4.3
0.3
28.9
17.3
35.2
18.6
62.6
8.9
26.4
2.2
83.7
8.8
2.7
4.7
59.2
14.8
22.2
3.8
66.2
6.2
23.5
3.6
35.6
18.0
38.0
8.4
58.0
20.5
15.1
6.4
29.5
18.9
36.5
15.2
37.1
9.9
49.6
3.4
23.6
24.1
43.8
8.6
58.2
10.3
26.5
5.0
65.3
10.3
22.4
2.1
69.2
10.0
18.8
1.9
52.2
9.9
35.7
2.2
78.6
6.0
13.4
2.0
56.8
13.3
21.4
8.5
52.6
11.4
32.9
3.2
90.9
4.8
2.9
1.4
44.2
63.0
38
17.2
9.5
28.0
24.5
10.6
2.9
Area
Salford
Greater Manchester
North West
England
Source: 2001 Census
Proportion of dwellings by tenure (%)
Registered
Private
Social
rented
Landlord
Private
and
(RSL) /
(owner
other
Local
Housing
occupied)
rented Authority Association
56.4
12.2
25.7
5.7
65.4
10.7
17.7
6.2
69.3
10.7
13.6
6.5
68.7
12.0
13.2
6.1
2.86
Salford can be seen to have a significantly lower proportion of private
sector properties than at the sub-regional, regional and national levels,
and a significantly higher proportion of social rented housing. The
private rented sector is proportionately more significant in Salford than
at the sub-regional, regional and national levels.
2.87
Within Salford, there is very significant deviation between the tenure
profiles of different parts of the city. Worsley, Boothstown and
Ellenbrook, Claremont and Walkden South can be seen to have very
high proportions of owner-occupied dwellings. In contrast, more than
half of the dwellings in Broughton, Little Hulton and Ordsall are in the
social rented sector. Ordsall, Kersal, Irwell Riverside and Broughton,
which are the four easternmost wards in the city, can be seen to have
relatively high proportions of property in the private rented sector.
There are also marked differences when comparing the tenure profile
of Central Salford and Salford West, particularly the lower levels of
owner occupation and a higher proportion of private rented dwellings in
Central Salford.
2.88
The data in the two tables is not directly comparable as it is from
different sources. However, it suggests that the overall proportion of
Salford’s housing stock that is in the owner occupation / private renting
sector has stayed similar at around 70%. The biggest change has been
a fall in the local authority stock between 2001 and 2011, from around
one-quarter to one-tenth of all dwellings in the city, and a significant
increase in the proportion of RSLs / HAs dwellings over the same
period. This change is primarily the result of the transfer of around
15,000 dwellings from city council ownership to City West Housing
Trust (which is classed as an RSL) in October 2008.
2.89
Data from the 2001 Census can also be mapped at lower super output
area (lower). The following maps show the levels of owner occupation
and social renting.
39
2.90
The first map above shows that there are low concentrations of owner
occupation across Central Salford, particularly in the south-east area.
In addition there are also low concentrations of owner occupation in the
40
north-west of the city, primarily in Little Hulton and the surrounding
areas. The high concentrations of owner occupation (above 80% of
total stock) are in a band running across the middle of Salford West (up
to Claremont in the east).
2.91
The second map shows that the spatial distribution of dwellings that are
social rented is the opposite of that shown on the owner occupied map.
The highest proportions of social rented dwellings are in the south-east
and eastern parts of the city. In Salford West as a whole, there is a
reasonably good mix of social rented dwellings amongst other tenures.
In the band running across the middle of Salford West there is
generally a low proportion of social rented dwellings, although this is
unsurprising given that this area is dominated by owner occupied
dwellings.
Type of dwellings
2.92
Data on the type of dwellings can be found in the 2001 Census and is
set out below.
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste & Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
Dwellings by type (% of total)
SemiDetached detached Terraced
house/
house/
house/
bungalow bungalow bungalow Flats
3.4
24.8
47.6
24.2
Caravan/
mobile/
temporary
structure
0.0
45.2
3.8
10.2
7.8
11.1
9.0
2.0
11.9
2.9
6.8
2.5
9.0
3.9
7.5
3.7
13.8
3.6
4.6
25.2
38.9
14.5
51.4
61.0
30.1
55.1
21.2
33.4
11.4
36.3
10.9
50.0
44.3
55.6
37.1
53.4
35.7
45.4
54.5
13.9
51.4
27.5
22.5
23.3
29.0
46.8
16.6
38.1
39.6
34.3
24.6
37.7
26.3
42.3
26.1
33.7
33.1
13.6
1.9
29.7
10.9
8.8
35.6
6.9
29.2
38.1
47.4
17.2
52.0
16.3
14.2
10.5
16.5
6.8
27.0
17.0
6.6
0.1
0.6
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.5
9.4
19.2
37.8
26.8
26.7
25.1
13.0
0.2
0.05
41
Dwellings by type (% of total)
SemiDetached detached Terraced
house/
house/
house/
bungalow bungalow bungalow Flats
Area
Salford
Greater Manchester
North West
England
Source: Census 2001
8.6
13.2
17.6
22.5
37.0
38.1
36.6
31.6
32.5
32.7
31.7
25.8
21.7
15.9
13.8
19.7
Caravan/
mobile/
temporary
structure
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.4
2.93
Salford has a relatively low proportion of detached dwellings, although
there are reasonably significant concentrations in Boothstown and
Ellenbrook and Worsley. Many locations have very low proportions of
detached houses, with Barton, Broughton, Irwell Riverside,
Langworthy, Little Hulton, Swinton North, Walkden North, Weaste and
Seedley, and Winton all below 5%. The proportion of semi-detached
houses in Salford at 37% is more typical of provision across Greater
Manchester and the North West, and above the national level. More
than half of all dwellings are semi-detached in Cadishead, Claremont,
Irlam, Pendlebury, Swinton South, Walkden South and Worsley,
reflecting the relatively suburban nature of these areas of the city.
There is around double the proportion of semi-detached houses in
Salford West than there is in Central Salford.
2.94
The proportion of terraced dwellings in Salford is also similar to that at
the Greater Manchester and North West levels, but above that
nationally. There are particular concentrations in some of those areas
of the city with very low proportions of detached dwellings, such as
Broughton (51%), Barton (48%), Irwell Riverside (47%) and Walkden
North (42%). The proportion of terraced dwellings is similar across
Salford West and Central Salford.
2.95
The proportion of apartments in Salford is higher than the national
level, and significantly higher than the levels for Greater Manchester
and the North West. Ordsall (52%), Langworthy (47%), Kersal (38%)
and Eccles (36%) have particularly high proportions of apartments,
although there are also significant levels in other parts of the city such
as Barton, Broughton, Irwell Riverside and Weaste and Seedley.
Apartment provision is very low in some of the more affluent areas of
the city such as Boothstown and Ellenbrook (2%), Worsley (7%),
Walkden South (7%) and Claremont (9%), with Irlam also have a low
proportion (7%). The proportion of apartments in Salford West is
around half that of Central Salford.
2.96
This geography of dwelling type can also be seen in the two maps
below (also using 2001 Census data), with the first showing the
proportion of dwellings that are detached and the second showing the
proportion that are apartments.
42
2.97
It can be seen that the proportion of dwellings that are detached within
Central Salford is very low, apart from in the areas to the fringe of it
such as Claremont and Kersal. The highest proportion of detached
43
dwellings (over 40%) can be found in a central band running through
Salford West, that includes the areas of Boothstown and Ellenbrook,
Ellesmere Park, South Walkden and Worsley.
2.98
There are particularly high concentrations of apartments (over 40% of
total stock) throughout Central Salford, and in the Eccles area, with
some smaller concentrations of apartments in Salford West. As would
probably be expected, those areas where there are high proportions of
detached properties are generally characterised by low proportions of
apartments.
Size of dwellings
2.99
Data on the size of dwellings (by number of rooms) from the 2001
Census is shown below.
Number of rooms by percentage of total stock
2
3
4
5
6
7
1.7
10.7
27.9
31.1
20.9
4.9
Area
Barton
Boothstown and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
0.1
1.1
0.1
0.7
1.1
0.1
0.6
1.1
2.2
0.2
1.1
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.4
3.8
1.5
1.6
2.7
1.4
3.4
3.1
4.1
1.7
3.1
2.7
0.9
0.9
1.8
1.5
2.0
14.7
7.8
4.7
17.1
5.2
12.3
14.3
16.9
9.8
18.2
8.9
7.8
5.8
11.5
4.8
12.5
25.1
18.3
10.7
17.9
16.3
35.4
24.0
33.2
23.4
39.1
24.1
23.2
18.2
22.1
15.3
25.8
28.1
31.6
34.6
18.4
44.4
32.0
19.0
23.8
32.6
24.5
34.9
39.0
35.6
34.7
28.2
25.1
16.0
29.7
30.9
21.0
22.9
12.1
15.8
14.0
24.1
10.8
20.9
21.0
28.1
23.9
31.6
14.9
6.6
6.7
10.8
9.9
6.2
2.2
7.5
3.4
5.3
2.1
4.9
5.8
7.1
4.0
11.3
19.3
4.5
4.2
6.0
12.0
3.5
1.8
15.2
2.4
2.8
1.1
3.4
2.2
3.9
1.8
7.0
0.7
0.2
0.2
2.4
1.3
0.7
10.3
10.0
4.8
20.3
17.4
8.4
28.1
37.7
18.4
24.2
25.9
34.6
8.6
5.1
15.7
5.3
2.4
17.1
Central Salford
Salford West
1.1
0.3
3.2
1.5
13.2
8.4
27.0
19.3
27.0
31.9
17.6
25.1
5.8
7.5
5.1
5.9
0.6
2.1
10.1
22.1
30.2
22.4
6.9
5.6
0.6
0.5
0.9
2.1
1.8
2.5
8.7
7.7
9.2
21.8
19.2
20.0
30.0
29.0
27.1
21.8
23.1
20.5
8.1
9.4
9.2
7.0
9.3
10.6
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Source: Census 2001
1
0.5
44
8+
2.5
2.100 Data on the size of dwellings paints a similar picture to the type, with
prosperous locations such as Worsley (67%), Boothstown and
Ellenbrook (59%), Walkden South (50%) and Claremont (48%) having
the highest proportions of dwellings with six rooms or more. These
areas also have very low proportions of dwellings with three rooms or
fewer (all 7% or lower). Kersal has the third highest proportion of
dwellings with 8 rooms or more, reflecting the large size of some
households in the area that has resulted in big house extensions.
2.101 Ordsall (14%) and Irwell Riverside (16%) have very low proportions of
dwellings with six rooms or more. Langworthy (23%), Ordsall (22%)
and Eccles (21%) have the highest proportion of smaller dwellings
(three rooms or less).
2.102 The size of dwellings in Salford West is generally larger than those in
Central Salford. For instance, in Central Salford 45% of dwellings have
between 1 and 4 rooms, whilst in Salford West the proportion is much
lower at 30%. The proportion of dwellings by different sizes in Salford
broadly matches the Greater Manchester, North West and England
averages.
Housing completions
Scale and location
2.103 The city council monitors net residential additions to the housing stock
on an annual basis, covering the period between 1 April and 31 March.
This includes identifying gross new build completions, net change as a
result of schemes involving a change of use / conversion, and losses to
the stock as a result of demolitions. The net annual change between
2003 and 2011 is shown in the table below.
Monitoring
period
2003/04
2004/05
2005/06
2006/07
2007/08
2008/09
2009/10
2010/11
Total
Average per
annum
Gross new
build
dwellings
1,071
1,585
1,104
2,164
2,766
1,950
699
683
Number of dwellings
Change of
Demolitions
use and
conversion –
net change
63
374
4
825
32
755
53
1,019
13
311
25
465
46
268
33
261
Net change
760
764
381
1,198
2,468
1,510
477
455
12,022
269
4,278
8,013
1,503
34
535
1,002
45
Source: Salford City Council (Spatial Planning) residential development and
land supply monitoring
2.104 The city has seen a relatively high level of residential development
since 2003, averaging a net increase of just over 1,000 dwellings per
annum. This equates to an annual increase to the total stock of
dwellings of just under 1%. However, there was a significant peak in
activity over the period 2006-2009, with an average of 1,725 net
completions per annum for those three years. The gross number of
new dwellings provided was 50% higher at just over 1,500 dwellings
per annum, but a significant amount of demolition activity led to the
lower net change figure. Conversions and changes of use have
contributed a relatively small proportion of the new dwellings.
Construction activity can be seen to have reduced significantly from its
peak over the last couple of years, reflecting broader economic
conditions. Demolitions have also been lower.
2.105 The following three tables show the gross additions, gross reductions
and net additions to the dwelling stock in the city by year and ward.
Gross completions 2003-2011 (new build and changes of use conversions)
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
Salford
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
39
38
3
14
58
57
9
3
Total
20032011
221
5
19
4
1
2
8
1
4
44
11
53
44
17
24
44
1
14
38
478
161
45
45
22
24
29
163
26
75
34
65
3
22
0
533
148
145
20
55
28
6
230
1
99
5
55
11
31
35
335
37
49
64
115
13
169
148
1
255
4
21
39
25
34
1,121
116
3
52
98
30
351
53
3
169
4
101
62
196
0
1,296
146
1
21
15
112
350
34
3
66
0
130
47
113
2
948
55
3
22
65
1
11
4
1
20
0
0
31
178
0
380
34
2
4
2
5
204
10
1
8
0
82
46
181
61
54
32
3
1
9
6
1,131
695
80
709
71
498
240
760
170
5,145
729
251
229
381
219
36
131
1
27
134
87
151
118
685
37
27
52
36
58
10
22
57
45
31
1
20
3
36
16
1
234
218
628
537
809
813
440
722
1,403
834
2,143
657
1,678
334
752
120
686
154
8,539
4,171
1,165
1,622
1,162
2,237
2,800
2,012
872
840
12,710
46
Gross reductions 2003-2011 (demolitions and losses through changes of use
conversions)
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
Salford
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
0
1
1
5
0
2
0
1
Total
20032011
10
0
1
7
1
0
2
1
1
13
18
0
1
16
2
12
27
109
88
103
0
4
2
12
7
127
1
0
15
2
237
4
228
51
46
0
16
3
104
2
265
1
1
3
1
34
122
276
19
0
1
9
0
8
3
205
4
0
13
1
15
4
640
27
60
0
0
0
21
2
40
4
1
2
0
57
1
147
3
0
0
1
2
11
1
242
3
1
1
0
57
1
154
1
1
1
1
3
12
0
80
1
0
9
0
129
2
134
0
2
1
1
4
2
1
99
2
0
1
6
37
2
224
0
0
2
1
1
1
3
1,076
16
4
60
12
578
163
1,912
189
212
5
33
15
171
19
2
0
26
34
57
3
24
2
148
1
1
19
1
0
4
1
6
1
4
0
17
1
3
1
1
24
37
272
133
642
216
724
57
958
81
303
29
459
43
371
24
364
21
4,093
604
405
858
781
1,039
332
502
395
385
4,697
Net additions 2003-2011 (new build and changes of use conversions)
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
39
37
2
9
58
55
9
2
Total
20032011
211
5
-7
53
43
1
22
32
-26
-95
18
-98
162
26
60
32
-172
-1
-206
-3
-259
229
0
96
4
21
-111
-245
0
-36
144
1
242
3
6
35
-615
2
311
49
2
167
4
44
61
49
6
108
31
2
65
0
73
46
-41
0
-69
3
1
11
0
-129
29
44
3
105
8
1
7
-6
45
44
-43
31
55
679
76
649
59
-80
77
-1,152
47
20032004
20042005
20052006
20062007
20072008
20082009
20092010
20102011
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
-50
375
161
41
43
10
17
-51
487
148
129
17
-49
26
16
335
36
40
64
107
10
7
1,061
116
3
52
77
28
-3
1,296
146
0
19
4
111
1
947
54
2
19
53
1
0
378
33
1
0
0
4
61
54
30
2
0
8
3
Total
20032011
-19
4,933
724
218
214
210
200
34
36
26
131
33
35
-25
58
6
-7
21
51
77
44
27
84
1
3
127
2
33
116
15
0
537
210
181
Central Salford
Salford West
356
404
167
597
-284
665
445
753
1,840
628
1,219
291
381
96
322
133
4,446
3,567
Salford
760
764
381
1,198
2,468
1,510
477
455
8,013
Area
2.106 In the early years of this monitoring period it can be seen that Salford
West was supplying the majority of new dwellings, but since 2007 it has
been Central Salford that has accounted for most of the additional
dwellings. The dominance of Central Salford would have been greater
were it not for the high level of gross reductions in that part of the city.
2.107 The ward of Ordsall has clearly dominated the supply of new dwellings
over recent years, accounting for 62% of net completions over the
period 2003-2011. During the period 2006-2008, at the peak of the
market, Ordsall provided more than 1,100 net additional dwellings per
annum. There have also been relatively significant net completions
since 2003 in Pendlebury, Cadishead, Eccles, and Weaste and
Seedley, generally reflecting a small number of large developments,
although nothing on the scale seen in Ordsall.
2.108 Langworthy has seen a very high level of demolitions, resulting in an
overall net reduction of 1,152 dwellings over the period 2003-2011
despite 760 new dwellings being provided. Broughton also saw
significant clearance activity, exceeding 1,000, although the scale of
new development was sufficient to outweigh this.
Type of dwellings
2.109 As part of its monitoring of new residential developments, the city
council records the split between houses and apartments. The table
below shows gross completions by type between 2003 and 2011. The
data for 2003 to 2008 relates only to new build dwellings, whilst the
2008 to 2011 data includes new build and gross additions changes of
use / conversion schemes.
48
Year
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Houses
Apartments
Total
dwellings
Number
% of total
Number
% of total
398
37.2
673
62.8
1,071
513
32.4
1,072
67.6
1,585
242
21.9
862
78.1
1,104
410
18.9
1,754
81.1
2,164
671
24.3
2,095
75.7
2,766
258
12.8
1754
87.2
2,012
102
11.7
770
88.3
872
400
47.6
440
52.4
840
Total
2,994
24.1
9,420
75.9
12,414
Average
per annum
374
24.1
1,178
75.9
1,552
2.110 Just over three-quarters of the new dwellings provided in Salford since
2003 have been apartments. The proportion of apartments was slightly
lower in 2003-2005, before peaking at 87-88% in 2008-2010. However,
in 2010-2011 there was a much more even balance between houses
and apartments.
2.111 As well as the overall split between the completion of houses and
apartments, the council also records the number of bedrooms in each
completed development, as shown below.
Gross completions by type and size 2003-2011 (new build only 2003-2008,
new build and changes of use/conversions 2008-11)
Houses
3
4+
Bed
Bed
25
1
1
Bed
0
2
Bed
15
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
3
0
12
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
0
2
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95
44
0
5
2
23
14
341
3
29
74
1
2
25
1
158
272
0
60
30
37
31
60
106
72
162
123
10
63
16
Barton
Apartments
2
3
4+
Bed
Bed
Bed
133
3
0
41
1
Bed
29
6
21
2
19
0
232
160
4
82
4
3
59
15
1
2
155
3
14
84
27
485
478
4
148
36
63
104
417
110
103
391
127
26
172
44
190
37
1
37
0
141
14
101
2
2,071
54
5
40
17
5
416
170
69
464
31
277
105
223
58
2,826
283
84
150
185
148
16
0
0
4
0
7
17
0
0
120
0
1
1
0
7
Total
49
165
Total
200311
206
0
21
42
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
622
207
70
506
31
425
136
324
60
5,017
337
90
191
202
160
1,107
685
74
654
67
488
240
741
170
5,120
728
217
217
374
204
Total
Houses
3
4+
Bed
Bed
2
Bed
Weaste &
Seedley
1
3
33
2
39
186
384
67
Winton
Worsley
TOTAL
Central Salford
Salford West
1
0
9
2
7
27
8
712
505
207
70
12
1,352
391
961
1
66
921
317
604
99
86
2,994
1,215
1,779
24
2
2,958
2,704
254
100
90
6,215
4,300
1,915
0
3
246
227
19
Total
1
Bed
2
Bed
Apartments
3
4+
Bed
Bed
1
Bed
Total
Total
200311
0
637
676
0
0
1
0
1
124
95
9,420
7,231
2,189
223
181
12,414
8,446
3,968
2.112 Between 2003 and 2011 there was a reasonably even balance
between houses and apartments in the supply of new dwellings in
Salford West (45%/55%), whereas in Central Salford the supply was
much more dominated by apartments (86% of new dwellings). More
than half of the new dwellings in Central Salford were two bedroom
apartments, and almost one-third were one bedroom apartments.
Although a relatively small proportion of houses was provided, 42% of
those houses were two bedroom dwellings, leading to a predominance
of smaller properties in the supply of new dwellings in Central Salford.
In contrast, there were relatively few one bedroom apartments and two
bedroom houses provided in Salford West, with the supply tending
towards larger properties (two bedroom apartments and three/four
bedroom houses).
2.113 As noted above, Ordsall had by far the highest supply of new dwellings
in the city, and 98% of those dwellings were apartments. Other wards
with a high proportion of apartments (and where there has been a
reasonably large number of completions) include Weaste and Seedley
(94%), Irwell Riverside (87%) and Eccles (77%). The main locations for
new houses were Broughton (485 houses, which also saw a
reasonably high level of apartment development), Cadishead (478),
Langworthy (417 houses, although 82% of these were two bedroom)
and Pendlebury (391).
Step 2.2: Stock condition
2.114 As noted in the DCLG SHMA Practice Guidance, as well as the number
of new properties, overall supply is influenced by general wear and
tear. A residential property only fulfils its purpose if it addresses the
requirements of those that live in it by meeting minimum quality
standards. The concept of Decent Homes is useful in the consideration
of the standard of the existing stock.
2.115 In order for homes to be considered “decent” they must meet the
following four criteria:
50
2.116 Part A: Homes must meet the statutory minimum standard for housing,
the underlying principles of which are that any residential premises
should provide a safe and healthy environment for any potential
occupier or visitor. Dwellings which fail to meet this category are those
containing one or more hazards assessed as serious under Category 1
of the Housing, Health and Safety Ratings System (HHSRS). The
HHSRS has 29 hazards which are grouped as follows:
• Psychological requirements
• Protection against infection
• Protection against accidents
2.117 Part B fails: Dwellings should be in a reasonable state of repair.
Dwellings which fail to meet this part of the Decent Homes Criteria are
where: one or more of the key building components are old, and
because of their condition need replacing or major repair; or two or
more of the other building components are old and, because of their
condition need replacing or major repair.
2.118 Part C fails: Dwellings should have reasonably modern facilities and
services. Dwellings that fail to meet this criterion are those which lack
three or more of the following:
• A reasonably modern kitchen (20 years old or less)
• A kitchen with adequate space and layout
• A reasonably modern bathroom (30 years old or less)
• An appropriately located bathroom and WC
• Adequate insulation against external noise (where external noise is
a problem)
• Adequate size and layout of common areas for blocks of flats.
2.119 A home lacking two or fewer of the above is still classed as decent,
therefore it is not necessary to modernise kitchens and bathrooms if a
home meets the remaining criteria.
2.120 Part D fails: Dwellings should provide a reasonable degree of thermal
comfort. This criterion requires dwellings to have both effective
insulation and efficient heating. Efficient heating is defined as:
• Any gas or oil programmable central heating, or
• Electric storage heaters; or
• Warm air systems; or
• Under floor systems; or
• Programmable LPG/solid fuel central heating; or
• Similarly efficient heating which are to be developed in the future.
2.121 Effective insulation is defined as:
• For dwelling with gas/oil programmable heating, cavity, wall
insulation (if there are cavity walls that can be insulated effectively)
or at least 50mm loft insulation. (If there is loft space) is an effective
purchase of insulation, and
51
•
For dwellings heated by electric storage
heaters/LGP/programmable solid fuel central heating a higher
specification of insulation is required at least 200mm of loft
insulation (if there is a loft) and cavity wall insulation.
Decency in private sector housing
2.122 The 2010 Salford City Council Private Sector House Condition Survey3
was conducted in order to produce a comprehensive review of the
current condition of private dwellings across the city. It also included
some dwellings owned by Registered Social Landlords (i.e. in the
social rented sector), but dwellings owned/managed by City West
Housing Trust and Salix Homes were excluded from the sample. The
survey was based on 1,300 questionnaire responses, providing a 1%
confidence interval for citywide figures (with 5-7% confidence intervals
for individual areas). It adopted a tiered approach to sampling, meaning
that more surveys were undertaken in those areas where non-decency
in private sector dwellings was considered to be a particular issue.
2.123 The key findings of the for Salford’s private housing stock are as
follows:
• The overall Decent Homes failure level is 20.9%. The national
average taken from the English House Survey 2008 (latest figures
available) is significantly higher at 35.8%.
• 24.9% of all privately rented properties fail the Decent Homes
Standard in Salford compared with 45.4% nationally.
• In the owner occupier sector 19.6% (11,666) homes were non
decent, of these 26.3% (3,068) were occupied by vulnerable
households.
• 32.7% of private dwellings in Salford are deemed to contain
vulnerable households (households in receipt of a means tested
benefit)
• 25.3% of households in Salford are in fuel poverty, which means
they spend more than 10% of their earnings on fuel to heat homes.
2.124 The table below sets out more detailed findings by ward. It can be seen
that the highest levels of Decent Homes failure are in Barton (42%),
Eccles (35%), Langworthy (32%) and Kersal (32%).
3
“Salford City Council Private Sector House Condition Survey 2010: Final Report” – Michael
Dyson associates ltd (July 2011)
52
Ward Summary Findings
Source: Salford City Council Private Sector Stock Condition Survey (2010), Table E2.1, Page xi
Notes
Vulnerable households: vulnerability has been taken as those households that are in receipt of at least one of the principal means-tested or disability-related
benefits. These being:
• Income Support
• Housing Benefit
53
• Council Tax Benefit
• Disabled Person Tax Credit
• Income Based Job Seekers Allowance
• Working Families Tax Credit
• Attendance Allowance
• Disability Living Allowance
• Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit
• War Disablement Benefit
• Child Tax Credit
• Working Tax Credit
• Pension Credit
Households in fuel poverty: Households in fuel poverty are those who spend more
than 10% of their income on fuel to heat their homes.
2.125 The overall cost to rectify the Decent Homes failures is just over £36m,
an average of £2,023 per failing property.
Decency in social rented housing
2.126 As of 1 April 2011 Salix Homes was responsible for managing 10,565
local authority dwellings on behalf of the city council. The 2011
Business Plan Statistical Appendix which is a statistical return that the
city council / Salix Homes make to DCLG, records the change in the
number of non-decent local authority dwellings, and data from this is
shown in the table below.
Dwellings
made decent
during
2010/11
Salford
Dwellings
received work
to prevent
non-decency
in 2010/11
708
334
Dwellings
becoming
non-decent
during
2010/11
505
Number of
non-decent
dwellings
01/04/11
5,067
2.127 As the above table shows, 708 dwellings were made decent between 1
April 2010 and 31 March 2011. However, a significant number of
dwellings either became non-decent during or needed work to prevent
non-decency in 2010/11. Having regard to the total level of stock, as of
1 April 2011, 47.96% of the local authority stock in Salford was nondecent.
2.128 The 2011 Business Plan Statistical Appendix also contains details as to
the expenditure needed to make all non-decent dwellings decent. This
is shown in the table below.
Salford
Expenditure in £000s
Money spent Spent
Costs arising
making
preventing
from dwellings
dwellings
non-decency becoming nondecent in
in 2010/11
decent in
2010/11
2010/11
10,940
1,053
6,238
54
Cost to
make all
dwellings
decent at
01/04/2011
61,604
2.129 As the table above shows, over £10m was spent on making nondecent homes decent in 2010/11, equating to around £15,500 per
property. The total cost as of 1 April 2011 to make all non-decent
homes decent is estimated at £61.6m, which is £12,158 per property. It
is forecast that by 2015 there will be no non-decent local authority
dwellings with Salix Homes having secured £51.8m from the
government to improve social rented homes between 2011 and 2015,
with £10.5m for 2011/12. £12m will be available in 2012/13, a further
£12m in 2013/14, and £17.3m in 2014/15. This amount is in addition to
the £5m secured in July 2010 after Salix Homes was rated as 'good'
with 'excellent prospects for improvement' by the Audit Commission.
2.130 14,615 former local authority properties are in the ownership of City
West Housing Trust, following a transfer of ownership to them in
October 2008. At transfer, 47.5% of the homes were non-decent, but
this has since been reduced to around 35% (leaving 5,115 non-decent
dwellings).
2.131 The value of investment works that has been delivered by City West on
an annual basis since transfer is as follows:
• From transfer to March 2009 £5.78m
• April 2009 - March 2010
£37.03m
• April 2010 - March 2011
£47.99m
• Predicted 2011/2012
48.67m
2.132 The total anticipated 5-year cost of achieving full decency by March
2014 is £223m. Going forward there will be ongoing investment costs
of maintaining decency, where properties are due to become nondecent.
Step 2.3: Shared housing and communal establishments
2.133 The Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) identifies the
number of dwellings that are officially classed as houses in multiple
occupation (HMOs). The HSSA figures for HMOs include the following:
• All HMOs that are required to be licenced under the 2004 Housing
Act (ie. all properties with three or more storeys, five or more people
and two or more households)
• HMOs that do not require to be licenced under the Housing Act but
are required to be licenced under Selective Licensing powers.
Areas of Salford where these powers exist include parts of Seedley
and Langworthy, Broughton, and Kersal/Charlestown
• An estimate of the number of other HMOs that do not need to be
licenced
2.134 The table below shows the number of houses in multiple occupation
between 2006 and 2011, according to the HSSA.
55
As at 1
Total number
HMOs as a %
April:
of HMOs
Total dwellings
of total stock
2006
1,410
101,789
1.39
2007
1,652
101,591
1.63
2008
1,445
104,325
1.39
2009
1,550
106,330
1.46
2010
1,550
106,717
1.45
2011
1,488
108,804
1.37
Source: Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix returns, 2006-2011
2.135 It can be seen that the stock of HMOs is reasonably steady, at just
under 1.5% of all dwellings in the city. The main concentrations of
known HMOs are in Broughton (around the Cliff area) and in parts of
Langworthy and Weaste and Seedley.
2.136 As well as HMOs there will inevitably be other shared housing that falls
outside this category.
Stage 3 - The active housing market
2.137 The DCLG Guidance (page 25) requires that this section of the SHMA
“should analyse indicators of housing market activity to improve
understanding about changes in demand over time and identify
pressure points within the area. The key aim is to identify evidence of
failing markets, such as volatile or unresponsive markets”.
2.138 As part of understanding the active housing market the DCLG
Guidance requires that analysis should include consideration of: the
cost of buying or renting a property; affordability; overcrowding and
under-occupation; vacancies; available supply; and turnover. This
evidence should then be brought together looking at the key trends and
drivers in the market and consideration of the issues these will have on
future policy / strategy.
Step 3.1: the cost of buying or renting a property
House prices
2.139 The first table below identifies the average dwelling sales prices in
Salford over the period April 2003 to March 2010. The following two
tables then provide separate figures for houses and apartments. Care
needs to be taken when interpreting this data as the figures for
individual wards can be skewed significantly by one or two new
housing developments, or by a small number of high or low value
properties if there is low turnover in the local market. This is particularly
the case for the separate figures for houses and apartments.
2.140 It can be seen that, during this period, overall dwelling sales price
growth in the city averaged around 40% with relatively little difference
56
between Central Salford and Salford West. However, there was
significant variety between different wards with no real discernible
pattern. Some of the higher value areas which would typically be
considered “high demand” actually had below average price increases,
such as Walkden South (10%), Boothstown and Ellenbrook (18%),
Worsley (23%) and Swinton South (37%), whilst Claremont had a more
significant increase (52%). Proportionate dwelling sales price growth
was actually much greater in some of the more deprived areas, such
as Broughton (124%) and Langworthy (66%), which may reflect the
scale of investment in regeneration projects, new high quality housing
developments and the very low sales prices at the start of the period.
However, there were some low price areas that saw little sales price
growth, such as Irwell Riverside (4%) and Little Hulton (9%).
2.141 In terms of Irwell Riverside, the separate data for houses and
apartments indicates that price growth for houses was actually very
high (83%) but the average for the area was reduced significantly by a
decline in apartment prices (19%). Across the city as a whole, price
growth for houses was significantly greater than apartment price
growth (53% compared to 12%), and this appears to be partly down to
apartment values reducing more rapidly than house values since the
market peak in 2007/8. The contrast is particularly stark in Central
Salford, where price growth for houses was 82% compared to 10% for
apartments. Ordsall is another ward where the growth in sales prices of
houses and apartments was significantly different, with a 62% growth
in house prices but only a 7% increase in apartment prices. The latter
may reflect the very significant increase in the supply of apartments in
the area during this period, as discussed above.
57
Average dwelling sales price (April 2003-March 2010). Source: Land Registry
2003/04
£65,542
2004/05
£87,557
2005/06
£89,774
2006/07
£101,775
2007/08
£111,267
2008/09
£100,046
2009/10
£91,564
Average
20032010
£90,485
£154,232
£48,206
£84,634
£89,463
£124,286
£82,124
£93,690
£98,852
£58,384
£70,288
£109,690
£99,406
£76,114
£84,171
£63,633
£105,150
£169,896
£74,015
£114,345
£116,508
£142,805
£108,491
£78,062
£120,750
£83,345
£79,406
£156,945
£125,457
£98,486
£107,069
£85,244
£126,858
£184,557
£99,162
£114,748
£117,921
£169,159
£115,697
£86,745
£147,271
£74,821
£92,389
£147,064
£121,287
£112,808
£118,525
£104,399
£129,513
£189,589
£130,498
£130,943
£133,523
£170,062
£129,413
£105,538
£152,724
£93,146
£93,737
£142,148
£129,155
£112,395
£121,484
£109,764
£148,959
£197,321
£135,417
£131,049
£140,483
£178,520
£135,608
£130,176
£181,002
£109,664
£102,282
£157,157
£135,100
£114,410
£124,498
£106,608
£157,411
£190,360
£137,873
£114,414
£134,343
£175,380
£135,201
£104,951
£202,791
£113,743
£97,862
£151,446
£116,593
£110,205
£122,689
£95,669
£141,309
£181,501
£107,920
£117,593
£136,382
£176,093
£134,060
£97,670
£176,132
£96,746
£76,786
£124,750
£111,233
£109,740
£115,012
£84,726
£115,571
£178,640
£102,081
£116,219
£120,818
£162,703
£117,203
£99,003
£146,134
£89,261
£86,808
£145,297
£120,929
£103,638
£111,888
£93,831
£132,299
17.7%
123.9%
38.9%
52.4%
41.7%
63.2%
4.2%
78.2%
65.7%
9.2%
13.7%
11.9%
44.2%
36.6%
33.1%
9.9%
-8.0%
-20.3%
-10.3%
-2.9%
-1.4%
-1.1%
-25.0%
-2.7%
-11.8%
-24.9%
-20.6%
-17.7%
-4.1%
-7.6%
-20.5%
-26.6%
£68,013
£67,859
£194,771
£89,770
£85,097
£246,880
£98,585
£100,882
£240,550
£109,113
£104,429
£241,161
£123,961
£113,938
£259,495
£113,570
£106,925
£234,653
£113,539
£103,872
£239,480
£99,336
£95,615
£236,198
66.9%
53.1%
23.0%
-8.4%
-8.8%
-7.7%
Central Salford
Salford West
£83,188
£96,684
£105,068
£121,478
£116,021
£128,788
£130,440
£137,371
£143,766
£143,216
£137,112
£136,714
£119,366
£135,336
£119,185
£126,773
43.5%
40.0%
-17.0%
-5.5%
City average
£91,206
£114,829
£123,336
£134,354
£143,468
£136,916
£127,903
£123,464
40.2%
-10.8%
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
58
% change
between 2003
and 2010
39.7%
% Change at
2009/10 from
peak (2007/08)
-17.7%
Average sales price of houses (April 2003-March 2010). Source: Land Registry
2003/04
£65,947
2004/05
£88,252
2005/06
£90,684
2006/07
£102,456
2007/08
£114,716
2008/09
£99,708
2009/10
£91,874
Average
20032010
£91,095
£154,996
£48,451
£84,816
£88,436
£130,565
£82,188
£48,052
£116,391
£48,212
£71,052
£82,864
£104,528
£77,520
£84,370
£64,652
£105,878
£187,449
£74,063
£115,015
£118,593
£149,099
£108,382
£61,574
£144,197
£64,401
£80,090
£102,160
£127,197
£99,838
£105,751
£84,659
£128,471
£187,939
£99,453
£118,436
£118,646
£184,747
£115,575
£71,151
£185,673
£64,671
£91,595
£111,564
£123,818
£113,286
£119,193
£102,200
£133,372
£191,634
£121,360
£135,971
£135,260
£200,208
£129,068
£89,642
£196,305
£90,542
£91,248
£133,862
£129,843
£112,719
£122,370
£109,543
£154,313
£204,192
£136,875
£136,989
£144,081
£218,072
£135,566
£104,045
£212,504
£106,157
£103,126
£127,471
£139,955
£115,379
£125,189
£106,507
£162,942
£192,227
£149,151
£122,128
£134,343
£209,275
£135,461
£93,349
£238,122
£110,505
£98,314
£145,731
£124,682
£113,145
£122,848
£97,223
£150,000
£181,501
£115,439
£119,785
£136,382
£206,282
£134,639
£87,975
£185,268
£94,096
£78,074
£134,010
£116,521
£113,015
£117,242
£85,356
£121,421
£183,725
£98,628
£118,241
£122,581
£183,776
£117,138
£74,482
£174,518
£82,371
£86,503
£115,713
£124,633
£104,663
£112,011
£92,460
£135,308
17.1%
138.3%
41.2%
54.2%
58.0%
63.8%
83.1%
59.2%
95.2%
9.9%
61.7%
11.5%
45.8%
39.0%
32.0%
14.7%
-11.1%
-15.7%
-12.6%
-5.3%
-5.4%
-0.7%
-15.4%
-12.8%
-11.4%
-24.3%
5.1%
-16.7%
-2.0%
-6.3%
-19.9%
-25.5%
£66,940
£67,648
£206,561
£86,147
£86,316
£255,888
£99,375
£96,932
£253,785
£114,479
£105,938
£251,166
£127,242
£115,507
£280,843
£114,084
£107,334
£258,443
£112,136
£104,154
£251,501
£98,936
£95,963
£249,659
67.5%
54.0%
21.8%
-11.9%
-9.8%
-10.4%
Central Salford
Salford West
£67,513
£97,965
£87,482
£123,565
£101,042
£131,645
£121,890
£141,142
£133,553
£147,841
£132,898
£142,111
£122,721
£140,455
£104,977
£129,409
81.8%
43.4%
-8.1%
-5.0%
City average
£88,494
£112,528
£121,300
£135,678
£143,306
£138,777
£135,518
£121,780
53.1%
-5.4%
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
59
% change
between 2003
and 2010
39.3%
% Change at
2009/10 from
peak (2007/08)
-19.9%
Average apartment sales price (April 2003-March 2010). Source: Land Registry
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Average
20032010
£80,933
% change
between 2003
and 2010
68.4%
% Change at
2009/10 from
peak (2007/08)
n/a
535.1%
28.1%
n/a
-7.4%
12.3%
-18.7%
117.7%
5.0%
21.8%
6.7%
13.5%
18.1%
24.5%
49.5%
13.0%
n/a
-24.3%
-44.2%
n/a
-30.1%
-33.9%
-33.1%
18.0%
-21.7%
-39.8%
-22.2%
-23.6%
-30.0%
-15.0%
-33.3%
-35.1%
2003/04
£51,870
2004/05
£77,333
2005/06
£73,400
2006/07
£76,500
2007/08
£90,044
2008/09
£108,988
2009/10
£87,333
£61,000
£15,500
£45,000
£97,117
£104,680
£80,141
£126,288
£75,369
£95,860
£38,167
£116,025
£82,150
£65,716
£81,839
£47,838
£76,658
£92,106
£61,950
£29,975
£109,020
£128,274
£109,595
£116,903
£87,445
£123,289
£59,325
£165,881
£88,381
£83,261
£164,000
£89,683
£100,371
£113,125
£30,000
£105,944
£106,323
£141,495
£117,690
£121,832
£97,958
£111,439
£97,150
£150,507
£110,394
£109,370
£88,988
£111,286
£103,120
£117,333
£240,659
£113,904
£98,500
£121,743
£134,118
£124,825
£116,770
£113,978
£106,247
£142,609
£123,905
£109,439
£116,371
£110,499
£98,095
£91,145
£129,960
£103,381
£100,711
£138,759
£136,254
£153,358
£139,105
£128,566
£77,250
£159,117
£121,977
£110,798
£119,861
£107,214
£133,443
£116,625
£120,863
£80,383
£98,441
£57,667
£102,862
£123,125
£128,816
£141,678
£138,207
£63,500
£151,809
£100,222
£78,714
£118,333
£73,600
£102,203
£96,950
£90,000
£102,655
£164,081
£100,696
£46,500
£123,781
£93,217
£77,591
£101,897
£71,500
£86,646
£96,158
£124,560
£104,458
£103,709
£125,660
£118,353
£127,542
£110,336
£114,759
£90,804
£147,986
£105,326
£96,250
£110,586
£101,538
£107,859
£69,975
£68,824
£129,127
£94,023
£77,367
£129,778
£96,008
£109,973
£149,865
£94,275
£95,007
£168,709
£118,660
£106,358
£176,529
£113,213
£89,975
£127,600
£114,151
£94,175
£121,267
£99,913
£93,854
£148,808
63.1%
36.8%
-6.1%
-3.8%
-11.5%
-31.3%
Central Salford
Salford West
£106,597
£84,268
£130,171
£100,631
£135,938
£114,538
£136,995
£116,970
£151,751
£124,787
£141,005
£101,346
£117,177
£93,435
£133,740
£110,330
9.9%
10.9%
-22.8%
-25.1%
City average
£100,915
£122,938
£128,597
£131,720
£143,750
£133,111
£113,113
£127,522
12.1%
-21.3%
60
-3.0%
2.142 The following table compares recent dwelling sales price changes
across Greater Manchester, and with the regional and national
averages. These figures provide an indication of how different parts of
the conurbation have faired in very recent economic circumstances,
whereas the previous tables for Salford offered a longer term view of
price changes.
Quarterly change
Annual change
(2010 Q4 to 2011
(2010 Q1 to 2011
Q1)
Q1)
Area
Actual
%
Actual
%
Bolton
£7,566
5.8%
£9,253
7.2%
Bury
£5,157
3.6% £11,077
8.1%
Manchester -£5,605
-3.8%
£8,582
6.5%
Oldham
-£16,345
-12.6% -£9,821
-8.0%
Rochdale
-£5,487
-4.5% -£3,796
-3.2%
Salford
-£6,684
-4.9% -£2,472
-1.9%
Stockport
-£5,722
-2.9%
-£758
-0.4%
Tameside
-£972
-0.8%
£747
0.6%
Trafford
-£5,871
-2.2% -£3,836
-1.5%
Wigan
-£4,081
-3.3% -£5,606
-4.5%
City Centre
MSP
-£13,408
£498
-8.3%
0.4%
£7,149
£8,131
Change since
market peak*
Actual
-£8,975
-£7,745
-£17,629
-£25,921
-£18,889
-£17,621
-£12,881
-£24,928
-£5,871
-£15,015
%
-6.1%
-5.0%
-11.1%
-18.6%
-14.1%
-12.1%
-6.4%
-17.1%
-2.2%
-11.1%
5.1% -£37,338
7.5% -£18,465
-20.2%
-13.7%
Greater
Manchester -£4,378
-2.9%
£1,083
0.7% -£10,145
-6.4%
North West
-£3,200
-2.7% -£5,480
-4.6% -£22,802
-16.6%
England
and Wales
-£1,166
-0.7% -£2,953
-1.8% -£21,044
-11.5%
MSP = Manchester Salford Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder area
* = Market peak is defined as the highest quarterly average value achieved
between 2002 and 2011
Source: Land Registry
2.143 Sales prices in Salford have seen a slightly greater reduction than the
sub-regional and national comparators, although not significantly so.
The picture for both the Manchester/Salford City Centre and the former
housing market renewal pathfinder area is mixed, with a significant
reduction since the peak but a relatively high level of sales price growth
over the last year.
House prices and sales value areas
2.144 The above data from the Land Registry on recorded sales values for
residential units does not provide details on the floorspace of the units.
It is therefore difficult to make direct comparisons between areas, as
part of the difference in sales prices may be due to the size and type of
dwellings rather than their location.
61
2.145 As a result, data has been assembled on the average sales value per
square metre of residential floorspace in different parts of the city. This
has used residential asking prices from Rightmove4 and housing
developer websites to approximate sales values, as dwelling floorplans
are generally readily available from these sources to help calculate
values per square metre. Identifying the floorspaces for dwellings for
which actual sales values are known is often not possible.
2.146 The city was initially split into 33 sub-areas to simplify the data
collection process, with those areas defined on the basis that they each
have reasonably common characteristics although inevitably there are
some significant differences within them. Some of these sub-areas
have subsequently been split into smaller areas as a result of the
analysis.
2.147 The review appraised over 300 residential properties across the city
being marketed for sale as at July 2011, and largely focused on new
build residential developments or modern housing developments (that
have been completed within the past 20 years). This approach was
taken because of the greater relevance to the consideration of issues
surrounding the provision of new housing to meet varied market needs,
the greater availability of information for such properties, and to help
maximise the consistency of the type of properties compared, For
areas of the city where there were a limited number of new build
developments or modern housing developments, the asking price
values for older dwellings were utilised.
2.148 This detailed analysis has identified a significant range of asking price
values across the city, ranging from £1,000 per sqm to £5,165 per sqm
of net internal floorspace. These asking price values per square metre
of floorspace have been, using the 33 sub-areas as a basis, and clear
patterns can be identified with particular spatial areas having broadly
similar values.
