CK Housing Study Update 2012

Municipality of Chatham-Kent

Housing Study Update

PREPARED BY:

MARCH 2012

i

Municipality of Chatham-Kent Housing Study Update Report (Final Draft – March 2012)

Executive Summary Housing is a vital human need. Housing choices, including affordable, accessible and supportive housing, are critical components of prosperous, complete and healthy communities. The Municipality of Chatham-Kent and its housing partners have an important role in the provision of housing for all residents. In 2006 the Municipality initiated its first comprehensive housing study. Since that time a number of activities have been initiated to help address local housing needs, including:

Resale of 75 new affordable ownership dwellings and 41 new affordable rental units were built as well as adding 40 rental subsidies (Housing Allowances)

Establishment of Habitat for Humanity affiliate

Completion of capital repairs and improvements to accessibility of existing social housing units

Hiring of a Youth and Immigrant Coordinator Hosting a number of educational activities (housing forums, training

workshops etc.) Implementation of cascading age policy for seniors buildings Ongoing advocacy efforts for increased funding for housing programs and

support services, including emergency program funding

Housing Issues While these initiatives have been helpful in starting to address many key issues, certain housing needs remain unmet. This Housing Study Update replaces the 2006 Housing Study, with updated information on the key housing issues facing residents of Chatham-Kent and builds upon the recommendations in order to create a strategic framework in which to continue to address housing needs over the next ten years. NEW HOUSING STOCK SHOULD BE FURTHER DIVERSIFIED Based on projections1, there will need to be an average annual increase of 194 new units over the 2011 to 2031 period. This is slightly higher than the average number of building permits issued over the past nine years (174 units/year). While the creation

1 All population and household projections are based on data provided by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

ii


of new units is keeping pace with demand, activity by type has not shown much diversification (approximately 80% of starts over 2005-2010 period were single detached). Smaller households and aging of the population further emphasize the need for a diverse and flexible stock. EXISTING HOUSING STOCK THAT IS TYPICALLY MORE AFFORDABLE IS AGING AND IN POORER CONDITION The housing stock in Chatham-Kent remains older than the average for the provincial stock as a whole and the municipality experienced less new development since the last Census period. Aging housing stock means higher energy costs making it less affordable and possibly less safe. EMPLOYMENT TRENDS DUE TO ECONOMIC SHIFTS CAN CREATE DEMAND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING High unemployment rates as a result of job loss and the recent economic downturn and increasing demand for income assistance influences household stability and affordability.

SENIORS POPULATION REQUIRES A RANGE OF HOUSING AND SUPPORT OPTIONS The aging of the population will continue with forecasts estimating that over one-third of the total population will be over the age of 55 by 2031. Many seniors are staying at home longer and looking for supports in the home. This is consistent with provincial directions, which are emphasizing more “aging at home” options for seniors. Waiting lists for affordable long term care are growing as are waiting lists for senior social housing units.

AFFORDABILITY REMAINS AN ISSUE IN BOTH RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP MARKETS Many renter households are facing affordability challenges and for about twenty percent of households the private rental market is out of reach. Waiting lists for social housing have increased as have the number of households in receipt of income assistance. While the homeownership market is affordable to most households it is still out of reach for households in the lower income ranges. Population groups such as lone parents, single persons, youth, Aboriginal persons, and persons with disabilities are experiencing higher rates of affordability challenges. VACANCY RATES REMAIN HIGH Social housing units saw vacancy rates decline for adult and seniors buildings while vacancy rates remain higher for family units particularly in Wallaceburg. Vacancy rate in the private market remain high at about 7% (a healthy vacancy rate is generally considered 3%). Given fairly high vacancy rates and continued wait list for

iii


some type of social housing units, additional rent supplement units should be considered in addition to the creation of new rental units. RURAL RESIDENTS FACE BARRIERS IN ACCESSING SERVICES While there have been some improvements to public transportation, access to services remains a challenge for individuals, in particular seniors and persons with disabilities, to access the services they need. SOME SOCIAL HOUSING TENANTS WOULD BENEFIT FROM SUPPORT SERVICES Stakeholders emphasized a continued need for support services for some social housing tenants. Often residents need assistance with lifeskills (parenting, healthy eating, budgeting etc.), and counselling in order to maintain their home. NEED FOR RANGE OF SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING OPTIONS (Emergency/Transitional, Supportive, Accessible) There is a limited supply of emergency, transitional and supportive housing in Chatham-Kent. Demand for supportive housing has been increasing and stakeholders point to a lack of emergency options for youth, men and single women. The need for more accessible housing also continues and is anticipated to increase with the aging of population.

Framework for Developing Housing Policy Given the fundamental necessity for a range of housing within Chatham-Kent the Municipality is aspiring to create greater opportunities to respond to these diverse needs. In order to identify such opportunities and actions a framework has been developed to guide the Municipality in achieving its housing goals. Importantly, the Chatham-Kent Housing Framework considers both the local and senior government policy context.

iv


On November 22nd 2011, stakeholders gathered to collectively set a direction for housing in Chatham-Kent. Stakeholders included representatives from various support service agencies and non-profit organizations, housing providers, municipal staff, and the private sector. A housing vision, objectives, and actions and targets resulted from this dialogue and are illustrated as the Chatham-Kent Housing Framework. The housing vision provides an overarching goal of where the community strives to be from a housing perspective. In order to work towards this vision, and to meet necessary senior government regulations, housing targets have been developed. These targets are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable, supportive and accessible housing throughout the Municipality and form the foundation for the development of housing objectives and actions.

Housing Study

Update

Provincial Policy

Statement Local Health Integrated Networks

(LHIN) Home First

Housing Services Act

Investment in Affordable

Housing Program

CK Healthy Community Initiatives CK Cultural

Master Plan

CK Community

Strategic Plan

CK Transport-ation Master

Plan

CK Official Plan and Growth Analysis

CK Parks and Rec Master

plan

Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy

v


To support the housing vision and targets, six housing objectives have been identified. These six housing objectives respond to the current housing issues facing Chatham-Kent and a series of actions are identified under each objective. The actions present a range of opportunities either through policy development, financial incentives, advocacy and support, or education and awareness, to address the key housing needs facing the communities of Chatham-Kent. Those actions which are considered of higher importance by stakeholders are identified as priorities (i.e. within the first three years) while the balance of the actions are planned for the remaining planning period. PLAN FOR A DIVERSE RANGE OF HOUSING CHOICES

Adopt the housing vision, objectives and targets as part of the Official Plan review

Eliminate zoning barriers that create restrictions for affordable and supportive housing development options

Include a policy as part of Official Plan Review, which permits second suites in all residential zones

Adopt 5% accessible housing target

HOUSING VISION To provide residents of Chatham-Kent with a full range of housing choices that meet their diverse needs and promote a community of collaboration, acceptance, and pride. This range of housing

includes accessible, affordable, safe and supportive housing.

CHATHAM-KENT HOUSING PLAN FRAMEWORK

Plan for Diverse

Supply

Improve and Maintain

Supply

Increase afford-able

Supply

Ensure Emergency and Transitional

Options

Expand Range of

Supports

Promote and

Educate

Local

Policy

Senior Gov‟t

Policy

HOUSING MEASURES Housing Report Card & 5 year Official Plan and Housing Plan Reviews

HOUSING TARGETS

25% Affordable Housing (including 2% supportive) & 5% Accessible Housing

HOUSING OBJECTIVES

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

vi


IMPROVE AND MAINTAIN EXISTING HOUSING STOCK

Continue to participate in housing renovation funding programs

Develop a plan to maintain service level standards as required by the Housing Services Act

Continue to complete regular building condition assessments and commit funding to social housing reserves

Develop a strategic asset management plan for social housing stock

Investigate feasibility and appropriateness of selling family units in Wallaceburg to address vacancy concerns, and determine most appropriate reallocation of units to meet current and projected housing needs (maintaining service level standards)

INCREASE SUPPLY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING

Adopt 25% affordable housing target including 2% supportive housing target

Encourage linkages with various funding programs and municipal incentives to maximize funding potential for affordable housing

Adopt definition of affordable housing, as per the Provincial Policy Statement and Municipal Facilities Bylaw, as part of the current Official Plan review

Continue to participate in affordable housing programs and other funding programs that may become available in order to achieve affordable housing targets

Encourage new affordable housing using municipal tools and incentives such as relief of taxes and charges, securing sites and including affordable housing in new developments

ENSURE AVAILABILITY OF EMERGENCY AND TRANSITIONAL HOUSING OPTIONS FOR RESIDENTS

Investigate opportunities to collaborate with housing providers and local support agencies to provide emergency and supportive housing options within existing buildings that may be experiencing vacancies

Further analyze emergency and transitional housing and support needs within Municipality (including consultation with persons experiencing homelessness) in order to develop a Homelessness Plan which responds to the requirements of the Housing Services Act

Support community agencies (i.e. in accessing funding opportunities) in developing emergency and transitional housing and support options

PROMOTE EXPANDING RANGE OF SUPPORT SERVICES (IN URBAN AND RURAL AREAS)

Conduct landlord and tenant positive relationship workshop.

Broaden membership of Seniors Advisory Committee to include more agencies (i.e. CCAC).

Conduct a survey of social housing providers and tenants to determine supports needed to foster positive tenant-landlord relationships

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

PRIORITY

vii


Initiate community working group comprised of housing providers, municipal staff, and support service agencies (including CCAC) to identify opportunities to leverage resources and provide more support services for tenants

Continue efforts to provide service hubs at municipal locations to assist support agencies in delivering support services to rural communities

Conduct target focus groups to further identify housing and support service needs of Aboriginal persons, persons with disabilities, homeless, victims of domestic violence, and youth

PROMOTE, EDUCATE, AND CREATE AWARENESS OF HOUSING NEEDS IN CHATHAM-KENT

Continue to be a leader in further education and awareness of housing issues

Continue to advocate with local and provincial partners on such issues as: o Increases to income support programs o Inclusionary zoning provisions o Continued and increased funding for housing assistance (emergency

housing, social housing, affordable housing, rent banks, energy banks etc.) o Simplified guidelines/rules for funding programs

Conduct affordable housing capacity workshop to bring together potential partners (i.e. community organizations, private corporations, developers, builders, financial institutions, support service agencies, real estate sector etc.) to work towards enhancing capacity for affordable housing programs

To ensure accountability and to meet the requirements of the Housing Services Act, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent will develop and distribute an annual Housing Report Card to monitor community progress in meeting the housing actions and targets. The Housing Report Card will include such indicators as number of new units created (affordable, accessible, supportive, and other), updated waiting list statistics, amount of funding contributed towards housing, number of partnerships created, number of educational initiatives implemented etc. Other measuring tools include the five-year Official Plan review as well as the new required five-year Housing and Homelessness Plan review.

Partnership Achieving this vision calls for leadership from the Municipality and strong dedication by all stakeholders. While Chatham-Kent has a leadership role to play community partners from across sectors must come together, each with a unique contribution, to reach the affordable housing targets and housing objectives over the next ten years.

PRIORITY

viii


Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction ......................................................................................... 1

1.1 Study Background ................................................................................ 1

1.1.1 Provincial Housing Policy Changes ....................................................... 1

1.2 Study Purpose .................................................................................... 2

1.3 Study Approach and Format .................................................................... 3

1.3.1 Sources of Information .................................................................... 3

1.3.2 Study Area ................................................................................... 4

1.4 The Chatham-Kent Housing Continuum ...................................................... 5

2.0 Demographic Profile ............................................................................... 7

2.1 Population Characteristics ..................................................................... 7

2.1.1 Trends in Population Growth by Community ........................................... 8

2.1.2 Trends in Age Distribution ............................................................... 10

2.1.3 Population Projections ................................................................... 11

2.2 Household Characteristics ..................................................................... 12

2.2.1 Trends in Household Growth............................................................. 12

2.2.2 Trends in Household Size ................................................................. 13

2.2.3 Trends in Household Type ................................................................ 14

2.2.4 Household Projections .................................................................... 15

2.3 Economic Indicators ............................................................................ 16

2.3.1 Economic Overview ....................................................................... 16

2.3.2 Labour Force Activity ..................................................................... 17

2.4 Income Analysis ................................................................................. 20

2.4.1 Trends in Household Income ............................................................. 20

2.4.2 Household Income by Income Range ................................................... 25

2.4.3 Household Income by Decile ............................................................. 26

2.4.4 Trends in Minimum Wage and Social Assistance ...................................... 29

2.4.5 Trends in Wage Rates ..................................................................... 32

2.4.6 Incidence of Low Income ................................................................. 34

2.5 Summary of Demographic Profile ............................................................ 35

3.0 Existing Housing Supply ........................................................................... 38

3.1 Trends in Dwelling Types ...................................................................... 38

3.2 Trends in Tenure ................................................................................ 40

3.3 Condition of Housing Stock .................................................................... 43

3.4 Recent Housing Supply Activity ............................................................... 45

3.4.1 Housing Starts and Completions ......................................................... 45

3.4.2 Demolitions and Conversions ............................................................ 47

3.4.3 Summary of Building Permits Issued .................................................... 47

3.4.4 Summary of Recent Activity to Projections ........................................... 49

3.4.5 Inventory of Designated Lands for Residential Development ....................... 49

3.5 Summary of Existing Housing Stock .......................................................... 51

4.0 Home Ownership Market ......................................................................... 52

ix


4.1 Overview ......................................................................................... 52

4.2 Trends in Ownership Tenure .................................................................. 52

4.3 Trends in House Prices ......................................................................... 53

4.4 Summary of Home Ownership Market ....................................................... 56

5.0 Rental Housing Market ............................................................................ 57

5.1 Overview ......................................................................................... 57

5.2 Trends in Rental Tenure ....................................................................... 57

5.2.1 Trends in Vacancy Rates ................................................................. 58

5.2.2 Trends in Average Market Rents ........................................................ 61

5.3 Summary of Rental Housing Market .......................................................... 64

6.0 Social Housing ...................................................................................... 65

6.1 Changes to Social Housing Portfolio ......................................................... 65

6.2 Current Breakdown of Public Housing Stock ................................................ 68

6.3 Social Housing Market Rents .................................................................. 69

6.4 Social Housing Waiting List .................................................................... 70

6.5 Affordable Housing ............................................................................. 76

6.6 Summary of Social Housing .................................................................... 78

7.0 Special Needs Housing ............................................................................ 80

7.1 Emergency and Transitional Housing ........................................................ 80

7.2 Supportive Housing ............................................................................. 84

7.3 Student Housing ................................................................................. 87

7.4 Aboriginal Housing .............................................................................. 87

7.5 Housing for New Canadians ................................................................... 88

7.6 Seniors Housing ................................................................................. 89

7.6.1 Seniors Age Distribution and Projections .............................................. 89

7.6.2 Seniors and Tenure ........................................................................ 91

7.6.3 Household Income of Senior Households ............................................... 92

7.6.4 Seniors Subsidized Housing .............................................................. 94

7.6.5 Retirement Housing for Seniors ......................................................... 95

7.6.6 Long-Term Care Homes ................................................................... 97

7.6.7 Other Supportive Housing for Seniors .................................................. 99

7.6.8 In-Home Supports for Seniors ............................................................ 99

7.6.9 Supply and Demand for Seniors Housing ............................................... 99

7.6.10 Summary of Special Needs Housing ..................................................... 99

8.0 Housing Affordability Analysis ..................................................................102

8.1 Home ownership Affordability ..............................................................102

8.1.1 Trends in Mortgage Rates ...............................................................102

8.1.2 Income of Home Owners ................................................................103

8.1.3 Ownership Affordability by Income Spent on Shelter ...............................104

8.1.4 Home Ownership Affordability by Income Decile ....................................105

8.2 Rental Housing Affordability .................................................................107

8.2.1 Income Ranges for Renter Households ................................................107

8.2.2 Rental Affordability by Income Spent on Rent .......................................109

x


8.2.3 Rental Affordability by Income Decile ................................................110

8.3 Affordability by Household Type and Size .................................................113

8.4 Affordability by Wage Rates .................................................................116

8.5 Summary of Housing Affordability in Chatham-Kent .....................................117

9.0 Summary of Changes in Housing Needs .......................................................120

10.0 Summary of Achievements and Current Status of Recommendations ....................125

11.0 Housing Directions and Actions 2012-2022 ....................................................126

11.1 Policy Context ..................................................................................126

11.2 Chatham-Kent Housing Plan Framework ...................................................129

11.2.1 A Housing Vision for Chatham-Kent ....................................................130

11.2.2 Housing Targets ..........................................................................130

11.2.3 Housing Objectives .......................................................................132

11.2.4 Housing Measures .........................................................................133

11.2.5 Housing Actions and Targets ............................................................134

11.3 Cost Benefit Analysis of Recommended Actions ...........................................144

11.4 Next Steps ......................................................................................155

List of Appendices Appendix A – Tables ......................................................................................157

Appendix B – List of Key Informants ...................................................................168

Appendix C – Surveys .....................................................................................170

Appendix D – Summary of Ontario Housing Policy Statement ......................................171

Appendix E – Summary of 2006 Recommendation ...................................................173

Appendix F – Chatham-Kent Housing Plan ............................................................188

Appendix G – Chatham-Kent Housing Report Card ...................................................200

xi


List of Tables Table 1: Comparative Growth Rates throughout Chatham-Kent, 1986- 2006 .................................. 7 Table 2: Major Public and Private Sector Employers, Chatham-Kent .......................................... 17 Table 3: Labour Force Activity by Community, 2006 ............................................................. 18 Table 4: Labour Force Activity by Industry, Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006 ....................................... 19 Table 5: Comparison of Average Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario & Canada, 1990-2005 .... 21 Table 6: Comparison of Median Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-2005 ... 23 Table 7: Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ....................................................... 27 Table 8: Ontario Works Rates and Shelter Allowance Rates for ODSP Clients ................................ 29 Table 9: Historical Overview of Ontario Minimum Wage Rates ................................................. 30 Table 10: Ontario Works Average Number of Recipients, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2010 ....................... 30 Table 11: Average Caseload Numbers for ODSP, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2011 ................................. 30 Table 12: Average Wage Rates by Occupation, Windsor-Sarnia Area, 2004 and 2010 Wages .............. 33 Table 13: Incidence of Low Income, by Community, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006 .................... 35 Table 14: Residential Building Permits Issued by Ward, Chatham-Kent, 2002-2010 ........................ 48 Table 15: Building Permits Issued by Housing Type, Chatham-Kent, 2002-2010 ............................. 48 Table 16: Residential Development Potential by Community, Chatham-Kent, As of May 2011 ........... 50 Table 17: Distribution of Ownership Dwellings by Community in Chatham-Kent, 2006 .................... 52 Table 18: MPAC Sales by Dwelling Type, 2006-2011 .............................................................. 53 Table 19: MPAC Sales by Price Range, 2005-2011 ................................................................. 55 Table 20: Distribution of Rental Dwellings by Community in Chatham-Kent, 2006 ......................... 57 Table 21: Rental Housing Vacancy Rates in Chatham-Kent, 2009-2010 ....................................... 60 Table 22: Private Apartment Average Rents, 1999-2010, Chatham-Kent CA ................................. 63 Table 23: Public Housing Portfolio by Mandate, Geographic Location and Unit Size ....................... 65 Table 24: Non-Profit, Co-operative and Federal Providers Housing Portfolio by Mandate, Geographic Location and Unit Size .................................................................................................. 66 Table 25: Summary of Social Housing Portfolio .................................................................... 67 Table 26: Social Housing Accessible Units by Community, C-K Social Housing, Non-Profits and Cooperatives ............................................................................................................. 67 Table 27: Social Housing Average Market Rents ................................................................... 70 Table 28: Social Housing Vacancy Rates by Community, Quarterly, 2009-2011 .............................. 74 Table 29: Public Housing, Number of Vacant Units by Community and Mandate, Quarterly, 2009-2011 75 Table 30: Public Housing Wait Times, November 2005 and June 2011 ........................................ 76 Table 31: Affordable Housing Program (AHP) – Funding Summary .............................................. 77 Table 32: Overview of Emergency and Transitional Housing Supply, Chatham-Kent 2010 ................. 81 Table 33: Overview of Supportive Housing Supply, Chatham-Kent 2010 ...................................... 85 Table 34: Households Age 65+ by Community, 2006 .............................................................. 90 Table 35: Summary of Housing Providers for Seniors in Chatham-Kent, 2011 ................................ 94 Table 36: Retirement Home Vacancy Rates by Bed Type, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2009-2011 ...... 96 Table 37: Retirement Home Vacancy Rates by Rent Range, Chatham-Kent, 2009-2011 ................... 97 Table 38: Overview of LTC Homes, 2011 ............................................................................ 97 Table 39: Trends in the Waiting List for Long-Term Care Facilities, As of August 2011 .................... 98 Table 40: Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre Caseload by Age, 2007-2011 ...................... 99 Table 41: Summary of Affordable Rents and Affordable Housing Cost in Chatham-Kent, 2011 .......... 119

xii


List of Figures Figure 1: The Chatham-Kent Geographical Area ..................................................................... 5 Figure 2: Chatham-Kent Housing Supply Continuum ................................................................ 6 Figure 3: Comparative Growth Rates, 1986/1991 to 2001/2006, Chatham-Kent and Ontario ............... 8 Figure 4: Historical Population by Community (Percent of Total Population), 2001-2006 ................... 9 Figure 5: Historical Population by Community (Absolute Numbers), 2001-2006 ............................... 9 Figure 6: Change in Population by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006 .................................. 10 Figure 7: Trends in Age Distribution, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006 ............................................... 11 Figure 8: Population Projections, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031 ................................................... 11 Figure 9: Projected Population by Age Group, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031 .................................... 12 Figure 10: Number of Households by Community, 2006 .......................................................... 13 Figure 11: Trends in Household Size, Chatham-Kent, ............................................................ 13 Figure 12: Trends in Persons Household Size, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006 ..................................... 14 Figure 13: Trends in Historical Households by Household Type, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006 ............... 15 Figure 14: Households by Selected Household Types, Chatham-Kent, 2006 .................................. 15 Figure 15: Household Projections, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031 .................................................. 16 Figure 16: Unemployment Rates by Community, Chatham-Kent, (2001-2006) ............................... 17 Figure 17: Trends in Full-time and Part Year or Part-time Employment, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006 .... 20 Figure 18: Comparison of Average Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-2005 21 Figure 19: Comparison of Average Household Income by Community and Ontario, 2005 Incomes ....... 22 Figure 20: Comparison of Median Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-2005 . 23 Figure 21: Comparison of Median Household Income by Community and Ontario, 2005 Incomes ........ 24 Figure 22: Percentage Change of Household Income Groups, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006 .................. 25 Figure 23: Comparison of 1995, 2000 and 2005 Income from Chatham-Kent ................................. 26 Figure 24: Household Income Deciles by Selected Household Characteristics, Chatham-Kent, 2005 .... 28 Figure 25: Household Income Deciles by Age of Primary Household Maintainer, Chatham-Kent, 2005 .. 29 Figure 26: Proportion of Population Receiving OW and ODSP, South West Region, 2011 .................. 31 Figure 27: Chatham-Kent Ontario Works Caseload Composition, 2008-2011 ................................. 32 Figure 28: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006 ....................................... 38 Figure 29: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent (1991-2006) ........................................... 39 Figure 30: Percentage of Occupied Private Dwellings by Dwelling Type ...................................... 39 Figure 31: Rate of Home ownership in Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006 ............................................. 40 Figure 32: Comparing Home Ownership Rates with Other Municipalities, 2006.............................. 40 Figure 33: Rate Home Ownership by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ....................................... 41 Figure 34: Age of Homeowners in Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006 .............................................. 41 Figure 35: Age of Renters in Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006 .................................................... 42 Figure 36: Age of Renters and Homeowners in Chatham-Kent, 2006 .......................................... 42 Figure 37: Age of Total Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006 .................................... 43 Figure 38: Age of Rental Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent Ontario, 2006 ........................................ 44 Figure 39: Age of Ownership Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006.............................. 44 Figure 40: Comparison of the Condition of Dwellings in other Municipalities, 2006 ........................ 45 Figure 41: Housing Starts, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010 ............................................................ 46 Figure 42: Housing Completions, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2005 .................................................... 46 Figure 43: Proportion of Owned Dwellings (as a Proportion of Total Dwellings) by Dwelling Type, Chatham-Kent, 1996, 2001, and 2006 ............................................................................... 53 Figure 44: Average Price of MPAC Sales by Dwelling Type, 2006-2011 ........................................ 54 Figure 45: Proportion of Rented Dwellings (as a Proportion of Total Dwellings) by Dwelling Type, Chatham-Kent, 1996, 2001, and 2006 ............................................................................... 58 Figure 46: Private Rental Apartment Vacancy Rates, Chatham-Kent CA, 2001-2010 ....................... 59 Figure 47: Occupied and Vacant One-Bedroom Apartment Units in Chatham-Kent by Rent Range, 2010 61 Figure 48: Occupied and Vacant Two-Bedroom Apartment Units by Rent Range, 2010 .................... 61 Figure 49: Private Apartment Average Rents by Bedroom Type, Chatham-Kent CA, 1999-2010 .......... 62

xiii


Figure 50: Comparison of 2010 Private Apartment Average Rents for Chatham-Kent CA and Similar Municipalities ............................................................................................................ 63 Figure 51: Breakdown of the Public Housing Portfolio by Unit Size and by Mandate ....................... 68 Figure 52: Breakdown of the Public Housing Portfolio by Geographic Location ............................. 69 Figure 53: Trend in Number of Households on Social Housing Waiting List, 1998-2010..................... 71 Figure 54: Social Housing Waiting List by Household Type, December 2005 and May 2011 ................ 72 Figure 55: Social Housing Waiting List by Community, As of December 2005 and May 2011 ............. 72 Figure 56: Number of Households on Waiting List by Bedroom Type, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010 ........ 73 Figure 57: Social Housing Vacancy Rates by Mandate, Quarterly, 2009-2010 ................................ 74 Figure 58: Number of Clients Served by the Salvation Army, 2006-2010 ...................................... 83 Figure 59: Income Deciles for Aboriginal Households, Chatham-Kent, 2005 .................................. 88 Figure 60: Immigration Status and Period of Immigration, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ............................ 89 Figure 61: Income Deciles for Recent Immigrant Households, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ........................ 89 Figure 62: Distribution of Adults Ages 50 and Over, Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006 ............................. 90 Figure 63: Population Projections for Adults Ages 55 Years and Over, 2006-2031........................... 91 Figure 64: Housing Tenure of Seniors in Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006 ............................................ 92 Figure 65: Distribution of Income (In Constant 2005 Dollars) for Seniors Aged 65+, Chatham-Kent, 2000 and 2005 .................................................................................................................. 92 Figure 66: Senior Renters by Age and Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006 .................................. 93 Figure 67: Senior Homeowners by Age and Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ........................... 93 Figure 68: Distribution of Retirement Home Beds by Type, Chatham-Kent, 2004 and 2011 ............... 95 Figure 69: Average Rent by Retirement Home Bed Type, 2009-2011 .......................................... 96 Figure 70: Trends in Average Waiting Times for Long-Term Care Facilities, July 2009-July 2011 ........ 98 Figure 71: Demand and Supply for Seniors Housing ............................................................... 99 Figure 72: Mortgage Interest Rates, (1992=100), 1996-2010 ................................................... 103 Figure 73: Average and Median Income for Chatham-Kent Homeowners, 1995, 2000, and 2005 ........ 103 Figure 74: Distribution of Income for Homeowners Chatham-Kent, 2005 .................................... 104 Figure 75: Proportion of Income Spent on Ownership Costs, 2005 ............................................ 105 Figure 76: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Homeowners... 105 Figure 77: Percentage of Household Income Spent on Home Ownership Costs by Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ................................................................................................... 106 Figure 78: Comparison of Average Housing Cost to Affordable Housing Cost by Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2011 ........................................................................................ 107 Figure 79: Average and Median Income for Chatham-Kent Renters, 1995, 2000 and 2005 ................ 108 Figure 80: Distribution of Income for Renters Chatham-Kent, 2005 .......................................... 109 Figure 81: Proportion of Income Spent on Rent ................................................................... 109 Figure 82: Gross Rental Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Renters .............. 110 Figure 83: Percentage of Household Income Spent on Rental Housing Costs by Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ............................................................................................................... 111 Figure 84: Comparison of Average Market Rents (AMR) to Affordable Rents by Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2011 ........................................................................................ 112 Figure 85: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Diverse Groups .................................................................................................................... 113 Figure 86: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Diverse Groups ... 114 Figure 87: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Household Characteristics ............................................................................................ 114 Figure 88: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Household Characteristics .......................................................................................................... 115 Figure 89: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income by Household Size 115 Figure 90: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income by Household Size ............... 116 Figure 91: Number of Work Hours Required to Maintain Affordable Rental Housing Costs at Minimum Wage, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2010 .................................................................................... 117

1


1.0 Introduction

1.1 Study Background

In June 2006, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent completed its first Housing Needs Assessment and Strategy. This study provided a comprehensive analysis of the current need and supply for all forms of housing, including affordable and special needs. The study also put forth a series of recommendations to address the immediate, short and long-term housing needs within the municipality. Following the completion of the final report, Council adopted several of the recommendations related to the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program (AHP). Since that time, the municipality has been engaged in a number of affordable housing program initiatives, in addition to some changes in the social housing portfolio. In 2008, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing approved the current Chatham-Kent Official Plan (OP). The municipality is required by the Ontario Planning Act to review their Official Plan every five years. As such, Council has directed administration to proceed with reviewing the Municipality‟s growth management policies through a comprehensive review of the OP in light of current legislation, regulation and provincial policy. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd has been retained to undertake the first phase (technical analysis phase) of the Comprehensive Review. To assist in this review and provide adequate analysis with respect to affordable housing strategies and policies, the municipality initiated the completion of an update to the 2006 Housing Needs Assessment and Strategy (2006 Housing Study). This report forms the Chatham-Kent Housing Update (2011). 1.1.1 Provincial Housing Policy Changes

Since the 2006 Housing Study, there have been some policy changes impacting housing across the Province of Ontario. Most importantly, the Strong Communities through Affordable Housing Act (2011) has been enacted. The Strong Communities through Affordable Housing Act repeals and replaces the Social Housing Reform Act (2000) with the Housing Services Act (2011) as well as includes amendments to the Planning Act and the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA). The Housing Services Act was passed on May 4, 2011. Proclamation for the Housing Services Act was confirmed January 1, 2012. The Housing Services Act is a key part of Ontario‟s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy (LTAHS). It is a goal of LTAHS to consolidate Ontario‟s housing and homelessness programs to give municipalities more flexibility in addressing their local needs. Amendments to Planning Act include requiring municipalities to establish policies allowing second units in new and existing developments, and adding affordable housing as a matter of provincial interest.

2


One of the new requirements for Service Managers is a requirement to have Housing and Homelessness Plans. These Plans must include an assessment of current and future housing needs; objectives and targets relating to housing needs; a description of measures proposed to meet objectives and targets; and a description of how progress towards meeting the objectives and targets will be measured. There is a requirement that The Plan must have a minimum 10-year horizon and is to be reviewed every five years. The Ontario Housing Policy Statement is intended to provide further direction to Service Managers to support the development of their plans. Policy directions include: ensuring a coordinated approach to delivering a system of housing and homelessness services; including strategies to reduce gaps (including short and long-term housing targets) and increase awareness and access to affordable and safe housing; providing measures to prevent homelessness and support people to stay in their homes; including the non-profit and private sector in planning; ensuring plans assess the needs of persons with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, Aboriginal persons (off-Reserve), and other local groups reflective of the evolving demographics of the community; and ensuring a commitment to improve the energy efficiency of existing and future publicly funding housing stock. 1.2 Study Purpose

The purpose of this study is to provide the Municipality of Chatham-Kent with an analytical update to the 2006 Housing Study. It is also the aim of this study to provide a review of the 2006 Housing Actions and Recommendations, and to evaluate their current status and relevancy. Another goal of this study to put forth new and updated housing objectives/strategies and targets to be incorporated as appropriate into Municipal growth management policies including the Municipality‟s Official Plan, scheduled to be updated in 2013. Importantly, it is intended that this study will set out the foundation for the development of the Municipality‟s Housing and Homelessness Plans and ensure that provincial interests are addressed, specifically as outlined within the new Housing Services Act (2010).

3


1.3 Study Approach and Format

The overall approach to this study includes the following tasks:

Update, where possible, the statistical data included in the 2006 Housing

Study and provide an analysis of key trends and observations

Prepare a Housing Needs Update Report

Provide a review of the 2006 Housing Study‟s Housing Actions and Recommendations, and prepare new/updated housing objectives, targets and measures

Conduct a workshop to engage stakeholders in developing new housing objectives, targets and measures

Finalize housing objectives, targets, measures, and prepare cost/risk analysis

Prepare a preliminary Housing Plan Report based on information gathered in tasks 1 to 5

Overall guidance and direction in completing this study was provided by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent Housing Services Division. Direction and collaboration was also provided Chatham-Kent Planning Services Division in order to avoid duplication of work and ensure a joint approach to the Official Plan Comprehensive Review. 1.3.1 Sources of Information

The preparation of the Housing Update entailed incorporating and analyzing data and research from a number of sources. Research sources include:

Obtained Statistics Canada data for 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006, and incorporated data into the analysis and custom tabulation data for 2006. Custom tabulation data from 2006 was obtained for the following geographies: Ontario, Chatham-Kent, Chatham, Blenheim, Dresden, Ridgetown, Tilbury, Wallaceburg, Wheatley, Bothwell, Charing Cross, Merlin, Mitchell‟s Bay, Pain Court, and Thameseville. Additional data tables are provided in Appendix A.

Update Statistical Analysis

Prepare Housing Needs Report

Review 2006

Housing Actions

Conduct Stakeholder Workshop

Prepare Housing

Objectives and

Measures

Prepare Preliminary

Housing Plan

4


Identified key informants in consultation with the Municipality and interviewed informants for information and insight into broad housing issues as appropriate. A list of key informants is in Appendix B.

Conducted a survey of supportive and emergency housing providers in order to gain a thorough understanding of housing needs and assistance in formulating recommendations for strategies. A copy of the Supportive and Emergency Housing Survey is in Appendix C.

Obtained additional information from various Municipal divisions (e.g. planning, housing services, employment and social services, senior services, and economic development) and other sources such as Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data was obtained through the Finance Division.

Incorporated household and population projections from Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

Prepared a comprehensive synopsis of the current and projected housing needs along the housing continuum. A description of the housing continuum approach is provided in section 1.4 below.

1.3.2 Study Area

The study area is the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. The Municipality of Chatham-Kent was formed on January 1, 1998 amalgamating thirteen separate communities. This analysis is based primarily on the Municipality as a whole and, where information is available, the following communities:

Primary Urban Areas Secondary Urban Areas Blenheim Chatham Dresden

Ridgetown Tilbury

Wallaceburg Wheatley

Bothwell Charing Cross

Merlin Mitchells Bay Pain Court

Thamesville

The 2006 Housing Study did not include the area Native Reservations (Moraviantown Reserve and Walpole Island Reservation) as housing on Reserves is not a responsibility of the Service Manager. The current Official Plan Comprehensive Review, including population forecasts, however, does include the Moraviantown Reserve within its „remaining rural area‟ data. For the purposes of this study, the Moraviantown Reserve is included in the analysis. Walpole Island falls outside the municipal boundary and has therefore not been included (limited information is provided in Section 7.4).

5


Figure 1: The Chatham-Kent Geographical Area

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Map of Chatham-Kent, 2011

In addition to the study area outlined above, information where available and where relevant has been provided for rural areas, the province of Ontario and other south western areas of the province (i.e. Lambton County, Bruce County and Windsor/Essex). 1.4 The Chatham-Kent Housing Continuum

A range of housing options, including a diversity of housing type, tenure and affordability level, is needed to accommodate a range of needs and contribute to more healthy and complete communities. Housing provides individuals and families of all ages, income levels, abilities, and cultures a place to grow and call home. For the most part, the private market is able to respond and meet the needs of the majority of residents. For some, however, their needs cannot be met in the private sector and therefore rely on the assistance of the public sector. For a variety of reasons and at various stages of one‟s lifetime, many of us will be in need of housing with some form of supports whether through the provision of care or through financial assistance. Households earning low and moderate incomes, individuals requiring supports, persons in crisis or in transition, may all rely on the not-for-profit and public sector to meet their housing needs. There are a number of housing forms in Chatham-Kent aimed at meeting the diverse range of housing needs within the municipality. These housing forms are represented

6


below as a continuum of housing. Generally, as household income increases, and households move along the continuum from left to right, an increased number of housing opportunities become available. Importantly, households can move either way along the continuum based on changes in income, need for supports, unexpected circumstances etc. Further, in some cases households on fixed incomes will remain within a certain income level throughout most stages of their live. Supports may be needed by households within all housing forms, and at all income levels.

Figure 2: Chatham-Kent Housing Supply Continuum

Emergency and

Transitional

Subsidized Affordable (rental and ownership)

Private Rental

Ownership

Supports

7


2.0 Demographic Profile

Changes in population and household characteristics, including changes in income, are important determinants to the overall changes in the demand for housing. The following section provides a demographic profile of the Municipality of Chatham-Kent and highlights any changes in trends since the 2006 Housing Study. 2.1 Population Characteristics

In 2006, Chatham-Kent had a population of 108,177 persons; an increase of 0.8% from 2001. This is a slower rate of growth compared with the Province (6.6%) as a whole. Surrounding areas such as Bruce County and Lambton County also experienced slower rates of growth compared to the Province at 2.3% and 1% respectively.

