Minute Number

Reason

Interest

Councillor Drean

Minute 25 – Update on the Potential Impact of Brexit on Port Health

Member of his family was employed by the Port

Personal

Councillor Churchill

Minute 29 – Annual Housing Statement

Member of Plymouth Community Homes Board

Personal

(a)

as a Port Health Authority, Plymouth was exposed to additional costs that would not be experienced by other local authorities; Plymouth Port Health Authority had received a small sum of funding to assist with the preparations for Brexit from the Food Standards Agency; the Council had not received any additional port funding from central government as Plymouth had not been acknowledged as a Strategic Port;

(b)

Government departments had been working to design customs and other control arrangements at the UK border to ensure goods could continue to flow into the country without any delays due to additional controls and checks; the UK Government did not have control over the checks which European Union member states imposed at the EU boarder; the European Commission had indicated that it was likely to impose full third country controls on people and goods entering the EU from the UK:

(c)

Plymouth was not a Border Inspection Post (BIP); if the risk assessment for high risk food and animal feed changed and the UK Government decided to start imposing import controls on high risk EU food, the meat, fish and diary produce that was currently imported through Plymouth, would need to be diverted to a Border Inspection Post;

(d)

Plymouth would be a suitable strategic location for a Border Inspection Post; designation as a (BIP) would ensure that the current freight would continue to be imported, if the UK decided to impose import controls; Port operators would be responsible for building BIP facilities;

the Council was currently assisting Associated British Ports (ABP) (the port operator at Millbay) with information about minimum requirements for a BIP facility; based on current information it was difficult to justify a business case for investment into the building of a BIP facility as there was currently no need for one;

(e)

both ABP and Brittany Ferries had indicated that they would definitely wish to secure the current high risk freight as they would not wish to lose this traffic to other ports; if Plymouth was designated as a BIP there was the potential to be able to attract new business; however, the current estimate to build a suitable facility was well in excess for £1.5m;

(f)

EU fishing products arriving in Plymouth via the ferries would require the Council to issue Catch Certificates in accordance with Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated fishing legislation (IUU); this was a new and onerous duty; it was estimated that between 80 and 200 vehicles per year would arrive in Plymouth which would require certificates; this would be chargeable to the importer, at full cost recovery but there was a significant impact on capacity for the Council’s Food Safety team;

(g)

Plymouth was still pursuing the Government in order to secure status as a strategic port; it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

(a)

2020 marked the 400^th anniversary of the Mayflower voyage which was one of the most influential journeys in global history and a defining moment in the

shared history of Britain, the United  States of America and the Native American Nation;

(b)

an exciting national and international programme of Mayflower 400 commemorations would highlight the significance of the special relationship between our nations, transform communities, provide cultural, business and visitor links, explore the different sides of the story and celebrate the people and places of this epic pioneering tale;

(c)

Plymouth had been formally designated as the lead partner for the UK by central government which had successfully co-ordinated a range of activities nationally including,  the creation of coherent branding, the delivery of multiple successful funding applications and the alignment of events;

(d)

overview -

?

there was a programme of over 400 moments, ranging from international civic ceremonies to local community events; signature events included Mayflower Muster, Illuminate 2019/20 and the Mayflower Ceremony;

?

there were new major cultural attractions which included The Box, new heritage trails and the Elizabethan House;

?

it was anticipated that there would be over 500,000 additional visits to Plymouth in 2020;

(e)

funding -

?

Plymouth City Council’s revenue commitment of £2.25m had leveraged a further £4m through grant funding and sponsorship, whilst its capital commitment of £5m had leveraged a further £1.1m through grant funding;

?

the Arts Council England had committed £16m into Plymouth’s core arts and culture (over five years);

(f)

a fund for local community projects, the Mayflower 400 Community Sparks fund had been launched in April 2018 which targeted grass-roots community, arts and cultural activity;  grants would be available up to £3,000 or £5,000 (in exceptional circumstances);

(g)

the Mayflower 400 Volunteer programme which aimed to contribute 100,000 hours of volunteering in support of the Mayflower programme;

(h)

to date, over 200 people had attended the Mayflower Maker introductory sessions with 98 people registered on the doit.like in the Mayflower Maker community group;

(i)

the key elements of legacy relating to the Mayflower 400 programme were categorised as perception, event and physical.

(j)

concerns regarding the lack of mobility scooters available for visitors to access events (Members had been advised by Access Plymouth that scooters would not be allowed on the Barbican); there were two wheel chairs available at the Tourist Information Centre on the Barbican but these were deemed as totally inadequate;

(k)

sought clarification as to the disability groups within the city that had been consulted regarding accessibility during Mayflower 400 (Members were aware that officers had consulted with Plymouth Area Disability Action Network (PADAN) regarding the Mayflower Trails);

(l)

whether traffic management schemes and adequate parking would be put in place to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

(a)

a Business Improvement District (BID) was a private sector led management organisation for a precisely defined geographical area, where business rate payers had identified projects and services that would have a positive impact on their trading environment;

businesses located within the area voted to invest collectively in delivering these improvements which were wholly additional to those already delivered by local, statutory bodies;  once a BID had been established, all businesses contributed a BID levy based on the rateable value of their premises to ensure fairness and equity; the BID duration was five years;

(b)

the Plymouth City Centre Company Ltd (PCCC) would be responsible for delivering the new City Centre BID; PCCC was an independent, not for profit company limited by guarantee which currently operated as a voluntary membership partnership with a Board of Directors which represented all the key business sectors in the BID area;

