manor, arbourthorne and gleadless housing … arbourthorne and gleadless housing market profile this...

Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless Housing Market Profile

This profile contains information about the population, housing stock, market performance and demand for housing in the Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless (MAG) HMA. The Housing Market Area Profiles have been developed as a guide for future housing delivery on sites located across the city. The profiles offer recommendations on the housing that would be suitable to meet the current need in the area and diversify the stock that is available in order to attract households to the area. The profiles also provide useful evidence and data on the population and housing levels across Sheffield which can be utilised in other reports and publications. This HMA data is compared with the Sheffield average to put the area in the wider context of the city. The data used in this profile is from a number of sources, including the 2011 Census, 2013 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), Council data, Experian and Land Registry sales. The SHMA data is based on a household survey of a statistically representative sample of 3,363 households living in Sheffield and accords well with the spatial, tenure & demographic profile of the city. Prior to the analysis the data was weighted by household type to ensure that it is representative as possible thus compensating for non-response bias. More information on the data can be found in the sources section of the profiles. The profile includes the following sections: Section 1 - Area description: A description of the neighbourhoods within the HMA Section 2 - Household profile: Demographics of the population and the households in the HMA Section 3 - Economic profile: Employment and incomes Section 4 - Housing profile: Current housing available, including the type, size, tenure and adequacy of the housing Section 5 - Neighbourhood profile: Neighbourhood satisfaction, crime and educational attainment Section 6 - Recently moved to HMA: People who have moved into the HMA and the reasons for this Section 7 - Supply from moving households: Supply of housing that might become available in the HMA by households moving in the next 5 years Section 8 - Demand from existing households: Future demand for housing from existing households planning to move to the HMA, including demand for different types, sizes and tenures of home Section 9 - Existing households that could not move in the last 5 years and the reasons why Section 10 - Newly forming households: Demand for housing from new households who may form in the next 5 years Section 11 - Supply and Demand balance - Details about the estimated supply of housing in the HMA, and how this matches with demand. Identifies shortfalls or surpluses of different sizes and tenures of homes to act as a guide for development. Section 12 - Social rented market: Details of the social housing stock and turnover Section 13 - Home ownership market: Average house prices, property sales, completions and the income required to afford to buy a property Section 14 - Private rented market: Average private rents and the income required to afford to rent a home Section 15 - Housing affordability - Level of income spent on housing costs, difficulties affording housing costs and housing benefit claimants Section 16 - Older people's accommodation: Supply of older people's accommodation and the demand for this in the HMA Section 17 - Care and support needs: Disabled households and the demand for adaptations, and care and support from the SHMA Section 18 – Summary: Brief conclusions drawing out the key points from the sections. Section 19 – Housing recommendations on the types of housing that is needed in the area to meet demand and attract households to the area.

1

Section 1: Area description

The Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless (MAG) Housing Market Area runs to the east and south of the City Centre. The area is dominated by social housing estates, including the inter-war estates on the Manor and Arbourthorne and the developments in Norfolk Park and Gleadless commanding impr essive views over the city. Over the past decade the area has been subject to wide-scale regeneration to diversify the housing stock, although social renting is still the most common tenure. The HMA also has some of ‘most severely deprived’ areas in the country, including Arbourthorne and the Manor. The most common types of households in the MAG HMA are families who need support and older social renters on low incomes. Oth er types of households found in large numbers are single social renters and transient private renters living in shared properties. The Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) identified sites with the capacity for over 3,000 dwellings, wit h each of the individual sites having the capacity to deliver over 25 dwellings and including 11 sites with capacity for over 100 dwellings. The area contains the neighbourhoods of: Arbourthorne - commands a prominent hilltop position 2 miles south-east of the City Centre, with far-reaching views from Arbourthorne Recreation Ground. The area has a small number of shops on East Bank Road, including a new medical centre and pharmacy which it is hoped will provid e a community base for some specialist services. Housing is a typical pre-war council estate with high concentrations of two-bedroom houses. Many properties suffer from poor visual appearance generating negative perceptions among residents and the wider public. A new 56-unit for older people is recently completed, and a large number of 5M construction houses and 9 blocks of flats have been demolished. Additionally, Sheffield Housing Company have plans to develop a small number of properties. Gleadless – is about 5 miles south east of the City Centre, Gleadless is bounded to the east by the A6102 Ridgeway Road and to the south by Gleadless Road. Densely populated, the neighbourhood has a mixture of housing types and tenures, centred on the old Gleadless village. There is a dis trict centre at Gleadless Townend to the south of the neighbourhood, offering a range of shops and services and good bus and tram routes. Residents have limited acces s to public green space. Gleadless Valley – is located 5 miles south of the City Centre and is dominated by Rollestone Wood with Herdings Park at its southern end, Leesh all Wood to the west and Gleadless Road to the north east. The area is predominantly made up of council housing consisting of mainly flats and mai sonettes built in the 1960’s on steep hillsides. Shopping areas at Herdings and Newfield Green provide local amenities. Granville - lies ½ mile south-east of the City Centre and is clearly visible from many parts of it. It is bounded by Shrewsbury Road to the North, the Sky Edge ridge to the North East, and Granville Road and Norfolk Park to the South. The housing in Granville is mostly of late 19th and early 2 0th century date. There are some excellent stone built detached villas and a rather larger number of semi-detached, villa terrace or terraced properties in private ownership. The area is serviced by the Manor Lodge Primary School, and contains both All Saints RC Specialist Sports College and the City College Campus at Granvill e Road. It is also served by three GP Surgeries, an advice centre and a number of shops on City Road. Although the area experiences traffic congestion as City Road is key transport corridor linking the City Centre with Manor Top and Sheffield's outer ring-road. Manor - lies on north-facing slopes about a mile to the south-east of Sheffield City Centre. The majority of houses in Manor and Manor Park were built in the 1920’s and 1930’s with a second building phase in the 1950’s. Parts of the area were cleared in the early 1980s and rebuilt with cou ncil and housing association properties. A number of residents, particularly in Manor Park, exercised their ‘right to buy’ and the tenure is more mixed than it was. Man y remaining vacant sites have been taken up by new-build private sector housing, with the Sheffield Housing Company due to deliver around 800 new homes by 2031. Resident s also have access to open

2

Norfolk Park - lies on a prominent hillside position 1 mile to the south-east of the City Centre with fantastic views of the city. The area is surrounded by extensive grass and woodland areas, dominated by the Norfolk Heritage Park. Built in the 1960s, the Norfolk Park estate was a flagship for urban design principles for post-war planning, consisting of high-rise tower blocks. However, during the 1980s and 90s the areas experienced severe decline with mass unemployment, high crime and poor quality housing. Since 1996, Norfolk Park has undergone a major transition to clear the 1960’ high -rise estate and create a new urban village with new affordable and private sector housing. As well as a new primary school, medical centre and extra care housing for the elderly . Further new homes are also being developed by a number of developers, including the Sheffield Housing Company. Although the area is serviced well by the Sheffield Supertram and close to city centre amenities, there is a lack of local shops within Norfolk Park. Wybourn - is less than a mile south east of the City Centre, on a steep north-east facing slope. It is surmounted by the 1970s-built Sky Edge 'View Block' which overlooks much of the city and the Wybourn Estate to the north, which consists of 1,200 social houses built in the 1930s and 1940s in a traditional style, but with substantial numbers of small, two-bedroom properties. Local shops are available at Cricket Inn Road, along Manor Oaks Road and o n Boundary Road. However, transport links are poor due to the street layout, steep slopes and general design of the Wybourn estate.

3

2. Household profile

Table 1 - Households and population

Figure 1 - Age Profile

MAG Sheffield

Households 19,346 229928

Population 44,172 552698

Average household size 2.28 2.40

Table 2 - Age profile

MAG MAG % Sheffield

0-14 8557 19% 17%

15-24 6735 15% 18%

25-34 6849 16% 14%

35-49 8767 20% 20%

50-64 6644 15% 16%

65-79 4843 11% 11%

80+ 1777 4% 4%

Total 44,172

Table 3 - Ethnic origin of household

MAG MAG % Sheffield

BME 9,087 21% 19%

Non-BME 34,993 79% 81%

The Household Profile data is from the Census 2011.

Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless (MAG) has the fifth largest number of people of all the Housing Market Areas (HMAs), with a population of 44,716, which accounts for 8% of those living in Sheffield. Geographically, it is one of the smaller HMAs covering only 4.4 square miles. The age profile of this HMA approximately matches the citywide profile, apart from a slightly higher number of children aged 14 and under, indicating a larger number of families. This varies by neighbourhood with the highest proportion in the Wybourn where children make up almost a quarter of the population. Overall, the BME population in the MAG is slightly higher than Sheffield, but this varies greatly between neighbourhoods. For instance, only 8% of households are from a BME community in the Gleadless neighbourhood, but this increases to 30% in Wybourn and 40% in Granville. The cultural differences and preferences of the BME communities will therefore need to be considered when developing new housing and services in these neighbourhoods.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

0-14 15-24 25-34 35-49 50-64 65-79 80+

MAG Sheffield

5

Table 4 - Household type Figure 2 - Household type

MAG MAG % Sheffield

One person household 6861 36% 35%

Couple 2671 14% 19%

Couple with dependent children 3945 21% 26%Couple with non dependant children 978 5% 6%Lone parent with dependant

children2205 12% 8%

Lone parent with non dependant

children 785 4% 3%

All full-time students 155 1% 3%Other 1429 8% 7%

Total 19029

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

On

e p

erso

n h

ou

seh

old

Co

up

le

Co

up

le w

ith

dep

en

den

tch

ildre

n

Co

up

le w

ith

no

n d

epen

dan

tch

ildre

n

Lon

e p

are

nt

wit

h d

epen

dan

tch

ildre

n

Lon

e p

are

nt

wit

h n

on

de

pe

nd

ant

child

ren

All

full-

tim

e st

ud

en

ts

Oth

er

MAG Sheffield

MAG has a slightly higher proportion of one person households than citywide and a lower proportion of households are couples. 12% of households are lone parents with dependent children households compared to 8% citywide. These families are likely to require more affordable housing due to only having one income and may be in receipt of Housing Benefits. There is a low proportion of student households compared to citywide, suggesting that there will be low demand for student accommodation in this area. The students that do live in this HMA are likely to reside in Granville and Norfolk Park where there are a number of privately rented properties and a student village. The Mosaic profile of the area emphasises the economic challenges many of its households face, and adds to the picture of high JSA claimant rates and low average incomes in the economic profile (Tables 7 & 8). Although the most numerous groups in the profile are of a range of ages and household types, the need for support, or for low cost accommodation is common to most.