Table 1: Comparative Growth Rates throughout Chatham-Kent, 1986- 2006

Population

Community 1986 1991 1996 2001 2006

Chatham-Kent 106,379 109,583 109,350 107,341 108,177

Bruce County 58,848 65,268 65,680 63,892 65,349

Lambton County

124,592 128,948 128,975 126,971 128,204

Windsor-Essex 316,362 327,365 350,329 374,975 393,402

Ontario 9,101,694 10,084,885 10,753,573 11,410,046 12,160,282

Percentage Increase/Decrease

Community 1986-1991 1991-1996 1996-2001 2001-2006 1986-2006

Chatham-Kent 3.0% -0.2% -1.8% 0.8% 1.7%

Bruce County 10.9% 0.6% -2.7% 2.3% 11.0%

Lambton County

3.5% 0.0% -1.6% 1.0% 2.9%

Windsor-Essex 3.5% 7.0% 7.0% 4.9% 24.4%

Ontario 10.8% 6.6% 6.1% 6.6% 33.6%

Source: Statistics Canada; 1986, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

Historically, the Municipality has had lower rates of population growth when compared to the Province as a whole.

8


Figure 3: Comparative Growth Rates, 1986/1991 to 2001/2006, Chatham-Kent and Ontario

2.1.1 Trends in Population Growth by Community

Chatham remains the largest community within the Municipality with a population of 46,863 in 2006; an increase of 4.9% from 2001. Chatham comprises almost half the population of Chatham-Kent at 43.3%. Wallaceburg remains the second largest community within the Municipality with a population of 10,723. Wallaceburg experienced a decline in population of 5.0% (567 persons) from 2001. Other urban areas to experience a decline in population include Dresden (143 persons or 5.4%), Ridgetown (210 persons or 6.1%), Blenheim (293 persons or 6.0%), Mitchell‟s Bay (54 persons or 15.9%), and Bothwell (34 persons or 3.4%). In general, there has been little change in the proportional distribution of the population by community since 2001.

3.0%

-0.2%-1.8%

0.8% 1.7%

10.8%

6.6% 6.1% 6.6%

33.6%

-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

1986-1991 1991-1996 1996-2001 2001-2006 1986-2006

Gro

wth

Rate

Chatham-Kent Ontario

Source: Statistics Canada; 1986, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

9


Figure 4: Historical Population by Community (Percent of Total Population), 2001-2006

Figure 5: Historical Population by Community (Absolute Numbers), 2001-2006

By community, Pain Court (17.0%), Merlin (6.0%), Wheatley (11.4%), Bothwell (5.0%) and Chatham (4.9%) showed the greatest increase in population. Mitchell‟s Bay had the greatest decline in population by 15.9%.

4.6

%

41.6

%

2.5

%

3.2

%

4.4

%

10.5

%

2.6

%

0.9

%

0.3

%

0.7

%

0.3

%

0.5

%4.3

%

43.3

%

2.3

%

3.0

%

4.5

%

9.9

%

2.8

%

0.9

%

0.4

%

0.7

%

0.3

%

0.5

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l P

op

ula

tion

Community

2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada; 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

4,9

17

44,6

69

2,6

47

3,4

53

4,6

72 1

1,2

90

2,7

45

1,0

02

364

719

339

5004

,624

46,8

63

2,5

04

3,2

43

4,8

55 1

0,7

23

3,0

57

968

426

762

285

525

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

50,000

Pop

ula

tion

Community

2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada;2001, 2006 Census of Canada

10


Figure 6: Change in Population by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006

2.1.2 Trends in Age Distribution

Changes in age distribution remain consistent with trends discussed in the 2006 Housing Study. In general, trends continue to show an aging of the population with increases in all population groups over the age of 45 years. The greatest increase is shown in population between 55 and 64 years. Also consistent with the 2006 Housing Study findings is a decline in population groups under the age of 34 years. One movement in population distribution by age is shown in the population group of 35 to 45 years where the proportion of the population has begun to decline; from 16.3% in 2001 to 13.9% in 2006. This may be a result of individuals and families moving outside the Municipality in search of employment opportunities given the economic challenges facing the area between the two Census periods. This aging of the population continues to point to the need to ensure an adequate supply and range of housing opportunities for seniors and support services for seniors within the Municipality. With the population of pre-retirees (i.e. baby boomers2) also continuing to grow, this suggests this trend will continue.

2 The baby boomer generation includes persons born between the years 1945 to 1964. In 2006, baby boomers were between the ages of 42 and 61 years.

-6.0%

4.9%

-5.4% -6.1%

3.9%

-5.0%

11.4%

-3.4%

17.0%

6.0%

-15.9%

5.0%

0.2% 0.8%

-20.0%

-15.0%

-10.0%

-5.0%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

Pre

ce

nt

Ch

an

ge

Community


11


Figure 7: Trends in Age Distribution, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006

2.1.3 Population Projections

Population growth forecasts 2011-2031 are based on work conducted by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Growth forecasts project that the population of Chatham-Kent will reach 118,100 by 2031; representing an increase in growth of 4.6% (or 5,200 persons) from 2006 to 2011, and 4.0% (or 4,500 persons) from 2011 to 2031.

Figure 8: Population Projections, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031

108,600109,200

110,700111,800

112,900113,600

112,900113,600

115,100116,200

117,400118,100

102,000

104,000

106,000

108,000

110,000

112,000

114,000

116,000

118,000

120,000

2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031

Pop

ula

tion

Year

Excluding Census Undercount Including Census Undercount*

Source: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2011

*Population Undercount estimated at approximatley 4%

29.5

%

22.6

%

14.7

%

10.4

%

9.0

%

8.0

%

5.9

%

28.6

%

20.0

%

15.6

%

12.4

%

8.9

%

8.2

%

6.3

%

27

.3%

17

.2%

16

.3%

14

.2%

9.9

%

7.9

%

7.1

%

25

.4%

16

.9%

13

.9%

15

.7%

12

.2%

8.2

%

7.8

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

0-19 20-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l P

op

ula

tion

Age Groups

1991 1996 2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada; 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

12


The population over the age of 55 years is expected to reach 42,662 by 2031; representing 36% of the total population. The population under the age of nineteen is expected to remain relatively constant at about 22% of the total population. The 35-55 age cohort is expected to decline in their proportion of the total population from about thirty percent in 2006 to twenty-four percent in 2031.

Figure 9: Projected Population by Age Group, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031

2.2 Household Characteristics

The following sections provide a profile of local household characteristics and highlight the changes in household trends over time. 2.2.1 Trends in Household Growth

The number of households in Chatham-Kent reached 43,670 in 2006. This represents an increase of 4.1% or 1,725 households from 2001 to 2006; showing a greater increase compared to the 1.5% growth experienced between 1996 and 2001. While the majority of households are located within the larger urban centres of Wallaceburg and Chatham, about 24% of households were located within the surrounding rural areas.

23.7

%

22.8

%

22.2

%

21.6

%

21.8

%

19.2

%

19.6

%

20.3

%

20.3

%

18.0

%

29.5

%

28.2

%

27.2

%

22.4

%

24.1

%

20.0

%

21.4

%

22.3

% 26.4

%

23.7

%

7.6

%

7.9

%

8.0

%

9.2

% 12.5

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

2006 2009 2011 2021 2031

Pop

ula

tion

Gro

wth

Years

0-18 19-34 35-54 55-75 75+


Note: Population figures include Census undercount of approximatley 4%

13


Figure 10: Number of Households by Community, 2006

2.2.2 Trends in Household Size

Household size in Chatham-Kent continues to decline reaching 2.4 persons per households in 2006; down from 2.5 in 2001. Figure 11: Trends in Household Size, Chatham-Kent, 1986-2006

In addition, the number of one and two-person households continues to increase while larger household sizes (three or more persons) have shown declines over the past four Census periods. In 2006, 63% percent of households were comprised of one and two-persons. By comparison, in Ontario one and two-person households comprise 56.1% of total households. These trends

are a result of general trends such as aging of the population, lower birth rates, greater rates of family break-up, and movement of youth.

19,630

1,9101,015 1,365 1,895

4,485

1,105390 210 295 155 200 380

10,630

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

Nu

mb

er

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulation 2006 Census

2.8

2.7

2.6

2.5

2.4

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

1986 1991 1996 2001 2006

Hou

seh

old

Siz

e

Source: Statistics Canada, 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006 Census of Canada

14


These trends in declining household size and increasing number of one and two person households point to a need for dwelling types that accommodate smaller households.

Figure 12: Trends in Persons Household Size, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006

2.2.3 Trends in Household Type

While showing a slight decline from 2001 to 2006, the majority of households remain family households at 70.8%. Importantly, Statics Canada defines a family as a household that is comprised of a married couple with or without children, a couple living in common law with or without children, or a lone parent living with one or more children.

22.9

31.7

16.7

25.6

3.2

24.4

32.8

16.1

23.9

2.8

26

.1

34

.2

15

.2

21

.8

2.6

27

.2

36

.1

14

.7

19

.8

2.3

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4-5 Persons 6+ Persons

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Hou

seh

old

s

1991 1996 2001 2006


15


Figure 13: Trends in Historical Households by Household Type, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006

Looking more specifically at various household types, about 27% of households are comprised of single person households and almost ten percent are lone-parent families. One quarter of households are senior-led households (where someone over the age of 65 is the household maintainer). Also noteworthy is that 38.7% of households in Chatham-Kent in 2005 had one or more members of the household were experiencing activity limitations.

Figure 14: Households by Selected Household Types, Chatham-Kent, 2006

2.2.4 Household Projections

Based on the household projections developed by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (2011), it is anticipated that the number of households will reach 48,230 by 2031; a total of 4,565 new units from 2006 to 2031; this represents an average annual increase of 183 units/year. Of these anticipated new units 3,390 would be low

9.3%, 4,040

27.2%, 13,050

3.6%, 12,550

2.9%1,275

27.2%11,860

3.6%1,575

25.0%10,900

0.6%260

2.2%945

38.7%16,920

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

Lone Parents

Couples with

Children

Couples without Children

Multiple Family

Single Person

Youth Led Household (<25 Years)

Senior Led Household (>65 Years)

Recent Immigrant

Aboriginal One or More

Members of

Household Have

Activity Limitations

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

lH

ou

seh

old

s

Selected Household Characteristics

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 2006

78.90%72.80% 71.70% 70.8%

21.10%27.20% 28.30% 29.2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1991 1996 2001 2006

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l H

ou

seh

old

s

Year

Family Non-Family


16


density (136 units/year), 730 medium density (29 units/year), and 445 high density (18 units/year).

Figure 15: Household Projections, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2031

2.3 Economic Indicators

2.3.1 Economic Overview

Overall, unemployment rates improved within Chatham-Kent from 2001 to 2006. With the exception of Wheatley, Thamesville, Mitchell‟s Bay and Bothwell, all communities showed a decline in unemployment from 2001 to 2006. Unemployment figures provided by Chatham-Kent Economic Development show that unemployment rates peaked in October of 2009 at 15.2%, and remained above 10% for most of 2009-2011. In the fall of 2011, the rate started to decline and was at 8.4% as of September 20113. The increase in the unemployment rate was largely due to high turnover in the automotive manufacturing sector. Much of this sector was dependant on the US auto industry, and Chatham-Kent was hit hard with supply chain issues. While there has been some turnover in employment, the new jobs created tend to be in the service industry and are not the higher paying manufacturing jobs.

3 Estimated monthly labour market indicators for Economic Region 570 (Chatham-Kent, Windsor-Essex, and Sarnia-Lambton). Data estimated and seasonally adjusted by the Centre for Spatial Economics.

34,830 35,610 36,375 37,125 37,720 38,245

2,165 2,175 2,340 2,550 2,720 2,8906,670 6,670 6,715 6,830 6,965 7,070

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

2006 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031

Hou

seh

old

s

Year

Low Density Medium Density High Density


43,665 44,455 45,430 46,505 47,405 48,205

17


Figure 16: Unemployment Rates by Community, Chatham-Kent, (2001-2006)

2.3.2 Labour Force Activity

Many of the major public sector employers listed in the 2006 Housing Study remain top employers in 2011. The Lambton-Kent School board has surpassed the Municipality as the top public sector employer. Also of note is that the Southwestern Regional Centre (mental health institution), with 650 jobs in 2006, has since closed.

Table 2: Major Public and Private Sector Employers, Chatham-Kent

Major Employers - Public Sector

Company Employment

Lambton-Kent School Board 2,300

Municipality of Chatham-Kent 1,800

Chatham-Kent Health Alliance 1,300

St. Clair Catholic School Board 500

Service Canada Income Security 275

Chatham-Kent Integrated Services 175

University of Guelph, Ridgetown Campus

170

Major Employers - Private Sector

Company Employment

Union Gas Limited 706

YA Canada 460

Martinrea Fabco Metallic Canada Corp. 400

TransCom 350

MSSC 271

KSR International Co. 250

9.1

%

14.5

%

7.1

%

7.1

%

11.2

%

4.0

% 6.0

%

7.0

%

5.4

%

7.8

%

5.8

%

4.4

%

8.3

%

6.1

%7.5

% 9.5

%

5.0

%

9.3

%

8.3

%

6.8

%

9.4

%

5.7

%

6.0

%

14.5

%

2.9

%

9.9

%

7.2

%

6.4

%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

Un

em

plo

ym

en

t R

ate

Community

2001 2006


18


Table 2: Major Public and Private Sector Employers, Chatham-Kent

Pioneer Hi-Bread Limited: (Dupont Agriculture and Nutrition)

186 + 100 Seasonal

CanGro Foods Ltd. 168 + 295 Seasonal

Source: Chatham-Kent Economic Development Services, 2011

By community, approximately 40% of the labour force in Chatham-Kent is located in Chatham; this remains consistent with trends identified in the 2006 Housing Study. In general, the distribution of labour force within the Municipality has not experienced substantial change.

Table 3: Labour Force Activity by Community, 2006

Community 2006

# %

Chatham 22,521 39.3%

Dresden 1,316 2.3%

Wallaceburg 5,242 9.2%

Wheatley 1,640 2.9%

Tilbury 2,407 4.2%

Ridgetown 1,686 2.9%

Blenheim 2,465 4.3%

Thamesville 419 0.7%

Merlin 456 0.8%

Mitchell's Bay 189 0.3%

Bothwell 449 0.8%

Pain Court 343 0.6%

Charing Cross 243 0.4%

Chatham-Kent 57,240 100.0%

Source: Statistics Canada; 2006 Census of Canada

Although showing a decline in proportion of the labour force, manufacturing remains the largest employment industry within the Municipality. The distribution of labour force activity by industry has not seen considerable change over the 2001 to 2006 period. Retail trade, health care and social assistance, accommodation and food services remain among the top employers. Agriculture and construction have both experienced slight declines, of 1.3% and 0.5% respectively, in their proportion of the labour force. The agriculture sector in Chatham-Kent, however, does remain strong with approximately 25% of the Municipality‟s GDP coming from agribusiness. Education services, other services, transportation and warehousing, and

19


administrative and support/waste management/remediation services have all experienced slight increases in their proportion of the labour force.

Table 4: Labour Force Activity by Industry, Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006

Industry Sector 1996 2001 2006

# % # % # %

Manufacturing 13,390 24.1% 12,880 23.2% 11,780 20.6%

Retail trade 6,555 11.8% 6,095 11.0% 6,610 11.5%

Healthcare and social assistance 5,555 10.0% 5,330 9.6% 5,310 9.3%

Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting

5,040 9.1% 4,590 8.3% 4,010 7.0%

Accommodation and food services 3,445 6.2% 3,795 6.8% 3,535 6.2%

Construction 2,455 4.4% 2,925 5.3% 2,755 4.8%

Other services (except public administration)

3,760 6.8% 2,605 4.7% 3,060 5.3%

Educational services 2,845 5.1% 2,490 4.5% 2,870 5.0%

Transportation and warehousing 1,840 3.3% 2,410 4.3% 2,965 5.2%

Wholesale trade 2,655 4.8% 2,305 4.1% 2,240 3.9%

Public administration 1,915 3.4% 1,880 3.4% 1,985 3.5%

Administrative and support, waste management and remediation services

0.0% 1,645 3.0% 3,295 5.8%

Professional, scientific and technical services

1,410 2.5% 1,405 2.5% 1,370 2.4%

Finance and insurance 1,130 2.0% 1,285 2.3% 1,310 2.3%

Arts, entertainment and recreation 0.0% 820 1.5% 1,035 1.8%

Utilities 1,570 2.8% 810 1.5% 925 1.6%

Industry - Not applicable 1,115 2.0% 755 1.4% 710 1.2%

Information and cultural industries 0.0% 750 1.3% 620 1.1%

Real estate and rental and leasing 730 1.3% 675 1.2% 695 1.2%

Mining and oil and gas extraction 105 0.2% 115 0.2% 130 0.2%

Management of companies and enterprises

0.0% 20 0.0% 30 0.1%

All industries 55,515 100.0% 55,585 100.0% 57,240 100.0%

Source: Statistics Canada; 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

Full-time employment has seen an increase over the 2001 to 2006 period of approximately 1,200 persons. The number of part-time employees continues to decline from 1991 rates and declined by about 600 persons between 2001 and 2006. This can be seen as a positive trend for the Municipality as full-time employment generally means higher wages and greater job security.

20


Figure 17: Trends in Full-time and Part Year or Part-time Employment, Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006

2.4 Income Analysis

Income levels are a key indicator when assessing the demand for housing. The following sections examine current trends in household income and highlight changes over time in income levels and wage rates across the Municipality. 2.4.1 Trends in Household Income

The 2006 Housing Study reported an average household income of $55,559 based on the 2001 Census. The average household income increased by 29.3% to $62,248/year based on the 2006 Census. While this income level remains below both provincial and national levels, the Municipality did experience a greater increase in average income over the 2000 to 2005 period compared to the province and Canada as a whole.

30,165 29,62530,960

32,180

27,70526,320 25,905 25,515

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

1991 1996 2001 2006

Nu

mb

er

of

Work

ers

Full Year Full-time Part Year or Part-time


21


Figure 18: Comparison of Average Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-2005

Table 5: Comparison of Average Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario & Canada, 1990-2005

Community Average Household Income Percent Change

1990 1995 2000 2005 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005

Chatham-Kent $42,990 $48,141 $55,559 $62,248 12.0% 15.4% 12.0%

Ontario $52,225 $54,291 $66,836 $77,967 4.0% 23.1% 16.7%

Canada $46,137 $48,552 $58,360 $62,248 5.2% 20.2% 6.7%


By community, Pain Court had the highest average household income, followed by Merlin and Wheatley. Generally, the more rural areas had comparatively higher average household incomes compared with more urban areas. With the exception of the Moravian Reserve, which had an average household income of $38,524, Wallaceburg had the lowest average household income at $52,419. These income trends by community are consistent with findings from the 2006 Housing Study.

$42,9

90

$48,1

41

$55,5

59

$62,2

48

$52,2

25

$54,2

91 $66,8

36

$77,9

67

$4

6,1

37

$4

8,5

52

$5

8,3

60

$6

2,2

48

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

1990 1995 2000 2005

Ave

rage

Hou

seh

old

In

com

e

Chatham-Kent Ontario Canada


22


Figure 19: Comparison of Average Household Income by Community and Ontario, 2005 Incomes

Median household income, while showing an increase, has not increased at the same rate as the average household income, suggesting incomes of lower income households are not keeping pace with incomes of higher income households. Overall, median household income increased by 9.8% from 2000 to 2005. This is consistent with national (9.3%) trends but lower than provincial trends (12.7%). The median household income in 2005 was $51,081.

$58,9

77

$60,3

05

$56,1

81

$60,6

34

$61,1

69

$52,4

19

$73,7

66

$66,2

59

$68,3

68

$74,4

43

$58,0

27

$84,4

52

$53,8

56

$69,3

66

$38,5

24

$77,9

67

$62,248

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000A

ve

rage

Hou

seh

old

In

com

e

Average Household Income Chatham-Kent Average Household Income


23


Figure 20: Comparison of Median Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-2005

Table 6: Comparison of Median Household Income, Chatham-Kent, Ontario and Canada, 1990-

2005

Community

Median Household Income Percent Change

1990 1995 2000 2005 1990-1995 1995-2000 2000-2005

Chatham-Kent $37,811 $39,048 $46,517 $51,081 3.3% 19.1% 9.8%

Ontario $44,432 $45,155 $53,626 $60,455 1.6% 18.8% 12.7%

Canada $39,013 $40,209 $46,752 $51,081 3.1% 16.3% 9.3%


$37,8

11

$39,0

48

$46,5

17

$51,0

81

$44,4

32

$45,1

55

$53,6

26

$60,4

55

$3

9,0

13

$4

0,2

09

$4

6,7

52

$5

1,0

81

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

1990 1995 2000 2005

Me

dia

n H

ou

seh

old

In

com

e

Chatham-Kent Ontario Canada


24


Figure 21: Comparison of Median Household Income by Community and Ontario, 2005 Incomes

Overall, households in Chatham-Kent are earning more compared to the 2006 Housing Study. There are fewer households earning less than $30,000 in 2005 compared with 2000. In addition, the number of households earning more than $80,000 has increased. The greatest increase in shown in households earning more than $100,000; which increased by about 5% from 2000 to 2005. While this is a positive trend for the Municipality, there were still just over one-quarter of households earning less than $30,000 and about half were earning less than $50,000 in 2005. This again suggests a polarization of incomes since the previous Census period.

$48,4

67

$49,2

62

$48,9

90

$53,1

87

$53,8

94

$42,0

69 $

61,4

84

$42,7

69

$48,8

46

$61,8

09

$46,7

50

$71,2

96

$43,4

54 $59,3

84

$29,7

60

$60,4

55

$51,081

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

Me

dia

n H

ou

seh

old

In

com

e

Median household income Chatham-Kent Median Household Income


5.8

%

16.5

%

13.7

%

36.0

%

12.6

%

11.6

%

9.9

%

8.6

%

6.2

%

4.7

%

3.3

% 7.1

%

5.5

%

13.1

%

11.6

%

30.2

%

12.1

%

11.0

%

9.8

%

8.7

%

7.2

%

5.6

%

4.0

%

11.3

%

4.0

%

11

.4%

11

.0%

26

.3%

11

.5%

11

.1%

8.9

%

8.6

%

6.6

%

6.0

%

4.8

%

16

.1%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l H

ou

seh

old

s

1995 2000 2005

Source: Statistics Canada; 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of CanadaSource: Statistics Canada; 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

25


Figure 22: Percentage Change of Household Income Groups, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006

Source: Statistics Canada, Cat. No. 97-563-XCB2006047

2.4.2 Household Income by Income Range

In the 2006 Housing Study, household income ranges were used to compare household income over time. As shown below, the proportion of households in the lower income ranges (i.e. earning less than $30,000) has declined by about ten percent. Despite this significant decline, over one-quarter of households still earned less than $30,000 in 2005. The largest proportional increase in income was seen in the households earning over $100,000; increasing from 11.3% in 2000 to 16.1% in 2005.

26


Figure 23: Comparison of 1995, 2000 and 2005 Income from Chatham-Kent

2.4.3 Household Income by Decile

While the figures for the average and median household incomes provide a general sense of household income, looking at the distribution of income provides greater detail of a household‟s economic capability. Income deciles divide the total universe (i.e. households) into ten equal portions of income groups and take into account context of location and local standards of living. For example, ten percent of households in Chatham-Kent earned $15,845 or less in 2005 and, therefore, fall within the first income decile. In 2005, the 10th decile represents households earning more than $116,724. In Chatham-Kent each decile represents about 4,380 households.

5.8

%

16.5

%

13.7

%

36.0

%

12.6

%

11.6

%

9.9

%

8.6

%

6.2

%

4.7

%

3.3

% 7.1

%

5.5

%

13.1

%

11.6

%

30.2

%

12.1

%

11.0

%

9.8

%

8.7

%

7.2

%

5.6

%

4.0

%

11.3

%

4.0

%

11

.4%

11

.0%

26

.3%

11

.5%

11

.1%

8.9

%

8.6

%

6.6

%

6.0

%

4.8

%

16

.1%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l H

ou

seh

old

s

1995 2000 2005

Source: Statistics Canada; 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of CanadaSource: Statistics Canada; 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

27


Table 7: Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2006

Decile # of

Households

1st decile ($15,845 and under) 4,400

2nd decile ($15,846-$24,377) 4,380

3rd decile ($24,378-$33,134) 4,365

4th decile ($33,135-$41,853) 4,365

5th decile ($41,854-$51,082) 4,360

6th decile ($51,083-$62,403) 4,380

7th decile ($62,404-$75,258) 4,360

8th decile ($75,259-$91,703) 4,350

9th decile ($91,704-$116,723) 4,365

10th decile ($116,724+) 4,355

Total Households 43,670


With the exception of senior-led households, the following household groups had greater proportion of households within the lower income deciles (i.e. first to third decile) in 2005 compared to the Municipality as a whole. Almost half (48.4%) of all single person households, for example, were earning less than $24,377 in 2005. Youth led households (46.6%), lone parent families (31.0%), and Aboriginal households (27.5%) also had large proportions in the first and second income deciles.

28


Figure 24: Household Income Deciles by Selected Household Characteristics, Chatham-Kent, 2005

By age, the following Figure illustrates that generally seniors and youth have a greater proportion of households in the lower income deciles. Seniors, for example, over the age of 65 had a higher proportion of households within the first to third income deciles (i.e. earning less than $33,134/year). Almost half of youth household maintainers between the ages of 15 and 24 years were earning less than $24,377 in 2005. Households where the primary household maintainer was between the ages of 45 and 54 years by comparison had a greater proportion of households in the higher income deciles.

8.4%

13.5%

13.8%

14.0%

16.9%

25.9%

29.5%

19.3%

3.8%

13.7%

17.0%

10.6%

22.5%

17.1%

17.4%

15.4%

12.5%

16.1%

19.0%

15.2%

15.2%

13.1%

9.6%

11.2%

12.9%

6.9%

11.0%

11.7%

12.1%

13.5%

10.5%

10.8%

10.1%

10.0%

9.2%

9.6%

9.6%

8.9%

10.1%

9.0%

7.2%

8.3%

6.9%

17.3%

8.1%

7.4%

5.8%

3.8%

3.2%

6.1%

5.8%

7.4%

6.9%

8.5%

2.6%

4.1%

4.0%

9.6%

7.3%

3.6%

6.9%

1.3%

1.3%

3.1%

3.8%

6.6%

1.2%

6.3%

0.5%

0.6%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Senior Led (>65 Years)

Recent Immigrant

One or more members of household have activity limitations

Lone parents

Primary maintainer is aboriginal

One person only

Youth Led (<25 years)

Percent of Households

Hou

seh

old

Typ

e

$15,845 and under $15,846 - $24,377 $24,378 - $33,134 $33,135 - $41,853$41,854 - $51,082 $51,083 - $62,403 $62,404-$75,258 $75,259 - $91,703$91,704-$116,723 $116,724+


29


Figure 25: Household Income Deciles by Age of Primary Household Maintainer, Chatham-Kent, 2005

2.4.4 Trends in Minimum Wage and Social Assistance

Income supports are provided through Ontario Works (OW) and Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP). Shelter allowances for each of these programs were set in 1995 and as of 2004 have seen modest increases. Currently the shelter allowance under OW for a single individual is $409/month, an increase of $76/month from 2005. For a single individual under the ODSP program the rate for a single person is currently $474/month, an increase of $47/month since 2005.

Table 8: Ontario Works Rates and Shelter Allowance Rates for ODSP Clients

Benefit Unit Size

ODSP Maximum Monthly Shelter

Allowance

OW Maximum Monthly Shelter

Allowance

1 $474 $409

2 $745 $572

3 $807 $636

4 $877 $696

5 $946 $846

6 or more $980 $882

Source: Ontario Works Act 1997, Amended 2011; Ontario Disability Support Program, Directive 6.2: Shelter

Calculation. November 2011

29.5%

10.3%

7.0%

9.0%

13.0%

6.9%

10.1%

17.1%

6.4%

6.4%

6.1%

7.1%

13.4%

25.5%

15.2%

11.1%

6.6%

5.5%

7.3%

15.7%

19.2%

11.7%

11.0%

8.7%

6.8%

10.0%

14.3%

11.9%

9.2%

11.8%

8.5%

8.6%

9.3%

13.3%

10.8%

8.3%

9.7%

12.2%

8.5%

10.8%

11.1%

8.0%

3.2%

15.3%

11.4%

9.6%

10.9%

8.0%

5.7%

4.1%

11.7%

12.6%

12.0%

9.9%

8.6%

3.5%

1.3%

9.6%

14.2%

14.8%

9.8%

5.0%

2.9%

0.6%

3.0%

12.4%

19.4%

11.9%

3.8%

2.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

15-25

25-34

35-44

45-54

55-64

65-74

75 and over

Title

Age

of

Pri

mary

Hou

seh

old

Main

tain

er

$15,845 and under $15,846 - $24,377 $24,378 - $33,134 $33,135 - $41,853 $41,854 - $51,082

$51,083 - $62,403 $62,404-$75,258 $75,259 - $91,703 $91,704-$116,723 $116,724+


30


Minimum wage rates have also seen an increase over the last few years from $7.75 in 2006 to the current rate of $10.25.

Table 9: Historical Overview of Ontario Minimum Wage Rates

Period Minimum Wage

Jan. 1995 - Jan. 31, 2004 $6.95

Feb. 1, 2004 - Jan. 31, 2005 $7.15

Feb. 1, 2005 - Jan. 31, 2006 $7.45

Feb. 1, 2006 - Jan. 31, 2007 $7.75

Feb. 1, 2007 - Mar. 31, 2008 $8.00

Mar. 31, 2008 - Mar. 31, 2009 $8.75

Mar. 31, 2009 – December 2011 $10.25

Source: Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, Minimum Wage Database, 2011

Ontario Works (OW) caseload figures indicate an increasing number of persons are in need of income support. The average caseload in 2010 reached a high of 3,445; an increase of over 1,000 cases since 2006. Current, figures suggest an even higher average caseload for 2011. Ontario Disability Support Program (ODSP) participants have also steadily increased from 2006. In 2010, the average caseload was 3,353; an increase of about 1,000 participants. Similar to OW trends, ODSP figures show an increase again for this current year.

Table 10: Ontario Works Average Number of Recipients, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2010

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011(YTD)

Ontario Works Recipients

2,375 2,477 2,683 3,126 3,445 3,386

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent Ontario Works, 2011

Table 11: Average Caseload Numbers for ODSP, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2011

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 (YTD)

ODSP Participants 2,315 2,421 263 3,032 3,353 3,323

Source: Ministry of Community Social Services, 2011

By comparison, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent has a greater proportion of its residents receiving OW and ODSP when compared to other areas in Southwestern Ontario.

31


Figure 26: Proportion of Population Receiving OW and ODSP, South West Region, 2011

Staff at Ontario Works indicate that the increase in caseload is largely a result of the recent economic downturn. Many individuals and families who were eligible for employment insurance have seen this run out and are now in need of Ontario Works. In addition, numbers continue to increase as individuals and families who may have been laid-off two years ago are now running out of savings and are in need of social assistance. Staff also indicate that they have seen a greater increase in the number of single persons in need of assistance where families and sole support parents have not seen as great an increase. Part of this is due to the changes in support for children which is now taken out of Ontario Works and provided directly to families through the Ontario Child Support Benefits.

1.7

%

5.8

%

2.7

%

1.5

%

3.8

%

5.2

%

2.9

% 3.8

%

1.5

%

5.0

%

2.8

%

4.9

%

4.0

%

3.3

%

3.2

% 3.9

%

3.3

% 3.8

%

2.5

%

3.6

%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

7.0%P

erc

en

t of

Pop

ula

tion

South West Region

Percent of Population receiving OW Percent of Population receiving ODSP

Source: Municipality ofChatham-Kent, Ontario Works Division, 2011

32


Figure 27: Chatham-Kent Ontario Works Caseload Composition, 2008-2011

2.4.5 Trends in Wage Rates

The following Figure compares average wage rates by occupation for 2004 and 2010. These rates are based on Human Resources Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) employment reports for the Windsor Management Area (including Essex County and the Municipality of Chatham-Kent).

3.6

%

4.1

%

4.4

%

5%8

.4%

8.5

%

8.7

%

9%

48.5

%

50.4

%

54.0

%

56%

39.5

%

37.0

%

32.9

%

31%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

2008 Average 2009 Average 2010 Average 2011 Average

Pe

rce

nt

of

Pop

ula

tion

Couple Couple with Dependents Single Sole Support

Source: Municipalityof Chatham-Kent, Ontario Works Division, 2011

33


Table 12: Average Wage Rates by Occupation, Windsor-Sarnia Area4, 2004 and 2010 Wages

Occupational Title

2004 Average

Wage $/hr

2010 Average

Wage $/hr

% Increase in Wage Rates

Registered Nurse $26.55 $33.34 25.6%

Elementary School and Kindergarten Teachers $24.70 $31.17 26.2%

Construction Millwrights and Industrial Mechanics (Except Textile) $26.20 $29.62 13.1%

Electricians (Except Industrial and Power System) $22.40 $29.51 31.7%

Carpenters $21.50 $26.05 21.2%

Elementary and Secondary School Teacher Assistants $18.55 $22.20 19.7%

Community and Social Service Workers $19.85 $22.04 11.0%

Welders and Related Machine Operators $17.20 $21.74 26.4%

Secretaries (Except Legal and Medical) $17.45 $20.17 15.6%

Metalworking Machine Operators $16.85 $19.66 16.7%

Machinists and Machining and Tooling Inspectors $19.05 $19.04 -0.1%

Construction Trades Helpers and Labourers $17.00 $18.69 9.9%

Machining Tool Operators $16.90 $18.68 10.5%

Truck Drivers $16.60 $18.19 9.6%

Automotive Service Technicians, Truck Mechanics and Mechanical Repairers

$15.55 $17.66 13.6%

Retail Trade Managers $13.75 $16.62 20.9%

General Office Clerks $14.35 $16.12 12.3%

Early Childhood Educators and Assistants $14.95 $15.75 5.4%

Plastics Processing Machine Operators $13.15 $15.38 17.0%

Material Handlers $12.95 $15.36 18.6%

Delivery and Courier Service Drivers $12.60 $14.39 14.2%

Other Labourers in Processing, Manufacturing and Utilities $13.55 $14.14 4.4%

Receptionists and Switchboard Operators $12.50 $13.79 10.3%

Customer Service, Information and Related Clerks $11.10 $13.75 23.9%

Cashiers $9.70 $13.48 39.0%

Cooks $10.10 $13.45 33.2%

Retail Salespersons and Sales Clerks $10.60 $13.21 24.6%

Harvesting Labourers $9.60 $13.04 35.8%

Food and Beverage Servers $8.40 $12.28 46.2%

Food Counter Attendants, Kitchen Helpers and Related Occupations $9.35 $12.26 31.1%

Landscaping and Grounds Maintenance Labourers $11.35 $12.18 7.3%

Source: HRSDC, Windsor-Sarnia Area Wage Report, 2011 Note: Windsor-Sarnia Area Includes Essex County and Chatham-Kent

4 Include Municipality of Chatham-Kent.

34


2.4.6 Incidence of Low Income

As identified in the 2006 Housing Study, the incidence of low income as reported by Statistics Canada is an important indicator of housing affordability. Statistics Canada uses “low income cut-offs” (LICO) to identify the incidence of low-income families and singles (i.e. families and singles living below the poverty line) within a community. Statistics Canada defines low income cut-off as:

“Income levels at which families or unattached individuals spend 20% more than average on food, shelter and clothing”.

Statistics Canada provides a low-income cut-off by community size and by the number of persons per household. For a community with a population between 100,000 to 499,999 the low income cut-offs (before tax) in 2005 are defined as follows: one-person is $17,906, two-person is $22,290, three-person is $27,403, four-person is $33,272, five person is $37,735, six person is $42,561, and seven or more person households is $47,384.

The incidence of low income in Chatham-Kent was 11.9% in 2005; a decline of 1.3% from 2000. The incidence of low income is slightly below the provincial average of 14.7%. The incidence of low income for both families and singles has declined by 0.5% and 4.2% respectively between 2000 and 2005.

The highest rates of low income are found in Chatham (15.6%), Dresden (15.9%), and Wallaceburg (14.8%).

35


Table 13: Incidence of Low Income, by Community, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006

Community Total

Families

Low Income Families

% Total Single

Individuals

Low Income Single

Individuals

%

Total Population

in Households

Total Low Income

Population %

Blenheim 1,334 124 9.3% 554 102 18.5% 4,505 482 10.7%

Chatham 12,556 1,620 12.9% 6,347 1,764 27.8% 43,155 6,732 15.6%

Dresden 701 87 12.4% 328 81 24.6% 2,424 385 15.9%

Ridgetown 920 59 6.4% 482 105 21.7% 3,157 272 8.6%

Tilbury 1,363 94 6.9% 577 108 18.8% 4,743 417 8.8%

Wallaceburg 3,080 376 12.2% 1,395 431 30.9% 10,498 1,554 14.8%

Wheatley 844 40 4.7% 285 56 19.6% 3,031 288 9.5%

Bothwell 264 12 4.5% 137 24 17.5% 967 87 9.0%

Charing Cross 137 11 8.0% 35 12 34.6% 425 41 9.7%

Merlin 231 0 0.0% 58 8 13.6% 752 0 0.0%

Mitchell's Bay 92 0 0.0% 40 0 0.0% 281 0 0.0%

Pain Court 156 14 9.1% 49 9 18.1% 525 48 9.1%

Thamesville 266 10 3.8% 119 24 20.4% 910 39 4.3%

Chatham-Kent 31,130 2,957 9.5% 13,320 3,836 28.8% 105,945 12,607 11.9%

Ontario 3,335,250 390,224 11.7% 1,432,705 488,552 34.1% 11,926,140 1,753,143 14.7%


2.5 Summary of Demographic Profile

Population Increases Following a Decline As reported in the 2006 Housing Study, the population of the Municipality declined between the 1996 and 2001 Census periods. The 2006 Census shows a 0.8% increase; reaching a population of 108,177. By community, Pain Court, Merlin, Wheatley, Bothwell and Chatham showed the greatest increase in population. Mitchell‟s Bay had the greatest proportional decline in population at 15.9%. Forecasts anticipate the population of Chatham-Kent will grow steadily over the next twenty years reaching 118,100 by 2031; an overall increase of 4.6% from 2006. Growth in Seniors Population Anticipated to Continue The population over the age of 55 years is expected to reach 42,662 by 2031; representing 36% of the total population. The population over the age of 75 years is expected to represent 12.5% of the population by 2031. A range of housing options and support services will be needed to accommodate the senior population in Chatham-Kent over the next twenty years. Household Composition Continues to Diversify The number of one and two-person households reached 63.3% of all households in 2005. Household type also shows signs of diversification as the number of non-family households increased to almost thirty percent in 2005.

