What could help, who could lead and how to tell whether it works. These proposals respond to the evidence; they are separate from the council’s actual commitments.
Proposal
Make Barbican renewal accessible through the disruption
Barbican Renewal has planning and listed-building consent for access improvements and repairs, with a future pause in most activities planned.
Proposed response: Explain the transition for visitors and test the renewed access as part of delivery.
Who could lead: City of London Corporation and Barbican Centre.
- Start now
Publish which activities and routes will change during each approved phase and how visitors can plan ahead.
- Over the next few years
Test new lifts, entrances and public spaces with disabled users before reopening the relevant areas.
- Over the longer term
Monitor lift reliability, visitor access and maintenance of the renewed spaces.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Barbican Renewal: Planning permission and listed-building consent approved. See the dated project evidence.
Measure: Clear access updates, accessible facilities opened, lift downtime and reported barriers resolved.
Trade-off: Repairing a listed arts centre can disrupt activity. Consent and a phased funding position do not mean all renewal work is complete.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Barbican Renewal →
Proposal
Check that crossing improvements remove real barriers
The programme addresses the height difference and obstruction at selected street crossings.
Proposed response: Test the completed routes with users who face access barriers.
Evidence
Who could lead: City of London Corporation.
- Start now
Publish the sequence of works and accessible diversion routes at each location.
- Over the next few years
Check crossing gradients, tactile guidance, drainage and whether vehicles obstruct the new crossings.
- Over the longer term
Review access problems and road-safety evidence before extending the approach to further streets.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Raised crossings across the Square Mile: Delivery planned from October 2026; completion not confirmed. Evidence dated 2026-10-05.
Measure: Crossings completed, access issues resolved and routes kept clear.
Trade-off: Raised crossings need drainage and clear guidance for people with sight loss; easier access is not proof of fewer collisions.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Raised crossings across the Square Mile →
Proposal
Make room for homes people can afford
The average home price is £711,000 (July 2026) in City of London council area. This is about £417,000 higher than the England average for the same month. Homes rented privately ranged from 22% in Portsoken to 84.2% in Bishopsgate — a gap of 62.2 percentage points.
Housing costs matter most alongside earnings and the number of affordable homes available. A local average cannot tell us whether a particular household can afford its home.
Who could lead: The housing and planning authorities, housing associations and developers.
- Start now
Publish the local waiting list, temporary accommodation and affordable-home delivery figures together. Start by checking the different needs in Bishopsgate and Portsoken; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Test proposed housing sites against affordable-home need, access to work, school places and water capacity.
- Over the longer term
Check whether completed homes reduce unmet need, rather than counting planning permissions as delivery.
How to judge progress
Starting point: The average home price is £711,000 (July 2026) in City of London council area. Homes rented privately ranged from 22% in Portsoken to 84.2% in Bishopsgate — a gap of 62.2 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 10 of 25 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Affordable homes completed, households waiting, time in temporary accommodation, and rent compared with local earnings.
Trade-off: More homes can put pressure on infrastructure and land. Affordability requirements also affect development viability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: Average home price →
Proposal
Plan homes and care around an older population
14.1% of people in City of London council area were aged 65 or over (21 March 2021). People aged 65 or over ranged from 1.6% in Tower to 23.5% in Aldersgate — a gap of 21.9 percentage points.
Age alone does not mean poor health or a need for care. Accessible homes, reliable transport and support close to home matter as people get older.
Who could lead: Adult social care, local health services, housing providers and transport authorities.
- Start now
Compare the location of older residents with access to care, shops and transport. Start by checking the different needs in Aldersgate and Tower; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Prioritise home adaptations and care capacity in places with the clearest unmet need.
- Over the longer term
Build accessible homes and joined-up care into local development plans.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 14.1% aged 65 or over; 21 March 2021. People aged 65 or over ranged from 1.6% in Tower to 23.5% in Aldersgate — a gap of 21.9 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 10 of 25 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Waits for home adaptations and care, avoidable hospital stays, and accessible homes delivered.
Trade-off: Services need skilled staff and ongoing funding. Age profiles alone cannot measure unmet care need.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People aged 65 or over →
Raised crossings across the Square Mile →
Proposal
Bring support closer to people in poor health
2.7% of people reported bad or very bad health in City of London council area (21 March 2021). Across England, the figure was 5.2%. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 0% in Bishopsgate and Tower to 7.3% in Portsoken — a gap of 7.3 percentage points.
This is how residents described their health in the census. It can reveal differences between neighbourhoods, but does not diagnose illness or measure current waiting times. Age profiles differ between places, so these shares do not measure service quality.
Who could lead: Local health services, public health teams, employers and community organisations.
- Start now
Use neighbourhood evidence to find where poor health and barriers to services overlap. Start by checking the different needs in Portsoken and Bishopsgate and Tower; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Test accessible local support and publish who is reached and who is missed.