6

MAG's most numerous household types (Mosaic category)

CategoryNumber of

householdsDescription

Families with Needs 3169 Families with many children living in areas of high deprivation and who need support

Low Income Workers 2658 Older social renters settled in low value homes in communities where employment is harder to find

Streetwise Singles 1525 Hard-pressed singles in low cost social flats searching for opportunities

Estate Veterans 1328 Longstanding elderly renters of social homes who have seen neighbours change to a mix of owners and renters

Childcare Squeeze 865 Younger families with children who own a budget home and are striving to cover all expenses

Renting a Room 864 Transient renters of low cost accommodation often within subdivided older properties

Disconnected Youth 818 Young people endeavouring to gain employment footholds while renting cheap flats and terraces

Make Do & Move On 812 Yet to settle younger singles and couples making interim homes in low cost properties

Dependent Greys 742 Ageing social renters with high levels of need in centrally located developments of small units

Seasoned Survivors 730 Deep-rooted single elderly owners of low value properties whose modest home equity provides some security

Mosaic' is Experian’s s consumer classification designed to help explain the demographics, lifestyles, preferences and behaviours of the UK adult population.

Section 2: Summary • Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless (MAG) has the fifth largest number of people of all the Housing Market Areas (HMAs), with a population of 44,716.

• Geographically, it is one of the smaller HMAs covering only 4.4 square miles.

• There are a slightly higher proportion of one person households in MAG, which contributes to the smaller household size in the area.

• There is a higher percentage of lone parent with children households than citywide, and the single income of these household may place a reliance on social rented accommodation.

• There are slightly more BME people living in this area, with concentrations in Wybourn, who the mosaic profile suggests are families, and Granville, who are mostly students..

• The Mosaic profiles stress the importance of lower cost accommodation to the areas residents.

7

3. Economic profile

Table 5 - Working status

Figure 3 - Working status

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Full time employed 10253 32% 34%

Part time employed 4727 15% 14%

Self employed 1684 5% 7%

Unemployed 2428 8% 5%

Full-time student (employed) 1248 4% 6%

Retired 4011 13% 13%

Student (including full-time

students)2214 7% 11%

Looking after home or family 1905 6% 4%

Long-term sick or disabled 2470 8% 4%

Other 1060 3% 2%

Total 32000

Table 6 - Occupation

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Elementary occupations 3106 18% 12%

Skilled trades occupations 2161 12% 11%

Sales and customer service

occupations2116 12% 10%

Caring, leisure and other service


Professional occupations 1934 11% 20%

Process plant and machine

operatives1899 11% 7%

Administrative and secretarial


Associate professional and technical


Managers, directors and senior

officials 979 6% 8%

Total 17516

The information in Table 5 and 6 is from the 2011 Census.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

MAG Sheffield

The working status of people in MAG is similar to citywide, with almost a third of the population in full time employment. Although unemployment and those not working because of long term sickness or disability are higher than the city average. There is also a slightly higher proportion of people not in work because they are looking after the home or family which could partly be because of the slightly higher numbers of lone parents in the area. Those that are in employment tend to work in elementary and caring, leisure and other service occupations which are usually lower paid. 11% of the population in MAG work in professional occupations which is considerably lower than in the city.

8

Table 7 - JSA Claimants

MAG Sheffield

Total number of claimants 1385 8540

% of working population claiming

JSA4.8% 2.3%

Table 8 - Proportions of households by income band (%)

MAG Sheffield

Median average income £22,700 £27,230

<£10,000 13% 11%

£10,000-£14,999 20% 15%

£15,000-£19,999 18% 11%

£20,000-£24,999 17% 14%

£25,000-£29,999 10% 11%

£30,000-£39,999 14% 16%

£40,000-£49,999 5% 10%

£50,000-£59,999 2% 6%

£60,000-£74,999 1% 4%

£75,000+ 0% 3% Figure 4 - Average household incomes by Wards in the MAG

- JSA data is the December 2016 claimant rate from the Office of National Statistics, and also includes people who claim Universal Credit for reason of unemployment. - The income data in Table 8 and Figure 4 is from Mosaic 2016.

Reflecting the elementary jobs and higher JSA rate the median income in Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless is considerably lower when compared to Sheffield. 51% of households earn under £20,000 a year. The Gleadless Valley ward has the highest median income at £25,688, but this may be due to the inclusion of neighbourhoods which are not situated in this HMA such as Meersbrook and Heeley. Income data is not available at neighbourhood level to confirm this. The lower income levels in MAG lead to considerable deprivation. Most of the Gleadless Valley and Manor Castle wards are in the 5% most deprived in he country. The low incomes will therefore restrict the housing options available to households with many relying on social housing.

4.8% of MAG working age residents claim JSA or Universal Credit for unemployment. This is the highest rate in the city but a significant reduction from 5.8% in 2015. This is partly because MAG comprises some of the most deprived neighbourhoods in Sheffield, which results in lower household incomes. 20% of the claimants are young people aged 18-24 years which is lower than the city figure of 23%.

£-

£5,000

£10,000

£15,000

£20,000

£25,000

£30,000

Park &Arbourthorne

Gleadless Valley Manor Castle Sheffield

Wards

9

Table 9 - Equity of existing households

MAG % Sheffield

Negative Equity 13% 2%

Up to £9,999 6% 5%

£10,000-£24,999 5% 5%

£25,000-£49,999 7% 9%

£50,000-£99,000 37% 23%

£100,000-£149,999 22% 23%

£150,000-£249,999 7% 21%

£250,000-£349,000 1% 7%

£350,000+ 1% 5%

Table 10 - Savings of existing households

MAG % Sheffield

Up to £4,999 58% 45%

£5,000-£9,999 15% 14%

£10,000-£14,999 7% 8%

£15,000-£19,999 0% 5%

£20,000-£24,999 4% 4%

£25,000-£29,999 3% 4%

£30,000-£39,999 0% 3%

£40,000-£49,999 4% 3%

£50,000-£74,999 1% 3%

£75,000 5% 12%

The SHMA asked homeowners how much equity they thought they had in their property and this is shown in Table 9. Table 10 is the level of savings all existing households said they have regardless of the tenure they live.

The SHMA survey found a higher proportion of homeowners in negative equity than citywide, at 13% compared to 2%. This was the result of a large fall in house prices in this HMA after 2008, see Table 46. Only 9% of households had equity over £150,000. Although prices have recovered since 2014 and the negative equity situation should have improved the size of the price dip is indicative of the weaker market in Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless. This is partly due to the lack of housing on offer in the area as many homes for sale are ex-right-to-buy properties, which are present in fringe housing markets where properties are typically bought by households on lower incomes and with lower saving levels to use as a deposit. These fringe housing markets are generally the first to fall and last to recover during a recession (average house prices can be found in Section 13).

The savings of households in the MAG are lower than citywide, with nearly 3 in 5 having less than £5,000. The low income levels in the area will make it difficult for households to save extra funds. Only half the amount of households have savings of over £15,000 (17%) compared to citywide (33%). The households with low savings will therefore have limited housing options available and could be restricted to the rental sector.

Section 3: Summary Unemployment and those not working because of long term

sickness or disability are higher than the city average. Those that are in employment tend to work in elementary and

caring, leisure and other service occupations which are usually lower paid.

Over double the citywide percentage of working residents are claiming unemployment benefits.

The Arbourthorne Ward has the highest number of JSA claimants in the city.

The median income in Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless is considerably lower when compared to Sheffield.

68% of households have an income of less than £25,000 compared to 51% citywide.

The savings of households in the MAG are lower than citywide, with nearly 3 in 5 having less than £5,000.

10

4. Housing profile

Table 11 - Property types in area Figure 5 - Property type

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Detached House/Bungalow 1018 5% 14%

Semi-Detached House/Bungalow 7187 37% 37%

Terraced House 6451 33% 27%

Flat, Maisonette or Apartment 4663 24% 21%

Other 3 0% 0%

Shared Dwelling 24 0% 0%

Total 19346

Figure 6 - Property tenure

The information on the housing profile is from the 2011 Census

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

Det

ach

edH

ou

se/B

un

galo

w

Sem

i-D

etac

hed

Ho

use

/Bu

nga

low

Terr

aced

Ho

use

Flat

, Mai

son

ette

or

Ap

artm

ent

MAG Sheffield

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Owned SharedOwnership

Councilrent

RP rent Privaterent

Other

MAG Sheffield

The area is dominated by social housing estates, including the large inter-war estates in Manor and Arbourthorne, which are largely made up of low density two-storey semi-detached houses that are typical of the era. The terraced accommodation in this HMA is predominantly of newer less traditional construction, largely roomier '5M' and 'Vic 'Hallam' properties built in the 1960s as part of large Council estates and are mainly situated in the Arbourthorne, Gleadless Valley, Norfolk Park and Wybourn neighbourhoods. The proportion of flats in this HMA is slightly higher than citywide, but the area has very low numbers of detached houses and bungalows. This restricts the options available to those households that require larger properties. The majority of flats are located in the Manor neighbourhood and are a mix of low rise early 1930s and 1960s construction. These flats were likely to be in social rented sector unless they have been brought through Right to Buy. There are also some low-rise blocks of flats and maisonettes in the Gleadless Valley, and a number of newer build properties within the privately owned Bellway development at Gleadless Townend.

11

Table 12 - Housing tenures in area

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Owned 7484 39% 58%

Shared Ownership 81 0% 0%

Council rent 5518 29% 18%

RP rent 3737 19% 7%

Private rent 2189 11% 16%Other 337 2% 1%

Total 19346

Table 13 - Size of homes in area

Number of bedrooms MAG MAG % Sheffield

0 beds 43 0% 0%

1 bed 2739 14% 12%

2 bed 6765 35% 27% Figure 7 - Number of bedrooms

3 bed 8648 45% 45%

4 or more bed 1151 6% 16%

Total 19346

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 or more bed

MAG Sheffield

Over a third of all properties have two bedrooms which is above the city average. Three bedroom properties make up an even greater proportion in some neighbourhoods, such as Arbourthorne where they are 55% of the stock. The proportion of larger properties with 4 or more bedrooms is 10% smaller than citywide and reflects the small number of detached properties in MAG. Granville has the largest proportion of these properties (15%), and Arbourthorne has the least (3%). There is a slightly higher proportion of 1 bedroom properties, which is likely due to the greater proportion of flats. The proportion of one bedroomed properties varies through the neighbourhoods: in the Manor, they make up a fifth of all properties, but in Arbourthorne and Gleadless, it is less than 5%.