36


Unemployment Rate Higher than Average in Area Recent unemployment figures, provided by Chatham-Kent Economic Development, show that unemployment rates peaked in October of 2009 at 15.2%, and are at 11.5% as of April 2011. Data for the Windsor Sarnia5 area show unemployment rates at 14.9% in June of 2011 and 12.9% as of July 2011. This is higher than the provincial unemployment rate of about 7.7% (June 2011). The increase in the unemployment rate is largely due to high turnover in the automotive manufacturing sector. Much of this sector was dependant on the US auto industry, and Chatham-Kent was hit hard with supply chain issues. While there has been some turnover in employment, the new jobs created tend to be in the service industry which may not pay as much as manufacturing jobs. Average and Median Household Income Remains below Provincial Average While showing increases in income over the past two Census periods, the average income in Chatham-Kent ($62,248) remained below the provincial average ($77,967) in 2005. Rates of increase are also not keeping up with provincial averages (although are increasing at a greater rate when compared to Canada as a whole). From 2000 to 2005 the median household income for the province increased by 12.7% compared to 9.8% for the Municipality. One-fifth of Households earned Less than $25,000 in 2005 Based on income distribution data, in 2005, twenty percent of households were earning less than $24,377 in 2005. Fifty percent of households were earning less than $51,082. Some Population Groups Experiencing Great Affordability Challenges Single persons, youth, lone-parent families, and Aboriginal households all had a greater than average proportion of households in the lower income deciles (i.e. first to third decile) earning less than $33,134 in 2005. Number of Households in Receipt of Social Assistance has Increased The average caseload Employment and Social Assistance in 2010 reached a high of 3,445; an increase of over 1,000 cases from 2006. Current, figures suggest an even higher average caseload for 2011. Ontario Disability Support Program participants have also steadily increased from 2006. In 2010, the average caseload was 3,353; an increase of about 1,000 participants. Similar to Social Assistance trends, ODSP figures show an increase again for this current year. Employment and Social Services staff indicate that the increase in caseload is largely a result of the recent economic downturn. Many individuals and families who were eligible for employment insurance have seen this run out and are now in need of social assistance. In addition, numbers continue to increase as individuals and

5 Windsor Sarnia area includes Municipality of Chatham-Kent.

37


families who may have been laid-off two years ago are now running out of savings and are now in need of social assistance.

38


3.0 Existing Housing Supply

The following sections provide an overview of the current housing supply as well as changes in this supply over time. 3.1 Trends in Dwelling Types

Single detached dwellings have remained the predominant housing form in the Municipality with only a slight decline from 2001 of 0.4%. The proportion of apartments has increased by 2% while the proportion of row houses has declined by 0.9%. The proportion of semi-detached dwellings remained relatively the same with a slight increase of 0.4%.

Figure 28: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006

Overall, the number of dwellings increased by about 1,600 from 2001 to 2006. Most of this increase was in single detached dwellings (1,020); there was also an increase in semis (200). Apartments also experienced an increase (1,105 in total units); most of these were in apartments with less than five storeys (865 units). There was a decline of about 335 row houses. The cause of these changes is likely in large part due to changes in Statistics Canada enumeration process which have impacted the historical comparability of the structural type of dwelling variable. In general these changes have resulted in decreases in the share of single detached dwellings and increases in the share of apartments. Therefore it is possible that units counted as row houses in the 2001 Census were counted as apartments with fewer than five storeys in the 2006 Census. Municipal Staff have indicated that they are not aware of any large demolitions or conversion projects that may have resulted in these changes. Further, in looking at building permit data (Section 3.4.3 below), there were virtually no building permits issued over the past nine years for apartments.

Single Detached,

76.0%

Semi-Detached,

2.9%

Row House, 3.4%

Apartment, 17.2%

Other , 0.6%

2006


Single Detached,

76.4%

Semi-Detached,

2.5%

Row House, 4.3%

Apartment, 15.2%

Other, 1.5%

2001


39


Figure 29: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent (1991-2006)

By community, more urban areas such as Chatham and Wallaceburg have a greater mix of housing types while more rural areas have a greater proportion of single-detached dwellings. These trends are consistent with findings from the 2006 Housing Study. Also of note is that areas with higher average household incomes such as Merlin and Wheatley also show greater proportion of single-detached dwellings.

Figure 30: Percentage of Occupied Private Dwellings by Dwelling Type and by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2006

29,7

25

1,1

90

1,2

75

6,8

35

840

31,4

00

1,0

60

1,5

05

6,7

95

360

32

,07

0

1,0

65

1,8

15 6

,38

0

62

5

33

,09

0

1,2

65

1,4

80

7,4

85

24

0

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

Single Detached Semi-Detached Row House Apartment Other

Nu

mb

er

of

Dw

ell

ings

1991 1996 2001 2006


76.9

%

76.0

%

84.1

%

76.0

%

77.1

%

75.7

%

86.4

%

87.9

%

77.2

%

91.4

%

97.5

%

90.1

%

15.1

%

17.2

%

14.0

%

14.0

%

13.4

%

15.5

%

8.3

%

6.3

%

5.0

%

8.6

%

0.0

%

5.4

%

1.8

%

2.9

%

0.5

%

3.0

%

2.3

%

3.6

%

0.6

%

1.3

%

3.0

%

0.0

%

0.0

%

0.0

%

5.7

%

3.4

%

1.4

%

7.0

%

7.0

%

4.6

%

4.3

%

4.5

%

0.0

%

0.0

%

2.5

%

3.0

%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

% o

f O

ccu

pie

d P

rivate

Dw

ell

ings

Single-detached house Apartments Semi-detached house Row house

Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Census of Canada

40


3.2 Trends in Tenure

The rate of home ownership within the Municipality has continued to increase reaching 73% in 2006. Figure 31: Rate of Home ownership in Chatham-Kent, 1991-2006

Chatham-Kent continues to have a slightly lower home ownership rate when compared to other local areas. The home ownership rate for the Municipality, however, is slightly higher compared to the overall home ownership rate for Ontario (71.0%).

Figure 32: Comparing Home Ownership Rates with Other Municipalities, 2006

In general, most areas experienced slight increases in their home ownership rates. Chatham continues to have the lowest rate of home ownership at 66.0%; typical of more urban areas where there are more housing and tenure choices.

69.0%

70.2%

72.2%

73.0%

66%

67%

68%

69%

70%

71%

72%

73%

74%

1991 1996 2001 2006

Ow

ne

rsh

ip R

ate

Year


73.0%

75.9%

82.7%

75.5%

68.0%

70.0%

72.0%

74.0%

76.0%

78.0%

80.0%

82.0%

84.0%

Chatham-Kent Lambton County

Bruce County Windsor-Essex

Ow

ne

rsh

ip R

ate

Municipality


41


Figure 33: Rate Home Ownership by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2006

In general, compared to the previous Housing Study, home ownership rates increased for persons over the age of 45 years while „younger‟ households experienced a decline in home ownership. The number of homeowners between the ages of 55 and 64 years increased by about 3.2% while the number of homeowners under the age of 34 declined by about 4%. This is likely a result of the decrease in population experienced in the under 35 age cohorts between the two Census periods.

Figure 34: Age of Homeowners in Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006

74.2

%

66.0

%

82.8

%

74.0

% 86.3

%

84.6

%

84.3

%

76.1

%

79.3

%

86.6

%

79.4

%

81.0

%

80.8

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Ow

ne

rsh

ip R

ate

Community


1.0

%

10.9

%

22.5

%

23.1

%

15.9

%

14.0

%

12.6

%

1.2

%

9.7

%

19

.5%

23

.4%

19

.1%

14

.3%

12

.7%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

15 to 24 Years

25 to 34 Years

35 to 44 Years

45 to 54 Years

55 to 64 Years

65 to 74 Years

75 and Over

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l O

wn

ers

hip

Dw

ell

ings

Age Groups

2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulation, 1996, 2001, and 2006

42


Figure 35: Age of Renters in Chatham-Kent, 2001 and 2006

The following Figure further illustrates the trends in tenure by age. As shown, as age increases so does the proportion of homeowners until about the age of 75 when there is an increase in the proportion of renters.

Figure 36: Age of Renters and Homeowners in Chatham-Kent, 2006

9.5

%

22.7

%

22.9

%

14.5

%

9.6

%

9.3

%

11.5

%

10

.0%

19

.8%

19

.4%

18

.8%

12

.6%

8.8

% 10

.6%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

15 to 24 Years 25 to 34 Years 35 to 44 Years 45 to 54 Years 55 to 64 Years 65 to 74 Years 75 and Over

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l R

en

tal

Dw

ell

ings

2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 2001 and 2006

57.2%

69.9%

78.9%81.4% 83.7% 84.4%

80.9%

42.8%

30.1%

18.6% 16.3% 15.6%19.1%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

15-25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75+

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Age Groups

Owners Renters


43


3.3 Condition of Housing Stock

The 2006 Housing Study found that the housing stock in Chatham-Kent was older than the provincial average. This continues to be the case with just 2.7% of the housing stock in Chatham-Kent being built between 2001 and 2006 compared with 9.2% for the Province. Overall, over three-quarters (77.2%) of the housing stock in Chatham-Kent was built prior to the 1980s. An aging housing stock can result in high maintenance and operating costs due to the lack of energy efficient designs and deterioration of a unit. During these times of increasing utility costs it is likely that individuals in older dwellings are facing high costs for maintenance and energy; this can create affordability challenges especially for individuals and families on fixed incomes. Energy funding programs (i.e. energy banks, energy home assistance program, and other incentive programs) are very important in assisting households to respond to these increases and help maintain their homes.

Figure 37: Age of Total Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006

By tenure, there has been a greater proportion of ownership units built more recently (i.e. since the 1990s) with 14.2% of the ownership stock being built between 1991 and 2006 compared to 7.2% of the rental housing stock being built during that time. Overall, almost eighty percent of the rental housing stock in Chatham-Kent was built prior to the 1980s. This aging of the rental housing stock can result in high maintenance and operating costs (including increased energy costs due to inefficient design). Such increases in costs can result in higher rents and increase affordability challenges for tenants. Although not as high, the ownership stock in Chatham-Kent is also aging with about three quarters of the stock being built prior to 1980 including almost half (46.8%)

24.8

%

20.0

%

13.9

%

18.5

%

5.5

%

5.3

%

4.2

%

5.1

%

2.7

%

14.9

%

15.2

%

14.1

% 17.1

%

7.4

%

9.0

%

6.4

%

6.9

% 9.2

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

1945 or before

1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2006

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l H

ou

seh

old

s

Period of Construction



44


having been built prior to 1960. Again, this can result in increased costs for homeowners and can create affordability challenges particularly for persons and families on fixed incomes.

Figure 38: Age of Rental Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent Ontario, 2006

Figure 39: Age of Ownership Housing Stock, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2006

As part of the Census, households are asked to self-report on the condition of their dwelling. These results are not based on detailed inspections of units, rather on households‟ perception of the condition of their housing. Overall, 7.5% of residents in Chatham-Kent in 2006 felt that their home was in need of major repairs. This finding is consistent with the 2001 Census figure of 7.4%. These findings are also consistent with other local areas including Bruce County (7.9%), Windsor/Essex (6.4%) and Lambton County (8.8%).

22.5

%

16.5

%

17.1

%

23.1

%

7.6

%

6.0

%

3.8

%

2.4

%

1.0

%

14.9

%

16.5

%

21.1

%

20.7

%

8.5

%

6.7

%

5.5

%

2.8

%

3.4

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

1945 or before

1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2006

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l R

en

ted

Hou

seh

old

s




25.5

%

21.3

%

12.7

% 16.8

%

4.7

%

5.1

%

4.4

%

6.1

%

3.4

%

14.9

%

14.7

%

11.2

%

15.6

%

7.0

% 9.9

%

6.7

% 8.5

% 11.5

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

1945 or before

1946-1960 1961-1970 1971-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2006

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l O

wn

ed

Hou

seh

old

s




45


Figure 40: Comparison of the Condition of Dwellings in other Municipalities, 2006

3.4 Recent Housing Supply Activity

In addition to Statistics Canada data, it is important to look at recent development activity within the Municipality. Such information is largely based on Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) data as well as readily available data from the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. The following sections describe recent housing supply activity. 3.4.1 Housing Starts and Completions

From 2005 to 2010 there were a total of 915 housing starts. Housing starts peaked in 2006 at 217 followed by a decline due to the economic downturn. Housing starts in 2010 have begun to increase with 103 starts last year. The vast majority of these new units were in the form of single detached dwellings (81.5% of starts between 2005 and 2010). There have been virtually no apartment starts over the past ten years with modest starts seen in row and semi-detached dwellings.

71.6

%

22.0

%

6.4

%

65.0

%

26.2

%

8.8

%

67.2

%

25.4

%

7.5

%

62.8

%

29.4

%

7.9

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Regular Maintenance Minor Repairs Major Repairs

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l O

ccu

pie

d

Dw

ell

ings

Condition of Dwelling

Windsor-Essex Lambton County Chatham-Kent Bruce County


46


Figure 41: Housing Starts, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010

Housing completions illustrate a similar trend with a decline in completions starting in 2007 following the peak of housing starts in 2006. Overall, there were 886 completions from 2005 to 2010 with a total of 113 in 2010.

Figure 42: Housing Completions, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2005

0

50

100

150

200

250

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Hosu

ing S

tart

s

Year

Single Detached Semi Detached Row Housing Apartments Total

Source: CMHC Starts and Completions Survey, 1998-2010

0

50

100

150

200

250

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Hou

sin

g C

om

ple

tion

s

Year

Single Detached Semi Detached Row Housing Apartments Total


47


3.4.2 Demolitions and Conversions

Given the lack of new rental housing being built in the Municipality, there is a strong need to preserve the existing stock and monitor the demolition and conversion of rental housing, in particular affordable rental housing. Preserving the stock of affordable rental housing is important to ensuring a diverse and adequate supply of housing for residents. In the 2006 Housing Study it was reported that Municipal staff do not see conversions and demolitions as a concern for their area. Residential demolitions totalled 93 from 2006 to 2010 (as referenced in Population Growth Forecast 2011-2031). Staff maintain that demolitions and conversions are not an issue for the area with a limited number occurring. In some cases there have been conversions of an old apartment to condominium but this is rare. 3.4.3 Summary of Building Permits Issued

Building permits in Chatham-Kent have seen a decline since 2005. However, they have shown an increase since 2008 demonstrating some recovery from the recent economic downturn. In 2010 there were 123 building permits issues with almost half located in Chatham. Thirty-nine were located in the rural areas. Rural areas include all areas outside the community settlement areas and represent a large land area. Staff at the Municipality noted that there are some developments occurring in proximity to Chatham as well as along water course areas which are attracting retirement and recreation developments. They are currently looking more closely at these „rural areas of interest‟.

48


Table 14: Residential Building Permits Issued by Ward, Chatham-Kent, 2002-2010

Community 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Blenheim 11 3 2 2 5 6 4 2 3

Chatham 72 64 71 98 93 89 73 41 53

Dresden 1 0 4 7 5 8 3 3 7

Ridgetown 3 2 8 12 1 3 5 1 4

Tilbury 15 8 27 29 9 5 3 3 5

Wallaceburg 4 5 3 2 1 6 8 0 8

Wheatley 1 2 1 8 3 1 2 3 1

Bothwell 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1

Charing Cross 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0

Merlin 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0

Mitchell's Bay 4 2 1 2 3 0 2 2 2

Pain Court 0 0 2 0 2 1 1 0 0

Thamesville 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Remaining Rural 61 84 68 81 85 80 55 41 39

Total 173 172 187 242 209 203 158 96 123

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Building, Enforcement & Licensing Services, 2011

As indicated by the CMHC housing starts and completions data, the vast majority of permits issued were for singles and semis and no building permits were issued for apartment buildings. Some building permits were issued for townhouses in the early 2000‟s with only two in 2010 and just one in each of the two years prior. In addition to the permits listed below, two multi-residential apartment permits were issued over this time period; one for Remmcor Ltd. for the development of 27 units (24 AHP and 3 market) at Riverview Terrace, and the second for AUBI Design Build Construction for the development of 14 units (12 AHP and 2 market) at Adelaide Manor. Adelaide Manor was a conversion of a commercial building to residential while Riverview Terrace was a new build.

Table 15: Building Permits Issued by Housing Type, Chatham-Kent, 2002-2010

Housing Type 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Singles and Semis 166 169 180 227 204 203 157 95 121

Townhouses 7 3 7 15 5 0 1 1 2

Apartments 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 173 172 187 242 209 203 158 96 123

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Building, Enforcement & Licensing Services, 2011

49


3.4.4 Summary of Recent Activity to Projections

Household projections indicate an increase of 4,565 new units from 2006 to 2031. Of these anticipated new units 3,390 or 74% will be low density (136 units/year), 730 or 16% will be medium density (29 units/year), and 445 or 10% will be high density (18 units/year). This represents an average annual increase of approximately 183 new units. Building permits over the last nine years (2002-2010) have averaged at 174 units per year. Over the past five years (2005-2010) housing starts for single-detached dwellings have averaged about 80% of all starts. In addition, high density developments (i.e. apartments) have not seen any building permit activity over the past nine years. Further diversification in development will be required to meet the projections by dwelling type. The aging of the population and diversification of household type and size (i.e. increasing number of smaller households) support the expansion of medium and higher denisty housing options to meet the current and future demand of Chatham-Kent residents. 3.4.5 Inventory of Designated Lands for Residential Development

Based on registered and draft approved plans, there is the potential for an additional 4,602 residential units within the Municipality. Approximately three quarters (78.4%) of these units are for single detached dwellings, about 15% are for townhouses, and about 7% are for apartment units (all draft plans). By area, seventy-five percent (or 3,427 units) of registered and draft approved plans are in Chatham. Other areas such as Tilbury (410 units), Wheatley (296 units), and Blenheim (243 units) are showing signs of future growth. Overall, these four communities account for ninety percent of the anticipated future residential growth. Based on the draft approved and registered plans to the housing projections, there is sufficient land availability to support projected housing activity. The planned mix of units is generally in keeping with the housing projections; although as indicted above, further diversification should be encouraged to fully support changing trends in population, household and income characteristics. Such trends include an aging population, increasing number of one-two person households, diversification of household type (i.e. lone parent families), as well as affordability challenges for many residents (Section 9.0).

50


Table 16: Residential Development Potential by Community, Chatham-Kent, As of May 2011

Registered/Reference Plans

Community Singles

and Semis

Townhouses Apartments Total Units

Blenheim 38 17 - 55

Chatham 130 8 - 138

Dresden 6 - - 6

Ridgetown 3 3 - 6

Tilbury 69 - - 69

Wallaceburg 60 - - 60

Wheatley 47 16 - 63

Bothwell - - - -

Charing Cross - - - -

Merlin - - - -

Mitchell's Bay 6 - - 6

Pain Court - - - -

Thamesville - - - -

Total 359 44 0 403

Draft Plans

Blenheim 176 12 - 188

Chatham 2,647 478 164 3,289

Dresden 28 16 - 44

Ridgetown - 60 - 60

Tilbury 267 12 62 341

Wallaceburg 16 - - 16

Wheatley 113 60 60 233

Bothwell - - - -

Charing Cross - - - -

Merlin - - - -

Mitchell's Bay - - 28 28

Pain Court - - - -

Thamesville - - - -

Total 3,247 638 314 4,199

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Planning Services, 2011

51


3.5 Summary of Existing Housing Stock

Single Detached Dwellings Continue to Dominate Market Based on the recent (2006) Census, single detached dwellings continue to comprise about three quarters of the total housing stock. While there have been some recent development plans for semis and row houses and even apartments (in Chatham (164 units), in Tilbury (62), in Wheatley (60) and in Mitchell‟s Bay (28)), the vast majority of recent development and development applications are for single detached dwellings. Ownership Rates Continue to Climb The home ownership rate in Chatham-Kent reached 73% based on the 2006 Census; higher than the previous three Census periods (1991, 1996, and 2000). Housing Stock is Aging Almost eighty percent of the rental housing stock in Chatham-Kent was built prior to 1980 including about 40% which was built prior to the 1960s. While there has been a greater proportion of ownership housing built in the past twenty years compared to rental housing, almost half (46.9%) of the ownership stock was built prior to the 1960s. In addition, new supply (i.e. housing built between 2001 and 2006) is not keeping up with provincial averages. Further, there a number of households (7.5%) who are reporting their homes are in need of major repairs. This is greater for renter households at 10.0% compared with owner households (6.6%). The provincial average was 6.6% in 2006. Further Diversification of Stock is Required to Meet Projections and Need By density, projections indicate that 74% of new units will be low density, however housing starts over the past five years (2005-2010) for single-detached dwellings have averaged about 80% of all starts. Further, given the aging of the population and diversification of household type and size (i.e. increasing number of smaller households), further expansion of medium and higher denisty housing options should be encouraged to meet the current and future demand of Chatham-Kent residents.

52


4.0 Home Ownership Market

4.1 Overview

For many individuals and families, home ownership is the ideal housing form. It can provide security of tenure, a positive financial investment, and ideally a safe place to call home. The following sections describe the home ownership market in Chatham-Kent. 4.2 Trends in Ownership Tenure

Overall, the number of owned dwellings in Chatham-Kent increased by 1,580 units from 2001 to 2006. Approximately half of these are located in Chatham.

Table 17: Distribution of Ownership Dwellings by Community in Chatham-Kent, 2006

Community # Owned % Distribution by

Community Total Housing Stock

Blenheim 1,387 4.4% 1,870

Chatham 12,167 38.3% 19,635

Dresden 827 2.6% 1,010

Ridgetown 1,015 3.2% 1,365

Tilbury 1,580 5.0% 1,830

Wallaceburg 660 2.1% 4,485

Wheatley 916 2.9% 1,110

Bothwell 299 0.9% 395

Charing Cross 134 0.4% 205

Merlin 246 0.8% 300

Mitchell's Bay 104 0.3% 155

Pain Court 162 0.5% 205

Thamesville 315 1.0% 385

Chatham-Kent 31,780 100.0% 43,670


With the exception of movable dwellings, all dwelling types experienced an increase in ownership. The number of owned semi-detached dwellings, for example, increased by about 13% and the number of owned row houses more than doubled. By comparison, however, the change in overall stock actually shows a decline of row houses and only a small increase in semis (0.4%), and apartments (2.0%).

These trends imply that these housing forms which may have been used as rental properties in the past are being reverted (or converted) to ownership. Given the economic downturn in the area, landlords may have been prompted to sell their

53


properties therefore removing them from the rental market. As mentioned, conversions are not seen as an issue for the Municipality.

Figure 43: Proportion of Owned Dwellings (as a Proportion of Total Dwellings) by Dwelling Type,

Chatham-Kent, 1996, 2001, and 2006

4.3 Trends in House Prices

The following section provides an overview of sales prices in Chatham-Kent based on data gathered through the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC). Based on this data, the average price for a single detached dwelling in Chatham-Kent as of August 30, 2011 was $149,854. Semi-detached and town houses were in a similar range although slightly higher at $153,766 and $165,400 respectively. While such housing types are typically smaller in size the higher price is likely a reflection of a newer stock. There are also fewer sales in semis and town houses, allowing for higher priced units to push the average upwards.

Table 18: MPAC Sales by Dwelling Type, 2006-2011

Dwelling Type

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 As of Aug 30,2011

Units Sold

Average Price

Units Sold

Average Price

Units Sold

Average Price

Units Sold

Average Price

Units Sold

Average Price

Units Sold

Average Price

Single-Detached House

1,469 $132,811 1,530 $138,087 1,294 $140,512 1,036 $142,802 1,152 $144,998 645 $149,854

Semi-Detached House

69 $109,028 83 $121,402 46 $112,701 38 $103,911 53 $122,616 26 $153,766

Row/Town House 42 $186,751 35 $178,736 26 $226,661 10 $193,890 24 $181,059 20 $165,400

Apartment/Condo 164 $90,901 114 $94,139 115 $110,781 77 $98,634 80 $109,384 51 $122,688

Total 1,744 1,762 1,481 1,161 1,309 742

Source: Chatham-Kent MPAC Sales Data, 2005-2011

87.7

%

42.7

%

7.0

%

23.6

%

3.0

%

4.2

%

32.0

%

79.6

%88.7

%

39.3

%

12.5

%

28.3

%

3.3

%

6.9

%

21.6

%

93.3

%

89.3

%

52.9

%

26.5

%

37.1

%

3.2

%

12.5

%

37.5

%

82.6

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Single-detached house

Semi-detached house

Row house Apartment, detached

duplex

Apartment, 5+ storeys

Apartment, less than five storeys

Other single-attached house

Movable dwelling

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l

Dwelling Type

1996 2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 1996, 2001, 2006

54


Figure 44: Average Price of MPAC Sales by Dwelling Type, 2006-2011

The following data, illustrates the number of house sales, by type, that would be affordable at each household income decile. This data is shown for 2005, 2010 and as of August 30, 2011. As shown, there were sales at affordable prices for all household deciles. Using the average price of about $150,000 for a single detached dwelling, this would be affordable to households in the fourth income decile. In general, most sales for single detached dwellings were affordable to households within the first six deciles. In 2011, almost forty-five percent of sales were affordable to households earning between $107,083 and $173,765; representing just twenty percent of households. Households in the top three deciles (representing thirty percent of households) had just under two percent of the sales within their affordable price range. Trends for semis/rows are similar with very few sales within the higher income decile affordability levels. In 2011, for example, the vast majority (78.2%) of sales were within the first five income decile affordability levels. Most sales in the condominium market are affordable to households in the second income decile; 100% in 2005, 52.2% in 2010, and 75% in 2011).

$132,811$138,087 $140,512 $142,802 $144,998

$149,854

$109,028

$121,402

$112,701$103,911

$122,616

$153,766

$186,751$178,736

$226,661

$193,890

$181,059

$165,400

$90,901 $94,139

$110,781

$98,634

$109,384

$122,688

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 As of Aug 30,2011

Ave

rage

Pri

ce

Year

Single-Detached House Semi-Detached House Row/Town House Apartment/Condo


55


Table 19: MPAC Sales by Price Range, 2005-2011

Sales by Price Range, 2005

HH Income Decile House Price Range Single Detached Semi/Row Condo

# % # % # %

1st $15,845 Under $58,741 129 8.7% 10 9.8% 0 0.0%

2nd $24,377 $58,741-$90,371 271 18.2% 31 30.4% 1 100.0%

3rd $33,135 $90,371-$122,839 332 22.3% 19 18.6% 0 0.0%

4th $41,854 $122,839-$155,162 361 24.2% 19 18.6% 0 0.0%

5th $51,083 $155,162-$189,376 204 13.7% 11 10.8% 0 0.0%

6th $62,404 $189,376-$231,345 97 6.5% 9 8.8% 0 0.0%

7th $75,259 $231,345-$279,002 59 4.0% 3 2.9% 0 0.0%

8th $91,704 $279,002-$339,967 26 1.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

9th $116,724 $339,967-$432,721 10 0.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

$432,721 and over 2 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total 1,491 100.0% 102 100.0% 1 100.0%

Sales by Price Range, 2010


# % # % # %

1st $18,736 Under $69,458 140 12.2% 9 11.7% 7 30.4%

2nd $28,080 $69,458-$104,095 191 16.6% 19 24.7% 12 52.2%

3rd $36,694 $104,095-$136,033 271 23.5% 13 16.9% 2 8.7%

4th $45,996 $136,033-$170,517 237 20.6% 10 13.0% 1 4.3%

5th $56,097 $170,517-$207,964 130 11.3% 11 14.3% 1 4.3%

6th $68,452 $207,964-$253,767 95 8.2% 14 18.2% 0 0.0%

7th $94,675 $253,767-$350,981 63 5.5% 1 1.3% 0 0.0%

8th $104,987 $350,981-$389,210 8 0.7% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

9th $120,850 $389,210-$448,017 13 1.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

$448,017 and over 4 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total 1,152 100.0% 77 100.0% 23 100.0%

56


Sales by Price Range, as of August 30,2011


# % # % # %

1st $19,375 Under $71,827 86 13.3% 8 17.4% 1 6.3%

2nd $28,885 $71,827-$107,083 92 14.3% 9 19.6% 12 75.0%

3rd $37,450 $107,083-$138,835 137 21.2% 3 6.5% 0 0.0%

4th $46,872 $138,835-$173,765 143 22.2% 6 13.0% 3 18.8%

5th $57,158 $173,765-$211,897 85 13.2% 10 21.7% 0 0.0%

6th $69,730 $211,897-$258,504 51 7.9% 6 13.0% 0 0.0%

7th $99,122 $258,504-$367,467 40 6.2% 4 8.7% 0 0.0%

8th $107,867 $367,467-$399,887 3 0.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

9th $121,693 $399,887-$451,143 5 0.8% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

$451,143 and over 3 0.5% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total 645 100.0% 46 100.0% 16 100.0%


4.4 Summary of Home Ownership Market

Ownership Increasing in Chatham-Kent The number of owned dwellings increased by 1,580 from 2001 to 2006; the total increase in all dwellings was 1,600. This signals that this increase in ownership is not solely based on new supply rather that some of the supply (i.e. semis, rows, apartments), are being reverted back or converted to ownership. Given the economic downturn, landlords may be prompted to sell thus removing their units from the rental market or given high vacancy rates decided to convert to condominiums. House Prices Continue to Rise Steadily House prices for single detached dwellings continue to increase steadily. As of August 2011 the average house price for a single detached dwelling was $149,845 compared to $132,811 in 2005; an increase of 12.8%. Data for semis and town houses show more fluctuations in the market as a result of a relatively small supply and newer units raising the average sales price. Using the average price of about $150,000 for a single detached dwelling, this would be affordable to households in the fourth income decile (i.e. earning more than $33,135).

57


5.0 Rental Housing Market

5.1 Overview

Home ownership is not a viable or preferable option for everyone; often the rental housing market can better meet the needs of individuals and families. For some, rental housing can be a more affordable housing option, for others it can provide smaller units with less maintenance and care required, and for others, who may be in transition, it can be a more short-term housing options. The following sections examine the current rental housing market in Chatham-Kent and comment on changes in the market over time. 5.2 Trends in Rental Tenure

The majority of the rental housing stock is found within the community of Chatham (53.4%) with the second highest proportion in Wallaceburg (10.5%). Overall there were 11,745 rental units within the Municipality in 2006; an increase of just 65 units from the 2001 Census. Given the number of building permits issued over this time period (no permits for apartments were issued and just 37 permits were issued for townhouses), it is likely that most of the addition to the rental housing stock was not through the development of purpose built apartment buildings but rather through secondary rental markets.

Table 20: Distribution of Rental Dwellings by Community in Chatham-Kent, 2006

Community #

Rented

% Distribution

by Community

Total Housing Stock

Blenheim 483 4.1% 1,870

Chatham 6,685 56.9% 19,635

Dresden 165 1.4% 1,010

Ridgetown 380 3.2% 1,365

Tilbury 250 2.1% 1,830

Wallaceburg 1,240 10.5% 4,485

Wheatley 180 1.5% 1,110

Bothwell 80 0.7% 395

Charing Cross 25 0.2% 205

Merlin 50 0.4% 300

Mitchell's Bay 30 0.3% 155

Pain Court 55 0.5% 205

Thamesville 75 0.6% 385

Chatham-Kent 11,755 100.0% 43,670

Source: Statistics Canada; Custom Tabulations, 2006

58


Consistent with the findings within the home ownership housing analysis, the proportion of rental dwellings as a proportion of total dwellings had declined for most housing types. In particular, the proportion of rented semis and row houses has declined since the previous Census period (2001).

Figure 45: Proportion of Rented Dwellings (as a Proportion of Total Dwellings) by Dwelling Type, Chatham-Kent, 1996, 2001, and 2006

5.2.1 Trends in Vacancy Rates

Vacancy rates in Chatham-Kent were around 7% for the Municipality in 2005, suggesting that there was an adequate supply of rental housing to meet demand. While fluctuating slightly over the years, as of 2010 the vacancy rate for the Municipality was at 7%. This again suggests an adequate supply of rental housing. Of note is that the vacancy rates for areas outside of Chatham and Wallaceburg have a lower than average vacancy rate at 4.9% suggesting a tighter rental market in the less urban communities.

12.3

%

57.3

%

93.3

%

75.9

%

97.3

%

95.8

%

72.0

%

20.4

%

11.3

%

60.7

%

87.5

%

71.7

% 96.7

%

93.1

%

75.7

%

6.7

%

10

.6%

47

.1%

73

.5%

63

.6% 9

6.8

%

87

.4%

62

.5%

17

.4%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Single-detached house

Semi-detached house

Row house Apartment, detached

duplex

Apartment, 5+ storeys

Apartment, less than five storeys

Other single-attached house

Movable dwelling

Pe

rce

nt

of

Tota

l

1996 2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 1996, 2001, and 2006

59


Figure 46: Private Rental Apartment Vacancy Rates, Chatham-Kent CA, 2001-2010

Vacancy rates for one-bedroom units is lower at 5.9% compared with two (7.8%) and three-bedroom units (6.8%).

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

18.0%

20.0%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Vacan

cy R

ate

Year

Chatham Wallaceburg Rest of Chatham-Kent Chatham-Kent CA Healthy Market

Source: CMHC Rental Market Reports, 1999-2010

60


Table 21: Rental Housing Vacancy Rates in Chatham-Kent, 2009-2010

Chatham Wallaceburg

Rest of Chatham-Kent

Chatham-Kent CA

2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010 2009 2010

Bachelor

Vacant Units ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

Universe 30 34 11 ** ** ** 44 41

Percent Vacant

** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1 Bedroom

Vacant Units 65 75 ** 0 29 13 118 88

Universe 1,208 1,183 135 85 237 236 1,581 1,504

Percent Vacant

5.4% 6.3% ** 0.0% 12.4% 5.7% 7.5% 5.9%

2 Bedroom

Vacant Units 93 141 ** 22 33 18 163 180

Universe 1,700 1,636 289 264 413 413 2402 2,313

Percent Vacant

5.4% 8.6% ** 8.3% 8.0% 4.3% 6.8% 7.8%

3+ Bedroom

Vacant Units 22 ** ** 4 7 4 29 45

Universe 506 554 29 43 61 69 597 666

Percent Vacant

4.3% ** ** 9.3% 11.9% 5.5% 4.9% 6.8%

Total

Vacant Units 182 254 ** 26 70 35 318 315

Universe 3,444 3,408 465 396 715 721 4,624 4,525

Percent Vacant

5.3% 7.5% ** 6.5% 9.7% 4.9% 6.9% 7.0%

Source: CMHC Rental Market Reports, 2009-2010 ** Data suppressed to protect confidentiality or data not statistically reliable.

The following figure illustrates the rent range of the vacant units in 2010 for Chatham-Kent only in buildings with three or more units. Based on this data, there is no way of knowing whether the available units are adequate or in good condition. In general, one-bedroom vacant units ranged from under $460/month up to $740/month. About forty percent of the one-bedroom vacant units fell within the rent range of $540 to $659 per month6.

6 Utilities such as heating, electricity and hot water may or may not be included in the rent.

61


Figure 47: Occupied and Vacant One-Bedroom Apartment Units in Chatham-Kent by Rent Range, 2010

Vacant two-bedroom units were also reported along a broad rent scale. In general, most (73.9%) of the vacancies for two-bedroom units fell within a rent range of $620 and up per month.

Figure 48: Occupied and Vacant Two-Bedroom Apartment Units by Rent Range, 2010

5.2.2 Trends in Average Market Rents

Looking at average market rents, the rents in Chatham-Kent have increased by approximately 10.3% from 2005 to 2010 (for all unit sizes)7. One-bedroom units in Chatham-Kent increased by about $50/month, two-bedroom increased by $60/month and three+ bedrooms increased by $90/month.

7 The overall average of 10.3% is consistent with the maximum allowed rent increase over this time period. Rent control guidelines averaged just under 2%/year from 2005-2010.

125

48

135

198

285

222172

129

26

19

7

9

15

15

9

513

1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Under $460 $460-$499 $500-$539 $540-$579 $580-$619 $620-$659 $660-$699 $700-$739 $740+

Nu

mb

er

of

Un

tis

Rent Range

Occupied Vacant

Source: CMHC, SpecialRequest

61 34152 146

211288

355

217

603

34

11 2011

32

31

38

38

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Under $460 $460-$499 $500-$539 $540-$579 $580-$619 $620-$659 $660-$699 $700-$739 $740+

Nu

mb

er

of

Un

its

Rent Range

Occupied Vacant

Source: CMHC, Special Request

62


Figure 49: Private Apartment Average Rents by Bedroom Type, Chatham-Kent CA, 1999-2010

Rents within Chatham showed higher increases to rent levels between 2005 and 2010 when compared to the Municipality as a whole. Wallaceburg on the other hand had lower increases in rent levels and even showed a decline in rent for two-bedroom and three+ bedrooms.