- Over the longer term
Review whether health gaps narrow, alongside housing and employment improvements.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 2.7% reporting bad or very bad health; 21 March 2021. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 0% in Bishopsgate and Tower to 7.3% in Portsoken — a gap of 7.3 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 10 of 25 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Access to services and the health gap between neighbourhoods, using comparable age-adjusted measures when available.
Trade-off: A census snapshot is dated. New service decisions also need current needs assessments and residents’ experience.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People reporting bad or very bad health →
Raised crossings across the Square Mile →
Proposal
Connect local skills to local opportunities
74.2% of people aged 16 or over had a degree or equivalent (21 March 2021) in City of London council area. Across England, the figure was 33.9%. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 1.9% in Castle Baynard to 20.6% in Portsoken — a gap of 18.7 percentage points.
Qualifications show one part of the skills available locally. They do not show whether people have secure jobs or work that uses those skills.
Who could lead: Employers, colleges, universities and the relevant skills authority.
- Start now
Compare vacancies and employer needs with training available to local residents. Start by checking the different needs in Portsoken and Castle Baynard; census differences are not proof of unmet demand.
- Over the next few years
Link training to real jobs, including routes for people without formal qualifications.
- Over the longer term
Track sustained employment and earnings after training, not just course starts.
How to judge progress
Starting point: 74.2% with a degree or equivalent; 21 March 2021. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 1.9% in Castle Baynard to 20.6% in Portsoken — a gap of 18.7 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 10 of 25 current wards have comparable figures.
Measure: Sustained jobs, earnings and training completion for residents who face barriers to work.
Trade-off: Training takes time and cannot create demand for jobs on its own. Qualifications are not a complete measure of ability.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: People aged 16+ with a degree or equivalent →
Evidence: People aged 16+ with no qualifications →
Proposal
Target safety work where problems repeat
Mapped police records are available for neighbourhoods in City of London council area.
Published locations are approximate and some crimes are not mapped. Counts show recorded incidents, not the chance of an individual becoming a victim.
Who could lead: The local police force, council community safety team and relevant services.
- Start now
Check recurring places and categories alongside local police priorities and residents’ reports.
- Over the next few years
Test focused prevention and support, with a comparison period agreed before the work starts.
- Over the longer term
Publish whether problems fall, move elsewhere or return, and adjust the response.
How to judge progress
Crime evidence and coverage →
Starting point: Use the dated, complete periods shown in Crime and safety; keep anti-social behaviour separate.
Measure: Comparable recorded incidents, repeat victimisation and residents’ reported experience; never a single crude league table.
Trade-off: More reporting can increase recorded crime. Enforcement and support may work differently for different problems.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Salisbury Square police and courts complex →
Proposal
Turn published plans into visible progress
3 named local projects or plans have official evidence in this collection.
A published plan makes responsibilities and intentions easier to inspect. It does not prove that funding is secured or that promised benefits have arrived.
Who could lead: The named project owners and council scrutiny bodies.
- Start now
Put the scope, owner, funding position and next milestone in one public place.
- Over the next few years
Report delivery against the agreed scope and explain delays or changes.
- Over the longer term
Check the benefits residents actually receive after completion.
How to judge progress
Starting point: The dated stages in Projects; unknown costs and funding remain unknown.
Measure: Milestones met, costs against the approved budget, and measured outcomes after delivery.
Trade-off: Delivery reporting takes staff time, but a launch announcement alone cannot show value for money.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Barbican Renewal →
Salisbury Square police and courts complex →
Raised crossings across the Square Mile →
Proposal
Target support where disadvantages overlap
Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 4.1% in Queenhithe to 28.7% in Portsoken — a gap of 24.5 percentage points.
These households met at least two census conditions covering education, employment, health and housing. This is not an income or poverty measure.
Who could lead: The council's housing, public health and employment teams, with local services.
- Start now
Check current advice and support access in Portsoken, using the census pattern as a starting point and asking residents what is missing.
- Over the next few years
Test joined-up housing, work and health support, and publish who takes part, who cannot reach it and what changes.
- Over the longer term
Track sustained outcomes and whether gaps between neighbourhoods narrow, using comparable dates and measures.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 4.1% in Queenhithe to 28.7% in Portsoken — a gap of 24.5 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 10 of 25 wards.
Measure: Access to support, unresolved housing problems and sustained work or health outcomes. Census percentages alone cannot measure a new programme's success.
Trade-off: Targeting neighbourhoods can miss people in need elsewhere. Avoid labelling every resident by the average for their ward.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Evidence: Households facing two or more measured disadvantages →
Barbican Renewal →
Salisbury Square police and courts complex →
Raised crossings across the Square Mile →