Socially rented housing is the largest tenure where it makes up nearly half of all stock, compared to a quarter city wide. Home ownership is the second largest tenure at 39% of the stock. MAG has the second largest number of socially rented properties of all the HMAs due to a large number of council estates being located here, some which were developed in the 1930s, namely in Arbourthorne, Manor and Wybourn, and some in the 1960s namely in Gleadless Valley. A larger number of the properties at Manor and Wybourn have been transferred into Registered Provider ownership and this accounts for the higher supply in the area. There is a low proportion of properties for private rent, which suggests that the area could provide more if demand exists.

12

Table 14 - Recent housing completions in HMA

Figure 8 - MAG Completions in the last 5 years

MAG Sheffield

2011/12 63 638

2012/13 74 933

2013/14 126 974

2014/15 131 1812

2015/16 69 1621

Total 463 5978

Table 14 shows the number of properties built in the HMA and in Sheffield.

Table 14 shows the number of new dwellings completed in MAG in recent years. In 2015/16 68% of the new properties delivered in the area were houses. This contrasts to the citywide picture where only 22% of new properties were houses. This, along with relatively high numbers of new build sales (22 in 2015 and 48 in Jan - Sep 2016), suggest that building houses for sale works in MAG. In other parts of the city the focus is more towards apartments. A number of the new build sales were for properties developed by the Sheffield Housing Company. The company's developments include a mix of two, three and four bedroom homes for sale and affordable rent.

13

Table 15 - Vacancy and turnover levels

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Number of properties 20505 247234

Number of vacant properties 406 2.0% 1.8%

Long term vacant properties 195 1.0% 0.8%

Table 16 - Housing adequacy

MAG Sheffield

3885 14%

49%

33%

38%

25%

14%

15%

5%

15%

7%

14%

13%

8%

8%

2%

5%

2%0%There's no heating

Re

aso

ns

for

ho

use

ho

ld li

vin

g in

inad

eq

uat

e

ho

usi

ng:

24%

Garden is difficult to maintain 8%

8%

11%

Affecting the health of me or my household

9%

Property facilities are inadequate

Rent or mortgage is too expensive 23%

12%

26%

MAG %

22%Households living in inadequate housing

Not enough bedrooms

4%

Too large 7%

Tenancy is insecure 3%

6%Difficult to access

Suffering harassment from my landlord

21%Location of home is undesirable

Suffering harassment from my neighbours

Neighbourhood services are inadequate

Needs improvements/repairs 53%

Too costly to heat 28%

Too small

A far higher percentage of households feel that they are living in inadequate accommodation compared to citywide - 22% vs 14%, which could indicate a mismatch between the existing housing available and occupants aspirations. The main reasons given for the home being inadequate were the property needs improvements or repairs, and is too costly to heat. This likely relates to the lower incomes of households in this area which will make it difficult for them to afford to make home improvements. The size of the property in terms of it being too small and having too few bedrooms is also an issue which likely relates to the higher levels of overcrowding in the area. However the percentages of households that gave this as the reason for their home being inadequate in the MAG was smaller than citywide.

The information in Table 16 is based on responses to the 2013 SHMA. Households were asked if their home was adequate for their needs. If they thought it was inadequate they were asked for the reasons. This was a multiple choice question and households could select as many options as they liked. The percentages therefore represents the proportion of households who chose this reason as one of their options, which is why the percentages in the table do not add up 100%.

The vacancy rate in MAG is slightly higher than citywide at 2.0%, and a slightly higher proportion of these remain empty for 6 months or more. However these figures from December 2016 represent a reduction from vacancy levels in March 2016 when 462 (2.3%) of properties in the area were vacant.

The information in Table 15 about vacant properties is taken from data on the Council Tax Register December 2016. 'Long term vacant properties' is defined as those that have been vacant for 6 months or more.

14

Table 17 - Occupancy

MAG % Sheffield

% overcrowded 5% 3%

% under occupying 62% 71%

% under occupying in SRS 47% 40%

Section 4: Summary The range of housing types and sizes in this HMA are limited, this is due in part to many properties being built as council housing in the 1930-60s.

Two and three bed properties are the most common types in the area.

There is a very low supply of properties with 4 or more bedrooms, at only 6% of the stock.

The vacancy rate in MAG is slightly higher than citywide at 2%, and a slightly higher proportion of these remain empty for 6 months or more.

A far higher proportion of households feel that they are living in inadequate accommodation compared to citywide - 22% vs 14%.

A much higher proportion of households feel that the location of their home is undesirable or that their neighbourhood services are inadequate compared to citywide.

A higher percentage of households in MAG are living in accommodation, which is classed as overcrowded than citywide. The overcrowding is likely being experienced in the private sector as more households in the social rented sector are under occupying than citywide. The overcrowding in the private sector could be because of the lower numbers of larger properties with four or more bedrooms in the area. The higher percentage of households that are under-occupying in the social rented sector could reflect the lower proportion of one bedroom properties in this sector in the MAG compared to citywide, see Section 12. This could have implications for those claiming Housing Benefits who may be affected by the under occupancy changes, see Section 15.

The information in Table 17 is from the 2013 SHMA and is based on households needing one less or one more bedroom than the household size needs.

Around a quarter of people thought that their rent or mortgage was too expensive. Due to the lower rental levels and property values (Tables 46 and 54) in this HMA, it is likely that this is a reflection of the low household incomes (Table 8). A much higher proportion of households feel that the location of their home is undesirable or that their neighbourhood services are inadequate compared to citywide. This shows a low level of neighbourhood satisfaction and mirrors the limited retail and service offer in some neighbourhoods, such as Norfolk Park Wybourn. Further detail about the reasons for low neighbourhood satisfaction are given in Section 5, with nearly half of respondents stating that the area needs cleaner streets and lower levels of anti social behaviour.

15

5. Neighbourhood profile

Table 18 - Neighbourhood Satisfaction

MAG Sheffield

% of households satisfied with their

neighbourhood46% 69%

Public transport 55%

Public

transport 45%

Clean streets 46%

Condition of

roads &

pavements 39%

Good neighbours 45% Clean streets 38%Condition of

roads &

pavements 42%

Shopping

facilities 38%

Low ASB levels 41%

Low crime

levels 38%

Condition of

roads &

pavements 63% 72%

Cleaner streets 50% 46%

ASB levels 47% 36%

Crime levels 42% 28%Activities for

teenagers 42% 26%

Five

ne

igh

bo

urh

oo

d q

ual

itie

s th

at

mak

e a

gre

at p

lace

to

live

Five

ne

igh

bo

urh

oo

d

qu

alit

ies

that

ne

ed

imp

rovi

ng

Condition of roads &

pavements

Crime levels

ASB levels

Education provision

Cleaner streets

The information in Table 18 is from the 2013 SHMA and measures neighbourhood satisfaction. The households were asked to chose the: a) Most important neighbourhood qualities that make a great place to live; and b) Neighbourhood qualities that need improving in their neighbourhood. This was a multiple choice question and households could select as many options as they liked. The percentages therefore represent the proportion of households who chose this reason as one of their options, which is why the percentages in the table do not add up 100%. The top 5 answers for each question are shown in this table. A higher percentage means that more people chose this as an option and therefore the issue is more important in this area.

Satisfaction with the neighbourhood is lower in Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless than across Sheffield, this is despite the area receiving considerable regeneration improvements over the last 10 years to the housing, such as demolition of the 5M properties at Arbourthorne and new build housing in Norfolk Park. There have also been improvements to many public spaces such as the City Road gateway to Manor Fields Park, the General Cemetery forecourt and in Norfolk Park itself. This will continue with the delivery of new homes in the area by the Sheffield Housing Company in the Norfolk Park, and Manor neighbourhoods. Over half of those who responded, thought that public transport was the most important neighbourhood quality. This is higher than citywide and may reflect a lower level of car ownership owing to lower income levels in the area (see Table 18). Public transport was not amongst the priorities for improvement, which may be due to the regular bus service and Supertram. The two next most important qualities were clean streets and good neighbours, which are likely to be related to the high proportion of people who thought that the qualities which needed improving were cleaner streets and ASB levels. This increased concern is likely due to the high number of crime and ASB incidents in the area, see Table 18.

16

Table 19 - Crime/ASB incidents

MAG Sheffield

No. of crime incidents 4050 43365

Crime per 1000 population 92 78

No. of ASB incidents 4493 40758

ASB incidents per 1000 population 102 74

Table 20 - School performance

MAG Sheffield

No. of primary schools 10 119

% pupils meeting the expected

standard in reading, writing and

maths

45% 52%

No. of secondary schools 3 30 Pupils achieving a grade C or better

in English and Maths GCSEs55% 59%

MAG has the third highest levels of reported crime and ASB of all the HMAs, although this varies by neighbourhood. Gleadless Valley had 147 ASB incidents per 1000 inhabitants compared to 20 in Gleadless. Gleadless Valley, Manor and Norfolk Park also experienced crime levels of over 100 incidents per 1000 residents. Crime and ASB are among the neighbourhood qualities residents felt were most in need of improvement.

Table 19 is from South Yorkshire Police statistics and shows the number of crime and ASB incidents from December 2015 to November 2016. This is then calculated by 1000 of the population to indicate the rate of crime and ASB as compared with citywide.

Table 20 includes provisional figures from the Department of Education for 2016.

Section 5: Summary Satisfaction with the neighbourhood is lower in Manor,

Arbourthorne and Gleadless than across Sheffield.

Residents in MAG considered: public transport, clean streets and good neighbours the most important qualities in a neighbourhood.

Residents felt that the neighbourhood qualities most in need of improvement were: the condition of roads and pavements, cleaner streets and crime and ASB levels.

The levels of crime and ASB incidents are higher in MAG. Gleadless Valley Neighbourhood had the highest levels of both ASB and Crime.

School performance in general in MAG is slightly lower than citywide, though some schools in the area do achieve significantly higher results.

Both primary and secondary school performance in these measures is slightly lower than the city average. Sheffield Springs Academy is the highest achieving secondary school, 67% of pupils achieved a grade C or above in English and Maths GCSE in 2016. It is possible that the improving attainment at the primary schools and some secondary schools may attract families with children to the area. However, the area must be able to offer suitable accommodation in order to do this.