2.149 On this basis, five broad residential sales value areas have been
identified:
• Over £3,000 per sqm (relating to the Regional Centre within the
inner relief route, and Salford Quays)
• Between £2,600 and £3,000 per sqm (relating to Worsley, South
Swinton, and Chat Moss)
• Between £2,200 and £2,600 per sqm (relating to Broughton Park,
Chapel Street / The Crescent, Exchange Quay, Ellesmere Park and
Monton, Boothstown, Ellenbrook, and South Walkden)
• Between £1,800 and £2,200 per sqm (relating to Trinity, Ordsall,
Claremont, Eccles and Peel Green, Irlam and Cadishead, Swinton,
Pendlebury and Agecroft, and North Walkden)
4
http://www.rightmove.co.uk
62
•
Between £1,400 and £1,800 per sqm (relating to Higher and Lower
Broughton, Charlestown and Lower Kersal, Pendleton, Weaste,
Seedley and Langworthy and Little Hulton)
2.150 Inevitably there are still potentially some significant differences within
these areas, but they give a good indication of the distribution of
residential values across the city. Where there are considerable
deviations, they tend to be higher rather than lower than the values
stated.
2.151 The plan below identifies the boundaries of these sales value areas:
63
64
2.152 The table below identifies the number of existing properties in each of
these value areas, and the proportion of all dwellings in the city that this
accounts for.
Value area
£1,400-£1,800 per m2
£1,800-£2,200 per m2
£2,200-£2,600 per m2
£2,600-£3,000 per m2
Over £3,000 per m2
Number of
dwellings
30,478
53,516
15,801
5,759
3,850
% of city
total
27.86
48.91
14.44
5.26
3.52
Total
109,411
100.00
Source: December 2011 Council Tax Records and July 2011 Residential
Sales Value Plan
Note: Total does not add up precisely as 7 dwellings were not assigned to a
value area.
2.153 It can be seen that almost half of Salford’s properties are within the
£1,800 to £2,200 per square metre price bracket. Looking at the wider
context, this price bracket covers dwellings that are around or just
below the average price overall for the city, Greater Manchester and
the North West region as a whole. It therefore reflects what could be
considered relatively typical housing areas within Greater Manchester,
particularly perhaps for the northern half of the conurbation.
2.154 A significant proportion (28%) of the city’s housing is in the low cost
areas (£1,400 to £1,800 per square metre), which also tend to be the
areas with the largest concentrations of social housing. These are
clustered together in Central Salford, just outside the Regional Centre,
except in the case of Little Hulton in the north-west corner of the city.
2.155 Although the £2,200 to £2,600 per square metre price bracket is the
middle of the value area categories identified, in practice it reflects
areas that have slightly above average house prices within the subregional and regional context. This accounts for a reasonably
significant proportion of the city’s housing supply, at more than 14%.
The other two price brackets offer housing at significantly higher than
average prices, but in terms of the existing overall supply in the city
collectively only account for less than 9% of all dwellings. Nevertheless,
these are an important part of the supply of housing in Salford, and
help to diversify the type and value of accommodation that is available
within the city.
Council Tax bands
2.156 Sales prices inevitably only provide data relating to a relatively small
proportion of housing in the city, and will be skewed somewhat towards
65
new additions to the dwelling stock. As such the Council Tax banding
of all properties provides a more general indication of the values of all
housing in the city. All properties in England are put into a valuation
band based on their value on 1 April 1991 for the purposes of Council
Tax. These bandings are set out in the table below, which also shows
what the equivalent house price value is at Q4 2012 for each band
using the Nationwide House Price Calculator.
Council tax valuation
bands
A
B
Range of values on 1
Equivalent values, Q4
April 1991
2012
Up to £40,000
Up to £97,128
Over £40,000 and up to Over £97,128 and up to
£52,000
£126,267
C
Over £52,000 and up to Over £126,267 and up
£68,000
to £165,118
D
£88,000
to £213,682
E
£120,000
to £291,384
F
Over £120,000 and up
to £160,000
to £388,513
G
to £320,000
to £777,025
H
Over £320,000
Over £777,025
Source: Equivalent values Q4 2012 – Nationwide House Price Calculator,
North West region.
2.157 Having regard to the banding of properties based on values at 1 April
1991, the following table shows the proportion of properties in Salford
that fall within each band as at December 2011.
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Total
dwellings
6,088
@
0.1
A
68.9
B
21.7
3,982
6,660
4,648
4,410
5,633
4,096
5,537
5,020
7,124
5,788
8,896
5,665
5,331
4,833
5,515
4,633
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1
0.2
0.2
7.2
75.8
55.0
20.7
45.3
47.0
76.0
44.0
88.2
81.9
41.9
52.3
51.8
39.8
73.9
31.8
13.4
15.2
22.4
34.4
19.3
30.1
17.5
16.9
8.0
11.7
25.6
23.1
28.9
36.3
16.3
19.9
66
Council Tax Band
C
D
E
7.9
1.1
0.1
33.5
5.6
12.3
33.4
14.5
17.7
3.7
12.6
1.7
3.9
14.7
15.2
16.2
18.1
7.0
26.1
18.7
1.5
7.7
7.6
9.7
4.0
2.4
10.0
1.1
1.8
13.0
5.3
2.7
4.3
2.3
17.0
17.5
1.0
1.9
2.7
5.7
0.9
0.1
9.6
0.7
0.5
3.9
2.8
0.2
0.8
0.2
3.5
F
0.1
G
0.0
H
0.0
6.8
0.6
0.3
0.8
3.4
0.2
0.0
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.6
1.0
0.1
0.4
0.0
1.3
2.9
0.2
0.1
0.2
1.9
0.0
0.0
3.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Total
dwellings
5,606
5,484
4,462
@
0.1
0.2
0.0
A
58.9
64.9
5.1
B
21.6
21.7
15.8
Council Tax Band
C
D
E
12.7
5.3
1.1
10.4
2.2
0.4
26.7
22.3
11.5
F
0.2
0.1
9.6
G
0.0
0.1
8.0
H
0.1
0.0
0.9
43,253
66,158
0.1
0.1
59.4
50.2
19.4
21.5
11.2
15.3
0.7
1.6
0.5
0.9
0.1
0.1
Total
109,411 0.1
53.9
20.7
13.6
6.7
3.0
1.3
@ = Application of Council Tax reduction for disabled people changes the band of the
property, and results in some Band A properties effectively having no band
Source: Salford City Council, Council Tax records
0.8
0.1
Area
Weaste & Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
6.0
7.1
2.6
3.2
2.158 Overall, just under 75% of properties in the city are in Bands A or B,
indicating a high supply of lower price dwellings (ie. less than £126,267
on average Q4 sales values). The proportion is lower in Salford West
than Central Salford, but not significantly so. Several wards have
particularly high concentrations of these lower cost properties, such as
Langworthy (96%), Little Hulton (94%), Irwell Riverside (94%),
Broughton (91%), Barton (91%) and Walkden North (90%). The city as
a whole has a low proportion of higher cost properties, in Band D and
above (ie. £165,118 at current prices), at 12%, and again there is little
difference between Central Salford and Salford West. Nevertheless,
there are some parts of the city that have a relatively high proportion of
such properties, including Worsley (52%), Boothstown and Ellenbrook
(46%), Kersal (27%), Walkden South (22%) and Eccles (21%).
Rental market
2.159 The following two tables show the average private sector rents for
houses and apartments in Salford, Manchester and the rest of the
conurbation, and how this has changed recently. Rent increases in
Salford over the period October 2010 to October 2011 were higher in
Salford than in Manchester and the rest of Greater Manchester for all
types and size of property, which would suggest a relative increase in
demand. Rental growth appears particularly strong in the apartment
market, where it has been around 10% for studios, one bedroom and
two bedroom accommodation. This is the type of property that has
dominated the supply of new dwellings in Salford in recent years.
Average rents for these sizes of apartment are above the Greater
Manchester average, as indeed they are for smaller houses, whereas
rents in Salford for larger houses of three and four bedrooms are below
the conurbation average.
Size
2 bed
Area
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Average asking rents for houses
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
£510
£527
£17
3.3%
£540
£546
£6
1.0%
£495
£507
£12
2.5%
67
Size
3 bed
4 bed
Size
Studios
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
Area
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Greater Manchester
average
Area
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Average asking rents for houses
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
£487
£488
£1
0.1%
£627
£697
£681
£656
£637
£701
£652
£622
£11
£4
-£29
£34
1.7%
0.5%
-4.3%
-5.2%
£983
£1,050
£1,013
£1,073
£998
£1,016
£880
£991
£15
-£33
-£133
-£82
1.5%
-3.2%
-13.1%
-7.7%
Average asking rents for apartments
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
£449
£493
£44
9.9%
£405
£419
£14
3.4%
£437
£440
£3
0.7%
£571
£589
£18
3.1%
£419
£12
3.0%
£407
£476
£494
£470
£622
£454
£526
£529
£510
£661
£476
£50
£35
£40
£39
£22
10.5%
7.1%
8.4%
6.3%
4.8%
£476
£494
£470
£622
£454
£526
£529
£510
£661
£476
£50
£35
£40
£39
£22
10.5%
7.1%
8.4%
6.3%
4.8%
£694
£1,031
£782
£1,420
£949
£844
£1,133
£872
£1,445
£917
£150
£102
£90
£25
-£32
21.6%
9.9%
11.5%
1.8%
-3.4%
Source: Vizzihome
2.160 The next two tables show the number of private sector houses and
apartments that have been advertised for rent, and how this has
changed over a recent twelve month period. The number of houses
being advertised has been reasonably steady in Salford, except for two
bedroom properties where it has increased. In contrast, Manchester
68
and the Pathfinder area have seen very significant reductions in the
number of houses of all sizes being advertised. As with Greater
Manchester as a whole, the number of apartments in Salford
advertised for rent has declined, although again not to the extent seen
in Manchester and the Pathfinder area.
Size
2 bed
3 bed
4 bed
Size
Studios
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
Area
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
Greater Manchester
average
Area
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Greater Manchester
average
Salford
Manchester
Pathfinder area
City Centre
Number of houses advertised
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
116
147
31
26.7%
311
172
-139 -44.7%
252
167
-85 -33.7%
1,879
2,009
130
6.9%
148
518
310
1,768
145
319
198
1,829
-3
-199
-112
61
-2.0%
-38.4%
-36.1%
3.5%
40
419
274
810
38
122
69
492
-2
-297
-205
-318
-5.0%
-70.9%
-74.8%
-39.3%
Number of apartments advertised
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
34
31
-3
-8.8%
97
58
-39 -40.2%
68
57
-11 -16.2%
29
19
-10 -34.5%
173
146
-27 -15.6%
228
620
428
215
1,505
206
441
335
186
1,220
-22
-179
-93
-29
-285
-9.6%
-28.9%
-21.7%
-13.5%
-18.9%
457
882
580
329
2,430
430
762
550
309
2,364
-27
-120
-30
-20
-66
-5.9%
-13.6%
-5.2%
-6.1%
-2.7%
51
137
81
24
41
64
48
20
-10
-73
-33
-4
-19.6%
-53.3%
-40.7%
-16.7%
69
Size
Area
Greater Manchester
average
Number of apartments advertised
Oct 2010 Oct 2011
Annual change
284
173
-111 -39.1%
Source: Vizzihome
Mortgages
2.161 The ready availability of mortgage finance is necessary in order to
allow potential new homebuyers to access the owner occupied sector
of the housing market. Since the credit crunch began, mortgage
providers have restricted the availability of mortgages to only those with
good credit scores and those with high deposits. As such total gross
mortgage lending at the national level has fallen dramatically since the
peak of the market in 2007. This is shown in the graph below.
Total gross mortgage lending (£m)
400,000
350,000
£million
300,000
250,000
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
est
Year
Source: Council
of Mortgage Lenders Research, Bank of England (December
2011)
2.162 The above graph shows that in 2007 gross mortgage lending was
around £362.8 billion. This fell to a low of £135.6 billion in 2010,
representing an overall fall in mortgage lending between 2007 and
2010 of 62.6%. There was a slight increase in mortgage lending in
2010 to an estimated £140 billion, but this is still far short of the 2007
peak. The Council for Mortgage Lenders forecast that in 2012 there will
be a fall in gross mortgage lending to £133 billion “representing the
weaker economic backdrop that now seems likely”5.
5
CML Forecasts 2012 - http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/media/press/3119. Accessed 31 January
2012.
70
Step 3.2: Affordability
House price to income ratios
2.163 House price to income ratios present a good picture as to whether
accommodation is generally affordable to prospective purchasers.
Paragraph 42 of the DCLG Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Practice Guidance explains that a household can be considered able to
afford to buy a home if it costs less than 3.5 times the gross household
income. As such this would imply that any house price to income ratio
in excess of 3.5 means that accommodation is unaffordable. The tables
below compare the ratios between lower quartile house prices to lower
quartile incomes, and also median house prices to median earnings, at
the Salford, Greater Manchester, North West and England levels.
Ratio of lower quartile house prices to lower quartile earnings
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2.81
3.95
4.75
5.54
5.85
5.34
4.93
4.82
Area
Salford
Greater
Manchester
3.11
4.18
North West
3.28
4.43
England
5.23
6.28
Source: DCLG Live Table 576
4.83
5.02
6.28
4.90
5.12
6.69
Ratio of median house prices to median earnings
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
3.26
4.27
4.94
5.20
5.55
5.26
4.65
2010
4.53
Area
Salford
Greater
3.78
4.63
Manchester
North West
3.94
4.84
England
5.83
6.58
4.88
4.99
6.82
5.14
5.38
6.81
5.59
5.62
7.15
5.49
5.68
6.97
5.92
5.93
7.25
5.66
5.81
7.23
5.59
5.71
6.97
5.38
5.54
6.93
4.89
5.17
6.27
5.03
5.23
7.01
2.164 As the tables above show, the ratio of lower quartile house prices to
lower quartile earnings is similar in Salford to that for Greater
Manchester as a whole, but significantly below the national average.
The ratio of median house prices to median earnings is slightly lower in
Salford than for Greater Manchester, with this gap having widened
marginally over the last few years. It can be seen that affordability
worsened significantly in Salford in the period 2003-2007, but has since
improved somewhat (although it is still at a level that is likely to impact
on many households).
2.165 The affordability of properties in the city varies considerably by ward.
The table below compares the median sales price of properties to the
median household income in that ward.
71
Ward
Barton
Boothstown and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Median
house
price
£90,250
Median
household
income
£22,724
House
price to
income
ratio
3.97
£169,500
£130,000
£110,500
£131,500
£143,000
£124,000
£87,000
£112,500
£88,000
£76,000
£138,000
£110,000
£90,000
£121,500
£84,750
£110,000
£46,578
£17,772
£26,337
£31,142
£28,298
£26,811
£21,128
£24,539
£19,435
£20,418
£30,479
£25,690
£25,226
£27,058
£23,413
£30,101
3.64
7.31
4.20
4.22
5.05
4.62
4.12
4.58
4.53
3.72
4.53
4.28
3.57
4.49
3.62
3.65
£98,500
£91,875
£222,400
£24,785
£23,696
£40,546
3.97
3.88
5.49
Salford
£112,500
£25,360
4.44
Source: Land Registry 2010 Q2 and Q3 sales, and 2011 CACI household
income
2.166 Using the measure of the ratio between median house prices and
median earnings, there are some significant differences in affordability
across the city, but no simple pattern. For example, Worsley has the
highest average house price and the second worst affordability ratio at
5.49, whereas Boothstown and Ellenbrook has the second highest
average house price but its affordability ratio is significantly below the
city average due to the ward having the highest average household
income in Salford. The worst affordability ratio by far in the city is in
Broughton at 7.31, but this appears to be partly due to the ward having
the lowest average household income in the city although its house
prices are above the city average. A combination of around average
household incomes but significantly below average house prices leads
to Swinton North and Walkden North having the lowest affordability
ratios.
72
Housing Benefit
2.167 Housing Benefit is paid to households who are renting property and
where their income and capital (savings and investments) are below a
certain level. Housing Benefit for those in private rented
accommodation is calculated according to the Local Housing
Allowance rules, whilst for those living in council accommodation or
other social housing the most Housing Benefit payable is the same as
the ‘eligible rent’ (which includes rent for the accommodation and
charges for services such as lifts, communal laundry services etc.).
Council Tax records held by the city council include details of all
occupied dwellings in receipt of Housing Benefit. The table below
shows the situation as of December 2011 at a ward level.
Area
Barton
Boothstown & Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste & Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Central Salford
Salford West
Occupied
dwellings
5,777
3,895
6,022
4,483
4,278
5,369
3,988
5,249
4,737
6,568
5,588
8,300
5,472
5,117
4,681
5,270
4,473
5,362
5,316
4,302
% in receipt of
Housing Benefit
31.19
4.72
49.49
20.30
9.02
23.56
21.46
35.11
27.72
42.98
43.74
21.04
25.15
22.01
19.82
30.65
13.79
25.61
31.62
3.70
40,516
63,731
30.76
23.48
Total
104,247
26.31
Source: Salford City Council -Council Tax data December 2011
2.168 The table above shows that Housing Benefit is claimed for just over
one quarter of occupied dwellings in Salford, with the rate in Central
Salford higher than for Salford West. As with several other indicators,
73
rates are particularly low in Worsley (4%), Boothstown and Ellenbrook
(5%), Claremont (9%) and Walkden South (14%), although Swinton
South is a little higher (20%). Broughton has the highest rate of
Housing Benefit claims, at just under 50%, which perhaps reflects the
high affordability ratio in the area discussed above. However, it may be
more specifically related to household income levels, as the areas with
the next to lowest average household incomes have the next highest
rates of Housing Benefit claims (Little Hulton at 44%, and Langworthy
at 43%).
Step 3.3: Overcrowding and under-occupation
2.169 The DCLG Strategic Housing Market Assessment Guidance states that
the degree of overcrowding and under-occupancy provides an insight
into possible future household flows and potential levels of concealed
households.
2001 Census
2.170 The 2001 Census includes data on under-occupancy and overcrowding
by levels of occupancy, and this is shown in the table below. The
occupancy rating provides a measure of under-occupancy and overcrowding, relating the actual number of rooms to the number of rooms
'required' by the members of the household (based on an assessment
of the relationship between household members, their ages and
gender). For example a value of -1 implies that there is one room too
few and that there is overcrowding in the household.
Area
Barton
Boothstown and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Dwelling occupancy rating (% of all households by category)
Under-occupied
Overcrowded
+2 or more
+1
0
-1 -2 or less
39.68
32.15
23.06
4.13
0.98
70.30
33.16
48.99
57.38
48.11
48.81
29.16
41.62
27.51
40.07
21.10
41.58
45.65
50.37
40.42
21.08
30.53
26.55
25.35
23.07
28.99
37.22
28.05
35.44
30.81
39.61
30.30
31.61
28.73
30.60
74
7.22
26.73
19.79
12.82
23.11
17.25
25.61
22.53
27.10
23.14
30.87
21.25
18.95
16.40
23.34
1.08
7.44
4.02
3.36
4.07
3.95
6.32
5.84
6.96
4.80
6.05
5.72
3.26
3.50
4.63
0.31
2.12
0.64
1.08
1.64
0.99
1.68
1.96
2.98
1.18
2.36
1.15
0.52
0.99
1.01
Area
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Dwelling occupancy rating (% of all households by category)
Under-occupied
Overcrowded
+2 or more
+1
0
-1 -2 or less
59.29
25.00
12.09
2.96
0.67
Central Salford
Salford West
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
England
Source: Census 2001
45.90
43.49
74.23
27.80
28.62
16.18
20.28
22.12
7.76
4.91
4.64
1.54
1.11
1.13
0.29
36.25
49.09
32.02
27.58
23.83
18.61
5.95
3.81
1.95
0.91
44.53
29.16
20.46
4.58
1.28
45.85
50.93
49.14
28.24
26.59
25.54
19.50
17.07
18.19
4.72
4.05
5.02
1.69
1.36
2.11
2.171 This data suggests that under-occupancy is a much more significant
issue in Salford than overcrowding, with 6% of dwellings overcrowded
and 74% under-occupied. The levels of overcrowding are slightly
higher in Central Salford at 8%, and under-occupancy is slightly higher
in Salford West at 77%. This picture is similar to the sub-regional,
regional and national comparators. The highest levels of underoccupancy are in Boothstown and Ellenbrook (91%), Worsley (90%),
Walkden South (84%) and Claremont (83%). Overcrowding is highest
in Broughton and Langworthy (both 10%), which could possibly reflect
the high proportion of small houses in those locations.
2.172 The Salford Housing Needs Assessment conducted in 2007 provides
more recent survey-based information of overcrowding and underoccupation. A summary of this is provided in the table below, which
provides a similar picture to the Census data above.
Number of
bedrooms required
1 bedroom
2 bedrooms
3 bedrooms
4+ bedrooms
Total
1
3,468
0
0
0
3,468
Number of bedrooms in home
2
3
4+
19,699
5,187
888
61
25,835
27,617
14,495
7566
785
50,463
Overcrowded
Under-crowded
Source: Salford Housing Needs Assessment (2007)
75
6,547
4,747
3859
1981
17,134
Total
57,331
24,429
12313
2827
96,900
Note: The bottom two cells of the 4+ number of bedrooms in home column
contain some households that are either overcrowded or under-occupied – for
example they may require three bedrooms but live in a five bedroom property
or may require a five bedroom property but are currently occupying a four
bedroom property.
2.173 The 2007 Housing Needs Assessment also provides details of underoccupation by household type and tenure. This is shown in the table
below.
Household type
Single pensioner
2 or more
pensioners
Single nonpensioner
2 or more adults,
no children
Lone parent
2+ adults, 1 child
2+ adults, 2+
children
Owner
Owner
Council
occupied occupied
(no
(with
mortgage) mortgage)
4,947
755
2,659
3,859
453
799
RSL
Private
rented
Total
56
36
447
145
8,864
5,292
9,130
1,493
3,677
2,366
220
1,374
3,529
6,847
1,443
340
1,254 13,413
78
117
140
203
857
1,431
292
96
67
44
-
Total
14,163
14,223
7,722
696
41
55
123
614
1,169
1,761
3,439 40,243
2.174 The above table indicates that around 91% of the under-occupation is
associated with households that consist only of adults. 35% of the
households are pensioners. 71% of the under occupied dwellings are in
the owner occupied sector, whilst 21% are in the public sector (council
and RSL).
2.175 The 2007 Housing Needs Assessment also identified the intentions of
overcrowded and under-occupying households, as shown below.
Overcrowded/
under-occupied
Overcrowded
Neither
overcrowded nor
under-occupied
Under-occupied
Number
need/expect
to move
692
18,031
Total
households
% needing
/ expecting
to move
2,273
30.4%
54,384
32.2%
12,770
40,243
Total
31,493
96,900
76
31.7%
32.5%
2.176 The above table suggests that the occupancy level of a property does
not particularly impact on whether households consider that they need
or expect to move home, with the proportions for overcrowded
households similar to those for under-occupied. However, the reasons
for moving could potentially be significantly different.
2.177 Other key findings of the Housing Needs Assessment in relation to the
issue of overcrowding and under-occupation were:
•
The estimated number of overcrowded and under-occupied
households is as follows:
o Overcrowded - 2,273 households (2.3% of all households)
o Under-occupied - 40,243 households (41.5% of households)
•
By neighbourhood, Worsley and Boothstown have the highest
proportion of under-occupied dwellings (59.0%); and Broughton
and Irwell Riverside the highest level of overcrowded dwellings
(6.0%) (similar to the Census results discussed above)
•
The age distribution confirms the household type analysis above
(i.e. low overcrowding and high under-occupancy amongst
pensioner households); though interestingly the data shows that
overcrowding levels for households containing both older and
non older persons and non older persons only are very similar.
Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey 2010
2.178 The 2010 Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey also provides
information on occupancy levels. It defines overcrowding and underoccupancy as follows (paragraph 4.12.1):
Category
Severely overcrowded
Overcrowded
Satisfactory
Under-occupied
Severely under-occupied
Definition
Lacking two or more bedrooms
Lacking one bedroom
Number of bedrooms required is same as is
present in dwelling
One bedroom more than required
Two ore more bedrooms more than required
2.179 The survey identifies the following situation of overcrowding and underoccupancy in the dwellings assessed (i.e. excluding Salix Homes and
City West Housing Trust accommodation).
Category
Severely overcrowded
Overcrowded
Satisfactory
Under-occupied
Severely under-
All households
Number
% of
Number
% in
households
category
218
0.3%
117
53.9%
3,309
3.9%
1,488
0.0%
22,030
25.9%
9,929
45.1%
33,391
39.2%
9,889
29.6%
26,174
30.7%
6,377
24.4%
77
All households
Number
% of
households
Category
occupied
Number
% in
category
Total
85,122
100.0%
27,800
32.7%
Source: Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey 2010 (Tables 4.36
and 4.38)
2.180 This data identifies a similar position to the 2001 Census and the 2007
Housing Needs Assessment, with a very low level of overcrowding. The
Private Sector House Survey report suggests that under-occupation is
a bigger problem, with 69.9% of dwellings under-occupied or severely
under-occupied. It considers that under-occupation “can be a problem
for the fuel poor and vulnerable where they may be paying to heat
rooms they do not use” (paragraph 4.12.2). However, more than half of
the households in severely overcrowded accommodation are identified
as vulnerable.
2.181 The table below shows that most of the overcrowding is in the rented
sector (73% of severe overcrowded and 58% of overcrowded
households), although it should be noted that the survey excluded the
stock of the two largest social rented providers in the city. However,
such households still only make up a very small proportion of
households in the rented sector (3.7% of households renting from an
RSL and 9.7% in the private rented sector). In contrast, 91% of
households who own their property outright are under-occupying it, and
71% who own their property with a mortgage.
Category
Severely
overcrowded
Overcrowded
Satisfactory
Under-occupied
Severely underoccupied
Total
Owned with
mortgage
No.
%
59
27.2
Owned
outright
No.
%
0
0.0
Rented from
RSL
No.
%
100
46.1
Rented
privately
No.
%
58
26.7
Grand
total
218
1,054
7,924
13,759
8,778
31.9
36.0
41.2
33.5
331
2,325
10,346
15,090
10.0
10.6
31.0
57.7
141
3,495
2,032
793
4.3
15.9
6.1
3.0
1,783
8,286
7,255
1,514
53.9
37.6
21.7
5.8
3,309
22,030
33,391
26,174
31,574
37.1
28,092
33.0
6,560
7.7
18,897
22.2
85,122
Source: Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey 2010 (Table 4.39)
% = refers to the proportion of dwellings in that overcrowding/underoccupancy category
2.182 In terms of the type of dwellings, from the table below it can be seen
that overcrowding is concentrated in semi-detached and terraced
housing, accounting for 73% of all severely overcrowded households
and 85% of overcrowded households. Flatted dwellings accounts for a
relatively low proportion of overcrowding despite them typically
providing smaller accommodation, with 27% of all severely
78
overcrowded households and 9% of all overcrowded households. Only
2.2% of flats are identified as suffering from overcrowding, compared to
3.6% of semi-detached houses and 6.5% of terraced houses.
Bungalow
Flat
House detached
Category
Severely
overcrowded
Overcrowded
Satisfactory
Underoccupied
Severely
underoccupied
Total
House –
semidetached
No.
%
103 47.5
No.
0
%
0.0
No.
58
%
26.7
No.
0
%
0.0
56
1,378
1,569
1.7
6.3
4.7
288
8,128
6,957
8.7
36.9
20.8
141
188
2,148
4.3
0.9
6.4
900
4,752
10,109
1,022
3.9
351
1.3
4,307
16.5
4,026
4.7
15,782
18.5
6,783
8.0
House terraced
Grand
total
No.
56
%
25.8
218
27.2
21.6
30.3
1,924
7,585
12,609
58.1
34.4
37.8
3,309
22,030
33,391
12,051
46.0
8,443
32.3
26,174
27,915
32.8
30,617
36.0
85,122
Source: Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey 2010 (Table 4.40)
% = refers to the proportion of dwellings in that overcrowding/underoccupancy category
Step 3.4: Vacancies, available supply and turnover
Vacancy levels
2.183 High vacancy levels are generally associated with low demand,
although it needs to be recognised that vacancies can be high in ‘high
demand’ areas due to investor and absentee demand. Council Tax
records are available showing vacancy rates by ward between 2006
and 2011 as of March each year. This is shown in the table below.
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
2006
4.41%
3.38%
9.81%
4.62%
3.74%
5.37%
2.70%
7.98%
6.12%
16.23%
3.44%
7.92%
2.70%
3.76%
2.85%
Proportion of vacant dwellings by year
2007
2008
2009
2010
4.12%
4.68%
5.17%
5.89%
3.22%
8.90%
4.76%
3.85%
5.93%
2.91%
8.64%
6.59%
9.34%
3.13%
9.18%
3.65%
4.04%
3.15%
79
2.89%
10.71%
4.47%
3.27%
5.59%
2.59%
8.66%
6.95%
8.23%
3.81%
8.59%
3.82%
4.35%
3.77%
3.19%
10.35%
4.82%
3.45%
6.28%
3.00%
7.30%
7.06%
7.46%
4.45%
8.69%
3.85%
4.89%
3.98%
2.77%
8.91%
4.63%
3.41%
6.27%
2.95%
8.15%
7.08%
7.47%
4.49%
9.24%
4.17%
5.00%
4.18%
2011
6.03%
2.87%
9.39%
3.96%
3.52%
5.73%
3.22%
5.85%
6.02%
6.79%
3.75%
8.14%
3.68%
4.38%
3.85%
Proportion of vacant dwellings by year
2007
2008
2009
2010
4.10%
4.56%
4.52%
4.07%
3.38%
3.60%
3.98%
3.97%
Area
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
2006
4.20%
3.75%
5.85%
3.97%
3.94%
6.56%
4.13%
4.28%
5.17%
3.77%
4.54%
6.27%
4.42%
4.41%
5.55%
4.60%
3.79%
5.20%
4.11%
4.28%
Central Salford
Salford West
8.91%
3.80%
7.80%
3.93%
7.62%
4.08%
7.46%
4.44%
7.38%
4.46%
6.71%
4.24%
Salford
5.73%
5.38%
5.42%
5.60%
5.59%
5.21%
2011
4.33%
3.93%
2.184 The table above shows that citywide vacancy levels have reduced
slightly since 2006. The Government’s New Homes Bonus is likely to
further incentivise the reoccupation of long-term vacant properties. The
most recent grant announcement suggests significant progress in this
regard in the city, with the 2012-13 New Homes Bonus provisional
allocation for Salford identifying that 1,478 long-term empty homes
were brought back into use between October 2010 and October 2011.
2.185 There has been a significant reduction in vacancies in Central Salford,
with a slight increase in Salford West. However, vacancy levels still
remain higher in Central Salford than in Salford West, with the highest
levels in Broughton (9%) and Ordsall (8%). Langworthy has seen a
significant reduction in vacancies from over 16% to less than 7%,
although the initial high levels may have been partly due to proposed
clearance activity in the area. Some areas that may be considered ‘low
demand’ areas when measured by other factors such as house prices
actually have very good occupancy levels, most notably Little Hulton
which has a lower vacancy rate than the ‘high demand’ area of Worsley
(although this may be partially explained by the high concentration of
social housing in Little Hulton and the low levels of vacancy in this
stock due to the high demand for affordable housing). However, most
of the higher value areas do have low vacancy rates, such as
Boothstown and Ellenbrook, Claremont, Swinton South and Walkden
South, all of which are below 4%.
Length of time on the market
2.186 Home.co.uk publishes data on the number of properties advertised and
the average amount of time they have been on the market. This
provides a general indication of demand for different types of property
in different parts of the city, and how this has changed in recent years.
Detailed data is set out in the tables below. It needs to be treated with
some caution as the number of properties is relatively low for some
areas/categories.
80
Post Code Sector M5 (Ordsall, Eccles New Road, Langworthy)
Median number of days properties are on the market (days) and the number of properties
advertised (January 2007 and January 2012) in Post Code Sector M5
January 2007
January 2012
Jan 2007 to Jan 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
0
0
Semidetached
59
8
235
17
298%
113%
Terraced
125
15
166
9
33%
-40%
Apartment
57
125
207
130
263%
4%
Unknown
12
11
All
59
Source: www.home.co.uk
160
209
167
254%
4%
advertised (January 2007 and January 2012), by property size in Post Code Sector M5
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
(days)
market
advertised
advertised
advertised
5+ bedrooms
117
2
795
2
579%
0%
4 bedrooms
154
1
217
2
41%
100%
3 bedrooms
55
30
205
29
273%
-3%
2 bedrooms
52
93
209
117
302%
26%
1 bedroom
59
32
186
14
215%
-56%
Unknown
2
3
All
59
160
209
167
254%
4%
Post Code Sector M6 (Claremont / Weaste)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
time on
in median
in no. of
No. of
No. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
140
17
243
25
74%
47%
Semidetached
115
82
178
104
55%
27%
Terraced
59
39
139
67
136%
72%
Apartment
118
43
228
38
93%
-12%
Unknown
47
33
All
89
228
183
81
267
106%
17%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
5+ bedrooms
105
6
168
7
60%
17%
4 bedrooms
131
28
143
24
9%
-14%
3 bedrooms
88
110
183
120
108%
9%
2 bedrooms
49
79
209
97
327%
23%
1 bedroom
58
3
195
13
236%
333%
Unknown
2
6
All
89
228
183
267
106%
17%
Post Code Sector M7 (Lower / Higher Broughton)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
184
13
312
38
70%
192%
Semidetached
136
28
227
66
67%
136%
Terraced
100
18
109
51
9%
183%
Apartment
72
30
196
123
172%
310%
Unknown
24
26
All
95
113
176
304
85%
169%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
time on
in median
in no. of
No. of
No. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
5+ bedrooms
106
18
182
39
72%
117%
4 bedrooms
150
25
174
41
16%
64%
3 bedrooms
78
36
182
71
133%
97%
2 bedrooms
49
28
159
111
224%
296%
1 bedroom
169
6
223
40
32%
567%
Unknown
2
All
95
113
176
82
304
85%
169%
Post Code Sector M27 (Swinton / Pendlebury)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
121
42
164
56
36%
33%
Semidetached
98
101
153
223
56%
121%
Terraced
105
52
172
71
64%
37%
Apartment
78
57
109
55
40%
-4%
Unknown
0
123
0
37
All
89
375
152
442
71%
18%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
(days)
market
advertised
advertised
advertised
5+ bedrooms
84
8
481
11
473%
38%
4 bedrooms
97
46
115
48
19%
4%
3 bedrooms
89
190
173
202
94%
6%
2 bedrooms
85
118
130
171
53%
45%
1 bedroom
51
10
69
7
35%
-30%
Unknown
3
3
All
89
375
152
442
71%
18%
Post Code Sector M28 (Walkden / Worsley)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
119
69
203
156
71%
126%
Semidetached
111
73
178
167
60%
129%
Terraced
117
41
140
59
20%
44%
Apartment
71
59
195
19
175%
-68%
Unknown
338
44
All
78
580
179
83
445
128%
-23%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
(days)
market
advertised
advertised
advertised
5+ bedrooms
97
24
222
35
129%
46%
4 bedrooms
86
128
185
112
115%
-13%
3 bedrooms
76
277
178
189
134%
-32%
2 bedrooms
76
127
140
91
84%
-28%
1 bedroom
72
20
275
12
282%
-40%
Unknown
4
6
All
78
580
178
445
128%
-23%
Post Code Sector M30 (Eccles)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
119
24
178
55
50%
129%
Semidetached
98
94
161
153
64%
63%
Terraced
83
92
163
113
96%
23%
Apartment
96
63
163
60
70%
-5%
Unknown
77
38
All
88
350
163
419
85%
20%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
time on
in median
in no. of
No. of
No. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
5+ bedrooms
95
20
254
24
167%
20%
4 bedrooms
97
38
174
48
79%
26%
3 bedrooms
87
149
157
188
80%
26%
2 bedrooms
94
111
153
123
63%
11%
1 bedroom
67
25
264
31
294%
24%
Unknown
7
5
All
88
350
163
84
419
85%
20%
Post Code Sector M44 (Irlam / Cadishead)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
(days)
market
advertised
advertised
advertised
Detached
150
28
321
76
114%
171%
Semidetached
106
59
285
170
169%
188%
Terraced
104
55
264
70
154%
27%
Apartment
24
26
305
26
1171%
0%
Unknown
134
20
All
24
302
279
362
1063%
20%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
5+ bedrooms
29
1
281
5
869%
400%
4 bedrooms
39
34
307
58
687%
71%
3 bedrooms
24
188
264
208
1000%
11%
2 bedrooms
24
70
279
79
1063%
13%
1 bedroom
44
6
51
12
16%
100%
Unknown
3
0
All
24
302
279
362
1063%
20%
Post Code Sector M50 (Salford Quays)
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
time on
in median
in no. of
No. of
No. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
Detached
0
0
Semidetached
1
0
-100%
Terraced
135
7
0
-100%
Apartment
106
113
111
111
5%
-2%
Unknown
6
7
85
All
106
127
111
118
5%
-7%
January 2007
January 2012
Median
Median
% change % change
time on
No. of
time on
No. of
in median
in no. of
market properties
market properties
time on
properties
Property type
(days)
advertised
(days)
advertised
market
advertised
5+ bedrooms
0
0
4 bedrooms
0
591
2
3 bedrooms
94
9
67
9
-29%
0%
2 bedrooms
115
90
123
75
7%
-17%
1 bedroom
85
28
88
23
4%
-18%
Unknown
9
All
106
127
111
118
5%
-7%
Summary
2.187 The tables above show that median times on the market have changed
significantly since January 2007. The exception to this is Salford
Quays, where average time spent on the market is virtually unchanged,
leading to this area moving from having the longest to the shortest
average times.
2.188 Salford Quays has by far the lowest average time spent on the market
at 111 days, with all properties in the January 2012 figures being
apartments. The next shortest time spent on the market is in the much
more suburban area of Swinton and Pendlebury at 152 days. The
average time on the market is similar in most other parts of Salford
West (163 days in Eccles and 178 days in Walkden/Worsley), however
properties in Irlam and Cadishead spend the longest on the market of
any part of the city at 279 days and this affects all types of property
(considerably higher than the next highest area of Ordsall, Eccles New
Road and Langworthy at 209 days). Once Salford Quays is excluded,
the different parts of Central Salford all have similar average times for
properties on the market ranging from 176 to 209 days.
2.189 There are no clear patterns relating to the size of property and the time
spent on the market. There is some evidence that detached properties
typically stay on the market for longer than other types of property, both
in inner city areas such as Broughton and suburban locations such as
Walkden/Worsley. Terraced houses generally spend slightly less time
on the market, though this is not true for all areas.
2.190 Overall, it can be seen that the housing market has suffered
significantly over the last five years, with a significant increase in the
time properties spend on the market. Salford Quays is the exception to
this, with demand apparently relatively high, and the data could
86
suggest that it has moved from having a slight oversupply to a relative
undersupply of property. In contrast, the significantly longer time that
properties now spend on the market in Irlam and Cadishead could
indicate that there is a relative oversupply of property in that area, at
least in the short-term.
Property transactions
2.191 The number of property transactions is a useful indicator in relation to
the general state of the housing market, with a large number of
transactions generally suggesting that the housing market is healthy
and that banks are willing to provide mortgages to prospective
purchasers. Information from the Land Registry in relation to the
number of transaction is shown in the tables below, over the period
between 2003 and 2010. The first table shows the total number of
property sales; whilst the second table details the number of new build
sales.
20032004
348
20042005
377
20052006
247
20062007
267
20072008
279
20082009
110
20092010
88
Total
sales
1,716
Av per
annum
245
Change
between
2007/08
and
2009/10
-68.5%
246
269
219
262
235
192
552
283
267
258
335
332
277
242
264
241
239
251
254
248
225
167
349
213
258
182
435
290
282
221
232
209
177
238
271
221
197
173
312
201
235
161
656
297
254
181
252
196
218
235
316
254
367
176
332
219
144
217
1,119
259
283
237
302
210
181
275
215
217
381
179
368
233
294
184
1,082
374
279
239
231
224
81
153
92
91
135
95
107
101
231
77
436
127
82
85
76
99
115
156
85
77
134
77
159
109
127
49
306
119
119
117
66
107
1,257
1,577
1,452
1,370
1,674
1,059
2,179
1,359
1,556
1,128
4,369
1,798
1,576
1,322
1,423
1,286
180
225
207
196
239
151
311
194
222
161
624
257
225
189
203
184
-36.5%
-43.3%
-60.5%
-64.5%
-64.8%
-57.0%
-56.8%
-53.2%
-56.8%
-73.4%
-71.7%
-68.2%
-57.3%
-51.0%
-71.4%
-52.2%
311
239
243
387
213
252
243
208
212
241
210
239
259
239
215
166
85
110
178
71
130
1,785
1,265
1,401
255
181
200
-31.3%
-70.3%
-39.5%
Central Salford
Salford West
2,279
3,336
2,141
3,143
2,106
2,826
2,544
3,301
2,728
3,220
1,285
1,254
1,112
1,277
14,195
18,357
2,028
2,622
-59.2%
-60.3%
Total
5,615
5,284
4,932
5,845
5,948
2,539
2,389
32,552
4,650
-59.8%
Total number of sales (1 April to 31 March)
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
87
20032004
5
20042005
79
20052006
6
20062007
2
20072008
12
20082009
2
20092010
3
Total
sales
109
Av per
annum
16
Change
between
2007/08
and
2009/10
-75.0%
1
3
41
23
2
11
197
11
36
38
31
129
52
18
25
2
40
0
94
38
37
24
4
8
70
0
200
90
73
11
26
18
7
0
120
0
42
23
38
3
29
25
406
74
45
0
80
19
0
47
109
1
118
20
66
40
1
19
559
19
17
32
80
14
0
118
20
0
102
19
99
26
69
0
526
93
9
8
28
14
1
81
6
0
37
16
18
10
86
0
333
44
4
2
2
16
0
50
2
1
26
4
93
22
53
0
188
26
13
13
0
13
49
299
392
63
364
117
515
120
344
82
2,243
475
213
84
241
96
7
43
56
9
52
17
74
17
49
12
320
68
30
12
34
14
n/a
-57.6%
-90.0%
n/a
-74.5%
-78.9%
-6.1%
-15.4%
-23.2%
n/a
-64.3%
-72.0%
44.4%
62.5%
-100.0%
-7.1%
33
3
7
118
0
41
7
47
12
1
9
18
36
18
14
77
2
9
78
0
6
350
79
107
50
11
15
116.7%
-100.0%
-57.1%
Central Salford
Salford West
334
334
438
533
483
500
715
457
874
337
605
141
485
106
3,934
2,408
562
344
-44.5%
-68.5%
Total
668
971
983
1172
1211
746
591
6,342
906
-51.2%
Total number of new build sales (1 April to 31 March)
Area
Barton
Boothstown
and Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
2.192 The tables above show that all parts of the city have seen a significant
reduction in transactions since 2007/8, reflecting the difficult market
conditions affecting most parts of the country. The lowest reduction in
transactions since the peak has been in Weaste and Seedley, which is
likely to reflect the newly constructed dwellings available in the area
(accounting for 155 sales in the last two years). In contrast, Boothstown
and Ellenbrook and Worsley have the next lowest reduction in
transactions, despite very little new build in those areas, and so this
may be due to an underlying strength of those markets. The major
reduction in transactions in Ordsall is increased significantly by the
number of new dwellings sold in 2006-2008, whereas there were no
new build sales in Little Hulton in 2007/8 and so the 73% reduction in
transactions in that area (the highest in the city) may reflect housing
market weakness.
88
Turnover
2.193 The city council’s Council Tax records can be used for identifying
turnover in housing stock (i.e. the number of homes where there is a
change in occupier). The table below shows turnover by ward on an
annual basis between 2006 and 2011.
Number of dwellings that have seen a change of
occupier as a proportion of all dwellings
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2.22% 2.26% 2.35% 2.62% 2.55% 2.53%
Area
Barton
Boothstown &
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste & Seedley
Winton
Worsley
1.36%
2.62%
1.67%
1.41%
2.19%
1.30%
3.58%
2.37%
2.44%
2.22%
5.30%
1.83%
1.87%
1.42%
2.01%
1.27%
2.38%
2.07%
1.22%
Central Salford
Salford West
2.38% 3.09% 3.20% 4.01% 3.98% 3.99%
1.78% 1.87% 1.85% 2.12% 2.03% 2.01%
1.34%
2.97%
1.77%
1.50%
2.34%
1.53%
4.02%
2.38%
2.35%
2.19%
5.59%
1.84%
1.94%
1.58%
2.10%
1.40%
2.49%
2.29%
1.21%
1.23%
3.24%
1.78%
1.32%
2.56%
1.42%
3.52%
2.39%
2.34%
2.14%
6.27%
2.02%
1.79%
1.54%
2.11%
1.23%
2.39%
2.19%
1.09%
1.42%
3.62%
2.08%
1.63%
2.86%
1.65%
4.34%
2.93%
3.01%
2.35%
7.83%
2.14%
2.21%
1.86%
2.37%
1.61%
2.99%
2.39%
1.42%
1.25%
3.67%
2.07%
1.49%
2.68%
1.58%
4.03%
2.74%
3.24%
2.46%
7.76%
2.19%
1.91%
1.68%
2.33%
1.60%
2.72%
2.10%
1.33%
1.30%
3.45%
1.99%
1.63%
2.71%
1.54%
4.04%
2.48%
3.33%
2.24%
7.60%
2.20%
1.85%
1.67%
2.27%
1.64%
2.96%
2.15%
1.42%
Salford
2.20% 2.33% 2.36% 2.85% 2.79% 2.79%
2.194 Turnover levels appear to have increased between 2006 and 2011,
with 2008-2009 marking a turning point. The increase in turnover has
been greater in Central Salford than Salford West, and Central Salford
turnover levels are now almost double those in Salford West. The
highest turnover levels by far are in Ordsall (7.6%), which may reflect
the role of the Regional Centre apartment market. Rates are also
relatively high in the nearby inner city areas of Irwell Riverside (4.0%),
Broughton (3.5%) and Langworthy (3.3%). The lowest turnover levels
are seen in Boothstown and Ellenbrook (1.3%), Worsley (1.4%),
89
Claremont (1.6%), Walkden South (1.6%) and Swinton South (1.7%),
which are the more affluent suburban parts of the city.
Stage 4: Brining the evidence together
2.195 This section of the Strategic Housing Market Assessment has
considered a very wide range of information regarding the current
housing market. The key messages are summarised below.
