Councillor Chris Penberthy (Cabinet Member for Housing, Co-operative Development and Communities) introduced the report and highlighted:

a)    Since its launch in November 2013, more than 1,100 new homes had been built on Council-owned sites, under Plan for Homes; 

b)    Over 64% of the 1,100 new homes had been affordable; 

c)    The ambition was to deliver a minimum of 5,000 new homes in Plymouth over 5 years; 

d)    Increased housing supply, with a focus on both social and affordable home ownership; 
 

e)    Improved the private rented sector to ensure homes were decent, safe, and secure; 
 

f)     Brought empty homes back into use to maximise existing stock; 
 

g)    Enhanced the condition and energy efficiency of homes across all tenures, retrofitting and delivering low-carbon new homes; 
 

h)    Supported estate regeneration and renewal to replace obsolete housing; 
 

i)     Reduced homelessness and reliance on temporary accommodation and expanded supported and specialist housing options; 
 

j)     Maximised inward investment through partnership working, including with Homes England;
 

k)    Maintained flexibility and innovation in response to emerging housing challenges such as people being priced out of the market and housing demands resulting from Section 21 evictions, VAWG (Violence against women and girls) and household break ups; 

l)       There were more than 8,000 households in Plymouth awaiting homes for rent at an affordable price;

m)   Having a place to call home had a positive effect on people’s health and wellbeing;

n)    Plan for Homes 4 had: 
 

                      i.        Developed a pipeline of future housing sites and a new market recovery plan;
 

                     ii.        Worked with investors and developers to establish a build-to-rent offer in Plymouth, that would capitalise the long-term investment in the dockyard and for people coming into Plymouth for dockyard employment; 
 

                    iii.        Prepared for the Renters’ Rights Bill;

o)      The action plan reported across all 10 of the Plan for Homes 4 initiatives and was RAG-rated with commentary; 

p)    The Housing Taskforce would continue to meet quarterly;

q)    Plan for Homes 4 was presented as a live, evolving strategy responsive to challenges.

In response to questions, supported byPaul Barnard (Service Director for Strategic Planning and Infrastructure), Nick Carter (Head of Housing & Regeneration), Neil Mawson (Housing Delivery Manager), John Green (Net Zero Delivery Manager) and Matt Garrett (Service Director for Community Connections), the following was discussed:

r)    Continued lobbying of government for the resources and powers to tackle the housing crisis in the city;

s)     Worked with PEC (Plymouth Energy Community) to support insultating homes;

t)       The Council was supporting not just homeowners to retrofit homes, but also landlords, which targeted fuel poverty and damp housing conditions;

                      i.        £3 million had been secured from Government to retrofit approximately 206 homes in Plymouth;

                     ii.        PCC (Plymouth City Council) had been very successful in previous retrofitting programmes and was in a good position to secure more funding if it became available;

u)    Estate regeneration included projects at North Prospect and Savage Road;

v)    Registered providers were encouraged to invest in existing housing stock as well as provision of supported and specialist housing;

w)   City centre housing plans considered infrastructure, service and amenity needs through a infrastructure needs assessment as well as strategic liaison meetings;

x)    Master planning was prioritised to ensure sustainable development and ensure that transport and community space needs were integrated into housing plans;

y)    The Renter’s Rights Bill would require licenses for all rented properties;

z)    Whilst the Renter’s Rights Bill would give the Council more powers, there were concerns about funding, which was yet to be confirmed, as there would be new burdens on the service;

aa)  All of the previous Plans for Homes had been completed ahead of schedule, and each consequential plan had been more ambitious;

bb)Plymouth had some population increase, but this was not significant, and not all factors contributing to this were mentioned/analysed in Plan for Homes 4;

cc)  Asylum seekers were not on the housing waiting list, and the list was growing because there was not enough housing for the number of people in Plymouth;

dd)The number of properties in the city for asylum seekers had been fixed for some time, and there had been no requests from Government to change this, so therefore it was not a pressure and was not included in Plan for Homes 4;

ee)Rough sleeping numbers fluctuated throughout the year due to weather conditions, creating a peak in Plymouth in the summer months;

ff)    Planning permissions were granted for over 5000 dwellings but private sector delivery lagged;

gg)  In 2023/24, 282 additional homes were built in the city of which 189 were affordable;

hh)Between 2014-2024, 6,798 dwellings had been built;

ii)    Efforts had been made to incentivise private sector investment and the aim was still to build 5,000 homes in the next 5 years;

jj)    The railway station project had stalled due to issues with network rail;

kk)The Homeless Prevention Grant would be spent building on the expertise and skills already present in the city;

ll)    An update would be presented in 2026/27 on whether rents could be expected to increase or decrease as a result of the plan being delivered;

mm)  A consultation on Council’s being able to use CPO (Compulsory Purchase Order) powers to reclaim land from developers, who were not developing, had closed that week and the team were curious to see the outcomes;

nn)Emergency accommodation differed due to a variety of factors including the number of people in the family unit, availability, and more;

oo)The team was working to get people away from nightly paid accommodation;

pp)The Housing and Community Services Scrutiny Panel received updates on homelessness throughout the year;

qq)The supported and specialist housing needs assessment was being reviewed;

rr)  Building regulations determined the number of properties within housing schemes that needed to be accessible;

ss)    PCC did sometimes subsidise affordable homes;

tt)   Neurodiversity was being developed to be included within specialist housing needs assessments.

The Panel agreed to:

1.    Note the report;

2.    Endorse the team maximizing the impact of the South West Housing and Construction Conference, to promote development opportunities, overcome challenges to delivery and secure inward investment.