17

6. Recently moved to HMA

Table 21 - Moved in last five years

MAGMAG % of

householdsSheffield

Moved into HMA in the last 5 years 7522 39% 70909

Moved into HMA from outside

Sheffield1563 21% 14328

Table 22 - Top five reasons for moving

MAG % Sheffield %

Move to a larger home 27%Move to a larger

home28% Figure 9 - Previous location of in-migrants

Move closer to friends/family 22%Move to smaller

home20%

Wanted to buy own home 19% A bigger garden 19%

Wanted a new home 18%Move to a better

neighbourhood18%

A bigger garden 15%Condition of

property14%

The information in Tables 21 & 22 is from the 2013 SHMA and shows the households who moved into their present home in the last five years and the reasons for this move. This helps us understand and the draws to this area. This was a multiple choice question and households could select as many options as they liked. The percentages therefore represent the proportion of households who chose this reason as one of their options, which is why the percentages in the table do not add up to 100%.

Section 6: Summary

• 39% of households in the MAG have moved in the last 5 years which is higher than 31% of movers citywide.

• A fifth of these households were from outside Sheffield mainly elsewhere in the UK. This is the sixth highest level of in migration from outside of Sheffield in the city. There was also some local movers from Rotherham, Barnsley and Doncaster.

• Over a quarter of those who had moved into the HMA had done so because they wanted a larger home. As there are few larger properties in this HMA, this suggests that the affordable larger properties are a draw.

• Nearly a fifth of households who had moved into the area in the last 5 years had done so because they wanted to buy their own home, and a further 18% because they wanted a new home. This suggests that the more affordable housing prices in this HMA is attracting first time buyers, and those seeking new properties.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

MAG Sheffield

18

7. Existing supply becoming available from moving households

Table 23 - Households moving in the next 5 years

MAG Sheffield

% of households moving from this

area in the next 5 years31% 28%

Turnover of households per year 6% 6%

% of households moving

out of Sheffield10% 18% Figure 10 - Property types becoming available from households moving

Table 24 - Households moving in next 5 years current dwelling type

MAG % Sheffield

Detached House/Bungalow 4% 12%

Semi-detached House/Bungalow 33% 30%

Terraced 37% 28%

Flat 25% 29%

Other 0% 0%

Figure 11 - Property tenures becoming available from moving households

The supply information is from the 2013 SHMA. This data provides a guide on the percentage of households in the area that said they expect to move in the next five years, and therefore the types of properties there are likely to become available through the turnover of the existing stock. This informs the supply and demand balance in Section 11.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%MAG % Sheffield

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%


Councilrent

RP rent Private rent Other

MAG % Sheffield

The properties which will become available in the MAG reflect the stock profile, with only 4% of properties becoming vacant being detached, compared to 12% citywide. More people expect to move from a terraced property than citywide, which reflects that they make up a third of all properties compared to 27% citywide. This could suggest that people are wishing to upsize into larger properties. The number of flats and semi-detached properties becoming available reflects the proportion of stock which they make up. This indicates a certain level of satisfaction with these properties but could also be as a result of not being afford to move to a larger property.

31% of households in Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless intend to move over the next 5 years. This is relatively high when compared to the city average, but housing turnover is the same as Sheffield indicating a relatively settled population. A lower proportion of households intend to leave Sheffield than citywide.

19

Table 25 - Households moving in next 5 years -current tenure

MAG % Sheffield

Owned 35% 53%

Shared Ownership 2% 1%

Council rent 37% 15%

RP rent 9% 5%

Private rent 17% 26%

Other 0% 1%

Table 26 - Households moving in next 5 years -current bed size

MAG % Sheffield

1 bed 15% 16%

2 bed 42% 26%

3 bed 33% 37%

4 bed 11% 21%

Figure 12 - Property bed sizes becoming available from moving households

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed

MAG % Sheffield

The majority of properties becoming available have 2 bedrooms, this is much higher than the city average, and higher than the 35% of stock which they represent. This suggests that there may be an oversupply. The large number of families in the area may be driving this as the families are likely to need larger homes as the children age. A third of properties being vacated have 3 bedrooms, which is lower than the percentage of stock which they represent. This suggests that residents are more satisfied with properties of this size and that there may not be sufficient supply.

The majority of properties becoming vacant in MAG will be Council rented, which is to be expected as they make up nearly a third of properties in the area. Only 35% of the properties being vacated will be available for purchase, which is similar to the 39% of overall supply in this HMA. The percentage of privately rented properties becoming available is higher than the percentage of stock they represent, but this will be due to private rented tenants having shorter tenancies and moving more frequently than other tenures.

The 2013 SHMA asked households the reasons why they want to move in the next five years. This was a multiple choice question and households could select as many options as they liked. The percentages therefore represent the proportion of households who chose this reason as one of their options, which is why the percentages in the table do not add up 100%. The table shows the five most popular answers given in the HMA and in Sheffield

20

Table 27 - Top five reasons for wanting to move

MAG % Sheffield %

Move to a better neighbourhood 32%Move to a larger

home27%

Move to a safer area 30%To move to a

smaller home20%

Move to a larger home 27%Move to better

neighbourhood16%

Condition of current property 25%Condition of

current property12%

Want a bigger garden 25%For cheaper

accommodation12%

This section discusses the demand from households that expect to move within or to this HMA in the next 5 years. The 2013 SHMA asked households who planned to move within or to this area what properties they would 'Like' and 'Expect'. 'Like' is used to measure the aspirations of households and gaps in the market, while 'Expect' generally reflects the current stock in the area and the households financial constraints. The moving preferences of these households acts as guide to the inform the housing that is needed in the area, and informs the supply and demand balance in Section 11. The housing requirements recommended in Section 19 consider this alongside the current population and housing stock in the area, the available housing development sites and the future aspirations and sustainability of the area.

Section 7: Summary • Nearly a third of households in MAG intend to move over the next

5 years.

• Two beds have a higher turnover rate than three bedroom properties. While 45% of properties have three beds, just 3% of moving households currently have a 3 bed property.

• The main reason for people wanting to leave MAG was to move to a better or safer neighbourhood.

• Nearly a third of people want to move to a larger home, though household who require a 4 bed will find their options limited. This could be an issue in the neighbourhoods that have larger BME communities as these households tend to be larger than average.

The main reason for moving is to move to a better neighbourhood which mirrors the low satisfaction with Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless as a place to live. Nearly a third of people want to move to a safer area, which reflects the higher levels of ASB and crime in this HMA. Households also wish to move to a larger home, which reflects that nearly half of all properties have 2 or fewer bedrooms compared to 39% citywide, and only 6% of properties have 4 or more bedrooms compared to 16% citywide (Table 13). Over a quarter of those wishing to move are leaving because of the condition of their current property. This corresponds with the higher levels of property inadequacy shown in Table 15. This shows a strong need for larger, good quality properties in this HMA. This would help to retain existing households, especially families, and encourage new people to move into the area.

21

8. Demand from households moving to the MAG

Table 28 - Existing household level of demand - next 5 years

MAG

Percentage of households intending

to move within or to the HMA

5%

Table 29 - Property type households would like

Figure 13 - Demand for property type in area - expect and like

MAG % Sheffield

Detached house 20% 34%

Semi-detached house 42% 30%

Terraced house 0% 11%

Flat or maisonette 29% 18%

Bungalow 10% 7%

Other 0% 0%

Table 30 - Property type households expect

MAG % Sheffield



Terraced house 16% 26%

Flat or maisonette 30% 26%

Bungalow 0% 7%

Other 0% 1%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Det

ach

edh

ou

se

Sem

i-d

eta

ched

ho

use

Terr

aced

ho

use

Flat

or

mai

son

ett

e

Bu

nga

low

Like Expect

Tables 29 and 30 show that the majority of people in MAG would like and expect a semi-detached property. This shows that people have realistic expectations for this area, as they make up roughly the same proportion of the housing stock as there is demand for. The next most popular housing type is a flat of maisonette, with around a third of households wanting or expecting this type of accommodation, which is significantly higher than in other areas of the city. Yet the proportion of people who want a flat is higher than the amount of stock which they make up, and is higher than the supply which is expected over the next 5 years. This suggests that a larger number of flats are needed in this HMA. The lowest demand is for detached properties, but with 14% of households expecting them and this type only making up 5% of al l properties. Therefore there could be a undersupply of this property type and a need for more to be developed.

5% of all Sheffield households intend to move to or within this HMA over the next 5 years, which is low compared to other areas. An equal proportion of these households are single people and families with dependent children (a third).

22

Table 31 - Tenure households would like

Figure 14 - Demand for tenures in area - expect and like

MAG % Sheffield

Owned 49% 59%



RP rent 0% 5%

Private rent 12% 16%

Other 0% 3%

Table 32 - Tenure households expect

MAG % Sheffield

Owned 49% 46%



RP rent 0% 2%

Private rent 2% 26%

Other 0% 5%

Table 33 - Bed size households would like

MAG % Sheffield

One 35% 11%

Two 44% 29%

Three 14% 30%

Four or more 7% 30%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Ow

ned

Shar

edO

wn

ersh

ip

Co

un

cil r

ent

Pri

vate

ren

t

Like Expect

Almost half of households in MAG would like to own a property, and the same amount expect to be able to achieve this. This is lower than citywide, which is likely to be due to the smaller supply in the area and the lower incomes and savings in the area which will lock some people out of the market, despite the relatively low house prices in MAG. Over a third of households would like and expect to rent a council owned property, which is double the citywide rate. This shows the popularity of the social rented sector in this area, which is also likely to be linked to the supply and affordability of this tenure in the Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless. No households have stated a preference to rent from a Registered Provider, this may be due to a low demand for this accommodation, or because households are not clear of the difference between Registered Providers and the Council. Very few households expect to be able to privately rent a property, but there is clearly a high demand for this as 12% of households would like a privately rented property, but only 2% expect one. This indicates that the market could be expanded in the area to offer an alternative rented option to social housing.

23

Table 34 - Bed size households expect

MAG % Sheffield

One 40% 20%

Two 38% 35%

Three 22% 26%

Four or more 0% 20%

Over a third of households would like to live in a one bedroom property, which is nearly three times the citywide demand, and even more expect to live in these properties. This demand greatly outstrips the existing or anticipated supply and suggests a need for more 1 bedroom properties, particularly flats. As smaller accommodation has traditionally been less popular, it is likely that this increase in demand is linked to the Housing Benefit 'bedroom tax' reforms. Many people in MAG live in socially rented property and there is a higher Housing Benefit claimant rate, meaning that many of those in larger socially rented properties are now receiving lower contributions to their rent, so may need to move to smaller, more affordable properties. This could also account for the high demand for one and two bedroom properties. Several neighbourhoods have a very low supply of 1 bedroom properties, particularly Arbourthorne and Gleadless. Manor and Gleadless also have low supplies of 2 bedroom properties. 7% of households would like to move into a property with 4 or more bedrooms but no households expect to be able to. Given the large number of children aged 14 and under in MAG, it is likely that smaller properties may only meet a household's needs for a limited amount of time, after which they would need to seek a larger property. The lower incomes in the area suggest that 4 bedrooms properties would need to be provided below market level for purchase or rent.