Summary of key evidence
Economic issues
2.196 Salford is well-positioned within the Greater Manchester economy,
sharing part of the Regional Centre that drives sub-regional economic
growth and forming part of the Greater Manchester South area which
has levels of GVA per capita higher than England as a whole.
However, it does have higher levels of unemployment and benefit
claimants than the national average, and the gap has widened during
the challenging economic conditions of the last few years.
2.197 In terms of household incomes, the city is slightly poorer than the
conurbation as a whole. Deprivation is generally concentrated in the
inner areas of Central Salford and the north-west corner of the city,
although there are relatively low household incomes in some other
areas such as parts of Eccles. The Worsley, Boothstown and
Ellenbrook areas have high household incomes, with the areas to the
east stretching into south Swinton, north Eccles and Claremont also
being above the city average.
2.198 Employee growth has been good in recent years. However, there
appears to be some disconnect between the type of employment that is
focused in Salford and the type of jobs that the city’s residents are
employed in. For example, Salford has a higher than average
proportion of jobs in the banking, finance and insurance sector but a
slightly lower than average proportion of people employed in that
sector, whereas it has a slightly higher proportion of people employed
in manufacturing but a significantly lower than average proportion of
the city’s jobs in that sector.
Commuting patterns
2.199 Commuting patterns into, out of and within Salford are strongly
influenced by the location of major employment opportunities within
and near to the city, and in turn impact on local housing markets.
Salford is perhaps more reliant overall on cross-boundary commuting
flows than any other district in Greater Manchester, both in terms of the
supply of jobs for the city’s residents and the supply of labour for jobs in
the city.
90
2.200 In terms of attracting commuters from Salford, Manchester has a major
pull on all parts of the city, as does Trafford to a lesser extent. The
roles of those two districts are more evenly balanced for the southern
and western parts of Salford than they are for the northern and eastern
parts of the city. Trafford has a stronger pull than Manchester on the
south-west of the city (Cadishead, Irlam, Winton and Barton), and
Bolton has a stronger pull on the north-west corner of the city (Little
Hulton and Walkden North). Bolton and Wigan are the main sources of
commuter inflows to the northern and western parts of Salford,
whereas Manchester, Trafford and Bury are more important for the
southern and eastern parts of the city. There is a net flow of commuters
from Salford West to Central Salford, and to a slightly lesser extent
from the northern to the southern parts of the city.
2.201 Overall therefore, there are generally flows from west to east and from
north to south. The city tends to look eastwards and southwards for
employment, particularly the former, whereas inflows are more
dependent on physical proximity, although these overall patterns mask
significant flows in different directions. Just over half of the city’s
working residents are employed in Salford. There is net out-commuting
to Manchester and Trafford, but net in-commuting from all other
districts in Greater Manchester and Warrington.
Demographic issues
2.202 After many decades of population decline, Salford has seen a
continuous increase in its population since 2002, with acceleration in
the growth rate over the last few years. This increase has been driven
by international migration and natural change, rather than any
significant net in-migration from the rest of the UK.
2.203 Most parts of the city have shared in this recent population growth,
although it has been highest in Central Salford. The pattern of change
within the city suggests that it has been significantly influenced by
development activity. This relates both to the scale of new residential
development, which for example has contributed to a 73% increase in
the population of Ordsall over the last decade, and also to the amount
of demolition activity, which for example coincided with a significant
reduction in the population of Langworthy.
2.204 The age profile of Salford West is generally quite similar overall to that
seen at the regional and national levels, as is that of some of the outer
parts of Central Salford such as Claremont. However, the rest of
Central Salford shows some significant deviations and these affect the
city averages.
2.205 Salford’s population has an above average proportion of young adults
(aged 20-34), and there is a similar picture in terms of the age of
household heads. It is this age group that has completely dominated
the city’s population and household growth over the last decade. This
91
may in part reflect the type and location of new dwellings that have
been provided in Salford over recent years, where a significant
proportion of the supply has consisted of apartments in the Regional
Centre. The proportion and rate of growth of young adults is highest in
Central Salford, perhaps reflecting the attractiveness of locations within
and around the Regional Centre to this age group for example in terms
of the huge range of employment and leisure opportunities available.
The most expensive locations in the city in terms of dwelling sales
prices (Worsley, and Boothstown and Ellenbrook) actually saw a
reduction in the 20-34 age group over the last decade, which may be
due to a combination of affordability issues and lifestyle choices.
2.206 The preponderance of young adults may partly explain the relatively
high proportion of single person households in the city, which has seen
a considerable increase over the last decade. This may be related to
the roles of certain parts of Salford, but could also be influenced by the
type of accommodation that is available within the city, particularly the
high levels of apartment development in the Regional Centre.
2.207 The city’s population has a slightly below average proportion of young
people (aged 0-19), with particularly low levels in Ordsall and
Langworthy possibly reflecting the Regional Centre location of the
former and the high proportion of terraced properties in the latter. The
number of young people in the city has reduced over the last decade,
as have the number of households with dependent children. The
highest loss of this age group was in Central Salford although there has
been a significant gain in that part of the city in the last couple of years.
However, some areas are clearly more attractive to households
containing younger people, with the 0-19 age group accounting for the
majority of population growth in Broughton but virtually none of that in
Ordsall.
2.208 The proportion of households in Salford with a household head aged
65 or over is similar to the national average, although this is somewhat
skewed towards single person households. Over the last decade, there
was some decline in the number of households with a household head
aged 65-84, and a small increase in those aged 85+. More generally, in
contrast to the country as a whole, Salford actually saw a reduction in
the number of people aged 65 or over during the last decade, with this
being particularly significant in Central Salford despite that area seeing
considerable overall population increase. Areas with high levels of
deprivation generally appear to have been most affected by reductions
in this age group, both in the inner city areas and parts of Salford West,
perhaps reflecting the relative attractiveness of those locations to older
people. However, these same areas also have high proportions of
single person households.
Housing stock issues
92
2.209 Salford has a relatively high proportion of social rented housing, and a
relatively low proportion of owner-occupied accommodation particularly
in Central Salford. However, some parts of the city have very high
levels of owner-occupation, most notably the area around Boothstown,
Ellenbrook, Worsley, south Swinton, Ellesmere Park and Claremont,
which also generally tends to have higher proportions of large dwellings
(typically detached and semi-detached) and lower proportions of
apartments than average. The four easternmost wards of the city have
the highest proportion of dwellings in the private sector, possibly
reflecting the proximity to the Regional Centre and the role of adjoining
areas of Manchester.
2.210 Salford as a whole has a relatively low proportion of detached houses,
particularly within the more deprived areas of Central Salford and parts
of Salford West. However, it still has large expanses of what would be
considered suburban housing, particularly in the west of the city. There
are some significant concentrations of terraced housing both in Central
Salford and Salford West.
2.211 The city as a whole has a relatively high proportion of apartments, with
particularly high concentrations in Ordsall and Langworthy in Central
Salford (areas which also have a low proportion of larger dwellings).
Some parts of Salford West also have significant numbers of
apartments and smaller dwellings, most notably in parts of Eccles.
2.212 There has been a high level of residential development activity in
Salford over the last decade, with net completions of around 1,000
dwellings per annum. The focus of this development switched from
Salford West in the first few years to Central Salford in the later years.
The supply of new dwellings was dominated by apartments in terms of
dwelling type, further increasing the relatively high proportion of such
accommodation in the city, and the ward of Ordsall in terms of location.
There was a more even balance between houses and apartments in
Salford West, where new housing was typically relatively large in size,
whereas in Central Salford there was a preponderance of small
dwellings. The proportion of apartments in the supply of new dwellings
was highest in the south and south-east of the city, in the area
extending from Eccles through Weaste and Seedley to Ordsall and
Irwell Riverside. However, there were some significant completions of
houses in parts of Central Salford, such as in Broughton and
Langworthy (both also areas that saw very high levels of demolition of
existing housing), as well as in some areas of Salford West.
2.213 Despite the relatively high proportion of apartments, and the significant
increase in their supply in recent years, the city actually has a high
proportion of dwellings that are under-occupied and a relatively low
level of overcrowding. Perhaps unsurprisingly, it is the area stretching
from Boothstown to Claremont, which is typified by larger dwellings,
that has the highest rates of under-occupancy. Broughton and
Langworthy have the highest levels of overcrowding, which may partly
93
reflect the relative preponderance of terraced and apartment
accommodation in those areas.
2.214 Overall, there was a net increase of more than 12% in the number of
dwellings in Salford over the eight-year period of 2003-2011,
representing a very considerable scale of change, particularly
considering that there were more than 4,000 demolitions during that
period. However, older dwellings still make up the vast majority of the
city’s housing stock. Decency levels are significantly higher in Salford
than the national average, although there is still considerable scope for
improvement, and major investment is ongoing to secure
enhancements to the city’s social housing stock.
Housing market issues
2.215 Average dwelling sales prices increased by around 40% over the
period 2003-2010, although this masks a decline over the last few
years after peaking in 2007/8. There has been a very varied picture in
terms of sales price change across the city, with there being no
particular correlation between the rate of change and levels of
prosperity in the local area for example. However, the rate of increase
has been much greater for houses than for apartments, which may
partly reflect the low house prices in parts of the city at the start of the
period but also the very large increase in the supply of apartments in
the city in recent years which may have dampened price growth.
2.216 An analysis of average dwelling prices per square metre of floorspace
indicates some significant differences within the city. The Regional
Centre has moderate to very high values, but is then surrounded by a
significant area with low dwelling prices covering most of Central
Salford. The central part of Salford West, stretching from west to east,
has high dwelling prices, but then there are large areas of moderate
dwelling prices to the north and south, and another low price area in
the north-west corner of the city. These values reflect some of the
characteristics discussed above in terms of the size and type of
dwellings available, as well as average household incomes.
2.217 Therefore, although there are some notable areas with higher values,
overall, large parts of Salford have dwelling prices around or below
average levels for the conurbation. This is reflected in the in the
Council Tax banding for the city, with just over 75% of properties in
Bands A and B.
2.218 Although dwelling prices in many parts of the city are relatively low, this
does not guarantee that housing is affordable. Government guidance
suggests that a household can be considered able to afford to buy a
home if it costs less than 3.5 times the gross household income, but
every ward in Salford has a ratio of median house price to median
household income above this level. There is generally some correlation
between household incomes and dwelling prices, but there are notable
94
exceptions such as Broughton which has the lowest average
household income in the city but above average dwelling prices that
result in a house price to income ratio more than twice that considered
to be affordable.
2.219 The citywide affordability position is relatively similar to that for Greater
Manchester as a whole, but significantly better than that seen
nationally. After a significant worsening of affordability in the city over
the period 2003-2007, there has been a modest improvement since.
However, constraints on mortgage availability may be offsetting this, to
the extent that many households may have seen little improvement and
some will have seen a worsening in their ability to access the owneroccupied sector. These difficulties in the owner-occupied market,
coupled with a slowdown in the completion of new dwellings, may
partly explain the increase in private sector rents that have been seen
in the city over recent months. This has included an increase of around
10% in apartment rents in the space of a year.
2.220 There has been a significant reduction in housing transactions since
2007/8, which reflects the challenging economic conditions faced by
the whole country. Once new build sales have been excluded, the
scale of reduction in transactions may provide some indication of the
inherent strength of some housing market areas, for example with the
highest reduction in transactions in Little Hulton (a low price area) and
relatively low though still quite significant reductions in Boothstown,
Ellenbrook and Worsley (high price areas).
2.221 Dwelling vacancy levels in Salford have reduced recently, although
they are still relatively high at more than 5%. Central Salford has seen
a significant reduction in vacancies, although this may partly relate to
demolition activity, whereas Salford West has seen a slight increase
though remains significantly below Central Salford levels. However, at
the same time, turnover levels have increased significantly in Central
Salford so that they are now around double those in Salford West. The
highest rates are in the core of Central Salford, including Ordsall, Irwell
Riverside, Broughton and Langworthy. When coupled with some of the
other data regarding tenure and household type, this could possibly
indicate that parts of Central Salford are increasingly being seen as
points of entry to the conurbation where people stay temporarily before
moving to more permanent accommodation (though not necessarily in
a different area). Most of the areas that may be considered high
demand areas have relatively low vacancy and turnover rates, although
Little Hulton also has a low vacancy rate which may reflect the level of
demand for the high proportion of social rented housing in the area.
Salford’s housing markets
2.222 The above evidence and analysis suggests that Salford has a very
diverse range of housing roles and markets. There are many different
95
ways in which those roles and markets can be viewed, and inevitably
markets overlap each other and are not completely discrete. One way
of characterising Salford’s housing markets is set out below.
City centre housing market
2.223 A strong housing market, based primarily around high density
apartments with relatively high prices per square metre of floorspace,
has emerged in the Manchester/Salford City Centre, particularly over
the last decade. Although there have been some significant residential
developments within Salford’s part of the City Centre, particularly at
Greengate, this market is probably the most well-developed within
Salford outside the City Centre at Salford Quays. It is this housing
market that has accounted for the majority of new dwellings in the city
since 2003, and therefore significant population growth, and it also
makes up more than 40% of the deliverable supply in Salford’s
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA).
2.224 It is also this market that has perhaps been most affected by recent
economic conditions. There are some doubts over whether it will fully
return to the buoyancy of the market peak in 2007, and if the funding
mechanisms based around high levels of off-plan sales will be as
prominent in the future. This has resulted in the SHLAA assuming a
significant reduction in the dwelling yields on many sites, though it still
envisages very significant completions over the next few decades.
Despite these difficulties, the area has seen reducing vacancy levels
and increasing private sector rents, indicating that underlying demand
in the area remains high. The relatively high turnover rates in property
occupancy are likely to reflect the role of the area rather than any
particular weaknesses. The very large and increasing concentration of
economic activity in this part of the conurbation, with a particularly
focus on knowledge-based employment, would suggest that this
market will continue to expand and evolve. Although dwellings prices
are high per square metre, average household incomes in the area are
also generally quite high. When coupled with the relatively small
dwellings this means that accommodation is reasonably affordable to
those living in the area, though not for many households elsewhere in
the city where average incomes are much lower.
2.225 The housing role of this area is undoubtedly less varied than that of
many other parts of the city, filling a relatively narrow but very important
niche in the wider Greater Manchester housing market. One and two
bedroom apartments dominate, not just in Salford but also adjoining
areas of Manchester and Trafford, and the accommodation and lifestyle
available appears particularly attractive to young adults and small
households. In contrast, there are relatively low proportions of children
and older people in the population. As with other housing markets, it is
difficult to discern whether demand is driving the provision of this type
of accommodation, or whether it is the relatively limited supply range
that is constraining the type of households that live in the area.
96
Edge of city centre housing market
2.226 Around the edges of the city centre market area are a range of what
could be considered ‘transitional’ areas, such as Trinity, Greengate
North, parts of Ordsall, and Eccles New Road. These areas generally
provide a much broader mix of dwellings, including a variety of tenures,
at a lower cost than is found in the city centre housing market, although
there is often still a relatively high proportion of apartments and other
medium/high density housing.
2.227 New developments in these areas over the last decade have often
been in the form of high density apartments, possibly suggesting an
increasing influence of the city centre market, and the SHLAA indicates
that this is likely to continue in the future. Over time some of these
areas may start to become ever more integrated into that city centre
market, if demand is sufficient, and the transitional areas may gradually
move outwards. As a result of this flux, there is a relatively diverse
population in these parts of Salford, with a mix of both newcomers and
long-standing residents. The changing roles of these areas also makes
them more difficult to characterise, with significant differences across
small distances.
2.228 There is some evidence that there is a higher than average proportion
of young adults, and residents with higher level qualifications,
suggesting that these areas may be attracting people who work in the
Regional Centre but are unable to afford to buy or rent within the city
centre market. At present, this does not appear to have resulted in
affordability being worse than the city average, despite some relatively
significant price inflation in parts of this market over the last decade.
However, there is a risk that some existing household types could
begin to be priced out of some of these areas if demand increases.
Inner city housing market
2.229 This area lies to the north and west of the city centre and edge of city
centre housing markets, and covers large parts of Central Salford. It is
characterised by large areas of low cost housing, including a high
proportion of social rented dwellings.
2.230 This inner city area benefits from its very close proximity to the
employment opportunities in the Regional Centre and this is seen in the
commuting patterns. All parts of the area have significant travel to work
movements into Manchester, with the south of the area also having
strong links to Trafford. There are significant inflows from Bury into the
northern part of this area.
2.231 The area has the highest concentration of deprivation in the city, with
low qualification levels, a high proportion of benefit claimants, and low
household incomes. However, although dwelling prices are generally
97
low, there are parts of the area where affordability is potentially a
significant issue, including Broughton and Ordsall. This may be partly
due to the location of these areas next to the Regional Centre, but
could also reflect higher sales values of the significant number of new
dwellings constructed in recent years.
2.232 There is a relatively high proportion of apartments in the area, as well
as some significant concentrations of terraced accommodation, and a
low proportion of detached houses. Apartments have tended to
dominate the supply of new dwellings in the southern part of the area,
particularly around Eccles New Road, with a broader mix of new
housing further north in areas such as Langworthy and Broughton.
2.233 Social rented housing dominates in many parts of the area, although
there are also significant pocket of owner-occupation. The private
rented sector is also relatively significant, especially compared to other
parts of the city, and this is seen particularly in the eastern part of the
area. It is also this part of Salford where most of the houses in multiple
occupation are located, although there are no major concentrations. All
three of the city’s landlord licensing areas are in this housing market.
Although overcrowding is generally not a significant issue in the city,
the highest levels are generally within this area. It also has quite high
turnover levels.
2.234 Some parts of the area have seen a significant increase in population
over the last decade, mainly as a result of the scale of development
activity. However, this growth has been concentrated in the 20-34 age
group, particularly in the areas closest to the Regional Centre. There
has been a reasonable increase in the number of younger people
(aged under 20) over the last few years, after some net losses in parts
of the area earlier in the last decade. It is notable that large parts of the
area have seen a significant reduction in the number of people aged 65
and over in recent years, and so overall there has been some change
in the demographics of this part of the city. The area has quite a high
proportion of single person households, but also a reasonable number
of households with dependent children.
2.235 Within the area, Broughton, Langworthy and Pendleton particularly
stand out in terms of some of the data. For example, they have high
proportions of benefit claimants, the lowest household incomes, the
worst levels of overcrowding, large numbers of small dwellings and
single person households, significant reductions over the last decade in
the proportion of people aged over 65, relatively high vacancy rates,
and high levels of turnover. Both areas have also seen major housing
change in recent years, with large numbers of demolitions but also
significant new build including relatively high completions of houses
compared to other parts of Salford. However, whereas Langworthy and
Pendleton have a relatively low and decreasing proportion of children in
the population, Broughton has a relatively high and increasing number.
98
Langworthy and Pendleton also have quite high rates of decent homes
failure.
2.236 This area can be seen to have a very important housing market role in
terms of providing low cost accommodation in an accessible location
close to a wide range of employment opportunities, thereby helping to
meet the needs of a significant number of low income households.
There are some pressures on the housing market, and there is the
potential for increasing demand to adversely affect affordability levels,
with Broughton already having poor affordability (the highest median
dwelling price to median household income ratio in the city at 7.3). The
growth of the private rented sector may also present some challenges,
as may the changing demographics of the area.
2.237 There are some major development opportunities in the area, with
more than 20% of the deliverable supply identified in the SHLAA being
within this area, providing opportunities to diversify the type of housing
available. However, overall, it would seem likely that it will continue to
function primarily as a low cost housing market area.
Broughton Park
2.238 This north-eastern corner of the city has a quite different role to nearby
areas of Central Salford, and has strong connections to adjacent
neighbourhoods in Manchester and Bury. This is partly as a result of
the large Jewish population in the area, and the concentration of
associated social facilities (further information on some of the specific
housing issues affecting this area is contained in section 5 of this
Strategic Housing Market Assessment).
2.239 Overall, the area has quite strong travel to work links with Bury (in both
directions) as well as into Manchester. It has a relatively high
proportion of large dwellings and detached houses, although it also has
a significant proportion of apartments. There is a limited amount of
social rented housing in the area, but the private rented is quite
significant compared to many other parts of Salford. The Private Sector
House Stock Condition Survey indicates that the area has quite high
levels of decent homes failure.
2.240 There is an above average number of households with dependent
children, and children make up a much higher than average proportion
of the total population. This reflects the relatively high proportion of
larger households in the area, which has the highest concentration of
very large households in the city.
2.241 There is quite a significant supply of relatively expensive houses in the
area, with dwelling prices above the city average. Although household
incomes and qualification levels are also relatively high, there are some
issues of deprivation in the area, and overall affordability is quite poor.
99
2.242 As explained in section 5 of this assessment, the age profile of the area
is very young, and the distinctive social characteristics mean that much
of this population may wish to remain within the immediate area. This is
likely to lead to very significant housing pressures, and could further
magnify the distinctive housing market role of this part of the city,
although development land availability is constrained.
High value suburbs
2.243 A significant band of primarily high price housing runs through the
central section of Salford West, including south Waldken, Ellenbrook,
Boothstown, Worsley, south Swinton, Ellesmere Park, and stretching
into parts of Claremont in Central Salford. This is a very important area
of high cost housing not just within Salford but also Greater Manchester
more generally, although it is not on the scale of the high value area
found in the south of the conurbation. Nevertheless, it is significant
particularly in terms of attracting and retaining skilled workers within the
sub-region, which is highlighted as a priority in the Greater Manchester
Strategy.
2.244 The area has very diverse travel to work connections, with outflows in
all directions. Inevitably, Manchester has a greater pull on the east of
the area, and Trafford on the south, but this part of Salford appears to
have a much broader role than the rest of the city serving a wide part of
the conurbation with skilled labour.
2.245 The area is characterised by high household incomes (particularly in
Boothstown, Ellenbrook and Worsley), low numbers of benefit
claimants, and high qualification levels. The high dwelling sales prices
found in the area are largely offset by the high household incomes so
that affordability ratios are typically around or below the city average,
although Worsley is pushed higher by its particularly high dwelling
prices. However, the prevailing household incomes in much of the rest
of the city would find the area to be unaffordable.
2.246 There are very high levels of owner-occupation and relatively little
social rented accommodation in this part of the city. It is characterised
by a high proportion of large dwellings, typically detached and semidetached, with a lower than average proportion of apartments.
Although there is a relatively low proportion of single person
households, this part of the city has the highest levels of underoccupancy.
2.247 The type of accommodation available and the broader residential
environment could be considered to make this an attractive family
housing area, and this is reflected to some extent in its demographics.
However, many parts of the area actually saw a reduction in the 0-19
age group over the last decade. When coupled with a reduction in the
number of young adults and an increase in those aged 65 and over in
the most affluent wards of Boothstown and Ellenbrook and Worsley,
100
this could indicate that younger families are finding it difficult to access
this housing market.
2.248 The area has low vacancy rates and low turnover levels, suggesting a
very stable housing market. It had a relatively low increase in dwelling
sales price in the last decade, possibly reflecting higher starting prices
and lower levels of investment purchases, although it is notable that
price inflation increased as one moved eastwards through the area.
2.249 After the significant expansion of Boothstown and Ellenbrook, which
provided a considerable proportion of the city’s new housing in the
1990s, there has been relatively little residential development activity in
recent years. The SHLAA suggests that the supply of deliverable
housing sites is quite constrained in this part of Salford.
2.250 Overall, this appears to be a successful and stable, high demand, high
cost housing market area, which serves a very important function within
the conurbation. There is no evidence that would suggest this is likely
to change in the foreseeable future, but there is also limited scope to
expand that role without considering greenfield or Green Belt
development given the limited availability of brownfield housing
opportunities in the area.
Mixed suburbs
2.251 Most of Salford West to the north and south of the central high value
housing areas consists of a series of what might be termed mixed
suburbs, comprising relatively large areas of primarily low to mid cost
housing. Parts of these areas have some similarities to Central Salford,
but they tend to be much more diverse and more typically suburban.
2.252 There is relatively little that is particularly distinctive about the overall
demography and housing of the area, reflecting a good balance of
characteristics, but this inevitably masks some significant internal
differences. Various parts of the area have concentrations of a
particular tenure, dwelling type, age group or household type, but these
normally balance out within the wider area.
2.253 For example, more than half of the dwellings in Cadishead, Irlam and
Pendlebury are semi-detached, and Cadishead is the only ward in the
city to have seen double digit growth in the 35-64 age group over the
last decade. Winton is notable within the area as a whole for having a
relatively high proportion of residents aged under 20.
2.254 The wards of Barton, Winton and Walkden North generally have higher
levels of deprivation than other parts of this area, with below average
household incomes, and quite high levels of benefit claimants. They
also have a high proportion of apartments, low proportion of detached
houses, low dwelling sales prices, and have seen a quite significant net
loss of older people over the last decade. The Private Sector House
101
Stock Condition Survey indicates that Barton has the highest level of
decent homes failure in the city.
2.255 However, overall, the area is characterised by its balance and diversity,
providing a range of housing opportunities to meet a wide variety of
needs. Although household incomes are generally around average or
below average for the city, this does not result in affordability being
worse than for Salford as a whole. Most areas have a ratio of median
house prices to median household incomes below 4, although it is a
little higher in Pendlebury, Irlam and Cadishead.
2.256 In some ways, it is the shopping patterns and commuting relationships
that distinguish the different parts of these mixed suburbs, with the
town centres of Eccles, Swinton and Walkden providing an important
focus for local communities. Irlam and Cadishead is relatively selfcontained in terms of commuting compared to the rest of the city,
although it has reasonably strong connections to Trafford as does the
neighbouring Eccles area. The Walkden area has quite strong links to
Bolton, whereas the commuting patterns of Swinton and Pendlebury
are generally more diverse. Consequently, in practice it is likely to be
made up of several smaller, overlapping housing market areas.
2.257 Some parts of the wider area have seen quite significant population
growth over the last decade as a result of major housing development,
most notably Pendlebury and Cadishead which have been an important
supply of new houses in the city over the last decade. There will be
further large-scale residential development opportunities in the future,
particularly as some of the existing employment areas cease to have
an economic function. However, this is unlikely to have any significant
impact on the overall role of this housing area.
Little Hulton
2.258 Although in some ways Little Hulton could be considered to form part of
the large mixed suburbs housing market area discussed above, the
evidence presented in this section suggests that it has a number of
distinctive characteristics that result in it having a somewhat different
role within the city. In many ways it is similar to some of the low cost
areas of Central Salford, but has a much more peripheral location.
Consequently, it has fewer connections to the major employment
concentrations in the south-east of the city, Manchester and Trafford,
but has some significant commuting links to Bolton.
2.259 The area has a high proportion of apartments despite its location on the
edge of the city, and a very low proportion of detached houses. More
than half of dwellings are in social rented sector and owner-occupation
levels are low. Demographically, the proportion of the population that is
under 20 is significantly above the city average, and the proportion of
households with dependent children is quite high. Although the
proportion of the area’s population that is aged 65 or over is very
102
similar to that for Salford as a whole, the area saw a significant
decrease in this age group over the last decade.
2.260 Little Hulton is one of the most deprived parts of Salford, with low
average household incomes and high levels of benefit claimants.
Dwelling values per square metre are similar to the low cost areas of
Central Salford, and Little Hulton actually has the lowest median
dwelling sales price of any ward in the city. Consequently, despite the
low average household incomes, this is one of the most affordable
areas of the city.
2.261 Some of the housing market indicators appear quite positive, for
example with the area having a low vacancy rate and a relatively low
turnover rate. However, there has been very little overall growth in
house prices over the last decade, particularly compared to the Salford
average, and the area has seen the largest reductions in transactions
since the market peak in the city. It has also seen relatively little new
development, with a net reduction of dwellings over the period 20032011 and the main completions being in the last year as a result of the
local authority new build programme. Low development values may
make it difficult to bring forward some potential residential development
sites without public subsidy. Many of the positive indicators such as low
vacancies are likely to result from good management of the social
rented stock in the area.
Overview
2.262 Overall, although there may be some ebb and flow of the housing
market areas in Salford, particularly the edge of city centre area, their
roles appear relatively well-established. There will always be higher
and lower cost areas due to the way in which housing markets function
more generally, but Salford as a whole benefits from the fact that such
areas are reasonably close together enabling all types of household to
live near to their ideal location.
2.263 The emphasis in the future may therefore need to be on ensuring that
each area can fulfil its current housing role as effectively as possible,
whilst understanding the particular pressures they face, rather than
seeking to initiate any substantial change in function. These future
pressures and changes are discussed in more detail in the next section
of this assessment.
103
3.
The future housing market
Projected changes in future numbers of households
3.1
Estimating the future change in the number of households in Salford is
fundamental to determining how much new housing needs to be
provided in the city. There are various different methodologies of
forecasting household growth, and several are set out below. Some of
these incorporate policy assumptions about the role of Salford and
where people should live within Greater Manchester, whereas others
are effectively policy-neutral.
3.2
Household growth forecasts are available and can be produced for a
variety of time periods. For consistency, the methodologies below focus
on the period 2011-2028. This time period has been selected as it is
that proposed in Salford’s Publication Core Strategy.
Methodology A – Regional Spatial Strategy6
3.3
Table 7.1 of Policy L4 of the Regional Spatial Strategy identifies a
housing provision figure for Salford of 28,800 dwellings (net of
clearance replacement) over the period 2003-2021. This equates to an
average of 1,600 dwellings per annum.
3.4
A net increase of 8,013 dwellings was delivered in Salford over the
period 2003-2011. This would leave a requirement for a net increase of
20,787 dwellings over the period 2011-2021 if the Regional Spatial
Strategy figure of 28,800 dwellings for the period 2003-2021 was to be
achieved.
3.5
The Regional Spatial Strategy only gives limited advice for what should
happen beyond 2021, stating that “local planning authorities should
assume that the average annual requirement set out in Table 7.1 will
continue for a limited period beyond 2021” (Policy L4). If the annual
average was continued up to 2028 then this would give a requirement
for Salford of 11,200 dwellings over the period 2021-2028. Adding this
to the residual requirement of 20,787 dwellings for the period 20112021 would give a total requirement for the period 2011-2028 of 31,987
dwellings net of clearance replacement.
3.6
The Regional Spatial Strategy appears to equate dwellings with
households, without any other considerations being factored in7.
6
“North West of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy to 2021” – Government Office for the
North West (September 2008)
7
See paragraph 6.99 of “North West Draft Regional Spatial Strategy – Examination in Public
October 2006-February 2007: Report of the Panel” (March 2007)
104
Consequently, the above is an estimate of household growth as well as
a dwelling requirement.
3.7
Therefore, utilising the Regional Spatial Strategy to identify the scale of
household growth would give a figure of 31,987 additional
households over the period 2011-2028.
3.8
The Regional Spatial Strategy housing figures for Greater Manchester
were based on a policy approach that identified the Regional Centre as
the first priority for development, and the surrounding inner areas as
the second priority for development. This approach effectively sought to
direct some of the demand generated in some areas of Greater
Manchester into the central parts of Manchester and Salford. In the
case of Salford, this was based on an assumption that there would be
very high levels of apartment development in the Regional Centre, and
to a lesser extent the rest of Central Salford, throughout the Regional
Spatial Strategy period of 2003-2021.
3.9
However, significant market changes over the last few years have
resulted in it being highly questionable whether this scale of
development could actually be delivered within the Regional Centre
and surrounding inner area within Salford. The assumptions about the
likely yields on many sites in these locations have been amended in
Salford’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, reducing the
overall identified capacity in the city. This means that the evidence on
which the Regional Spatial Strategy figure for Salford was based has
changed significantly since it was considered at an examination in
public in October 2006-February 2007, as have the likely implications
of seeking to meet that figure in the long-term.
Methodology B – Housing-led forecast
3.10
A simple way of estimating future housing demand is to assume that it
will match past development rates in terms of net housing completions.
3.11
It is possible that past housing completions will have been constrained
by land supply, and therefore could represent an underestimate of
demand. Equally, there is also some evidence that the scale of
development around 2006-2009 was driven in part by speculative
investment seeking to take advantage of increasing house prices, and
therefore may not have represented a genuine need for new housing.
3.12
For the purposes of the calculations here, it is assumed that any
possible issue of potential land constraint in constraining past
completions is offset by the impacts of speculative demand and
vacancies in new dwellings. Consequently, dwelling completions are
assumed to be a proxy for household growth, and can be extrapolated
on that basis.
105
3.13
Accurate figures for net completions are available as far back as 1998.
Over the period 1998-2011, a net total of 9,374 dwellings were
completed, equating to an annual average net increase of 721
dwellings per annum. If future household growth was at the same rate,
then there would be an increase of 12,258 households over the period
2011-2028.
3.14
It could be argued that this is a very long period of past completions to
be projecting forward. An alternative would be to use the period since
2003, as this is the base date of the Regional Spatial Strategy which
marked a significant change in policy, and is also the date from which
more detailed information on completions was collected for example in
terms of the type of dwellings being constructed. Over the period 20032011, a net total of 8,013 dwellings were completed, equating to an
annual average net increase of 1,002 dwellings per annum. If future
household growth was at the same rate, then there would be an
increase of 17,028 households over the period 2011-2028.
Distribution of household growth
3.15 As detailed information is available, a spatial element can also be
provided for this method of estimating future household growth. The
table below identifies the balance between Central Salford and Salford
West using the two approaches above. The balance between the two
areas is very similar across the two approaches, with just under 57% of
household growth in Central Salford and just over 43% in Salford West.
Area
Central Salford
Salford West
Salford total
Area
Central Salford
Salford West
Salford total
Completions 1998-2011
2011-2028 household growth
Total
Per annum
Total
% of city total
5,335
410
6,977
56.9%
4,039
311
5,282
43.1%
9,374
721
12,259
Completions 2003-2011
2011-2028 household growth
Total
Per annum
Total
% of city total
4,525
566
9,616
56.5%
3,488
436
7,412
43.5%
8,013
1,002
17,028
Methodology C – Department for Communities and Local Government
2008-based household projections
3.16
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)
household projections are based on a forward projection of past
demographic trends, and do not seek to take into account how nondemographic factors such as planning policy, the economy or housing
supply may impact on household growth.
106
3.17
The DCLG summarises its methodology as follows:
“The household projections are produced by applying projected
household representative rates to the population projections published
by the Office for National Statistics. Projected household representative
rates are based on trends observed in Census and Labour Force
Survey data. The assumptions underlying national household and
population projections are demographic trend based. They do not
attempt to predict the impact that future government policies, changing
economic circumstances or other factors might have on demographic
behaviour. They provide the household levels and structures that would
result if the assumptions based on previous demographic trends in the
population and rates of household formation were to be realised in
practice.”8
3.18
The DCLG 2008-based sub-national household projections forecast an
increase of 18,311 households in Salford over the period 2011-2028
(from 101,401 in 2011 to 119,712 in 2028).
Timing of household growth
3.19 The table below shows the forecast timing of household growth over
this period. It can be seen that the household growth is slightly above
the average for 2011-2028 in the first seven years of the period, before
reducing slightly below the average, and then returning to around the
average by 2027/28. Overall, the pattern of growth is therefore forecast
to be relatively even.
Year
Net additional
households
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17
1,178
1,154
1,120
1,142
1,146
1,152
Year
Net additional
households
2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23
1,108
1,065
1,056
1,028
1,035
1,005
Year
Net additional
households
2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 Average
988
993
1,014
1,053
1,074
1,077
Variables affecting household growth
3.20 The ONS 2010-based national population projections were published in
October 2011, but have yet to be disaggregated to the sub-national
level or translated into household projections. The table below
compares the 2008-based and 2010-based population projections for
England.
8
“Household Projections, 2008 to 2033, England” – Department of Communities and Local
Government (26 November 2010)
107
National
population
projection
2008-based
2010-based
Natural change
3,778,974
4,023,115
England (2011-2028)
Net migration
Total population
growth
2,695,000
6,473,974
3,030,700
7,053,815
3.21
It can be seen that both the natural change and net migration
components are forecast to be higher in the latest population
projections. However, it is not possible to identify whether these
increases would apply to a lesser or greater extent to Salford.
Furthermore, the Government has a target of reducing net migration
into the UK to the tens of thousands by 2015, which would suggest that
the migration assumptions could be a significant overestimate. The
Institute for Public Policy Research estimates that there will be a
reduction in UK net in-migration to around 180,000 in 20129, which
compares to an assumption in the 2010-based population projections
of 232,500 in 2012-13, and in the 2008-based population projections of
190,800 in 2012-13.
3.22
Consequently, although the 2010-based population projections forecast
higher levels of net in-migration, the 2008-based household projections
could potentially overestimate the impacts of migration on household
growth due to changes in Government policy (and possibly also other
factors such as economic conditions).
3.23
The table below shows the variant household projections for England10.
These variant projections have been produced by applying the 2008based variant population projections published by the Office for
National Statistics to the household representative rates in the principal
household projections. They show that an increase in fertility rates
would not have a significant impact on household growth up to 2033.
Although higher fertility rates would lead to higher population growth,
this would not work through into higher household growth until the end
of this period.
Variant
Fertility
Long term
average
number of
children per
adult
Scenario
Assumption
in population
(England)
Number of
Households
in 2033
(thousands)
Average
annual
increase
2008-2033
(thousands)
High
Principal
2.05
1.85
27,596
27,536
235
232
Low
1.65
27,477
230
9
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16372717
Based on Table 416 of the Department for Communities and Local Government 2008based household projections
10
108
Variant
Scenario
Assumption
in population
(England)
Number of
Households
in 2033
(thousands)
Average
annual
increase
2008-2033
(thousands)
Males 85.3
Females 88.3
278,89011
246
Males 83.4
Females 87.1
27,536
232
Low
Males 81.5
Females 85.9
27,169
218
No
improvement
Males 78.1
Females 82.2
25,982
170
217,000
157,000
97,000
0
28,318
27,536
26,755
25,455
264
232
201
149
28,734
280
26,331
184
Life Expectancy
Expectation
High
of life at birth
at 2033
(years)
Principal
Migration
Long term
annual
migration
High
Principal
Low
Zero Net
Combination variants
High
population
Low
population
3.24
High on all
assumptions
Low on all
assumptions
Overall, therefore, the latest population projections and estimates of net
migration would suggest that there are some upward pressures on
population growth, but these are likely to be counterbalanced and
possibly outweighed by reduced levels of net in-migration. It would
therefore seem, at least at the national level, that the 2008-based
household projections should be a reasonable estimate of household
growth.
Methodology D – Greater Manchester Forecasting Model
Background to the Greater Manchester Forecasting Model
3.25 The Greater Manchester Forecasting Model (GMFM) is developed and
managed by Oxford Economics on behalf of the Association of Greater
11
This is the figure in the DCLG table, but it is assumed that it should be 27,889
109
Manchester Authorities. It is an integrated forecasting model covering
factors such as population, economic output and employment as well
as wider issues such as skills demand, employment land, households
and migration.
3.26
The GMFM adopts a more complex approach to estimating the number
of future households than the DCLG household projections, taking into
account a much wider range of variables and not just demographic
factors. It also considers whether there are likely to be any changes in
trends rather than simply projecting forward past trends. However, in
common with the DCLG approach, the GMFM Baseline forecast does
not take into account supply side issues (such as the supply of
housing) or changes in policy.
3.27
There are three key sets of assumptions that underpin the GMFM
Baseline forecast12:
•
Macroeconomic conditions – such as oil prices, inflation,
exchange rates, world demand, government spending, consumer
spending
•
Past trends – inherent supply side factors that underpin
performance, with the model assuming that supply side pressures
exert the same level of influence in the future that they have done
previously
•
Basic economic relationships – including relationships such as
people and jobs, spending and jobs, and economic growth and
migration (a more detailed example is the way in which GDP is
affected by levels of consumption, investment, government
spending and the balance of trade, and the level of consumption
is in turn affected by incomes and interest rates)
3.28
The GMFM sits within a hierarchy of models produced by Oxford
Economics, with a World model at the top. Each lower geographical
level (UK, region, Greater Manchester, district) is consistent with the
level above in the Baseline forecasts, so for example the Greater
Manchester figures when added to Merseyside, Cheshire, Lancashire
and Cumbria equal the North West region figures.
3.29
The more complex relationships are modelled at the larger geographies
due to the quality and reliability of data, with their outputs then feeding
into the GMFM. The GMFM has a more detailed coverage of a range of
variables such as ethnicity, housing stock, quintile population and
households. It is the macro changes outside Greater Manchester that
have the biggest impact on the outputs rather than trends within the
conurbation.
3.30
In terms of population and households, the GMFM specifically
considers amongst other things:
12
“Greater Manchester Forecasting Model: Autumn 2009 update – Summary of Results” –
Oxford Economics/New Economy (2009)
110
•
•
•
•
Five-year population age bands split by male and female (0-4
years old, 5-9, 10-14, and so on up to 80-84 and 85 upwards).
Inwards and outward migration flows, separating out domestic and
international migration, and working-age migration. Domestic
migration is modelled by an equation relating net inflows to a
variety of economic and demographic factors. For example, it is
informed by inflows and outflows derived from the Census, the
level of deprivation (higher levels reducing migration), the housing
vacancy rate (higher levels having a detrimental impact on
people’s willingness to move into an area), the proportion of young
people in the population (with younger people tending to be more
mobile, so that areas having a higher proportion of 16-24 year olds
tending to see more inflows and those with a high proportion of 2529 year olds lower inflows), the balance of regional migration
flows, the regional employment rate relative to the UK average
(relative increases pushing up outward migration and reducing
inward migration), regional house prices relative to London, and
average regional wages relative to London. International migration
is influenced by similar regional factors.
Natural population increase, including the ageing of the surviving
population each year, death rates by sex and age group, and new
births based on the number of women of child-bearing age.
Changes in headship rates, applying them to the five-year age
groups to estimate the number of households in each age group.
3.31
The GMFM outputs may be different to those from other models for a
variety of reasons including:
•
It produces forecasts rather than simply projections (i.e. factors in
changes in trends rather than just projecting forward past trends)
•
Its assessment of relationships and past trends may be different
•
It may use different data and a much larger number of variables
3.32
Oxford Economics is very careful to point out that the additional
complexity of the GMFM does not necessarily guarantee a more
accurate forecast of household growth and other variables. It is simply
one of many different ways in which an estimate can be calculated.
Forecast results
3.33 The 2011 update of the GMFM forecasts an increase of 16,568
households in Salford over the period 2011-2028 (from 102,144 in
2011 to 118,712 in 2028). The scale of household growth forecast by
the GMFM is therefore 1,743 households fewer than that estimated by
the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) 2008based household projections (although the number of households
forecast in 2028 is only 1,000 lower, because GMFM estimates a
higher number of households in 2011 than the DCLG projections).
Timing of household growth
3.34 The table below shows the forecast timing of household growth over
this period according to the GMFM. In contrast to the DCLG
111
projections, where household growth was reasonably even over the
whole period though slightly higher in the first seven years, the GMFM
forecasts that household growth will be significantly lower in the early
years with a gradual increase over the period.
Year
Net additional
households
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17
682
809
870
756
827
837
Year
Net additional
households
2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23
876
913
968
1,000
1,055
1,097
Year
Net additional
households
2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 Average
1,142
1,170
1,189
1,185
1,193
975
Migration assumptions
3.35 One of the differences between the assumptions underpinning the ONS
2008-based population projections (and therefore the DCLG household
projections) and the GMFM household forecasts relates to net
migration levels. The table below compares the figures from these
sources for the period 2011-2028.
Year
ONS/DCLG
GMFM
2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17
600
500
400
400
300
300
758
606
376
185
197
90
Year
ONS/DCLG
GMFM
2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23
300
200
200
100
100
200
64
22
29
-38
-43
-83
Year
ONS/DCLG
GMFM
2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 Total
200
200
200
200
200
4,600
-98
-143
-215
-321
-390
996
3.36
It can be seen that the GMFM assumes significantly lower levels of
migration overall, with net out migration in the second half of the period.
However, this is more than offset by other factors, as it is these later
years in which the GMFM forecasts higher household growth than the
DCLG 2008-based household projections. This highlights that different
models will have a variety of different assumptions, some of which will
magnify each other and some of which will offset each other. The
overall impact is that the GMFM forecasts slightly lower levels of
household growth compared to the DCLG projections over the period
2011-2028 (9.5% lower).
112
Methodology E – Greater Manchester Forecasting Model with additional
growth
3.37
The Greater Manchester Forecasting Model (GMFM) provides a
baseline forecast, without considering the implications of any policy
interventions. A further way of estimating future household growth in
Salford is therefore to use the GMFM as a starting point but then apply
additional assumptions relating to the impact of certain policies. The
methodology used here focuses on two particular aspects of this,
related to the scale of office development proposed in Salford’s Core
Strategy and the impacts of housing benefit changes on the number of
single person households.
Office development
3.38 The GMFM splits the economy into 52 different sectors, and forecasts
the change in the number of jobs in each sector by district. It also
estimates the proportion of jobs in each of these sectors that would
utilise office floorspace, and then applies job densities to calculate the
change in office floorspace that this would result in. However, new
guidance13 is now available on job densities, which suggests that some
types of office developments are achieving lower average levels of
floorspace per worker (i.e. higher densities). The city council has
revised the GMFM office floorspace outputs utilising this updated job
density information, but with all other assumptions remaining the same.
This results in a forecast net increase of 239,730m2 of office floorspace
over the period 2011-2028.
3.39
Salford’s Publication Core Strategy is proposing a net increase of
500,000m2 of office floorspace over the period 2011-2028. All other
things being equal, it would be anticipated that this additional
260,270m2 of office floorspace compared to the GMFM-based forecast
(referred to hereafter as the “additional office floorspace”) would result
in higher household growth given the additional jobs that would be
generated. There is no standardised methodology for calculating the
scale of this extra household growth, and any approach will inevitably
involve a significant number of assumptions. However, if the scale of
office development that is delivered in Salford over the period 20112028, and therefore the number of new jobs, is significantly above that
which is assumed within the household growth forecasts then it would
seem likely that those forecasts will represent an underestimate of
demand and it is helpful to seek to provide some indication of the
potential scale of this.