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Ave

rage

Re

nt

Year

Bachelor 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom +

Source: CMHC Rental Market Reports, 1999-2010

63


Table 22: Private Apartment Average Rents, 1999-2010, Chatham-Kent CA

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Average Annual

Increase

% Change 1999-2010

City of Chatham

Bachelor ** ** ** ** ** ** $452 $440 $425 $456 $452 $478 1.2% N/A

1 Bedroom $502 $503 $506 $519 $522 $532 $541 $544 $556 $575 $581 $598 1.6% 19.1%

2 Bedroom $593 $596 $606 $607 $616 $625 $627 $634 $658 $645 $667 $714 1.7% 20.4%

3 Bedroom + $611 $629 $611 $613 $622 $630 $602 $589 $675 $625 $603 $706 1.6% 15.5%

Wallaceburg

Bachelor ** ** ** ** ** ** $379 $395 $409 $425 $430 ** N/A N/A

1 Bedroom $419 $429 $441 ** $505 $532 $534 $530 $546 $554 $556 $579 4.4% 38.2%

2 Bedroom $545 $551 $565 $585 $610 $609 $622 $616 $621 $630 $613 $610 2.2% 11.9%

3 Bedroom + $599 ** ** ** ** $675 $656 $610 $639 $661 $565 $634 N/A 5.8%

Rest of Chatham-Kent

Bachelor N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A ** ** ** ** ** ** ** N/A N/A

1 Bedroom N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $510 $506 $508 $511 $518 $533 $533 0.7% N/A

2 Bedroom N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $611 $607 $598 $608 $608 $617 $618 0.2% N/A

3 Bedroom + N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A $578 $595 $628 $625 $615 $616 $635 1.6% N/A

Chatham-Kent CA

Bachelor $381 $391 $409 $408 $441 $434 $421 $451 $444 $469 2.0% 23.1%

1 Bedroom $495 $497 $500 $514 $520 $529 $536 $538 $550 $565 $571 $588 1.6% 18.8%

2 Bedroom $588 $591 $601 $604 $616 $622 $624 $627 $646 $637 $653 $684 1.4% 16.3%

3 Bedroom + $610 $627 $615 $617 $625 $629 $604 $593 $667 $626 $602 $694 1.4% 13.8% Source: CMHC Rental Market Reports, 1999-2010

** Data suppressed to protect confidentiality or data not statistically reliable.

Rent levels for all bedroom sizes in Chatham Kent remain lower than surrounding local areas including Sarnia and Windsor.

Figure 50: Comparison of 2010 Private Apartment Average Rents for Chatham-Kent CA and Similar

Municipalities

$588$632 $627

$684$743 $752

$694

$943 $891

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

$700

$800

$900

$1,000

Chatham CA Sarnia CA Windsor CMA

Ave

rage

Re

nt

1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom +

Source: CMHC Rental Market Report Ontario Highlights, 2010

64


5.3 Summary of Rental Housing Market

Proportion of Renter Occupied Dwellings Continues to Decline Consistent with the findings within the home ownership housing analysis, the proportion of rental dwellings as a proportion of total dwellings has continued to decline for most housing types. In particular, the proportion of rented semis and row houses has declined further since the previous Census period (2001). With interest rates remaining relatively low up to the last Census period, more individuals and families were able to enter into the home ownership market. In addition, some homes that may have been used as rental dwellings (i.e. semis and row houses) may have been reverted back to home ownership through landlords deciding to sell their properties. Vacancy Rates in Chatham-Kent Remain Comparatively High Vacancy rates in Chatham-Kent were around 7% in 2010; approximately what they were at in 2005 (7.4%). A healthy vacancy rate is generally considered around 3% meaning a balance between choice of housing and households entering into the home ownership market. Areas outside Chatham and Wallaceburg have lower vacancy rates compared to the Municipality as a whole at 4.9% suggesting a tighter rental market in the less urban areas. Likely due to high vacancy rates, average market rents for the area remain lower than surrounding municipalities for all bedroom sizes. In addition, the rental housing stock is older with eighty percent of the stock built prior to the 1980s and thirty percent build prior to the 1960s. Just one percent of the rental stock was built from 2001 to 2006. An older housing stock can indicate higher utility costs and therefore, even if rents are more „affordable‟ the added costs of utilities could cause households to face affordability challenges. There are also a greater number of renter households reporting that their units are in need of major repairs at 10.0%, compared to 6.6% of owners. The overall decline in the population under the age of 35 may also be a result of high vacancies. Individuals and families in this age cohort may have traditionally been more likely to rent but due to economic reasons have moved out of the Municipality in search of employment opportunities.

65


6.0 Social Housing

Social housing provides affordable rental housing for people whose income prevents them from obtaining housing that is affordable to them in the private market. The maximum rent in social housing is 30% of gross household income (rent-geared-to-income (RGI)) or market rent for the unit, whichever is lower. 6.1 Changes to Social Housing Portfolio

Since the 2006 Housing Study, the social housing portfolio in Chatham-Kent decreased from 1,817 units to 1,592 units. Over this time, three federal housing projects paid out their mortgages thereby ending their operating agreements. As a result, the social housing stock has been reduced by 225 units (these units were mixed; just over half of them were one-bedroom units). As well, two unilateral federal social housing projects (Tilbury Centential ILM and Maple City) have gone into receivership and were subsequently sold. These projects had been administered by CMHC. There is one remaining federally administered cooperative in Chatham-Kent (Nova Housing). Despite expiring operating agreements and diminishing federal funding, the Municipality is still required to maintain its service level standards. This is an important consideration in developing housing policy; in addition to identifying opportunities to create new housing it is critical that the Municipality maintain their existing supply of affordable housing. In addition, while not an overall increase to the social housing stock, there was an increase in the public housing stock (i.e. stock managed by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent) of 100 units. In 2007, the Wallaceburg Housing Corporation was sold and transferred to the Municipality of Chatham-Kent resulting in a transfer of 100 units from the non-profit housing stock to the public housing stock.

Table 23: Public Housing Portfolio by Mandate, Geographic Location and Unit Size

Mandate Community # of

Buildings

# of Units

Bachelor One

Bedroom Two

Bedroom Three

Bedroom Four

Bedroom Total

Special Needs

Adult

Blenheim 2 0 61 0 0 0 61 1

Bothwell 1 0 10 0 0 0 10 0

Chatham 2 0 209 2 0 0 211 6

Dresden 1 0 40 0 0 0 40 1

Ridgetown 1 6 4 0 0 0 10 0

Tilbury 3 3 36 0 0 0 39 0

Wallaceburg 2 0 71 0 0 0 71 4

Wheatley 1 0 20 0 0 0 20 1

Total Adult 13 9 451 2 0 0 462 13

66


Table 23: Public Housing Portfolio by Mandate, Geographic Location and Unit Size

% of Total Public Housing Stock

23.6% 1.3% 64.6% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 66.2% 1.9%

Family Tilbury 7 0 0 4 9 4 17 0

Wallaceburg 32 0 0 64 56 14 134 4

Total Family 39 0 0 68 65 18 151 4


70.9% 0.0% 0.0% 9.7% 9.3% 2.6% 21.6% 0.6%

Senior Chatham 2 0 0 0 0 50 0

Wallaceburg 1 0 35 0 0 0 35 0

Total Senior 3 0 85 0 0 0 85 0


5.5% 0.0% 12.2% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 12.2% 0.0%

Total 55 9 536 70 65 18 698 17


100% 1.3% 76.8% 10.0% 9.3% 2.6% 100% 2.4%

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, May 2011

Table 24: Non-Profit, Co-operative and Federal Providers Housing Portfolio by Mandate, Geographic

Location and Unit Size

Mandate Community # of

Buildings

# Units

Bachelor One

Bedroom Two

Bedroom Three

Bedroom Four

Bedroom Total

Special Needs

Senior Blenheim 1 0 25 10 0 0 35 2

Adult/Family/Senior Chatham 158.5 174 256 204 33 667 33

Family/Senior Ridgetown 7 0 17 17 6 2 42 2

Family Wallaceburg 4 0 9 21 0 30 1

Total 170.5 0 216 292 231 35 774 39

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, May 2011 Note: 25% of the Non-Profit, Co-operative and Federal Housing Portfolio is Market Rent

In addition to the supply of public and non-profit housing, there is also a supply of rent supplement housing in Chatham-Kent8. The number of rent supplement units within the public housing portfolio has not changed since 2006 and remains at 120 units. In October 2011, however, twelve supportive rent supplement units with the Ontario March of Dimes were terminated. The Municipality is providing twelve rent-geared-to income units to replace these units effective November 1, 2011.

8 A rent supplement is a subsidy paid to a landlord towards rent to help bridge the gap between market rent and the rent-geared-to-income portion of the rent paid by the tenant.

67


Within the non-profit and cooperative housing portfolios there has been an overall increase of 12 rent supplement units and 31 rent-geared-to income (RGI) units. The increase in RGI units is a result of market rent units changing to RGI units in two buildings: Wallaceburg Kinsmen Court (6 units) and Christian Senior Citizens (25 units). This was made possible by municipal Council‟s consent to convert these projects to the reformed provincial program.

Table 25: Summary of Social Housing Portfolio

Rent

Supplement RGI

Market Rent

Special Needs

Public Housing - 683 15 17

Rent Supplement (excluding NP/Co-op) 120 - - 1

Non-Profits & Co-operatives 35 562 177 44*

Total 155 1,245 192 62

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, June 2011 Note: *includes 10 units designated as supportive housing.

As of June 2011, there were no increases to the total number of accessible units within the Municipality.

Table 26: Social Housing Accessible Units by Community, C-K Social Housing, Non-Profits and Cooperatives

Community Number of Accessible Units Unit Sizes

Chatham 52 1Bd- 29, 2Bd- 17, 3Bd- 5, 4B-1

Wallaceburg 8 1Bd- 4, 2Bd- 2, 3Bd- 2

Blenheim 1 1Bd- 1

Tilbury 2 2Bd- 2

Wheatley 1 1Bd- 1

Dresden 1 1Bd- 1

Ridgetown 1 1Bd- 1

Bothwell 0 -

Total 66

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, June 2011 Note: There are more accessible units than special needs units as some accessible units are not

designated as “special needs” units under the Social Housing Reform Act.

More recently, Riverview Terrace was completed in November 2011 with 27 barrier-free apartments including 12 fully modified units. There have also been a number of improvements to the accessibility of the social housing stock. Enhancements include the addition of an elevator to Park View Apartments in Wallaceburg, installation of in-suite ringers at Ridge Marsh Manor and Ridgetown Non-Profit, automatic door openers at the front entrances of several buildings, several wheelchair accessibility improvements at Clairvue Cooperative and Chatham Non-Profit, ramp added at

68


Tilbury property, as well as the addition of several ramps and handrails to specific units. For more details on the accessibility improvements to social housing units in Chatham-Kent, refer to the Accessibility Advisory Committee‟s Annual Report to Council found on the municipal website (visit: 2010 - 2011 Chatham-Kent Accessibility Report).

6.2 Current Breakdown of Public Housing Stock

Of the 698 public housing units, the majority (77%) are comprised of one-bedroom units and most (66%) are adult units.

Figure 51: Breakdown of the Public Housing Portfolio by Unit Size and by Mandate

The majority of the public housing stock is located within Chatham and Wallaceburg with 37% and 34% respectively.

Bachelor, 9, 1%

1 Bedroom, 536, 77%

2 Bedroom, 70, 10%

3 Bedroom, 65, 9%

4 Bedroom, 18, 3%

Source: Municipalityof Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, May 2011

Adult66%

Family22%

Senior12%


http://www.chatham-kent.ca/cityBundle_services/downloadsService/downloadfiles/1f8e63b1-fd86-4c68-a1ce-1cbb24ad9efd_2010-11%20AAC%20Report.pdf

http://www.chatham-kent.ca/cityBundle_services/downloadsService/downloadfiles/1f8e63b1-fd86-4c68-a1ce-1cbb24ad9efd_2010-11%20AAC%20Report.pdf

69


Figure 52: Breakdown of the Public Housing Portfolio by Geographic Location

6.3 Social Housing Market Rents

Average market rents in social housing projects in Chatham-Kent have experienced some increases since the 2006 Housing Study. Average market rents remain, in general, slightly higher in Chatham compared to other areas within the Municipality. In Chatham, rents increased by approximately 5% from 2005 to 2011. This increase is below average market rent increases in the private sector, which were around 10% for a one-bedroom unit in Chatham. As of 2011, rents for apartments units range from $508 up to $581 for a one-bedroom unit. Townhouses and semis range from about $654 to $684 for a two-bedroom unit, and detached dwellings range from about $682 to $711.

Blenheim9%

Bothwell2%

Chatham37%

Dresden6%

Ridgetown1%

Tilbury8%

Wallaceburg34%

Wheatley3%


70


Table 27: Social Housing Average Market Rents

Community Chatham Wallaceburg Remainder of Chatham-Kent

Year 2005 2011 2005 2011 2005 2011

Apartments

Bachelor - - - - $418.50 $422.50

1 Bd Apartment $554.00 $581.67 $500.00 $513.33 $479.67 $508.64

2 Bd Apartment $644.82 $680.67 - - $633.78 $686.00

3 Bd Apartment $695.00 $713.00 - - - -

Townhouses/ Semi-Detached Houses

1 Bd Townhouse - - - - $520.00 $425.00

2 Bd Townhouse $631.14 $654.67 $569.33 $644.00 $589.85 $612.00

3 Bd Townhouse/Semi $653.89 $684.57 $621.20 $680.80 $619.64 $654.33

4 Bd Townhouse/Semi $694.37 $730.75 $658.75 $719.33 $661.39 $704.67

Detached Houses

2 Bd House $640.00 $682.00 - $682.00 - -

3 Bd House $694.37 $692.00 $647.00 $683.00 - -

4 Bd House $684.00 $718.00 $688.00 $711.00 - -

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, June 2011

6.4 Social Housing Waiting List

Overall, the number of households on the social housing waiting list has fluctuated since 1998 from a low of 192 in 2003 to a high of 344 in 20009. As of December 2010, there were 321 households waiting for social housing, the 2006 Housing Study reported a waiting list of 216 households as of December 2005.

9 Annual wait list statistics are based on figures from December of each year.

71


Figure 53: Trend in Number of Households on Social Housing Waiting List, 1998-2010

As of May 2011, there were 353 households on the social housing waiting list; an increase of 32 households from December. The average number of households on the wait list for 2011 (as of May) was 353. Interestingly, while the supply of seniors units has not changed, the proportion of seniors on the waiting list has increased from 11.5% in 2005 to one-third of the households in 2011. The number of seniors has increased as a result of the Municipality considering seniors as 50 years and over as part of the cascading age policy. In addition, staff at the Municipality indicated that there are more support agencies providing supports to seniors living independently and therefore more seniors are “aging in place” longer. In addition, the waiting lists for long-term care homes (in particular for basic rooms which are more affordable) are growing and some seniors may be attempting to manage on their own longer with supports in place.

296

327344

246235

192214 216

277

235

308335

321

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Nu

mb

er

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Year

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, 1998-2011

72


Figure 54: Social Housing Waiting List by Household Type, December 2005 and May 2011

By community, there have not been considerable changes in the proportion of households waiting for social housing. Both Chatham and Wallaceburg have shown increases at 3.7% and 1% respectively and currently comprise almost ninety percent of the waiting list.

Figure 55: Social Housing Waiting List by Community, As of December 2005 and May 2011

48.7%

39.6%39.9%

27.1%

11.5%

33.3%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Decemer 2005 May 2011

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s on

Wait

ing L

ist

Period

With Dependents Without Dependents Seniors

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, December 2005 & June 2011

32.0%

11678%

0

96%

85%

96%

21% 0

11%

83.3%

19782%

0

73%

94%

177%

0

10.4%

10.4%

0

50

100

150

200

250

Nu

mb

er

of

Hou

seh

old

s on

Wait

ing L

ist

Community

Dec-05 May-11

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Division, December 2005 & June 2011

73


Figure 56: Number of Households on Waiting List by Bedroom Type, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010

In general, vacancy rates remain lower (approximately 2%) for adult and seniors buildings with higher vacancy rates in family units. Vacancy rates for family units were at about 15% as of early 2011, rates reported in the 2006 Housing Study were at about 24%. Two-thirds of the current family unit vacancies are within Wallaceburg. Vacancies for family units in Wallaceburg have traditionally been higher in particular for the Wallace Street location. With the economic downturn in the area, many of the other family sites in Wallaceburg have started to fill up and it is anticipated that vacancies at Wallace Street may start to decline with a lack of other options. Typically, residents do not wish to live at the Wallace Street residence due to its location, many find it unsuitable to raise their families.

149

125 123

142

130

91

138

111106

91 89

139

125120

62

32

56 54 58

22

42

71

23

3647 43 41 45

2316 16

3827

11

25 28

1323

3530

1523

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Dec. 1998

Dec. 1999

Dec. 2000

Dec. 2001

Dec. 2002

Dec. 2003

Dec. 2004

Dec. 2005

Dec. 2006

Dec. 2007

Dec. 2008

Dec. 2009

Dec. 2010

Nu

mb

er

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Period

1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms


74


Figure 57: Social Housing Vacancy Rates by Mandate, Quarterly, 2009-2010

Table 28: Social Housing Vacancy Rates by Community, Quarterly, 2009-2011

Community

Vacancy Rates

Q1 2009

Q2 2009

Q3 2009

Q4 2009

Q1 2010

Q2 2010

Q3 2010

Q4 2010

Q1 2011

Average

Blenheim 0.0% 3.3% 4.9% 3.3% 4.9% 8.2% 6.6% 4.9% 3.3% 4.4%

Chatham 2.3% 3.8% 3.1% 1.9% 3.1% 3.8% 2.7% 1.1% 0.8% 2.5%

Dresden 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 2.5% 10.0% 2.5% 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 3.6%

Ridgetown 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 20.0% 10.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 6.7%

Tilbury 3.6% 1.8% 1.8% 1.8% 0.0% 5.4% 5.4% 3.6% 3.6% 3.0%

Wallaceburg 4.6% 5.0% 7.1% 5.4% 7.5% 6.7% 7.5% 7.9% 11.7% 7.0%

Wheatley 5.0% 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3%

Bothwell 10.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.1%

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , 2009-2011 Note: social housing vacancy rate date prior to 2009 is not included due to changes in the housing portfolio.

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2009 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q4 2010 Q1 2011

Vacan

cy R

ate

Quarter

Adult Senior Family


75


Table 29: Public Housing, Number of Vacant Units by Community and Mandate, Quarterly, 2009-2011

Community Mandate Total Units

Number of Vacant Units

Q1 2009

Q2 2009

Q3 2009

Q4 2009

Q1 2010

Q2 2010

Q3 2010

Q4 2010

Q1 2011

Average

Blenheim Adult 61 0 2 3 2 3 5 4 3 2 3

Chatham Senior 50 0 1 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 1

Chatham Adult 211 5 9 6 5 5 5 4 2 2 5

Chatham Family Included in Senior and

Adult 1 0 0 0 1 3 3 1 0 1

Dresden Adult 40 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 2 0 1

Ridgetown Adult 10 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 1

Tilbury Family 17 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0

Tilbury Adult 39 2 1 1 1 0 2 0 2 2 1

Wallaceburg Adult 71 2 1 2 0 2 4 0 2 3 2

Wallaceburg Family 134 8 10 14 12 14 11 18 17 23 14

Wallaceburg Senior 35 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 2 1

Wheatley Adult 20 1 1 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1

Bothwell Adult 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 698 22 27 30 22 37 38 36 30 34 31

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , 2009-2011

Social housing staff has indicated that one and two bedroom units are in high demand in particular in Chatham and, in general note that there is a sufficient supply of three and four bedroom units. Wait time trends, shown below, further illustrate this. With the exception of units in Chatham and Ridgetown (four bedroom units only) wait times are minimal for two, three, and four bedroom units. Wait times for one-bedroom units have increased since the 2006 Housing Study. With the exception of Wallaceburg and Wheatley, wait times for one-bedroom units have increased in all areas, generally by about four to six months. Wait times for seniors units have also increased; in most cases from „minimal wait‟ to at least four to six months.

76


Table 30: Public Housing Wait Times, November 2005 and June 2011

Community 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms

2005 2011 2005 2011 2005 2011 2005 2011

Blenheim processing

time 4 to 6

months N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Chatham 12 months 14 to 16 months

East End - minimal

wait; Other than East

End - 4 to 6 months

East End- 4 to 6

months; Other than East End -

6 to 8 months

East End - minimal

wait; Other

than East End - 0 to 2 months

East End- 2 to 4

months; Other than East End- 2

to 4 months

4 to 6 months

6 months

Chatham- Seniors

no wait list

8 to 10 months

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Dresden no wait

list minimal wait list


Ridgetown 8 to 10 months

4 to 6 months

N/A N/A N/A minimal wait list

12 Months +

12 Months +

Ridgetown- Seniors

processing time

4 to 6 months

minimal wait list

no wait list

4 to 6 months

N/A N/A N/A

Tilbury minimal

wait 6 to 18 months

8 to 12 months

6 to 8 months

N/A no wait list no wait

list no wait

list

Wallaceburg 3 to 4

months 2 to 4

months no wait list

no wait list

no wait list

no wait list no wait

list no wait

list

Wallaceburg- Seniors

no wait list

6 to 8 months


Wheatley minimal

wait minimal wait list


Bothwell wait

minimal 8 to 10 months


Thamesville minimal

wait 2 to 12 months

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A minimal wait list

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , 2011

6.5 Affordable Housing

The Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program (2005) was administered through the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. There were four components to the program: Rental and Supportive, Home ownership, Northern, and Housing Allowances. Service Managers are responsible for establishing local program guidelines. Under the program, Chatham-Kent successfully implemented the following program initiatives with $4.69 million in program funding plus $339,125 in administrative funding:

Capital, Rental & Supportive: has resulted in the addition of a total of 41 new affordable rental units, including:

One Chatham Hope Non Profit Housing Inc. single family dwelling modified for the physically disabled;

77


Twelve Remmcor Ltd rental units (three with mental health supports and four modified for physically disabled);

Four Chatham Kent Women‟s Centre second stage housing (at Nancy’s Place) for victims of domestic violence supports; and

24 Riverview Terrace rental units (12 modified for physically disabled).

Housing Allowance/Rent Supplement (HARS): 40 rental units with private landlords, including four victims of domestic violence, for a five year period, ending March 31, 2013.

Affordable Home Ownership: assisting 75 low to moderate income households purchase re-sale homes in Chatham-Kent. In most cases we assisted first time home buyers enter the private housing market.

Table 31: Affordable Housing Program (AHP) – Funding Summary

Program Total Units

Supportive Mental Health

Supportive Domestic Violence

Supportive Physically Disabled

Program Funding Received

Admin Funding Received

Capital, Rental and Supportive

41 3 4 16 $4,030,000 $75,000

Housing Allowance Rent Supplement

40 N/A 4 N/A $384,000 $37,440

Home Ownership

75 N/A N/A N/A $276,000 $26,685

Sub-totals 156 3 8 16 $4,690,000 $139,125

AHP/SHRRP (Used for admin of Social Housing Renovation &

Retrofit Program: hired Eng Tech on contract 09-11) $200,000

Totals 156 3 8 16 $4,690,000 $339,125

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, Housing Services Report January 11, 2012.

As a result of the implementation of the HARS program, the wait time for one and two bedroom units in Chatham dropped from 16 to18 months down to between 8 and 12 months. The HARS program is set to lapse on March 31, 2013 unless the Ministry agrees to extend the program. The implementation of the Home Ownership program exceeded expectations in Chatham-Kent. Due to the lower cost of re-sale homes, the municipality was able to assist 75 households in the purchase of their first home (in Canada). The average purchase price of homes was just under $99,000.

While there was some great achievements over the past few years in affordable housing in Chatham-Kent, particularity through the AHP program, stakeholders strongly emphasize a continued need for affordable housing in communities throughout the Municipality.

78


In 2011, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) executed the CMHC-Ontario Agreement for Investment in Affordable Housing (IAH) 2011-2014 with the stated objective being “to improve the living conditions of households in need by improving access to Affordable Housing off-reserve that is sound, suitable and sustainable. The IAH program will provide about half a billion dollars to Ontario in funding for six program components (Rental Housing, Homeownership, Northern Repair, Rent Supplement, Housing Allowance, and Ontario Renovates) from 2012 to 2015. The Program provides new flexibilities for Service Managers to determine which components of the Program to participate in and how much funding is directed to each component. Chatham-Kent is expected to receive $3,498,860 for the creation and repair of affordable housing over the next three years (starting in 2012 and ending March 31, 2015. Program Delivery and Fiscal Plans (PDFPs) are required to be submitted for approval by February 29, 2012. The Chatham-Kent PDFP was endorsed by Council on January 30 2012 and submitted to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing on January 31, 2012. The projected plan includes 12 new rental units, 37 re-sale ownership unit and one new build ownership unit, and 40 rent supplement units (maintained from previous funding program to be funded for an additional three years). In addition, the plan projects assisting 312 home owners repair or modify their homes or rental units, or creating new residential units such as secondary or garden suites through the (Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates Program. 6.6 Summary of Social Housing

Social Housing Stock Declines Since the 2006 Housing Study, the social housing portfolio in Chatham-Kent decreased from 1,817 units to 1,592 units. Over this time, three federal housing projects paid out their mortgages thereby ending their operating agreements. Thus reducing the social housing stock by 225 units (these units were mixed; just over half of them were one-bedroom units). As well there have been two unilateral federal social housing projects (Tilbury Centential ILM and Maple City) go into receivership and were subsequently sold. These projects had been administered by CMHC. There is one remaining federally administered cooperative in Chatham-Kent (Nova Housing). In addition, while not an overall increase to the social housing stock, there was an increase in the public housing stock (i.e. stock managed by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent) of 100 units. In 2007, the Wallaceburg Housing Corporation was sold and transferred to the Municipality of Chatham-Kent resulting in a transfer of 100 units from the non-profit housing stock to the public housing stock.

Social Housing Waiting List Increasing Especially for Seniors From December 2005 to December 2010 the social housing waiting list increased by 105 households. As of May 2011 there were 353 households on the waiting list. The proportion of seniors on the waiting list has increased from 11.5% in 2005 to one-third of the households in May 2011. This is primarily a result of the Municipality

79


considering seniors as 50 years and over as part of the cascading age policy. It is also likely in part due to the aging of the population. In addition, there are more support agencies providing supports to seniors living independently and therefore more seniors are “aging in place” longer. Waiting lists for long-term care homes (in particular for basic rooms which are more affordable) are growing and some seniors may be attempting to manage on their own longer with supports in place. High Vacancy Rates for Family Units Have Decreased but Remain High In general, vacancy rates remain lower (approximately 2%) for adult and seniors buildings with higher vacancy rates in family units. Vacancy rates for family units were at about 15% as of early 2011, rates reported in the 2006 Housing Study were at about 24%. Two-thirds of the current family unit vacancies are within Wallaceburg. Vacancies for family units in Wallaceburg have traditionally been higher in particular for the Wallace Street location. With the economic downturn in the area, many of the other family sites in Wallaceburg have started to fill up and it is anticipated that vacancies at Wallace Street may start to decline with a lack of other options. Typically, residents prefer not to live at the Wallace Street residence due to its location; many potential applicants have expressed the sentiment that its location is not conducive to how they want to raise their families. Wait Times Getting Longer Smaller Unit Sizes Wait times indicate that there is considerable demand for one and two-bedroom units within the Municipality. For most areas, wait times for one-bedroom units have increased by about four to six months. Wait times for seniors units have also increased; in most cases from „minimal wait‟ to at least four to six months. More Affordable Housing Units as a Result of AHP As a result of the Affordable Housing Program, Chatham-Kent has seen an increase of 59 affordable home ownership units, 17 affordable rental dwellings (including 3 supportive housing units for persons with mental illness and 4 supportive housing units for women of domestic violence), and 40 housing allowances rent supplement units (including an additional 4 supportive housing units for women of domestic violence).

80


7.0 Special Needs Housing

Special needs housing is generally defined as the integration of housing and support services. The Province defines special needs housing as housing, including dedicated facilities, in whole or in part, that is used by people who have specific needs beyond economic needs, including but not limited to, needs such as mobility requirements or support functions for daily living (Provincial Policy Statement, 2005). Special needs housing is housing for persons who need some form of support to maintain their health and their wellbeing. Special needs housing can be provided in various forms including, but not limited to, temporary housing for persons in crisis, housing with supports provided on site such as group homes and retirement homes, and housing where supports are brought into an individual‟s home. The following sections provide an overview of the current demand and supply for special needs housing in Chatham-Kent. 7.1 Emergency and Transitional Housing

There are currently two emergency shelters serving the Chatham-Kent area. One is located in Chatham (Chatham-Kent Women‟s Centre) and the second is located in Walpole Island (Three Fires Women‟s Centre). While Walpole Island is located in Lambton County it serves residents of Chatham-Kent as well. Since the 2006 report, Chatham-Kent‟s Women‟s Centre (CKWC) has opened a transitional housing facility, Nancy‟s Place, for women and children who are victims of domestic violence. The Chatham-Kent Women‟s Centre recently (June 2011) completed an expansion and were able to increase the total number of beds to 32, an increase of five beds from 2005. Overall the number of women and children served by CKWC has increased. Staff have also indicated that over the past few years the average length of stay has increased due to increased wait times for social housing and a lack of safe and affordable housing in the community. Staff also noted an increase in the number of clients with mental health and/or substance abuse issues along with experiences with violence seeking assistance from CKWC In general, the shelter tries to accommodate all women and children that come to the shelter but an average of six to seven families are transferred to another shelter each year. Nancy‟s Place has been in operation since 2008 and provides temporary housing as well as support services (i.e. counselling) to women and their children. To date, they have not had to turn women away due to capacity. It was noted, however, that in some cases it is difficult to provide space for larger families (i.e. women with four children) as a result of occupancy restrictions per unit. All women who have stayed at Nancy‟s Place have been able to secure housing upon leaving the program.

81


The 2006 Housing Study noted a lack of transitional housing in the Municipality. Youth, males, women fleeing abuse and persons with addictions were populations noted to be in need of transitional housing. At Three Fires Women‟s Centre, while the supply of beds has not changed, they are seeing an increase in demand. Often they have to turn women away due to capacity limitations. They are hoping in the future to be able to expand the number of bedrooms they have and offer transitional housing as well. Many of the women who stay at Three Fires need to stay for extended periods of time in order to obtain housing on the Reserve. The Chatham-Kent Women‟s Centre also provides transitional counselling and support to assist women and children re-establish themselves in the community. This Transitional Housing Support Program (THSP) includes assistance with understanding abuse and relationships, housing assistance, legal referral services, and budgeting skills. Counselling is provided to women across Chatham-Kent.

Table 32: Overview of Emergency and Transitional Housing Supply, Chatham-Kent 2010

Provider and Number of Beds

Needs Served/ Support Services

Occupancy Rate and Length of

Stay

Number of Clients

Nancy‟s Place

5 units 10 beds

Abused Women and their children

50% 2008: 3 women; 7 children

2009:6 women; 11 children

2010: 3 women; 3 children

2011: 3 women; 6 children

- 2nd stage housing - Counselling

8 months – 1 year

Chatham-Kent Women‟s Centre

32 Beds

Abused women and their children

Generally at capacity

2005:212

2010:298 (208 women plus 87 children)

2011:313 (169 women plus 144 children

*Stats based on April 1st to March 31st - Shelter -Counselling

Usually six weeks

Three Fires Women‟s Centre

4 units 16 beds

Abused women and their children

Generally not at capacity

Varies

-Counselling -Counselling for children -Advocacy -Outreach -24 hour crisis line

Usually six weeks

82


Provider and Number of Beds

Needs Served/ Support Services

Occupancy Rate and Length of

Stay

Number of Clients

CMHA

9 beds (8 transitional + 1 emergency)

Persons with developmental disabilities

Usually at capacity


-Housing -Case management -One home provides 24 hours supports

Generally 6 months

Salvation Army Family and Housing Services

Does not have units, refer to motels

Low income individuals and families

N/A

2005: 159

2006: 164

2007: 209

2008: 233

2009: 245

2010: 228

2011: 112 (to date June 30/11)

-Homelessness and emergency housing -Housing Support Services -Emergency assistance programs -Budget management -Youth support services -Local motels -Provides housing information and view housing -Provides ongoing housing lists

Usually 2-3 night stay (up to 7 nights)

Source: Survey of Supportive and Emergency Housing Providers, 2011

In addition to dedicated emergency and transitional housing units, the Salvation Army Family and Housing Services provides emergency assistance (including referrals to motels for short-term accommodation) and housing support. Generally individuals would stay in the motels for a couple days and would be referred to Ontario Works for

83


assistance. Since 2005, the number of referrals has increased from 159 in 2005 to 228 in 2010. The number of referrals peaked in 2009 at 245. As of July 2011, the Salvation Army has referred 112 persons to motels for emergency housing. Most of the individuals served continue to be men representing approximately 65% of clients served in 2010.

Figure 58: Number of Clients Served by the Salvation Army, 2006-2010

Emergency service providers noted affordability challenges for youth, newcomers and seniors. Stakeholders have also noted a lack of emergency housing and emergency services for men in the community. Survey respondents and workshop participants also emphasized a need for housing for youth (transitional and affordable).

0 0 0 4 3

45 43 41 4452

121

155 156149 149

4354

77

96

79

5 0 1 4 8

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Nu

mb

er

of

Cli

en

ts

Children (15 years)Youth (16 to 21 years)MenWomenSeniors (65 years and over)


84


Case Study - Peel Youth Village, Mississauga, Ontario Peel Youth Village is a mixed-use development that incorporates housing with a community centre. The residential component provides safe, stable, transitional housing and support services for homeless youth aged 16 to 30 years. There are 48 single rooms with 32 rooms that are clustered into groups of four and these clusters are called “houses.” Each “house” shares a kitchen, washrooms, and a common lounge. The remaining 16 rooms have either one or two beds and are intended for short term stays. The residential areas are designed to take advantage of social supports and community building interaction. The community centre services residents as well as the surrounding neighbourhood. There are recreation opportunities and social services, such as employment and life skills counselling.

Emergency service providers also noted a need for new funding to keep up with the need in the community. Staff at CKWC noted that many women who experience domestic violence do not seek help from the shelter and therefore staff are working hard at getting the community more involved to help address this issue and provide more support to women and children. Stakeholders also noted that while Nancy‟s Place has been a positive development in Chatham-Kent there is still a continued need for transitional and affordable housing for single women coming out of abusive relationships in the area. 7.2 Supportive Housing

While there are no new supportive housing providers since the 2006 Housing Study was completed there have been some changes to the overall supply. Community Living Wallaceburg is now operating 40 twenty-four hour supportive housing beds; an increase of 15 beds from 2006. They are also currently providing support to 46 persons who are living independently (currently own, rent or live with family), and employment support to 15 individuals. There is a waiting list of nine people for the supportive housing beds located in several group homes and ten people waiting for supports who are living independently in their own home or with a family. Community Living Chatham-Kent also increased its overall supply by 21 beds since 2006. Community Living Chatham-Kent built a new home in 2007 and in 2009 bought a new home for residents. Despite these increases in supply, the waiting list for beds has increased from 31 in 2005 to 66 currently. Given the extremely low turnover in such units (usually only when a current resident passes away), the wait time can be long. Often the wait time for supportive housing such as that provided by Community Living is dependent on new funding to build new beds for individuals in need. In addition to providing 87 beds, Community Living Chatham-Kent also provides supports to 115 individuals currently (July 2011) in their own home. There has been no change in the number of beds provided by the Ontario March of Dimes, although they have experienced an increase in their waiting list. March of

85


Dimes does have 12 new units at Riverview Terrace (a seniors building built with funding under the Affordable Housing Program), however these units were moved from a previous location. The Westover Treatment Centre in Thamesville provides housing and support to persons 16 years and older who suffer from or have been affected by the problems of substance abuse. They currently have 22 funded beds plus three fee-for-service beds. They have an application in to the Erie St. Claire LHIN to increase their number of funded beds. Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) experienced a decline in their number of units (by 12) since 2005. CMHA sold one of their group homes, Lorne House, as a result of no further funding for this home. In addition to their transitional home, they now operate two group homes for persons with mental illness on a long-term basis. In addition to supportive housing located within the Municipality, Brentwood Recovery Home for Alcoholics (Windsor) provides housing and support to residents of Chatham-Kent. Brentwood currently operates 120 residential beds and many support programs. They provide housing to approximately 730 clients per year, approximately 14% of the population served is from Chatham-Kent (about 102 clients/year).

