At Housing 2026, Seddon, Identity Consult and PRP brought together housing leaders for a to tackle one of the sector's biggest questions: how can housing providers continue delivering new homes while regenerating existing communities and meeting increasingly ambitious sustainability targets?
Participants agreed these priorities can no longer be treated as separate workstreams. As housing demand grows, existing homes require significant investment and sustainability standards continue to rise, the challenge is how to balance all three in a volatile operating and financial environment.
A consistent theme was that there is no one-size-fits-all answer. Housing providers are operating in very different financial positions, with different stock profiles, geographies, legacy issues and levels of exposure to higher-risk buildings.
Several participants said decisions around development, regeneration and sustainability have to be grounded in data, the financial reality, access to grant and a clear understanding of what residents need now and in the future.
Regeneration was discussed as a flexible response rather than a single model. While major estate renewal remains important, participants stressed that it does not always mean doing everything at once.
It can include infill development, investment in existing homes, public realm improvements, community facilities, or closer alignment with asset management programmes.
Where new homes are being built in or around existing communities, residents may experience years of disruption without necessarily benefiting directly.
This makes it vital to align regeneration with investment in existing stock, so that current residents see improvements as well as new residents. Community benefits, such as parks, youth facilities, allotments and local improvements, were seen as important ways to build trust early.
Viability ran through almost every part of the discussion. Participants spoke about the growing pressure from development costs, grant requirements, design standards and sustainability expectations.
The discussion was clear that there is no lack of desire to bring schemes forward, but the financial conditions for delivery have become much more difficult.
There was also concern that social rent, while essential, creates long-term business plan challenges when the cost of delivery is rising faster than the income available to support it.
Net zero and high-performance homes were recognised as important for long-term quality and resident outcomes, but participants also acknowledged that they can create additional barriers to financial viability if they are not considered properly from the outset.
There was agreement that partnership working is essential to viability if schemes are to move from planning to delivery. Participants pointed to the need for developers, housing associations, procurement teams, contractors, local authorities, Homes England and combined authorities to be around the table earlier. Crucially, this means understanding from the start what access to grant funding looks like, rather than designing a scheme and then reverse-engineering how it will be paid for.
On the role of local authorities, participants noted that councils are under pressure to accelerate delivery, but also have to answer to residents when schemes do not work well.
This places them in an important position, balancing pace with place. Several contributors argued for more place-based thinking, where public intervention and partnership capacity are focused on the sites and communities where they can have the greatest impact.
Sustainability prompted a more nuanced discussion. Participants supported the need for higher standards and better long-term performance, but raised concerns about cost and consistency.
Some argued that sustainability works best when it is embedded from the start, rather than added late in the process. Others warned that the sector risks chasing increasingly complex standards without always linking them to resident benefit or deliverability.
Throughout the discussion, one principle consistently resurfaced: successful regeneration starts with residents. While debates often focus on funding, design standards and carbon reduction, delegates emphasised that communities ultimately judge success differently. Safe, warm homes, lower energy bills, attractive public spaces and neighbourhoods that function well every day remain the measures that matter most.
A strong point was also raised around resident understanding. Low-carbon and high-performance homes can deliver real benefits, but residents need to understand how those homes work.
Participants suggested that the sector needs clearer communication around technologies such as heat pumps and low-energy homes, rather than leaving every provider to create its own guidance.
The discussion often returned to the importance of not losing sight of customers and tenants. Regeneration can often be framed around the art of the possible, but participants questioned whether that always reflects what residents actually want or need.
Safe, warm homes, good outdoor space, lower bills, durable materials and places that work day-to-day were seen as central to any successful scheme.
Design quality was another area where participants recognised both the importance and the tension. Good design, durable materials and safe outdoor space were seen as essential to creating places that last.
Data was identified as a major opportunity. Participants felt the sector already holds a huge amount of useful information on build costs, sustainability standards and regeneration outcomes.
However, this data is not always shared or used effectively. More transparent benchmarking and stronger feedback loops could help providers and delivery partners make better decisions earlier.
The roundtable concluded that new homes, regeneration and sustainability can be delivered in tandem, but only if they are planned together as part of a cohesive strategy from the outset.
That means early partnership, honest conversations about viability, resident-focused decision-making, better use of data, and a shared commitment to long-term place quality rather than short-term delivery numbers alone.
The discussion was held between representatives from Together Housing, L&Q Group, Torus Developments, MSV Housing, Incommunities, Saffer Cooper, Trafford Council, CBRE and Magenta Living.