3.40
Some of the additional office floorspace is likely to be vacant,
particularly that which is constructed at the end of the period 20112028 as it will inevitably take some time for new floorspace to be
occupied. The vacancy rate is estimated at 10% for the purposes of
this methodology. This would mean that 234,243m2 of the 260,270m2
13
“Employment Densities Guide: 2
nd
Edition” – Homes and Communities Agency (2010)
113
of the additional office floorspace would be occupied. The
aforementioned guidance on job densities indicates an average job
density in general offices of 12m2. This job density relates to net
internal floor area and therefore needs to be translated into gross
internal floor area in order to be related to the aforementioned
234,243m2 of office floorspace. Paragraph 2.8 of the guidance states
that a figure of 15-20% should be used as a general benchmark for
converting gross to net areas in office property. However, it also
explains that the range may be higher for multi-tenanted buildings. It is
anticipated that most of the new office development in Salford will be in
the form of large, multi-tenanted buildings in the Regional Centre, and
so a figure towards the top end of the range has been used, namely
19%. The guidance explains that the following formula should be used
to translate a gross internal area (GIA) to a net internal area (NIA): GIA
m2 x (100-x)% = NIA m2 (where x would be 19% in the case of Salford
as identified above). Moving from a job density expressed in terms of
net internal floor area to one expressed in gross internal floor area
therefore involves dividing the floor area by 0.81 (100-19% expressed
as a decimal). This gives a job density of 14.8m2 per job (i.e. 12/0.81).
Applying this to the occupied additional office floorspace of 234,243m2
gives an estimated 15,811 extra jobs resulting from the additional office
floorspace being proposed in Salford’s Publication Core Strategy
compared to the GMFM 2011 forecast.
3.41
The proportion of this additional office development in Salford that is
actually additional to Greater Manchester as a whole, rather than
already effectively appearing in the forecasts of other Greater
Manchester districts, could theoretically be anywhere between 0% and
100%. If the office floorspace is not additional to Greater Manchester,
then its household growth implications would already be expected to be
incorporated within the household growth forecasts for the ten local
authority areas within Greater Manchester, including Salford. Past
trends would suggest that virtually all of the additional office floorspace
in Salford compared to the GMFM will be within Salford’s part of the
Manchester/Salford City Centre. The Publication Core Strategy
proposes a total of 220,000m2 in the City Centre over the period 20112028, which equates to an average of 12,941m2 per annum compared
to the past trend for that part of the city over the period January 2002 to
March 2011 of 450m2 per annum. Indeed, the Publication Core
Strategy is actually proposing a lower annual office floorspace figure in
the rest of the city (i.e. excluding Greengate and Salford Central)
compared to past trends, with 16,471m2 per annum proposed
compared to a past trend of 18,652m2 per annum. Over the last
decade, the City Centre office development has virtually all been within
Manchester rather than Salford, and therefore the jobs associated with
new City Centre office floorspace are likely to appear in the future
forecasts for Manchester rather than Salford. Consequently, it would be
expected that a significant proportion of the jobs resulting from the
additional office floorspace in Salford do already actually appear in the
GMFM forecasts, particularly in those for Manchester.
114
3.42
However, the scale of office growth proposed in Salford’s Core
Strategy is intended to support a higher level of economic growth
across Greater Manchester rather than simply move the same amount
of economic development around. The opportunities within the City
Centre are likely to prove very attractive to the market, for example with
Manchester identified as the UK’s second city after London in the
European Cities Monitor14. A large amount of new office floorspace is
also proposed in Manchester’s part of the City Centre. This overall
scale of office development would be expected to strengthen the City
Centre agglomeration in a way that should assist in increasing the
overall scale of job growth above forecast levels.
3.43
Therefore, it would seem likely that some but not all of the additional
office development in Salford would also be additional to Greater
Manchester compared to the GMFM forecasts. The likely balance
between whether the offices are additional to Greater Manchester or
effectively redirected from elsewhere within it will be influenced by a
wide range of factors, including the state of the local and national
economies, and competing developments within and around the
conurbation. Given this uncertainty, for the purposes of this analysis
the midpoint has been taken between all and none of the floorspace
being additional to Greater Manchester, i.e. 50%, as this reduces the
potential for it being a significant under- or over-estimate. This would
mean that 7,906 jobs would be additional to Salford and Greater
Manchester as a result of the additional office floorspace proposed in
Salford’s Publication Core Strategy compared to the GMFM forecast.
3.44
According to the 2001 Census, 87.5% of those working in Salford live
somewhere in Greater Manchester (including Salford). However, the
figures are lower for the wards within which the Regional Centre falls,
which is where 90% of the office floorspace proposed in the Publication
Core Strategy would be located (79.2% for Ordsall, and 85.7% for
Blackfriars, which equates to 81.8% for the two wards together (this
data is from the 2001 Census and consequently uses the old wards,
but they are a reasonable approximation of the Regional Centre)). The
extent to which those occupying any additional office jobs live in
Greater Manchester will depend on a range of factors, including family
ties and the availability of appropriate housing in attractive locations
within the conurbation. If such housing could be provided then it may
be possible to increase the proportion of workers in Salford’s part of the
Regional Centre who live in Greater Manchester. Nevertheless, it
would seem likely that at least some of the additional jobs provided
would be occupied by commuters from outside Greater Manchester,
given the extent of the influence of the Regional Centre. On the basis
that it is appropriate to seek to reduce this to some extent, it has been
assumed that 90% of the additional jobs would be occupied by people
living in Greater Manchester, which would equate to 7,115.
14
“European Cities Monitor 2011” – Cushman and Wakefield (2011)
115
3.45
In practice, a significant proportion of these people would normally be
expected to live outside Salford. According to the 2001 Census, 65.8%
of those working in the two Regional Centre Salford wards of Ordsall
and Blackfriars live within Greater Manchester but outside Salford.
However, none of the other Greater Manchester districts are currently
planning for any of the extra household growth that would result from
the additional office floorspace in Salford. Therefore, to ensure that the
households would be catered for, it would be necessary to assume that
all of those working in the 7,115 extra office jobs would live in Salford.
This approach is likely to result in a figure that is effectively a maximum
level of demand, potentially significantly above what would actually be
seen.
3.46
There is a wide range of variables that could potentially influence the
number of households that would be generated by the additional 7,115
office jobs. The GMFM forecasts that the average number of jobs per
household in Greater Manchester in 2028 will be 1.053809. This would
suggest that the 7,115 office jobs could result in 6,752 extra
households above the GMFM forecasts. However, these office jobs
would be expected to result in other additional employment, for
example in terms of the shops and other services required to support
them, and so the number of households could potentially be higher.
Equally, if the extra office jobs were generating the additional migration
then it would be expected that this migration would be likely to have a
much higher proportion of working households than Greater
Manchester overall. It is also possible, and indeed would be an
ambition, that some of these extra office jobs would be occupied by
existing residents within Salford and the rest of Greater Manchester,
and so would not generate any migration at all. These factors are
working in different directions, and therefore could potentially offset
each other. Consequently, the figure of 6,752 extra households above
the GMFM forecasts is considered to be a reasonable estimate of the
potential impact of the additional office floorspace that is proposed in
Salford’s Publication Core Strategy compared to the GMFM forecasts.
Housing benefit changes
3.47 The forthcoming change to housing benefit rules in April 2012 will
increase the age threshold from 25 to 35 for single person households
to receive housing benefit for anything other than a room in a shared
house. It would seem very likely that this will significantly increase the
demand for shared accommodation, as living as a single household will
become financially untenable. As of January 2011, 672 people living in
Salford would be affected by this change.
3.48
It would seem likely that all of these people will need to move to shared
accommodation. This would result in them effectively changing from
672 single person households to a smaller number of multi-person
households. The number of multi-person households will depend on
the type of accommodation available, with some potentially living in
116
two-bedroom apartments and others in houses with several bedrooms.
If it were assumed that on average they will live in three-bedroom
properties, then this would mean that the 672 existing single person
households would become 224 multi-person households in the future.
This would effectively reduce the total household growth over the
period 2011-2028 by 448 households.
Total household growth
3.49 Compared to the GMFM 2011 Baseline position, this methodology
estimates an increase in household growth resulting from additional
office development of 6,752 households, and a reduction in household
growth resulting from housing benefit changes of 448 households.
3.50
Overall, it therefore estimates total household growth in Salford for
the period 2011-2028 at 22,872 households (i.e. the GMFM forecast
of 16,568 plus 6,752 minus 448). Alternative assumptions could be
used to produce a range of different figures, both above and below this,
but the approach set out is likely to provide a reasonable middle point
that would provide a basis for planning for Salford’s housing needs.
3.51
Any attempt to modify the DCLG 2008-based household projections in
a similar way, in order to take account of the large amount of office
floorspace proposed in Salford’s Publication Core Strategy, would be
far more difficult involving significantly more assumptions. This is
because the DCLG projections are purely demographic, and so there is
no real basis on which to estimate how much economic growth they
effectively assume in Salford. Indeed, it is possible that the 500,000m2
of additional office floorspace proposed in Salford over the period
2011-2028 is fully consistent with the DCLG projections, such that no
extra allowance would need to be made. In contrast, the GMFM is an
integrated model that has economic and demographic outputs, which
enables this type of methodology for calculating household growth to
be used.
Methodologies F and G – The Chelmer Model (as submitted by The Peel
Group)
3.52
The Peel Group submitted detailed representations to Salford’s PrePublication Core Strategy in August 2011. These were accompanied by
a report by Open House titled “Salford City-Wide Housing Need
Assessment”, which included outputs from the Chelmer model.
About the Chelmer model
3.53 The Cambridge Econometrics website describes the Chelmer
Population and Housing Model as follows:
“The Chelmer Population and Housing (Chelmer) Model is a
demographic regional housing model that can be tailored to produce
forecasts for specific local areas. The model was originally developed
117
over many years by the Population and Housing Research Group at
Anglia Ruskin University under the leadership of Professor Dave King.
Cambridge Econometrics became custodian of the model in 2008 since
when the company has invested strongly in the development of this
powerful tool.
Features of the model
Key features of the model include:
•
provides projections of population, housing numbers, household
composition and labour supply
•
identifies household numbers disaggregated by type (e.g. single,
married etc.)
•
allows for the running of 'what-if' scenarios
•
operates at different spatial levels; region, county, unitary
authority, district
•
projections can be migration-led, housing-led or population-led
•
user-friendly software application to facilitate in-house analysis
providing a range of summary/detailed results tables
Broad structure of the model
The model projects the change in the population between two dates by
calculating births, deaths, out-migrants and in-migrants. The projection
of private households is made from the private household population
through assumptions for age/gender-specific headship rates. The
implied increase for the number of dwellings is then derived from
assumptions for rates of sharing dwellings by multiple households and
for vacancy rates.
Housing-led projections
It is possible to reverse the direction of causation described above to
consider the impact that a particular profile for future housebuilding in
an area would have on the size and character of the population. In this
case the population growth and migration assumptions are derived
from the assumed capacity of an area to accommodate dwellings.”15
3.54
It can therefore be seen that Chelmer is a demographic model, and
does not seek to provide any integrated economic modelling in the way
that the Greater Manchester Forecasting Model does. This does not
mean that either model is by definition more “accurate” than the other,
but it is important to recognise that they are different types of model.
Scenarios
3.55 The Open House report sets out four different Chelmer model
scenarios:
1)
Assumes “the average level of net in-migration will remain
consistent with the more recent period between 2005-2010 at a
rate of 1100 per annum”
15
http://www.camecon.com/Home/ConsultancyCapability/Demographic_Analysis/Chelmer_Mod
el.aspx - viewed 13 January 2012
118
2)
3)
4)
3.56
Assumes “that the Adopted RSS rate (1600 dwellings net per
annum) will continue to apply over the period 2010-2030”
Is “based on the Council’s proposal in the Pre-Publication
version to limit housing to 1100 dwellings per annum”
Assumes “employment growth of 34,700 between 2007-2026, in
line with the medium growth scenario adopted by the Salford
Employment Land Review of November 2008”16
The second and third of these scenarios start from a particular
proposed dwelling provision, and therefore are not relevant here in
terms of a methodology for estimating future household growth. The
other two scenarios are discussed below.
Methodology F – Average level of net in-migration remain at a rate of
1,100 per annum
3.57
The Open House report states that:
“This scenario adopts a migration-led approach whereby the Chelmer
Model has assumed a level of net in-migration of 1,100 per annum from
2011 onwards, which is consistent with the annual average for Salford
City between 2005-2010. It should be noted that the longer-term trend
of 2002-2010 has been similar at a level of 1,000 per annum. The
shorter five year period is probably representative of likely migration
patterns over the longer twenty year period to 2030 because it includes
years of economic growth (2005-2007) and less successful years
(2008-2010)” (paragraph 2.73).
3.58
The report then sets out figures for dwellings, population and labour
force for the period 2010-2030, and five year periods within it. An
appendix is included in the report with the full outputs of this scenario,
which gives information for five year periods between 2001 and 2036. It
appears that the figures in the main report have been calculated on a
pro rata basis from those in the appendix (i.e. they assume that the
change in any five year period is evenly distributed between each of
the five years). Taking a similar approach, the table below shows the
outputs as they would apply to the period 2011-2028.
Population
Household population
Natural change (household population)
Net migration (household population)
Households
16
2011
230,526
224,444
2028
276,265
269,824
101,533
126,040
Change
2011-28
45,739
45,380
26,681
18,700
24,507
“Salford City-Wide Housing Need Assessment” – Open House (July 2011), paragraphs
2.69-2.72
119
3.59
The net migration in the Chelmer model is effectively an input rather an
output in this scenario, as its whole basis is an assumption that there
will be net in-migration to Salford of 1,100 people per annum. This
equates to a total net in-migration of 18,700 over the period 2011-2028.
This is very significantly above the figures from the ONS 2008-based
population projections (4,600) and the GMFM (996).
3.60
It should be noted that the Chelmer model migration figures only relate
to household population (i.e. those people living in households rather
than the ‘institutional population’ living in shared accommodation)
rather than all migration. The DCLG 2008-based household projections
assume an increase in Salford’s institutional population from 5,904 to
6,280 over the period 2011-2028, so the impact of this is likely to
limited.
3.61
It should also be noted that the Chelmer model outputs for this scenario
also assume a higher level of natural population growth (26,681
people) than the ONS 2008-based population projections (23,800
people) for the period 2011-2028.
3.62
This approach therefore represents a significantly different view of
Salford’s future demographics than Government projections and the
GMFM, and is effectively driven by a policy approach rather than a
detailed objective modelling of future migration. Consequently, it is
important to consider it as a scenario rather than a forecast or a
projection. The result of this scenario is an estimated household
growth in Salford of 24,507 households over the period 2011-2028.
Methodology G – Economic-led target of an increase of 34,700 jobs over
the period 2011-2031
3.63
The Open House Report states that:
“The final scenario assumes employment growth of 34,700 between
2007-2026, in line with the medium growth scenario adopted by the
Salford Employment Land Review of November 2008. The high growth
or ‘Aspirational’ scenario plans for the creation of 55,800 jobs over the
20-year period, but given the economic challenges facing the Region
and the Country as a whole it is considered more prudent to follow a
restrained approach. It is considered that the medium-growth scenario
remains in line with the RSS’ vision to establish Manchester/Salford as
a world class city with high economic growth” (paragraph 2.72).
3.64
However, the title of the scenario elsewhere in the report suggests that
the 34,700 additional jobs would be provided over the period 20112031 rather than 2007-2026. For the purposes of this analysis, it is
assumed that the 2011-2031 time period is correct. The 34,700 figure
is taken from the 2007 GMFM Accelerated Growth Scenario, which is a
120
policy-on figure rather than a baseline forecast. The Accelerated
Growth Scenario is no longer produced.
3.65
As with the migration-led scenario described above, the Open House
Report then sets out figures for dwellings, population and labour force
for the period 2010-2030, and five year periods within it. The table
below shows the outputs in the appendix to the report as they would
apply to the period 2011-2028 on a pro rata basis.
Population
Household population
Natural change (household population)
Net migration (household population)
Labour force
Households
2011
230,526
224,444
2028
296,902
290,461
111,733
101,533
142,357
134,867
Change
2011-28
66,376
66,017
30,273
35,738
30,624
33,334
3.66
The Chelmer model is a demographic rather than an economic model,
and so it cannot directly model the impact of 34,700 additional jobs
over the period 2007-2026. Paragraph 2.76 of the Open House report
indicates that labour force growth and job growth are being equated for
the purposes of its analysis. It would therefore appear that the job
growth is being modelled simply by increasing the size of the labour
force. This assumes that very major job growth in Salford would not
result in any additional net in-commuting, and effectively views the city
as a self-contained entity rather than part of an integrated sub-regional
economy.
3.67
No increase in net in-commuting would seem to be a highly unlikely
outcome given that the focus of job growth will be in the Regional
Centre, with a key part of the attractiveness of that location being the
ability of businesses to access a very large labour market covering the
whole of Greater Manchester and beyond. The GMFM estimates that
net in-commuting to Salford was 9,998 workers in 2011, and forecasts
that this will increase to 15,484 in 2028 (an increase of 5,486). As a
comparison, Manchester’s net in-commuting level in 2011 was
estimated to be 92,068 workers by the GMFM. A significant proportion
of this net in-commuting is likely to be the result of the sub-regional role
of the Regional Centre, and it would be anticipated that the growth of
the Regional Centre within Salford would result in that part of the city
having a similar sphere of influence.
3.68
The Open House report also states that the Chelmer projections
assume that “the aggregate economic activity rate of people of working
age increases by less than a percentage point over the 20 year period
of the projections to 2031”, so virtually all of the new jobs would be
occupied by in-migrants to Salford rather than existing residents.
121
3.69
This scenario forecasts an extremely high level of net in-migration
(35,738 people) compared to the ONS 2008-based population
projections (4,600 people) and GMFM (996). It also forecasts a much
higher level of natural change (30,273 people) compared to the ONS
2008-based population projections (23,800). The result is forecast
household growth in Salford of 33,334 households over the period
2011-2028.
Comparison of household growth estimates
3.70
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
The table below compares the various household growth projections,
forecasts and scenarios discussed above.
Methodology
Regional Spatial Strategy (effectively
using 2003 as the start date)
Housing-led forecast (based on past
residential development rates)
DCLG 2008-based household
projections
Greater Manchester Forecasting Model
2011 Baseline
Greater Manchester Forecasting Model
plus extra office growth
Chelmer model – 1,100 per annum net
in-migration
Chelmer model – 34,700 job growth
over the period 2011-2031
Change
2011
2028
2011-28
N/A
N/A
31,987
N/A
N/A
17,028
101,401
119,712
18,311
102,144
118,712
16,568
102,144
125,016
22,872
101,533
126,040
24,507
101,533
134,867
33,334
Calculating the dwelling requirement from household growth estimates
3.71
The above analysis relates to estimates of the growth in the number of
households in Salford. This does not necessarily mean that this is the
number of additional dwellings that are required, although the Regional
Spatial Strategy Panel Report did take the approach of directly
equating household growth with dwelling requirements (the housing-led
forecast also effectively forecasts dwellings rather than households).
3.72
The number of dwellings that are required to meet the needs of these
additional requirements will depend on several different factors,
including:
• Vacancy levels in existing dwellings
• Vacancy levels in new dwellings
• The number of second homes
Vacancies in existing dwellings
122
3.73
Existing vacant dwellings have the potential to accommodate some of
the forecast household growth, thereby helping to reduce the need for
new housing.
3.74
Salford’s Council Tax database was being upgraded in April 2011, so
the figures from that month are not considered to accurately reflect
vacancy levels. Taking an average of the March 2011 and May 2011
figures is considered to be more appropriate, and gives a figure of
5,721 vacant dwellings at the start of the 2011-2028 period. This
equates to around 5.3% of all dwellings in the city.
3.75
Information published by the Government indicates that nationally in
April 2008, around 3% of private sector dwellings and 2% of social
rented dwellings were vacant17. The vacancy rate in Salford would
therefore appear quite high.
3.76
Salford’s Private Sector Housing Strategy 2010-2015, approved in
November 2010, sets a target for returning 2,377 private sector homes
into sustainable occupation by 2014. Council Tax data suggests that
there was a reduction in the number of vacant dwellings of 235 over the
period 2010-2011, which are likely to be predominantly if not all in the
private sector. This would leave a further 2,142 existing private sector
dwellings to be reoccupied to meet the identified target. These 2,142
dwellings could help to meet the needs of the household growth that is
forecast above, and it could therefore be considered appropriate to
take them into account when determining how much new housing
should be provided in Salford.
Vacancies in new dwellings
3.77 Some new properties as well as existing dwellings will be vacant at any
one time. The national figures referred to above suggest that a vacancy
rate of 2-3% is typical across the market as a whole. If household
growth is significant then it would be expected that the demand for new
dwellings would be high, minimising the potential for vacancies.
However, Salford has typically had a higher vacancy rate, and there is
some evidence that some apartment schemes have initially had
relatively high vacancy rates before gradually reducing.
3.78
It is therefore considered likely that the vacancy rate of new dwellings
in Salford will be slightly higher than the national vacancy rate for all
dwellings, assumed to be 4% for the purposes of this analysis. This
figure relates to the vacancy rate in April 2028 for all dwellings built
over the period 2011-2028, as new dwellings built earlier in this period
that are initially vacant would be able to meet housing needs later in
the period.
17
“Housing and Planning Key Facts: England” – Department for Communities and Local
Government (November 2010), p.1
123
Second homes
3.79 According to the English Housing Survey18, there were 245,000 second
homes in England in 2008 out of a total stock of 22,200,000 dwellings.
This gives an average second homes proportion of just over 1.10%.
This is significantly higher than the national figure of 0.64% from the
2001 Census, which had even lower figures for the North West
(0.44%), Greater Manchester (0.14%) and Salford (0.09%). Within
Salford, the 2001 Census indicated that the highest rates were in the
wards of Blackfriars (0.29%) and Ordsall (0.21%) (i.e. within the
Regional Centre).
3.80
Since the 2001 Census there has been an enormous expansion of the
apartment market within the Regional Centre, and there is anecdotal
evidence that some of these apartments are being used as ‘crash
pads’, second homes, and holiday lets. Given the high proportion of
new dwellings in Salford that will be in the form of Regional Centre
apartments, it is considered appropriate to make an allowance for
second homes within the new housing stock. The 2001 Census figures
indicate that Salford is starting from a low base of second homes, but
the English Housing Survey information suggests that second home
numbers have increased quite significantly nationally since the Census.
Salford’s Publication Core Strategy proposes to restrict the use of
apartments for short-term hotel-like lets, and if this were carried forward
then it could help to reduce the proportion of apartments that are not
being used as primary residences.
3.81
Overall, it would seem likely that the proportion of new dwellings in
Salford being used as second homes would be above the national
average in the future, given the role of the Regional Centre and the
type of accommodation being provided, but there is no evidence to
indicate that this would constitute a significant proportion of that
accommodation. In light of these factors, it is assumed here that 2% of
new dwellings will be used as second homes.
Impact on dwelling requirement
3.82 The table below identifies the scale of household growth estimated by
the various methodologies discussed above, the number of households
that could be accommodated by reducing vacancies in existing
dwellings, and the number of additional dwellings that would be
required if it is assumed that 4% of new dwellings would be vacant and
2% would be second homes. Household growth and the dwelling
requirement are the same for methodologies A and B, as those
methodologies effectively treat households and dwellings as the same.
18
“English Housing Survey: Household report 2008-09” and “English Housing Survey:
Housing stock report 2008” – Department for Communities and Local Government (October
2010)
124
Methodology
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Regional Spatial
Strategy (effectively
using 2003 as the start
date)
Housing-led forecast
(based on past
residential development
rates)
DCLG 2008-based
household projections
Greater Manchester
Forecasting Model 2011
Baseline
Greater Manchester
Forecasting Model plus
extra office growth
Chelmer model – 1,100
per annum net inmigration
Chelmer model – 34,700
job growth over the
period 2011-2031
Household
growth
2011-2028
(1)
Reduction
in existing
vacancies
(2)
Vacancies
in new
dwellings
(3)
Second
homes
(4)
Dwelling
requirement
(1-2+3+4)
31,987
N/A
N/A
N/A
31,987
17,028
N/A
N/A
N/A
17,028
18,311
2,142
674
344
17,186
16,568
2,142
601
307
15,334
22,872
2,142
864
441
22,034
24,507
2,142
932
475
23,772
33,334
2,142
1,300
663
33,154
3.83
Salford’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment separates
sites into three categories:
•
Category 1 – deliverable/developable sites that are consistent
with existing development plan policies
•
Category 2 – deliverable/developable sites where additional
information is required to ensure that they are consistent with
existing development plan policies
•
Category 3 – sites that are not considered to be
deliverable/developable, either because they would require a
significant change in development plan policy for them to receive
planning permission or due to them being physically unsuitable
for housing (the degree of deviation from existing development
plan policies varies between the sites)
3.84
The SHLAA identifies that the Category 1 and Category 2 sites,
together with an allowance for windfalls19, indicates that there was a
total capacity as of 1 April 2011 of 24,003 dwellings for the period
2011-2028.
19
The windfall allowance is based on past trends over the period 2000-2011 and only applies
from 2023. The exception is Broughton Park and Higher Broughton, where the Core Strategy
is proposing to allow slightly greater levels of infill development due to the high household
growth in the area, and the windfalls are slightly higher than past trends (with a greater
emphasis on houses rather than apartments than in the past) and apply from 2016.
125
3.85
This suggests that there would be sufficient capacity to accommodate
the dwelling requirement indicated by methodologies B-F above,
although in the case of the Chelmer model (1,100 per annum net inmigration) there would be relatively little spare capacity in the supply.
3.86
However, a significant change in policy would be required to
accommodate the scale of residential development required if
methodologies A or G were used. This would require the release of
large areas of greenfield and Green Belt land, and/or the
redevelopment of existing employment areas at a rate that, based on
economic forecasts, would be likely to force out many active
businesses and would significantly reduce local employment
opportunities.
Comparison with the scale of housing proposed elsewhere in Greater
Manchester
3.87
The second table below compares the scale of housing proposed by
each local authority in Greater Manchester in their latest Core Strategy
document with their household growth forecasts from the 2008-based
DCLG household projections and the GMFM 2011 Baseline. The time
periods of the different Core Strategies vary, and so the period 20112028 has been used for consistency and comparability with the data
presented above. The first table below identifies how the figures for
each local authority have been calculated, and the second table sets
out the detailed figures for each local authority area.
Area
Core Strategy stage
Bolton
Bury
Adopted - March 2011
2008-2026
Draft Publication 2011-2028
November 2011
Publication - February
2009-2027
60,000
2011
Adopted - November
2010-2026
5,075
20
2011
Publication - November
2010-2026
6,400
2010
2011-2028
22,100
2012
Adopted - March 2011
2011-2026
7,200
No Core Strategy document published, so the
Regional Spatial Strategy figure has been used
Publication - September
2008-2026
11,800
2010
2011-2026
15,000
2011
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Core
Strategy
period
20
Total
housing
over Core
Strategy
period
12,492
6,800
Average
per annum
over Core
Strategy
period
694
400
Figure for
2011-2028
assuming
average
applies
11,798
6,800
3,333
56,667
317
5,392
400
6,800
1,300
22,100
480
750
8,160
12,750
656
11,144
1,000
17,000
The policy refers to at least 289 dwellings per annum, but the reasoned justification
indicates that there is a backlog to make up as well, so this higher figure is included here
126
Area
Core Strategy stage
Core
Strategy
period
Greater
Manchester
Not applicable
N/A
Area
20112028
housing
proposed
in Core
Strategy
Total
housing
over Core
Strategy
period
N/A
Average
per annum
over Core
Strategy
period
N/A
Figure for
2011-2028
assuming
average
applies
158,611
DCLG 2008-based household
projections
Change Proposed Proposed
2011housing
housing
2028
minus
as % of
household household
growth
growth
11,915
-117
99.02
9,149
-2,349
74.33
50,241
6,426
112.79
9,882
-4,490
54.57
7,028
-228
96.76
16,587
-8,427
49.20
13,504
-754
94.42
18,359
-7,215
60.70
15,869
1,131
107.13
GMFM 2011 Baseline household
forecasts
Change Proposed Proposed
2011housing
housing
2028
minus
as % of
household household
growth
growth
13,367
-1,569
88.26
12,378
-5,578
54.94
39,461
17,206
143.60
9,956
-4,564
54.16
8,555
-1,755
79.49
16,485
-8,325
49.50
15,215
-2,465
83.80
13,820
-2,675
80.64
20,058
-3,058
84.75
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
11,798
6,800
56,667
5,392
6,800
8,160
12,750
11,144
17,000
Greater
Manchester
excluding
Salford
136,511
152,534
-16,023
89.50
149,295
-12,784
91.44
31,987
17,028
17,186
15,334
22,034
23,772
33,154
18,311
18,311
18,311
18,311
18,311
18,311
18,311
13,676
-1,283
-1,125
-2,977
3,723
5,461
14,843
174.69
92.99
93.86
83.74
120.33
129.82
181.06
16,568
16,568
16,568
16,568
16,568
16,568
16,568
15,419
460
618
-1,234
5,466
7,204
16,586
193.06
102.77
103.73
92.55
132.99
143.48
200.10
168,498
170,845
-2,347
98.63
165,864
2,635
101.59
153,539
170,845
-17,306
89.87
165,864
-12,324
92.57
153,697
170,845
-17,148
89.96
165,864
-12,166
92.66
151,845
170,845
-19,000
88.88
165,864
-14,018
91.55
158,545
170,845
-12,300
92.80
165,864
-7,318
95.59
160,283
170,845
-10,562
93.82
165,864
-5,580
96.64
169,665
170,845
-1,180
99.31
165,864
3,802
102.29
Salford A
Salford B
Salford C
Salford D
Salford E
Salford F
Salford G
Greater
Manchester
(Salford A)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford B)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford C)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford D)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford E)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford F)
Greater
Manchester
(Salford F)
127
3.88
The table above indicates that the rest of Greater Manchester is not
currently planning to fully meet its forecast levels of household growth,
with around 89.5% of the identified demand in the DCLG 2008-based
household projections being met and 91.4% of the GMFM 2010
Baseline household forecasts. Only Manchester is providing for more
than its forecast level of household growth in both scenarios, with
Wigan higher than its DCLG household projection but lower than its
GMFM projection. Stockport has the lowest proportionate level of
provision identified in its Core Strategy, at 49% of household growth in
both scenarios. Oldham is the next lowest, at 54-55% of forecast
household growth. Bury’s proportionate provision is also very low
compared to the GMFM forecast (55%), but less so for the DCLG
projection (74%). The relationship is the reverse for Trafford, where its
proportionate provision is very low compared to the DCLG projection
(61%), but less so for the GMFM projection (81%).
3.89
Within Salford, Methodology D discussed above would result in a level
of housing provision lower than both scenarios, with methodologies B
and C also below the DCLG projection but above the GMFM forecast.
Methodologies E and F would provide for 120-143% of the household
growth identified in the two forecasts, and methodologies A and G
would provide for 173-200%. In terms of the DCLG projections,
methodologies A, E, F and G would all result in Salford providing a
higher level of housing proportionate to its forecast household growth
than any of the other Greater Manchester local authorities. The same is
the case in relation to the GMFM forecasts, except for Manchester
being higher proportionately than methodologies E and F. This
suggests that methodologies A, E, F and G would all be consistent with
the Regional Spatial Strategy approach of seeking to concentrate a
higher proportion of housing in Manchester and Salford than would be
indicated by household growth forecasts.
3.90
It can be seen from the table that none of the methodologies for
identifying Salford’s housing figure would result in Greater Manchester
as a whole meeting all of the household growth identified in the DCLG
household projections. Methodologies A and G would be very close to
doing so, and would exceed the scale of household growth identified by
the GMFM. None of the methodologies would provide for less than
88.88% of the projected household growth (methodology D compared
to the DCLG 2008-based household projections).
3.91
However, this potential gap in provision is an issue for the whole of
Greater Manchester rather than for Salford in isolation. This is
particularly the case if methodologies A, E, F or G are used, as they all
lead to Salford significantly exceeding its forecast level of household
growth in a way that only Manchester comes close to doing, with
several of the other local authority areas significantly under-providing
for their forecast levels of household growth. This raises the issue of
128
whether it would be appropriate to use methodologies A or G, given
that they would require the release of significant areas of greenfield
and Green Belt land in Salford for housing, in order to meet a need that
is generated in other parts of Greater Manchester and could potentially
be satisfied within them. Viewing Salford in isolation in this context
could therefore lead to a sub-optimal outcome, both in terms of housing
and the spatial pattern of development more generally.
3.92
A Greater Manchester assessment is therefore required to determine
whether methodologies A or G would be appropriate, or whether more
sustainable sites are available in locations closer to where the DCLG
and GMFM forecasts suggest the housing need will be generated.
3.93
An initial analysis of the latest Strategic Housing Land Availability
Assessments of the ten Greater Manchester districts, as shown in the
table below, suggests that there may be sufficient land already
identified as being potentially suitable for residential development.
However, this data needs to be treated with caution as, whilst the
various Greater Manchester SHLAAs have all followed the DCLG
methodology and are broadly comparable, there are some slight
differences in certain assumptions to reflect local circumstances (e.g.
some of the district figures have been adjusted to take account of large
scale clearance programmes, whilst others have windfall allowances
built in). Consequently, further analysis is required to determine
whether there is sufficient housing land available in Greater
Manchester, and, if not, how this can most appropriately be addressed
across the sub-region.
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Estimated capacity from the
relevant Strategic Housing
Land Availability Assessment
12,380
7,851
59,524
10,546
10,017
24,003
9,195
12,606
10,665
25,564
Greater Manchester total
182,351
Accuracy of population and household projections
Variance in the Greater Manchester Forecasting Model forecasts
3.94 The GMFM is updated annually, using the latest data and reviewed
assumptions. The table below shows how the household growth
129
forecast for the period 2011-2026 has changed between each iteration
of the model, reflecting the impact that the evolving relationship
between different variables can have on the number of households
(2011-2026 is the longest period from 2011 for which comparable
figures are available).
3.95
The forecast level of household growth has increased with each update
of the model (with the 2011 Baseline forecasting growth 48% higher
than in the 2007 Baseline), but this in no way increases or decreases
the likelihood of any future update forecasting an even higher level of
household growth. It simply indicates the difficulties in forecasting
household growth and the potential for significant inaccuracies
compared to what actually happens, and this will be the case for any
forecasts or projections, including the DCLG 2008-based household
projections.
GMFM
2007 Baseline
2008 Baseline
2009 Baseline
2010 Baseline
2011 Baseline
2011
99,420
98,385
98,400
101,164
102,144
2026
Change 2011-2026
109,036
9,615
110,813
12,428
110,336
11,936
114,762
13,598
116,335
14,191
National projections
3.96 The various household projections and forecasts do not have
probabilities or potential deviation estimates attached to them. This
includes the variant household projections produced by DCLG, even
though they look at a series of different scenarios. Indeed, the Office
for National Statistics is clear that the variant population projections on
which the variant household projections are based are all plausible,
and “they do not represent upper or lower limits of future demographic
behaviour”21.
3.97
In 2007, the Office for National Statistics produced an analysis of the
accuracy of population projections over the last 50 years22. This
national analysis gives a good indication of how unforeseen changes in
trends can have a major impact on the accuracy of projections. Some
of the significant errors identified included the following:
• The 1955-based population projections estimated that the
population in 1995 would be 53 million, which was more than 5
million below the actual figure because it did not foresee the 1960s
baby boom
21
“Statistical Bulletin: 2008-based National population projections” – Office for National
Statistics (21 October 2009), p.7 (original emphasis)
22
“Fifty years of United Kingdom national population projections: how accurate have they
been?” – Population Trends 128 (Office for National Statistics, Summer 2007), p.8-23
130
•
•
In contrast, the 1965-based projection for the year 2000 was 75
million, but the actual UK population that year was only 59 million,
with the overestimate being due to the extrapolation of the high birth
rate of the 1960s
The 1977-based projection for the year 2005 was 57.5 million
compared to an actual UK population that year of 60.2 million, with
the underestimate largely being the result of assumed long-term net
outward migration
3.98
From 1971 onwards, the projected UK population for 2005 ranged from
57.5 million in the 1977-based projections to 64.3 million in the 1971based projections, compared to an actual figure in 2005 of 60.2 million
(i.e. ranging from 4.4% too low to 6.8% too high). Individual elements
feeding into the 1970s and 1980s projections were actually more
inaccurate than the projections themselves, but overestimates of births
were offset to a significant degree by underestimates of migration and
overestimates of deaths. If all of these factors had been inaccurate in
the same direction (i.e. all leading to an overestimate or underestimate
of population) then the population projections would have been much
more inaccurate overall than they actually were.
3.99
The assumptions underpinning the population and household
projections are therefore constantly evolving, and not always in the
same direction. For example, in terms of birth rates, the average
number of children per woman peaked in 1964 at 2.97, before
dramatically reducing to 1.69 by 1977. This had increased slightly to
1.74 in the 2004-based population projections, but has further
increased to 1.84 in the 2006-based and 2008-based projections23.
3.100 The assumed level of annual net migration to England is 14,500 lower
in the 2008-based population projections than in the 2006-based
projections, although it is higher for Scotland and Wales showing how
different parts of the UK can be affected differently. One of the key
migration assumptions is that the net inflow from the most recent EU
accession countries (those joining in May 2004 (Cyprus, the Czech
Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia
and Slovenia) and January 2007 (Bulgaria and Romania)) will reduce
from +21,000 in 2009/10 to zero from 2014/15 onwards24.
3.101 The Office for National Statistics acknowledges that: “Migration
numbers are particularly unpredictable, with recent actual figures
varying widely”25. As a result, a constant net annual migration rate is
usually assumed for most of the projection period, although this is
clearly a major assumption given the potential impact that economic
23
“National population projections, 2008-based” – Office for National Statistics (21 October
2009), p.9
24
“2008-based Subnational Population Projections: frequently asked questions” – Office for
National Statistics (June 2010), Q18
25
“Summary Quality Report for National Population Projections” – Office for National
Statistics (October 2009), p.2
131
conditions and public policy both within and outside the UK can have
on migration levels (greater variance is seen in the GMFM as its
assumptions around migration rates are strongly influenced by
economic variables and how these may change in the future).
International migration assumptions are based on the International
Passenger Survey and internal migration on changes in GP
registration. Other factors are considered to be less volatile. For
example, changes in mortality are generally more gradual and stable.
3.102 Within London, the Greater London Authority produces its own
population projections because the national projections are considered
to underestimate the population of London boroughs as a result of a
higher rate of in-migration and population churn in London compared to
national trends26. It is possible that similar problems may apply to other
major cities. Housing supply is also factored into the alternative Greater
London Authority projections, whereas it is not with the ONS
projections (this reduces rather than increases the projections for some
boroughs, such as the City of London27).
3.103 The overall conclusion from the ONS study28 is that the accuracy of
population projections, and therefore household projections, is always
likely to be diminished where any of the key factors such as birth rates,
death rates and migration are subject to a period of significant change.
Their methodology is based on extrapolating past trends, often from the
previous five years, although there is also an ‘assumption drag’ where
there is caution about making significant changes to assumptions on
the basis of data from just a few years. Consequently, such projections
are never likely to predict events such as the baby boom of the 1960s
or the sharp upward trend in migration since the early 1990s.
3.104 It is also notable that the projections are less accurate for longer
timescales and smaller geographies, although the Office for National
Statistics considers that “even at local authority level the projections
can be considered as sufficiently accurate for a wide range of uses”.29
Nevertheless, the potential scale of any inaccuracies in Salford’s
projections is much greater than for the national projections.
3.105 The above commentary mainly relates to population projections.
Household projections introduce a further series of variables, and
therefore the potential for additional inaccuracies that may either
compound or offset those associated with the population projections.
26
See for example
http://www.islington.gov.uk/DownloadableDocuments/CommunityandLiving/Pdf/GLA_ONS_es
timates_March2010.pdf
27
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/6760D4BB-393F-403E-B409205D6656939E/0/DP_PL_2010PopulationEstimatesProjectionsCoL.pdf
28
“Fifty years of United Kingdom national population projections: how accurate have they
been?” – Population Trends 128 (Office for National Statistics, Summer 2007), p.8-23
29
“Subnational Population Projections Accuracy Report” – Office for National Statistics Centre
for Demography (August 2008)
132
3.106 Although there are no probabilities associated with them, and they
should not be seen as the end points of a range, it is useful to consider
the degree of deviation resulting from DCLG’s variant household
projections for England. These can be summarised as follows:
• Fertility rates – have very little impact (alter the scale of household
growth by around 1% in either direction depending on the scenario,
equating to 0.2% in terms of the total number of households)
because there is insufficient time for increased fertility to feed into
household formation significantly by 2033
• Life expectancy – have a more significant impact than the fertility
rate variants (change the scale of household growth by around 6%
up or down depending on the scenario, equating to 1.3% in terms of
the total number of households; no improvement in life expectancy
would result in 22% lower household growth compared to the
principal projection, equating to 5.6% fewer households overall than
in that projection)
• Net international migration – have the greatest impact (household
growth would be 13% higher or lower than the principal projection
depending on the scenario, equating to 2.8% difference in the total
number of households; zero net migration would result in 36% lower
household growth compared to the principal projection, equating to
7.6% fewer households overall than in that projection). At the subnational level, changes in net migration levels between
districts/regions would clearly therefore have a significant impact on
household growth, as well as net international migration rates.
3.107 The combined effects of the main variant projections (i.e. excluding the
‘no improvement in life expectancy’ and the ‘zero net migration’
scenarios) would be to increase or decrease the scale of household
growth compared to the principal projection by 20.7% (equating to
4.4% difference in the total number of households). As noted above,
the ONS is clear that these do not give upper and lower limits, but they
do provide a reasonable indication of the broad range within which
household growth is likely to be even if there is still the potential for
significant demographic changes to result in higher or lower figures.
The variance could potentially be much higher for smaller geographical
areas.
3.108 The table below compares past Government household projections for
Salford with the actual figures. It should be noted that those actual
figures can themselves be subject to inaccuracies, for example with
concerns over non-completion of Census forms and the fact that
figures in non-Census years are themselves estimates based on a
series of assumptions. The DCLG 2008-based figure for 2011 is a
projection rather than an estimate made for that year, but is used for
comparative purposes.
133
Scenario
1985-based projection
GMFM 2011 Baseline
DCLG 2008-based
% deviation from GMFM
% deviation from DCLG
1991
93,000
95,000
95,343
-2.11
-2.46
1996
92,000
95,000
94,892
-3.16
-3.05
2001
91,000
94,000
93,909
-3.19
-3.10
GMFM 2011 Baseline
DCLG 2008-based
96,000
95,000
95,343
1.05
0.69
94,000
95,000
94,892
-1.05
-0.94
GMFM 2011 Baseline
DCLG 2008-based
94,000
95,000
95,343
-1.05
-1.41
GMFM 2011 Baseline
DCLG 2008-based
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
2006
2011
N/A
96,763
96,619
N/A
N/A
N/A
102,144
101,401
N/A
N/A
94,000
94,000
93,909
0.00
0.10
94,000
96,763
96,619
-2.86
-2.71
94,000
102,144
101,401
-7.97
-7.30
95,000
95,000
94,892
0.00
0.11
95,000
94,000
93,909
1.06
1.16
96,000
96,763
96,619
-0.79
-0.64
98,000
102,144
101,401
-4.06
-3.35
96,017
95,000
94,892
1.07
1.19
96,189
94,000
93,909
2.33
2.43
97,108
96,763
96,619
0.36
0.51
98,896
102,144
101,401
-3.18
-2.47
3.109 It can be seen that the inaccuracies generally increase over a longer
time period. However, the errors do not form a smooth line, and there is
a swing from an overestimate to an underestimate for the 1989-based,
1992-based and 1996-based projections.
3.110 The 1989-based projections are perhaps the most useful as they allow
a comparison over a 22 year period (the same as the Core Strategy
end date of 2030 compared to the base date of the latest DCLG
projections). They show an initial decline in the number of households
followed by a long period of stabilisation, whereas what actually
happened was a similar but slightly less rapid decline followed by a
period of increase to a higher level than the base number. As a result,
the 1989-based projections are likely to have underestimated the
number of households in 2011 by around 7-8%.
3.111 If it were to be assumed that the latest DCLG household growth
projections are likely to have a similar level of accuracy to previous
Government projections then this would suggest that the number of
households in Salford in 2028 is likely to be within around 7.3% of the
DCLG 2008-based household projection of 119,712 for that year. This
would give a range of 110,973 to 128,451 households, equating to a
household growth range of 9,572 to 27,050 over the period 2011-2028
(based on the DCLG 2008-based projection for 2011 of 101,401
households). Methodologies A and G above indicate household growth
significantly above the top end of this range.
134
Projected changes in the age of households
3.112 Both the DCLG 2008-based household projections and the Greater
Manchester Forecasting Model (GMFM) 2011 Baseline provide a
detailed breakdown of household type on the basis of the age of the
household head, and how this is forecast to change. The GMFM is
slightly more detailed using five-year age groups throughout, whereas
the DCLG figures are provided for a mix of five-year and ten-year age
groups. The details are summarised below, with some of the GMFM
age groups having been combined to enhance comparability with the
DCLG data (figures may not add up due to rounding).
Age of household
head
24 or less
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-59
60-64
65-74
75-84
85+
City total
Change 2011-2028
DCLG 2008-based
GMFM 2011 Baseline
forecast
Number
% of city
Number
% of city total
total
change
change
-81
-0.44
-419
-2.53
2,779
15.18
-718
-4.33
8,439
46.09
6,433
38.83
96
0.52
4,291
25.90
1,398
7.63
2,342
14.14
429
2.34
629
3.80
2,192
11.97
3,253
19.63
1,273
6.95
1,189
7.18
1,787
9.76
-431
-2.60
18,311
100.00
16,568
100.00
3.113 It can be seen that there are both similarities and differences between
the two sets of figures. Both the DCLG projections and the GMFM
forecast indicate a slight reduction in the number of households with a
household head aged 24 or less. They also both suggest that 27-29%
of household growth will be due to households with heads aged 65 or
over, although the GMFM forecasts that most of this growth will be in
the 65-74 age group, whereas the DCLG envisages a more even
distribution of growth. In particularly, the DCLG projections point
towards a reasonably significant increase in the number of households
with a head aged 85 or over, whereas the GMFM forecasts a small
reduction.
3.114 The DCLG projections suggest that almost half of the growth will be in
households where the head is aged 35-44, with reasonably significant
growth in the 25-34 age group as well. The GMFM also anticipates very
significant though slightly lower growth in the 35-44 age group, with
quite high growth in the 45-54 age group as well, and so the bulk of the
growth is slightly older in the GMFM forecast.