Table 33: Overview of Supportive Housing Supply, Chatham-Kent 2010

Provider Needs Served

Support Services

Number of Beds

Number of Clients

Waiting List Wait Times

Canadian Mental Health Association

Individuals with mental illness

-Case management -Housing

16 beds in two homes

2002: 14 2003: 19 2004: 30 2005: 28 2011: 16 plus 61 rent supplement clients


N/A

Ontario March of Dimes

Adults with physical disabilities

Support with daily living activities

18 one-bed units

2005: 18 2006: 18 2007: 18 2008: 18 2009: 18 2010: 18

2005: 9 2006: 11 2007: 11 2008: 12 2009: 14 2010: 14

Varies

Community Living Chatham-Kent

Individuals who have an intellectual disability and in some cases a physical disability

-Community -Day -Employment -Residential -Respite

87 beds 2005: 66 2011: 202* *87 beds plus 115 independent support

2005: 41 2011: 66* *for supportive housing beds only

There is no specific wait time

86


Community Living Wallaceburg

Individuals with intellectual disabilities

-24 hr supported accommodation -employment support -Respite -Support with daily living -Enhanced specialized services

40 beds 2005: 25 2011: 101* *40 supportive housing, 46 independent support, and 15 employment support

2005: 0 2011: 19* *9 for supportive housing, 10 independent support

There is no specific wait time

Westover Treatment Centre

Individuals who suffer from or have been affected by the problems of substance abuse

-24 hr supported accommodation -Family support - Aftercare - Addictions support

22 funded beds (including 2 „no wait beds‟) Plus 3 fee for service beds

Generally at capacity (25 clients)


6-8 weeks for Substance Dependent Program Up to 3 months for co-Dependence Program

Brentwood Recovery Home for Alcoholics

Individuals recovering from alcohol abuse

-Personal care -Outreach -Aftercare program -Counselling

120 beds Approximately 730 clients per year – approx. 105 clients from Chatham-Kent

2 weeks


Similar to findings in the 2006 Housing Study, a number of stakeholders noted a lack of affordable and accessible housing as a key challenge facing persons with special needs in the Chatham-Kent area. Stakeholders also expressed long waiting lists for supportive housing as gap in the area and emphasized that more funding was needed to provide additional services. Stakeholders also noted a need for more support for persons with mental illness. Supportive of findings from the 2006 Housing Study, workshop participants indicated a continued need for additional support services for some persons receiving social assistance. In some cases individuals and families are in need of additional lifeskill support (i.e. budgeting, positive parenting, healthy eating), counselling, and referral support in order to gain the necessary skills to maintain their tenancy and/or their home. Support needs for persons with brain injuries were also identified by Stakeholders at the New Beginnings Club and Brain Injury Association of Chatham-Kent. It was expressed that such individuals are often not capable of living safely on their own due to behavioural or wandering issues. Often the only option for individuals is to apply for a secured unit in a long term care facility. When the injured person is young, however, a long-term care facility is not appropriate and does not provide the support

87


that an individual needs for rehabilitation. In other cases, individuals are put on a waiting list for a facility in London, which means they must leave their community and often their family support. Also identified and supported in 2006 Housing Study findings, is the need to ensure support services are accessible to rural residents. While there have been some enhancements to public transportation it remains challenging for individuals, particularly seniors and persons with disabilities who live in rural areas, to access the services they need. In some cases the housing may be more affordable, but access to services is more challenging than in urban areas. 7.3 Student Housing

As reported in the 2006 Housing Study, there are two major post-secondary educational institutions in Chatham-Kent; St. Clair College and Ridgetown College of Agriculture and Technology (which is also a Guelph University Campus). Enrolment at St. Clair College Thames Campus has increased from 872 students in the Fall of 2005 up to 1,300 in the Fall of 2010. Original forecasts, reported in the 2006 Housing Study noted that the College expected enrolment to be about 1,500 by 2010. Since the 2006 Housing Study, the campus has developed a student residence of 48 townhouse rooms which are at capacity with a waiting list. At this point there is no intention to expand. Enrolment at Ridgetown College has remained the same at about 500 full-time students. They also continue to house 250 students in single and double rooms which are at full capacity. 7.4 Aboriginal Housing

The Municipality of Chatham-Kent had a total Aboriginal population of 2,715 in 200610; an increase of 630 from 2001. The Moravian Reserve had a total population of 412 in 2006. Although not located in the Municipality, Walpole Island First Nation Reserve is located close to the Municipality within the County of Lambton. The population of this Reserve was 1,878 in 2005. Additional Statistics Canada data identifies a total of 945 Aboriginal-led households (primary household maintainer with Aboriginal identity). Of these households approximately 34% are within Chatham, 23% are within Wallaceburg and 32% are located in the rural areas (areas outside the primary and secondary urban areas).

10 Including the Moravian Reserve.

88


Aboriginal-led households had a greater proportion of households in the lower income deciles compared to the Municipality as a whole. Approximately forty-six percent of Aboriginal households earned less than $33,134 in 2005 (compared to 30% for the Municipality as a whole).

Figure 59: Income Deciles for Aboriginal Households, Chatham-Kent, 2005

Stakeholders identified that some Aboriginal persons living in social housing may be in need of additional support services. As mentioned, some social housing tenants, including Aboriginal persons, may require some additional supports (i.e. life-skills, referral services, counselling) to help them maintain their home. In addition, there are nine former Rural and Native Housing Program units and five former Rural and Native Housing Program home ownership units owned and operated by Ontario Aboriginal Housing Services in the district. These units are not administered by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. 7.5 Housing for New Canadians

Overall, Chatham-Kent has a lower proportion of immigrants when compared to the Province. In 2006, approximately 10% of the Chatham-Kent population was comprised of immigrants compared to 28.3% for the province. About 1% of the immigrant population arrived between 2001 and 2006.

16.9%160

10.6%100

19.0%180

6.9%65

10.1%95

9.0%85

5.8%55

8.5%80 6.9%

656.3%60

0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%

10.0%12.0%14.0%16.0%18.0%20.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Income Deciles


89


Figure 60: Immigration Status and Period of Immigration, Chatham-Kent, 2006

In general, there is some diversity among the incomes of new immigrant households. While there is a slightly higher than average proportion in the first decile (13.5% for recent immigrants compared with 10% for the Municipality as a whole) the distribution of incomes until the 7th decile is fairly proportional to the overall population. There are not, however, as many new immigrant households in the upper income deciles, in particular the tenth decile, compared with households overall.

Figure 61: Income Deciles for Recent Immigrant Households, Chatham-Kent, 2006

7.6 Seniors Housing

7.6.1 Seniors Age Distribution and Projections

As outlined within the demographic profile, the population in Chatham-Kent is aging. As of 2006, there were 17,625 persons over the age of 65 (about 16% of the population).

Non-Immigrants,

89.5%

Non-Permanent Residents,

0.4%

Immigrants, 10.1%

Source: Chatham-Kent PublicHealth Unit, Chatham-Kent 2010 Health Status Report, 2011

74.3%

15.80%

9.9%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

120.0%

Perc

ent

of Im

mgra

nts

Before 1991 1991 to 2000 2001 to 2006

Source: Chatham-Kent PublicHealth Unit, Chatham-Kent 2010 Health Status Report, 2011

13.5%35

3.8%10

15.4%40

9.6%25

13.5%35

9.6%25

17.3%45

5.8%15

9.6%25

3.8%10

0.0%2.0%4.0%6.0%8.0%

10.0%12.0%14.0%16.0%18.0%20.0%

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Income Deciles


90


By community, there were a total of 10,900 senior households in 2006. Most (43.4%) of senior households were located in Chatham with another ten percent located in Wallaceburg.

Table 34: Households Age 65+ by Community, 2006

Community # %

Blenheim 500 4.6%

Chatham 4,730 43.4%

Dresden 305 2.8%

Ridgetown 420 3.9%

Tilbury 440 4.0%

Wallaceburg 1,165 10.7%

Wheatley 265 2.4%

Bothwell 95 0.9%

Charing Cross 60 0.6%

Merlin 45 0.4%

Mitchells Bay 45 0.4%

Pain Court 30 0.3%

Thamesville 145 1.3%

Rural Areas 2,645 24.3%

Chatham-Kent 10,900 100.0%


With the exception of the 70 to 74 age category, all age groups over the age of 50 years increased between 2001 and 2006. Some of the greatest increases occurred in pre-retiree age groups of 50 to 64 years; suggesting the aging of the population will continue. Overall there were 38,490 persons over the age of 50 in 2006 comprising about 36% or just over one-third of the total population. From 2001 to 2006, the number of persons over the age of 50 increased by 4,325 persons.

Figure 62: Distribution of Adults Ages 50 and Over, Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006

5,9

60

5,1

00

4,6

35

4,6

75

4,2

70

3,0

80

2,1

40

1,6

95

7,3

25

5,7

30

4,9

30

4,3

40

4,1

75

3,5

40

2,2

45

1,8

85

8,0

10

7,3

30

5,8

85

4,8

10

4,0

60

3,5

45

2,7

60

2,0

90

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

50-54 55-59 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-84 85+

Pop

ula

tion

Age Groups

1996 2001 2006

Source: Statistics Canada, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

91


Population projections indicated that by 2031 the number of persons over the age of 55 years will increase to 42,662, which would comprise about 36% of the total population. It is anticipated that the number of persons between the ages of 55 and 74 years will peak in 2021 at just over thirty thousand followed by a decline in 2031.

These trends, as previously indicated, point to the need to provide an appropriate range of housing forms and supports to meet the needs of Chatham-Kent‟s current and future senior population.

Figure 63: Population Projections for Adults Ages 55 Years and Over, 2006-2031

7.6.2 Seniors and Tenure

The proportion of senior households over the age of 65 increased between 2001 and 2006 by 5.8%. Seniors are likely staying in their homes longer as a result of increased supports into the home either through family members or support services provided by local agencies. As seniors reach 75+ years, they are more likely to enter into the rental market. Longer waiting lists for long-term care beds (basic units) may also be contributing to seniors maintaining their homes longer.

22,5

93

8,5

51

24,4

08

8,9

93

25,4

21

9,1

07

30,7

15

10,7

30

27,9

41

14,7

21

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

55-75 75+

Pop

ula

tion

Age Groups

2006 2009 2011 2021 2031


92


Figure 64: Housing Tenure of Seniors in Chatham-Kent, 1996-2006

7.6.3 Household Income of Senior Households

The majority, approximately two-thirds of seniors (aged 65+) in Chatham-Kent, were earning less than $30,000 in 2005. This is largely a result of seniors living on fixed incomes. Given increasing costs to maintain homes, many of these seniors are likely facing affordability challenges. Figure 65: Distribution of Income (In Constant 2005 Dollars) for Seniors Aged 65+, Chatham-Kent,

2000 and 2005

79.7

%

80.3

%

80.5

%

20.3

%

19.7

%

19.5

%

79.8

%

78.9

%

81.5

%

20.2

%

21.1

%

18.5

%

66.0

%

73.2

%

76.4

%

34.0

%

26.8

%

23.6

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

1996 2001 2006 1996 2001 2006

Owners Renters

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s

55 to 64 Years 65 to 74 Years 75 and Over

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 1996, 2001, and 2006

7.1

%

40.9

%

21.7

%

14.3

%

6.5

%

4.1

%

2.1

%

1.2

%

2.0

%

6.6

%

35.7

%

26.0

%

12.8

%

7.6

%

5.4

%

2.6

%

1.3

%

2.1

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Pre

ce

nt

of

Se

nio

rP

op

ula

tion

2000 2005


93


By tenure, senior renter households are more likely to be in the lower income deciles (i.e. first to third deciles) when compared to senior owner households. In addition, seniors for both tenure groups over the age of 75 are more likely to be in the lower income deciles. Many of these seniors would likely be on a fixed income.

Figure 66: Senior Renters by Age and Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006

Figure 67: Senior Homeowners by Age and Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006

34.8

%

13.9

%

14.5

%

9.1

%

9.5

%

6.4

%

4.7

%

3.4

%

4.1

%

0.0

%

20.3

%

28.5

%

19.3

%

10.6

%

7.7

%

4.3

%

2.9

%

3.4

%

1.0

%

1.9

%

13.6

%

40.4

%

18.0

%

11.2

%

8.0

%

3.2

%

1.2

%

2.8

%

1.6

%

0.0

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Income Deciles

55-64 65-74 75 and over


7.7

%

5.5

%

5.5

%

10.2

%

9.3

% 11.8

%

12.4

%

11.5

%

11.1

% 14.8

%

3.9

%

10.0

%

14.9

%

15.1

%

14.5

%

12.6

%

9.2

%

9.7

%

5.9

%

4.3

%

9.0

%

20.9

%

19.6

%

12.0

%

11.7

%

9.5

%

7.2

%

3.7

%

3.3

%

3.1

%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs

Income Deciles

55-64 65-74 75 and over


94


7.6.4 Seniors Subsidized Housing

Section 6.0 summarizes the social housing portfolio for seniors as well as waiting list statistics. As a summary, the following Table provides a breakdown of the social housing stock in Chatham-Kent designated as seniors:

Table 35: Summary of Housing Providers for Seniors in Chatham-Kent, 2011

Housing Provider

Community

Number of

Projects

Number of

Buildings

Number of Units

One Bedroom

Two Bedroom

Special Needs

(Modified)3

CK Public Housing

Chatham

1

2

50

50

0

0

CK Public Housing1

Wallaceburg

1

1

35

35

0

0

Ridge Marsh Manor1

Ridgetown

1

1

12

12

0

0

Christian Seniors2

Chatham

3

1

67

42

25

0

Evangel Villa2

Chatham

1

1

35

24

11

2

Legion Villa2

Blenheim

1

1

35

25

10

2

5 Housing Providers

4 Communities

8 Projects

7 Buildings

234 Units

188 One Bedroom

46 Two Bedroom

4 Special Needs

(Modified)

1. CK Public Housing and Ridge Marsh Manor are 100% RGI portfolios 2. Christian Seniors, Evangel Villa and Legion Villa have mixture of RGI and Market Rents

3. Special Needs/Modified Units are units designated as such under the Social Housing Reform Act (SHRA): units are modified for accessibility.

As of May 2011, one third of the wait list was comprised of seniors. The increase in the number of seniors on the wait list is in part a result of the aging of the population as well as a result of the Municipality considering seniors as 50 years and over as part of the cascading age policy. In addition, staff at the Municipality indicated that there are more support agencies providing supports to seniors living independently and therefore more seniors are “aging in place” longer. Waiting lists for long-term care homes (in particular for basic rooms, which are more affordable) are growing and some seniors may be attempting to manage on their own longer with supports in place. The Municipality has also recently completed a 27 unit affordable housing building with 15 units for seniors and 12 units for clients of March of Dimes.

95


7.6.5 Retirement Housing for Seniors

Retirement homes are privately owned and operated rental housing residences. They offer minimal to moderate levels of on-site support such as meals, homemaking, and personal care. Overall, the number of retirement home beds has increased from a total of 658 to 686, an increase of 28 beds since 2004. There has been a shift to more one-bedroom private units and fewer semi-private and ward beds compared to 2004 statistics.

Figure 68: Distribution of Retirement Home Beds by Type, Chatham-Kent, 2004 and 2011

Average monthly rents are shown below. Rates have increased since the 2006 Housing Study for semi-private rooms (by $86/month) and private studios (by about $110/month). However, rents for one bedroom units have decreased by $172/month since the 2006 Housing Study.

23.4%172

74.3%545

2.3%17

3.5%24

86.9%596

9.6%66

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Semi Private & Ward Private/Studio One Bedroom

Pe

rce

nt

Bed Type

2004 2011

Source: CMHC Retirement Homes Report, 2004; CMHC Senior's Housing Report, 2011

96


Figure 69: Average Rent by Retirement Home Bed Type, 2009-2011

The overall vacancy rate for retirement homes in Chatham-Kent was at 11.1% in 2011; up from the previous two years. This is consistent with provincial rates of 16.4% in 2010 and 15.7% in 2011. Most of the vacancies were for private/studio units ranging in monthly rent from $2,000 up to $2,500.

Table 36: Retirement Home Vacancy Rates by Bed Type, Chatham-Kent and Ontario, 2009-2011

Bed Type

Year

2009 2010 2011

Chatham -Kent Ontario Chatham -Kent Ontario Chatham -Kent Ontario

Semi Private & Ward ** 19.4% ** 21.5% ++ 26.0%

Private/Studio 8.6% 12.6% 5.6% 14.8% 10.9% 14.70%

One Bedroom 13.8% 13.9% ++ 19.1% 5.2% 16.20%

Two Bedroom -- 16.1% -- 16.8% -- 18.70%

Total 9.9% 13.3% 7.5% 16.4% 11.1% 15.70%

Source: CMHC Senior's Housing Report, 2010 & 2011 ** Suppressed to protect confidentiality

++ Not statistically reliable -- No units exist in universe for this category

$1,679$1,765

$3,002

$2,830$2,288 $2,369

$2,398

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

2009 2010 2011

Re

nt

Year

Semi Private & Ward Private/Studio One Bedroom

Source: CMHC Senior's Housing Report, 2009, 2010 & 2011Note: 2010 data for Semi Private/Ward and One Bedroom is supressed to protect confidentiality

97


Table 37: Retirement Home Vacancy Rates by Rent Range, Chatham-Kent, 2009-2011

Rent Range Year

2009 2010 2011

$2,000 or less 19.4% ** ++

$2,001 - $2,500 6.5% 5.9% 13.3%

$2,501 - $3,000 13.1% ** 2.9%

$3,001 - $3,500 8.3% ** ++

$3,501 and more -- -- **

Total spaces where rents are known 9.3% 7.5% 11.1%

Source: CMHC Senior's Housing Report, 2010 & 2011 ** Suppressed to protect confidentiality ++ Not statistically reliable

-- No units exist in universe for this category 7.6.6 Long-Term Care Homes

Long-term care (LTC) homes are facilities for individuals requiring personal and nursing care, meals, and support services. The number of LTC homes/beds has remained unchanged from the 2006 Housing Study at a total of seven homes and 847 beds.

Table 38: Overview of LTC Homes, 2011

LTC Home Location Number of Beds

Blenheim Community Village Blenheim 65

Copper Terrace LTC Facility Chatham 151

Fairfield Park Wallaceburg 99

Meadow Park Nursing Home Chatham 97

Tilbury Manor Nursing Home Tilbury 75

Riverview Gardens Chatham 320

The Village Ridgetown 40

Source: Community Care Access Centre Ontario, List of Long-Term Care Homes in Chatham-Kent, 2011

As of August 2011, a total of 118 clients were waiting for a long-term care bed. The 2006 Housing Study reported a waiting list of 90 individuals. Most of the persons waiting are females, consistent with 2006 trends.

98


Table 39: Trends in the Waiting List for Long-Term Care Facilities, As of August 2011

Bed Application Waiting List as of August 2011

Basic – Male 34

Basic – Female 71

Private – Male 9

Private – Female 9

Semi-Private – Female 3

Semi-Private – Male 4

Total Unique Clients* 118

Source: Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre, 2011 *1 client may have multiple bed applications

While showing a decline from 2010 to 2011, wait times are typically longer for basic rooms (for both males and females). The longest wait time for beds in 2011 was for females seeking a basic room (199 days). Wait times are shorter for private and semi-private rooms. This is due to affordability reasons where many seniors cannot afford the costs for private and semi-private rooms.

Figure 70: Trends in Average Waiting Times for Long-Term Care Facilities, July 2009-July 2011

Staff at Riverview Gardens noted that there are long wait times for individuals needing a basic room. Many of the seniors in the area have low incomes (i.e. less than $20,000) and are unable to afford rents. Staff also noted that there are some residents with developmental delays who do not require 24-hour support who may be better suited to a group home or other housing form with some support services.

15

329

153

207

286

199

2236

171

84

58

271

5

103

204

107

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Jan-09 Jan-10 Jan-11

Ave

rage

Nu

mb

er

of

Days

Wait

ing

Period

Basic - Male Basic - Female

Private - Male Private - Female

Semi-Private - Male Semi-Private - Female

Average Wait Time for All Admissions*

Source: Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre, 2011*1 client may have multiple bed applications

99


7.6.7 Other Supportive Housing for Seniors

The Red Cross Homemaker services provides supportive housing for seniors in two buildings in Chatham-Kent. They have a total of nine units including three accessible units. These units are generally at capacity. 7.6.8 In-Home Supports for Seniors

Table 40: Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre Caseload by Age, 2007-2011

Age Group 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011

Under 55 6,628 7,164 7,260 7,034

Aged 55 to 65 3,605 3,744 3,748 3,818

Over 65 15,050 15,281 14,678 15,217

Total 25,283 26,189 25,686 26,069

Source: Erie St. Clair Community Care Access Centre, 2011

7.6.9 Supply and Demand for Seniors Housing

The following Table summarizes the housing supply of seniors in Chatham-Kent.

Figure 71: Demand and Supply for Seniors Housing

As of November 2011, there were also 27 additional seniors units at Riverview Terrace. 7.6.10 Summary of Special Needs Housing

Nancy’s Place Responding to Need Nancy‟s Place has been in operation since 2008 and has provided temporary housing as well as support services (i.e. counselling) to women and their children. To date, they have not had to turn women away due to capacity. All women who have stayed at Nancy‟s Place have been able to secure housing upon leaving the program.

31,144

42,662

14,720

3,765 686 847 249

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

Seniors Population -

2006

Seniors Population -

2031

Owner Senior

Households

Renter Senior

Households

Retirement Home Beds

Long Term Care Beds

Social Housing For

Seniors

Nu

mb

er

Source: Statistics Canada 2006 Census and Custom Tabulations based on 2006 Census; Watson & Associates Ltd., 2001; CMHC Senior Housing Report, 2011; Municipality of Chatham-Kent Housing Services Division

Note: A "senior" is considered to be 55 years or older

100


Emergency Housing and Service Referrals Increasing The Salvation Army Family and Housing Services, provides emergency assistance (including referrals to motels for short-term accommodation) and housing support. Since 2005, the number of referrals has increased from 159 in 2005 to 228 in 2010. The number of referrals peaked in 2009 at 245. Loss of Supportive Housing for Persons with Mental Illness Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) sold one of their group homes (12 units), Lorne House, as a result of no further funding for this home. Stakeholders emphasized housing for persons with mental illness as a continued need in the community. Further, it is noted that there are some social housing tenants who have mental health challenges and/or substance abuse issues who do not have adequate supports in place to assist them. Supply of Supportive Housing for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Increased Although Still Strong Demand Community Living Wallaceburg and Community Living Chatham both expanded the supply of housing for persons with developmental disabilities by 15 and 21 beds respectively. Given the extremely low turnover and increasing waiting list, however, wait times will remain long without new units. Need for Accessible Housing Emphasized Respondents of the Special Needs Housing Survey indicated a strong need for affordable and accessible housing in the area. There have been no increases to the number of units provided by March of Dimes or the number of accessible units within Social Housing Stock for persons with physical disabilities. However, 12 March of Dimes clients have recently (November 2011) moved into the new Riverview Terrace facility. Aboriginal Population Increasing The population of Aboriginal households increased by 30%, or 630 households, from 2001 to 2006. Many Aboriginal households are facing affordability challenges. Approximately forty-six percent of Aboriginal households earned less than $33,134 in 2005 (compared to 30% for the Municipality as a whole). Majority of Seniors (aged 65+) in Chatham-Kent Earning Less than $30,000 Approximately two-thirds of seniors (aged 65+) in Chatham-Kent were earning less than $30,000 in 2005. Further, seniors aged 75 and over were more likely to be in the lower income deciles (i.e. first three deciles) and earning less than $33,134; over seventy-percent in 2005. Many of these seniors would have likely been on a fixed income. In general, as seniors age the more likely they are to be in the lower income deciles.

101


Range of Housing Options Needed for Seniors Aging in place continues to be a key direction for senior government policy. In particular, the Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care has placed an emphasis on keeping people in their homes and within their communities. Housing options and support services need to be available in order to facilitate seniors remaining in their homes. Demand for Basic Accommodation in LTC Homes Continues to Increase As of August 2011, there were a total of 118 clients waiting for a long-term care bed. This is an increase of 90 applicant reported in the 2006 Housing Study. The majority of persons waiting for an LTC bed are waiting for basic rooms (89%).

102


8.0 Housing Affordability Analysis

Housing is the single largest monthly expenditure for most households. Research has shown that housing affordability is a problem disproportionately faced by lower income households although it is also an issue faced by some moderate income households who opt to spend a large proportion of their income on housing in order to move from the rental market to the home ownership market. Housing affordability is a critical element in the social well-being of all residents, and an adequate supply of affordable housing greatly contributes to the creation of complete and more economically viable communities. Measuring housing affordability involves comparing housing costs to a household‟s ability to meet those costs. Income and wages are used as a measure of housing affordability. Housing is generally, considered affordable if shelter costs account for less than 30% of before-tax household income. The following sections provide a review of current housing affordability in Chatham-Kent as well as changes in overall affordability levels of households since the 2006 Housing Study. 8.1 Home ownership Affordability

The following section provides a review of home ownership affordability, including trends in mortgage rates, incomes of homeowners, an analysis of proportion of income spent on housing costs, and an analysis of home ownership affordability by income decile. 8.1.1 Trends in Mortgage Rates

Since the 2006 Housing Study, interest rates increased to 7.54% in 2007 followed by a steady decline reaching 5.19% as of 2010.

103


Figure 72: Mortgage Interest Rates, (1992=100), 1996-2010

8.1.2 Income of Home Owners

The average household income for homeowners in Chatham-Kent was $72,148, an increase of 12.6%, in 2005. The median household income was $62,310, an increase of 11.9%.

Figure 73: Average and Median Income for Chatham-Kent Homeowners, 1995, 2000, and 2005

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

19

80

19

81

19

82

19

83

19

84

19

85

19

86

19

87

19

88

19

89

19

90

19

91

19

92

19

93

19

94

19

95

19

96

19

97

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

20

04

20

05

20

06

20

07

20

08

20

09

20

10

Mort

gage

Rate

Year

1-Year Conventional Mortgage Rate* 5-Year Conventional Mortgage Rate*

Source: Bank of Canada, Data and Statistics Office, 2010

$55,4

93

$64,0

91

$72,1

48

$49,6

84

$55,6

99

$62,3

10

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

1995 2000 2005

Incom

e

Average Median

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 1996, 2001 and 2006

104


The following Figure illustrates the distribution of income by decile for homeowners. As income increase, so does the percentage of owners falling within the higher income ranges. Over one-third (38.2%) of homeowners earned more than $75,259 in 2005.

Figure 74: Distribution of Income for Homeowners Chatham-Kent, 2005

8.1.3 Ownership Affordability by Income Spent on Shelter

Statistics Canada defines “income spent on shelter” as the proportion of a household‟s average monthly total household income that is spent on owner‟s major payments, in the case of owner-occupied dwellings, or on gross rent, in the case of tenant-occupied dwellings. This percentage is calculated by dividing the total shelter related expenses by the household‟s total monthly income and multiplying the result by 100. These expenses include the monthly rent or the mortgage payment and the costs of electricity, heat, municipal services, property taxes and other shelter-related expenses.11 Households spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing, therefore, are considered to be facing affordability challenges. In 2005, about 15% of households spent more than thirty percent of their income ownership housing costs. This is up slightly from the 2001 Census, which showed 12.5% of homeowners were spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs in 2000.

11 Statistics Canada 2006 Census Dictionary

5.1%

7.0%7.8%

9.2%10.0%

11.0%11.7%

12.2% 12.7%13.4%

0.0%

2.0%

4.0%

6.0%

8.0%

10.0%

12.0%

14.0%

16.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs

Income Deciles


105


Figure 75: Proportion of Income Spent on Ownership Costs, 2005

Similar to findings with trends outlined in the 2006 Housing Study, a comparatively higher proportion of lone parent families and single person households were spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing costs. Figure 76: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Homeowners

8.1.4 Home Ownership Affordability by Income Decile

In 2005, eighty percent of owner households in the first income decile (earning less than $15,845) were spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing. In general, once households reached the sixth income decile (i.e. earning at least $51,083 in 2005) they were likely not experiencing affordability challenges.

85.2%

9.3%2.3% 3.3%

0.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

Less than 30% 30% to 49% 50% to 69% 70% and over

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs

Income Spent on Ownership Costs

Source: Statistics Canada; Custom Tabulations, 2006

90.4

%

6.3

%

1.2

%

2.1

%

90.1

%

6.8

%

1.6

%

1.5

%

74

.5%

17

.3%

3.1

%

5.0

%

92

.0%

5.7

%

1.1

%

1.1

%

71

.8%

15

.8%

4.6

%

7.8

%

77

.5%

13

.7%

6.9

%

3.9

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s

Percentage of Income Spent on Ownership Payments

One-family households: Married/Common-law without children One-family households: Married/Common-law with children

One-family households: Lone parents Multiple family and Other family households

Non-family households: One person only Non-family households: Two or more persons


106


Figure 77: Percentage of Household Income Spent on Home Ownership Costs by Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006

Using average sales prices, the home ownership market is generally affordable to households in the fourth income decile (i.e. earning $46,872 or more annually) and higher. As shown in Section 4.3, however, there are some limited options available to households at all income levels. The Affordable Housing Program, Home Ownership Component, provided an opportunity for low to moderate income households (i.e. second to fourth income decile) to purchase re-sale homes in Chatham-Kent and enter the home ownership market. The new Investment in Affordable Housing Program (2012-2015) will provide further opportunities for first time home buyers to enter the private market in Chatham-Kent.

19.5%

53.6%

72.9%

75.5%

85.8%

92.3%

96.1%

98.0%

98.4%

99.3%

80.5%

46.4%

27.1%

24.5%

14.2%

7.7%

3.9%

2.0%

1.6%

0.7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

$15,845 and under

$15,846 - $24,377

$24,378 - $33,134

$33,135 - $41,853

$41,854 - $51,082

$51,083 - $62,403

$62,404-$75,258

$75,259 - $91,703

$91,704-$116,723

$116,724+

Percentage of Homeowners

Incom

e D

ecil

e

<30% 30% or more

Source: Statistics Canada,Custom Tabulations, 2006

107


Figure 78: Comparison of Average Housing Cost to Affordable Housing Cost by Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2011

8.2 Rental Housing Affordability

The following section provides a review of rental housing affordability, including incomes of renters, an analysis of proportion of income spent on rental costs, and rental affordability by income decile. 8.2.1 Income Ranges for Renter Households

As of 2005, the average income for renters was $35,106; less than half the average income of homeowners. The median household income for rents was $28,810 in 2005.

$71,827

$107,083

$139,543

$173,765

$211,897

$258,504

$367,467

$399,887

$451,143

$0

$50,000

$100,000

$150,000

$200,000

$250,000

$300,000

$350,000

$400,000

$450,000

$500,000

Hou

se P

rice

Household Income

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 2006;Chatham-KentMPAC Sales, 2011; SHS Calculations based on 30% of income for housing costs

Note: 2011 Income deciles are based on SHS cacluations

Apartment/Condo=$122,688

Not Affordable

Single-Detached House=$149,854

Semi-Detached House=$153,766

Row/Town House=$165,400

108


Figure 79: Average and Median Income for Chatham-Kent Renters, 1995, 2000 and 2005

In contrast to trends identified in the ownership market, when looking at the distribution of income by deciles, for renters, the trend shows a higher proportion of renters earning incomes in the lower deciles with a lower proportion of renters in the higher income deciles. Almost one quarter of renters fell within the first income decile and earned less than $15,845 in 2005. Over half (57.9%) of renter households fell within the first three deciles and earned less than $33,134 in 2005.

$29,1

03

$32,6

52

$35,1

06

$23,9

00

$26,3

47

$28,8

10

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

1995 2000 2005

Incom

e

Year

Average Median

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations,1996, 2001 and 2006

109


Figure 80: Distribution of Income for Renters Chatham-Kent, 2005

8.2.2 Rental Affordability by Income Spent on Rent

Just over forty percent (42.2%) of renter households in 2005 were spending more than thirty percent of their income on rent. This is up slightly from 41.6% in 2000. The number of households spending more than 50% of their income on rent declined from 19.5% in 2000 to 16.6% in 2005.

Figure 81: Proportion of Income Spent on Rent

Similar to trends in the ownership market, lone parent families and single person households face the highest proportion of affordability challenges compared to other household types. Almost 15% of lone parent families and 12.2% of single person families were spending more than 50% of their income on rent.

23.6%

18.3%16.0%

12.0%10.0%

7.4%5.4%

3.8%2.8%

0.7%

0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Income Deciles


57.9%

25.6%

9.2% 7.4%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Income Spent on Rent


110


Figure 82: Gross Rental Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Renters

8.2.3 Rental Affordability by Income Decile

In 2005, eighty-six percent of renter households in the first income decile (earning less than $15,845) were spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing. Not surprising, as income increases, it is less likely a household is spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing. In general, once households reached the fifth income decile (i.e. earning at least $41,854 in 2005) they were not experiencing affordability challenges. It is the households, therefore, in the first four income deciles that require further assistance in attaining and maintaining affordable housing.

75.1

%

16.9

%

3.8

%

75.2

%

18.1

%

3.5

%

48

.0%

31

.3%

14

.6%

69

.9%

24

.7%

2.7

%

46

.8%

30

.1%

12

.2%

80

.0%

13

.3%

0.0

%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Less than 30% 30% to 49% 50% to 69%

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hou

seh

old

s

One-family households: Married/Common-law without children One-family households: Married/Common-law with children

One-family households: Lone parents Multiple family and Other family households

Non-family households: One person only Non-family households: Two or more persons


111


Figure 83: Percentage of Household Income Spent on Rental Housing Costs by Income Decile, Chatham-Kent, 2006

In general, based on average market rents, the private rental market becomes affordable to households in the second income decile. There may be some opportunities for one-bedroom units for households within the upper end of the first income deciles; a one-bedroom unit would be affordable to households earning $23,520 based on the average market rent provided by CMHC. Based on average market rents single persons on OW and ODSP would not be able to afford the private rental market. Based on the proportion of renters in the first and second income deciles, approximately 40% of renters could not afford the private rental market. Many of these households are either living in some form of subsidized housing or are experiencing affordability challenges and spending more than 30% of their income on rent. Such affordability challenges are further exacerbated if utility costs are over and above the rents charged, which can further impede households from entering the private rental market. Importantly, while Chatham-Kent continues to have numerous requests for assistance with energy payments, the issues behind the requests are caused by the fact that Ontario Works and ODSP rates are not high enough to cover the costs of living. Many rental units do not include energy costs and the maximum shelter allowances are far below market rental rates. The modest increase to the shelter allowance for Ontario Works each year does not match the increase in the energy rates. This makes it extremely challenging for those in receipt of Social Assistance to find appropriate ,

13.4%

23.1%

64.5%

87.2%

97.0%

100.0%

99.2%

96.7%

98.4%

100.0%

86.6%

76.9%

35.5%

12.8%

3.0%

0.0%

0.8%

3.3%

1.6%

0.0%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

$15,845 and under

$15,846 - $24,377

$24,378 - $33,134

$33,135 - $41,853

$41,854 - $51,082

$51,083 - $62,403

$62,404-$75,258

$75,259 - $91,703

$91,704-$116,723

$116,724+

Percentage of Renters

Incom

e D

ecil

e

<30% 30% or more


112


affordable housing and making the need for additional affordable Social Housing units in Chatham-Kent necessary. Also of note, starting March 1, 2012 Chatham-Kent Hydro will be called Entegrus. Since the 2006 Housing Study, Entegrus has changed their billing cycle from a two month bill to a one month bill. This has for the most part been a very positive change for Ontario Works recipients. This allows them to budget monthly for these payments and the arrears payments are more manageable. Also in October 2010 the Ontario Energy Board made some changes that are very positive for this client group. Security deposits can no longer be required by energy providers for eligible low income families. “eligible low-income customer” means residential electricity customers who have a pre-tax household income at or below the current pre-tax Low Income Cut-off, according to Statistics Canada, plus 15% as confirmed by a social service agency or government agency accepted by the Board for this purpose. This would automatically include all Ontario Works and ODSP clients. The Ontario Energy Board also introduced an “Arrears Payment Agreement”, which assists low –income customers with paying their arrears rather than face disconnection of the utility. These changes have assisted OW and ODSP clients in avoiding disconnects and, according to staff, there has been a noticeable decrease in the numbers of clients facing disconnection in Chatham-Kent.

Figure 84: Comparison of Average Market Rents (AMR) to Affordable Rents by Household Income Deciles, Chatham-Kent, 2011

$409 $474 $484

$722 $941

$1,172

$1,429

$1,743

$2,478 $2,697

$3,042

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

Mon

thly

Re

nt

Household Income

Source: Statistics Canada, Custom Tabulations, 2006; CMHCOntario Rental Market Report, 2010; SHS Calculations based on 30% of income for housing costs; Ontario Works Act 1997, Amended 2010; Ontario Disability

Support Program, Directive 6.2: Shelter Calculation. March 2011Note: 2011 Income deciles are based on SHS cacluations; OW and ODSP Shelter Alowance are for 1 Bedroom units

Not Affordable

AMR (1 Bdrm)=$588

AMR (2 Bdrm)=$684

AMR (3 Bdrm)=$694

113


8.3 Affordability by Household Type and Size

A well functioning housing system provides adequate, safe, accessible, adaptable and affordable housing to meet the needs of all households and removes barriers to enhance access to housing for these groups. Looking at diverse population groups that may be experiencing affordability challenges in the ownership market, about one-quarter of lone-parent (24.7%), single person (27.8%), and youth led (27.9%) households were spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing costs in 2005. Recent immigrants had the highest proportion of owner households spending more than 30% of their income on rent at one third in 2005.

Figure 85: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Diverse Groups

In the rental market, half of most diverse population groups are spending more than 30% of their income on rent; this includes lone parents (51.9%), single persons (52.9%, youth led (58.5%), senior led (50.3%) and households where one or more persons have activity limitations. Over one-quarter of youth led households were spending more than fifty percent of their income on rent in 2005, followed by 23% of single person households, and 21% of lone parent renter households.