(c)

the City Centre BID would help the City to achieve its Visitor Plan targets which included -

?

growing visitor spend by 30% from £347m to £450 in 10 years;

?

increasing the total  visitor numbers by 15% from 5.1m to 6m by 2030;

(d)

in February 2020, the businesses would have to decide whether to vote yes or no to fund the delivery of the final City Centre BID business plan; if the majority of businesses voted yes, then all business in the BID area would be required to contribute an annual BID levy payment;

(e)

based on rateable value, the average city centre business would pay an annual levy of £765 which equated to £14.70 per week; it was proposed that a minimum rateable value threshold of £4000 was set within the new BID term, below which no additional levy was made;

(f)

the total projected Plymouth City Council cash and in kind contribution would be £672,500;

(g)

the BID levy was match funded by Plymouth City Council and other partners to generate further funds from additional sources; the  City Centre BID aimed to lever £6 of additional match funding for every £1 of BID levy received from business, this would maximise the delivery of project and service improvements;

(h)

a postal ballot of business ratepayers within the City Centre BID area would take place between 28 January 2020 and 27 February 2020; the result of the ballot would be announced by 28 February 2020; the BID’s fourth term would commence on 1 April 2020.

(i)

electric charging points would be part of the BID’s infrastructure improvements;

(j)

consideration had been given to putting incentives in place to encourage home/small businesses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

(a)

local housing pressures –  

?

9413 households on the waiting list of which 2535 had a priority need;

?

715 long term empty homes (October 2018);

(b)

Plan for Homes 2013 (refreshed 2016) had delivered 2453 direct construction jobs and 479 indirect jobs, generated £102.7m Gross Value Added benefits for the Plymouth economy;

(c)

one of the ambitions for the Plan for Homes programme was to deliver 5000 new homes over five years;

(d)

over the past 18 months 33 council owned sites had been released for development;

(e)

a total of 1526 affordable homes had been delivered in 2013/14 to 2018/19 which included the following -

?

229 social rented;

?

818 affordable rented;

?

436 shared ownership;

?

19 wheelchair user home;

(f)

the growth dividend had delivered 5563 completed homes during the first five years of the programme and had generated -

?

£28,840,000 in New Homes Bonus;

?

£9,000,000 in Council Tax (per annum);

(g)

excellence in housing delivery had included the Nelson, Stirling and Primrose Park projects;

(h)

a total of 281 long term empty homes had been returned to use over the first five years of the programme;

(i)

Joint Local Plan 2014-2034 (across Plymouth, South Hams and West Devon) included -

?

26,700 new homes across the Joint Local Plan area;

?

19,000 of new homes to be built in the Plymouth policy area;

?

the delivery of 6600 new affordable homes, of which 4550 were within the Plymouth policy area;

(j)

Plan for Homes 3 sets out the Council’s priority objectives across three themes that would directly support the delivery of 1000 new homes per year (over the next five years), supporting a range of housing delivery and service initiatives, tackling housing needs, homelessness and poor housing conditions.

(k)

whether the number of empty houses in multiple occupation (HMOs) could be re-purposed to provide housing for people who were currently on the housing waiting list;

(l)

the need for the Council to engage with landlords (through various medias) and investigate offering incentives to landlords looking to re-furbish or sell house in multiple occupation (HMOs):

(m)

whether there were stalled development sites across the City, and if so, what action was being taken to address this situation.

(a)

the information contained within the Annual Housing Statement covered a wide range of indicators, such as the number of new dwellings completed, with planning permission but not started and under construction as at 1 April (each year);

(b)

the most important element of the Statement related to whether the Local Planning Authority could demonstrate a five year land supply of sites for housing development;

(c)

in July 2019, the Joint Local Plan Partnership Board approved the publication of the first Joint Local Plan Housing Position Statement which was produced following the adoption of the Plymouth and South Wet Devon Joint Local Plan; (the monitoring of housing delivery and in particular the calculation of the five year land supply was undertaken for the whole plan which included parts of South Hams District Council and West Devon Borough Council);

(d)

the key headlines relating to the Housing Position Statement included -

?

across the plan area a total of 1388 dwellings (net) were delivered between April 2018 and 2019; of this total 850 had been delivered in Plymouth;

?

across the plan area there were 2204 dwellings under construction at April 2019 and 13,250 dwellings with planning consent;

?

there had also been a high level of new dwellings started during April 2018 and 2019; across the plan 1845 homes (932 of which were in Plymouth); there was a forecast of 1925 (1156 being constructed in Plymouth) dwellings being completed in 2019 – 2020;

?

a total of 8797 dwellings had been identified across the plan in the five  year land supply of which 4117 would be located in Plymouth;

?

1663 affordable dwellings (net) had been delivered in the first five years of the plan, at an average of 333 dwellings per year (1036 of which were located in Plymouth) this delivery was slightly ahead of the targets set out within the Joint Local Plan.

(e)

how confident was the Council in continuing to be able to identify land for housing development;

(f)

concerns that land identified within the Plymouth plan area was not being allocated to Plymouth based housing associations such as Plymouth Community Homes;

(g)

what would be the impact on the statistics within the Annual Statement, if property developed for general housing use was re-purposed for student accommodation and whether there were any checks regarding this matter;

(h)

whether there was a requirement for the Annual Housing Statement to separately identify student accommodation;

(i)

whether there would be an adverse effect on the surrounding community relating to sites where planning permission  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.