135
3.115 If the household growth is as concentrated in the younger working age
households and retired households as suggested by the DCLG
projections then this may have some implications for affordability in the
future.
Projected changes in the age and type of households
3.116 The DCLG 2008-based household projections provide a detailed
breakdown of the type of households that are forecast in Salford over
the period 2011-2028. Separate figures are provided for each of the
following categories, which allows the precise household size to be
identified for some but only an estimate to be made for others. This is
set out in the table below.
Household category
One person households: Male
One person households: Female
One family and no others: Couple: No dependent children
One family and no others: Couple: 1 dependent child
One family and no others: Couple: 2 dependent children
One family and no others: Couple: 3+ dependent children
One family and no others: Lone parent: 1 dependent child
One family and no others: Lone parent: 2 dependent children
One family and no others: Lone parent: 3+ dependent children
A couple and one or more other adults: No dependent children
A couple and one or more other adults: 1 dependent child
A couple and one or more other adults: 2 dependent children
A couple and one or more other adults: 3+ dependent children
A lone parent and one or more other adults: 1 dependent child
A lone parent and one or more other adults: 2 dependent
children
A lone parent and one or more other adults: 3+ dependent
children
Other households (defined as a multi person household that is
neither a couple household nor a lone parent household.
Examples include, lone parents with only non dependent
children, brothers and sisters and unrelated (and non-cohabiting)
adults sharing a house or flat. This category does not include
households with dependent children)
Household
size
1
1
2
3
4
5+
2
3
4+
3+
4+
5+
6+
3+
4+
5+
2+
3.117 The table below sets out the relevant data from the DCLG projections
grouped into the household sizes, and also the type of household in
terms of whether they have dependent children or not.
136
2011
2028
Household type
Household size
Single
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
Other
City total
Households with
children
Adult-only households
Households with
dependent children
City total
Change 2011-2028
Number
% of city total
change
43,542
26,210
13,626
8,027
3,793
227
5,974
101,401
57,352
30,216
13,922
8,505
4,200
138
5,379
119,712
13,810
4,006
296
478
407
-89
-595
18,311
75.41
21.88
1.62
2.61
2.22
-0.49
-3.25
100.00
76,467
90,339
13,872
75.75
24,932
101,401
29,373
119,712
4,441
18,311
24.25
100.00
3.118 Around three-quarters of the household growth is forecast to consist of
adult only households. However, this still results in a relatively
significant increase in the number of households with dependent
children, with an additional 4,441 such households representing an
increase of 18% on 2011 levels. This is roughly the same proportionate
increase on 2011 levels as for adult only households.
3.119 In terms of household size, the ‘other’ household category is a
complicating factor. For the purposes of this analysis, it has been
assumed that the size distribution of households in the “other
households” category matches that of the rest of the multi-person
households (by definition this category cannot include single person
households). This results in lower household growth in all non-single
person households as the “other” category shows a decline rather than
increase.
3.120 On this basis, the table below shows the size distribution of households
in Salford forecast by the DCLG 2008-based household projections
(figures may not add up due to rounding).
2011
2028
Household size
1 person
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
43,542
29,228
15,195
8,951
4,230
253
57,352
33,068
15,236
9,308
4,596
151
137
Change 2011-2028
Number
% of city total
change
13,810
75.41
3,841
20.97
41
0.23
357
1.95
367
2.00
-102
-0.56
2011
2028
Change 2011-2028
Number
% of city total
change
Household size
Total
101,401
119,712
18,311
100.00
3.121 This suggests that household growth will be completely dominated by
smaller households, with three-quarters of the growth being single
person households and more than one-fifth being two person
households (i.e. more than 96% of the growth is one and two person
households). This is likely to have significant implications for the type of
new housing that is required in Salford. The forecast growth in larger
households is very limited.
Future economic performance
National economic prospects
3.122 In November 2011, the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR)
downgraded its growth forecasts for the country30, so that the potential
output of the economy in 2016 would be 3.5% less than its March 2011
forecast. It now assumes “that potential output will take until the start of
2014 to return to its long-term average growth rate of around 2.3 per
cent a year, as the financial sector and credit conditions take time to
normalise” (paragraph 1.2).
3.123 Its central forecast is for growth in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of
2.1% in 2013, 2.7% in 2014 and 3% in 2015 and 2016 (paragraph 1.3).
The OBR identifies that a disorderly outcome to the current crisis in the
euro area “poses a significant downside risk to the central forecast” and
“the probability of a much worse outcome than the central forecast is
greater than the probability of a much better one” (paragraph 1.21).
Employment growth
3.124 The Greater Manchester Forecasting Model provides detailed forecasts
by sector in terms of future job numbers. Details from the 2011
Baseline model for Salford and Greater Manchester are provided
below, grouped together for the main economic sectors.
Economic sector
Agriculture
Extraction*
Manufacturing
Electricity, gas and
water*
30
Salford
Number of jobs
2011
2028
384
284
1
1
8,061
5,729
230
165
%
change
-25.9%
0.0%
-28.9%
-28.4%
Greater Manchester
Number of jobs
%
change
2011
2028
4,980
3,720
-25.3%
98
49
-50.0%
116,813
80,145
-31.4%
8,171
6,109
“Economic and fiscal outlook” – Office for Budget Responsibility (November 2011)
138
-25.2%
Economic sector
Construction
Distribution and
hotels
Transport and
communications
Financial and
business services
Public administration
and defence*
Health and
education
Other personal
services
Salford
Number of jobs
2011
2028
7,921
10,305
%
change
30.1%
Greater Manchester
Number of jobs
%
change
2011
2028
73,853
86,933
17.7%
24,886
27,656
11.1%
278,668
304,036
9.1%
5,750
6,835
18.9%
82,464
93,126
12.9%
37,498
52,322
39.5%
295,280
389,711
32.0%
6,369
6,100
-4.2%
62,880
55,100
-12.4%
26,623
28,756
8.0%
268,905
274,157
2.0%
5,622
7,313
30.1%
79,421
92,533
16.5%
Total
123,346 145,467
17.9%
1,271,535
* Does not include self-employment
Source: Greater Manchester Forecasting Model 2011 Base Forecast
1,385,621
9.0%
3.125 Salford is forecast to see particularly strong growth in the service
sector, including a 40% increase in the largest sector of financial and
business services. A major reduction of around 29% is forecast for the
manufacturing sector, which as noted in the previous section is an
important source of employment for Salford residents.
3.126 Overall, the forecast sectoral distribution of job growth is quite similar
for Salford and Greater Manchester, but the overall rate of job growth in
Salford is twice as high (17.9% compared to 9.0% for Greater
Manchester as a whole). However, there are some differences, with the
rate of growth in construction and other personal services significantly
higher in Salford, and the rate of decline in public administration and
defence noticeably lower.
Occupation forecasts
3.127 The Greater Manchester Forecasting Model provides forecasts for
employment change in different occupations, but only at the subregional level. These are summarised for Greater Manchester for the
period 2011-2028 in the table below. The skill level as set by the 2000
Standard Occupational Classification is also identified.
Skill
level Occupation
4
Corporate Managers
3
Managers/Proprietors in
Agriculture & Services
4
Science & Tech
Professionals
4
Health Professionals
4
Teaching & Research
Professionals
Number of workers
Change 2011-28
2011
2028
Number
%
156,929
192,487 35,558
22.66
34,504
39,028
4,524
13.11
48,169
14,136
59,816
16,210
11,647
2,073
24.18
14.66
52,366
37,930
-14,436
-27.57
139
Skill
level Occupation
4
Business & Public Service
Professionals
3
Science & Tech Associate
Professionals
3
Health & Social Welfare
Associate Professionals
3
Protective Service
Occupations
3
Culture, Media & Sports
Occupations
3
Business & Public Service
Associate Professionals
2
Administrative Occupations
2
Secretarial & Related
Occupations
3
Skilled Agricultural Trades
3
Skilled Metal & Electrical
Trades
3
Skilled Construction &
Building Trades
3
Textiles, Printing & Other
Skilled Trades
2
Caring Personal Service
Occupations
2
Leisure & Other Personal
Service Occupations
2
Sales Occupations
2
Customer Service
Occupations
2
Process, Plant & Machine
Operatives
2
Transport & Mobile
Machine Drivers &
Operatives
1
Elementary Occupations:
Trades, Plant & Storage
Related
1
Elementary Occupations:
Clerical & Services Related
Total Occupations
Number of workers
2011
2028
Change 2011-28
Number
%
45,735
62,125
16,390
35.84
24,317
27,289
2,973
12.23
56,103
63,189
7,085
12.63
10,065
9,173
-893
-8.87
28,099
33,938
5,839
20.78
68,900
126,187
82,176
120,899
13,276
-5,289
19.27
-4.19
33,722
5,695
34,397
5,513
675
-181
2.00
-3.19
45,319
30,676
-14,643
-32.31
41,468
51,327
9,859
23.78
21,035
19,569
-1,466
-6.97
81,033
95,056
14,023
17.31
23,230
87,900
25,539
99,498
2,308
11,597
9.94
13.19
25,762
33,717
7,955
30.88
38,784
29,055
-9,729
-25.09
53,326
58,705
5,380
10.09
40,387
34,987
-5,400
-13.37
110,151
124,727
14,576
13.23
1,273,321 1,387,023 113,702
8.93
3.128 The next table groups together these figures on the basis of the skill
levels in the Standard Occupational Classification.
140
Skill level
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
Level 4
Total
Number of workers (Greater Manchester)
Change
2011
2028
2011-2028
150,537
159,714
9,176
469,944
496,864
26,920
335,504
361,877
26,373
317,336
368,568
51,232
1,273,321
1,387,023
% increase
2011-2028
6.10
5.73
7.86
16.14
113,702
8.93
3.129 This suggests that the highest growth, both numerically and
proportionately, will be in the highest skilled jobs. Around 45% of the
increase in workers in Greater Manchester will be in level 4 jobs, with
only around 8% in the lowest skilled jobs of level 1.
Local economic proposals
3.130 The Greater Manchester Strategy identifies the vision for the City
Region that:
“By 2020, the Manchester city region will have pioneered a new model
for sustainable economic growth based around a more connected,
talented and greener city region where the prosperity secured is
enjoyed by the many and not the few.”31
3.131 This vision is predicated on the continued growth of the ‘new economy’
of knowledge-led enterprises. It describes however that this new
economy must be extended to acknowledge the economic importance
of areas like tourism, culture and global sports brands.
3.132 In order to support the growth envisaged the Strategy identifies that,
“first and foremost, we must ensure our regional centre continues to be
the largest and most important growth node in the city region, given its
economic clout and diversity of sectors located there such as
ICT/Digital, creative and new media, finance, retail and higher
education”. Central to this growth will be the delivery of huge levels of
high-quality office developments through the Regional Centre in
Manchester, Salford and Trafford.
3.133 The Strategy goes on to describe that we also “need to promote our
town centres across the city region’s districts as important growth
nodes in their own right”. This is particularly important, “not only
because they can accommodate additional people and jobs, but
because they have the potential to become important meeting places,
locations for cultural facilities, public institutions, major services, and
transit hubs”.
31
AGMA (2009) Prosperity for all: The Greater Manchester Strategy, page 5.
141
3.134 Finally, it is recommended that “we need to ensure that we continue to
support Trafford Park and other key locations which have the potential
to contribute to the future growth of the city region”32. There are a
number of such initiatives coming forward across Greater Manchester
each of which will contribute to the wider growth of the conurbation.
These include the Inter-Modal Freight Facility at Barton (Port Salford),
around 90 hectares of quality industrial and warehousing development
at Cutacre (Bolton and Salford) and Airport City providing over “4
million ft2 of quality business space, including: Manufacturing, logistics
accommodation and grade A offices”33.
3.135 The overall economic strategy for the sub-region is therefore very
ambitious, seeking to deliver high levels of economic growth, albeit in
challenging conditions in the short to medium-term. Many of the key
elements of this strategy are within or immediately adjacent to Salford,
such as the City Centre office areas, MediaCityUK, Port Salford,
Cutacre and Trafford Park. Salford is therefore likely both to be a key
business investment location and to feel the associated impacts of
economic growth such as in terms of the housing market. The close
proximity to these various economic opportunities could potentially
significantly increase demand for housing in some parts of the city,
although much will depend on the relative quality of the housing and
neighbourhoods available compared to other locations within the subregion.
Commuting patterns
3.136 The continuing evolution of the Greater Manchester economy together
with the proposals summarised above could potentially have a
significant impact on the commuting patterns within Salford and to/from
neighbouring local authority areas. This in turn could lead to
considerable changes in the pattern of housing demand within the city.
Overall patterns
3.137 As noted in section 2 of this assessment, Salford is perhaps more
reliant overall on cross-boundary commuting flows than any other
district in Greater Manchester, both in terms of the supply of jobs for
the city’s residents and the supply of labour for jobs in the city. The city
cannot therefore be viewed in isolation.
3.138 Salford will not just be affected by what happens within the city. The
established commuting patterns mean that the provision of additional
jobs and housing in surrounding districts will affect Salford. People will
also commute through the city without stopping, particularly to get to
Manchester and Trafford from Bolton, Bury and Wigan, placing
pressures on the transport networks.
32
33
Ibid, page 7
http://www.manchesterairportez.co.uk/airport-city
142
3.139 Manchester has a very wide and significant sphere of influence
compared to the rest of Greater Manchester. Salford’s share of the city
centre has the potential to have a similar function, drawing in
commuters from a much wider area and at higher levels than it
currently does.
3.140 In terms of attracting commuters from Salford, Manchester has a major
pull on all parts of the city, as does Trafford to a lesser extent (although
it has a stronger pull than Manchester on the south-west of the city
(Cadishead, Irlam, Winton and Barton)). The influence of these two
districts could increase further as the City Centre office role of
Manchester continues to expand and economic activity in Trafford
concentrates along its northern edge (for example with the
regeneration of Trafford Park, and new developments at Trafford
Quays, Trafford Wharfside and Pomona Docks).
3.141 Bolton has a stronger pull on the north-west corner of the city (Little
Hulton and Walkden North). This could also potentially increase with
the major expansion of Bolton Town Centre proposed, and Bolton’s
main employment site located on Salford’s boundary at Cutacre.
3.142 Bolton and Wigan are the main sources of inflows of commuters to both
North Salford and Salford West, whereas Manchester, Trafford and
Bury are more important for South Salford and Central Salford. As subregional economic investment becomes increasingly concentrated
within the cluster of activity in and around the south and south-east of
the city (stretching through Salford, Manchester and Trafford, and
including the Manchester/Salford City Centre, Salford Quays, Trafford
Park and the Trafford Centre), the sphere of influence of this area is
likely to continue to expand, potentially increasing the area from which
it draws large numbers of commuters. This could increase the potential
to divert housing demand to Salford, particularly its eastern and
southern areas, if high quality accommodation and neighbourhoods
can be provided. Equally, the provision of a large number of new jobs
in Salford’s part of the Regional Centre could attract more commuters
from surrounding districts.
3.143 There is a net flow of commuters from Salford West to Central Salford,
and to a slightly lesser extent from North Salford to South Salford. The
location of the city’s main economic investment proposals are likely to
increase these flows, with large amounts of office floorspace focused in
the south-east of the city and other major investments such as Port
Salford on the southern edge of Salford.
Individual parts of the city
3.144 This section refers to the wards that existed at the time of the 2001
Census, as it utilises the evidence on commuting patterns set out in
section 2 of this assessment.
143
3.145 The core area of Ordsall, Blackfriars and Weaste already provides
almost 40% of the jobs in Salford. The area is very dependent on
labour from outside the city, and there is net commuting from all
districts in Greater Manchester. It would seem likely that this role will be
further enhanced in the coming years as the city centre, Salford Quays
and MediaCityUK develop. This could suggest that the whole of
Greater Manchester should help to meet the housing needs of the
people who work in this part of Salford, rather than Salford on its own,
given this broader role.
3.146 The rest of Central Salford has an important function providing labour
for this core area of Ordsall, Blackfriars and Weaste, as well as to
Manchester and to a lesser extent Trafford. There are some subtleties
with Kersal having links to Bury, Pendleton being a net importer of
labour, and Claremont sending more commuters to Weaste than to
Blackfriars and Ordsall as well as having some links to Swinton and
Pendlebury. As with the city as a whole, these parts of Central Salford
are likely to become increasingly reliant on Manchester, Trafford,
Ordsall, Blackfriars and Weaste as a source of employment. Jobs
within the northern and western parts of Central Salford are likely to
continue to be occupied primarily by those within close proximity, with
Pendleton continuing to draw from a slightly wider but still reasonably
contained area.
3.147 Swinton and Pendlebury is very well-balanced in terms of jobs and
working residents, particularly compared with all other parts of Salford
West which are net out-commuters. The key flows are west to east,
with the main inflows from Bolton, Wigan, Walkden and Little Hulton,
and Worsley, and the main outflows to Manchester, Trafford and the
core Salford employment area of Ordsall, Blackfriars and Weaste. It
would seem unlikely that this situation will change significantly in the
next few decades, although an increasing dominance of the
conurbation core could see even higher commuting levels eastwards.
3.148 Eccles also has major outflows to Trafford and Manchester, although
the former is more significant both in terms of gross and net flows. In
contrast to Swinton and Pendlebury, it tends to attract commuters from
all directions although it has net outflows overall. It is possible that the
eastern part of the area could increasingly become part of the core
Salford employment area of Ordsall, Blackfriars and Weaste, forming
part of a much larger focus extending into Manchester and Trafford.
This could impact on the various commuting flows to and from the area,
potentially leading to more inflows from the west and north. Major
business investment in the northern part of Trafford could increase the
attractiveness of Eccles as a residential location.
3.149 Worsley has a different role to other parts of the city, and is as much a
suburb for Greater Manchester as it is for Salford, with high levels of
commuting out of the city particularly to Manchester and Trafford. It
would seem likely that this strong commuter role if anything will further
144
strengthen as the increasing number of employees in the core seek
high quality housing areas close to their place of work.
3.150 Walkden and Little Hulton, and Irlam and Cadishead, are relatively
peripheral to the rest of the city, with only limited inflows of commuters
from elsewhere in Salford. Walkden and Little Hulton has strong but
balanced connections with Bolton, but overall there is the typical west
to east movement with modest net inflows from Wigan and major net
outflows to Manchester and Trafford as well as to Swinton and
Pendlebury. Similarly, Irlam and Cadishead has balanced connections
with Warrington, although they are not as significant overall as those of
Bolton with Walkden and Little Hulton. There is a very modest net
inflow from Wigan into Irlam and Cadishead, but major outflows to
Trafford and Manchester, and within Salford to Eccles, Ordsall and
Weaste. Walkden South already has many similarities to Worsley, and
it is possible that the Walkden and Little Hulton area as a whole may
have an increasing role serving the core employment areas to the
south-east. However, the proposed Cutacre development could also
increase outflows to the west. It would seem less likely that the role of
Irlam and Cadishead will change significantly, although it is possible
that the eastward and southward out-commuting could increase further,
particularly given the large and increasing concentration of economic
activity in and around the south-east and south of the city.
Overview
3.151 Overall therefore, there are generally flows from west to east and from
north to south. The city tends to look eastwards and southwards for
employment, particularly the former, whereas inflows are more
dependent on physical proximity, although these overall patterns mask
significant flows in different directions. It would seem unlikely that these
patterns are going to change significantly in the future, and indeed are
likely to become magnified as Manchester, Trafford and the southern
part of Central Salford will probably become even more important as
destinations for work.
Consumer preferences
3.152 The evidence and analysis in this section thus far have focused on the
demographic and economic factors that are likely to influence housing
demand within Salford in the future. However, it is also important to
consider how consumer preferences may affect the scale and type of
demand for housing in the city.
3.153 It is important to understand the decisions that underpin people’s
housing choices, and how they manifest within the local market. The
Manchester Independent Economic Review and the Greater
Manchester Strategic Housing Market Assessment make some broad
statements about the type of housing that is required to attract skilled
workers in particular. However, there has been little research
145
examining the needs and preferences of purchasers, or the process by
which consumers trade off factors to arrive at a final housing choice34.
3.154 There are inherent tensions in consumer preferences for housing, both
at the individual level and when they are added together across all
consumers. For example, it would be impossible to meet the frequently
cited preference of many people to live in a semi-rural location whilst
also satisfying the desire to be within close proximity of a wide range of
local services and facilities. As CABE has said:
“Of course, not all individual aspirations can be met. Not everyone can
have a detached house with a garden in quiet surroundings, a view of a
pastoral landscape, be within easy reach of a good school, a variety of
specialised shops, a railway station and a motorway”35.
3.155 Housing is a complex good composed of many attributes, each of
which commands a value. Consumer demand for housing reflects the
complex basket of attributes associated with a particular dwelling,
including space (both internal and external), nearby amenities such as
green space or good schools, and other specific features and
characteristics of the dwelling. The ability of households to benefit from
various attributes is limited by what they can afford to pay and by what
is available in the market. Consumers therefore typically have
competing preferences which necessarily involve trade-offs, both due
to inherent contradictions and the practicalities of affordability and
availability.
3.156 In addition to being a complex good, it is important to recognise that
housing represents a substantial component of individual wealth and is
typically the largest investment that a householder ever makes. This is
an important driver of housing purchase, and the desire for a sound
investment typically plays an important role in shaping consumer
preferences. An example of this is the trade-off between number of
bedrooms and bedroom size. Householder surveys have identified that
whilst at an individual level householders will express a preference for
larger bedroom sizes even where this delivers fewer bedrooms overall,
at a collective level through the operation of the housing market
purchasers typically prefer a greater number of bedrooms, even where
these are smaller individually36. This derives from the functioning of the
UK housing market where the number of bedrooms (as opposed to
floorspace) is regarded as one of the prime components of house price,
and a property with more bedrooms is therefore considered to be more
marketable (although there could also be an element of there being a
34
“Preferences, quality and choice in new build housing” – Leishman et al, for
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (January 2004)
35
“What home buyers want: attitudes and decision making among consumers” –
CABE (March 2005), p5
36
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (January 2004), p17
146
difference between the theoretical (attraction of larger bedrooms) and
the practicalities (having children who demand separate rooms)).
3.157 Home buyers will therefore trade-off their personal preferences for a
home against the investment value of the home as a property asset. It
is therefore important to recognise that consumer preferences at the
market level can be driven by the perceived value of housing as an
investment.
3.158 There is evidence that the market for new homes is to some extent
distinct from that for second-hand dwellings. Research suggests that
the majority of home buyers are unwilling to consider newly built
housing. For example, New Homes Marketing Board found that only
36% of potential house buyers would consider buying a new house37.
This is largely due to perceptions about floorspace and room sizes in
new dwellings being small, concerns regarding the quality of
construction standards, and concerns resulting from higher density
standards which result in small private gardens and greater levels of
overlooking from neighbouring properties38. Whilst some of these
issues can be addressed by higher construction standards and better
quality design in the housebuilding industry, there are implications in
terms of consumer preferences. This is particularly the case where the
concerns relate to issues of small plot and dwelling size which result
from higher residential densities, as the density of new build housing
has steadily increased over the past twenty years.
3.159 This has significant implications for residential activity in Salford, and
would indicate that increases in densities are likely to result in
reductions in the potential size of the market for a development. It also
points to the need for clear policies on issues such as the size of
dwellings and private amenity space.
3.160 Research suggests that the demographic profile of residents living in
newly built housing developments is not representative of the
population as a whole. New housing developments typically have a
greater proportion of households with children, reflecting that the
majority of purchasers of new build homes buy at a particular stage in
their life-cycle39. However, this could be as much a function of the type
and location of new homes as it is the fact that they are new rather than
second-hand.
37
Cited in “Sustainable communities: building for the future” – Office of the Deputy
Prime Minister (2003), p13
38
“Improving the image of new houses” – R. Young, in “Consumer choice in housing
– the beginnings of a house buyer revolt” – K. Bartlett et al for Joseph Rowntree
Foundation (February 2002), p82
39
“A sense of place: what residents think of their new homes” – CABE (December
2007), p28
147
Quantifying consumer preferences
3.161 A number of research studies have sought to identify the relative
prioritisation of consumer preferences relating to new housing. Savills’
Occupier Demand Study was undertaken in 2007 and was based on a
survey of 500 households across the country40. It asked people what
features of their existing residence they considered important.
Respondents were asked to rank the importance of defined features of
their existing residence. Locational characteristics were clearly
identified as the most important features (in terms of neighbourhood,
proximity to good schools and amenities). By contrast, characteristics
associated with the dwelling itself in terms of size and layout were
ranked as lower priorities (such as the size of rooms, number of rooms,
overall size and storage).
3.162 A similar survey was undertaken by Ipsos MORI on behalf of CABE in
2006 which surveyed 643 households living on a range of new housing
developments across the country41. However, this specifically looked at
what people would most want from a housing development, rather than
what they most liked about their existing home. There are clear
similarities in relation to the identified priorities, with location being cited
as the most important priority. Other locational attributes also scored
highly, including safety and security and provision of local services and
facilities. Factors associated with the dwelling itself however were also
highly ranked, with type and size of home being the second most cited
attribute, and private garden space and car parking being seen as
reasonably important.
3.163 It is important to recognise that consumer preferences will vary
according to household type. For example, the CABE survey found that
location was less important to social housing tenants, who will
necessarily have less control over where they chose to live. Dwelling
type and size were more important considerations to families, but less
important to single person households. A private garden or outside
space was more important to families, and less important to private
tenants. Conversely, public transport was more important to private
tenants and less so to families, who perhaps may rely more on cars42.
This highlights how priorities change depending on individual
circumstances and spending power.
Quantifying trade-offs in preferences
3.164 A 2004 research paper for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation
specifically sought to identify how new build house buyers balance and
trade off these preferences, in the context of what they can afford to
40
“Occupier Demand Survey” – Savills Research (Summer 2007)
2007)
42
2007), p18
41
148
purchase43. The survey was based on 400 households within recently
completed housing developments, and sought to quantify respondents’
prioritisation of eight key attributes in choosing their new home. The
eight attributes utilised were price, location, neighbourhood, property
type, public room layout, bedroom layout, front garden and back
garden. The relative importance of the eight housing attributes was
calculated statistically and reported according to four consumer group
typologies.
3.165 For the group of predominantly younger single households and
couples, property type was found to be the single most important
factor, whilst location was the least important. This group was likely to
be drawn to new-build housing sites as these feature the property types
and public room options that appeal to them. However, the group with a
slightly higher prevalence of couples and non-professional occupations
was very different, with these buyers rating location as the most
important attribute by a considerable margin. The group of slightly older
buyers, over half of whom had children, was attracted to housing
options that are in their preferred price bracket, and had a strong
preference for low-density suburban housing. Although in theory
location was not particularly important to them, their preferred property
type would only be found in certain areas. A similar group, but with a
higher prevalence of single person households and a greater
predominance of professional occupations, was attracted to location,
garden characteristics and property type. Buyers in this group had a
strong preference for out-of town locations and for detached housing44.
3.166 This research suggests that the trade-off of different factors is
extremely complicated, and can change quite significantly with only
relatively subtle changes in the characteristics of households. However,
lower density suburban property types were preferred by three of the
four groups, highlighting the challenge in attracting people to inner city
locations.
Schools
3.167 Despite the large proportion of the population who do not have schoolage children, a CABE survey found that schools are considered to be
the single most important local amenity when choosing a new home45.
It may be that the school is regarded as an asset which will make the
home more marketable in the future, or that the presence of a well
performing school is an indicator in itself of a desirable neighbourhood.
A study in 2003 sought to quantify the impact of school catchment
43
Joseph Rowntree Foundation (January 2004)
44
45
CABE, What home buyers want: attitudes and decision making among consumers
(March 2005), p6.
149
areas on house prices, through utilising the Reading area in Berkshire
as a case study46. The research estimates showed:
• The value of a house in the best possible secondary school
catchment area would be £23,750 (18 per cent) higher than that for
an otherwise identical house in the worst possible secondary school
catchment area
• The value of a house in the best possible primary school catchment
area would be £42,550 (33 per cent) higher than that for an
otherwise identical house in the worst possible primary school
catchment area
3.168 This corroborates an extensive body of information that identifies the
importance of school performance in consumer preferences in housing,
and as reflected in house prices47.
Shopping facilities
3.169 The presence of shops, schools and local services are all recognised to
enhance the attractiveness of a location for home buyers, particularly
where they are in easy walking distance48. The CABE ‘What home
buyers want’ survey identified that proximity to a wide range of shops
was ranked third by respondents in a list of locational priorities. The
ability to walk to a range of local facilities was seen as an opportunity
for social contact and an important factor in generating a sense of
community, consequently making the place feel more secure. The
CABE survey found that the character of the local shopping facilities
was however important. A neighbourhood centre with a variety of small
shops was considered as desirable, while respondents regarded
unfavourably being near to a larger centre with supermarkets, hot food
take-aways and businesses, due to perceptions of traffic, litter and the
potential for anti-social behaviour.
3.170 The CABE ‘What home buyers want’ survey found that respondents’
views on access to public transport were more complex, and suggested
that whilst good access to a main rail station was valued in terms of
enabling commuting by public transport, the availability of local bus
services were viewed as less of an asset49. Notwithstanding this,
respondents across all age groups stated that good public transport
was either important or essential. However, CABE’s ‘A sense of place’
survey found that local public transport was cited the least as an
important aspect that people want from a housing development. This
survey also indicates that the provision of public transport does not
necessarily translate into its use, finding that although 91% of residents
46
“Capitalised in the Housing Market or How we Pay for Free Schools: The Impact of
Supply Constraints and Uncertainty” – P. Cheshire and S. Sheppard (August 2003)
47
“The good schools effect – identifying the UK’s educational super towns and
leading suburban areas” – Savills Research (November 2009)
48
49
150
confirmed that buses were available locally only 35% made use of
them. Car-based travel dominated, with 53% of residents surveyed
reporting that they make short journeys from their home by car, rather
than by public transport or walking50.
Public open space
3.171 Proximity to public open space is frequently identified as a positive
factor informing home purchase decisions. In CABE’s 2007 survey of
residents of new housing development, 40% considered that there was
not enough public open space provided within the development and
48% considered that there were not enough play areas within the
development51.
3.172
A 2007 RICS research paper sought to calculate the impact of
proximity to public green space on house prices, using Aberdeen as a
case study52. The study found that the house price premium ranged
from between 0.44% and 19.97% (depending on house type) for
dwellings located adjacent to a green space, compared to houses that
are over 450m from the green space. The average premium was
highest for proximity to a district park (10.1%), followed by a
neighbourhood park (9.0%), and was lowest for other amenity green
space (2.6%). In terms of the impact of dwelling type, detached
properties commanded the greatest percentage price premium for
proximity to green space. A CABE Space report found broadly similar
levels of premium, with the range of values for dwellings being in the vicinity of a
park ranging from between 0% to 34%, and the premium for dwellings overlooking a
53
park ranging from 3% to 34% . The premiums were found to vary according to the
type of park, the nature of the location and the local population, and the type of
property.
Dwelling type
3.173 The research conducted by MORI for CABE’s 2005 ‘What home buyers
want’ study found that over half the population want to live in a
detached house, compared to 22% whose preferred housing type was
a bungalow, 14% a semi-detached house and 7% a terraced house.
The detached house was the most popular choice across all
householders, regardless of social status or ethnicity54. These findings
are corroborated by a wide range of home buyer surveys which identify
an overwhelming preference for detached properties, and a high level
50
2007), p7
51
2007), p7
52
“Urban parks, open space and residential property value” – N. Dunse, M. White
and C. Dehring, RICS Research Paper Series, Volume 7, Number 8 (September
2007)
53
“Does money grow on trees?” – CABE Space (2005)
54
“A nation of desperate housewives? Staple of suburbia tops poll for England's
favourite house type” – CABE (http://www.cabe.org.uk/press-releases/suburbia)
151
of demand for bungalows55. There is a clear mismatch here between
the identified preferences and the nature of the existing housing stock,
with only 22.5% of properties in England being detached (2001
Census), and only 1.3% of dwellings in Salford being bungalows and
7.1% detached (excluding bungalows) (Council Tax, December 2010).
3.174 A simplistic reading of consumer preferences would imply that all new
homes being delivered should be in the form of detached dwellings, in
order to address the mismatch between preferences and supply.
However, the policy implications of this would lead to extensive lowdensity development across the country with an associated high land
take. As set out above, this may not deliver the attractive residential
neighbourhoods that home buyers prefer where local services, facilities
and public transport networks are within easy reach.
3.175 In practice, many households are already demonstrating that they are
prepared to compromise on this issue, and it is important to understand
why people may see a detached house as the ideal. Possible reasons
could include perceived investment value, status, the typically larger
size and number of bedrooms, and the reduced impact from
neighbours in terms of noise, privacy, poor maintenance, impact of
extensions, etc. Some of these issues such as size and amenity can be
addressed through the design of other types of dwelling, allowing at
least some of these aspirations to be met.
3.176 Similarly, in terms of the identified consumer preference for bungalows,
it is important to consider the motivations behind this expressed
preference in order to identify if these can be met through alternative
means. Despite high levels of demand, housing developers build very
few bungalows due to the greater land take associated with them,
which make them an inefficient and typically unprofitable use of land56.
This preference is likely to be based around the desire for a home
where all rooms can be accessed on a single level for older persons
and those with mobility issues, the desire for a more low-maintenance
property, and for a suburban setting with garden space. Many of these
issues could be provided by high quality apartment development in a
suburban setting that provides spacious accommodation with lift
access to all floors, good sound insulation between floors, and the
development being set within garden space. There may therefore be
considerable scope for well designed apartments to function as an
effective substitute for the identified consumer preference for
bungalows.
55
“Preferences, quality and choice in new build housing “ – Leishman et al, for
56
“An ageing population – meeting the housing challenge” – Home Builders
Federation (April 2010)
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&safe=active&tbo=1&prmdo=1
&q=cache:JlqoJA9qfQJ:http://www.hbf.co.uk/fileadmin/documents/RHG/Retirement_Housing_Summarie
s/RHGPositionPaper.pdf+%22bungalows%22+hbf&ct=clnk
152
3.177 In relation to apartments, the consumer preference surveys are
contradictory in relation to their popularity. The CABE ‘What home
buyers want’ research found that over a third of single person
households were unwilling to consider living in an apartment57. In
particular, one-bedroom flats were unpopular and were typically
purchased because they were the only form of housing that could be
afforded, especially within central areas. The research found that a key
factor undermining perceptions of apartments relates to concerns about
visual and acoustic privacy. This is clearly an issue that could be
overcome through improved design and construction standards.
Internal space
3.178 Consumer surveys identify that a key perceived drawback of new
homes relates to an overall shortage of space within the dwelling. The
CABE ‘What home buyers want’ survey found that around a third of
new home buyers were dissatisfied with this aspect of their new home,
and 40% of home buyers purchasing second-hand homes explicitly
stated that they were put off buying a new home by the lack of internal
space58. 30% of residents on newly built developments considered that
the size of their home offered them no flexibility to stay there if their
needs changed, and 43% considered that the internal spaces and
layout of their home would not allow them to make adaptations,
conversions or extensions59.
3.179 Evidence also points towards a growing demand for space, regardless
of household size60. The projected growth in the number of single
person households does not necessarily translate into a demand for
less space, with statistics indicating that the major growth in oneperson households is expected to be in the middle aged demographic,
many being divorced or former co-habitees who may have children
living with a former partner and may need more space to ‘share’
children between homes. Consumer preference research shows that
space is high on the list of priorities of the increasing number of oneperson households61. The CABE ‘What home buyers want study’ found
that criticism about lack of space was expressed by all groups of home
buyers, with single person households as vociferous as families in their
criticism of the lack of space in new homes62.
57
58
“What home buyers want: attitudes and decision making among consumers “ –
59
2007), p7
60
“Room to move? Reconciling Housing Consumption Aspirations and Land-use
Planning” – J. Stewart, for Home Builders Federation (2005)
61
“Consumer choice in housing: the beginnings of a house buyer revolt” – K. Bartlett
et al (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2002)
62
CABE, What home buyers want: attitudes and decision making among consumers
(March 2005), p20.
153
Outdoor space
3.180 The provision of outdoor garden space is a key factor for many home
buyers, particularly in terms of its usability and size. The CABE ‘What
home buyers want’ survey found that over three quarters of
respondents preferred to have a private garden rather than sharing a
communal space with their neighbours, and one in five residents of
new housing developments were dissatisfied with the small size of their
gardens63. The concept of communal gardens was not popular, and
families with children were particularly hostile to this, with concerns
about danger from strangers and the quality of maintenance.
3.181 Similarly, the Alliance & Leicester ‘Moving Improving’ home buyer
survey found that two-thirds of people looking to buy a house
considered a garden to be among the main features sought, ranking
this higher than other attributes including provision of a garage or offstreet parking64. The survey found that those who valued a garden
most highly were in their twenties or thirties, reflecting the usefulness of
private garden space for households with younger children.
3.182 The CABE ‘What home buyers want’ survey did find that where there
are alternative open space and recreational facilities in proximity to the
dwelling, householders may be more prepared to accept a smaller
private garden space65. It also found that there are conditions where
communal space can work provided that certain requirements are
fulfilled, typically relating to the management of the space and the
profile of the households that share access to it. For instance, it
identified that older people were prepared to use a communal garden
provided that it was exclusive to people like themselves, and single
apartment dwellers valued access to a communal garden. Studies of
the functioning of communal amenity space have found that the
greatest dissatisfaction levels result where the profile of users is mixed,
particularly where there are families with young children66. This
suggests that communal garden space can be effective where there is
broad similarity in the type of dwellings that share access to it, but that
there may be very significant challenges in accommodating children in
developments with only communal outdoor space.
Car parking
3.183 Consumer research demonstrates a high degree of frustration amongst
the residents of new housing development in relation to under-provision
63
64
“Moving/Improving Index 2001” – Alliance & Leicester, cited in “Preferences,
quality and choice in new build housing” – Joseph Rowntree Foundation, (January
2004)
65
66
“Perceptions of Privacy and Density in Housing” – Mulholland Research and
Consulting (August 2003)
154
of car parking67. In CABE’s ‘A sense of place’ survey of residents within
new housing developments, 47% considered that there was not
enough car parking associated with individual homes (i.e. driveway and
garage space) and 62% thought that there was not enough alternative
car parking (e.g. capacity for on-street parking, and provision of shared
car parking areas and spaces for visitors)68. Rear courtyard parking
was generally disliked because it was too far away from the home and
perceived to be subject to vandalism, and access routes to rear parking
were considered to be unsafe.
Intention to move
3.184 The Salford HNA was based on extensive survey work undertaken in
late 2006/early 2007, which included questions on people’s intentions
to move69. The data for these questions is available in an unweighted
format, but the sample was very similar to the city average in terms of
the type of dwellings occupied and so is considered to provide a
reasonably robust indication of consumer intentions in Salford.
3.185 18.5% of the 2,736 households surveyed stated that they needed to
move to a different home within the next five years, and 28.2%
identified that they intended to move to a different home within the next
five years. The table below sets out the identified dwelling type
preference of those stating that they intended to move.
Detached
Would like to move to70
Would expect to move to71
Actual proportion of
Salford housing stock72
SemiTerraced
Apartments
detached
45.0%
30.1%
10.9%
13.9%
20.1%
34.7%
23.8%
21.4%
8.6%
37.0%
32.5%
21.7%
3.186 In addition, of those who stated that they intended to move within the
next five years, 16.9% identified that they would like to move to a
bungalow, however only 9.6% stated that they expected to move to a
bungalow (included in the above table, cutting across the detached,
semi-detached and terraced categories), compared to a supply of 1.3%
in Salford73.
3.187 The consumer preferences of households in Salford therefore appear
to be similar to those found in national surveys, and indicate a
mismatch between aspirations and the housing that is actually
available in Salford. In particular, the preference for detached houses
67
68
2007), p7
69
“Salford Housing Needs Assessment” – Fordham Research (October 2007)
Out of 531 responses to this question
71
72
2001 Census
73
Council Tax data, December 2010
70
155
and bungalows exceed actual provision enormously, whereas the
supply of terraced housing is well above what people would like or
expect. Although the Salford HNA suggests that people are prepared to
compromise to some extent on their aspirations, the type of housing
that they expect to be able to access is not readily available within the
city.
3.188 The difference between what people would like and what they expect
appears to be more limited for the size of dwelling compared to the
type, as shown in the table below (for those intending to move within
the next five years). This suggests that people are less prepared to
compromise on this issue, and it therefore needs to be given more
weight in policy-making than dwelling type.
Would like to move to74
Would expect to move to75
One
8.0%
13.3%
Number of bedrooms
Two
Three
40.1%
32.8%
46.1%
28.8%
Four or more
18.9%
11.6%
3.189 Those intending to move in the next five years were asked to identify
one or more reasons for moving from a set list. The results of this are
shown in the table below (424 respondents gave a total of 990
reasons).
Identified reasons for moving
Locational
Move to a safer area
Move closer to transport links
Move close to employment / facilities
Move closer to shops and services
Move to a better environment
Move into a school catchment area
Move close to place of worship
Dwelling characteristics
Current home is too small
Current home is too big
Personal Circumstances / Family
Addition to the family
Access problems
Relationship breakdown
Move in with partner
Be near family
To live independently
To be less isolated
To receive support or care
74
75
156
Number of
citations
Percentage of
respondents citing this
as a reason
125
29
40
41
172
27
7
29.5%
6.8%
9.4%
9.7%
40.6%
6.4%
1.7%
131
56
30.8%
13.2%
39
36
7
27
74
16
30
23
9.2%
8.5%
1.6%
6.4%
17.5%
3.8%
7.1%
5.4%
Identified reasons for moving
Number of
citations
To provide support or care
Unable to manage in current home
Financial
To move to cheaper accommodation
11
36
Percentage of
respondents citing this
as a reason
2.5%
8.5%
63
14.9%
3.190 It can be seen that a wide variety of reasons were given for people
intending to move. However, moving to a better environment, moving to
a safer area, and needing a larger home were the most often quoted
reasons. As suggested by some of the surveys discussed above, the
perceived quality of an area and the size of dwellings would therefore
appear to be particularly important. It is also worth noting that the need
for lower-cost accommodation was the fifth most quoted reason, which
could indicate that many households are unable to access the locations
and size of dwellings they need/want. People wishing to downsize was
the sixth most popular reason, indicating that high quality smaller
dwellings are required to enable people to move out of homes that are
too large for them, as well as there being a need for some new
dwellings to be larger in order to meet the aspirations of others.
Conclusion
3.191 It is clearly important to have regard to consumer preferences when
considering the type of new housing that should be provided in Salford,
but it also needs to be recognised that some of those preferences are
inherently contradictory and are often unrealistic given the budget
available, and people are prepared to compromise on some issues in
order to secure those housing characteristics that are most important to
them. As CABE has observed:
“Consumer preferences must be expressed within the context of the
possible: few can afford to live in a detached period house in a village,
even though it might be what they would prefer. Similarly, the desire for
a range of local services and facilities can only be made possible with
the critical mass that higher densities bring. So the preferences of
home buyers necessarily represent a set of trade-offs.”76
3.192 The relative value placed on the various housing attributes will be
different for every household. However, there appear to be some
reasonably consistent messages from the various surveys:
•
Location is very important for most households, and this is linked
to environmental quality, safety, proximity to good schools, and
perceived desirability. Purchasing a dwelling is an enormous
financial commitment, and many households will want the
reassurance that their investment is safe and unlikely to decline in
value.
76
157
•
•
A smaller number of households will be prepared to compromise
more on location, particularly if this allows them to secure the type
of housing that they aspire to. They may also be prepared to take
greater risks in terms of investing in areas where there is the
potential for greater capital growth but also less certainty of it (e.g.
regeneration areas).
The type of housing (detached, semi-detached, etc) generally
appears to be less important than the size and layout, both in
terms of internal and external space. However, there is a
relatively significant proportion of the population that would not
consider living in an apartment, particularly those with children.
3.193 This raises significant challenges for the provision of new dwellings.
Houses rather than apartments would appear to offer the ability to meet
a wider range of housing needs, but apartments still have an important
role for many people. If the houses are carefully designed and
constructed (for example in terms of good site layout and high
standards of noise insulation), then it would appear that both the needs
and aspirations of many households can be met through terraced and
semi-detached dwellings despite the often expressed preference for
detached houses. This would enable houses to be provided at a higher
density, however some of the characteristics that people seek would
appear to set a limit on the densities that can realistically be achieved,
for example in terms of the size of dwellings, the ability to adapt and
extend them, the provision of adequate private garden space, and the
availability of sufficient off-street car parking.
3.194 There seems to be a clear message that new housing developments
are often not meeting the needs and desires of consumers, and it will
be important to secure a significant improvement in the quality of new
dwellings. The research also indicates that some of Salford’s existing
housing may struggle to meet the needs and aspirations of many
households, particularly the large supply of terraced housing which
cannot offer the necessary indoor or outdoor space required.
Nevertheless, such housing still has an important role for a significant
number of households who are unable to afford and do not currently
require larger dwellings.
Future housing market performance
Household incomes
3.195 The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) estimates that real
household disposable income fell 2.3% in 2011, which would be a postwar record, and states that: “Earnings growth is not expected to
overtake inflation again until 2013 and not by a significant margin until
2014. As a result, we expect consumer spending to remain broadly flat
in real terms next year before picking up as real household disposable
158
income starts growing again” (paragraph 1.23)77. Further weakening of
the labour market is expected, with unemployment rising “from its
current 8.3 per cent of the workforce to 8.7 per cent in the final quarter
of 2012, before falling back again to 6.2 per cent by 2016” (paragraph
1.24).
3.196 Knight Frank is forecasting neutral growth in household incomes in
2012 and 2013, before returning to growth from 2014 onwards.
However, it warns that a combination of these could contribute to real
declines in household income if inflation falls back more slowly than
anticipated78.
3.197 Consequently, in the short term, pressures on household incomes and
increases in unemployment are likely to adversely affect affordability
and the performance of the housing market.
Mortgage availability
3.198 Household incomes will not be the only factor that influences house
prices and affordability, with the availability of mortgages also being
important.