72.3

%

16.8

%

7.9

%

70.8

%

15.6

%

12.2

%

69.6

%

19.0

%

8.9

%

84.0

%

8.8

%

3.9

%

63.0

%

25.9

%

7.4

%

61.5

%

8.3

%

5.5

%

80.2

%

10.3

%

6.6

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

Less than 30% 30% to 49% 50% and over

Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs


Lone Parents Single Person

Youth Led Household (<25 Years) Senior Led Household (>65 Years)

Recent Immigrant Aboriginal

One of More Members of Household Have Activitiy Limitations


114


Figure 86: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Diverse Groups

While the following two Figures further illustrate the affordability challenges faced by lone-parent and smaller households it should be noted that a number of families in Chatham-Kent are experiencing affordability challenges in both the ownership and rental markets. In 2005, ten percent of households comprised of couples with children were spending more than 30% of their income on housing costs and one-quarter of renter households comprised of couples with children were spending more than thirty percent of their income on rent. For a further breakdown of household payments as a percentage of household income by household type and size refer to Appendix A.

Figure 87: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Household Characteristics

47.9

%

31.2

%

20.6

%

46.4

%

29.9

%

22.9

%

39.4

%

29.7

%

28.8

%

48.8

%

39.4

%

10.9

%

68.0

%

8.0

%

12.0

%

51.9

%

27.8

%

16.5

%

49.1

%

33.3

%

17.3

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Percentage of Income Spent on Rent

Lone Parents Single PersonYouth Led Household (<25 Years) Senior Led Household (>65 Years)Recent Immigrant AboriginalOne of More Members of Household Have Activitiy Limitations


90.4

%

6.3

%

3.3

%

90.1

%

6.8

%

3.2

%

74.5

%

17.3

%

8.2

%

92.0

%

5.7

%

2.3

%

71.8

%

15.8

%

12.4

%

77.5

%

13.7

%

10.8

%

0.0%10.0%20.0%30.0%40.0%50.0%60.0%70.0%80.0%90.0%

100.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs


Couples without children Couples with children Lone parents

Multiple-families One-person only Two or more persons


115


Figure 88: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income for Selected Household Characteristics

In general, as household size increases, fewer households are experiencing affordability challenges (i.e. spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing costs or rent).

Figure 89: Gross Ownership Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income by Household Size

75.1

%

16.9

%

8.3

%

75.2

%

18.1

%

6.7

%

48.0

%

31.3

%

20.7

%

69.9

%

24.7

%

5.5

%

46.8

%

30.1

%

23.1

%

80.0

%

13.3

%

4.0

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Percentage of Income Spent on Rent Payments

Couples without children Couples with children Lone parents

Multiple-families One-person only Two or more persons


71.7

%

15.8

%

12.3

%

88.4

%

7.7

%

3.8

%

87.4

%

8.2

%

4.4

%

89.4

%

7.3

%

3.2

%

91.0

%

6.0

%

2.8

%

88.2

%

7.8

%

4.6

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Hom

eow

ne

rs


1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 5 Persons 6+ Persons


116


Figure 90: Rent Payments as a Percentage of 2005 Household Income by Household Size

8.4 Affordability by Wage Rates

For housing to be affordable, a household should not be spending more than 30% of its gross household income on housing costs. In 2010, a person earning the minimum wage would have to work 212 hours per month to be able to afford the average market rent in Chatham-Kent. This means that this person would have to work approximately 10.5 hours Monday to Friday (based on twenty day work month); higher than one person would generally be expected to work (based on a 40/hour work week). Individuals earning minimum wage therefore would either need to work extra hours (i.e. more than one job) or share accommodation to ease the affordability gap.

46.9

%

30.2

%

23.2

%

67.4

%

18.7

%

13.7

%

61.4

%

27.5

%

10.8

%

72.6

%

19.4

%

9.1

%

67.1

%

28.0

%

2.4

%

78.6

%

21.4

%

0.0

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%


Pe

rce

nt

of

Re

nte

rs

Percentage of Income Spent on Rent Payments

1 Person 2 Persons 3 Persons 4 Persons 5 Persons 6+ Persons


117


Figure 91: Number of Work Hours Required to Maintain Affordable Rental Housing Costs at

Minimum Wage, Chatham-Kent, 2006-2010

8.5 Summary of Housing Affordability in Chatham-Kent

Renters More Likely to be Experiencing Affordability Challenges Generally speaking, renters earn less than home owners. They are households that often for affordability reasons are unable to enter into the home ownership market. The average income of renter households ($35,106) in Chatham-Kent is less than half the average income of home owners. Moreover, over forty percent (42.2%) of renter households were experiencing affordability challenges (i.e. spending more than thirty percent of their income on rent) compared to 14.9% of homeowners who were paying more than thirty percent of their income on housing in 2005. Many Renters Still Unable to Afford Average Market Rents Despite comparatively low average market rents, approximately 40% of renter households are unable to afford (based on spending less than thirty percent of their income on rent) the private rental market. In order to afford (based on spending thirty percent of household income on rent) a one-bedroom unit, based on CMHC average market rents, an individual or family would need an annual income of approximately $23,520. For the growing caseload of persons in receipt of OW and ODSP, the private rental market is out of reach. Many rental units do not include energy costs and the maximum shelter allowances are below market rental rates. The modest increase to the shelter allowance for Ontario Works each year does not match the increase in the

$594

$612 $610$618

$652

255 255 254235

212

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

$550

$600

$650

$700

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Hou

rs W

ork

ed

Ave

rage

Mon

thly

Re

nt

Year

Average Monthly Rental Cost

Number of Hours Required to Work for Rent to be Affordable per Month

Source: Human Resources and Skills Development Canada, Minimum Wage Database, 2011; CMHC Rental Market Report, 2006-2010

118


energy rates making it extremely challenging for those in receipt of Social Assistance to find appropriate , affordable housing making the need for additional affordable Social Housing units in Chatham-Kent necessary. The Investment in Affordable Housing (2012-2015) program provides an opportunity for additional funding to create more opportunities to meet the housing needs of households in the lower income deciles (i.e. first and second deciles). Given the number of renters with affordability challenges this is valuable program that can help further assist some of the households most in need of financial support. Average House Prices Affordable to Households in Fourth Income Decile Using average sales prices, the home ownership market is generally affordable to households in the fourth income decile (i.e. earning $46,872 or more annually) and higher. As shown in Section 4.3 and based on Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) data, there are options available to households in the lowest income levels (below the 30th income decile). Given the age of the housing stock in Chatham-Kent it is likely that the more affordable (by price) home ownership units are older stock, and while the price may seem affordable, many of these homes would have higher utility and maintenance costs making them less affordable to households in the lower income deciles. Programs such as Ontario Renovates are important as this funding can be used to improve the efficiency of the home making them more affordable and providing a greater opportunity for families to maintain their home. Based on MPAC data, in 2011, almost forty-five percent of sales were affordable to households in the third and fourth deciles (earning between $107,083 and $173,765); representing just twenty percent of households. Households in the top three deciles (representing thirty percent of households) had just under two percent of the sales within their affordable house range. Importantly, the upcoming Investment in Affordable Housing Program (2012-2015) has the potential to assist some first time home buyers as well as low and moderate income households that may not have otherwise had the opportunity to enter the homeownership market. Some Population Groups Experiencing Higher than Average Affordability Challenges Looking at population groups which may be experiencing affordability challenges in the ownership market, about one-quarter of lone-parent (24.7%), single person (27.8%), and youth led (27.9%) households were spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing costs in 2005. Recent immigrants had the highest proportion of owner households spending more than 30% of their income on rent at one third in 2005.

119


In the rental market, half of several diverse population groups are spending more than 30% of their income on rent; this includes lone parents (51.9%), single persons (52.9%, youth led (58.5%), senior led (50.3%) and households where one or more persons have activity limitations (50.7%). Over one-quarter of youth led households were spending more than fifty percent of their income on rent in 2005, followed by 23% of single person households, and 21% of lone parent renter households.

Table 41: Summary of Affordable Rents and Affordable Housing Cost in Chatham-Kent, 2011

Household Income

Affordable Monthly

Rent

1 Bedroom

2 Bedrooms

3 Bedrooms

Affordable House Price

Apartment/Condo Single-

Detached Semi-

Detached Row/Townhouse

$588 $684 $694 $122,688 $149,854 $153,766 $165,400

ODSP $409 Not

Affordable Not

Affordable Not

Affordable $60,650 Not Affordable

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

OW $474 Not

Affordable Not

Affordable Not


Not Affordable

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

LICO ($17,906)

$448 Not

Affordable Not

Affordable Not


Not Affordable

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

1st Decile ($19,375)

Under $484

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

Not Affordable

$71,827 Not Affordable Not

Affordable Not

Affordable Not Affordable

2nd Decile ($28,885)

$722 Affordable Affordable Affordable $107,083 Not Affordable Not

Affordable Not


3rd Decile ($37,641)

$941 Affordable Affordable Affordable $139,543 Affordable Not

Affordable Not


4th Decile ($46,872)

$1,172 Affordable Affordable Affordable $173,765 Affordable Affordable Affordable Affordable







8th Decile ($107,867)


9th Decile ($121,693)


Source: CMHC Rental Market Report, 2011; Statistics Canada Custom Tabulations, 2006; Chatham-Kent MPAC Sales, 2011; SHS Calculations

Note: ODSP, OW, and LICO are calculated for a 1 person household.

120


9.0 Summary of Changes in Housing Needs

The 2006 Housing Update summarized thirteen current housing issues to form the basis of the recommended strategies. These are summarized below along with an update on their current status based on the above analysis.

Housing Issues 2006 Current Trends

Housing activity is not keeping pace with growth projections and should be monitored

Based on projections, there will need to be an average annual increase of 194 new units over the 2011 to 2031 period which is slightly higher than the average number of building permits issued over the past nine years (174 units/year).

There needs to be a greater emphasis on smaller units

While permits are almost keeping up with projections, activity by type has not shown much diversification.

By density, projections indicate that 74% of new units will be low density, 16% will be medium density and 10% will be high density. Over the past five years (2005-2010) housing starts for single-detached dwellings have averaged about 80% of all starts signaling a need for further diversification.

Smaller households and aging of the popualtion further emphaize the need for a diverse and flexible housing stock.

The overall housing stock in Chatham-Kent is older than provincial stock and should be monitored

The housing stock in Chatham-Kent remains older than the average for the provincial stock as a whole and had seen less new development since the last Census period. Just 2.7% of the stock was built between 2001 and 2006; compared to 9.2% for the Province.

Almost half the rental stock was built prior to the 1980s.

Fluctuating labour market points to need for flexible housing supply

Unemployment rates in Chatham-Kent have remained high over the 2009-2011 period, peaking at 15.2% in October 2009. Recent figures show improvements with a rate of 8.4% as of September 2011.

The recent economic downturn resulted in considerable job loss. In addition, stakeholders noted that many new jobs in the area are lower paying jobs than the ones lost in the downturn (largely in automotive manufacturing).

121



Ontario Works and Ontario Disability Support Program caseloads have both experienced an increase from the 2006 Housing Study.

A range of housing and support service options are needed for the aging of the population, especially those at the lowest income ranges

The aging of the population will continue with forecasts estimating that over one-third of the total population will be over the age of 55 by 2031.

Many seniors are staying at home longer and looking for supports in the home. This is consistent with provincial directions, which are emphasizing more “aging at home” options for seniors.

Waiting lists for affordable long term care are growing as are waiting lists for senior social housing units.

A strong proportion of seniors remain within the lower income deciles; approximately two-thirds of seniors (aged 65+) in Chatham-Kent were earning less than $30,000 in 2005.

Home ownership options for low income individuals should be explored

Ownership has increased in Chatham-Kent; this is in part due to an increasing proportion of owned semis, rows and apartments and not solely a result of new supply.

Given the economic downturn, landlords may be prompted to sell thus removing their units from the rental market or given high vacancy rates decided to convert to condominiums.

Based on average house prices, the home ownership market is affordable t o households in the fourth income decile (i.e. earning $46,872 and higher). Further analysis of MPAC data show that there were sales at all income decile affordability levels.

Using funding from the Affordable Housing Program Homeownership Program 75 new affordable housing units were built in Chatham-Kent.

Vacancy rates in Chatham-Kent are decreasing but remain high in private rental and some social housing units.

Social housing units saw vacancy rates decline for adult and seniors buildings while vacancy rates remain higher for family units particularly in Wallaceburg.

Vacancy rate in the private market remain high

122



at about 7%. Areas outside Chatham and Wallaceburg have slightly lower vacancy rates at about 5%.

Given high vacancy rates and the continued need for affordable housing, stakeholders emphasize a need to work with private landlords to encourage them to work with the Municipality and support agencies in the provision of affordable housing.

Vacancy rates in the social housing stock point to an oversupply of family housing in Wallaceburg.

Given fairly high vacancy rates and continued wait list for some type of social housing units, additional rent supplement units should be considered and limited new rental units.

Low income households, in particular those on OW and ODSP are currently facing affordability challenges

Similar to findings in 2006, approximately forty percent of renter households are spending more than thirty percent of their income on rent.

For persons earning less than $23,520 (just less than twenty percent of households) including single persons on OW and ODSP the private rental market would be out of reach.

New data on income deciles suggests that several population groups are experiencing higher rates of affordability challenges. Such households include lone parents, single persons, youth, Aboriginals, and households where one or more persons have activity limitations.

Many rental units do not include energy costs and the maximum shelter allowances are below market rental rates. The modest increase to the shelter allowance for Ontario Works each year does not match the increase in the energy rates making it extremely challenging for those in receipt of Social Assistance to find appropriate , affordable housing making the need for additional affordable Social Housing units in Chatham-Kent necessary.

Rural residents are facing barriers accessing necessary services

Rural area residents have a higher average household income when compared to the Municipality.

While there have been some improvements to

123



public transportation, access to services remains a challenge for individuals, in particular seniors and persons with disabilities, to access the services they need.

There is a strong demand for support services for some social housing tenants

Stakeholders emphasized a continued need for support services for some social housing tenants. At times some residents may experience various challenges (addictions/substance abuse, mental health issues, hoarding, housecleaning/lifeskills) and additional support programs would be helpful to both tenants and housing providers.

There is a need for more accessible units throughout Chatham-Kent

Stakeholders did emphasize a continuing need for accessible housing units within the Municipality.

Current custom tabulation data indicates that 38.7% of households in 2005 had one or more members experiencing activity limitations.

There have been a number of improvements to the accessibility of the social housing stock.

Riverview Terrace, completed in November 2011 included 27 barrier-free apartments including 12 fully modified units.

Population projections by age suggest that the need for accessible units will increase with the anticipated further aging of the population.

An Affordable Housing Program project (Remmcor - 2008). added 12 affordable units including 4 that are fully accessible.

There is currently a long waiting list for housing for persons with developmental disabilities

Community Living Wallaceburg and Community Living Chatham both expanded the supply of housing for persons with developmental disabilities by 15 and 21 beds respectively. Given the extremely low turnover and increasing waiting list, however, wait times will remain long without new units.

In addition to housing for persons with developmental disabilities the Housing Study Update also points to a need for additional supportive housing for persons with mental illness and/or addictions issues.

There is a need to monitor the demand for emergency and transitional housing throughout

New transitional units were added for women, yet stakeholders point to continued need for

124



the Municipality, especially for youth, males, and women

affordable and transitional housing for single women fleeing abusive relationships.

Emergency service providers continue to note a lack of services for youth and men.

Stakeholders continue to highlight need for funding for emergency and supportive housing and services.

125


10.0 Summary of Achievements and Current Status of Recommendations

There have been many achievements in housing since the 2006 Housing Study, in particular the successful implementation of the Affordable Housing Program. Chatham-Kent was successful in assisting 75 households enter into the private home ownership market (with the vast majority being first time home buyers) and in adding 41 rental and supportive housing units. As well, 40 new housing allowance/ rent supplement units were created. The 2006 Housing Study was also critical to launching a Habitat for Humanity affiliate. In October of 2009 Habitat for Humanity Canada - Chatham-Kent (HFHC-CK) obtained affiliate status. Currently an Employment and Social Services Supervisor is the Vice President of the Board and Chair of the Family Selection Committee. CFHC-CK recently (October 2011) announced a donation of land and anticipates starting to build in the Spring of 2013. Responding to some of the needs of youth and newcomers, the Municipality has hired a Youth and Immigrant Coordinator. A key aspect of this position is to attract newcomers and retain the Municipality‟s youth population. An initiative underway is the Newcomer Portal Project aimed at attracting and supporting new immigrants to Chatham-Kent. The 2006 Housing Study highlighted issues related to seniors housing and high vacancies in some buildings. In response, the Municipality implemented its Cascading Age Policy in 2006. In addition, a number of educational activities have been underway in the Municipality. These include a homeowner seminar hosted in partnership with CMHC, a seniors housing survey, a Healthy and Active Living Community Forum, as well as a number of ongoing advocacy initiatives. The full set of 57 recommendations is outlined in Appendix E highlighting all progress over the past five years.

126


11.0 Housing Directions and Actions 2012-2022

11.1 Policy Context

The Chatham-Kent Housing Study Update has been developed within the context of relevant provincial legislation as well as key local existing and proposed policy.

Provincial Policy:

Long Term Affordable Housing Strategy It is a goal of the LTAHS to consolidate Ontario‟s Housing and Homelessness programs to give municipalities more flexibility in addressing their local needs. Amendments to Planning Act include requiring municipalities to establish policies allowing second units in new and existing developments, and adding affordable housing as a matter of provincial interest. One of the new requirements for Service Managers is to have Housing and Homelessness Plans. These Plans must include an assessment of current and future housing needs; objectives and targets relating to housing needs; a description of measures proposed to meet objectives and targets; and a description of how progress towards meeting the objectives and targets will be measured. The Plan must have a minimum 10-year horizon and a requirement to review every five years.

Housing Study

Update

Housing Services Act Provincial

Policy Statement

Investment in Affordable

Housing Program

Local Health Integrated

Nework Home First

Strategy

CK Healthy Community Initiatives

CK

Transport-ation Master

Plan

CK Parks and Rec Master

plan

CK Cultural Master Plan

CK Community

Strategic Plan

CK Official Plan and Growth Analysis

Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy

127


Housing Services Act The Strong Communities through Affordable Housing Act (2011) has been enacted. The Strong Communities through Affordable Housing Act repeals and replaces the Social Housing Reform Act (2000) with the Housing Services Act (2011) as well as includes amendments to the Planning Act and the Residential Tenancies Act (RTA). The Housing Services Act is a key part of Ontario‟s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy.

Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement (2005) requires municipalities to provide a full range of housing types and densities and requires municipalities to establish minimum targets for the provision of affordable housing. The Ontario Housing Policy Statement (2011) is intended to provide further direction to Service Managers to support the development of their Housing and Homelessness Plans. Policy directions include: ensuring a coordinated approach to delivering a system of housing and homelessness services; including strategies to reduce gaps (including short and long-term housing targets) and increase awareness and access to affordable and safe housing; providing measures to prevent homelessness and support people to stay in their homes; including the non-profit and private sector in planning; ensuring plans assess the needs of persons with disabilities, victims of domestic violence, Aboriginal persons (off-Reserve), and other local groups reflective of the evolving demographics of the community; and ensuring a commitment to improve the energy efficiency of existing and future publicly funding housing stock.

Investment in Affordable Housing for Ontario The new bilateral agreement with the federal government for the Investment in Affordable Housing for Ontario (IAH) program will provide about half a billion dollars to Ontario in funding for six program components (Rental Housing, Homeownership, Northern Repair, Rent Supplement, Housing Allowance, and Ontario Renovates) from 2012 to 2015. The Program provides new flexibilities for Service Managers to determine which components of the Program to participate in and how much funding is directed to each component. Program Delivery and Fiscal Plans (PDFPs) are required to be submitted for approval by February 28, 2012 and funding is for the period from 2012 to 2015.

Local Health Integrated Network Home First Strategy The Local health Integrated Network (LHIN) Home First Strategy continues the provincial direction and focuses on keeping seniors safe in their homes for as long as possible with community supports. Local Policy:

Growth Analysis A Municipal growth analysis is currently underway to prepare comprehensive municipal-wide population, housing and employment forecast update. The aim of this analysis is to guide decision making and policy development specifically related to

128


growth management, urban land needs, master plans and fiscal planning. Projections related to population and households have been incorporated into the Housing Study Update and used in the development of affordable housing targets.

Official Plan The Municipality is currently undertaking a comprehensive review of its Official Plan. Results from the HSU will form a foundation for housing policies within the new/updated Official Plan.

Community Strategic Plan The Community Strategic Plan will be the overarching strategic document for the municipality. The 2011 work plan outlines three key objectives for the Community Strategic Planning Committee (CSPC): communicate with Council and stakeholders on community focus areas of Health, Economy, Environment, Culture and Learning; inspire community action; and enhance capacity of committee members. While not one of the five focus areas for the Strategic Plan, housing, as one of the social determinants of health, is an important component in the overall health, vitality and sustainability of the Municipality.

Cultural Master Plan The Cultural Master Plan outlines culture and tourism priorities for Chatham-Kent. Objectives include establishing a role for the Municipality in cultural planning project, conducting cultural mapping, establishing partnerships, and raising awareness of issues and activities. Attracting newcomers to the area and promoting cultural diversity is a strategic direction of Municipal Council; accordingly housing actions and targets need to promote a housing supply that can respond to this direction.

Parks and Recreation Master Plan The Parks and Recreation Master Plan supports renewal and investment in parks, recreation facilities, and open space. The Plan strives to enhance the capacity of community organizations to contribute to recreation activities.

Transportation Master Plan The Transportation Master Plan was adopted March 3, 2008. The Municipality of Chatham-Kent currently operates three of the four potential interurban transit routes. This provides access to public transit for approximately 75% of the geographic area of the Municipality. Roll-out of the fourth route is subject to public consultation and Council approval for budget considerations. All interurban vehicles are accessible.

Healthy Community Initiatives In 2011 an amendment to the Chatham-Kent Official Plan was enacted which was aimed at reducing health inequities by addressing improvements in neighbourhood design, improving infrastructure, increasing the provision of accessible and affordable healthy food choices, transit, active transportation options, housing, and recreation

129


programs and facilities to support healthy lifestyles. In addition there was a Healthy Communities Forum Held in January 2011 where 180 delegates looked at ways to enhance the quality of life for citizens by focusing on health issues. The Public Health Unit is also investigating developing a comprehensive health strategy. 11.2 Chatham-Kent Housing Plan Framework

Given the fundamental necessity for a range of housing within Chatham-Kent the Municipality is aspiring to create greater opportunities to respond to these diverse needs. The Chatham-Kent Housing Plan Framework takes into consideration both the local and senior government policy context, as well as the identified housing issues in Chatham-Kent in order to provide a structure for effectively and efficiently meeting these needs. The following diagram represents the Chatham-Kent Housing Framework. Each of its four key components (vision, targets, objectives, measures) is described in the following sub-sections.

HOUSING VISION To provide residents of Chatham-Kent with a full range of housing choices that meet their diverse needs and promote a community of collaboration, acceptance, and pride. This range of housing


CHATHAM-KENT HOUSING PLAN FRAMEWORK

Plan for Diverse

Supply

Improve and Maintain

Supply

Increase afford-able

Supply

Ensure Emergency and Transitional

Options

Expand Range of

Supports

Promote and

Educate

Local

Policy

Senior Gov‟t

Policy

HOUSING MEASURES Housing Report Card & 5 year Official Plan and Housing Plan Reviews

HOUSING TARGETS

25% Affordable Housing (including 2% supportive) & 5% Accessible Housing

HOUSING OBJECTIVES

130


To provide residents of Chatham-Kent with a full range of housing choices that meet their diverse needs and promote a community of collaboration, acceptance, and pride. This range of housing includes accessible, affordable, safe and supportive housing.

25% affordable housing, including 2% supportive housing

5% accessible housing (fully modified to meet Chatham-Kent

Facility Accessibility Design (FAD) requirements)

11.2.1 A Housing Vision for Chatham-Kent

On November 22, 2011, stakeholders gathered to collectively set a direction for housing in Chatham-Kent. Stakeholders included representatives from various support service agencies and non-profit organizations, housing providers, municipal staff, and the private sector. A housing vision resulted from this dialogue and is presented below. Achieving this vision calls for great leadership from the Municipality and strong dedication by all stakeholders. The housing vision for Chatham-Kent is:

11.2.2 Housing Targets

To support the vision of having a “full range of housing choices”, and to meet senior government regulations, it is recommended that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent adopt housing targets for new housing supply. Housing targets form the foundation for the development of housing actions. Importantly, these targets are aimed at creating new supply over and above the existing supply of affordable housing. The overall housing goal for Chatham-Kent is to achieve: The housing targets are based on the income profile of the Chatham-Kent‟s residents. Achieving these targets would address the needs of the additional households anticipated to make Chatham-Kent their home in the future. The number of new units to be constructed from 2011 to 2016 is based on Chatham-Kent‟s household projections prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 2011. The targets assume that the tenure split that existed in Chatham-Kent in 2006; rental housing accounting for 30% of the total stock, is maintained for the future.

131


The Municipality of Chatham-Kent uses the provincial definition of affordable housing as defined within the Provincial Policy Statement (2005). In Chatham-Kent this means that: Affordable rental housing is housing where monthly rental costs (excluding utilities) do not exceed 30 percent of the tenant gross monthly household income and is rented at or below the average market rent for a rental unit in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. In 2011, this translates to rents of less than $637/month (less than average market rent) and households earning less than $24,480. Affordable ownership housing is housing where monthly housing expenses (including mortgage principle, interest and property tax but excluding insurance or utilities expense) do not exceed 30 percent of gross monthly household income and where the purchase price is at least 10% below the average purchase price of a resale home in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. In 2011, this translates to house prices of less than $124,859 (10% below average price) and households earning between $25,480 and $33,680. Using this methodology, it is recommended that 25% of new housing be affordable. In addition to an affordable housing target, and critical to ensuring a diverse range of housing, it is further recommended that a target of 2% of the new affordable housing stock be supportive (i.e. for persons with disabilities and/or seniors). Estimating the need for supportive housing is based on the need and demand going forward, stemming from literature, data, and/or waiting lists. The accessibility housing target is aimed at creating fully modified units in 5% of the new housing supply. These units would meet the requirements of Chatham-Kent Facility Accessibility Design Standards (FADS) (2006). Of note, in addition to the recommended accessibility target, the Ontario Building code requires 10% of units to be barrier-free. Barrier-free includes a level access path of travel and a bedroom and washroom on the same floor as the entrance in buildings greater than 3 storeys and 600 square metres in area. The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA), passed in 2005, builds on the Ontarians with Disabilities Act (ODA) 2001 with the creation of Standards Development Committees. The purpose of the AODA is to benefit all Ontarians by: “developing, implementing, and enforcing accessibility standards in order to achieve accessibility for Ontarians with disabilities with respect to goods, services, facilities, accommodation, employment, buildings, structures and premises on or before January 1, 2025.” The AODA requires the establishment of Standards Development Committees to develop accessibility standards. Five standards development committees were established to develop standards in the following areas: customer service, transportation, information and communications, built environment, and employment.

132


These standards define measures, policies, and steps needed to remove barriers for persons with disabilities. A barrier means anything that prevents a person with a disability from fully participating in all aspects of society because of his or her disability, including a physical barrier, an architectural barrier, information or communication barrier, an attitudinal barrier, a technological barrier, a policy or a practice. The Accessibility Standards for Customer Service came into effect January 1, 2012. Requirements for Transportation, Employment and Information and Communication will be phased in between 2012 and 2021. The proposed accessible built environment standard was issued for public review in July 2009. This standard has now been submitted to the Minister of Community and Social Services. 11.2.3 Housing Objectives

In support of the housing vision and to guide Chatham-Kent‟s Housing and Homelessness Plans, six housing objectives have been identified.

Plan for a diverse range of housing choices A range of housing choices are needed to accommodate the diversity of residents within the community. A diverse range of housing means ensuring the housing stock can accommodate an aging population, a variety of household types and sizes, a greater diversity of culture, a range of physical and mental disabilities, and can respond to fluctuations in these need (i.e. economic downturn, family crisis).

Improve and maintain existing housing supply Chatham-Kent has an older housing stock. Often an aging housing stock can result in high maintenance and operating costs due to the lack of energy efficient designs and deterioration of a unit. Such increasing costs can create affordability challenges, especially for individuals and families on fixed incomes. In an area where there are high vacancy rates in the rental housing market, maintaining and improving the existing stock can help meet affordable housing needs without the high costs of new development.

Increase supply of affordable housing There is a gap in meeting the housing needs of individuals and families in the lower income ranges. Many households are spending more than thirty percent of their income on housing and putting them at risk of losing their home. Waiting lists for social housing and caseloads of persons in receipt of social assistance are increasing. There continues to be a strong need in the area to increase the supply of affordable housing.

133


Ensure availability of emergency and transitional housing options for residents

Meeting the housing needs of all residents includes being able to respond to individuals and families in times of crisis or in times of transition.

Promote expanding range of housing support services (in urban and rural areas)

A range of support services are needed for a safe, healthy and high quality lifestyle for residents. In addition, such supports can help residents maintain their home longer and stay in their community and close to support from family and friends.

Promote, educate and create awareness of housing needs in Chatham-Kent The Municipality has an important role in educating community stakeholders in housing issues as well as in creating greater awareness to ensure an understanding and tolerant community. In addition to providing education and awareness to residents and community groups within Chatham-Kent, the Municipality has an important role in promoting the housing needs of Chatham-Kent residents to senior levels of government and other agencies to ensure collaboration in responding to housing needs. 11.2.4 Housing Measures

A requirement of the Housing Services Act, monitoring the housing stock is essential to ensuring the housing stock is responding to community needs and objectives and targets are being achieved. To ensure accountability, and meet the Housing Service Act requirement to monitor the housing targets, it is recommended that the Municipality publish and distribute an annual Housing Report Card to monitor community progress in achieving the housing targets and housing actions. The Housing Report Card will include such indicators as number of new units created (affordable, accessible, supportive, other), updated waiting list statistics, amount of funding and/or investments obtained towards housing, number of partnerships created, number of educational initiatives implemented etc. A sample Housing Report Card Template is provided in Appendix F. Other measuring systems/tools include the five-year reviews of the Official Plan as well as the new requirement that Housing and Homelessness Plans be reviewed every five years also. These reviews provide an important opportunity to re-assess the housing actions and update policies and recommendations as needed. The annual Housing Report Card will provide valuable insight for these reviews. Other measuring tools include additional reports such as workshop summary reports and additional research reports (i.e. building conditions reports). All of these achievements will also be noted in the annual Housing Report Card in order to monitor all housing actions and targets.

134


11.2.5 Housing Actions and Targets

Based on the above analysis of housing need and in consultation with community stakeholders, a series of actions and targets have been established which respond to the current housing issues facing Chatham-Kent.

135


Objectives Context Recommended Actions and Targets Measures

1. Plan for a diverse range of housing choices

A diverse housing supply in terms of type and tenure is critical to meeting needs of current and future residents.

1. Incorporate and adopt the housing vision, objectives and targets (as outlined in the Housing Study Update) as part of the Official Plan review.

Official Plan Review

Zoning bylaws contain a range of regulations and standards governing the development of land use within a Municipality. Zoning barriers which may restrict the development of affordable and supportive housing generally include provision of range of housing types, parking requirements, and distancing bylaws.

2. Eliminate zoning barriers that create restrictions for affordable and supportive housing development options.


Annual Housing Report Card

Amendments to the Planning Act, as a result of the new Housing Services Act (2011) require that municipalities establish second suite policies in new and existing developments.

3. Include a policy as part of Official Plan Review, which permits second suites in all residential zones in accordance with appropriate planning criteria.



An important component of ensuring housing meets the needs of residents is an adequate supply of accessible housing in particular given the aging of the population within the Municipality.

In addition to the 5% accessible housing target (fully modified as per Chatham-Kent Facility Accessibility Design Standards (FADS)), the Ontario Building Code requires that 10% of all new apartment units (exceeding 3 storeys) be barrier-free (bedroom and washroom on same floor as entrance, barrier-free

4. Adopt accessible housing targets as follows:

5% of new multi-unit housing units be accessible (fully modified to meet CK FADS)


Evaluate and update every five years to support Official Plan Review and Housing and Homelessness Plan review requirements.

136



path of travel from entrance to bedroom and bathroom)

2. Improve and Maintain Existing Supply

The Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) is being replaced with the new Ontario Renovates Program offered under the IAH program.

Many municipalities have benefited from the RRAP program over the years through improvements to energy efficiency, accessibility, and affordability.

This new version of the program will now become a responsibility of the Service Manager to administer (unlike previously where the program was typically administered by CMHC). Service Managers now have the responsibility of allocating funds, developing procedures and business processes, and the overall administration of loans.

Council has approved Housing Services Recommendation to administer (Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates Program over fiscal years 2012-2015.

5. Continue to participate in housing renovation funding programs.

Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan12


In addition to efforts to create new affordable housing units, it is critical that the Municipality ensure service level standards continue to be met

6. Develop a plan to maintain service level standards as required by the Housing Services Act.

Service Level Standards Report

Annual Housing

12 Chatham-Kent Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan was approved by Council on January 30, 2012.

137



despite diminishing funding levels.

A service level standard plan would take into consideration expiring operating agreements, mortgage end dates, public housing debenture end dates, rent supplement agreement end dates, and overall diminishing federal funding.

Service Level Standards are prescribed the Housing Services Act Regulations 367/11 Schedule 4: Item 3. Service Level Standards for Chatham-Kent is 1,365 RGI units including 747 high need units and 63 modified units.

Report Card

Building condition reports provide a summary of the overall state of a building and outline any needed repairs and/or renovations.

2006 Building Condition Assessment (BCA) and Reserve Fund Study (RFS) completed for Chatham-Kent municipal public housing portfolio and all private non-profit social housing providers funded by Chatham-Kent.

Energized Building Condition Assessment (EBCA) and Reserve Fund Forecasts completed in 2011.

Council added both public housing and funded private non-profit social housing to the municipal corporate lifecycle funding model/strategic plan for municipal infrastructure funding.

7. Continue to complete regular building condition assessments and commit funding to social housing reserves.

Building Condition Assessment Reports


138



Strategic management plans assess the existing condition of the stock, identify portfolio priorities, and provide consideration for replacement, intensification or disposition.

Given the aging of the stock and expiring senior government operating agreements a strategic asset management plan can assist with identifying challenges and opportunities.

8. Develop a strategic asset management plan for social housing stock.

Strategic Asset Management Plan


Consistent with findings in the2006 Housing Study, the Housing Study Update points to continued vacancy concerns for family units in Wallaceburg. It is suggested that the Municipality evaluate options to address these concerns.

9. Investigate feasibility and appropriateness of selling family units in Wallaceburg to address vacancy concerns, and determine most appropriate reallocation of units to meet current and projected housing needs (while maintaining service level standards).

Summary report of analysis and options for addressing social housing vacancies in Wallaceburg


3. Increase Supply of Affordable Housing

It is a requirement under the PPS that Municipalities establish a target for affordable housing.

10. Adopt affordable housing targets as follows:


Annual Housing Report Card (monitoring process)


The development of housing that can meet the affordability needs of

11. Encourage linkages with various funding programs and municipal


139



households in the lower income ranges often requires funding from a number of sources in order to be feasible.

incentives to maximize funding potential for affordable housing.

It is a requirement under the PPS that Municipalities establish a definition for affordable housing.

Based on the PPS and the Municipal Housing Facilities By-law, affordable housing in Chatham-Kent is defined as:

Rents of less than $637/month (less than average market rent); and

House price of less than $124,859 (10% below average price).

12. Adopt definition of affordable housing, as per the Provincial Policy Statement and Municipal Facilities Bylaw, as part of the current Official Plan review.


The new bilateral agreement with the

federal government for the Investment in Affordable Housing for Ontario (IAH) program will provide about half a billion dollars to Ontario in funding for six program components (Rental Housing, Homeownership, Northern Repair, Rent Supplement, Housing Allowance, and Ontario Renovates) from 2012 to 2015.

13. Continue to participate in affordable housing programs and other funding programs that may become available in order to achieve affordable housing targets.

Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan (approved by Council Jan 30, 2012, submitted to MMAH Jan 31, 2012)


Municipal incentives are an important tool in increasing the supply of affordable housing and in achieving the affordable housing targets.

14. Encourage new affordable housing using municipal tools and incentives such as relief of taxes and charges, securing sites and including affordable housing in new developments.

Annual summary of municipal financial incentives in the development of affordable housing (as part of Housing Report Card)

140



4. Ensure availability of emergency and transitional housing options

Given vacancy rates of some rental properties within the Municipality and the need for emergency/transitional and supportive housing options, consideration of potential partnerships should be further investigated.

15. Investigate opportunities to collaborate with housing providers and local support agencies to provide emergency and supportive housing options within existing buildings that may be experiencing vacancies.


Based on the Ontario Housing Policy Statement a provincial objective is the goal of ending homelessness. As part of this goal Service Managers are required to develop strategies to prevent homelessness which are developed in consultation with a range of stakeholders including those who have experienced homelessness.

16. Further analyze emergency and transitional housing and support needs within Municipality (including consultation with persons experiencing homelessness) in order to develop a Homelessness Plan which responds to the requirements of the HSA.

Homelessness Plan


The Housing Study Update identified a need for more emergency/transitional housing options and supports for youth, men, and single women.

17. Support community agencies (i.e. in accessing funding opportunities) in developing emergency and transitional housing and support options for youth, men, and single women.