Section 8: Summary 5% of all Sheffield households intend to move to or within this

HMA over the next 5 years, which is low compared to other areas.

The majority of people in MAG would like and expect a semi-detached property.

Around a third of people want to move to a flat, but the supply is unlikely to meet the demand.

There is a clear need for more properties with 4 or more bedrooms to be delivered in this area.

There is a demand for more privately rented properties in this HMA. Very few households expect to be able to privately rent a property in this area, but some have expressed a preference for this. Two fifths of households would like to live in a one bedroom property.

For some of those who wished to live in a 2 bed property , but expected a 1 bed, the barrier is changed to benefit regulation and lettings policy.

24

9. Existing households that cannot move

Table 35 - Want to move but cannot

Figure 15 - Would like to move but cannot

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Yes, for less than a year 2836 34% 16%

Yes, for 1-2 years 920 11% 10%

Yes, for 2-3 years 0 0% 4%

Yes, for 3-5 years 508 6% 3%

Yes, for over 5 years 769 9% 6%

No 3214 39% 61%

Table 36 - Top five reasons cannot move

MAG

Family reasons

Lack of affordable rented

Cannot afford the monthly

Cannot afford moving costs

Cannot afford the house depositLack of affordable rented housing

Sheffield

Unable to sell

Cannot afford the monthly mortgage payment

Cannot afford moving costs

Cannot afford the house deposit

The 2013 SHMA asked households if they would like to move but cannot and the reasons for this. This is shown in Tables 35 & 36.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

Yes, for lessthan a year

Yes, for 1-2years

Yes, for 2-3years

Yes, for 3-5years

Yes, for over5 years

No

MAG Sheffield

Section 9: Summary A very high percentage of those in MAG would like to move but cannot - 61% compared to 39% citywide. This reflects the low levels of neighbourhood and housing satisfaction, meaning that people are having to settle for properties that they would rather not have. This suggests that the area has some pent up demand which could be realised if the barrier to moving were removed. A lack of affordable rented housing is the main reason for not being able to move in the area, this is surprising given the large supply of social rented stock in the area and the higher turnover levels. It could therefore be implied that the social stock that is becoming available is not meeting needs, as there is a particular low turnover of four bed properties, with just 7 let during 2014, see Section 12. There is a small supply of privately rented properties in MAG, but rental costs are lower than the city average (Table 54). An increase in the provision of private rented accommodation could meet the need expressed for affordable rented properties and offer different types of properties that are not available in the social rented sector. Affordability of moving are also key reasons why people cannot move this relates to the deposit, moving costs and mortgage payments, which again reflects the lower incomes in the area, and suggests that affordable housing is still a requirement in the area despite the ample supply.

25

10. Newly forming households demand

Table 37 - Number of newly forming households expected to form

MAG Sheffield

No. of newly forming households 852 11345

Proportion in city 8%

Table 38 - Type of household forming

MAG % Sheffield

Single adult 56% 67%

Lone parent 0% 2% Figure 16 - Type of property required by new household

Couple 44% 25%

Couple with children 0% 2%

Other 0% 3%

Table 39 - Type of property required

MAG % Sheffield



Terrace house 28% 23%

Flat 26% 46%

Bungalow 6% 2%

Other 15% 10%

The 2013 SHMA asked existing households if they have any people in their household that are likely to move in the next 5 years to form their own household e.g. son/daughter moving out. These are known as newly forming households. Although the SHMA did not ask where these households expect to move to, we do know that each HMA is a relatively self-contained market and that households are most likely to move within their local area due to the 'place attachment' that they have to the area they live. This is supported by Rightmove data which shows that a quarter of all

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%MAG % Sheffield

8% of the city's newly forming households over the next 5 years will originate in MAG, which is the same as the proportion of the population as it represents. Although the majority of new households will be single people, the proportion of couples is significantly higher in MAG than across Sheffield.

Around a quarter each of newly forming households require: a terraced house, flat or semi-detached house. There is a greater demand for bungalows than citywide, but a small supply generally, so these households may need to choose an alternative housing type or move to a different HMA.

26

Table 40 - Tenure of property required Figure 17 - Tenure of property require

MAG % Sheffield

Owned 23% 25%



RP rent 9% 2%

Private rent 5% 33%

Other 16% 16%

Table 41 - Bed size of property required

MAG % Sheffield

1 bed 13% 41%

2 bed 71% 49%

3 bed 16% 9%

4 bed 0% 1%

Figure 18 - Bed size of property required

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


Council rent RP rent Private rent Other

MAG % Sheffield

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4 bed

MAG % SheffieldThe highest proportion of newly forming households are looking to rent in the social sector, which is similar to existing households where this is the predominant sector. This reflects the housing supply and lower incomes in the area. Over two thirds of demand from newly forming households in MAG is for two bedroom properties. Smaller properties will suit the needs of single people and couples likely to form, but these households are restricted to one bedroom properties under the Council's Allocations Policy, so may need to change their expectation.

27

Table 42 - Mosaic groups likely to contain newly forming households

CategoryNumber of


Families with Needs 3169 Families with many children living in areas of high deprivation and who need support

Budget Generation 689 Families supporting both adult and younger children where expenditure can often exceed income

Offspring Overspill 253 Lower income owners whose adult children are still striving to gain independence meaning space is limited

11. Supply and demand balance

Figure 19 - Supply and demand balance by tenure

Section 10: Summary • Over 850 new households will form over the next 5 years in MAG, and these will mainly be couples and single people. • Demand is greatest for terraced houses, flats and semi-detached houses, particularly those with 2 bedrooms. • Demand is greatest for socially rented properties.

This section shows the balance between supply and demand for different dwellings in this area. This compares the supply of housing becoming available through the turnover of existing stock (Section 7) with the demand for housing in the area. The demand is based on what the existing households said they would like in Section 8 and what the newly forming households require in Section 10.

The proportion of demand for each property is compared against the proportion of supply. If demand is higher than supply this will show as a negative, shortfall on the graph (the bar will be below the 0% line). If supply is higher than demand, the bar will be above the 0% line and show as a surplus.

For example, if 20% of demand was for terraced houses, and 15% of supply was terraced houses, this would show as a minus 5% shortfall of this type of housing on the graph (the bar would be 5% below the 0% line). This section discusses the tenure and bed size as the type is not directly comparable. -20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

Owned Sharedownership

Council rent RP rent Private rent Other

MAG Sheffield

• The three Mosaic profiles above are picked out as examples of where new households may form as young adults leave their parents home. All three stress the economic challenges these households face. This suggests that a large proportion of newly forming households in MAG will require social housing. The SHMA survey suggested around half.

28

Figure 20 - Supply and demand balance by bed size

Section 11: Summary • When comparing the tenure of property which households would like with

the expected turnover of the existing stock, the greatest shortfall occurs in the private rented sector.

• There is a shortfall in owned property in MAG, which reflects the smaller proportion of properties in this tenure.

• There is a shortfall in Council rented properties.

• Although the chart shows a surplus of RP accommodation, analysis of bidding patterns suggests strong demand for PR properties in the area.

• The area has a significant shortage of 1 and 2 bed properties, which could be met by the provision of more flats.

• Although Figure 20 suggests a surplus in 4+ bedroom properties, the low demand may be due to residents being aware of the small supply and perceived expense of these properties. Delivery of more affordable 4+ bed properties could meet this potential demand.

• The area is likely to have an over supply of 3 bed properties, which may be due to the large supply, coupled with fewer households being eligible for these under the Council's lettings policy.

• The city has a shortfall of family homes and the MAG can contribute to meeting this shortfall.

-25%

-20%

-15%

-10%

-5%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 bed 2 bed 3 bed 4+ bed

MAG Sheffield

29

12. Social rented market

Table 43 - Current social stock in the area

Council/RSL MAG MAG % Sheffield

Council stock 5225 52% 39,996RP stock 4735 48% 17,411 Figure 21 - Social stock by bedroom size

Total social stock 9960 57,407

Table 44 - Social stock by bedroom size

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Bedsit 54 1% 1%

One 2422 24% 31%

Two 3893 39% 37%

Three 3455 35% 29%

Four or more 122 1% 2%

Total 9946

Table 43 shows the amount of social housing stock the area has, compared with Sheffield overall. This includes both Council owned and those owned by Registered Providers. Table 44 and Figure 21 show the social stock by bed size.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Bedsit One Two Three Four or more

MAG Sheffield

MAG has the second highest number of social rented properties in the city with over 9,900 properties, around half of which are owned by the Council and half by Registered Providers (RP). Over a quarter of all socially rented accommodation is located in the Manor neighbourhood, with large numbers of socially rented properties also to be found in the Arbourthorne, Wybourn and Norfolk Park neighbourhoods. 2015 and 16 have seen around 160 properties added to the RP stock, largely in Arbourthorne and Wybourn. The majority of the council housing in the area is comprised of semi-detached houses, or roomier '5M' type terraced properties, built in the 1960s. The majority of socially rented flats are located in the Manor and are mainly low-rise, but there are also a number of flats and maisonettes in Gleadless Valley. The majority of bungalows are located in Manor, so delivery of these in other neighbourhoods would increase access to this type of accommodation. There are a lower proportion of one bedroom properties in MAG compared to citywide, which may present a supply problem given the demand for this property size shown in Tables 32 and 33. The majority of social stock has 2 or 3 bedrooms, which is in line with demand in the area.

30

Table 45 - Social housing demand

Indicators MAG Sheffield

CBL lettings 2016 733 4526

Average number of bids per

advertised social property 46 45

Average days to re-let a property 67 60

SHMA affordable housing surplus -133 725

Figure 22 - Social lets by bed size

Table 46 - Social stock let by bedroom size

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Bedsit 0 0% 2%

One 260 35% 45%

Two 285 39% 36%

Three 183 25% 16%

Four or more 5 1% 1%

Total 733

Table 45 shows a number of indicates that measure social housing demand. • CBL lets 2016 - number of council and RP properties that were let

through Choice Based Lettings • Average number of bids - a high number can show demand for the

properties • Average days to re-let - a low number suggests that the property or

area are popular • SHMA affordable housing shortfall - This is the number of affordable

homes that the area and Sheffield need per annum for the next 5 years.