3.199 The Bank of England’s latest credit conditions survey suggests that
lenders are expecting to tighten credit scoring criteria for mortgage
applications due to worries about the poor economic outlook, falling
house prices, and the cost and availability of funds79. The short-term
picture is mixed, with a small increase in overall mortgage availability
anticipated, focused on those able to put down a large deposit, but a
fall in the total loan applications being approved.
3.200 Savills suggests that there is little evidence of an increase in the
availability of higher loan to value mortgage finance80, and Jones Lang
LaSalle considers that high loan to values of around 75-80% will persist
in the future due to tighter rules on bank capital reserves81.
3.201 Consequently, although base interest rates are anticipated to remain
very low for the next few years, mortgage terms and availability will
continue to present difficulties for many households. This will inevitably
affect both the number of transactions and house prices.
3.202 Nevertheless, the OBR forecasts “that households will take on around
£480 billion of additional debt over the forecast period leaving
household debt at 161 per cent of disposable income in 2016. A large
part of this increase reflects borrowing by households to purchase
77
Ibid
“UK Housing Market Forecast” – Knight Frank (Q4, 2011 Edition)
79
“Credit Conditions Survey: Survey Results 2011 Q4” – Bank of England (January 2012)
80
“Residential property focus: Housing genetics – the fundamental change in the DNA of the
housing market” – Savills (Q3, 2011)
81
“UK Residential Market Forecasts” – Jones Lang LaSalle (November 2011)
78
159
assets, as activity in the housing market picks up. Our latest forecast is
for households to purchase financial assets of around £500 billion over
the forecast period” (Box 3.4, p.76).
House prices and transactions
3.203 The OBR forecasts that house prices will fall slightly in 2012, and
property transactions will not return to normal levels until 2013
(paragraph 3.73). From mid-2014, house prices are anticipated to rise
in line with the long-term average rate of earnings growth (paragraph
3.110). Table 3.6 of the OBR report (p.100) identifies house price
growth of 4.3% in 2014, and 4.5% in both 2015 and 2016. Transactions
are expected to pick up in the second half of its forecast period (i.e.
2013-2016) as credit restrictions are expected to ease (paragraph
4.21).
3.204 House price forecasts vary quite considerably, reflecting the difficulties
in predicting market movements. Predictions for 2012 generally range
from a 3% fall to a 2% increase82. Savills suggests that low growth in
house prices should be expected over the next five years, with northern
regions lagging behind London and the south, and the North West
region not returning to house price growth until 201683. Knight Frank
has a more pessimistic view of the short-term in the region, with a 4.8%
reduction in house prices forecast in 2012, but envisages a more rapid
return to house price growth beginning in 2014 and then averaging
4.6% from 2016 to 202184.
3.205 Overall, the general picture appears to be one of relatively stagnant
house prices over the next few years, before recovering to a longer
term average increase of around 4.5% per annum. The OBR predicts a
more rapid recovery than some other commentators, beginning in
2014, but it could be 2016 before house price increases return to that
level. In the interim, the lack of significant house price growth could
adversely affect the financial viability of new residential developments,
and the ability for them to contribute to the provision of affordable
housing and infrastructure through section 106 agreements. However,
it could support greater affordability in the wider housing market.
Affordability
3.206 Knight Frank suggests that affordability ratios will fall back from current
levels, but will remain elevated above historic levels due to a widening
disconnect between supply and demand in the housing market85.
Evidence in section 4 of this Strategic Housing Market Assessment
82
See for example http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article1671748/House-prices-What-expect--news-predictions.html
83
“Residential property focus. Reprogrammed: 2012-16: decoding the next five years of the
housing market” – Savills (Quarter 4, 2011)
84
85
160
indicates that there has already been a reasonably significant
improvement in Salford’s affordability ratio since it peaked in 2007, but
it remains considerably above the level in 2003.
3.207 Affordability is likely to be a particular problem for younger households,
which Salford has a high proportion of, due to the impacts of higher
deposits, higher youth unemployment and debts associated with tuition
fees. It may also impact on older households due to the costs
associated with care in later life, which in turn could limit their ability to
subsidise younger related households. The average age of the
unassisted first time buyer is now 3786.
3.208 However, other household types may also suffer affordability problems,
and Savills expects that those who will be priced out of owneroccupation are likely to include older age groups, and are more likely to
have children and need family housing rather than small apartments87.
Development activity
3.209 Jones Lang LaSalle anticipates that the low transaction levels will
mean that housebuilding will not return to any significant level until
2016, with total completions for England reaching 140,000 that year88.
They also consider that development finance will be subject to the
same constraints as the mortgage market, further reducing the ability to
bring forward new sites. Savills reports that developers are becoming
increasingly cautious ahead of an anticipated dip in house prices89.
3.210 The overall picture appears to be one of developers concentrating on
lower risk sites, particularly in locations where the local market remains
relatively buoyant and there are equity-rich owner-occupiers, with this
approach likely to continue for another 3-4 years.
3.211 The OBR again appears to be a little more optimistic, anticipating that
residential investment will not gain much momentum until 2013, after
which four consecutive years of relatively strong growth are expected.
However, “the level of residential investment at the start of 2017 is still
forecast to be more than 10 per cent below its pre-recession peak”
(paragraph 3.78). The introduction of the Government’s new build
indemnity scheme is expected to boost transactions.
3.212 The difficulties in the new build and owner-occupied sectors are
already resulting in an increase in the demand for private rented
accommodation, and are expected to continue to do so in the future.
For example, Jones Lang LaSalle notes that renting is becoming the
86
“Development, Investment and New Homes” – Savills (September 2011)
Ibid
88
89
“Market in Minutes: UK Residential Development Land” – Savills (January 2012)
87
161
default tenure for some types of household, with 70% of new
households moving into private rented accommodation in 2009/10
compared to 40-50% before the crisis90.
3.213 Savills anticipates that the demand for private rented accommodation
will begin to spread across a much greater mix of neighbourhoods over
the next decade91. This will partly be due to people being priced out of
the owner-occupied market, but will also reflect a separate cohort of
households who require labour mobility, flexibility or expect their
household status to change.
3.214 This increase in demand for private rented accommodation is leading
to rising rents, and there is also some evidence of increased
investment interest in this market. Savills suggests that this is focusing
particularly on core markets with proven tenant demand, but much
higher rental yields are achievable in those parts of the market where
the purchasing powers of homeowners is weakest92. Perceived levels
of risk will inevitably affect this investment market as much as any other
part of the housing market. However, the rising demand may provide
opportunities to support new build developments to partly compensate
for the reduced demand from owner-occupiers.
3.215 The English Housing Survey indicates that for the first time in at least a
decade there has been a net movement out of owner occupation and
into private renting93. However, Knight Frank suggests that those who
predict the development of a ‘generation of renters’ are slightly
overstating the position94. Nevertheless, the private rental market is
likely to continue to grow in importance, filling the gap between
affordable housing and owner-occupation.
Capacity of the market to deliver new housing
3.216 The household forecasts and projections provide a theoretical
indication of the potential scale of household growth. However, this
does not necessarily mean that the development industry is capable of
delivering the necessary scale of construction activity on a consistent
basis (both physically and in terms of the availability of loans), or
whether the newly forming households will have the financial ability to
access housing. Consideration therefore needs to be given to whether
seeking any theoretical housing requirement that may be impossible to
deliver in practice, and if seeking to do so could result in an oversupply
of land for development.
90
“Development, Investment and New Homes” – Savills (September 2011)
92
“Residential Investment research bulletin” – Savills (Autumn 2011); and “Development,
Investment and New Homes” – Savills (September 2011)
93
Quoted in “Residential property focus: Housing genetics – the fundamental change in the
DNA of the housing market” – Savills (Q3, 2011)
94
91
162
3.217 A rapid increase in housing supply will inevitably have some
dampening effect on prices in both the new and second-hand markets,
as increased competition amongst sellers will put buyers in a stronger
negotiating position. However, it is very difficult to quantify this.
3.218 The Manchester Independent Economic Review (MIER) suggests that
the release of land can increase supply, but developers may also limit
their activity to maintain values and therefore profitability:
“Where land and planning have permitted, new build developments
have occurred, for instance in peripheral areas of the Greater
Manchester city region such as Wigan, Congleton and Cheshire.
Property developers have sought to safeguard their markets by
restricting the quantity of new build housing to ensure demand and
market values are maintained”95.
3.219 Consequently, an increase in land supply will not automatically result in
an increase in the supply of dwellings, even if the demand is
theoretically there.
3.220 The recession has had an enormous impact on the supply of new
housing over the last few years. However, the Greater Manchester
Strategic Housing Market Assessment specifically warns against
increasing the land supply simply to address short-term supply
problems:
“A relaxation of policy, leading to potentially enhancing developer
margins, in the current market climate is unlikely to affect macro-level
conditions. Therefore the actual uplift in the volume of housing
delivered may be limited” (p.278).
3.221 Nevertheless, there is a risk that a prolonged period of low levels of
residential development activity could reduce confidence in Salford,
particularly if nearby districts are more successful at maintaining
development rates.
Impact of new housing on local housing markets
3.222 A report published in 2007 by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation
considered the potential impacts of new housing investment on the
local housing market.96 It suggests that the impact that new housing
investment has is likely to vary at different geographical levels, over
different time periods and in different market conditions. The potential
effects of new development on the housing market are summarised
below.
95
“Sustainable Communities: Appendix 6 – Housing in Greater Manchester” – Manchester
Independent Economic Review (March 2009), paragraph 6.6
96
The Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2007. Housing Investment and Neighbourhood Market
Changes
163
•
•
•
•
Supply and demand effects: If there is more supply in a market
area in a give time period it is expected this would have a
negative impact on prices. The effect is likely to be greater if the
area is a relatively self contained housing market and this tends
to happen more in lower demand areas, suggesting that they are
more vulnerable to oversupply.
Environmental quality effects: New investment may change the
perceived quality of a local environment. The report explains that
in general new housing is perceived to be of a higher quality than
older housing and so more new building should upgrade the
average quality of an area (although this is not fully consistent
with the consumer research by the New Homes Marketing Board
discussed above). This is more likely to be the case where
existing housing is of relatively poor quality and less likely in an
area of existing high quality. The effects may relate to the mix of
new housing versus existing housing, so for example in a mature
suburb where the new housing being developed is higher density
apartments, the impact may be perceived negatively as ‘town
cramming’.
Social effects: This concerns the perceived impact of new
development on the social profile of an area and the indirect
impacts of this on factors such as crime or school quality. The
tenure mix is likely to be important here, with new owner-occupier
housing being likely to be perceived positively, particularly in
areas dominated by social housing. The type of housing may also
determine the social effects, with more apartments being
generally associated with smaller and potentially more transient
households.
Confidence effects: New development may be taken as a signal
that an area has a positive future, because people are investing
and moving into it, and that signal may encourage others both
local and non-local to do the same. These effects are likely to be
more marked in lower demand areas. Whilst this tends to be
primarily a neighbourhood effect, it may operate to some extent at
a wider scale.
3.223 Whilst the issue of ‘town cramming’ is identified as a potential issue in
higher quality suburbs, it is also an important consideration in relation
to lower demand areas, where over-development equally has the
potential to compromise environmental quality and may also result in
supply outstripping demand within individual housing markets.
Overview
3.224 Overall, a return to relatively good levels of economic growth is
forecast, but this is likely to take longer than initially envisaged with
some short-term problems relating to unemployment, household
incomes and the housing market. Some increase in the number of
transactions is expected from 2013 and in house prices from 2014, at
the earliest with potential for this to be delayed by a couple of years,
164
with forecasts for house prices indicating relatively high annual growth
compared to the likely increases in earnings.
3.225 However, the fact that the level of residential investment in 2017 is still
likely to be more than 10% below the pre-recession peak suggests that
there will continue to be challenges in the housing market in the
medium term. Longer-term structural changes may also be seen, with
the private rented sector taking an increasing important role compared
to the recent past, and the pattern of affordability in terms of household
type continuing to evolve.
3.226 Theoretical demand in terms of household projections will not
necessarily translate into actual demand, which will be affected by a
wide range of factors. Providing an excessive amount of new housing
in particular locations, or significantly increasing the supply of land for
residential development, could be damaging particularly if it is in the
wrong locations.
Future housing supply
3.227 The table below shows the supply of dwellings as of 31 March 2012 in
terms of existing planning permissions and sites allocated for
residential development in the Unitary Development Plan (including
conversions and changes of use, as well as new build). It can be seen
that 21.8% of this supply of new dwellings is in the form of houses, and
78.2% in the form of apartments. It is also notable that just under one
quarter of this supply (24.9%) consists of one-bedroom apartments,
which would tend to have the potential to meet a narrower range of
household needs than other types of dwelling. 22.5% of the supply
consists of dwellings with three bedrooms or more, so this supply is
relatively skewed towards smaller dwellings.
3.228 It is also notable that 45.0% of the supply is in the ward of Ordsall, and
28.3% in Irwell Riverside. Indeed, 87.3% of the dwellings would be in
Central Salford, and only 12.7% in Salford West. Within Salford West, a
much higher proportion of the dwellings would have three bedrooms
(68.2%) and would be in the form of houses (76.7%) than for the city as
a whole. In contrast, only 15.8% of dwellings in Central Salford would
have three bedrooms or more, and 13.9% would be houses.
Dwellings with extant planning permission and undeveloped UDP housing
allocations, as at 31 March 2012 (gross dwellings)
Ward
Barton
Boothstown
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Total
Total dwellings
Houses Apartments
87
22
65
29
29
0
886
297
198
234
688
63
1
bed
0
0
0
0
165
Houses
2
3
bed
bed
0
14
3
15
23
19
103
112
4+
bed
8
11
72
103
1
bed
Apartments
2
3+
bed
bed
5
54
6
0
0
0
319
2
337
61
32
0
Ward
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell
Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Salford
total
% of
Salford
total
Central
Salford
% of
Central
Salford
Salford
West
% of
Salford
West
Total dwellings
Houses Apartments
294
227
67
60
34
26
9
5
4
3,345
660 2,685
Total
1
bed
0
0
0
0
Houses
2
3
bed
bed
45
69
0
10
0
5
169
247
4+
bed
113
24
0
244
Apartments
2
3+
bed
bed
0
39
28
2
20
4
2
2
0
1,022 1,413
250
1
bed
161
179
122
112
98
104
49
81
18
0
0
0
4
57
4
29
37
13
79
4
87
9
0
6
26
81
12
14
0
0
5,319
101
37
94
83
21
5,225
18
16
0
1
0
7
2
6
79
48
15
8
32
0
1,531
0
0
3,513
8
16
181
10
0
31
22
9
0
2
15
5
0
9
0
631
524
107
1
114
269
140
35
69
3
9
1
8
0
1
0
0
0
5
3
141
45
96
0
9
27
9
10
76
10
12
71
6
63
6
8
0
0
0
0
6
35
0
28
0
1
6
7
0
0
11,821
2,582
9,239
2
465
1,148
967
2,944
5,754
541
100.0
21.8
78.2
0.0
3.9
9.7
8.2
24.9
48.7
4.6
10,325
1,434
8,891
0
314
591
529
2,891
5,485
515
100.0
13.9
86.1
0.0
3.0
5.7
5.1
28.0
53.1
5.0
1,496
1,148
348
2
151
557
438
53
269
26
100.0
76.7
23.3
0.1
10.1
37.2
29.3
3.5
18.0
1.7
Source: Salford City Council residential development and land supply in
Salford
3.229 The above table relates to permissions, but it is anticipated that a
significant number of those permissions will not be implemented in their
current form due to changes in the housing market. For example, some
of the very large apartment schemes are ultimately likely to come
forward for lower densities, and on some sites houses may be provided
rather than apartments. There are also other sites that do not currently
have planning permission that are likely to be developed for housing
over the next few decades. Consequently, the Strategic Housing Land
Availability Assessment (SHLAA) potentially provides a more accurate
picture of the potential future supply of dwellings in Salford.
166
3.230 The SHLAA can only ever provide a broad indication of the sites that
are likely to come forward for residential development, and the number
and type of dwellings that are likely to be provided on them. It cannot
be precise, and nor is it intended to be prescriptive. It does not mean
that all of the sites identified will necessarily come forward for housing,
or in the form suggested. Equally it does not preclude other sites that
have not been specifically identified from being developed for housing.
It is therefore a general estimate rather than a precise forecast of the
availability of deliverable land for residential development and the
potential number of dwellings that could be provided.
3.231 The assumptions in the SHLAA have been informed by the existing and
emerging policy context, for example in terms of the mix of dwellings
(see below), the density of development, and the provision of green
infrastructure. The estimates of the likely number of dwellings to be
provided on individual sites have also been informed by constraints
such as flood risk, protected habitats, the Thirlmere Aqueduct and
overhead power lines. In addition, an allowance has been made for
other uses where mixed use development is likely, particularly within
the Regional Centre.
3.232 The table below summarises the results of the SHLAA for what it terms
Category 1 and Category 2 sites (those that are considered to be
deliverable, or are likely to be deliverable) together with windfalls (see
the SHLAA for further explanation). It uses the Core Strategy housing
areas rather than wards, however figures are also given for Central
Salford, Salford West and the city as a whole, which can be directly
compared to the previous table.
Core Strategy sub-area
Broughton Park and Higher
Broughton
Charlestown and Lower Kersal
Chat Moss
Claremont and Weaste
Crescent
Eccles
Eccles New Road
Greengate
Greengate North and Trinity
Irlam and Cadishead
Liverpool Street
Lower Broughton
Ordsall
Ordsall Waterfront
Pendleton
Salford Central
Salford Quays
Swinton and Pendlebury
Walkden and Little Hulton
20112016
Net additional dwellings
Phasing
Dwelling type
20162021Total 2011ApartHouses
2021
2028
2028
ments
124
244
2
374
0
332
160
282
0
342
0
86
269
240
-423
192
598
85
464
136
489
0
175
251
555
60
880
514
161
200
918
195
313
848
1580
2032
273
823
167
260
1242
2
14
546
885
7
716
187
59
0
624
56
714
437
895
2,515
432
338
520
1975
4
563
797
1,772
227
1,878
701
562
200
1,628
520
1,267
862
2,667
5,145
790
1625
141
1,617
4
502
142
1,220
78
120
3
472
0
378
262
40
717
321
0
566
1151
379
358
0
61
655
552
149
1,758
697
91
200
1,250
258
1,227
145
2,345
5,145
224
474
Worsley and Boothstown
182
30
88
300
208
92
Regional Centre
Central Salford (excluding the
Regional Centre)
Salford West
1,312
5,256
5,386
11,954
623
11,330
834
1,407
3,335
1,842
2,827
1,804
6,996
5,053
3,698
3,621
3,297
1,433
Total
3,553
10,433
10,017
24,003
7,942
16,060
Source: Salford City Council, 2011-2028 SHLAA
3.233 This suggests a more even balance between houses and apartments in
the potential supply from the SHLAA compared to that described above
from the permissions and allocations, with 33.1% houses and 66.9%
apartments. It is also from a much higher total supply of 24,003
dwellings. Within Salford West, the potential supply is dominated by
houses (71.6%), whereas the situation is reversed in Central Salford
where apartments predominate (77.2%). However, as 78.9% of the
total supply identified is in Central Salford this means that apartments
are in the majority across the city as a whole.
Bringing the evidence together
Future scale of housing provision
3.234 This section has identified several different ways of estimating
household growth in Salford over the period 2011-2028, and therefore
that can be used to identify a future dwelling requirement for the city. It
has also highlighted some of the difficulties associated with forecasting
household growth, the inaccuracies of past forecasts, and the potential
for variance from current forecasts and projections.
3.235 Consequently, it is impossible to identify a “correct” estimate of
household growth. The future is inherently unknowable, and any
projection or forecast could prove to be highly inaccurate. This is borne
out by the fact that the various methodologies identified in this section
lead to household growth estimates for the period 2011-2028 ranging
from 16,568 to 33,334 households. The seven methodologies
effectively result in three rough bandings of household growth
estimates, with three around 17-18,000, two around 23-24,000, and
two around 32-33,000.
3.236 Given the potential inaccuracies, there would appear to be some merit
in using one of the figures in the middle band of around 23-24,000
households. This would still significantly exceed the city’s baseline
household growth forecast, by a similar proportion to that which is
proposed in Manchester.
3.237 The discussion of past household forecasts suggests that the
Government projections can lead to a deviation of up to around 7-8% in
the total number of households over a 20 year period. If the DCLG
168
2008-based household projections prove to be equally as accurate,
then this would suggest that household growth would be somewhere
between 9,572 to 27,050 households over the period 2011-2028. The
realism of the two methodologies that result in a household growth
forecast of 32-33,000 could therefore be questioned, even if policies
were put in place to help achieve them, as they would result in a much
more significant deviation of 11-12% from the DCLG household
projections. Seeking to accommodate such a high level of household
growth would also lead to Salford’s housing figure being vastly higher
proportionate to its baseline household growth projection than for any
other district in Greater Manchester.
3.238 The supply of potential residential development sites that currently
comply with planning policy, or are likely to do so once further evidence
has been submitted, is sufficient to accommodate around 24,000
dwellings over the period 2011-2028. Seeking to meet household
growth of around 32-33,000 households would therefore require a
major change in planning policy, including the release of hundreds of
hectares of greenfield and Green Belt land. This scale of greenfield and
Green Belt development could have potentially significant impacts on
local housing markets, not just in Salford but also surrounding districts.
It would therefore seem difficult to select such an approach without it
and potential alternatives being fully assessed at the Greater
Manchester level (and possibly even more broadly involving other
nearby local authorities such as Warrington).
3.239 At the same time, the lower household growth figures of around 1718,000 households over the period 2011-2028 could potentially risk
underestimating demand, particularly given the high level of economic
growth proposed in Salford and the wider economic ambitions of
Greater Manchester discussed above. A restricted supply of new
housing could potentially constrain economic growth, exacerbate
affordability issues and increase the amount of long-distance
commuting through the city.
3.240 The ability of the market to deliver new housing over the next few years
is likely to be severely constrained, with negligible house price growth
and problems around the availability of development finance and
mortgages limiting dwelling completions. Difficulties could persist into
the medium term, with suggestions that the level of residential
investment in 2017 will still be more than 10% below the pre-recession
peak, and locations outside London and the south are likely to find
market conditions even more challenging.
3.241 It may therefore take several years before Salford is able to return to
the high residential development levels achieved in the period 20062008 when net completions averaged around 1,725 dwellings per
annum. Even if the city could provide this scale of housing completions
consistently throughout the period 2011-2028, it would still deliver less
than 30,000 dwellings, reiterating the potential lack of realism regarding
169
some of the household growth forecasts of around 32-33,000
households. A much more likely scenario, even with major policy
interventions, is significantly constrained activity over the next three
years with a gradual return to much higher levels of completions in the
longer-term but even then it would be unlikely to exceed the average
achieved during the 2006-2008 peak. In this context, the lower
household growth forecasts of around 17-18,000 should be achievable,
and the middle band of around 23-24,000 households also appears
realistic though would be likely to involve some challenges.
3.242 As a result, the use of one of the two household forecasts in the middle
band of around 23-24,000 additional households over the period 20112028 would seem most appropriate. This would balance the wide range
of factors discussed above, relating to the risks and realism associated
with the higher and lower forecasts. The Chelmer Model methodology
based on assuming annual net in-migration to Salford of 1,100
households per annum produces the higher household growth of these
two methodologies. However, it is driven by a very narrow assumption
regarding a single variable, which is significantly different to the
estimates in the baseline DCLG projections and GMFM forecasts, and
its suitability is therefore questionable.
3.243 The other methodology in this range utilises the GMFM forecasts as a
basis, and then seeks to factor in the additional household growth
impacts of the scale of economic development proposed in Salford. It
therefore integrates much of the evidence contained in this Strategic
Housing Market Assessment, and so is considered a reasonable basis
on which to forecast household growth in Salford. This approach
estimates household growth of 22,872 over the period 2011-2028, and
leads to a net dwelling requirement in Salford of 22,034 over that
period once vacancies and second homes have been taken into
account.
3.244 Although this estimate of household growth is considered to be the
most appropriate on which to base housing decisions, it must be
recognised that actual demand could still be significantly higher or
lower. It will therefore be important to carefully monitor a wide range of
housing demand indicators to determine whether it continues to be
appropriate or needs to be reviewed.
Future housing affordability
3.245 The provision of an appropriate scale of new housing should help to
ensure that affordability is not worsened as a result of a shortage of
supply. Housing affordability will be an important demand indicator that
will help to inform whether the scale of new housing provision
suggested above is sufficient.
170
3.246 The strong economic prospects for the city and wider conurbation are
positive, and should support increased prosperity. Ensuring that
everyone shares in that prosperity is a central aim of the Greater
Manchester Strategy. The occupational forecasts from the GMFM
suggest that employment growth will be focused in the higher skilled
jobs, with relatively little increase in the number of low skilled workers.
Higher skilled jobs would normally be expected to have higher salaries
associated with them, helping to boost household incomes.
Consequently, the economic factors affecting affordability look
reasonably favourable.
3.247 In the short-term, there is unlikely to be any significant growth in either
earnings or house prices, and so affordability ratios are likely to remain
reasonably stable. However, the ability to access owner-occupation will
be influenced heavily by the terms and availability of mortgages, which
seem unlikely to see any immediate improvement.
3.248 In the medium term, house price increases are expected to reach an
annual average growth rate of around 4.5%, which may well prove to
be above the rate of earnings growth. There could therefore be some
upward pressures on affordability, counteracting the more recent
downward pressures that have been seen. However, it would seem
unlikely that the considerable recent increases in private sector rents
will continue in the long-term, particularly as the owner-occupied
market begins to recover.
3.249 There is some evidence that certain types of household may be more
affected by affordability issues than others, most notably households
with young household heads of which Salford is anticipated to see a
significant growth.
3.250 Overall, therefore, there are both upward and downward pressures on
future affordability levels in the city, associated with anticipated
changes in house prices, earnings and mortgage availability. These are
most likely to combine to result in a slight worsening of affordability, but
probably not to the levels seen at the peak of the market in 2007.
However, the type of households where household growth in Salford is
most likely to be focused are amongst those who may be most affected
by affordability issues, and so it will be important maximise the supply
of new affordable housing in the city.
171
4.
Housing need
4.1
PPS3 defines housing need as “the quantity of housing required for
households who are unable to access suitable housing without
financial assistance”. The DCLG SHMA practice Guidance (Page 41,
paragraph 2) further states that for the purposes of assessment:
“….this means partnerships need to estimate the number of
households who lack their own housing or live in unsuitable housing
and who cannot afford to meet their needs in the market”
4.2
The types of housing that should be considered unsuitable as stated in
DCLG guidance are summarised below:
• homeless households or insecure tenure
• mismatch of housing need and dwellings
• dwelling amenities and condition
• social needs
4.3
The primary focus of this section of the SHMA is in relation to the need
for affordable housing. The SHMA Practice Guidance contains a clear
process for calculating the level of affordable housing need, and this
methodology has been followed in order to calculate the need for
affordable housing in Salford.
4.4
This Chapter also considers the housing requirements of households in
need with analysis and discussion focusing around the choices
households have within the existing housing stock, the requirements
for different sized properties and how the private rented sector is
potentially used to accommodate those in housing need. It concludes
with highlighting key policy and strategy issues arising from the
analysis of the data, and then compares the need for affordable
housing to the overall potential housing requirement for 2011-2028.
4.5
The core outputs from this section of the SHMA are estimates of:
• current number of households in housing need
• future households that will require affordable housing
• households requiring market housing
• the size of affordable housing required
Unsuitable housing
4.6
The DCLG Practice Guidance sets out different types of unsuitable
housing. Many forms of unsuitable housing have already been
discussed in various other parts of this SHMA, whilst the issues of
homelessness and vulnerable households are set out below.
172
Homelessness
4.7
DCLG Live table 784 sets out local authorities’ action under the
homelessness provisions of the Housing Acts. It includes information in
relation to the number of households accepted as being homeless and
in priority need on a financial year basis, and this is shown in the table
below for all districts in Greater Manchester, and the North West and
England averages.
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Numbers accepted as being homeless and in priority need
(April to March) - number per 1,000 households
2004/ 2005/ 2006/
2007/ 2008/ 2009/
2010/
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009 2010
2011
6.7
5.1
3.9
3.3
2.6
2.3
2.4
5.8
..
4.5
4.5
1.6
1.3
1.5
7.3
7.2
..
..
2.7
2.4
3.2
10.0
..
..
5.3
1.2
0.8
0.7
8.7
6.8
6.7
3.3
1.1
0.9
0.8
12.9
14.8
11.1
6.4
4.8
2.5
2.5
4.6
3.1
1.9
1.3
1.1
1.0
0.9
6.5
1.8
1.5
1.3
0.4
0.5
0.8
3.9
2.9
2.6
2.1
1.2
1.5
1.5
11.4
8.8
8.0
5.6
3.7
2.5
1.7
Greater
Manchester
7.8
n/a
North West
6.1
4.6
England
5.7
4.5
Source: DCLG live Table 784
4.8
n/a
3.9
3.5
n/a
3.0
3.0
2.2
1.9
2.5
1.7
1.4
1.9
1.8
1.3
2.0
Number
accepted
(April to
March)
2010/11
266
115
643
61
66
245
113
70
135
223
1,937
3,880
44,160
The table above shows that homelessness rates have decreased
significantly in most areas between 2004 and 2011, and particularly in
Salford. The city now has a homelessness rate just above the national
average compared to a rate that was more than triple the national
figure in 2005/6.
4.9
Salford’s 2010 Private Sector Housing Stock Condition Survey sought
to assess the number of vulnerable households living in non-decent
accommodation (see Chapter 2 of this assessment for the definition of
‘vulnerable’ used in the Private Sector Housing Stock Condition
Survey).
4.10
27,800 vulnerable households were identified in the Survey, which is
equivalent to 32.7% of all households97. The study concludes that the
“cost for remedying failures against the Decent Homes Standard in
vulnerable households amounts to £17.6m an average of £2,500 per
97
The Private Sector Stock Condition Survey included all private sector and RSL households,
but excluded Salix Homes and City West Housing Trust Stock
173
failing property which is higher than the average figure for all dwellings
of £2,023. Assisting vulnerable households with boiler replacement,
modernising kitchen amenities and reducing excess cold would have
the greatest impact, as these are the components with the highest cost
attached to them. Modernising kitchens and replacing boilers are also
to the more expensive improvements to be made and are unlikely to be
in the reach of households deemed vulnerable. This should be the
main focus for the council to target vulnerable households and develop
policies to assist them through its ‘Home Improvement Assistance’
scheme” (paragraphs 3.15.6 and 3.15.7).
4.11
As a result, there is no real quantification of the number of households
who could be considered to live in unsuitable housing and who cannot
afford to meet their housing needs in the market. Instead, the emphasis
is on ensuring that the number of households, particularly vulnerable
households, living in non-decent private sector accommodation is
reduced significantly, through investment in the housing stock.
4.12
Some of the vulnerable households in non-decent private sector
housing will appear on the Housing Register as households with
priority need. Consequently, to avoid double-counting, no separate
figure for vulnerable households in non-decent private sector housing
is included in the housing needs assessment model.
Previous assessments of affordable housing need
4.13
Various assessments of affordable housing need have already been
undertaken covering Salford. Details of these are set out below.
4.14
A Housing Needs Assessment for Salford was completed by Fordham
Research98 in October 2007, and was undertaken in accordance with
‘Version 1’ of the DCLG SHMA Practice guidance99. It identified an
annual need for 674 affordable dwellings on the basis of the shortfall
being met over a 5 year period. This need was made up of 607 social
rented and 67 intermediate tenure dwellings.
4.15
The North West SHMA (July 2008) used its own housing needs model
to identify affordable housing requirements utilising secondary data.
This approach has some similarities to the DCLG model used by the
Salford HNA. Given that it only looked at housing market areas rather
than individual local authority areas, it is not possible to derive any
figures specifically for Salford from the NWSHMA. However, the total
net affordable housing need for Greater Manchester derived from this
methodology was 14,750 dwellings per annum (Table 6.3, p.159).
98
99
“Salford City Council Housing Needs Assessment” – Fordham Research (October 2007)
“Strategic Housing Market Assessments – Practice Guidance” – DCLG (March 2007)
174
4.16
The December 2008 Greater Manchester SHMA took a very similar
approach to calculating housing need as Salford’s housing needs
assessment, but used the more recent ‘Version 2’ of the DCLG practice
guidance. It relied solely on secondary data, whereas the Salford HNA
also utilised primary survey data. It identified an affordable need of
1,327 dwellings per annum in Salford if the backlog is reduced over 5
years.
4.17
An update to the affordable housing needs assessment was
undertaken in December 2009, although it has not previously been
formally published. This followed the methodology adopted in the
December 2008 Greater Manchester SHMA, using updated secondary
data, and identified a need in Salford equating to 1,118 dwellings per
annum if the backlog were to be met over a five-year period. A
summary of the various stages of the model is shown below. The
definition of each category in the table is set out in the next section,
together with an updated assessment of need.
Step
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
Homeless households and those in temporary
accommodation
Overcrowding and concealed households
Other groups
Total current housing need (gross)
New household formation (gross per year)
Proportion of new households unable to buy or rent in
the market
Existing households falling into need
Total newly arising housing need (gross per year)) (2.1 x
2.2) + 2.3
Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need
Surplus stock
Committed supply of new affordable housing
Units to be taken out of management
Total affordable stock available (3.1+3.2+3.3-3.4)
Annual supply of social re-lets (net)
Annual supply of intermediate affordable housing
available for re-let or resale at sub market levels
Annual supply of affordable housing (3.6+3.7)
Total need: Step 1.4 – Step 3.5
Annual flow: 20% of total need
Net annual housing need: (Step 2.4 + annual flow) - Step 3.8
Dwellings
0
0
8,175
8,175
765
56%
1,364
1,792
0
417
339
1456
-700
2,449
0
2,449
8,875
1,775
1,118
Updated assessment of need
4.18
This section provides a further update of the assessment of need,
utilising the same model but with the latest available data and some
revised assumptions.
175
4.19
The SHMA DCLG Practice Guidance is clear that that there is an
assumption that secondary data should be used where appropriate and
feasible, meaning that it may not be necessary to undertake large scale
primary data collection exercises such as household surveys, provided
there is sufficient information from other sources to estimate housing
need. Having regard to this, it is considered that there is sufficient
secondary data on which to calculate the need for affordable housing.
4.20
The following section sets out the different elements to the affordable
housing needs calculation. The model follows the DCLG Guidance,
and also takes account of some subtle differences in approach that
were agreed at the Greater Manchester level in the production of the
2008 Greater Manchester SHMA by GVA Grimley. It uses the most up
to date secondary data available.
DCLG Needs Assessment Model Structure
4.21
The DCLG model for the assessment of the housing need covers the
following 5 stages:
Stage 1
Stage 2
Stage 3
Stage 4
Stage 5
Current housing need (gross backlog)
Future housing need (gross annual estimate)
Affordable housing supply
Housing requirements of households in need
Bringing the evidence together
Stage 1: Current housing need (gross backlog)
4.22
In order to assess housing need, there has to be a good understanding
of the scale of current housing need, including any backlog, at the local
authority level. This section assesses the number of households who
lack their own housing or live in unsuitable housing and who cannot
afford to meet their housing needs in the market. It also provides an
understanding of the scale of housing need, including any backlog, and
is based on the city council’s Choice Based Letting register.
4.23
The current level of housing need is largely indicated by the number of
people on the waiting list for social rented properties that includes
current occupiers of affordable housing in need (i.e. existing tenants in
need who are on the transfer list, households from other tenures in
need, and households who are classified as homeless or without self
contained accommodation).
Step 1.1: Homeless households and those in temporary accommodation
4.24
The number of households presenting themselves as homeless to the
authority reached a peak in 2004, with some of the highest
presentation and acceptance levels in the country. However,
176
restructuring of the homelessness service, with a focus on
homelessness prevention, meant that year on year the number of
presentations and the number of households assessed as being
statutorily homeless (where the local authority has a legal duty to
secure accommodation) decreased by 508%.
4.25
However, in line with the approach agreed through the Greater
Manchester SHMA it is assumed that homeless households and those
in temporary accommodation are already registered on the waiting list,
and therefore are not included in the calculation in this stage to avoid
double counting. These households are effectively incorporated in Step
1.3 of the assessment as set out below.
Step 1.2: Overcrowding and concealed households
4.26
Concealed households include couples, people with children and
single adults over 25 sharing a kitchen, bathroom or WC with another
household. According to the DCLG guidance the housing need
assessment should record an estimate of the number of households in
over-crowded housing and the number of concealed households. The
guidance recommends that where possible, it is useful to create
separate estimates for the social-rented sector and the private sector.
4.27
In this assessment, the figure for overcrowding and concealed
households is considered as zero, to be consistent with the Greater
Manchester SHMA approach, and to avoid double counting with Step
1.3 below.
Step 1.3: Other groups
4.28
The ‘other groups’ category includes existing tenants in “priority need”
i.e. in unsuitable housing and households from other tenures in “priority
need”.
4.29
The Housing Act 1996 requires local authorities to give “reasonable
preference” when allocating social housing to those who are genuinely
classed as in “need”, and whose needs are not met by their current
property or circumstances. Salford City Council currently operates a
choice based letting system, and uses the following reasonable
preference groupings to ensure that those in most housing need are
given priority.
Band
Applicants
A
Applicants who need to move home as a result of
regeneration (homes to be demolished / refurbished)
Homeless people, people who are threatened with
homelessness with a priority need
Households with one or more housing needs, who are
given reasonable preference, for example children
B
C
177
Number of
households
110
33
6,552
Band
M
Applicants
Number of
households
leaving care or households who require
accommodation to give or receive care.
Households which include someone with a medical
condition i.e. health problems, mobility problems or
mental illness/ depression which are made difficult /
worse by their current house circumstances
1,010
TOTAL
Source: Choice Based Lettings Register, as of 25 January 2012
7,705
Step 1.4: Total current housing need
4.30
Having regard to the three steps of the model set out above, the total
current gross housing need is 7,705. This is shown in more detail
below.
Step
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4 – Total current
housing need (gross)
Households
Homeless households and those
in temporary accommodation
Overcrowding and concealed
households
Other groups
1.1+1.2+(1.3)
Households
0
0
7,705
7,705
Stage 2: Future housing need (gross)
4.31
This stage of the needs assessment model estimates the scale of
newly arising need. The estimate is based on the annual level of new
household formation, the proportion of these new households who are
unable to buy or rent, the number of existing households who fall into
need, and newly arising housing need.
Step 2.1: New household formation
4.32
This section estimates the number of new household likely to form per
annum. The DCLG Guidance recommends that for this stage an
estimate of gross household formation on an annual basis over a period
of at least 20 years should be made. This is the number of households
at the end of the year which did not exist as separate households at the
beginning. The SHMA Guidance further states that there are two
methods for calculating this figure from secondary data: further analysis
of the Communities and Local Government household projections or
analysis of information about the current population and propensity to
form new households.
178
4.33 In order to be consistent with the conclusion to section 3 of this
Strategic Housing Market Assessment, it is considered that between
2011 and 2028 there will be 22,872 new households (equating to 1,345
households per annum). As section 3 explains, this has been derived
from the Greater Manchester Forecasting Model (GMFM) household
forecasts between 2011and 2028, an additional allowance for further
households as a result of the Publication Core Strategy planning for a
higher level of office development than forecast in the GMFM, and the
likely impact of a change In housing benefit rules.
4.34
A detailed explanation of how the total increase in households between
2011 and 2028 has been derived is set out in section 3 of this SHMA.
Step 2.2: Proportion of households unable to buy or rent in the market
4.35
As part of this stage of the needs assessment, the DCLG Guidance
considers it necessary to identify the minimum household income
required to access entry level (lower quartile) market housing. Having
regard to this, it is considered appropriate to focus on the number and
proportion of households on lower quartile income who cannot afford
the lower quartile house price
4.36
According to 2011 CACI PayCheck data, the average lower quartile
household income in the city was £22,399 whilst the average lower
quartile sales price of property in Quarter 1 of 2011 was £72,000 (ie. a
house price to income ratio of 3.2). As a result, 21,494 out of a total
city-wide 101,547 households cannot afford the entry level sales price
(i.e. 21% of households).
4.37
The table below shows the mean, median, and lower quartile house
prices, and income on the basis of CACI PayCheck and Land Registry
data. It highlights that the proportion of households who cannot afford
to buy is significantly higher when looking at the relationship between
mean income and house prices.
Average
overall
house
prices
Average
income
Affordability
Number of
ratio (i.e.
households
prices
earning less
divided by than respective
income)
income
% of
households
that fall
below the
affordability
ratio
56%
35%
33%
Mean
£128,482
£32,090
4.0
56,971
Median
£104,950
£25,360
4.1
35,503
Mode
£60,000
£12,500
4.8
33,789
Lower
£22,399
3.2
21,494
quartile
£72,000
Source: CACI Paycheck data 2011, Land Registry data 2011 Q1. Total
number of households is 101,547.
4.38
The DCLG Guidance also refers to identifying the proportion of newly
179
21%
forming households unable to rent in the market. From available data
sources this is not possible, although it is considered that any newly
forming households who require private rented accommodation should
be able secure a property with housing benefit at the local housing
allowance level. The local housing allowance has been set at the 30th
percentile level, meaning that 3 out of 10 rents in a Broad Rental
Market Area (BRMA) will by definition be affordable to people on
housing benefit.
4.39
The table below shows the local housing allowance by bedroom size,
in the two BRMAs that Salford falls within. The vast majority of the city
falls within the Central Greater Manchester Area, whilst Clifton is in the
Bolton and Bury BRMA.
Bolton and
Central Greater
Bury BRMA Manchester BRMA
£45.00
£60.00
Shared Accommodation
rate
One bedroom rate
£80.77
Two bedrooms rate
£98.08
Three bedrooms rate
£114.23
Four bedrooms rate
£150.00
Source: Local Housing Allowance, February 2012
£95.00
£114.23
£126.92
£174.62
Step 2.3: Existing households falling into need
4.40
The DCLG Guidance recommends that the calculation of the existing
households falling into need should be based on households “who
have entered the housing register and been housed within the year”
(page 46, paragraph 5).
4.41
As stated in the Greater Manchester SHMA (page 254) this step can
be calculated as follows:
“Updated best practice-guidance has been received from the CLG sets
out that this should be based on households ‘who have entered the
housing register and been housed within the year’. Here CORE lettings
data can be used to estimate existing households falling need by
discounting newly forming households (i.e. those where there previous
accommodation type was living with a family, staying with friends, or a
children’s home / foster care). We have utilised only data from the past
available year (2006/07) as local authorities indicated that this was
likely to produce the most realistic image of the situation at present. We
have also excluded existing social tenants (transfer requests) from the
assessment at this stage to avoid double counting…”
4.42
Having regard to the above, CORE lettings data for 2010/11 can be
used to calculate existing households falling into need. This data
shows that between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011 there were a total
180
of 3,478 RSL and local authority lettings. Out of these, 1,135 were let
to existing tenants of social housing (ie. transfers). Theses transfers
have been calculated through the addition of ‘local authority general
needs tenancy’ ‘and ‘housing association general needs tenancy’
figures recorded in Tables 17 and 40 (‘type of accommodation in which
household lived immediately prior to housing’) of the 2010/11Salford
CORE Lettings Annual Report. In line with the approach taken in the
Greater Manchester SHMA these lets have been excluded (given that
they are already existing households in need and did not therefore fall
into need), meaning that there was a total of 2,343 new lettings in
2010/11.
4.43
In line with the approach taken in the Greater Manchester SHMA and
the advice received from DCLG, newly-forming households should be
discounted from the total 2,343 new lettings. As stated above, newlyforming households are considered to be households whose previous
accommodation type was living with a family, staying with friends, or a
children’s home/foster care.
4.44
Having regard to Tables 17 and 40 of the CORE Lettings Data
2010/11Annual Report, the number of lets in 2010/11 to newly forming
households totalled 948, as follows:
• Previously living with family = 659
• Previously living with friends = 277
• Previously in Children’s Home/Foster care = 12
4.45
Taking account of these newly forming households, the number of
existing households falling into need in 2010/11 was 1,395 (ie. 2,343
new lettings minus 948 lettings to newly forming households). This
figure has been included in the model, and is an annual figure.
Step 2.4: Total newly arising housing need (gross per year)
4.46
The DCLG Guidance states that calculating the total newly arising
housing need (on a gross per year basis) involves multiplying stage 2.1
(newly forming households) by step 2.2 (the proportion unable to afford
market housing. The output should then be added to step 2.3 (existing
households falling into need) to give an annual gross figure for future
households in need.
4.47
The table below shows the calculation of the gross annual arising
housing need.
Step
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
Households
Proportion of new households unable to
buy or rent in the market
Total newly arising housing need (gross
per year) (2.1 x 2.2) + 2.3
181
Total
1,345
21%
1,395
1,677
Stage 3: Affordable housing supply
Step 3.1: Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need
4.48
The DCLG Guidance indicates that the number of dwellings vacated by
current occupiers that are fit for use by other households in need
should be assessed. This is considered an important consideration in
establishing the net levels of housing need as the movement of these
households within affordable housing will have a nil effect in terms of
housing need.
4.49
The approach taken in the Greater Manchester SHMA was that
transfer applications have been excluded from other calculations (e.g.
the waiting list figures at step 1.3). Having regard to this, the level of
affordable dwellings occupied by households in need is 0.
Step 3.2: Surplus stock
4.50
This step of the model assesses the ‘surplus’ vacant social rented
stock that could be brought back into use. The DCLG Guidance
indicates that a certain level of voids is normal, however if the rate is in
excess of 3 per cent and properties are vacant for considerable periods
of time, these should be counted as surplus stock.
4.51
The vacancy in social rented dwellings (local authority and RSL stock)
as of December 2011, according to Council Tax records is 884 local
authority dwellings and 677 RSL properties. 546 of the local authority
vacancies are awaiting demolition whilst 10 of the RSL dwellings are to
be demolished.
4.52
For the purposes of the needs assessment model, and given that step
3.4 makes an allowance for units to be taken out of management (i.e.
demolished), it is considered appropriate to include all properties
scheduled to be demolished at this step, and those vacant dwellings
not awaiting demolition but which have been empty for “considerable
periods of time”. For the purposes of the needs assessment calculation
“considerable” is taken to be 1 year or more.