5. Promote Expanding Range of Support Services (in urban and rural areas)

Developing positive relationships among landlords and tenants was identified as a priority among stakeholders and is identified as a key housing issue within Chatham-Kent.

18. Conduct landlord and tenant positive relationship workshop.

Workshop summary report


A Chatham-Kent Seniors Advisory Committee was appointed by Council. The Director of Seniors Services is the staff support person. The Committee is currently comprised of each

19. Broaden membership of Seniors Advisory Committee to include more agencies (i.e. CCAC).

New membership


141



community seniors centre (except one).

It was suggested by community stakeholders that membership could be broadened to include support agencies and other organizations such as the CCAC.

Additional support for social housing tenants was identified need in the community in order to help foster improved landlord-tenant relationships and help tenants maintain their housing.

20. Conduct a survey of social housing providers and tenants to determine supports needed to foster positive tenant-landlord relationships and to identify supports needed to assist tenants to maintain their housing.

Survey summary report


Support services might include free services for landlords and tenants, housing support services (assistance with utilities etc.), assistance with daily living (positive parenting, money management, health eating), assistance with job loss, referrals etc.

21. Initiate community working group comprised of housing providers, municipal staff (Housing Services), support service agencies as well as representation from the Erie St. Clair CCAC‟s Chatham-Kent Geographic Implementation Committee for Home First, to identify opportunities to leverage resources and provide more support services for tenants.

Community Supports Working Group


Stakeholders identified challenges for rural residents in accessing necessary support services.

Municipal hubs such as libraries and community centers can provide a local location for residents to access services and referrals.

22. Continue efforts to provide service hubs at municipal locations to assist support agencies in delivering support services to rural communities


142



The Ontario Housing Policy Statement identifies meeting a broad range of community needs as a priority and as such requires that Service Managers‟ respond (through assessment and strategies) of the specific needs of Aboriginal people living off-Reserve, victims of domestic violence, people with disabilities, and others in locally defined groups.

23. Conduct target focus groups to further identify housing and support service needs of:

Aboriginal persons

Persons with disabilities

Homeless

Victims of domestic violence

Youth

Homelessness Plan

Focus group summary report(s)


6. Promote, educate, and create awareness of housing issues in Chatham-Kent

An education campaign is needed to engage partners, government, housing providers, community agencies and the private sector. An education campaign will help “put a face” on affordable housing needs.

24. Continue to be a leader in further education and awareness of housing issues, in particular:

Accessibility issues and the Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act (AODA)

Landlord and tenant relationships

Homeownership training

Benefits of affordable housing and understanding its role

Affordable housing funding programs (SEED, IAH)

Supportive housing and support service funding programs (LHIN, MOH-LTC, MCSS)

Affordable housing development options (i.e. cooperatives, shared living, life lease)

Renovation and energy efficiency

Annual summary of all housing education and awareness initiatives (as part of Housing Report Card)

Prosperity Roundtable participation

143



funding/programs

Community support programs (i.e. Salvation Army)

Community Partnership Fund (as tool for housing awareness initiatives)

Given the various partners in housing policy and development and the complexity of meeting the housing needs across the continuum, advocacy is an important tool. It is important to align advocacy efforts with other stakeholders.

25. Continue to advocate with local and provincial partners on such issues as:

Increases to income support programs

Inclusionary zoning provisions

Continued and increased funding for housing assistance (emergency housing, social housing, affordable housing, rent banks, energy banks etc.)

Simplified guidelines/rules for funding programs

Annual summary of all housing and funding advocacy efforts (as part of Housing Report Card)

A capacity workshop may provide new ideas and strategies in expanding the current level of financial support for affordable and supportive housing.

26. Conduct affordable housing capacity workshop to bring together potential partners (i.e. community organizations, private corporations, developers, builders, financial institutions, support service agencies, real estate sector etc.) to work towards enhancing capacity for affordable housing programs.

Capacity Workshop Summary Report


144


11.3 Cost Benefit Analysis of Recommended Actions

The above framework outlines, based on the housing vision for Chatham-Kent, the approach and actions needed to address the housing issues facing the Municipality and ultimately to achieve healthier and more sustainable communities. The following table outlines the category of each action (research and policy, financial incentive, advocacy and support, education and awareness), outlines any anticipated costs, summarizes the overall benefits, identifies the linkages with other Municipal initiatives, provides an overall priority level (immediate, high, ongoing), and identifies if any new supply is anticipated as a result of the implementation of that action.

145


Action Category Cost Benefit Linkages with other Initiatives

Priority New Supply

Plan for a diverse range of housing

1. Incorporate and adopt the housing vision, objectives and targets (as outlined in the Housing Plan) as part of the Official Plan review.

Research & Policy

n/a Establishes a clear direction for Housing in Municipality


Immediate No new supply directly created, although the supply target is identified


Research & Policy

Staff time (additional research)

Ensures zoning is meeting diverse housing needs

Zoning By-law review (to follow OP review)

High Potential to increase affordable and supportive housing through removal of barriers

3. Include a policy as part of Official Plan Review, which permits second suites in all residential zones in accordance with appropriate planning criteria.

Research & Policy

Staff time (additional research)

Facilitates an increase in supply of affordable housing


Immediate Potential to increase supply of affordable housing through creation of second suites


5% of new multi-unit housing units be accessible (fully modified to meet CK FADS)

Research & Policy

Staff time (monitoring of targets)

Increases supply of accessible housing

Creates greater awareness of housing activity and ability to meet targets and address need


Immediate Increase supply of accessible multi-unit housing (5% annual target)

146



Priority New Supply

Improve and maintain existing supply

5. Continue to participate in housing renovation funding programs.

Financial Incentive

Staff time to oversee program administration and possibly design a “made in Chatham-Kent” program

Funding outlined in PDFP ($75,000 in admin funding and $1.5 million program funding)

Improvements to current housing supply

Reduces energy costs for residents

(Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates program

Immediate (Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates program projected to assist 132 home owners repair or modify their homes or rental units, or create new residential units such as secondary or garden suites between 2012 and 2015


Research & Policy

Staff time to monitor maintaining standards

Meets HSA requirement (1,365 units)

Housing Services Policies

High Maintain supply of subsidized units

7. Continue to complete regular building condition assessments and commit funding to social housing reserves13.

Research & Policy

Staff time and consulting costs to update the BCAs14

Creates awareness of social housing portfolio needs and reserve fund


Ongoing No new supply, potential to improve/retain existing stock

13 First BCA completed in 2005 and updated in 2011. Energy Audit also completed in 2011. 14 Costs for previous BCAs range from $245,000 (completed in 2004/05) to $350,000 (completed in 2010/11).

147



Priority New Supply

Estimated amount for funding for social housing reserves

status


Research & Policy

Staff time

Potential consulting fees

Improves awareness of demand and supply of stock

Identifies options to better meet current and projected housing needs


High Possible redistribution of existing units and addition of new units

9. Investigate feasibility and appropriateness of selling family units in Wallaceburg to address vacancy concerns, and determine most appropriate reallocation of units to meet current and projected housing needs (maintaining service level standards).

Research & Policy

Staff time

Potential consulting fees

Appraisal fees15

ESA fees

Realtor commission

Land Transfer Tax

Improves awareness of demand and supply of family housing stock in Wallaceburg

Identifies options to better meet current and projected housing needs


Immediate Possible redistribution of existing units and addition of new units

15 Based on an appraisal of public housing buildings in 2011, the building has been valued at $2,813,100.

148



Priority New Supply

Increase Supply of Affordable Housing



Research & Policy

Staff time (monitoring of targets)

Meets HSA requirement

Increases supply of affordable and supportive housing in Chatham-Kent

Creates greater awareness of housing activity and ability to meet targets and address need (monitoring of targets)


Immediate Potential to increase affordable housing (25% of new supply) and supportive housing (2% of 25% new affordable housing supply)

11. Encourage linkages with various funding programs and municipal incentives to maximize funding potential for affordable housing.

Education & Awareness

Staff time Improves synergies in program and service delivery

Creates greater leveraging of funding opportunities


Employment and Social Services Policies

Healthy Community Initiatives

Ongoing Potential to create new supply through additional funding opportunities

149



Priority New Supply


Research & Policy

Staff time Establishes clear definition for Municipality

Meets PPS requirement


Immediate No new supply created


Financial Incentive

Staff time

Allocation of $3.5 million in IAH funding for 2012 to 2015

Increases supply of affordable housing


Immediate/ Ongoing

IAH projected to create 12 new affordable rental units and 37 affordable re-sale and one new ownership units for the period 2012 to 2015


Financial Incentive

Staff time

Lost opportunity costs of municipal revenue related to any financial incentives

Increases supply of affordable housing



Planning Services Policies

High Potential for increased supply based on funding incentives

Ensure Availability of Emergency and Transitional Housing Options

15. Investigate opportunities to collaborate with housing providers and local support agencies to provide

Research & Policy

Staff time Identify new opportunities for partnerships


Employment

High No new supply created, potential for increased number of

150



Priority New Supply

emergency and supportive housing options within existing buildings that may be experiencing vacancies.

Increase emergency and supportive housing options

and Social Services Policies

Prosperity Roundtable

emergency and supportive units

16. Further analyze emergency and transitional housing and support needs within Municipality (including consultation with persons experiencing homelessness) in order to develop a Homelessness Plan which responds to the requirements of the HSA.

Research & Policy

Staff time

Consulting fees

Meet HSA requirement

Develop Plan to respond to needs of homeless and at-risk population

Improved support for persons in need

Engage homeless population in Plan




Immediate No new supply created, potential to identify housing and support options for persons who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness


Advocate & Support

Staff time Improve housing and supports for persons in need

Increased funding for emergency and



Prosperity

Ongoing Potential to create new emergency and transitional housing and support options

151



Priority New Supply

transitional funding

Community partnership development

Roundtable

Promote Expanding Range of Support Services (in urban and rural areas)



Staff time

Materials for workshop

Improved relationship among landlords and tenants

Greater awareness of issues


High No new supply created


Advocacy & Support

Staff time Improve coordination of agencies addressing needs of seniors

Senior Services Policies and Initiatives

High No new supply created


Research & Policy

Staff time

Potential fees for survey implement-ation and analysis

Improve supports for tenants and landlords

Greater awareness of issues

Improve relationship

Social Housing Policies

High No new supply, potential to improve existing housing conditions

152



Priority New Supply

among landlords and tenants

21. Initiate community working group comprised of housing providers, municipal staff (Housing Services), support service agencies as well as representation from the Erie St. Clair CCAC‟s Chatham-Kent Geographic Implementation Committee for Home First, to identify opportunities to leverage resources and provide more support services for tenants.


Staff time

Materials (printing)


Opportunity to leverage resources to meet community support needs

Social Housing Policies

High No new supply, potential to identify resource opportunities

22. Continue efforts to provide service hubs at municipal locations to assist support agencies in delivering support services to rural communities.

Advocacy & Support

Staff time Improved access to services for rural residents

Develop synergies in delivery of services




Ongoing No new supply, potential for improved access and availability of support services

23. Conduct target focus groups to further identify housing and support service needs of Aboriginal persons, persons with disabilities, homeless persons, victims of domestic


Staff time

Facilitation fees

Materials

Greater awareness of unique housing and support needs of persons in


Employment and Social

Immediate (as part of Homelessness Plan)

No new supply created

153



Priority New Supply

violence, and youth. need in Chatham-Kent

Services Policies


Promote, Educate and Create Awareness of Housing Issues in Chatham-Kent

24. Continue to be a leader in further education and awareness of housing issues


Staff time Greater awareness of housing issues in the community



Healthy Communities Initiatives

Senior Services Initiatives

Ongoing No new supply created





Simplified guidelines/rules

Advocacy & Support

Staff time Opportunity for increased funding for housing and supports




Ongoing No new supply created, potential to improve tools for creating more affordable housing or improving living conditions

154



Priority New Supply

for funding programs



Staff time

Materials

Potential facilitation fees


Capacity building

Greater coordination in developing affordable housing

Improve awareness of various housing partners




High Potential for new supply through funding and agency synergies

155


Present Draft HSU and Housing Plan

to Council

Circulate Draft HSU and Housing

Plan to MMAH and Local

Stakeholders

Summarize and Incorporate

Feedback

Seek Council Approval of HSU and Housing Plan

Provide MMAH with Final

Housing Plan and Share with

Stakeholders

11.4 Next Steps

The Chatham-Kent Housing Plan Framework represents a compressive approach to addressing housing needs in Chatham-Kent. It establishes a housing vision, housing targets, housing objectives and housing measures for Chatham-Kent while taking into consideration both senior and local government policies. Importantly, the housing vision for Chatham-Kent cannot be achieved by the Municipality alone but rather requires the collective efforts of a broad range of stakeholders to come together to implement the recommended actions and ultimately achieve the housing vision for Chatham-Kent. The information provided in the above sections provides the context and structure for meeting the Housing and Homelessness Plan requirements as outlined within the Housing Services Act. A template for the Chatham-Kent Housing Plan and Housing Report Card is provided in Appendices F and G. At this time it is anticipated that Housing Services will provide a final draft of the Housing Study Update and Proposed Housing Plan to Council in March 2012. Following this, Housing Services will circulate the proposed Housing Plan to social housing providers funded through the Municipality, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH), community agencies and groups (who were invited to participate in the Housing Study Update consultation activities), and the community at large via website and media release. Comments will be accepted for input for up to 60 days and results will be summarized and incorporated into final HSU and Housing Plan. Following the preparation of the final draft, Housing Services will return to Council to seek Council approval of the HSU and Housing Plan. Following Council approval, Housing Services will provide MMAH with final Plan, post document on municipal website and issue media release. In addition, with Council‟s approval of the 2012 budget, provision has been made for undertaking the work of preparing a Homelessness Study and Plan. Administration anticipates that a Request for Proposal for this work will be issued possibly as early as April 2012.

156


Appendices

157


Appendix A – Tables Appendix A 1: Historical Population by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006 ............................ 158 Appendix A 2: Trends in Household Growth, Chatham-Kent, 1991 to 2006 .................................. 158 Appendix A 3: Population by Household Type by Community and Ontario, 2006 ........................... 159 Appendix A 4: Household Income Ranges, Chatham-Kent, 1995, 2000, and 2005 .......................... 159 Appendix A 5: Unemployment Rates by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006 ........................... 160 Appendix A 6: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent (1991-2006) ..................................... 160 Appendix A 7: Occupied Private Dwellings by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2006 ........................... 161 Appendix A 8: Conditions of Dwellings by Municipality, Chatham-Kent, 2006 .............................. 163 Appendix A 9: Housing Starts and Completions, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010 ................................. 163 Appendix A 10: Tenure Rates for Chatham-Kent, 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006 ............................. 164 Appendix A 11: Geographic Location of Rent Supplement Units by Unit Size ............................... 164 Appendix A 12: Summary of Social Housing Portfolio by ........................................................ 164 Appendix A 13: Snapshot of Social Housing Waiting List by Household Type and Unit Size, December of 1998-2010 ................................................................................................................ 165 Appendix A 14: Snapshot of Social Housing Waiting List by Community, December of Each Year 1998-2010 ....................................................................................................................... 166 Appendix A 15: Total Income in Constant (2005) Dollars, for Seniors Aged 65+ in Chatham-Kent, 2000-2005 ....................................................................................................................... 167

158


Appendix A 1: Historical Population by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006

2001 2006 Change 2001-

2006

Community # % # % # %

Blenheim 4,917 4.6% 4,624 4.3% -293 -6.0%

Chatham 44,669 41.6% 46,863 43.3% 2,194 4.9%

Dresden 2,647 2.5% 2,504 2.3% -143 -5.4%

Ridgetown 3,453 3.2% 3,243 3.0% -210 -6.1%

Tilbury 4,672 4.4% 4,855 4.5% 183 3.9%

Wallaceburg 11,290 10.5% 10,723 9.9% -567 -5.0%

Wheatley 2,745 2.6% 3,057 2.8% 312 11.4%

Bothwell 1,002 0.9% 968 0.9% -34 -3.4%

Charing Cross 364 0.3% 426 0.4% 62 17.0%

Merlin 719 0.7% 762 0.7% 43 6.0%

Mitchell's Bay 339 0.3% 285 0.3% -54 -15.9%

Pain Court 500 0.5% 525 0.5% 25 5.0%

Thamesville 928 0.9% 930 0.9% 2 0.2%

Chatham-Kent 107,341 100.0% 108,177 100.0% 836 0.8%

Source: 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

Appendix A 2: Trends in Household Growth, Chatham-Kent, 1991 to 2006

1991 1996 2001 2006 % Change % Change % Change

1991-1996 1996-2001 2001-2006

Number of Households 39,950 41,320 41,945 43,670 3.4% 1.5% 4.1%


159


Appendix A 3: Population by Household Type by Community and Ontario, 2006

Geography Total Households Family Non-Family

# % # %

Blenheim 1,910 1,370 71.7% 530 27.7%

Chatham 19,630 13,160 67.0% 6,480 33.0%

Ridgetown 1,365 910 66.7% 450 33.0%

Tilbury 1,895 1,360 71.8% 535 28.2%

Wallaceburg 4,485 3,080 68.7% 1,410 31.4%

Wheatley 1,105 860 77.8% 245 22.2%

Bothwell 390 270 69.2% 125 32.1%

Charing Cross 210 165 78.6% 40 19.0%

Merlin 295 245 83.1% 60 20.3%

Mitchells Bay 155 95 61.3% 60 38.7%

Pain Court 200 155 77.5% 50 25.0%

Thamesville 380 260 68.4% 120 31.6%

Rural Areas 10,630 8,290 78.0% 2,335 22.0%

Chatham-Kent 43,670 30,915 70.8% 12,750 29.2%

Ontario 4,555,025 3,301,130 72.5% 1,253,895 27.5%


Appendix A 4: Household Income Ranges, Chatham-Kent, 1995, 2000,

and 2005

1995 2000 2005

Income Range # % # % # %

Under $10,000 2,370 5.8% 2,325 5.5% 1,730 4.0%

$10,000-$19,999 6,765 16.5% 5,500 13.1% 4,940 11.4%

$20,000-$29,999 5,615 13.7% 4,860 11.6% 4,790 11.0%

Under $29,999 14,750 36.0% 12,685 30.2% 11,460 26.3%

$30,000-$39,999 5,155 12.6% 5,065 12.1% 5,015 11.5%

$40,000-$49,999 4,775 11.6% 4,595 11.0% 4,835 11.1%

$50,000-$59,999 4,050 9.9% 4,100 9.8% 3,875 8.9%

$60,000-$69,000 3,525 8.6% 3,655 8.7% 3,725 8.6%

$70,000-$79,999 2,535 6.2% 3,035 7.2% 2,880 6.6%

$80,000-$89,999 1,925 4.7% 2,365 5.6% 2,630 6.0%

$90,000-$99,999 1,370 3.3% 1,690 4.0% 2,070 4.8%

$100,000 and over 2,905 7.1% 4,760 11.3% 7,025 16.1%

All households 40,990 100.0% 41,950 100.0% 43,515 100.0%

Source: Statistics Canada; 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

160


Appendix A 5: Unemployment Rates by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2001-2006

Community 2001 2006

Blenheim 11.2% 5.5%

Chatham 9.1% 7.5%

Dresden 14.5% 9.5%

Ridgetown 7.1% 5.0%

Tilbury 7.1% 9.3%

Wallaceburg 11.2% 8.3%

Wheatley 4.0% 6.8%

Bothwell 6.0% 9.4%

Charing Cross 7.0% 5.7%

Merlin 5.4% 6.0%

Mitchell's Bay 7.8% 14.5%

Pain Court 5.8% 2.9%

Thamesville 4.4% 9.9%

Chatham-Kent 8.3% 7.2%

Ontario 6.1% 6.4%


Appendix A 6: Occupied Private Dwellings, Chatham-Kent (1991-2006)

Housing Type 1991 1996 2001 2006

# % # % # % # %

Single Detached 29,725 74.6% 31,400 76.4% 32,070 76.4% 33,090 76.0%

Semi-Detached 1,190 3.0% 1,060 2.6% 1,065 2.5% 1,265 2.9%

Row House 1,275 3.2% 1,505 3.7% 1,815 4.3% 1,480 3.4%

Apartment, detached duplex 675 1.7% 850 2.1% 595 1.4% 780 1.8%

Apartment building, five or more storeys

1,405 3.5% 1,470 3.6% 1,475 3.5% 1,530 3.5%

Apartment building, less than five storeys

4,755 11.9% 4,475 10.9% 4,310 10.3% 5,175 11.9%

Other single attached house 260 0.7% 105 0.3% 180 0.4% 110 0.3%

Movable unit 580 1.5% 255 0.6% 445 1.1% 130 0.3%

Total occupied private dwellings

39,865 100% 41,120 100% 41,955 100% 43,560 100%

Source: Statistics Canada, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

161


Appendix A 7: Occupied Private Dwellings by Community, Chatham-Kent, 2006

Chatham-Kent Chatham Dresden Wallaceburg

Housing Type # % # % # % # %

Single-detached house 33,090 76.0% 11804 63.6% 848 84.1% 3369 75.7%

Semi-detached house 1,265 2.9% 805 4.3% 5 0.5% 161 3.6%

Row house 1,480 3.4% 718 3.9% 14 1.4% 205 4.6%


Apartment, building that has five or more storeys

1,530 3.5% 1355 7.3% 0 0.0% 115 2.6%

Apartment, building that has fewer than five storeys

5,175 11.9% 3297 17.8% 129 12.8% 487 10.9%

Other single-attached house 110 0.3% 35 0.2% 0 0.0% 24 0.5%

Movable dwelling 130 0.3% 22 0.1% 0 0.0% 1 0.0%

Total occupied private dwellings 43,560 100% 18,569 100% 1,008 100% 4,451 100%

Wheatley Tilbury Ridgetown Blenheim

Housing Type # % # % # % # %

Single-detached house 949 86.4% 1,473 77.1% 1047 76.0% 1,443 76.9%

Semi-detached house 7 0.6% 44 2.3% 41 3.0% 33 1.8%

Row house 47 4.3% 133 7.0% 97 7.0% 107 5.7%



0 0.0% 0 0.0% 50 3.6% 0 0.0%


67 6.1% 240 12.6% 114 8.3% 261 13.9%



Total occupied private dwellings 1,098 100% 1,910 100% 1,378 100% 1,877 100%

Thamesville Merlin Mitchell's Bay Bothwell

Housing Type # % # % # % # %

Single-detached house 311 79.7% 266 91.4% 119 97.5% 348 87.9%

Semi-detached house 10 2.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 5 1.3%

Row house 15 3.8% 0 0.0% 3 2.5% 18 4.5%



0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0%


39 10.0% 21 7.2% 0 0.0% 18 4.5%



Total occupied private dwellings 390 100% 291 100% 122 100% 396 100%

162


Pain Court Charing Cross

Housing Type # % # %

Single-detached house 182 90.1% 156 77.2%

Semi-detached house 0 0.0% 6 3.0%

Row house 6 3.0% 0 0.0%

Apartment, detached duplex 3 1.5% 3 1.5%


0 0.0% 0 0.0%


8 4.0% 7 3.5%

Other single-attached house 3 1.5% 0 0.0%

Movable dwelling 0 0.0% 0 0.0%

Total occupied private dwellings 202 100% 172 85%


163


Appendix A 8: Conditions of Dwellings by Municipality, Chatham-Kent, 2006

Community

Regular Maintenance

Minor Repairs Major Repairs Total

# % # % # %

Blenheim 1,281 68.5% 464 24.8% 126 6.7% 1,871

Chatham 12,995 70.3% 4,135 22.4% 1,360 7.4% 18,490

Dresden 700 68.7% 231 22.7% 88 8.6% 1,019

Ridgetown 967 69.5% 329 23.6% 96 6.9% 1,392

Tilbury 1,229 64.7% 557 29.3% 114 6.0% 1,900

Wallaceburg 2,804 63.4% 1,267 28.7% 350 7.9% 4,421

Wheatley 722 66.5% 295 27.2% 69 6.4% 1,086

Bothwell 221 56.2% 127 32.3% 45 11.5% 393

Charing Cross 97 58.4% 59 35.5% 10 6.0% 166

Merlin 170 60.7% 73 26.1% 37 13.2% 280

Mitchell's Bay 82 64.1% 46 35.9% 0 0.0% 128

Pain Court 132 67.7% 57 29.2% 6 3.1% 195

Thamesville 279 73.6% 81 21.4% 19 5.0% 379

Chatham-Kent 29,240 67.2% 11,035 25.4% 3,250 7.5% 43,525


Appendix A 9: Housing Starts and Completions, Chatham-Kent, 1998-2010

Housing Starts

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Single Detached

164 119 108 65 74 122 120 147 141 165 126 72 95

Semi Detached

4 0 20 6 8 16 18 12 28 8 10 10 4

Row Housing

4 0 8 25 8 12 5 38 46 4 0 3 4

Apartments 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Total 206 119 136 96 90 150 143 197 217 177 136 85 103

Housing Completions

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Single Detached

157 144 108 54 85 85 151 131 118 164 129 81 102

Semi Detached

4 0 18 8 8 10 24 10 22 12 6 10 8

Row Housing

9 0 4 13 24 8 9 22 39 20 7 0 3

Apartments 2 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

Total 172 176 130 75 117 103 184 163 181 196 142 91 113


164


Appendix A 11: Geographic Location of Rent Supplement Units by Unit Size

Community Bachelor One

Bedroom Two

Bedroom Three

Bedroom Four

Bedroom Total

Special Needs

Chatham 0 85 25 1 0 111 1

Thamesville 0 2 0 0 0 2 0

Tilbury 0 2 0 0 2 0

Wallaceburg 0 5 0 0 0 5 0

Total 0 94 25 1 0 120 1

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , May 2010

Appendix A 12: Summary of Social Housing Portfolio by Geographic Location and Provider Type

Community Public Rent Supp NP & Co-op Total Units % of Units

Blenheim 61 - 35 96 6.0%

Bothwell 10 - - 10 0.6%

Chatham 261 111 667 1,039 65.3%

Dresden 40 - - 40 2.5%

Ridgetown 10 - 42 52 3.3%

Thamesville - 2 - 2 0.1%

Tilbury 56 2 - 58 3.6%

Wallaceburg 240 5 30 275 17.3%

Wheately 20 - - 20 1.3%

Total 698 120 774 1,592 100.0%

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , June 2011

Appendix A 10: Tenure Rates for Chatham-Kent, 1991, 1996, 2001, and 2006

Year Ownership Rented Total

1991 27,545 12,395 39,940

1996 28,915 12,285 41,200

2001 30,270 11,680 41,950

2006 31,780 11,745 43,525

Years % Owner Occupied % Rented Total

1991 69.0% 31.0% 100.0%

1996 70.2% 29.8% 100.0%

2001 72.2% 27.8% 100.0%

2006 73.0% 27.0% 100.0%

Source: Statistics Canada, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006 Census of Canada

165


Appendix A 13: Snapshot of Social Housing Waiting List by Household Type and Unit Size, December of 1998-2010

Households Dec. 1998

Dec. 1999

Dec. 2000

Dec. 2001

Dec. 2002*

Dec. 2003

Dec. 2004

Dec. 2005

Dec. 2006

Dec. 2007

Dec. 2008

Dec. 2009

Dec. 2010

Average

With Dependents

2 Bedrooms 59 28 51 52 58 21 41 70 21 36 44 41 39 43

3 Bedrooms 23 16 16 38 27 11 25 28 13 23 35 30 15 23

4 Bedrooms 8 9 6 12 2 1 9 6 5 7 17 9 8 8

Total With Dependents

90 53 73 102 87 33 75 104 39 66 96 80 62 74

Without Dependents

1 Bedroom 109 97 99 109 114 74 131 84 63 55 44 75 62 86

2 Bedrooms 2 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Total Without Dependents

111 98 102 111 114 74 131 84 64 55 44 75 62 87

Seniors

1 Bedroom 40 28 24 33 16 17 7 27 43 36 45 64 63 34

2 Bedrooms 1 3 2 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 3 2 2 1

Total Seniors 41 31 26 33 16 18 8 28 44 36 48 66 65 35

Total

1 Bedroom 149 125 123 142 130 91 138 111 106 91 89 139 125 120

2 Bedrooms 62 32 56 54 58 22 42 71 23 36 47 43 41 45

3 Bedrooms 23 16 16 38 27 11 25 28 13 23 35 30 15 23

4 Bedrooms 8 9 6 12 2 1 9 6 5 7 17 9 8 8

Processing 54 145 143 N/A 18 67 N/A N/A 130 78 120 114 132 115

Total 296 327 344 246 235 192 214 216 277 235 308 335 321 311

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , 1998-2010 *Jan 2003 data substituted for Dec. 2002 as Dec. 2002 data not available.

166


Appendix A 14: Snapshot of Social Housing Waiting List by Community, December of Each Year 1998-2010

Community Dec. 1998

Dec. 1999

Dec. 2000

Dec. 2001 Dec.

2002* Dec. 2003

Dec. 2004

Dec. 2005

Dec. 2006

Dec. 2007

Dec. 2008

Dec. 2009

Dec. 2010

Average

Blenheim 7 1 2

Data not available

by community

12 0 3 3 1 2 7 7 3 4

Bothwell 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Chatham 213 168 181 156 86 108 116 124 131 135 174 154 146

Dresden 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1

Ridgetown 1 1 0 7 8 13 9 9 5 6 7 4 6

Thamesville 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0

Tilbury 6 4 11 15 13 10 8 8 7 11 11 8 9

Wallaceburg 11 8 7 22 18 15 9 5 11 28 20 17 14

Wheatley 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0

Processing 54 145 143 139 67 64 68 130 78 120 114 132 105

Total 296 327 344 246 356 192 214 216 277 235 308 335 321 282

Source: Municipality of Chatham-Kent, , 1998-2010 *Jan. 2003 data used instead of Dec. 2002 data as Dec. 2002 data not available.

167


Appendix A 15: Total Income in Constant (2005) Dollars, for Seniors Aged 65+ in Chatham-Kent, 2000-2005

Income Categories 2000 2005 Change 1995-2000

# % # % # %

Under $2,000 75 0.5% 55 0.3% -20 -26.7%

$2,000 to $4,999 55 0.4% 60 0.4% 5 9.1%

$5,000 to $6,999 270 1.8% 240 1.5% -30 -11.1%

$7,000 to $9,999 655 4.4% 695 4.4% 40 6.1%

$10,000 to $11,999 665 4.5% 685 4.3% 20 3.0%

$12,000 to $14,999 2130 14.3% 1575 10.0% -555 -26.1%

$15,000 to $19,999 3270 22.0% 3380 21.4% 110 3.4%

$20,000 to $24,999 1780 12.0% 2240 14.2% 460 25.8%

$25,000 to $29,999 1445 9.7% 1870 11.8% 425 29.4%

$30,000 to $34,999 1265 8.5% 1220 7.7% -45 -3.6%

$35,000 to $39,999 860 5.8% 800 5.1% -60 -7.0%

$40,000 to $44,999 525 3.5% 645 4.1% 120 22.9%

$45,000 to $49,999 445 3.0% 560 3.5% 115 25.8%

$50,000-$59,999 610 4.1% 850 5.4% 240 39.3%

$60,000-$69,999 315 2.1% 410 2.6% 95 30.2%

$70,000-$79,999 180 1.2% 205 1.3% 25 13.9%

$80,000 and over 300 2.0% 335 2.1% 35 11.7%

Total - Income Groups 14845 15810 965 6.5%

Average Income $27,097 $28,401 $1,304 4.8%

Median Income $20,765 $22,705 $1,940 9.3%


168


Appendix B – List of Key Informants The following individuals provided input to this report by completing a survey and/or participating in interviews.

Name Organization

Austin, Melaney Habitat for Humanity Canada, Chatham-Kent

Babcock, Michelle Family Service Kent Bechard, Brandon Chatham-Kent Housing Services Belore, Rebecca Chatham-Kent Housing Services Colasanti, Valerie Chatham-Kent Employment & Social

Services Coristine, Ron Association for Community Living,

Chatham-Kent District Corso, Angela Nancy‟s Place Chatham-Kent Women‟s

Centre Coyne, Marsha Chatham-Kent Planning Services Craig, Jennifer Chatham-Kent Riverview Gardens Craig, Shelley Riverway Non Profit Housing Corporation Cross, Denise Association for Community Living,

Wallaceburg & Sydenham District Davidson, Lyndsay Chatham-Kent Public Health Unit Dickson, Rhonda Chatham-Kent Salvation Army Gall, Lori Brain Injury Association of Chatham-Kent Hebrick, Crystal Delaware Nation Henley, Hilary Canadian Mental Health Association,

Chatham-Kent Jacobs, Suzanne Three Fires Women‟s Centre Jacques, Ryan Chatham-Kent Planning Services

Johns, Jennifer Chatham-Kent Housing Services Kalbfleisch, Nancy Chatham-Kent Housing Services Kaminek, Renee Clairvue Co-operative Housing

Corporation Lennox, Mark Brentwood Recovery Home for Alcoholics Menelaws, Andy Canadian Mental Health Association Michaud, Gilles Chatham-Kent Home Builders‟ Association Mieras, Janet Canadian Mental Health Association,

Chatham-Kent Mofat, Sylvia Chatham-Kent Association of Realtors Nelmes, April March of Dimes Canada Nordam, Jean Christian Senior Citizens Home of

Chatham Peltier, Glen St. Vincent de Paul

169


Peters, Roberta Delaware Nation Pickering, Mary Lynn Chatham-Kent Employment & Social

Services Pugliese, Ralph Chatham-Kent Planning Services Rabideau, Nancy Columbus Estates of Chatham Reaume, Maril Brentwood Recovery Home for Alcoholics Salisbury, Linda Chatham-Kent Housing Services Smoke, Gail Clairvue Co-operative Housing

Corporation Thain, Allison Community Living Wallaceburg Verburg, Tonya Chatham-Kent Women‟s Centre Verfaillie, Brad Community Living Chatham-Kent Wilcox, Amy Community Development (CAO‟s Office)

170


Appendix C – Surveys

Organization Name:

Contact Person:

Telephone Number:

Email Address:

Please verify if the Needs Served and our Support Services are correct and complete the table for Number of Beds, Number of Clients, Waiting List, and Wait Time.

Needs Served Support Services Number of Beds

Number of Clients

Waiting List

Wait Time

-

1. What are the key housing and support challenges facing your clients?

2. How have these changed since 2006?

3. Do you have any recent (i.e. post 2006) reports/studies that you feel we should look at?

4. Do you feel the actions adopted by the Municipality of Chatham-Kent have been effective in addressing the housing issues experienced by your clients? Why or why not?

5. Do you have any ideas/strategies that the Municipality of Chatham-Kent could put into place to address the housing needs of your clients?

We thank you for your assistance. Please return your survey to [email protected] or fax to (905) 763-7558

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

171


Appendix D – Summary of Ontario Housing Policy Statement

The Ontario Housing Policy Statement is intended to provide further direction to Service Managers to

support the development of their plans. The Province outlines seven broad policy directions each with

more specific requirements for service managers. These requirements are outlined below:

1. Accountability and Outcomes

Service Managers will ensure that local housing and homelessness plans:

a. demonstrate a system of coordinated housing and homelessness services to assist

families and individuals to move toward a level of self-sufficiency;

b. include services, supported by housing and homelessness research and forecasts, that

are designed to improve outcomes for individuals and families;

c. are coordinated and integrated with all municipalities in the service area;

d. contain strategies to increase awareness of, and improve access to, affordable and safe

housing that is linked to supports, homelessness prevention and social programs and

services;

e. contain strategies to identify and reduce gaps in programs, services and supports and

focus on achieving positive outcomes for individuals and families;

f. contain local housing policies and short and long-term housing targets;

g. provide for public consultation, progress measurement, and reporting.

2. Goal of Ending Homelessness

Service Managers will ensure that housing and homelessness plans:

a. provide measures to prevent homelessness by supporting people to stay in their homes

including eviction prevention measures and the provision of supports appropriate to

clients’ needs;

b. are based on a Housing First philosophy and developed in consultation with a broad

range of local stakeholders including those who have experienced homelessness;

c. support innovative strategies to address homelessness;

d. include the provision of supports prior to and after obtaining housing to facilitate

transitioning people from the street and shelters to safe, adequate and stable housing.

3. Non-Profit Housing Corporations and Non-Profit Housing Co-Operatives

Service Managers will ensure that their housing and homelessness plans:

a. reflect the active engagement of non-profit housing corporations and non-profit

housing co-operatives in current and future needs planning;

b. include strategies to support non-profit housing corporations and non-profit housing co-

operatives in the delivery of affordable housing;

c. include strategies to support ongoing access to affordable housing by preserving existing

social housing capacity.

172


4. The Private Market

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will set out a strategy to generate municipal

support for an active and vital private ownership and rental market, including second units and

garden suites, as a necessary part of the housing continuum including affordable home

ownership, where appropriate.

5. Co-ordination with other Community Services

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will demonstrate how progress will be made

in moving toward integrated human services planning and delivery.

6. A Broad Range of Community Needs

a) Accessibility

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will contain an assessment of needs that

identifies and sets local requirements for accessible housing and homelessness services for

people with disabilities, including those who have mental health needs or illness and/or

substance use issues.

b) Special Priority Policy

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will include a strategy setting out how the

housing needs for victims of domestic violence will be addressed and managed at the local level,

in coordination with other community-based services and supports.

c) Aboriginal Peoples Living Off-Reserve

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will identify and consider the housing needs

of Aboriginal Peoples living off-reserve.

d) Community Needs

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans reflect the evolving demographics of their

community and address the needs of specific local groups. Local groups might include: seniors,

youth, women, immigrants, persons released from custody or under community supervision,

Crown Wards, and Franco-Ontarians.