733 properties were let in this neighbourhood, a decrease from 1008 in 2015. The proportion of two beds let in 2016, at 39%, is the same as the proportion of two beds in the stock in this area. One beds were relet at a slightly higher rate than other property sizes, reflecting the generally higher turnover for this property size compared to larger family homes. A higher percentage of three bedroom properties was let than citywide, reflecting the larger supply in the area. This may be due in part to the larger number of children aged under 14 who live in this HMA, meaning larger families will require three bedrooms.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%


MAG Sheffield

733 social rented properties were let in MAG during 2016, a reduction from over 1000 on 2015. This is a turnover rate of 7%, below the Sheffield average of 8% and a reduction from the previous years rate of 10%. The number of bids in this area are similar to across the city, which shows there is demand for social housing in this HMA. However due to the dominance of social housing in this area the SHMA estimated an over-supply of 133 affordable homes here.

31

Table 47 - Average number of bids on social stock by bed size

Figure 23 - Average no. of bids by bed size

MAG Sheffield

Bedsit 62 42

One 42 44

Two 60 46

Three 19 34

Four or more 51 53

Two bedroom properties received the highest number of average bids in MAG, suggesting a healthy demand for them. Demand for one bedroom properties was similar to that elsewhere in the city. Fewer bids were received on average for each 3 bedroom property than citywide. This seems to be due to the greater availability of them in this HMA.

Section 12: Summary Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless has the second highest number of social rented properties in the city with over 9,900 prope rties.

There are a lower proportion of one bedroom properties in MAG compared to citywide, which may present a supply problem.

The majority of social stock has two bedrooms, which is inline with demand in the area.

733 social rented properties were let in MAG during 2016, a significant reduction from the previous year.

The number of days taken to re-let a property are comparable to the city average.

39% of the social lettings were two bedroom properties and they were the most popular property type in MAG.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70


MAG Sheffield

32

13. Home ownership market

Table 48 - Average house price

MAG Sheffield

2009 £73,335 £129,418

2010 £83,897 £126,808

2011 £69,411 £124,359

2012 £72,479 £125,342 Figure 24 - Average houses prices since 2009

2013 £70,573 £130,141

2014 £77,615 £141,246

2015 £90,408 £144,767

2016 £96,798 £149,968

Table 49 - Average house price by type of property

MAG Sheffield Figure 25 - Average House Price by Property Type

Detached £164,431 £260,312

Flat £77,967 £104,157

Semi-detached £114,051 £161,128

Terraced £74,229 £104,157

The house price information in Tables 48 & 49 is taken from Land Registry sales. The sale data for each HMA has been weighted against the UK House Price Index average price for the city. This is done to ensure that the average house price for each area is not skewed by the number or types of sales in the particular quarter, and to ensure that it gives a true reflection of the property values.

£0

£20,000

£40,000

£60,000

£80,000

£100,000

£120,000

£140,000

£160,000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

MAG Sheffield

The average house price in the MAG is lower than the city average, but has increased at a faster rate in recent years. Since 2013 house prices in the MAG have increased by 27% compared to 13% citywide. The highest average price is in the Gleadless neighbourhood at £131,910, the lowest in Arbourthorne at £58,340.

£0

£50,000

£100,000

£150,000

£200,000

£250,000

£300,000

Detached Flat Semi-detached Terraced

MAG Sheffield

Terraced properties and flats are the most affordable properties to buy in MAG at around £75,000, which offers opportunities for first time buyers in the area. Family housing also offers more value for money in this area than citywide, with a typical detached property being 37% cheaper than citywide.

33

Figure 26 - Numbers of Sales and price paid, by property type 2016

Table 50 - Income needed to buy a property

MAG Sheffield

Average house price £96,798 £149,968

Typical home mover deposit £27,103 £41,991

Typical home mover income required £20,992 £107,977

Entry level house price £65,510 £101,000

Typical first time buyer deposit £9,827 £15,150

Typical first time buyer income

required £15,598 £24,048

Average house price ratio 4.26 5.51

Table 50 shows the incomes needed to buy an average price property and an entry level property in the area. For the average house price the income required is based on providing a 28% deposit and getting a 72% mortgage worth 3.32 times the household income for the average house price. For the entry level house price the income required is based on providing a 15% deposit and getting a 85% mortgage worth 3.57 times the household income for the average entry level house price. This are the typical deposits and income multiples provided by the Council of Mortgage Lenders for home movers and first time buyers in December 2016.

Figure 26 illustrates that the majority of properties in MAG sell in the £50,000 to £149,000 range. Although properties do sell at higher prices, some reach over £300,000, they are a small proportion of the market.

34

Figure 27 - Income needed to afford to buy a property in MAG

Table 51 - Average deposit held

MAG Sheffield

All Households £34,221 £83,818

Newly forming households £3,076 £5,229

No equity households £4,125 £6,248

Table 52 - Property sales 2016

MAG Sheffield

Total sales in 2016 391 6752

Turnover of owner occupied stock 5% 5%

New build sales 54 193

Sales at £250k-£500k 4 1093

The total sales in the last year shown in Table 52 is based on all private property sales in 2016. Figure 28 shows the trend in sales in this HMA since 2009, and Figure 29 shows the types of property sales in 2016.

Figure 27 shows that households in the MAG with a median income, and a deposit, do have sufficient earnings to afford entry level and average priced properties in the MAG. The house price ratio is also more affordable than citywide. However, continued price rises unless they are matched by a similar increase in income look set to reduce affordability in an area that offers the opportunity of home ownership for households with relatively low incomes.

Households need to have almost £10,000 for a 15% deposit to afford to buy an entry level house in the MAG. While this is considerably lower than the £15,000 needed on average across the city, the equity and savings levels of existing home owners and first time buyers is low, with newly forming households having only around £3,000 in savings. This suggests that MAG households seeking to buy a property will need assistance with the deposit from either their family or a low cost home ownership scheme such as shared ownership or help to buy.

Table 51 is from the 2013 SHMA and shows the average deposit households are likely to have in this HMA based on the levels of savings, equity and other financial resources. The 'all households' includes all tenures while those with no equity is households living in the rented sectors and also homeowners with negative or no equity in their property.

£0

£5,000

£10,000

£15,000

£20,000

£25,000

Typical home mover incomerequired

Typical first time buyer incomerequired

Income needed for mortgage MAG Median Income

35

Figure 28 - Property sales since 2009

Table 53 - 2016 Sales by property type

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Detached 18 5% 15% Figure 29 - 2015 sales by property type

Flat 70 18% 15%

Semi-detached 147 38% 33%

Terraced 156 40% 37%

391 properties were sold in MAG during 2016, which is a turnover of 5% of the owner occupied stock in the area and is comparable to citywide, and the number of sales in the area have grown significantly over than past two years. There were 48 new build sales in this period, 32 of which were flats in the refurbished Park Hill. The remainder were houses at Norfolk Park. Although only 4 houses sold for over £250k ( a 100% increase from 2015!), it does indicate that these prices can be are achieved in MAG.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Total sales New build sales

Semi-detached and terraced houses made up the majority of sales in this area, which is greater than the proportion of stock that they represent. Sales of flats were slightly higher than citywide, while only 18 detached properties sold in 2016, which will restrict the housing options available for larger families looking to buy.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Detached Flat Semi-detached Terraced

MAG Sheffield

36

Section 13: Summary The average house price in MAG is considerably lower than citywide at £96,798. However, prices are increasing at a faster rate than in the city as a whole.

The majority of sales are in the £50,000 to £150,000 range.

Terraces and flats are the most affordable properties to buy in MAG at around £75,000.

The median income in MAG is above that required to buy an average priced and entry level property in the area

The average deposit held by MAG residents is much lower than citywide and they will need assistance to raise this deposit.

Only 5% of properties sold were detached, highlighting a shortage of supply of family housing in the area.

37

14. Private rented market

Table 54 - Average monthly private rent (mean)

MAG Sheffield Figure 30 - Average private rent by bed size

2010 £482 £526

2011 £491 £554

2012 £508 £569

2013 £506 £586

2014 £515 £558

2015 £516 £561

2016 £539 £603

Table 55 - Average monthly private rent by bed size (median)

MAG Sheffield

Bedsit £395 £475

One bed £459 £523

Two bed £525 £615

Three bed £575 £642

Four or more bed £795 £951

Shared £364 £357

Figure 56 - Income needed to afford average private rent property

MAG Sheffield

Yearly rent £6,468 £7,236

Income needed to afford £25,872 £28,944

The average (mean) private rent data is taken from rental information for properties advertised for let by estate agents through Rightmove.

£0

£100

£200

£300

£400

£500

£600

£700

£800

£900

£1,000

Bedsit One bed Two bed Three bed Four ormore bed

Shared

MAG Sheffield

Section 14: Summary continued • The Gleadless and Norfolk Park neighbourhoods command the

highest average rents at around £575-80 per month.

• Around one third of all private rented properties advertised for let were in Norfolk Park.

• 41% of all private rented properties advertised for let in MAG had two bedrooms, compared to 33% citywide. It has much lower proportions of properties with one bedroom and four or more bedrooms. The larger properties were concentrated in Norfolk Park and Granville and many were aimed at the student rather then family market. This suggests a more limited private rental offer for singles and larger families.

• Private rented properties are unaffordable for households who earn the average income in MAG, and local people accessing this tenure are more likely to be reliant on Housing Benefit.

Section 14: Summary

• The average private rent for properties advertised during 2016 was £64 a month lower in MAG than citywide.

• Although MAG has seen a 12% increase in rental prices since 2010 this is a lower level of growth than citywide.

• The lowest average rents are in Arbourthorne, Manor and Wybourn, whey they range between £470-£500.