4.53
In order to determine if there is any surplus stock (ie. above a 3%
vacancy rate) it is necessary to compare the number of vacant
dwellings against the total available stock. This calculation is shown in
the table below.
182
Total
dwelling
stock
Vacant
dwellings
awaiting
demolition
Other
%
dwellings
vacant
vacant for
over a year
Local Authority
10,702
546
dwellings
RSL dwellings
21,096
10
Source: Council Tax records, December 2011
4.54
79
205
%
Surplus
surplus stock
(%
vacant
minus
3%)
5.84%
2.84%
304
1.02%
-2.02%
Having regard to the above table there is a surplus of 304 local
authority, but no surplus RSL social rented dwellings. The particularly
high level of vacancy in the local authority stock is due to properties
which are being held for demolitions (and which are discounted at step
3.4 below).
Step 3.3: Committed supply of new affordable units
4.55
This step assesses the number of new social rented and intermediate
affordable dwellings that are committed at the time of the assessment.
The committed supply of affordable housing includes housing on sites
with full or outline planning permission, or where government funding
has been allocated to a specific scheme. This estimate includes RSL
developments and sites where affordable housing will be provided
through Section 106 agreements (i.e. planning gain).
4.56 Government funding for 449 affordable dwellings has been agreed and
committed through the National Affordable Housing Programme (AHP)
for the period 2011 to 2015. Experience indicates that it is likely that
changes will occur and that there may be opportunities for additional
affordable homes, but at this current time the potential scale of this is
unknown.
4.57
The city council also seeks to secure affordable housing through
section 106 agreements as part of open market housing schemes.
Although affordable dwellings have been ‘secured’ be way of section
106 agreements, the affordable dwellings will only be delivered when a
start on site is made. In the current market conditions, assessing when
this is likely to happen is difficult to estimate. As such it is considered
appropriate to only count those affordable dwellings that have been
secured on sites that are currently under construction. Having regard to
this, it is considered that there are 46 committed affordable dwellings
that will be delivered through section 106 agreements.
4.58
The committed supply of affordable dwellings as of January 2012 is
495 dwellings, made up of 449 dwellings which have public subsidy
allocated to them and 46 dwellings on section 106 sites.
183
n/a
Step 3.4: Units to be taken out of management
4.59
This step of the model provides an estimate of the number of socialrented or intermediate affordable housing units that will be taken out of
management that would lead to net loss of stock, and subsequently
result in households needing to be re-housed. The DCLG Guidance is
clear that empty properties that are due for demolition should have
been counted as surplus housing in step 3.2, but they must then be
taken out of the overall calculation of stock at this step of the model as
they will not be available to meet need. Having regard to this, as of
December 2011 there were a total of 556 social rented dwellings
scheduled for demolition (546 local authority dwellings and 10 RSL).
Step 3.5: Total affordable housing stock available
4.60
The total affordable dwelling stock is calculated by calculating the sum
of steps 3.1 (dwellings currently occupied by households in need), 3.2
(surplus stock) and 3.3 (committed additional housing stock), minus 3.4
(units to be taken out of management). The following table shows this
calculation, with it identifying that there are potentially 243 affordable
dwellings that could help meet housing needs.
Step
Dwellings
3.1 Affordable dwellings occupied by households in need
0
3.2 Surplus stock
304
3.3 Committed supply of new affordable housing
495
3.4 Units to be taken out of management
556
3.5 Total affordable housing stock available 3.1 + 3.2 + 3.3 – 3.4
243
Step 3.6: Annual supply of social re-lets
4.61
This section estimates the number of units that become available for
re-let to a new household, with the DCLG Guidance clear that the
average number of re-lets over the previous three years should
generally be taken as the predicted annual level. This should not
include transfers of tenancies to other household members, with only
properties that come up for re-let being counted. Having regard to this,
the average number of social relets is shown in the table below.
Average
(2008-11)
983
Relets to new households
2008/09 2009/10 2010/11
A Local authority lettings
766
509
1,540
B RSL Lettings
1,027
1,440
1,834
1,434
Total = (A+B)
2,567
2,206
2,343
2,372
Source: Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix Returns, 2008 to 2010 and
CORE data annual reports 2008 to 2011
184
4.62
The total 2,343 new lettings for local authority and RSL stock in
2010/11 has been derived from CORE data, as explained in Step 2.3
above. For 2008/09 and 2009/10 the new RSL lettings have been
taken from the relevant CORE lettings annual reports100. No local
authority lettings information is available from the CORE data for
2008/09 and 2009/10 and so therefore the new local authority lettings
for these periods has been derived from Housing Strategy Statistical
Appendix returns (Section D).
4.63
As the above table shows, the average number of new lets is
calculated by adding the Local Authority and RSL lettings. The three
year average is for 2,372 annual relets.
Step 3.7: Future annual supply of intermediate affordable housing
4.64
DCLG guidance recommends that the number of intermediate units
that come up for re-let or re-sale should be taken into account in this
stage. Those are properties that fall within the definition of intermediate
housing as set out in PPS3. Properties that are no longer affordable
e.g. social rented homes bought under the Right to Buy, and shared
equity homes where the purchaser has entirely bought out the
landlord’s share should not be included at this stage.
4.65
The level of intermediate affordable housing in the city is minimal, and
so therefore the numbers that are re-let or re-sold is likely to negligible.
For consistency with the approach taken in the Greater Manchester
SHMA, and due to the complications in achieving a meaningful figure,
the estimate for this step is counted as zero.
Step 3.8: Future annual supply of affordable housing units
4.66
Step
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
The DCLG Guidance states that this is the sum of steps 3.6 (social
rented units) and 3.7 (intermediate affordable units). The table below
shows this calculation and also summarises the various steps in Stage
3 of the needs assessment model.
Surplus stock
100
Dwellings
0
304
495
556
243
2,372
0
For 2008/09 the RSL lettings figure has been calculated by subtracting the ‘local
authority general needs tenancy’ and ‘housing association general need tenancy’
figures from the total HA lettings identified in Tables 16 and 42, whilst for 2009/10 the
same calculation has been made having regard to the data in Tables 17 and 40.
185
Step
3.8
Dwellings
2,372
Estimate of net additional affordable housing requirement
4.67
This stage converts the information about housing need and housing
supply into annual flows (i.e. the number of households per year) over
a prescribed period, it can be used to establish an aggregate estimate
of net housing need. These calculations are undertaken on the
assumption that there is a one-to-one relationship between households
and dwellings.
Total net need
Annual flow
Net annual housing
need
Step 1.4 – Step 3.5
20% of total net need
(assumes 5 years to
meet backlog)
(Step 2.4 + Annual flow)
– Step 3.8
Dwellings
7,705 – 243 = 7,462
1,492
(1,677 + 1,492) – 2,150
= 1,019
4.68
As the table above shows it is estimated that there is a net additional
need for 1,019 affordable dwellings per annum based on addressing
the current backlog of need over a five year period.
4.69
The full needs assessment calculation drawing together all stages of is
summarised in the table below.
Step
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
Homeless households and those in temporary
accommodation
Overcrowding and concealed households
Other groups
Total current housing need (gross)
Proportion of new households unable to buy or rent in
the market
Total newly arising housing need (gross) (2.1 x 2.2) + 2.3
Surplus stock
186
Dwellings
0
0
7,705
7,705
1,345
21%
1395
1,677
0
304
495
556
243
2,372
0
2,150
Total need: Step 1.4 – Step 3.5
Annual flow: 20% of total need
Net annual housing need: (Step 2.4 + annual flow) - Step 3.8
7,462
1,492
1,019
Stage 4: The housing requirements of households in need
4.70
The DCLG SHMA Practice Guidance states that information about the
housing requirements of those in need is an important component of
the evidence base, particularly in developing policy responses. The
research questions for the stage of the SHMA are as follows:
•
•
•
What choices do households have within the existing affordable
housing stock?
What are the requirements for different sized properties?
How is the private rented sector used to accommodate housing
need?
Step 4.1: choices within the existing housing stock
4.71
The DCLG SHMA Guidance (page 50) refers to choice based lettings
systems, turnover data, and the housing register being important in
revealing the criteria which affect household choices, and the relative
pressure on different property sizes and types. The information below
focuses on the existing supply of affordable dwellings and examines
the different data referred to above.
Existing stock
4.72
Salford has a significant supply of affordable housing. As of 31 March
2011, 29.5% of the housing stock was owned by the local authority or
housing associations, equating to 31,692 dwellings.
Housing Stock by tenure as at 31 March 2011
Number of
dwellings
%
Private Sector
75,735 70.5%
Housing
Associations
21,170 19.7%
Local Authority
10,522
9.8%
Total
107,427 100.0%
Source: Housing Flow Returns 2010/11
Turnover of local authority stock
4.73
The following table provides details of turnover in the housing owned
by the city council (ie. the number of relets).
187
Local authority lettings 2005/06 to 2010/2011 and turnover of stock
Lettings between 1 April and 31 March:
2005/ 2006/ 2007/ 2008/ 2009/
2010/
Year
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Tenants transferring from
other social housing
498
501
505
309
195
238
Dwellings let to new
tenants of social housing
2,186 2,214 1,904 1,540
766
646
Mutual exchanges
137
116
139
13
3
1
Mobility arrangements
0
0
113
0
0
0
Total LA lettings
2,821 2,831 2,661 1,862
964
885
Total LA stock
Turnover (lettings as a
proportion of available
stock)
Source: HSSA
25,992 25,542 25,375 10,540 10,519
10.9%
11.1%
10.5%
17.7%
10,571
9.2%
8.4%
4.74
In October 2008, most of the local authority housing stock in Salford
West was transferred into the ownership of City West Housing Trust.
The dwellings that remained in the city council’s ownership were then
managed by Salix Homes. The transfer of stock to City West explains
the significant reduction in the number of dwellings and lettings after
the 2007/08 period101.
4.75
It appears that, notwithstanding the transfer of stock to City West, there
has been a modest reduction in the proportionate turnover of local
authority dwellings over the last few years. The reduction in the number
of mutual exchanges is particularly noticeable.
Salix Homes stock turnover
4.76
The next table provides details of the turnover rate in local authority
housing in the first part of 2011/12. The current turnover data uses the
number of terminations up to that reporting week, while the forecast
just divides the number of terminations by the reporting week and then
multiplies it by 52 to produce a projected annual figure for the current
financial year. Terminations can see quite significant seasonal
variations, so this only gives a broad indication of the likely annual
turnover rate.
4.77
This data suggests that the turnover is greatest in smaller dwellings,
with the highest rates seen in bedsits and one bedroom flats. The
101
The particularly high turnover in 2008/09 is an anomaly as the total LA stock is as at 31
March 2009 whilst the number of lettings for the period 2008/09 includes some dwellings that
were let as LA dwellings prior to the transfer of stock to City West in October 2008)
188
turnover rates in houses are very low compared to the other dwelling
types.
Salix Homes stock turnover (1 April 2011 to 14 October 2011)
Actual
Property
Number of Number of
Number of
current
type
bedrooms terminations
properties
turnover
Bedsit
1
3
21
14.3%
Bungalow
1
5
91
5.5%
2
2
30
6.7%
3
0
11
0.0%
4
0
0
5
0
1
0.0%
Flat
1
197
2,285
8.6%
2
136
2,549
5.3%
3
6
135
4.4%
4
0
3
0.0%
House
1
0
3
0.0%
2
71
1,973
3.6%
3
62
2,500
2.5%
578
1.7%
4+
10
Maisonette
1
0
0
2
3
53
5.7%
3
1
50
2.0%
4
0
3
0.0%
Total:
496
10,286
4.8%
Source: Salix Homes
Forecast
annual
turnover
26.5%
10.2%
12.4%
0.0%
0.0%
16.0%
9.9%
8.3%
0.0%
0.0%
6.7%
4.6%
3.2%
10.5%
3.7%
0.0%
9.0%
Social housing sales
4.78
One of the factors affecting the availability of affordable housing is the
number of ‘right to buy’ sales. The table below provides details over
recent years for each Greater Manchester district. Salford has seen a
relatively high number of social housing sales over this period,
although this partly reflects the significant number of social rented
dwellings in the city. As with other data, it is affected considerably by
the transfer of some of the city council housing stock to City West
Housing Trust in October 2008. Nevertheless, there was already a
significant reduction in sales before that date, and the last few years
have seen very low levels indeed. This is a very similar pattern to other
Greater Manchester districts.
4.79
It is worth noting that this loss of social housing stock is not factored
into the affordable housing need calculations above. This is because
the households purchasing the properties effectively move out of any
need category. However, the loss of stock could impact on the number
of social relets that become available each year.
189
Social housing sales: Local Authority Stock
2003/ 2004/ 2005/ 2006/ 2007/ 2008/ 2009/
District
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Bolton
654
616
413
300
186
65
31
Bury
243
188
78
65
44
9
6
Manchester
1,261 1,398 1,282
783
347
140
21
Oldham
467
378
151
184
146
46
22
Rochdale
568
384
285
307
222
55
34
Salford
880
746
572
501
204
34
4
Stockport
438
262
135
105
59
8
9
Tameside
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Trafford
302
254
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Wigan
780
688
436
264
207
54
24
Greater
Manchester
5,593 4,914 3,352 2,509 1,415
411
151
Total
2,265
633
5,232
1,394
1,855
2,941
1,016
0
556
2,453
18,345
Step 4.2: requirement for affordable dwellings of different sizes
2007 housing needs assessment
4.80
The 2007 Salford Housing Needs Assessment examines what type of
shortfalls exist within the current stock of affordable housing and does
this through analysing survey data, with the size and type of
accommodation required by households in need being balanced
against the size and type of accommodation secured by those who
have recently moved into affordable accommodation. It was informed
by primary survey data, with the assessment identifying the following:
Net need for affordable housing by size
Dwelling size Need
Supply
Total
1 bedroom
1,857
1,277
2 bedroom
995
1,261
3 bedrooms
535
395
4+ bedrooms
219
0
Total
3,607
2,933
Source: Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007
4.81
580
-286
140
219
674
Supply as a
% of
need
68.8%
126.7%
73.8%
0.0%
81.3%
The above table indicates that there are shortfalls of one, three and
four bedroom properties and surpluses of two bedroom homes. The
largest shortfall is for one bedroom dwellings followed by four bedroom
190
homes. The table also suggests that the shortage relative to supply is
also greatest for four or more bedroom accommodation.
Choice based lettings
4.82
The data below identifies the number of bids per property on Salford
Home Search’s Choice Based Lettings System. This includes
properties owned/managed by Salix Homes, City West Housing Trust
and some registered social landlords. The data relates to the period 1
January 2011 to 13 October 2011.
191
Area
All Wards
Barton
Boothstown /
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste / Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Total
bids
52,704
4,181
213
Total
properties
1,880
138
4
3,120
1,836
278
1,996
1,356
4,125
978
3,536
6,304
3,154
3,933
2,865
2,304
4,298
514
2,854
4,817
42
134
52
11
95
48
144
49
192
252
129
105
79
58
140
20
87
140
3
6
n/a
n/a
Number of bids per property by type and number of bedrooms
Houses
Flats
1
2
3
4
5
0
1
2
3
4
13
48
42
36
30
2
22
19
12
0
17
68
76 n/a
n/a
n/a
25
24
14 n/a
38
44
93 n/a
n/a
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
6
87
13
n/a
16
12
12
6
n/a
5
n/a
n/a
n/a
18
14
14
22
10
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
45
55
n/a
118
39
42
63
61
35
38
67
58
65
47
n/a
67
46
18
32
53
n/a
93
35
36
29
38
28
48
46
53
46
42
79
55
44
n/a
31
n/a
n/a
n/a
67
36
20
34
20
20
n/a
51
43
n/a
n/a
52
32
n/a
192
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
30
n/a
5
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
2
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1
1
n/a
n/a
n/a
17
21
26
13
14
23
5
22
27
19
21
n/a
27
30
41
19
29
n/a
15
11
n/a
18
18
19
22
13
17
16
26
17
10
25
6
21
26
n/a
n/a
n/a
22
n/a
17
6
n/a
13
9
9
4
13
n/a
n/a
n/a
4
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
0
0
n/a
n/a
n/a
5
Average number of bids
All Houses
Apartments
28
41
20
30
64
24
53
53
n/a
23
35
25
21
28
29
20
18
25
25
38
36
40
31
26
33
34
14
43
46
n/a
79
33
39
28
45
27
41
62
55
55
37
42
55
42
14
16
19
25
15
17
21
12
17
21
17
23
14
22
26
17
2
28
n/a
4.83
The average number of bids per property is significantly higher for
houses than apartments in all wards of the city, and around double for
the city as a whole. In terms of houses, the highest demand appears to
be for two and three bedroom properties, although there is also a
relatively significant demand for four and five bedroom properties which
is higher than for any size of apartment. The demand for apartments
seems to primarily relate to one and two bedroom properties.
4.84
The lowest average numbers of bids per property were in Worsley,
Langworthy and Eccles. However, Eccles actually saw a very high level
of demand for two and three bedroom houses. The highest overall
numbers of bids per property were in Boothstown/Ellenbrook and
Swinton South. Eccles, Barton and Pendlebury had the highest number
of bids per house.
Households on the housing register, by number of bedrooms
4.85
The two tables below identify the number of households on the waiting
list in recent years, together with the number and proportion seeking
different sizes of dwellings.
4.86
The number of households on the waiting list can be seen to have
more than doubled since 2003, with a significant increase since 2007.
The proportions looking for different sizes of property are reasonably
consistent, with around 60% requiring one bedroom accommodation,
just over one-quarter needing two bedroom, and only 13-14% requiring
three bedrooms or more.
Number of households on housing waiting list (excluding households looking for transfers) in
st
Salford as at 1 April, by bedroom requirements
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Total
households
8,026 8,644 11,216 12,074 9,269 12,621 12,661 14,492 16,476
on waiting
list
Require 1
6,635
7,204 5,783
7,800
7,920
8,817
9,778
bedroom
6,819 7,563
Require 2
2,946
3,127 2,322
3,214
3,176
3,831
4,435
bedrooms
Require 3
967
906
1,340
1,429
993
1,355
1,343
1,557
1,945
bedrooms
Require 4+
240
168
295
314
171
252
222
287
318
bedrooms
Unspecified
number of
0
7
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
bedrooms
Source: HSSA
193
Number / proportion of households on housing waiting list (excluding households looking for
transfers) in Salford as at 1st April, by bedroom requirements
Year
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
Total
households
8,026 8,644 11,216 12,074 9,269 12,621 12,661 14,492 16,476
on waiting
list
Require 1
59.2% 59.7% 62.4% 61.8% 62.6% 60.8% 59.3%
bedroom
85.0% 87.5%
Require 2
26.3% 25.9% 25.1% 25.5% 25.1% 26.4% 26.9%
bedrooms
Require 3
12.0% 10.5% 11.9% 11.8% 10.7% 10.7% 10.6% 10.7% 11.8%
bedrooms
Require 4+
3.0%
1.9%
2.6%
2.6%
1.8%
2.0%
1.8%
2.0%
1.9%
bedrooms
Unspecified
number of
0.0%
0.1%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
bedrooms
4.87
When households join the housing register they are assigned a band
which identifies their housing circumstances and needs. In Salford the
following bands are used for members of the register:
• Band A – Those households who are affected by regeneration
(demolition and / or refurbishment)
• Band B – Statutory homeless members
• Band C – General housing need members with a local connection
• Band D – Members with no housing need
• Band M – Assessed medical need members
• Band N – Members with no local connection
4.88
The following table shows the number of households on the housing
register as at 1 April 2011 by need category and number of bedrooms
required.
Need category – proportion of households
by band
% of total
households
Total
1
2
3
4+
Source: Salix Homes
Beds
required
-%
4.89
26.9
11.8
1.9
59.3
A
0.4
B
0.3
C
46.7
D
31.3
M
6.3
N
15.0
72.9
16.9
6.8
3.4
35.7
44.6
14.3
5.4
63.7
22.4
11.0
2.9
46.8
36.2
15.9
1.0
71.4
24.4
3.5
0.7
67.2
22.3
9.2
1.3
The table above shows that nearly half of the households on the
register have a general housing need with a local connection, with
about a third being assessed as having no need. Of those with a
general housing need and local connection 63% require a one
bedroom property. Those assessed with having no need generally
require larger properties than those with a general housing need, whilst
194
the band with the highest proportion requiring three bedrooms or larger
is Band B (statutory homeless).
Step 4.3: The private rented sector
4.90
Data and analysis on the role of the private rented sector is set out in
Chapter 2 of this SHMA (the current housing market), whilst the
potential for this sector to meet some housing needs is discussed
below.
Stage 5: bringing the evidence together
4.91
The SHMA Guidance (page 52) requires that information about net
need should be presented with evidence from the other stages of the
assessment to inform decisions about appropriate policy interventions.
The Guidance goes on to require (at page 53) that “as a minimum
available information is presented on the following issues:
•
•
•
The proportion of current households in need experiencing different
types of problems (i.e. homelessness, overcrowding, other)
Current requirements for different sized affordable dwellings
Current use of the private rented sector by households who are in
housing need”
Step 5.1: Estimate of net annual housing need
4.92
Having regard to the calculation of need set out above, it is estimated
that there is a net additional need for 1,019 affordable dwellings per
annum based on addressing the current backlog of need over a five
year period. This would reduce to 273 dwellings per annum if the
backlog was addressed over a ten year period.
4.93
The needs assessment model provides an estimate of the likely level of
affordable need, although it needs to be recognised that there are a
large number of assumptions built into it the model, and a variety of
data sources are used. As such the findings of the assessment should
be treated with a degree of caution, with actual need potentially being
lower or higher than that estimated through the model. Data and
analysis in Chapter 2 of this SHMA (under the active market section)
clearly shows that the number of households on the waiting list for
social housing is consistently rising, with 16,476 households waiting as
of 1 April 2011, which is 16.2% of all households in the city. This
indicates the need for affordable housing is significant.
Step 5.2: Key issues for future policy / strategy
Homelessness
195
4.94
DCLG Live Table 784 shows that in 2010/11 there were 245
households accepted as being homeless and in priority need. The main
causes of homelessness are believed to broadly reflect national trends
and include parents or friends no longer or able to accommodate;
termination of assured short-hold tenancy; domestic violence; and left
an institution or local authority care.
4.95
Although the number of homelessness acceptances has fallen there is
a need to ensure that their needs are met. However, the issue is wider
than meeting their accommodation needs, it is also important that
measures are put in place to prevent homelessness occurring in the
first instance. The city council have published a Homelessness
Strategy covering the period 2008-2013102, and this includes an Action
Plan aimed at reducing homelessness. The key objectives of the
Strategy are to:
• Reduce the use of temporary accommodation
• Deliver early intervention to prevent homelessness
• Widen housing choice and increase economic activity
• Provide effective co-ordinated support to vulnerable young people
Overcrowding
4.96
Data on the issue of overcrowding and under-occupation is set out in
Chapter 2 of this SHMA (in the active market section). Data from the
2001 Census showed that 6% of dwellings are overcrowded and 74%
under-occupied, whilst the 2007 Salford Housing Needs Assessment
estimated that 2,273 households (2.3% of all households) are
overcrowded and 40,243 households (41.5% of households) underoccupied. Of those dwellings deemed to be under-occupied, the
assessment found that 71% of the under occupied dwellings are in the
owner occupied sector whilst 21% are in the public sector (council and
RSL). The findings of the 2010 Private Sector Stock Condition Survey
are similar, with 69.9% of dwellings included within the Survey being
under-occupied and 4.2% overcrowded.
4.97
The relatively low levels of overcrowding would suggest that this is not
a significant issue for the city. However, in order to seek to minimise
the potential for overcrowding, there will be a need to ensure that there
is a good supply of new larger dwellings in all tenures.
4.98
In relation to under-occupation, there is little the city council can do in
relation to this in the owner occupier and private rented sectors, given
that the decision to under-occupy is outside of the city council’s control.
However in the stock under the ownership of social housing providers,
the city council and other registered providers could examine the
potential for running downsizing schemes that help tenants move into
smaller homes, thus making better use of the stock by potentially
102
Salford City Council. “Promoting Positive Prevention. Salford’s homelessness strategy
2008-2013”
196
freeing up larger stock for overcrowded households. Changes to
welfare reform at the national level from April 2013, in relation to the
under-occupation of social housing, are likely to have an impact on the
levels of under-occupation.
Affordable housing need
4.99
Meeting all of the identified need for additional affordable housing will
be especially challenging (and more than likely impossible if there is a
reliance solely on the provision of new affordable dwellings through
planning gain), particularly having regard to the recent levels of
affordable housing completions, as set out in the table below.
2004/ 2005/ 2006/ 2007/ 2008/ 2009/
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
Social rented
housing
29
37
18
176
71
212
2010/
2011
Total
20042011
178
721
Intermediate
31
1
6
92
49
70
54
303
housing
Total affordable
60
38
2
268
120
282
232 1,024
completions
Total gross
1,622 1,162 2,237 2,800 2,012
872
840 11,545
completions
(including
affordable)
Total affordable
3.7% 3.3% 1.1% 9.6% 6.0% 32.4% 27.6%
8.9%
units as a % of all
gross completions
Source: Salford City Council Annual HSSA returns to DCLG, 2004-11. Some
figures have been adjusted following an audit of data
4.100 The table above shows that between 2004 and 2011 there were a total
of 1,024 gross affordable housing completions, representing 8.9% of
the total gross completions103. The higher rate of affordable housing
completions over the last couple of years principally reflects the
availability of public subsidy (directed through the Homes and
Communities Agency) for affordable housing as a result of a number of
initiatives aimed at stimulating the housing market / economy (such as
Housing Market Rescue packages, Housing Stimulus funding, Local
Authority New Build etc).
103
These dwellings are in line with the definition of affordable housing in PPS3. Other
affordable dwellings have been completed in the city (such as those under the LPC
Launchpad scheme, the First Time Buyer Initiative), although they do not meet the
definition of affordable housing as the dwellings are not affordable in perpetuity and /
or staircasing receipts are not recycled. Also note that the council has only required
affordable housing through planning gain since December 2006, and only schemes
of 25 or more dwellings are required to provide affordable housing.
197
4.101 Looking forward, it is unlikely that the scale of affordable housing
delivered in 2009-11 will be achieved over the near future, primarily
due to a fall in available public subsidy for affordable housing.
Additionally, given current uncertainty in the housing market it is also
likely that the number of dwellings delivered through section 106
agreements (i.e. planning gain) will be limited in the short to medium
term.
4.102 Having regard to the above, the city council will need to ensure that it
seeks to maximise the affordable contribution secured through section
106 agreements, whilst still having regard to the impact such
requirements will have on scheme viability. The city council will also
need to continue to engage with the Homes and Communities Agency
in relation to securing public funding for affordable housing schemes,
and positively engage with registered providers of affordable housing in
relation to them developing / managing affordable housing. This also
suggests that the private rented sector will have an important role in
meeting the needs of some of the households that the needs model
suggests should ideally be housed in affordable housing.
Requirement for different sized affordable dwellings
4.103 Data and analysis in relation to the requirement for different sized
affordable dwellings is set out above in Step 4.2. The key findings and
issues arising from this are set out below.
4.104 The information from the 2007 Housing Needs Assessment can help
inform the judgement as to the most appropriate size of affordable
dwellings, and this concludes that there are shortfalls of one, three and
four bedroom properties, but a surplus of two bedroom homes. The
needs assessment however does not have regard to the fact that some
one bedroom needs could be met with two bedroom units, due to them
being more adaptable and better able to therefore meet changing
needs.
4.105 Although the Housing Needs Assessment considered that there was a
surplus of two bedroom accommodation, other more up to date data
suggests that there is a potential demand for all sizes of properties.
The information from the housing register shows that the requirement
for affordable housing is in the main for one and two bedroom
dwellings, with 59.3% of all households registered on the waiting list
requiring one bedroom, and 26.9% of the total number of households
requiring two bedrooms (9,778 and 4,435 households respectively).
Although the proportions requiring three and four bedrooms are less (at
11.8% and 1.9% respectively) the number of households requiring such
accommodation is still significant, with 1,945 households requiring
three bedrooms and 318 households requiring four bedrooms.
198
4.106 Although a lower number of households require four bedroom
accommodation when compared to other dwelling sizes, information
supplied by Salix Homes (and presented in Step 4.1 above) shows that
the turnover in four bedroom dwellings between 1 April 2011 to 14
October 2011 was much lower than for other dwelling sizes. For
instance, of the 578 houses managed by Salix Homes, there were only
10 tenancy terminations (a turnover of only 1.7%, which equates to an
annual forecast turnover of 3.2%). Given such low turnover it is
unlikely that the needs of those households who require four bedroom
properties will be readily met, even through the number of households
requiring four bedroom properties is much lower than for other sizes.
4.107 Information from the Choice Based Lettings system is also a good
indicator as to the type and size of affordable housing that households
require. Data showing the average number of bids by property size and
type between 1 January 2011 and 13 October 2011 shows that there
was an average 28 bids per property, with the number of bids for
houses being around double that for apartments (41 bids and 20 bids
respectively). The data also shows that the lowest number of bids
received was for one bedroom houses (19 bids per property), with the
highest number bids being for two bedroom houses (48 bids per
property).It is clear therefore that there is a need for accommodation of
all types and sizes of affordable housing.
4.108 Having regard to the available evidence, the city council will need to
ensure that a broad range of affordable dwellings are provided, in
terms of both type and size of dwellings. The city council can influence
this by ensuring it has an appropriate planning policy framework in
place, and that where public subsidy has been secured for the
provision of affordable housing, that this is used to provide a variety of
property types and sizes.
Other housing that could address need
4.109 The DCLG Guidance recognises that the model for assessing needs
does not take into account the role of other key areas of the housing
market in directly meeting households in need. One area which could
potentially meet need is the private rented sector.
4.110 Although the level of dwellings in the private rented sector is set in
Section 2, quantifying the exact contribution that the sector can play in
meeting housing need is particularly difficult. However, it is likely that
the private rented sector will play an important role in providing
accommodation for those who cannot afford to enter the owner
occupied sector or gain access to the social sector. As noted earlier in
the SHMA, since the credit crunch began, mortgage providers have
restricted the availability of mortgages to only those with good credit
scores and those with high deposits. As such, total gross mortgage
199
lending at the national level has fallen dramatically since the peak of
the market in 2007. The effect of this is that those households who
would traditionally have purchased their own property are likely to
instead consider living in a private rented property.
4.111 There is evidence that the private rented sector is potentially being
used to meet the housing requirements of those households who are in
need. Earlier evidence presented in Chapter 2 of the SHMA shows
that, as of December 2011, around 26% of those dwellings that were
recorded on the Council Tax system as being occupied were in receipt
of housing benefit. This 26% includes all dwellings in receipt of housing
benefit, and so includes both private rented dwellings and social rented
dwellings. It is however possible to separately calculate the proportion
of private rented households in receipt of housing benefit. Having
regard to this, there are 10,276 private rented dwellings in receipt of
housing benefit (which is 12.6% of the total occupied private rented
stock of 77,750 dwellings).
Low cost market housing
4.112 As set out in PPS3, low cost market housing may be an important form
of housing, particularly in the context of creating mixed communities.
This SHMA has identified a general picture of falling house prices since
the peak of the market in 2007, and this could potentially increase the
supply of market housing which falls within lower price bands.
However, the analysis also clearly outlines the current issues
households, particularly first time buyers, are facing in obtaining
finance in order to purchase housing.
4.113 A simple multiplication of the lower quartile income for households in
each ward by 2.9 (the mortgage multiplier suggested within the DCLG
Guidance for dual income households) indicates the potential house
price which could be identified as being affordable for the lower quartile
of the market, which could include some households who may be in
need. It is possible to quantify the number of house sales in 2009/10 (1
April to 31 March) which fall below this threshold and could therefore
potentially represent alternative options for households in need
Lower quartile
household income
House price
Total number of
threshold (2.9
properties sold falling
mortgage
below lower cost
multiplier)
threshold
Salford
£22,399
£64,957
196
Source: 2011 CACI Household Income, Land Registry Sales (1 April 2009 to
31 March 2010)
4.114 As shown above there were 196 property sales that fell below the lower
cost threshold in 2009/10. In this period there were a total of 2,389
property sales, and so therefore only 8.2% of all sales fell below the
lower cost threshold.
200
Step 5.3: Joining up across the assessment
Nat annual need and future annual change
4.115 The affordable housing need figure identified in this section of the
SHMA is 1,019 net additional dwellings per annum for the next five
years (ie. a total of 5,095 dwellings).
4.116 Chapter 3 of the SHMA identifies a number of different ways of
calculating the change in the total number of households between 2011
and 2028, and converts this to net dwelling change over the same
period. The table below assesses the affordable housing shortfall
against the annual average requirements identified under Methodology
E (i.e. the one used by the city council in its Publication Core Strategy).
Methodology
Greater Manchester
Forecasting Model plus
extra office growth
Net annual
affordable
need
Annual net
dwelling
requirement
Housing
requirement
represented by
housing need (%)
1,296
78.6%
1,019
4.117 As shown above, the annual affordable housing need is 78.6% of the
total annual housing requirement, with the total affordable housing
need of 5,095 dwellings representing 23.1% of the overall requirement
identified under methodology E between 2011 and 2028.
Determining an appropriate level of affordable housing
4.118 Paragraph 29 of PPS3 states that In Local Development Documents,
Local Planning Authorities should:
“Set an overall (ie plan-wide) target for the amount of affordable
housing to be provided. The target should reflect the new definition of
affordable housing in this PPS. It should also reflect an assessment of
the likely economic viability of land for housing within the area, taking
account of risks to delivery and drawing on informed assessments of
the likely levels of finance available for affordable housing including
public subsidy and the level of developer contribution that can
reasonably be secured. Local Planning Authorities should aim to
ensure that provision of affordable housing meets the needs of both
current and future occupiers, taking into account information from the
Strategic Housing Market Assessment”
4.119 Having regard to this, the city council will need to ensure that any
targets that are set for affordable housing in its Core Strategy are
based on an assessment of the impact that affordable housing
201
requirements will have on scheme viability. In addition, account will
have to be taken of the findings of this SHMA, particularly in relation to:
• Low levels of mortgage lending continuing to restrict access to
owner occupation, and the potential growth of the private rented
sector
• A fall in the levels of available public subsidy for affordable housing
• High house price to income ratios meaning the owner occupied
sector is not an option for many new households
• The increasing demand for social rented accommodation and low
turnover of such dwellings
• The potential for new affordable housing tenures (such as
affordable rent)
202
5.
Housing requirements of specific
household groups
5.1
This section of the assessment considers the housing requirements of
a wide range of specific household groups, namely:
• Families
• Large households in Broughton Park and Higher Broughton
• Older people
• People with support needs
• Gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople
• Students
• Households seeking higher priced housing
Family housing
Background
5.2
Section 2 of this assessment identifies how the supply of new dwellings
in Salford over recent years has been dominated by apartments. Over
the period 1 April 2003 to 31 March 2011, a total of 12,414 new
dwellings were provided in Salford, and 75.9% of these were
apartments (data for 2003 to 2008 relates only to new build dwellings,
whilst the 2008 to 2011 data includes new build and gross additions
changes of use / conversion schemes).
5.3
In terms of sites with planning permission for housing and saved
Unitary Development Plan allocations, section 3 of this assessment
explains that around 78.2% of the total supply of 11,821 dwellings
would be in the form of apartments. Only 22.5% of dwellings would
have three bedrooms or more, so the current supply of permissions
and allocations is skewed heavily towards smaller dwellings.
5.4
At the same time, consultation on the Core Strategy has indicated that
some developers, landowners and residents consider that there is a
need to increase the supply of ‘family housing’. It is therefore
appropriate to consider whether there is a demand for a significant
increase in the amount of family housing in Salford, or whether it is
appropriate that the supply of new dwellings is primarily in the form of
smaller dwellings such as apartments.
Identifying the size of future households
5.5
Details from the DCLG 2008-based projections relating to the size
distribution of households in the forecast household growth were set
out in section 3 of this assessment. However, it is the GMFM
household forecasts rather than the DCLG 2008-based household
projections that the conclusion in section 3 suggests should be used as
the basis for estimating future household growth.
203
5.6
The GMFM outputs do not provide details of household size, and so for
the purposes of this analysis it has been assumed that the mix of
household sizes in the GMFM baseline forecast will be the same as in
the DCLG projection, as shown in the table below.
Household
size
1 person
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
% of total households in GMFM 2011 Baseline when DCLG
DCLG 2008-based
size distribution is applied to the total
household number
2011
2028
2011
2028
Change
42.94
47.91
43,862
56,873
13,011
28.82
27.62
29,442
32,792
3,350
14.99
12.73
15,307
15,109
-198
8.83
7.78
9,017
9,230
213
4.17
3.84
4,261
4,558
297
0.25
0.13
255
150
-105
Total
100.00
100.00
102,144
118,712
16,568
5.7
The preferred methodology for calculating household growth discussed
in section 3 of this assessment also requires consideration of the likely
sizes of the additional households that would result from the high level
of office floorspace being proposed in Salford. As set out in section 3, it
is estimated that this could generate an extra 6,752 households in
addition to those identified in the GMFM 2011 Baseline forecast.
5.8
These households would be generated by migration, as a result of the
extra employment opportunities, rather than internally through changes
in headship rates. Consequently, it is considered likely that their size
distribution will be more similar to that for all households (including
those that already exist) than that of just the new households in the
growth forecast. The forecast proportions for all households in Salford
in 2028 have been used for this purpose and the relevant figures are
shown in the table below (i.e. the percentages in the second column
have been applied to the additional 6,752 households from the extra
office development to give the figures in the third column, and then
these have been added to the estimated size distribution of the
baseline household growth from the previous table which is shown in
the fourth column below to give the totals in the fifth column).
Household
size
1 person
2 person
3+ person
% of total
households in
2028 (DCLG
2008-based
household
projections)
47.91
27.62
12.73
Change in number of households (2011-28)
Households
GMFM 2011
Total
from extra
Baseline
households
office
estimate (from
floorspace
previous table)
3,235
1,865
859
204
13,011
3,350
-198
16,246
5,215
662
Household
size
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
Total
5.9
100.00
5.10
Households
GMFM 2011
Total
from extra
Baseline
households
office
estimate (from
floorspace
previous table)
525
259
9
213
297
-105
738
557
-97
6,752
16,568
23,320
The preferred methodology for calculating household growth also takes
account of the likely implications of changes in the minimum age for
being able to claim housing benefit as a single-person household. As
described above, it is estimated that this will result in a reduction of 448
households, with 672 existing households reducing to 224 households
that have an average household size of three people. On this basis, it
has been assumed that 25% of the new households will be two person,
50% will be three person, and 25% will be four person. The table below
shows the impact that this has on the overall estimated size distribution
of household growth in Salford over the period 2011-2028.
Household
size
1 person
2 person
3+ person
4+ person
5+ person
6+ person
Total
% of total
households in
2028 (DCLG
2008-based
household
projections)
7.78
3.84
0.13
Households
Households
Total
from GMFM
from benefit
households
2011
changes
Baseline and
extra office
growth
16,246
-672
15,574
5,215
56
5,271
662
112
774
738
56
794
557
0
557
-97
0
-97
23,320
-448
22,872
Proportion of
change in the
number of
households in
each size
category
68.09
23.04
3.38
3.47
2.43
-0.42
100.00
It can therefore be seen that the majority of new households are
forecast to be single-person households. Indeed, household growth is
expected to be completely dominated by smaller households, with
91.1% being either one or two person households (this is slightly lower
than the 96.4% when considering the DCLG 2008-based household
projections in isolation).
Translating household size into dwelling size – simplistic approach
5.11 The simplest approach to estimating the size of new dwellings required
as a result of the forecast size distribution of the household growth set
205
out above would be to assume that on average each new household
will occupy a property with the same number of bedrooms as the
number of people in the households. Such an approach would assume
that there is no significant overcrowding or under-occupancy in these
new dwellings.
5.12
This approach would suggest that the vast majority (91.1%) of new
dwellings should be in the form of one and two-bedroom properties. It
would seem likely that dwellings of this size would be provided
predominantly in the form of apartments. This would indicate that there
is likely to be a very limited additional need in Salford for what might be
termed family housing.
5.13
The data earlier in this section on the future housing supply identified
that 22.5% of the supply of dwellings with planning permission would
have three or more bedrooms. In terms of the supply of category 1 and
2 sites in the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, 33.1%
would be in the form of houses. On this basis, the supply would actually
involve a higher proportion of larger dwellings than might be considered
necessary, rather than there being an undersupply as some
representations on the Core Strategy have suggested.
5.14
However, this approach takes no account of issues that impact on
housing choices, such as the need for flexible accommodation,
consumer preferences for larger dwellings, requirements for spare
bedrooms for people to visit, and space to work from home, all of which
are an upward pressure on size. Consequently, it could underestimate
the demand for larger dwellings, constraining the supply available for
families. As a result, a second approach that effectively factors in
consumer preferences is set out below.
Translating household size into dwelling size – detailed approach
5.15 This alternative approach to identifying what size of new dwellings is
required to meet the forecast size distribution of household growth
involves assuming that the current relationship between household size
and dwelling size remains the same in the future. The survey data from
the Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007 (HNA) can be used to
estimate this relationship between household size and dwelling size.
5.16
The weighted data from the survey has been used, as this is likely to
be more representative overall than the unweighted data. The HNA
explains the process of weighting as follows:
“Survey data was weighted to match the suggested tenure profile
shown by existing secondary sources. An important aspect of preparing
data for analysis is ‘weighting’ it. … social survey responses never
exactly match the estimated population totals. As a result it is
necessary to ‘rebalance’ the data to correctly represent the population
being analysed. Data was also weighted to be in line with the
secondary data distribution recorded for the following information:
206
•
•
•
•
•
•
5.17
Ward
Number of people in household
Household type
Accommodation type
Car ownership
Ethnicity of household head”104
This weighted data is set out in the table below. Larger households and
dwelling sizes have been grouped together because of the low
numbers involved.
Household
Dwelling size (number of households)
Total
size
households
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
4 bed
5+ bed
1 person
9,342
14,479
10,245
866
403
35,335
2 person
1,028
10,623
15,459
2,387
297
29,794
3 person
0
3,545
9,062
1,548
403
14,558
4 person
20
685
7,398
2,387
338
10,828
5 person
0
446
2,286
1,375
346
4,453
6+ person
0
0
523
769
637
1,929
Total
10,390
29,778
44,973
9,332
Source: Salford housing needs assessment, 2007
2,424
96,897
5.18 The following table shows the same results in terms of the proportion
the households of each household size that occupy the different sizes of
dwelling.
Household
size
1 person
2 person
3 person
4 person
5 person
6+ person
Dwelling size (% of households)
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
4 bed
5+ bed
26.44
40.98
28.99
2.45
1.14
3.45
35.65
51.89
8.01
1.00
0.00
24.35
62.25
10.63
2.77
0.18
6.33
68.32
22.04
3.12
0.00
10.02
51.34
30.88
7.77
0.00
0.00
27.11
39.87
33.02
Total
10.72
30.73
46.41
9.63
Source: Salford housing needs assessment, 2007
5.19
2.50
Total
households
(%)
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
The next table applies these proportions to the estimated level of
household growth identified above. However, it only uses the GMFM
baseline household growth plus the extra households likely to result
from the high level of office development proposed, and does not
include the reduction in households expected as a result of housing
benefit changes. The latter has been omitted at this stage because it
104
“Salford City Council Housing Needs Assessment: Technical Appendix” – Fordham
Research (October 2007), paragraphs B1.2-B1.3
207
would be expected that single-person households who will no longer be
able to afford to live on their own due to the changes in housing benefit
rules will still expect to have their own bedroom, whereas some of the
three and four person households in the HNA data actually occupied
one or two bedroom properties. Including the benefit changes at this
stage would therefore lead to a slight underestimate of the demand for
larger dwellings. The household growth figure that is used is therefore
23,320 (16,568 from the GMFM 2011 Baseline plus 6,752 from the
extra office growth).
Household
Dwelling size (number of households)
Total
size
households
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
4 bed
5+ bed
1 person
4,295
6,657
4,710
398
185
16,246
2 person
180
1,859
2,706
418
52
5,215
3 person
0
161
412
70
18
662
4 person
1
47
504
163
23
738
5 person
0
56
286
172
43
557
6+ person
0
0
-26
-39
-32
-97
Total
% of total
5.20
4,476
19.20
8,780
37.65
8,592
36.84
1,182
5.07
290
1.24
23,320
100.00
An earlier section of this assessment explained how the number of
households can be translated into a dwelling requirement, and it is
appropriate to incorporate these stages into this approach to identifying
the sizes of dwellings that are likely to be required. The first stage of
this is to make an allowance for the reoccupation of 2,142 existing
dwellings. It has been assumed that the size distribution of these will
match that of the distribution of demand more generally as identified in
the table above. The impacts of the housing benefit changes have then
been factored in, with the same assumption as above that 25% of the
new households will be two person, 50% will be three person, and 25%
will be four person. The impacts of a 4% vacancy rate in new dwellings
have then been allowed for, as have those of 2% of new dwellings
being second homes. As discussed in section 3 of this assessment,
this relatively high proportion of second homes is due to the particular
characteristics and role of the apartment market in the Regional
Centre. It has therefore been assumed that all of the second homes will
be apartments. There is no detailed evidence on which to identify the
size of the apartments being used as second homes, and so it has
been assumed that 50% of the second homes will be one-bedroom
apartments, and 50% will be two-bedroom apartments. The table below
sets out the application of these assumptions.
208
Household size
Dwelling size (number of dwellings)
1 bed
2 bed
3 bed
4 bed
5+ bed
Total
dwellings
Total from last
table
% of total
4,476
19.20
8,780
37.65
8,592
36.84
1,182
5.07
290
1.24
23,320
100.00
Reoccupied
vacant dwellings
Updated total
411
4,065
806
7,973
789
7,803
109
1,074
27
263
2,142
21,178
Impact of benefit
changes
Updated total
-672
3,393
56
8,029
112
7,915
56
1,130
0
263
-448
20,730
With 4% vacancy
rate in new
dwellings
3,535
8,364
8,244
1,177
274
21,594
2% second
homes in new
dwellings
220
220
0
0
0
22,035
Final total
% of final total
3,755
17.04
8,584
38.96
8,244
37.42
1,177
5.34
274
1.24
22,035
100.00
5.21
This approach identifies a far greater need for larger dwellings
compared to the much simpler methodology discussed above.