7. Environmental Sustainability and Energy Conservation

Service Manager housing and homelessness plans will demonstrate a commitment to improve

the energy efficiency of existing and future publicly funded housing stock. This includes

support for energy conservation and energy efficiency through operating programs, tenant

engagement, housing located near transportation choices, and innovative investment decisions

such as the installation of renewable energy and low carbon technologies.

173


Appendix E – Summary of 2006 Recommendation

174


Current Status of 2006 Housing Study Recommendations

Strategic Direction (4)

Completed Recommendations (10)

No Longer Applicable (3)

For Discussion: Incomplete (19)

For Discussion: Ongoing Recommendations (25)

OP = OFFICIAL PLAN

HSU= HOUSING STUDY UPDATE

175


2006 Recommendation Status Background/Progress

Strategic Housing Direction 1: Housing Choices

Ensuring there is an appropriate supply and mix of housing for all household types, including persons with special needs will support the creation of liveable, sustainable communities across Chatham-Kent.

1. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent consider adding specific housing objectives into the development of any updated or future Community Strategic Plan.

-The CSP has not been updated since 2005

The Community Strategic Plan Committee (CSPC) is an advisory committee to Chatham-Kent Municipal Council has been working to pull together existing plans and people.

The 2011 Workplan outlines 3 key objectives for CSPC: communicate with Council and stakeholders on community focus areas Health, Economy, Environment, Culture and Learning; inspire community action; and enhance capacity of committee members.

The Community Strategic Plan will be the overarching strategic document for the municipality. It will be important for the HSU to include, in the introduction to the strategy, how the HSU helps contribute to the overall principles of the Strategic Plan (i.e. health, economy, environment, culture).

Promotion of healthy active people is one of six Council directions in the Strategic Plan.

2. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent put in place a system to ensure that new housing production and mix is monitored on a regular basis, preferably annually or at least every three years.

-Incomplete Pending OP Review & HSU

3. That, in keeping with the policies of the Official Plan, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent re-evaluate its housing projections once the 2006 Census data on population and household information is available.

-Completed in 2009 and update currently underway

2009 Growth Analysis adopted by Council.

Current OP Review process & HSU process underway

176



4. That the Municipality adopt affordable housing target ranges.

-Partially completed

________________

-In progress

Housing Delivery Plan for AHP, adopted in 2006

OP Review & HSU in Progress

5. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, in conjunction with community agencies, monitor the effectiveness of its new group home distancing bylaw in reducing barriers to the creation of this form of housing.

-Completed Has been seen as a positive change by community organizations (i.e. Community Living Association).

6. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent permit accessory apartments in all residential zones in accordance with appropriate planning criteria in order to help provide a wider mix of unit types in such areas.

-Incomplete

It is possible that this will be completed as part of Phases 2 and 3 of the OP Review.

Amendments to the Planning Act (as a result of the Housing Service Act) requires municipalities to have a policy to permit secondary units.

7. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, through its Accessibility Committee, monitor the development of the Accessibility for Ontarians Disability Act (AODA) standards and provide support to organizations covered by the new regulation to ensure compliance.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Dec 2/02 Council established the Accessibility Advisory Committee (AAC).

AAC has made annual reports to Council since 2004. The 2010-2011 Accessibility Report was approved by Council Feb 14/11.

Community FADs adopted by Council on Oct 6/08 for municipally-owned properties.

CKHS has permanent staff represented on the Committee

(Health & Family Services reps)

8. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent invite CMHC to co-host an Accessibility Forum to provide public awareness and education on accessibility legislation and best practices for design standards.

-Incomplete In April 2011, the Accessibility Committee held a half day training session for CKHS staff and private non-profit housing representatives.

177



9. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent encourage local housing providers to consider universal design and flex housing concepts when undertaking a major renovation.

-Complete

&

-Ongoing

Created and maintain database of Modified Units specific modifications as well as site accessibility features for all social housing projects.

Encourage improvements to accessibility when funding available, i.e. SHCAP, SHRRP, Enabling Accessibility Funding.

Update database re: improvements. Report on improvements annually.

Building Division only requires compliance with Ontario Building Code; recommendation has not been adopted by Council.

Required use of FADS for design-build contract for Riverview Terrace, 5 Tecumseh Road, Chatham.

10. That the Municipality monitor the impact of recent changes to landlord and tenant relationships and work with municipal sector organizations such as the Association of Municipalities of Ontario and the Service Manager Housing Network to advocate for changes as required.

-Complete

&

-Ongoing

Municipal staff participate on SMHN, OMSSA and Committees re: Rental Tenancies Act (replaced Tenant Protection Act), Housing Services Act (replaced Social Housing Report Act); Now, HSA Regulations.

Also provide direct input to various Ministries, Departments and agencies/commissions.

11. That the Municipality encourage social housing providers with vacancy issues to enter into agreements with local organizations, such as emergency and transitional housing providers and support service agencies, to help address these vacancies, as well as the need for emergency, transitional and supportive housing.

-Incomplete

_____________

-Not Started

Municipal staff had deferred item for in-depth analysis in Homelessness Planning process.

Grant application was denied in 2011. Homelessness Plan to be developed in 2012, subject to council budget deliberations.

Strategic Housing Direction 2: Housing Affordability

Providing a range of housing choices affordable by households of all income levels will demonstrate the commitment of a caring community.

12. That the Municipality invite CMHC to conduct its Homeownership Education and Training Program in Chatham-Kent.

-Completed Seminar for new homeowners held March 2007.

Also, all new AHP Homeowners provided with complimentary binder of CMHC information on maintaining a home.

178



13. That the Municipality offer support to local community members towards establishing a Habitat for Humanity Chapter in Chatham-Kent.

-Completed Director assisted local resident and Executive Director of United Way launch a group of interested community members into process; 2006 Housing Study was critical to launching a HFHC group

HFHC-CK obtained affiliate status effective October, 2009.

Currently an OW Supervisor is Vice President of the Board and Chair of the Family Selection Committee; CKHS Housing Advisor is also a member of the Family Selection Committee.

HFHC-CK recently (October 2011) announced donation of land and anticipate starting to build in the Spring 2013. IAH PDFP includes $50,000 forgivable loan for HFHC-CK in Spring 2013.

14. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, in conjunction with its participation in the Homeownership component of the Affordable Housing Program, explore the feasibility of various affordable home ownership models.

-Incomplete

-Pending HSU

In August 2011, received funding allocation under new IAH program.

IAH PDFP includes Home Ownership.

15. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent advocate for increased funding from senior governments towards the remediation of brownfields in order to make brownfield development a more viable option for affordable housing.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Municipality did submit a Brownfield Redevelopment Support letter and met with MOE Minister John Garretson (Feb, 2009).

There is currently a Brownfield CIP but no significant clean-up has taken place.

One site located on Grand Ave. West was remediated.

The Municipality does not own brownfield lands.

Municipality will continue to work with private sector if viable options are proposed.

16. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent make every effort to strategically link available affordable housing programs with its Downtown and Main Street Area financial incentive programs, where appropriate in order to maximize the funding potential for affordable housing programs.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Recommendation endorsed by Council.

Housing Services and Planning Services staff work co-operatively to encourage such links.

E.g. Remmcor Ltd. – AHP Development in downtown Chatham received CIP funding.

179



17. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent lend its support to local social and economic development organizations that help develop initiatives to improve income and wages of Chatham-Kent residents.

-Completed

-In progress

&

-Ongoing

Workforce Development Council created in 2002, but only obtained MTCU funding in 2007.

Workforce Planning Board created in 2009

Poverty Round Table created in 2009. Changed name to Prosperity Roundtable in 2011.

18. That the Municipality monitor the impact of recent increases in income support policies and in minimum wage on housing affordability and consider advocating to the Province to adjust income support and minimum wage policies on an annual basis to reflect changes in cost of living.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Have participated in advocacy efforts with Southwest CMSMs, Strategic MGMT (SM) Group; OMSSA, Social Assistance Review (2011).

Submitted report to Council to support and endorse AMO and OMSSA to have the Government of Ontario introduce and fully fund a $100/month Healthy Food Supplement for all adults on social assistance (April 18, 2011)

19. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent enact a Municipal Housing Facilities By-law under Section 210 of the Municipal Act and as outlined in the Official Plan that would enable Chatham-Kent to provide incentives to the private sector to create new affordable housing. The by-law would include the definition of affordable as recommended below (recommendation 20).

-Completed Recommendation adopted by Council.

Municipal Housing Facilities By-Law, #44-2007, passed March 5, 2007.

20. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent adopt the definition of affordable housing as outlined within the Provincial Policy Statement on Housing.

-Completed

______________

-In Progress

Recommendation adopted by Council.

AHP Delivery Plan approved by Council on July 24, 2006.

Pending OP Review & HSU.

21. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent continue to undertake the necessary steps required to participate in the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program and work with proponents to put forward proposals to the Province under this program.

-Completed

______________

-In Progress


AHP –completed with participation in Strong Start, Rental & Supportive Capital Projects, Housing Allowance / Rent Supplements and Home Ownership.

Now have Investment in Affordable Housing (IAH) allocation to plan take-up for. IAH PDFP approved by Council January 30,2012.

180



22. That Chatham-Kent provide a grant in-lieu of a property tax reduction to equalize the taxation rate for newly constructed affordable housing projects funded under the Canada-Ontario Affordable Housing Program and consider providing property tax grants for other affordable housing projects on a case-by-case basis.

-

-Completed

&

-Ongoing


Remmcor Limited By-Law #143-2007 passed July 23, 2007.

This approach will also be applicable for any new projects under IAH Program

23. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent establish an Affordable Housing Reserve Fund to provide incentives to private and community organizations for the creation of affordable housing and other affordable housing purposes.

-Not started Pending HSU

24. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent consider making an annual contribution to the Affordable Housing Reserve Fund to ensure that ongoing funds are available to address identified housing needs.


25. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent consider the use of surplus government lands for the development of affordable housing projects on a case by case basis and advocate for them to be made available at low costs for such purposes.

-Ongoing Used Surplus Municipal Property to build Riverview Terrace.

Review surplus land via Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) & Tax Division notices.

26. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent encourage community groups and agencies interested in development projects to apply for CMHC’s Seed funding program.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Both Planning and Housing Services staff and Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) have been encouraging this.

Remmcor Ltd obtained SEED Funding for Adelaide Manor AHP Project

Municipality of Chatham-Kent obtained SEED Funding for Riverview Terrace

Remmcor Ltd is seeking SEED Funding for Nasr Manor IAH Project

181



27. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, in keeping with the Provincial Policy Statement on Housing, consider flexibility and innovation in development standards, providing they meet basic health and safety requirements.

-Not Started No action taken to date (recommendations not adopted by Council)

28. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, in association with other Service Managers, advocate for changes to provincial policy to strengthen capability of municipalities to adopt inclusionary zoning policies.

-Incomplete Included in Bill 198 and later in Bill 58.

Bill 58 passed second reading on June 3 2010 and has been referred to the Standing Committee on Regulations and Private Bills.

Was not included in recent provincial legislation, including the LTAHS or HSA.

29. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent urge the federal government to change the tax system (as outlined below)

-See rec. #31 See rec. #31

30. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent urge the provincial government to:

Eliminate its capital taxes on rental properties;

Continue bilateral discussions with the federal government on more flexible financing terms for rental development

-Not started No action taken to date (recommendations not adopted by Council)

31. That Chatham-Kent should urge the federal government to expedite the implementation of its low-income housing tax credit program.

-Completed No action taken to date (recommendations not adopted by Council)

32. That Chatham-Kent should consider lending its support, i.e. limited staff time and start-up funds, to local not-for-profit agencies interested in establishing a Community Land Trust.

-

-Not started Has not been requested by any group or PNP.

182



33. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent investigate the feasibility of increasing the number of 100% Municipally funded rent supplement units in order to provide a long-term solution to housing affordability for Chatham-Kent residents.

-Incomplete Diminishing funding for Rent Supplement since 2002 as costs increase but funding static. Municipality has maintained Service Level Standard for Rent Supplement.

IAH PDFP includes Rent Supplement, PDFP approved by Council January 30, 2012 and submitted to MMAH on January 31st, 2012.

Pending HSU.

34. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent continue to provide grants under the Community Partnership Fund and consider adding Housing under the list of potential areas for funding.

-Ongoing Partnership Fund is ongoing with applications now being accepted up until December 2011.

Housing not specifically added as priority area, however, “promoting healthy communities’, enhancing social services”, “focus on youth and seniors development programs are listed”.

Program funding is anticipated to continue annually, subject to council’s annual budget deliberations.

35. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent identify opportunities to bring together potential partners (i.e. community organizations, private corporations, developers and builders, financial institutions, support service agencies, real estate sector etc.) to enhance the capacity for affordable housing projects.

-

-Completed

-Ongoing

Some examples of where this has taken place:

Housing Forum

Regional Planning Community Events

Healthy Communities Events

Strategic Plan of Prosperity Roundtable

36. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent invite CMHC to hold a Strategies for Gaining Community Acceptance workshop to provide private and non-profit housing developers with strategies for gaining community acceptance of their proposed projects. This educational workshop is also suggested for Municipal Councillors.

-

-Incomplete Unsuccessful in getting CAO/EMT support in February 2006 and August 2009

Reconsider in HSU

183



Strategic Housing Direction 3: Housing Quality

Placing strong attention to the maintenance and perseverance of existing housing will contribute to a healthy and sustainable community.

37. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent work closely with CMHC to ensure that available RRAP funds are fully utilized to help improve the existing rental housing stock.

-Completed RRAP will be terminated in March 31, 2012

PDFP includes (Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates allocation.

IAH PDFP endorsed by Council January 30, 2012 and submitted to MMAH on January 31, 2012.

38. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent advocate to senior levels of government for the continuation of CMHC funding programs including the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP), the Emergency Repair Program (ERP), and the Shelter Enhancement Program. Reference to the need for these programs in Chatham-Kent should be emphasized.

-Not

-Applicable

All RRAP Programs of CMHC are finished March 31, 2012.



No new funding for ERP and SEP announced to date.

39. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent inform residents and builders of the federal funding programs available to renovate and repair older existing housing units.

-Completed

Did provide information on RRAP.



40. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent consider supporting local agencies applying for CMHC’s Shelter Enhancement Program funding.

-Completed Supported CKWC Shelter’s application for recent improvements.

41. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent continue to participate in the administration of the Energy Emergency Fund.

-Completed

____________

-Ongoing

Provincial One-Time Energy Bank established August 2004; continued annually as one-time funding in subsequent years

This program will be consolidated under the new Housing Services Act.

OMSSA and OW Strategic Management Group continues to advocate for base funding of this program.

184



42. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent join other Service Managers to advocate for the Energuide for Low Income Households to be reinstated and funding re-allocated.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Support advocacy of OMSSA and SMHN.

Working with CK Energy & OPA Anticipating Fall 2011 announcement.

Launch of CK Energy’s Home Assistance Program (February 7, 2012) with social housing private non-profit housing providers. March 5, 2012 is the Community Launch session. Chatham-Kent’s energy delivery agent for program is Green Saver.

43. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent continue to advocate to MMAH for capital reserve contribution increases at a level that ensures social housing providers are able to meet their obligations and undertake necessary capital repairs.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Advocacy of OMSSA and SMHN ongoing.

Support advocacy of SHSC / ONPHA / CHFC 2006 BCAs/RFFs and Letters to Ministers.

Support advocacy in 2011 EBCAs/RFFs and Letters to Ministers.

Letter received from Hon. Diane Finley acknowledging receipt of letter from Mayor/CEO Randy Hope July 29, 2011 sharing the results of the Municipality’s 2010-2011 Energized Building Conditions Assessments and Reserve Fund Forecasts. Letter notes the positive impact of the Province’s Social Housing Renovation and Retrofit Program (SHRRP) on the aggregate capital reserve fund for social housing.

Strategic Housing Direction 4: Housing Supports and Services

Ongoing efforts to expand the range of available housing supports and access to required services will enable all Chatham-Kent residents to live in healthy, safe and secure environments.

44. That Chatham-Kent consider establishing a Working Group on Older Adults’ Housing to examine more in depth the appropriateness of housing options for older adults. This Group should include both private and non-profit housing sector representation and should examine both private and non-profit housing options for seniors.

-Completed Chatham-Kent Seniors Advisory Committee appointed by Council. Director of Seniors Services is the staff support person. Committee is comprised of each community seniors centre (except one). Committee supported Riverview Terrace project.

Older Adults housing needs were explored during a number of Municipal initiatives:

Housing Forum

Seniors Survey

Regional Community Events

Healthy Communities Event

45. That Chatham-Kent implement the cascading age policy similar to the one put in place in the City of Kingston to address the Seniors Age Policy for Social Housing issue.

-Completed CK-SH 0602 Social Housing Cascading Age Policy and Procedure Issued August 31/06 and Effective October 1/06 after consultation with PNPs with a Seniors’ Mandate.

185



46. That the Municipality monitor the development of the Erie St. Clair LHIN, especially as related to its role in funding supportive housing and support services in the community.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Director, Senior Services attended LHIN Community Agency Meetings.

47. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent continue to pursue funding under the Homelessness Prevention Program in order to help homeless individuals and those at risk of homelessness.

-Ongoing This program will be consolidated under the new Housing Services Act

48. That the Municipality advocate to the Province for additional funding under its rent bank program.

-

-Completed Both Ontario Works and Social Housing regularly advocated for additional funding. MMAH established base funding for 2010 onward.

This program will be consolidated under the new Housing Services Act

49. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent lend its support to community agencies interested in pursuing additional funding from MOH-LTC and MCSS to address the identified needs outlined within the Housing Needs Assessment.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Recommendation endorsed by Council.

Regional Planning Committee (Chatham, Sarnia-Lambton & Windsor Essex communities) held summit ( Promoting Healthy Living, Housing, and Community Design)

CCAC application denied (to extend some senior support services in Chatham seniors housing projects)

AHP referral agreements – support for Remmcor

50. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent advocate to the Homelessness Secretariat to allocate funds under the Supporting Community Partnership Initiatives (SCPI) to Chatham-Kent.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

Application for HPS funding made in 2011 and application was denied.

New requirement under HSA – for January 1, 2014.

186



51. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent conduct a survey a social housing providers and tenants in order to determine what supports are needed to not only foster positive tenant-landlord relationships but to provide the necessary supports to tenants in order for them to maintain their housing.


52. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent examine the feasibility of funding support programs similar to those provided for Hope Housing for all Municipal funded housing providers including public housing providers.

-Not started Municipality tries to provide some supports for its housing, but not sufficiently resourced to do so.

Pending HSU.

53. That the Municipality work with the Salvation Army Housing Support Services program to expand its awareness and understanding of the services provided by the Salvation Army for landlords and tenants and encourage landlords and tenants to access these services where appropriate.

-Completed Ontario Works facilitated meeting with Chatham-Kent Landlord Association in 2008.

Salvation Army works closely with Landlords.

54. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent, through the development of its Transportation Master Plan, further identify the transportation needs of communities within the Municipality and outline strategic policies to meet these needs; including the feasibility of providing some form of public transportation to rural communities.

-Completed (2008) Transportation Master Plan adopted March 3, 2008

The Municipality of Chatham-Kent currently operates three of the four potential interurban transit routes. This provides access to public transit for approximately 75% of the geographic area of the Municipality. Roll-out of the fourth route is subject to public consultation and Council approval for budget considerations. All interurban vehicles are accessible.

187



55. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent establish a Youth Housing Task Force to examine more in-depth the needs of Youth in the Municipality: what funding options are available, what is an appropriate housing model, and to explore other issues affecting Youth such as employment. This Task Force should include a broad representation of stakeholders including representatives from the Mayor’s Youth Council, Ontario Works, education and employment services, youth support services, housing providers, and economic development. Other community organizations such as United Way may also want to be considered. This Task Force should work in conjunction with existing community partners currently working at addressing Youth issues to ensure a coordinated effort at meeting the needs of Youth in Chatham-Kent.

-Completed

&

-Ongoing

March 2006 – Youth Housing Needs Committee established per 2006 Housing Study recommendations.

Hired 0.5 FTE Municipal Youth Co-Ordinator and 0.5 FTE Immigration Support

United Way’s Youth Engagement Strategy completed.

Recently applied for funding for a Co-Coordinator’ supported by CKHS and OW.

56. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent work with local community agencies providing support services to seniors to pursue strategies to bring more support services to rural areas to help seniors stay in their communities.

-Complete

&

-Ongoing

Regional Planning Committee Summit Event and Healthy Community Events considered this recommendation.

Will continue to advocate to LHIN; consistent with Homes First Provincial Strategy (aging at-home philosophy).

57. That the Municipality of Chatham-Kent work with community agencies to determine the feasibility of agencies traveling to rural communities to provide necessary supports where a need is determined.

-Ongoing Encourage / provide hubs at municipal locations, eg. Library Branches, Best Start Centers; Municipal Centres / information desks.

188


Appendix F – Chatham-Kent Housing Plan

189


Chatham-Kent Housing Plan 2012-2022

BACKGROUND

The Housing Services Act was passed on May 4, 2011 and received proclamation on January 1, 2012. The Housing Services Act is a key part of Ontario‟s Long-Term Affordable Housing Strategy (LTAHS). It is a goal of the LTAHS to consolidate Ontario‟s housing and homelessness programs to give municipalities more flexibility in addressing their local needs. As outlined in the Housing Services Act, it is a requirement for all Services Managers to have Housing and Homelessness Plans. These Plans must:

Identify current and future housing needs

Include objectives and targets relating to housing needs

Describe measures proposed to meet these goals

Describe how progress towards meeting the identifies goals will be measured

It is also a requirement that Plans encompass a 10 year period and a review and reporting at least once every 5 years. Plans must incorporate public consultation (including specifically the needs of victims of domestic violence and persons with disabilities). Final approval of the Plans must be in place no later than January 1, 2014.

PURPOSE

Housing is a vital human need. Housing choices, including affordable, accessible and supportive housing, are critical components of prosperous, complete and healthy communities. The Municipality of Chatham-Kent and its housing partners have an important role in the provision of housing for all residents.

The purpose of the Chatham-Kent Housing Plan is to meet the diverse range of housing needs of individuals and families in Chatham-Kent and to fulfill the provincial requirements pursuant to the Housing Services Act and the Ontario Housing Policy Statement. This will be achieved through the full implementation of the Chatham-Kent Housing Plan - Vision, Objectives, Targets and Actions.

190


LOCAL HOUSING NEEDS

The Housing Study Update (HSU) (March 2012) provided a comprehensive update to the 2006 Housing Study. The HSU identifies a number of local housing issues facing the community over the next ten years. NEW HOUSING STOCK SHOULD BE FURTHER DIVERSIFIED Based on projections16, there will need to be an average annual increase of 194 new units over the 2011 to 2031 period. While the creation of new units is keeping pace with demand, activity by type has not shown much diversification (approximately 80% of starts over 2005-2010 period were single detached). Smaller households and aging of the population further emphasize the need for a diverse and flexible stock. EXISTING HOUSING STOCK THAT IS TYPICALLY MORE AFFORDABLE IS AGING AND IN POORER CONDITION The housing stock in Chatham-Kent remains older than the average for the provincial stock as a whole and the municipality experienced less new development since the last Census period. Aging housing stock means higher energy costs making it less affordable and possibly less safe. EMPLOYMENT TRENDS DUE TO ECONOMIC SHIFTS CAN CREATE DEMAND FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING High unemployment rates as a result of job loss and the recent economic downturn and increasing demand for income assistance influences household stability and affordability. SENIORS POPULATION REQUIRES A RANGE OF HOUSING AND SUPPORT OPTIONS The aging of the population will continue with forecasts estimating that over one-third of the total population will be over the age of 55 by 2031. Many seniors are staying at home longer and looking for supports in the home. This is consistent with provincial directions, which are emphasizing more “aging at home” options for seniors. Waiting lists for affordable long term care are growing as are waiting lists for senior social housing units. AFFORDABILITY REMAINS AN ISSUE IN BOTH RENTAL AND OWNERSHIP MARKETS Many renter households are facing affordability challenges and for about twenty percent of households the private rental market is out of reach. Waiting lists for social housing have increased as have the number of households in receipt of income assistance. While the homeownership market is affordable to most households it is still out of reach for households in the lower income ranges. Population groups such as lone parents, single persons, youth, Aboriginal persons, and persons with disabilities are experiencing higher rates of affordability challenges.

16 All population and household projections are based on data provided by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.

191


VACANCY RATES REMAIN HIGH Social housing units saw vacancy rates decline for adult and seniors buildings while vacancy rates remain higher for family units particularly in Wallaceburg. Vacancy rate in the private market remain high at about 7% (a healthy vacancy rate is generally considered 3%). Given fairly high vacancy rates and continued wait list for some type of social housing units, additional rent supplement units should be considered in addition to the creation of new rental units. RURAL RESIDENTS FACE BARRIERS IN ACCESSING SERVICES While there have been some improvements to public transportation, access to services remains a challenge for individuals, in particular seniors and persons with disabilities, to access the services they need. SOME SOCIAL HOUSING TENANTS WOULD BENEFIT FROM SUPPORT SERVICES Stakeholders emphasized a continued need for support services for some social housing tenants. Often residents need assistance with lifeskills (parenting, healthy eating, budgeting etc.), and counselling in order to maintain their home. NEED FOR RANGE OF SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING OPTIONS (Emergency/Transitional, Supportive, Accessible) There is a limited supply of emergency, transitional and supportive housing in Chatham-Kent. Demand for supportive housing has been increasing and stakeholders point to a lack of emergency options for youth, men and single women. The need for more accessible housing also continues and is anticipated to increase with the aging of population.

HOUSING VISION

On National Housing Day, November 22, 2011, community partners gathered to collectively set a direction for housing in Chatham-Kent. Partners included support service agencies and non-profit organizations, housing providers, the private sector and municipal staff. A housing vision resulted from this dialogue:

To provide residents of Chatham-Kent with a full range of housing choices that meet their diverse needs and promote a community of collaboration, acceptance, and pride. This range of housing


Achieving this vision calls for great leadership from the Municipality of Chatham-Kent and strong dedication by all stakeholders.

192


HOUSING TARGETS

To work towards this vision, and to meet necessary senior government regulations, housing targets have been developed. Chatham-Kent‟s target for new housing supply includes:

25% Affordable Housing (including 2% supportive) and 5% Accessible Housing In Chatham-Kent this means: Affordable rental housing is housing where monthly rental costs (excluding utilities) do not exceed 30 percent of the tenant gross monthly household income and is rented at or below the average market rent for a rental unit in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. Affordable ownership housing is housing where monthly housing expenses (including mortgage principle, interest and property tax but excluding insurance or utilities expense) do not exceed 30 percent of gross monthly household income and where the purchase price is at least 10% below the average purchase price of a resale home in the Municipality of Chatham-Kent. Supportive housing is housing for persons with disabilities (mental, physical, and/or developmental disabilities) and/or seniors. Accessible housing refers to units/dwellings that would meet the requirements of Chatham-Kent Facility Accessibility Design Standards (FADS) (2006). These targets are aimed at increasing the supply of affordable, supportive and accessible housing throughout the Municipality and form the foundation for the development of housing actions.

HOUSING OBJECTIVES

To support the housing vision and targets, six housing objectives have been identified:

1. Plan for a diverse range of housing choices 2. Improve and maintain existing housing supply 3. Increase supply of affordable housing 4. Ensure availability of emergency and transitional housing options 5. Promote expanding range of housing support services 6. Promote, educate and create awareness of housing needs

193


ACTIONS, MEASURES AND INDICATORS

ACTION MEASURES INDICATORS

Plan for a diverse range of housing

1. Incorporate and adopt the housing vision, objectives and targets (as outlined in the Housing Study Update) as part of the Official Plan review.

Official Plan Review Adoption of new Official Plan which includes the Municipality‟s housing vision, objectives and targets




Identification and removal of zoning barriers during Comprehensive Zoning By-law review process (to follow OP review)

Number of new affordable housing units/year

Number of new emergency and transitional housing units/year

Number of new supportive housing units/year

3. Include a policy as part of Official Plan Review which permits second suites in all residential zones in accordance with appropriate planning criteria.



Adoption of new Official Plan (including second suite policy) by Council

Number of new affordable housing units created/year


5% of new multi-unit housing units be accessible (fully modified to meet Chatham-Kent Facility Accessibility Design Standards (FADS))


Evaluate and update every five years to support Official Plan Review and Housing and Homelessness Plan review requirements

Number of new accessible housing units/year

Improve and maintain existing supply

5. Continue to participate in housing renovation funding

Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan17

Number of households assisted through (Ontario) Chatham-Kent Renovates (and

17 Chatham-Kent Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan was approved by Council on January 30, 2012.

194



programs. Annual Housing Report Card

other) programs

Number of households reporting home in need of major repairs (every five years only per Census data)


Service Level Standards Report


Completion and adoption of Report

Number of rent-geared-to-income (RGI) units funded each year

7. Continue to complete regular building condition assessments and commit funding to social housing reserves.

Building Condition Assessment Reports


Completion of Building Condition Assessments updates every five years

Investment in capital maintenance of social housing (municipal corporate life cycle approved budget)


Strategic Asset Management Plan


Completion and adoption of Strategic Asset Management Plan including short, medium and long term directions.

Progress in meeting Strategic Asset Management Plan initiatives and priorities on an annual basis.

9. Investigate feasibility and appropriateness of selling family units in Wallaceburg to address vacancy concerns, and determine most appropriate reallocation of units to meet current and projected housing needs (maintaining service level standards).

Summary report of analysis and options for addressing social housing vacancies in Wallaceburg


Completion of report determining most appropriate approach to meet family housing needs in Wallaceburg

Report on progress in executing the approved approach to meet family housing needs in Wallaceburg on an annual basis

Increase Supply of Affordable Housing





Adoption of new Official Plan (including affordable housing and supportive housing target) by Council

Number of new affordable units created/year

Number of new supportive units created/year

195



Cumulative total of affordable units created toward housing target

11. Encourage linkages with various funding programs and municipal incentives to maximize funding potential for affordable housing.


New partnerships and collaborations

Amount of investment in affordable housing by all partners


Official Plan Review Adoption of new Official Plan (including affordable housing definition) by Council


Program Delivery and Fiscal Plan




Amount of investments in affordable housing by all partners


Annual Housing Report Card)



Amount of investments (financial and in-kind) in affordable housing

Ensure availability of emergency and transitional housing options

15. Investigate opportunities to collaborate with housing providers and local support agencies to provide emergency and supportive housing options within existing buildings that may be experiencing vacancies.

Homelessness Plan




Number of new supportive housing units/year

Number of new applicants waiting for supportive housing

Average vacancy rates (private and public)

16. Further analyze emergency and transitional

Homelessness Plan Completion and adoption of Homelessness

196



housing and support needs within Municipality (including consultation with persons experiencing homelessness) in order to develop a Homelessness Plan which responds to the requirements of the Housing Services Act.


Plan

Number of households assisted by (Municipal) homelessness programs


Homelessness Plan


Investments in emergency and transitional housing



Promote expanding range of support services


Workshop on Landlord and Tenant Relations


Completion of workshop and summary report



Number of new tenant support services


Seniors Advisory Committee membership


Broadened membership of Seniors Advisory Committee



Homelessness Plan

Survey of Social Housing Providers on Tenant Support Needs


Number of surveys respondents

Survey summary report


Number of new tenant support services


Number of evictions in public housing stock

21. Initiate community working group comprised of housing providers, municipal staff (Housing Services), support service agencies as

Homelessness Plan

Community Supports Working Group

Establishment of Working Group membership and terms of reference


197



well as representation from the Erie St. Clair CCAC’s Chatham-Kent Geographic Implementation Committee for Home First to identify opportunities to leverage resources and provide more support services for tenants.


Number of new tenant support services initiatives

22. Continue efforts to provide service hubs at municipal locations to assist support agencies in delivering support services to rural communities.



Number of new services offered in rural communities

23. Conduct target focus groups to further identify housing and support service needs of Aboriginal persons, persons with disabilities, homeless persons, victims of domestic violence, and youth.

Homelessness Plan

Target Focus Groups


Completion and adoption of Homelessness Plan

Completion of focus groups and summary report

Promote, educate and create awareness of housing issues

24. Continue to be a leader in further education and awareness of housing issues.


Prosperity Roundtable participation

Number of new housing education and awareness initiatives

Documented contribution to Prosperity Roundtable





Simplified guidelines/rules for


Number of new housing and support service advocacy efforts

Status of advocacy efforts

198



funding programs


Capacity Workshop


Completion of workshop and summary report


Number of new affordable housing units created/year

CO-ORDINATION AND PARTNERSHIP

Achieving this vision calls for leadership from the Municipality and strong dedication by all housing partners. While the Municipality Chatham-Kent has a leadership role to play, community partners from across sectors must come together, each with a unique contribution, to achieve the housing targets and housing objectives over the next ten years. Partners included in the development and implementation of this Plan include:

Housing Providers

Private Sector

Community Agencies and Non-Profit Organizations

Municipal Staff (various departments)

Senior Government Staff

In addition, the successful accomplishment of the housing objectives outlined within this Plan will be achieved through co-ordinated planning with other community initiatives and processes. This includes Municipal initiatives (i.e. Official Plan Review and Growth Analysis, Chatham-Kent Community Strategic Plan, Healthy Community Initiatives, Parks and Recreation Master Plan, Cultural Master Plan, and Transportation Master Plan), as well as non-profit and private housing and support service initiatives. Future developments in the integration of human services planning and delivery will also help inform and guide the implementation of housing and homelessness programs and services. Several actions outlined within the Housing Plan are aimed at further developing a co-ordinated framework for the delivery of housing and homelessness services (in particular Actions 21 and 26).

199


MONITORING

To ensure accountability and to meet the requirements of the Housing Services Act, the Municipality of Chatham-Kent will prepare an annual Housing Report Card to monitor community progress in meeting the housing actions and targets. The Housing Report Card includes indicators such as number of new units created (affordable, accessible, supportive, and other), updated waiting list statistics, amount of funding contributed towards housing, number of partnerships created, number of educational initiatives implemented, etc. Other measuring tools include the five-year Official Plan review as well as the new required five-year Housing and Homelessness Plans review. Additional reports and consultation activities will also be used to measure the achievement of the housing actions.

SUMMARY

This Housing Plan outlines the vision and direction for housing in Chatham-Kent for the period 2012-2022. Importantly, this Housing Plan will be monitored on an annual basis through the Chatham-Kent Housing Report Card. In addition a comprehensive review of this Plan will be completed in 2017 including community consultation activities and an evaluation of all housing actions and targets.

200


Appendix G – Chatham-Kent Housing Report Card

201


Chatham-Kent

Housing Report Card January – December 2012

Overall Summary

Insert general description on community progress towards housing actions and targets. Include as part of this description the total number of affordable housing units, accessible units, and supportive units created to target.

2011 2012

DEMOGRAPHIC INDICATORS

Population

Population Growth (%)

Households

Household Growth (%)

Unemployment Rate

Ontario Works Maximum Shelter Allowance for One Benefit Unit

ODSP Maximum Shelter Allowance for One Benefit Unit

General Minimum Wage

Average Household Income

Median Household Income

Change in Consumer Price Index from Previous Year

HOUSING INDICATORS

Average Market Rent

Average Vacancy Rate (private rental market)

Average Resale House Price Singles/Semis

202


Average Resale House Price Rows

Average Resale House Price Condo

Number of Social Housing Units

Number of Households on Social Housing Waiting List as of December 31st

Number Of Households Housed from the Social Housing Waiting List

Number Of New Applications for the Social Housing Waiting List

Number of Evictions (public housing)

Average Vacancy Rate for Social Housing Units

Number of New Building Permits Issued for Single Detached Houses

Number of New Building Permits Issued for Semi-Detached

Number of New Building Permits Issued for Rows

Number of New Building Permits Issued for Apartments

Number Of New Emergency and Transitional Housing Units

Number Of New Supportive Housing Units

Number of New Applicants Waiting for Supportive Housing Units

Number of New Accessible Housing Units

Total Number of New Affordable Units Created this Year

Cumulative Total of Affordable Units Created Toward Housing Targets

Number Of Households Assisted Through Ontario Renovates (and other)

HOUSING SUPPORT SERVICE INDICATORS

Number of New Tenant Support Services

Number of New Services in Rural Communities

Number of Households Assisted by Energy/Renovation Programs

Number of Households in Receipt of OW

Number of Households in Receipt of ODSP

Number of Households Assisted by (Municipal) Homelessness Programs

203


INVESTMENT INDICATORS This area provides space for outlining investments in affordable housing, including

Investment in capital maintenance of social housing

Financial investments in affordable housing by all partners

Local government (waiving of fees, land etc.)

Senior government (IAH, Ontario Renovates, SEED etc.)

In-kind investments in affordable housing

PROGRESS ON HOUSING ACTIONS This area provides space for outlining progress on strategic actions. Description should describe all completed actions as well as all activities initiated in response to housing strategy.

PROGRESS IN PARTNERSHIP DEVELOPMENT This area provides space for outlining new partnerships and efforts of collaboration to meet housing actions and targets.

204


PROGRESS IN HOUSING AWARENESS This area provides space for outlining all housing education and awareness initiatives including all housing and support service advocacy efforts.

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS This area provides space for general comments and description of any other community activities aimed at achieving the housing vision for Chatham-Kent.

CK Housing Study Update 2012

Documents

Transcript of CK Housing Study Update 2012