38

15. Housing affordability

Table 57 - Proportion of income spent on housing costs

MAG % Sheffield

Below 15% 34% 35%

15%-25% 16% 18%

25%-35% 6% 14%

35%-45% 11% 8%

45% or above 8% 7%

Don't know 26% 18%

Table 58 - Difficulties with housing costs

MAG % Sheffield

Yes, Rent/mortgage 8% 9%

Yes, Fuel bills 23% 23%

Yes, Council tax 9% 13%

Yes, Other bills 10% 13%

No 72% 58%

Table 59 - Claiming Housing Benefits

MAG MAG % Sheffield

Social rented 6546 89% 81%

Private rented 803 11% 19%

Working age claimant 5253 71% 69%

Pension age claimant 2096 29% 31%

Total 7349

% of all households claiming HB 38% 20%

The SHMA 2013 asked households how much of their income is spent on rent/mortgage and if people have difficulties with their bills. 25% or below is considered an affordable amount to pay in housing costs. This is captured in Table 57. Table 58 was a multiple choice question and therefore will not total 100% as people can struggle to pay more than one housing cost. The information in Table 59 is from the Council Housing Benefit records from December 2016 and shows the number of claimants in private and social accommodation (not hostel). Please note we do not have records for the tenure and age breakdown for all claimants.

Section 15: Summary • Half of the households who responded to this question said that

they pay less than a quarter of their income on housing costs.

• Over two thirds of respondents do not have difficulty meeting their housing costs, which is higher than citywide.

• 38% of households claim Housing Benefits in this area which is much higher than the Sheffield proportion. The vast majority of claimants are in the social rented sector, which reflects the large amount of this type of stock and the low incomes of the households in this area.

• Only 11% of Housing Benefit claimants are in the private rented sector, reflecting the small supply of this stock in the area. Those who are likely to struggle as the Local Housing Allowance (LHA) limits are lower then than average private rent for all property sizes in MAG. The LHA limit for a room in shared accommodation (the only option for single people under 35) is £276 p.m.. The average rent for this property type in MAG is £364 p.m..

• Over 70% of the claimants are also working age, which means the Housing Benefit reforms will have a larger impact in MAG than elsewhere in the city. The Sheffield Hallam University Research 'The impact of welfare reform on communities & households in Sheffield January 2015' shows that working age people living in the Manor Castle and Arbourthorne wards will have some of the biggest financial losses in the city when all the Welfare Reforms come into fruition, with losses of over £600 per annum per working age adult. This is because these households are likely to claim more than one benefit.

39

16. Older people's accommodation

Table 60 - Older people's housing

MAG Sheffield

Number of units/beds - all types 735 9545

Population aged 65 or above 6620 61488

Older people's housing per 1,000

older population111 155

Table 61 -Older Households Mosaic

Categories (Top 6)Number of


Estate Veterans 1328

Dependent Greys 742

Seasoned Survivors 730

Classic Grandparents 385 Lifelong couples in standard suburban homes enjoying retirement through grandchildren and gardening

Solo Retirees 278 Senior singles whose reduced incomes are satisfactory in their affordable but pleasant owned homes

Pocket Pensions 222 Elderly singles of limited means renting in developments of compact social homes

Ageing social renters with high levels of need in centrally located developments of small units

Deep-rooted single elderly owners of low value properties whose modest home equity provides some security

Longstanding elderly renters of social homes who have seen neighbours change to a mix of owners and renters

The information in Tables 60 - 62 is taken from a variety of sources, including: • Council stock data • RP stock data • Private data from the Elderly Accommodation Council. • Mosaic The units/beds is the individual properties or beds available per person. This total is than divided by 1000 of the older population to calculate whether there is a sufficient supply of older accommodation to meet the needs of the population in the area. The information in Table 62 shows the demand for the Council's sheltered housing schemes during the Jan-Sep 2016.

MAG has 735 units of older people's accommodation, which is a significantly lower number of units per 1,000 of the population than citywide. All of the units / beds are provided in the social rented sector, providing affordable options for older people specifically seeking this kind of accommodation but which means those seeking privately owned or rented accommodation will need to move to another HMA. A 60-unit older person's independent living scheme is currently being planned for a council-owned site in the Manor, with completion expected in 2018 if it is delivered. Over half of MAG's 4,476 older households rent their properties from social landlords, a much higher proportion than citywide. Only 41% of older households are owner occupiers in MAG, with many of these living in low value properties. This is likely to restrict the available options for moving into more suitable housing if the need or desire arises.

40

Table 62 - Older people's accommodation - existing provision

Schemes Beds/UnitsSheffield beds

/units

Care Home 3 96 3801

Extra Care 1 40 566

Sheltered 14 232 2414

Social age banded housing (60+) NA 367 2764

Total schemes 18 0

Table 63 - SCC Social rented sheltered housing demand

MAG Sheffield

No. of properties let 2016 5 186

Average bids 3 6

Days to re-let 67 66

Table 64 - Percentage of moving households that are over 65 years

Figure 31 - Type of accommodation that older households require

MAG Sheffield

65-79 11% 15%

80+ 2% 4%

Table 65 - Would like older people's accommodation

Like MAG % Sheffield

No, Independent accommodation 40% 75%

No, Independent accommodation

with support 28%7%

Yes, Residential/ nursing home 0% 2%

Yes, Extra care housing 0% 2%

Yes, social rented sheltered housing 32% 11%

Yes, Other purpose-built supported

housing 0%3%

MAGMAG has a total of 18 older people's schemes, all of which are socially rented. This includes 3 care homes located in Norfolk Park, Gleadless Valley and Gleadless, and 14 sheltered schemes located in Arbourthorne, Gleadless Valley, Granville, and Manor. There is also the Guildford Grange Extra Care Scheme in Norfolk Park, which offers 24 hour care from site based staff, and meal provision on site. Only 5 units were let in the Council's single sheltered scheme in this areas in 2016 (Jan-Sep). The numbers of bids were below the citywide average but average re-let time for these properties was similar to other areas of the city. Older people's provision is not evenly distributed across MAG and means older households are more likely to need to move to different neighbourhoods if they require specialist accommodation.

The information in Tables 64 -65 is taken from the SHMA and measures the percentages of older households aged 65 and over that intend to move in the area in the next five years and the type of accommodation that they would like and expect to get.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

No, Independentaccommodation

No, Independentaccommodation with

support

Yes, social rentedsheltered housing

Like Expect

41

Table 66 - Expect older people's accommodation

Expect MAG % Sheffield

No, Independent accommodation 47% 79%

No, Independent accommodation

with support 14%4%

Yes, Residential/ nursing home 0% 1%

Yes, Extra care housing 0% 2%

Yes, social rented sheltered housing 39% 12%

Yes, Other purpose-built supported

housing 0%2%

Table 67 - Supply / demand balance for retirement housing

MAG Sheffield

2015 Shortfall -168 -2430

2034 Shortfall -365 -4767

Less than half of MAG's older residents expect to move into independent accommodation, showing a strong demand for specialist older person's accommodation and/or support services to be provided to general needs housing. The low levels of home ownership within the 65+ age group imply that many residents will require their home care and support to be subsidised. A higher proportion of residents in MAG expect to live in social rented sheltered accommodation than citywide. However, even if the planned 60 unit scheme is delivered in the Manor this is still unlikely to meet future demand according to analysis by the University of Sheffield.

Section 16: Summary 4,476 households in MAG are aged 65+ years but there is a lower proportion of older people units per 1,000 of the population in this area than citywide. The

specialist accommodation offer is limited and entirely provided by social landlords and registered charities.

Only 41% of older households are owner occupiers in MAG, with many of these living in low value properties. This is likely to restrict the available options for moving into more suitable housing if the need or desire arises.

Less than half of MAG's older residents expect to move into independent accommodation, showing a strong demand for specialist older person's accommodation and/or support services to be provided to general needs housing.

A 60-unit older person's independent living scheme is planned for a council-owned site in the Manor in 2018 , which will help to address some but not all of the future demand in this area.

More information about older people's accommodation in the city and the demand for this across the HMA's can be found in the 'Sheffield Guide to Developing Older People's Accommodation' which is available here: https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/in-your-area/housing-services/housing-strategies/developing-older-peoples-accommodation.html.

The information in Table 67 indicates the balance in demand and supply for older people's specialist independent living housing (such as sheltered and extra-care) and is taken from "Retirement Housing in Sheffield, Supply and Demand to 2034", University of Sheffield (2016).

42

17. Care and support needs

Table 68 - Disabled households

MAG % Sheffield

Disabled people (Census) 23% 19%

Disabled household (SHMA) 32% 25%

Figure 32 - Type of disability

Table 69 - Type of disability or limiting long term illness

MAG % Sheffield

A physical disability 34% 24%

Long Term Limiting Illness 30% 33%

Mental health problem 16% 13%

Other 9% 14%

Learning or development disability 5% 6%

A sensory disability 3% 5%

Autism 3% 4%

Coginitive impairment (brain injury) 0% 0%

Dementia 0% 2%

This section discusses the care and support needs for disabled people and the demand for adapted properties from existing households. Table 68 shows the percentages of disabled people from the Census 2011 and the percentages of households containing a disabled person from the 2013 SHMA. Both the datasets are shown to measure the proportion of disabled people per household. Table 69 and Figure 32 show the types of disability people have. This is from the SHMA as this is not provided in the Census.

The majority of disabled people in this HMA have a physical disability, which accounts for over a third of those with a disability, compared to under a quarter citywide. This suggests that more property adaptations may be needed in MAG. The next most frequent disability was a long term limiting illness, which accounted for a slightly lower proportion of people than citywide, but is often linked to older age. There was a slightly higher incidence of mental health problems than citywide.

The Census and SHMA show that MAG has a higher percentage of people with a disability or long term limiting illness than citywide, which reflects the older population in MAG. A quarter of residents in Manor are disabled, which is the highest of all the neighbourhoods, followed by Arbourthorne, Gleadless and Norfolk Park. Granville and Wybourn had the lowest proportion of disabled residents.

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

MAG % Sheffield

43

Table 70 - Domiciliary Care Hours (per week)

MAG Sheffield

Current Domiciliary Hours 2325 23715

Average hours per household 0.12 0.10Unmet Domiciliary Hours 208 1881

Total Domiciliary Hours 2533 22133

Table 71 - Adequacy of home for disabled resident needs

MAG % Sheffield

Adequate 52% 64%

Inadequate 48% 36%

Table 72 - Need to move to resolve difficulty for disabled resident

MAG % Sheffield

Yes 47% 25%

No 53% 75%

Table 73 - Support and adaptations needed to stay in the current property

MAG Sheffield

Bathroom adaptations 50% 53% Figure 33 - Adaptations and support needed

Handrails/grabrails 34% 56%

Vertical lift/stair lift 29% 28%

Assistance maintaining home/garden 25% 10%

Access to property/ramp 22% 29%

Kitchen adaptations 17% 5%

Wheelchair adaptations 16% 19%

Safe access to garden/external area 14% 17%

Ground floor toilet 14% 24%

Citywide alarm system 13% 23%

Downstairs bedroom 6% 6%

Extension/extra room 0% 5%

Households with a disabled resident were asked what kind of support or adaptation they would need to help them stay in their property, as shown in Table 73.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%MAG Sheffield

Table 70 shows the total hours per week that residents in the area receive domiciliary care and the unmet need. Domiciliary care is floating support going into the home to allow people to live independently. The 2013 SHMA asked households with a disabled person if their home is adequate and if not whether they need to move to resolve this difficulty. This is shown in Tables 70 & 71.