However, 56.0% of new dwellings would still only require one or two
bedrooms, which would most likely be in the form of apartments
although some small houses would also be expected. This would
suggest that 44.0% of new dwellings would need to have three or more
bedrooms, which would most likely be in the form of houses if they
were to attract families with children although some large apartments
would also be anticipated.
5.22
The original source of the household sizes in this methodology is the
DCLG 2008-based household projections. As discussed above, some
of the household types can only be identified in terms of their minimum
size rather than their actual size, because the categories refer to one or
more other adult in the title (applies to some households involving three
people or more). As a result, the size of dwellings required for some of
these household types could have been underestimated, although this
is unlikely to be significant given the numbers involved. Consequently,
it is anticipated that there would be relatively little need for additional
housing with four bedrooms or more.
5.23
It is also worth noting again that this methodology assumes that the
existing relationship between household size and dwelling size remains
the same. However, data in section 2 of this assessment explains that
209
Salford has a relatively high level of under-occupancy, and so this
could be considered to be a potentially significant overestimate of the
need for larger dwellings. This data identifies that there are 38,911
households living in dwellings with three bedrooms or more who only
technically require dwellings of two bedrooms or less (out of a total of
67,597 households living in dwellings with three bedrooms, i.e. 57.6%
of such dwellings could be considered to be under-occupied). This
suggests that the above methodology could potentially overestimate
the need for dwellings with three bedrooms or more by a factor of two.
5.24
However, the 2007 Housing Needs Assessment data also suggests
that there is some overcrowding in existing dwellings, with 949 of the
25,825 two bedroom dwellings being overcrowded, and 785 of the
50,463 three bedroom dwellings. Although this overcrowding is a
serious issue, its scale is significantly less than the level of underoccupancy. Therefore, in terms of the need for family housing, the
above methodology for calculating the required range of dwelling sizes
is likely to be at the top end of what might be required.
Conclusion
5.25 Overall, therefore, these two methodologies suggest that the majority of
new dwellings should have one or two bedrooms, given the likely size
distribution of forecast household growth. The proportion of dwellings
that should have three bedrooms or more could range from 9% to 44%
on this basis.
5.26
A figure towards the bottom end of the range for larger dwellings (9%)
would help to minimise under-occupancy, but could result in new
housing struggling to meet the consumer preferences of many
households. It would also provide less flexible accommodation that
may not be able to adapt to a wide variety of evolving needs.
5.27
However, a figure towards the top of the range for larger dwellings
(44%) could lead to the exacerbation of the high levels of underoccupancy currently found in Salford, a less efficient use of land, and
potentially less affordable housing (as larger dwellings will inevitably be
more expensive to build and therefore to buy or rent).
5.28
The appropriate mix of dwelling sizes therefore largely depends on the
prioritisation that is given to these various issues, although it will also
depend on whether it is considered appropriate to diversify the type of
housing that is coming forward in different parts of the city and to
encourage certain types of household such as families with children to
live in Salford.
5.29
Given the high proportion of apartments in the recent supply of new
dwellings (75.3% over the period 2003-2011), it may be more
appropriate for the proportion of larger dwellings to be towards the top
end of the range. This may lead to additional under-occupancy, but it
would help to diversify the type of new dwellings being provided in the
210
city and ensure that the city’s housing stock is able to adapt to a wide
variety of needs including families with children.
Housing provision in Broughton Park and Higher Broughton
5.30
Although issues of housing need and demand will vary across Salford,
there are particularly distinctive issues affecting the Broughton Park
area and to a lesser extent Higher Broughton.
Household growth
5.31 A detailed analysis of the 2001 Census indicates that the Jewish
population in Salford has a very distinctive age profile as a result of the
large strictly Orthodox population, with 35.4% aged 14 or under105. As a
comparison, this age group accounts for just 18.9% of the total
population of England and 19.0% of Salford. This young population has
the potential to generate a significant growth in households over the
next few decades.
5.32
In addition to this internal population and household growth, the
analysis of the Census suggests that Salford has a net inflow of Jewish
people (159 in the year leading up to the Census, which was the eighth
highest net inflow of any local authority area in the country), and this is
“likely to be from the in-flow of strictly Orthodox Jews from London”106.
5.33
A 2008 Orthodox Jewish Community Housing Needs Assessment107
found that the local Orthodox Jewish community is growing at a much
higher year on year rate than the wider community and is estimated to
increase in size by 50% between 2008 and 2021 based on projected
birth increases and mortality rates.
5.34
The strictly Orthodox Jewish population has a strong geographical
focus in the north-east of the city extending into neighbouring areas of
Bury and Manchester. The highest proportions are in the Broughton
Park area, with four output areas in that part of the city at the time of
the 2001 Census having more than 70% Jewish population108.
5.35
The geographical area populated by the strictly Orthodox Jewish
community is limited by religious requirements such as the need for
synagogues and other facilities to be within easy walking distance. As
the community has grown in this location so have the number and
quality of facilities, for example in terms of educational provision,
105
“Jews in Britain: A snapshot from the 2001 Census” – D. Graham, M. Schmool and S.
Waterman (Institute for Jewish Policy Research, 2007), p.43
106
107
“Orthodox Jewish Community Housing Needs Assessment” (Salford City Council, 2008)
108
Waterman (Institute for Jewish Policy Research, 2007), p.33-34
211
reinforcing the attractiveness of this area as a location for strictly
Orthodox Jewish people to live.
5.36
The combination of the strong internally-generated population growth,
net in-migration and the cultural attractiveness of the area as a place to
live means that there is likely to be a significant increase in housing
demand within Broughton Park and parts of Higher Broughton over the
Core Strategy period.
Land availability
5.37 This is one of the most constrained areas of the city in terms of the
availability of land for residential development. The SHLAA, identifies
specific sites in the Broughton Park and Higher Broughton area to
accommodate a net increase of 328 dwellings between 2011 and 2028,
consisting of 69 houses and 259 apartments. One of the reasons for
the low net change in houses is the proposed demolition of houses in
the ‘Top Streets’ area, but it also reflects the very constrained land
supply. The majority of the sites already have planning permissions,
and this partly explains the relatively high number of apartments.
5.38
The SHLAA has a site threshold outside the Regional Centre and town
centres of 0.25 hectares, except in the case of extant and lapsed
planning permissions where all sites are included, and so there could
be additional smaller sites that would be suitable for housing. As a
result, a more detailed assessment of the Broughton Park area has
been undertaken using aerial photographs and an indicative site size
threshold of 0.10 hectares. This suggested only very limited additional
potential, with the presence of protected trees being a major constraint.
5.39
The Broughton Park and Higher Broughton area typically has a
moderate number of ‘windfalls’ on sites smaller than the 0.25 hectare
threshold used in the SHLAA, providing an average net increase of
around 14 dwellings per annum over the period 2000-2011
(approximately 2 houses per annum and 12 apartments per annum). If
current policies were continued then it would be expected that a similar
level of windfall provision would be achieved in the future. Government
guidance states that windfalls should not normally be counted within
the first 10 years of supply109, and so allowing for windfalls in this way
would increase the total estimated supply over the period 2011-2028 to
399 dwellings (79 houses and 320 apartments).
5.40
The area therefore has the problematic combination of high demand
and low supply. This is exacerbated by relatively modest incomes
impacting on the ability to access housing in a location where prices
are quite high. Data from 2010, which considered mean average
household incomes and house prices rather than the median incomes
and house prices used in section 2 of this assessment, indicated that
109
“Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing” – Department for Communities and Local
Government (June 2010), paragraph 59
212
Broughton Park (rather than the wider Broughton Park and Higher
Broughton area) had a local house price to income ratio of 6.1 (second
only to Chat Moss within the city). Although this data showed that
house prices in Higher Broughton were below the Salford average, they
were relatively high compared to local incomes, giving a house price to
income ratio of 4.9110. High housing demand and low supply is only
likely to exacerbate these affordability problems.
5.41
Consequently, given this scale of housing demand and the constrained
supply of developable housing sites, it may be appropriate to
encourage an increased supply of windfalls within the area. This could
be achieved for example by taking a more flexible approach to infill
developments and the redevelopment of existing dwellings where they
would result in a net increase of housing. If such a policy approach
were taken, then it would be likely to result in the windfall supply
increasing within the first ten years of supply, potentially from around
2016.
Size of dwellings
5.42 The analysis of the Census data shows that “the religious makeup of
Hackney in Inner London and of Salford in Greater Manchester is
shown by the very high proportion of households with three or more
dependent children in those areas”111. This is reflected in the very high
proportion of the population that is aged 14 or under, as discussed
above. 18.13% of households in the Broughton Park area consist of 5
or more people, by far the highest proportion of any part of the city
(Winton is the next highest at 9.33%, and the city average is 6.55%).
The contrast is even starker for households of 6 or more people, which
account for 12.23% of households in Broughton Park but only 3.21% in
the next highest area of Winton and 1.99% across the city as a
whole112.
5.43
The 2008 Orthodox Jewish Community Housing Needs Assessment
found that average household size in Broughton Park of 5.9 is around
2.5 times the national and local average, with this contributing to
overcrowding (which was found to be 3 times higher in the Orthodox
Jewish community than in the community as a whole).
5.44
This would suggest that it would be appropriate to encourage or
possibly require a significant proportion of new dwellings in this area to
be in the form of large houses, possibly with at least five bedrooms.
This would help to ensure that appropriate housing is available to
accommodate the growing number of large households in the area.
110
Houses prices from Land Registry (2009/10 average sales price) , and 2010 average
household incomes from CACI PayCheck
111
112
2001 Census
213
5.45
The pressure for larger dwellings is perhaps seen to a greater extent
through proposed changes to the existing housing stock than in the
scale and type of new dwellings, as indicated by the number of
planning applications for very large extensions in this part of the city.
Such applications are often well beyond the standards set out in the
city council’s House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document
(SPD)113, for example in terms of the length of extensions along the
common boundary, separation distances and the provision of dormers.
Both during the production of that guidance and since then there have
been representations from members of the strictly Orthodox Jewish
community requesting that a less restrictive approach is taken to house
extensions in the Broughton Park and Higher Broughton area.
5.46
In order to meet the needs of the significant number of large families in
the area, there is an argument that an explicitly more permissive
approach to larger extensions should be taken in this part of the city.
This could be through different standards to the rest of Salford, or
simply a statement that the standards in the house extensions SPD will
not be applied in the Broughton Park and Higher Broughton area and
that cases will be judged on their individual merits. However, there is a
risk that this could result in significant negative impacts on the
residential amenity and environmental quality of the area, resulting in a
gradual decline in its attractiveness and detracting from the quality of
life of existing residents. Great care is therefore required to find the
appropriate balance of these various considerations.
Older people
5.47
The DCLG Practice Guidance on SHMAs identifies older people as one
of the groups for which it may be appropriate to consider specific
housing needs. This recognises the importance of achieving a good
mix of housing in the context of an ageing society.
5.48
Section 2 of this assessment included data from the ONS 2010 MidYear Population Estimates, which showed that Salford has a below
average proportion of people aged 65 and over (14.6%, compared with
14.8% in Greater Manchester as a whole, 16.7% in the North West
region, and 16.5% in England). It also identified that the city actually
saw a relatively significant decrease in this age group of 1,500 people
over the period 2001-2010, compared to a 4.5% increase in Greater
Manchester, 7.2% in the North West and 9.8% in England (ONS MidYear Population Estimates).
5.49
Despite this recent decrease, Section 3 of this assessment identifies
that there is likely to be a reasonably significant increase in the future in
the number of households with household heads aged 65 or over. The
DCLG 2008-based household projections suggest that there will be an
increase of 5,252 such households over the period 2011-2028,
113
“House Extensions Supplementary Planning Document” – Salford City Council (July 2006)
214
whereas the GMFM 2011 Baseline forecasts a lower increase of 4,011
households.
5.50
The table below shows how this compares with other parts of Greater
Manchester, as well as the regional and national figures, using the
DCLG 2008-based household projections.
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Number of households with
household head aged 65 or over
2011
2028
Change
2011-28
30,054
39,915
9,861
20,528
27,423
6,895
36,726
43,679
6,953
23,301
30,663
7,362
21,010
27,773
6,763
25,032
30,284
5,252
36,601
47,670
11,069
24,824
34,381
9,557
24,527
31,286
6,759
36,124
48,739
12,615
% increase
in the
number of
households
with
household
head aged
65 or over
32.81
33.59
18.93
31.60
32.19
20.98
30.24
38.50
27.56
34.92
% of the
total
increase in
households
that has a
household
head aged
65 or over
82.76
75.36
13.84
74.50
96.23
28.68
66.73
70.77
36.82
79.49
Greater
Manchester
278,727
361,813
83,086
29.81
48.63
North West
819,415 1,101,309
281,894
34.40
73.42
Source: Department for Communities and Local Government 2008-based
5.51
The above table shows that Salford is forecast to have the lowest
increase of the Greater Manchester districts in the number of
households with a household head aged 65 or over, and the second
lowest proportional increase after Manchester. It can be seen that the
increase in these older households is expected to dominate household
growth in some locations such as Rochdale (96%), Bolton (83%) and
Wigan (79%), whereas it is only anticipated to account for 29% of all
household growth in Salford.
5.52
The next table looks specifically at the forecast growth in single person
households aged 65 or over, with the same geographical comparators.
215
Number of single person
households aged 65 or over
2011
2028
Change
2011-28
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
16,530
10,631
23,007
12,498
11,375
14,979
19,479
14,205
13,131
18,235
22,509
13,852
28,403
16,339
14,796
18,418
25,454
20,702
16,427
25,257
5,979
3,221
5,396
3,841
3,421
3,439
5,975
6,497
3,296
7,022
% increase
in the
number of
single
person
households
aged 65 or
over
36.17
30.30
23.45
30.73
30.07
22.96
30.67
45.74
25.10
38.51
% of the
total
increase in
households
that are a
single
person
aged 65 or
over
50.18
35.21
10.74
38.87
48.68
18.78
36.02
48.11
17.95
44.25
Greater
202,157
48,087
31.21
28.15
Manchester
154,070
North West
436,219
589,112
152,893
35.05
39.82
Source: Department for Communities and Local Government 2008-based
5.53
This shows a slightly different picture, with the forecast increase in
single person households aged 65 or over being similar in Salford to
several other districts. However, Salford has the lowest proportional
increase in this age and type of household (23%), and it also accounts
for a relatively low proportion of all household growth in the city (19%).
Single person households account for around 65% of all household
growth in Salford where the household head would be aged 65 or over.
5.54
Nevertheless, although Salford’s existing population and future
household growth is less dominated by older people and households
than many other areas, there is still forecast to be a reasonably
significant increase in the number of households with an older
household head, and older single person households. This increase is
likely to have implications for the type of housing that is required in the
city.
5.55
The city council has published a housing strategy for older people
(“Promoting Independence – Our Housing Strategy for people as they
grow older in Salford”), the vision of which is “To ensure there is a wide
range of good quality and appropriate housing and support services
that promotes independence and wellbeing, provides choice and meets
the changing needs and aspirations of people as they age in Salford”.
216
5.56
It is important not to caricature the housing needs of older people as
they can vary enormously. However, it would generally be expected
that an increase in the number of older households would lead to an
increase in demand for the following:
• Adaptable homes, for example with disabled adaptations or that
could easily be adapted for those with constrained mobility (for
example meeting the Lifetime Homes standard, or wheelchair
standards)
• Single level living (such as bungalows and appropriate apartment
accommodation)
• Sheltered accommodation
• Retirement villages
• Care homes
5.57
The relatively high proportion of the growth in older households that will
involve single person households could potentially result in a significant
amount of the additional demand focusing on housing options that
provide additional comfort for those living alone, such as sheltered
accommodation and retirement villages where independence can be
combined with warden provision.
Households with specific needs
5.58 This sub-section considers the demand for housing from households
with specific needs, particularly support needs associated with disabilities.
Consequently, there is some overlap with the issues of an ageing
population discussed immediately above.
5.59
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
5.60
The Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007 sought to estimate the
number of households with support needs, looking at the following
groups:
Frail or elderly
Persons with a medical condition
Persons with a physical disability
Persons with a learning disability
Persons with a mental health problem
Persons with a severe sensory disability
Others
The assessment warned that the data should be seen as broadly
indicative rather than providing exact figures for recognised categories
of care or support need, particularly given that the survey method of
data collection meant that all requirements were self-assessed and the
217
sample sizes for some groups were small114. The results are
summarised in the two tables below.
Type of household
No people with support needs
Single support need only
Multiple support needs
Households
% of households
72,561
74.9%
14,112
14.6%
10,227
10.6%
Total
96,900
Source: Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007 (Table 7.2)
Not in
unsuitable
housing
Support
needs
No support
needs
Number of
households
100.0%
% of total
households in % of those in
unsuitable
unsuitable
housing
housing
19,227
24,339
21.0%
46.8%
66,749
72,561
8.0%
53.2%
Total
85,976
96,900
11.3%
100.0%
5.61
This suggests that 25% of households in Salford have support needs,
and around 42% of those households have multiple support needs.
Almost 47% of households with support needs are living in unsuitable
housing, although this does not mean that they require alternative
accommodation, and adaptations to existing housing may be sufficient
to address the unsuitability.
5.62
The next table identifies the size of households with support needs. It
can be seen that the majority of need is found in smaller households,
with 74% in one and two person households. The assessment
identifies that around 48% of the households with support needs
contain no older people, and around 38% contain only older people.
Household
size
(persons)
One
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six or more
Support
needs
10,153
7,749
3,661
1,576
640
561
No support Number of % of total
needs
households households
with
support
needs
25,182
35,335
28.7%
22,046
29,795
26.0%
10,898
14,559
25.1%
9,252
10,828
14.6%
3,814
4,454
14.4%
1,369
1,930
29.1%
114
% of those
with a
support
need
41.7%
31.8%
15.0%
6.5%
2.6%
2.3%
“Salford City Council Housing Needs Assessment” – Fordham Research (October 2007),
paragraphs 7.2-7.4
218
Household
size
(persons)
No support Number of % of total
needs
households households
with
support
needs
% of those
with a
support
need
Total
24,340
72,561
96,901
25.1%
100.0%
5.63
Support
needs
The graph below provides information from the study regarding the
type of support needs that the households require, with some
households having more than one need. This would suggest that many
of the needs could be met through adaptations to existing dwellings,
rather than necessarily requiring a move to purpose-built
accommodation.
Source: Salford Housing Needs Assessment 2007 (Figure 7.7)
Private Sector House Condition Survey 2011
5.64 The 2011 Private Sector House Condition Survey included a question
relating to the need for disabled adaptations. The table below
summarises the key results (from Table 4.24 of the report).
219
Category
Disabilities in household – no adaptations needed
Disabilities in household – with adaptations
Disabilities in household – with adaptations and
more adaptations needed
Disabilities in household – with no adaptations but
adaptations needed
Total households
Total households
Source: Private Sector Stock Condition Survey 2010
8,509
5,321
1,555
1,842
85,122
5.65
This suggests a much lower level of need for adaptations than the 2007
needs assessment, but this study excludes the significant number of
households living in social rented accommodation owned/managed by
City West Housing Trust and Salix Homes (given it focussed on private
sector dwellings).
5.66
It can be seen that around 3,397 households were identified as
needing additional disabled adaptations (4% of all households covered
by the survey). The report suggests that the highest need is in Little
Hulton and Broughton (paragraph 4.7.3). It is notable that there are
more households that already have sufficient adaptations than those
that require new/additional adaptations.
5.67
The following table identifies the type of adaptations required to enable
people with disabilities to live independently, with some households
requiring more than one adaptation (taken from Table 4.25).
Disabled adaptations needed
Total households
Wider doorways
2,160
Emergency alarm
4,328
Straight stair lift
2,144
Redesign bedroom
890
Curved stair lift
2,308
Redesign kitchen
556
Ramp
693
Redesign WC
2,564
Grab hand rails
2,777
Redesign bathroom
1,708
Hoist
3,110
Other
2,384
Source: Private Sector Stock Condition Survey 2010
Other indicators
5.68 Salford City Council has been awarded £1,234,142 of disabled facilities
grant funding for 2011/12, to support adaptations in private sector
housing.
220
5.69
The table below identifies the proportion of people who are claiming
incapacity benefit or severe disablement benefit. It also identifies the
proportion of people claiming disability living allowance, some of whom
will also be eligible for incapacity benefit or severe disablement benefit.
This data therefore needs to be interpreted carefully, but provides a
broad indication of the level of long-term illness that could potentially
impact on housing needs.
Area
Barton
Blackfriars
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Kersal
Langworthy
Little
Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Pendleton
Swinton
North
Swinton
South
Walkden
North
Walkden
South
Weaste &
Seedley
Winton
Worsley &
Boothstown
Resident
population
(aged
16-64)
7,338
9,781
5,794
6,437
8,338
8,213
6,519
7,873
4,295
6,701
Incapacity
benefit
Number
%
Severe
disablement
benefit
Number %
Total incapacity
and disablement
claimants
Number %
Disability living
allowance
Number
%
610
620
670
345
435
610
335
510
510
710
8.3%
6.3%
11.6%
5.4%
5.2%
7.4%
5.1%
6.5%
11.9%
10.6%
55
30
50
25
70
85
30
40
25
40
0.7%
0.3%
0.9%
0.4%
0.8%
1.0%
0.5%
0.5%
0.6%
0.6%
665
650
720
370
505
695
365
550
535
750
9.1%
6.6%
12.4%
5.7%
6.1%
8.5%
5.6%
7.0%
12.5%
11.2%
960
765
955
680
855
1,015
755
795
725
1,285
13.1%
7.8%
16.5%
10.6%
10.3%
12.4%
11.6%
10.1%
16.9%
19.2%
6,720
10,573
8,265
7,548
465
655
845
480
6.9%
6.2%
10.2%
6.4%
30
85
45
80
0.4%
0.8%
0.5%
1.1%
495
740
890
560
7.4%
7.0%
10.8%
7.4%
710
1,195
970
925
10.6%
11.3%
11.7%
12.3%
8,390
350
4.2%
40
0.5%
390
4.6%
730
8.7%
7,533
615
8.2%
35
0.5%
650
8.6%
1,090
14.5%
10,168
505
5.0%
90
0.9%
595
5.9%
1,120
11.0%
6,376
555
8.7%
55
0.9%
610
9.6%
1,025
16.1%
8,482
8,717
700
200
8.3%
2.3%
65
30
0.8%
0.3%
765
230
9.0%
2.6%
1,195
540
14.1%
6.2%
Central
Salford
Salford
West
57,442
4,610
8.0%
345
0.6%
4,955
8.6%
6,800
11.8%
96,619
6,115
6.3%
660
0.7%
6,775
7.0%
11,490
11.9%
Salford
154,061
10,700
6.9%
830
0.5%
11,530
7.5%
18,280
11.9%
33.86
million
1.40
million
4.1%
0.15
million
0.5%
1.56
million
4.6%
2.64
million
7.8%
England
Notes:
•
Ward data is based on old ward boundaries (2003 CAS wards)
•
Resident population taken from Claimant Count Denominators - Current residents 2011
•
Benefit claimants for wards taken from dataset Benefit claimants: IB/SDA for small
areas (May 2011)
221
•
•
Benefit claimants for Salford and England taken from dataset Benefit claimants:
Incapacity benefits and severe disability allowance (May 2011) (Incapacity benefit is the
total of those claiming lower rate, higher rate, long term and credits)
Disability living allowance provides a non-contributory, non means-tested and tax-free
contribution towards the disability-related extra costs of severely disabled people who
claim help with those costs before the age of 65. People can continue to receive the
allowance after reaching age 65 if they continue to satisfy the entitlement conditions
(www.nomisweb.co.uk)
5.70
It can be seen that the proportion of people claiming incapacity benefit
and/or disability living allowance in Salford is significantly above the
national average. The proportion claiming incapacity benefit is
noticeably higher in Central Salford than Salford West, whereas Salford
West has a slightly higher rate of disability living allowance claimants.
5.71
The highest claimant rates are seen in Broughton, Langworthy and
Little Hulton. Pendleton has a relatively high proportion of people
claiming incapacity benefit, but an average rate of disability living
allowance claimants. Walkden North, Weaste and Seedley, and Winton
all have relatively high proportions of people claiming disability living
allowance, but only slightly above average levels of incapacity benefit
claimants. The lowest claimant levels are in Worsley and Boothstown
and Swinton South. There is therefore some inverse relationship
between claimant rates and prosperity.
Implications for housing demand
5.72 It is quite difficult to draw any clear conclusions from this data in terms
of the implications for the type of housing that is provided in Salford.
The proportion of people claiming incapacity and/or disability benefits in
Salford is considerably higher than in England as a whole, and this
citywide rate masks some significant variations between different
wards. This suggests that the demand for housing that can meet
particular support needs is likely to be relatively high in Salford, as
indicated by the 2007 Housing Needs Assessment which identified that
one quarter of all households have support needs.
5.73
The 2010 Private Sector House Condition Survey identified that there
are more households living in homes with adaptations than there are
households requiring adaptations, which suggests that good progress
has already been made in Salford in terms of ensuring that suitable
housing is available. It also suggests that many needs can be met
through adaptations to mainstream housing rather than requiring
purpose-built accommodation designed to meet a specific need.
5.74
This could be seen to indicate that the emphasis in the future should be
on ensuring that new dwellings are designed to be as adaptable as
possible, for example by meeting the Lifetime Homes standard, and
that suitable support services are available to deliver adaptations and
promote independent living.
222
Gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople
Existing provision
5.75
The scale of authorised provision of Gypsy, traveller, and travelling
showpeople sites within the North West as of 22 January 2010 is shown
in the table below.
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Provision as of 22 January 2010
Authorised Gypsy and
Authorised travelling
traveller pitches
showpeople plots
26
88
17
20
16
75
0
0
27
0
31
99
0
0
0
38
83
0
34
36
Greater Manchester
234
356
Cumbria sub-region
91
38
Cheshire sub-region
256
22
Lancashire sub-region
359
28
Merseyside sub-region
30
0
North West Total
970
444
Source: “Current authorised provision (gypsy and traveller pitches) in 2007:
Revised version” – 4NW (published 25 January 2010, data as at 22 January
2010)
5.76 It can be seen that Salford has the third highest number of pitches for
Gypsies and travellers of the districts in Greater Manchester, and
provides 13.2% of the sub-region’s total provision. Greater Manchester
provides 24.1% of the regional total.
5.77 In relation to authorised travelling showpeople provision, Salford has the
highest number of plots in Greater Manchester, providing 27.8% of the
sub-region’s total provision. Notably, Greater Manchester
accommodates 80.2% of the region’s travelling showpeople plots,
whereas there is no provision at all within the Merseyside sub-region.
5.78 The latest available data from the DCLG count of Gypsy and traveller
caravans, as of 28 July 2011, is shown below. This relates to the total
number of caravans rather than the number of pitches, with there
typically being two caravans per pitch on an authorised site.
223
Number of caravans as of 28 July 2011
Authorised sites
Unauthorised sites
Area
Bolton
Bury
Manchester
Oldham
Rochdale
Salford
Stockport
Tameside
Trafford
Wigan
Social
43
25
20
0
48
62
0
0
0
12
Private
temporary
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Private
permanent
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
21
33
Total
43
25
20
0
48
62
0
0
21
45
Tolerated
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Not
tolerated
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
Total
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
12
Total of
all
caravans
43
25
20
0
48
62
0
0
21
57
Greater
Manchester
210
0
54
264
0
12
12
North West
473
53
551 1,077
48
154
202
Note: Manchester data relates to July 2010 as no count was provided for July 2011
276
1,279
Source: Department for Communities and Local Government count of Gypsy
and traveller caravans (November 2011)
5.79
This information indicates that some of the sites in the January 2010
data for pitch numbers may since have been lost. 29.5% of all caravans
on authorised sites in Greater Manchester are in Salford. It can be
seen that Greater Manchester has a very low proportion of caravans on
private sites (20.5%) compared to the North West as a whole (51.2%),
and there are no private caravan sites in Salford. The only
unauthorised provision in Greater Manchester on 26 July 2011 was in
Wigan.
Sites in Salford
5.80 Salford currently has one Gypsy and traveller site at Duchy Road
(Irwell Riverside) providing 31 pitches. These pitches are all social
rented, and are currently occupied by a total of 62 caravans. The site
has an area of 1.2ha (12,000 square metres). It is owned by the city
council and managed on its behalf by Salix Homes.
5.81
Originally half of the site was for transit pitches, but due to an under
provision of permanent sites within the city, some transit pitches have
gradually become permanent pitches. The intention is that some of
these permanent pitches will in future become available as transit
pitches, as and when residents leave the site. A timeline for this will
depend on the natural turnover of residents on the site.
5.82
Salford currently has three travelling showpeople sites which together
provide a total of 99 plots:
Regent Road Caravan Park – located next to the Gypsy and traveller
site at Duchy Road, and is owned by the city council. The site is
approximately 8244m² (0.8ha) in size, and provides 24 plots.
•
224
•
•
5.83
Brookdale Park – located at Cleggs Lane in Little Hulton, and is a
privately owned site. The site is approximately 9,861 m² (0.99ha) in
size, and provides 25 plots.
Fairways – located at Clarence Street in Lower Broughton, and is
privately owned. The site is approximately 12,148 m² (1.2ha) in size,
and provides 50 plots.
The Fairways site is located within the indicative floodplain, and would
be affected by a severe flood event115. Caravans, mobile homes and
park homes intended for permanent residential use are identified as
highly vulnerable uses in Planning Policy Statement 25116, and
consequently new developments should not be located on sites with a
1 in 100 or greater annual risk of river flooding. Therefore ideally the
Fairways site should be relocated to a site at lower risk of flooding
Need for additional gypsy, travellers and travelling showpeople
accommodation
5.84 Various assessments of need have been undertaken to determine what
future provision needs to be made for Gypsies and Travellers within
Salford. This includes the Salford Housing Needs Assessment (2007),
the Greater Manchester Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation
Assessment (GTAA) (2008) and the North West GTAA (2007).
5.85
At a regional level 4NW (the former Regional Planning Body) undertook
research into the need for new pitches and plots for travellers as part of
a partial review of the North West Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). An
Examination in Public took place in March 2010, but due to the likely
revocation of the RSS, the partial review was not completed or
incorporated into the RSS. However, the Panel report was published
following a Freedom of Information request to the Planning
Inspectorate. The partial review took a policy based approach that
considered the appropriate distribution of plots and pitches, rather than
simply focusing on where the need was currently being generated.
5.86
The table below provides a summary of the various assessments of
need for additional Gypsy and traveller pitches.
115
“Manchester City, Salford City and Trafford Councils Level 2 Hybrid SFRA” – JBA
Consulting (March 2011)
116
“Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk” – Department for
Communities and Local Government (March 2010)
225
Need for additional Gypsy and traveller pitches (time period and source)
2007-16 RSS (4NW
2007-16 (RSS
2007-17 (SCC Housing
2008-15 (GM
RSS Partial Review
Panel Report – not
Needs Assessment)
GTAA)
submission)*
issued)*
Permanent
PermaPermaPermanent
Transit
Transit
Transit
and transit
nent
nent
pitches
pitches
pitches
pitches
pitches
pitches
pitches
Area
Salford
24
n/a
39
30
10
35
5
Greater
Manchester
n/a
n/a
381
280
100
330
50
North West
n/a
n/a
n/a
825
270
890
220
* 3% annual compound increase in the total pitches post 2016
Sources: Salford City Council 2007 Housing Needs Assessment (Fordham
Research); Greater Manchester Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation
Assessment (Arc4); 4NW RSS Partial review Submission Document; Panel
Report into the North West RSS Partial Review (not issued)
5.87
All of these assessments identified some additional need in Salford,
ranging from 24 to 40 pitches though with slightly varying time periods.
The RSS partial review identified the need for transit as well as
permanent provision.
5.88
The next table provides a summary of the various assessments of need
for additional travelling showpeople plots
Need for additional travelling showpeople plots (time period and source)
2007-17 (SCC
2008-15
2007-16 RSS
2007-16 RSS
Housing needs
(Greater
(4NW RSS
Panel Report
assessment)
Manchester
Partial Review
(not issued)**
GTAA)
submission)*
43
51
20
20
n/a
210
155
155
Area
Salford
Greater
Manchester
North West
n/a
* 3% compound increase in plots post 2016
** 2% compound increase in plots post 2016
n/a
285
285
Sources: Salford City Council 2007 Housing Needs Assessment (Fordham
Research); Greater Manchester Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation
Assessment (Arc4); 4NW RSS Partial review Submission Document; Panel
Report into the North West RSS Partial Review (not issued)
5.89
These assessments all identify some additional need in Salford, but
this varies quite considerably between 20 plots in the RSS review and
51 plots in the Greater Manchester Gypsy and Traveller
Accommodation Assessment. The methodology that is used for the
accommodation assessments effectively means that locations where
there is currently travelling showpeople provision are likely to show the
greatest need for additional provision in the future. However, the RSS
partial review took the view that new provision should be more evenly
distributed, although this redistribution of demand was still relatively
226
limited as no provision at all was proposed in the whole of the
Merseyside sub-region.
5.90
Further work will be required at the sub-regional level to ensure that the
provision of new sites for Gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople
is properly distributed and coordinated.
Student housing
5.91
There is one university within Salford (the University of Salford), which
is located in the eastern part of the city. There are also two other
universities relatively near by in central Manchester (the University of
Manchester, and Manchester Metropolitan University). This generates
a significant demand for student housing in the inner areas of the
conurbation.
5.92
The University of Salford has two main campuses:
• The Peel Park and Frederick Road campus, located on the western
edge of the Manchester/Salford City Centre
• The MediaCityUK Campus at Salford Quays, which opened in
October 2011
5.93
The table below shows the number and type of students at the
University of Salford in the 2010/2011 academic year.
Number of students (2010-2011)
HEFCE
Non-HEFCE International Total
Type
fundable
fundable
Undergraduate
11,973
3,891
953
16,817
Postgraduate
2,072
401
1,109
3,582
– taught
Postgraduate
381
215
596
– research
Total
14,045
4,673
2,277
20,995
Note: HEFCE is the Higher Education Funding Council for England
Source: University of Salford Financial Statements Year Ending 31 July 2011
Purpose-built student accommodation
5.94 There are a total of 3,245 purpose-built student bedrooms in the city,
52% of which the University directly owns and controls. A summary of
the accommodation including a brief description is shown in the table
below.
227
Site
Description
Castle Irwell
University owned comprising both houses (11 people)
& flats (6 persons) for undergraduates and
postgraduates. Sports complex included within the
Student Village and free car parking.
Constantine University owned comprising 13 bed houses on
Court
campus.
Horlock
University owned comprising 14, 12 bed houses on
Court
campus.
Bramall
University owned close to the Adelphi Campus,
Court
providing accommodation for undergraduates.
Matthias
Leased to the university the flats which are usually
Court
shared between 2 – 3 people provide accommodation
for postgraduates.
Lester Court Owned by Campus Living Villages providing
accommodation for both under and postgraduates.
Colman
Owned by Campus Living Villages providing
Court
accommodation for both under and postgraduates.
iQ Student
Owned by CRM Ltd and located close to Castle Irwell,
Quarter
it comprises a number of houses which contains six
flats which are typically shared by 6 people.
Total
Number
of rooms
1,058
87
168
346
290
376
379
541
3,245
Source: Information taken from The University of Salford Student Village Proposals Planning
and Regeneration Statement by Turley Associates, planning application 11/60366/HYB and
also www.accommodation.salford.ac.uk./accommodation_locations
5.95
The map below shows the location of the purpose built student
accommodation in Salford.
228
5.96 Much of the existing accommodation was built in the 1960s and 1970s,
and is in need of some modernisation. It may increasingly struggle to
compete with alternative provision, as prospective students are said to
229
becoming much more discerning in their choice of accommodation.
However, it is possible that recent increases in university fees could
impact on both the demand for and expectations of student
accommodation.
5.97 A Campus Plan, produced in April 2011, illustrates the university’s
aspirations and vision for change. A key objective is the provision of oncampus student accommodation in order to increase animation, vibrancy
and improve the campus experience. The university has indicated that it
would like to guarantee accommodation to all first year undergraduates
and also, if possible, to all overseas students.
5.98 In October 2011 the university was granted planning permission for the
erection of up to 2,100 student bedrooms at the Peel Park campus
(application number 11/60366/HYB). The application indicated that
1,949 of the new bedrooms would be direct replacements for those that
are to be vacated elsewhere (1,058 bedrooms at Castle Irwell, 255
bedrooms at Horlock Court and Constantine Court, and 636 bedrooms
at Matthias Court and Bramhall Court).
5.99 As well as plans for student accommodation on the main Peel Park
campus, a private sector scheme has recently been granted for 240
bedrooms at St Simon Street in Greengate North (11/60830/FUL). A
further application for private sector accommodation totalling 1,091
student bedrooms at Adelphi Street just to the east of the Peel Park
campus is currently awaiting determination (11/59839/FUL).
Students in private sector dwellings
5.100 Many students live in private sector rented housing rather than
purpose-built student accommodation. Council Tax data can be used to
give a broad indication of the number and distribution of private sector
dwellings being occupied by students. It is only possible to identify those
households where all occupants are students and consequently qualify
for a Council Tax exemption, and so this data does not include all
students who live in private sector housing. The data is shown in the
table below.
Ward
Barton
Boothstown and
Ellenbrook
Broughton
Cadishead
Claremont
Eccles
Irlam
Irwell Riverside
Kersal
Number of
occupied
dwellings
Number of
% of occupied
dwellings with
dwellings with
student discount
student discount
5,777
14
0.24
3,895
6,022
4,483
4,278
5,369
3,988
5,249
4,737
230
4
76
10
28
16
2
256
37
0.10
1.26
0.22
0.65
0.30
0.05
4.88
0.78
Ward
Langworthy
Little Hulton
Ordsall
Pendlebury
Swinton North
Swinton South
Walkden North
Walkden South
Weaste and
Seedley
Winton
Worsley
Number of
occupied
dwellings
6,568
5,588
8,300
5,472
5,117
4,681
5,270
4,473
Number of
% of occupied
dwellings with
dwellings with
student discount
student discount
312
4.75
14
0.25
301
3.63
24
0.44
10
0.20
8
0.17
15
0.28
11
0.25
5,362
5,316
4,302
Total
104,247
Source: Council Tax data December 2011
50
14
5
0.93
0.26
0.12
1,207
1.16
5.101 The above table shows that 1.16% of all dwellings in the city are
student households. The largest concentrations of student dwellings are
in those wards that are in close proximity to the main university
campuses (i.e. in Irwell Riverside, Langworthy and Ordsall). There is no
ward where the proportion of occupied dwellings with student exemption
from paying council tax is above 5%.
Future demand for student housing
5.102 It is very difficult to estimate the likely future demand for student
housing given recent increases in student fees to up to £9,000 per
annum. It is possible that financial pressures could result in more
students remaining in their family home, reducing the demand for
student housing (both in terms of purpose-built accommodation and
private rented housing).
5.103 In this context, it may be appropriate to ensure that a clear need is
demonstrated before further purpose-built student accommodation is
permitted, in order to avoid any potential oversupply of a housing
product that has a very targeted market.
5.104 The very high concentration of students in south Manchester has been
identified as having adverse impacts on the local housing market, and
Manchester’s Publication Core Strategy seeks to limit further
concentrations117. There does not appear to be any evidence that there
is any similar concentration of students in private sector dwellings that
affects part of Salford, although it will be important to keep this under
review as patterns of demand can change quickly.
117
“Manchester’s Local Development Framework: Core Strategy Development Plan
Document – Publication consultation” – Manchester City Council (February 2011), Policy H11
231
Higher priced housing
5.105 The key housing objective of the Greater Manchester Strategy is
“creating quality places to meet the needs of a competitive city region”.
It explains that:
“Within the city region, there is need to focus on improving the match
between the housing ‘offer’ and the aspirations of existing and potential
new households and ensuring our housing policy is linked to improving
life chances in deprived communities, attracting and retaining the best
talent and moving towards a low-carbon economy.”118
5.106 The strategy makes a strong link between the provision of housing for
skilled workers and the sub-region’s economic prospects, stating that:
“The city region has to be known as a place that offers high quality
housing in places where people at all levels of the market, including the
highly skilled and talented, will choose, and can afford, to live and
invest.”119
5.107 The need for housing in the higher price brackets is therefore
considered to be an important priority for Greater Manchester.
However, the areas where it is realistic to secure such provision are
relatively limited.
5.108 The future economic performance section of chapter 3 of this
assessment identifies that the number of workers in the highest skill
categories (level 4) will see the greatest growth in Greater Manchester
over the period 2011-2028. Given that highly skilled jobs tend to
command higher salaries, it may be expected that the demand for
higher cost housing will increase significantly over the next few
decades.
Scale of future provision in Salford
5.109 The section on the active housing market in chapter 2 of this
assessment explains how the city has been split into five value areas
on the basis of average sales values per square metre of residential
floorspace. It describes those areas as follows:
• Over £3,000 per square metre (relating to the Regional Centre
within the inner relief route, and Salford Quays)
• Between £2,600 and £3,000 per square metre (relating to Worsley,
South Swinton, and Chat Moss)
• Between £2,200 and £2,600 per square metre (relating to
Broughton Park, Chapel Street / The Crescent, Exchange Quay,
118
“Prosperity for all: The Greater Manchester Strategy” – Association of Greater Manchester
Authorities (August 2009), p.47
119
Ibid, p.48
232
•
•
Ellesmere Park and Monton, Boothstown, Ellenbrook, and South
Walkden)
Between £1,800 and £2,200 per square metre (relating to Trinity,
Ordsall, Claremont, Eccles and Peel Green, Irlam and Cadishead,
Swinton, Pendlebury and Agecroft, and North Walkden)
Between £1,400 and £1,800 per square metre (relating to Higher
and Lower Broughton, Charlestown and Lower Kersal, Pendleton,
Weaste, Seedley and Langworthy and Little Hulton)
5.110 The specific sites identified in the Strategic Housing Land Availability
Assessment (SHLAA) as being, or likely to be, deliverable/developable
(i.e. what are referred to in that document as Category 1 and Category
2 sites) have been categorised according to these value areas. The
windfall allowances set out in the SHLAA are only available on a subarea rather than a site-specific basis, and so the proportions which are
likely to be in each value area have had to be estimated. This has been
done on the following basis:
• Broughton Park – 25% in low cost area; 75% in mid cost area
• Charlestown and Lower Kersal – all in low cost area
• Chat Moss – all in the mid/high cost area
• Claremont and Weaste – all in the low/mid cost area
• Crescent – all in the mid cost area
• Eccles – 75% in the low/mid cost area; 25% in the mid cost area
• Eccles New Road – all in the low cost area
• Greengate – all in the high cost area
• Greengate North and Trinity – all in the low/mid cost area
• Irlam and Cadishead – all in the low/mid cost area
• Liverpool Street – all in the mid cost area
• Lower Broughton – all in the low cost area
• Ordsall – all in the low/mid cost area
• Ordsall Waterfront – 75% in the low/mid cost area; 25% in the mid
cost area
• Pendleton – all in the low cost area
• Salford Central – 60% in the mid cost area; 40% in the high cost
area
• Salford Quays – all in the high cost area
• Swinton and Pendlebury – 85% in the low/mid cost area; 15% in the
mid cost area
• Walkden and Little Hulton – 35% in the low cost area; 35% in the
low/mid cost area; 30% in the mid cost area
• Worsley and Boothstown – 50% in the mid cost area; 50% in the
mid/high cost area
5.111 The table below shows the results of this, identifying the amount of the
identified SHLAA supply in each of the value areas.
233
Cost area
Low
Mid/low
- Within Regional
Centre
- Outside Regional
Centre
Mid
- Within Regional
Centre
- Outside Regional
Centre
Mid/high
High
Total
Number of dwellings
% of city total
Houses ApartTotal
Houses ApartTotal
ments
ments
3,356
2,181
5,537
38.39
13.58
22.32
3,524
3,337
6,861
40.32
20.78
27.66
40
1,187
1,227
0.46
7.39
4.95
3,484
1,248
2,150
3,476
5,634
4,724
39.86
14.28
13.39
21.64
22.72
19.05
463
3,101
3,564
5.30
19.31
14.37
785
493
120
375
25
7,043
1,159
518
7,163
8.98
5.64
1.37
2.33
0.15
43.85
4.67
2.09
28.88
8,741
16,062
24,803
100.00
100.00
100.00
Excluding the
Regional Centre
- Low
- Mid/low
- Mid
- Mid/high
- High
3,356
3,484
785
493
0
2,181
2,150
375
25
0
5,537
5,634
1,159
518
0
Total
8,118
4,731
12,849
% of total excluding the
Regional Centre
41.34
46.11
43.09
42.92
45.45
43.85
9.66
7.92
9.02
6.08
0.52
4.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
5.112 It can be seen that a significant proportion of the potential supply over
the period 2011-2028 is within the high cost area (29%). However, that
area consists solely of Salford Quays and that part of the City Centre
within the Inner Relief Road. It therefore represents a very specific
sector of the housing market, focused on high density ‘city centre’
apartment living, which may not be attractive to or suitable for many
households.
5.113 In some ways it is the second part of the above table that is more
informative, as it excludes the potential supply of dwellings within the
Regional Centre where apartments dominate. This suggests that 87%
of the potential supply is within the low and mid/low cost areas. The
availability of higher cost housing outside the Regional Centre is
therefore relatively limited, with only 4% in the mid/high areas and 9%
in the mid areas (totalling 1,677 dwellings across these two categories).
5.114 It may therefore be appropriate to give consideration to whether there
is the potential to increase the supply of housing land in the mid and/or
mid/high areas, in order to support the Greater Manchester priority of
increasing the supply of higher value housing within the conurbation.
234

Strategic Housing Market Assessment

Transcription

Similar documents

learner services guide

Pharyngoscopy, Laryngoscopy, Upper Oesophagoscopy

Transition Black Isle

For advance bookings or queries please call our

Ordsall Hall What`s On guide, Jan-June 2015

Alison Brettle - CILIP Conference

3.3 Acre Restaurant Site Jonesboro, Arkansas

media kit lmm2 - La Mega Mundial

strike a pose! - Salford M3 Magazine CIC

New Hampshire Jobs for America`s Graduates New - NH-JAG