MAG's residents receive more domiciliary care hours than the citywide average delivered per household. This reflects MAG's higher proportion of older and disabled households. Households in Gleadless and Manor receive the most number of hours and as these households grow older they are more likely to require a move to some type of supported accommodation.

Around half of all disabled residents in MAG feel that their home is adequate to meet their needs, which is lower than citywide. Nearly half of disabled households feel they need to move to resolve a difficulty for a disabled resident, which is nearly double the Sheffield average. This high level of dissatisfaction with the housing of disabled residents in this area needs to be addressed.

44

Table 74 - Resident in household receives care

MAG % Sheffield

Yes receives care 19% 15%

Yes care in adequate 62% 72%

Figure 34 - Care and support needed

Table 745 - Care and support needs

MAG Sheffield

Looking after the garden 58% 49%

Looking after the home 42% 38%

Claiming benefits or managing

finances 38% 28%

Participate in social activities 34% 18%

Personal safety or security 32% 21%

Having someone to act on your/their

behalf 18% 16%

Preparing meals 12% 18%

Personal care 11% 16%

Half of all disabled residents said that bathroom adaptations would help them to be able to stay in their current property, which is similar to the Sheffield average and fits with physical disability being the most common. Around a third of households said that they needed handrails or grab ra ils, which is high, but lower than the city average. As a large amount of households are on lower incomes and in receipt of Housing Benefit, it is possible that many hou seholds have already had adaptations made using Disable Facilities Grants from the Council as they were eligible to receive them. A quarter of disabled households need assistance with maintaining their home or garden, which is much higher than citywide. P art of this may be due to the large number of semi-detached properties with ample gardens. This could also show that the actual need for domiciliary care is higher than is currently being provided and more floating support is needed in this area.

The level of people who receive care is higher to the city average at nearly a fifth of households, and a lower proportion of these believe the care to be adequate. When asked what support they needed, the majority said help with looking after their garden, which suggests the need for a handyperson scheme. 42% of people said that they needed help looking after the homes, which shows a need for more domiciliary care. A handy person scheme is provided by the Council Housing Service to council tenants aged 60 or over or those with a disability/severe health problem. The service helps tenants with smaller jobs in their home that they cannot manage themselves, but this is not available to home owners.

The 2013 SHMA asked if anyone in the household receives care and if this is inadequate. Households were also asked if someone needed care and what they needed. This shown in Tables 74 and 75.

0%

10%20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%MAG Sheffield

45

18. Manor, Arbourthorne and Gleadless Summary

Section 17: Summary

The Census and SHMA show that MAG has a higher percentage of people with a disability or long term limiting illness than citywide.

The majority of disabled people in this HMA had a physical disability or long term limiting illness.

MAG has 1,809 domiciliary care hours per week and is inline with the average hours per household citywide.

Around half of all disabled residents in MAG feel that their home is adequate to meet their need and more households need to move to resolve their difficulties.

Half of all disabled residents said that bathroom adaptations would help them to be able to stay in their current property.

There is demand for a handy person scheme to assist with the garden and home.

Household profile

MAG is relatively densely populated, with a (2011) population of 44,716, in its 4.4 square miles.

The main features of the key Mosaic groupings in the area, such as 'Families with needs' and 'Low income workers' are their l ow incomes.

There are a higher proportion of one person households than citywide, and a higher number of lone parent families, which cont ributes to a smaller household

size.

Overall, the BME population in the MAG is slightly higher than Sheffield, but there is a large variation between Neighbourhoo ds. Responses to the after sales survey for the Sheffield Housing Company's Cutler's View Phase 1 development suggests that buyer s were a mix of those moving

from within the local area and those moving in from elsewhere in Sheffield or outside the city.

Economic profile

The area’s median household income is low at £22,700 compared to £27,230 citywide.

32% of the MAG population are in full time employment, (34% citywide).

The occupation profile leans towards lower paid occupations. 18% of workers are in elementary occupations compared to 12% cit ywide, while 11% are in

professional occupations compared to 20% citywide.

The number of people not working because of long term sickness or disability (8% vs 4%) and numbers in receipt of benefits fo r reasons of unemployment (4.8%

vs 2.35) is higher than the city average.

Just 32% of homeowners had over £100,000 equity in their property compared to 56% citywide. This reflects the area's lower pr operty prices.

There are lower savings in the area, 58% have under £5,000 compared to 45% citywide, which limits the number of first time bu yers able to afford a deposit.

Housing profile

48% of properties are rented from the Council or Housing Association.

There is a small proportion of detached properties (5%) and of 4 bed properties (6%).

This may be a factor in the higher overcrowding rates of 5% compared to 3% citywide.

More social renters are under-occupying than citywide - 47% compared to 40%.

46

Housing profile continued

A higher proportion of households living in MAG feel that their housing is inadequate (22% compared to 14% citywide). 'Needing improvement/repairs' was the

main reason given.

There have been 463 new property completions in the last 6 years. MAG has seen more houses built for sale, some by the Sheffi eld Housing company, than other

areas where the focus has been on apartments for rent.

Neighbourhood profile Fewer MAG residents were satisfied with their neighbourhood, 46% compared to 69% citywide. ASB and crime were among the reaso ns for dissatisfaction and

levels in MAG were fairly high. There were 92 crimes per 1000 residents compared to a citywide figure of 78. School performance as a whole is below the city average. 55% of secondary pupils achieved a grade C in English and Maths GCSE . However some schools perform

well, 67% of Springs Academy pupils achieved this standard. The improving school performance could be a factor that helps att ract families to the area.

Supply and demand balance (sections 7 to 11) The SHMA calculation, based on the housing ambitions and expectation of residents, indicates a large shortfall of owner occup ied and private rented properties,

and a smaller shortfall of council rented properties. For property sizes the shortfalls were for 1 bed and 2 bed properties. The survey responses do not indicate a shortfall of 4 beds, though other data would suggest

that these are required. Increasing the supply of larger properties, in addition to positive features, such as the quality parks, good transport links , good value property and well

performing schools, could also make the HMA more attractive to people from outside the area.

Housing market (sections 12 to 14) The average price at £96,798 is lower than the citywide figure of £149,968. However, house prices are increasing faster in MA G than in the city as a whole. The majority of properties sell in the £50,000 - £150,000 range, with only a very few selling for over £250,000. 3 bed properties at Norfolk Park sold for £172,000

on average. 80% of Norfolk Park new build homeowners surveyed were first time buyers, suggesting a market for Starter Homes. The levels of home ownership are low at 38% compared to 58% city wide. The median income (£22,700) is above the income required to afford the average property (£20,992) and entry level property (1 5,598), but the level of deposit

needed is higher than the savings that households are likely to have. The average private rent of £539pcm would be affordable with an income of £25,872. The median income of £19,704 would not be sufficient for the average one

bed flat at £459pcm, but would be enough for a room in a shared property. Although the SHMA calculated a social housing surplus in MAG, there is considerable demand for social housing. This is eviden ced in average bidding levels

similar to the city average (46 in MAG vs 45 citywide) and a small undersupply indicated in the supply/demand balance (sectio n 11).

Older people's independent living housing

MAG has a lower number of older people’s units per 1,000 of the population than citywide, but a large demand as there are the same percentage of residents

aged over 65+ as citywide.

As half of these residents live in socially rented accommodation, they are likely to look to access age banded or supported socially rented accommodation.

47

Care and support needs

MAG has a high proportion of disabled households. A large proportion of these households said they would need to move to reso lve a difficulty with their

accommodation.

This would suggest a high need for accessible and adaptable properties to be built in this area.

A high proportion said they would need assistance maintaining their home and garden.

High levels of domiciliary care could translate into a need for more specialist accommodation in the area over the next few y ears.

48

19. MAG Housing Recommendations

Recommendations

The area's substantial capacity for additional new dwellings also makes it an important area for contributing to the city’s growth ambitions. These recommendations therefore provide a guide to the housing types required for diversifying the area’s existing housing stock to meet the future needs of MAG’s current households and also for attracting households from other parts of the city and beyond. The analysis emphases the importance of social housing to the area and suggests that development aimed at MAG residents needs to be affordable. However,

the area does have a large population with incomes in the £20 - 40,000 bracket and a large potential pool of first time buyers. Larger Family housing for sale, 3 or 4 bedrooms New family housing in this area will diversify the tenure and type of housing stock. There is a low number of detached properties, but also demand for these

from moving households The high number of families living in the area creates a need for family houses with three or four bedrooms for sale. Larger homes also offer an opportunity for households currently based in areas with higher property values to buy a larger property than in their current

location. Low savings levels, and lower incomes suggest Shared Ownership or Starter Homes would be attractive to some MAG residents

Private rented flats There is demand for private rented properties and a shortage of one and two bedroom properties in the area, which could be met in the form of purpose built

apartments to rent. The Mosaic profile of MAG indicates that a market for new, good quality, private rented properties could be found in groups such as 'Renting a room', 'Make do

and mend', 'Midlife stopgap' or 'Bus route renters'.

Affordable housing Although the area has a large supply of social rented accommodation, the lower incomes of households’ and continuing high demand means that affordable

housing will continue to be needed. Any additional supply should be considered on a site by site basis.

Older People Independent Living Housing There is a shortfall of older people’s accommodation in MAG, and the economic and tenure profile of the older population suggests this will need to be met by

social and affordable rented accommodation. A planned new development on the Manor will add 60 social sheltered housing beds. Other investment is needed but decisions should be considered on a site

by site basis. All new build properties should be built to accessible and adaptable design standards.

49

Sources

Sheffield Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2013

Sheffield Housing Market Bulletin

Sheffield House Price Summary

Local Area Partnerships

Sheffield Community Profiles

50

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/housing/strategic-housing-market-assessment

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content/sheffield/home/housing/sheffield-housing-market.html

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content/sheffield/home/housing/sheffield-housing-market.html

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/home/your-city-council/local-area

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content/sheffield/home/your-city-council/sheffield-profile.html

manor, arbourthorne and gleadless housing … arbourthorne and gleadless housing market profile this...

Documents