Practical proposed steps for Wiltshire.
The stages explain what should happen first. They are not promised completion dates. Funding, powers and ongoing costs need to be established before a proposal is adopted.
Proposal
Keep Salisbury’s opened facilities accessible and useful
Salisbury’s River Park play area and remodelled station forecourt are open.
Proposed response: Move from opening milestones to checking everyday accessibility and maintenance at both places.
Evidence 1 · Evidence 2
Who could lead: Salisbury City Council, Wiltshire Council and Environment Agency; Wiltshire Council, South Western Railway and Network Rail.
- Start now
Publish who maintains each facility and clear routes for users to report access problems.
- Over the next few years
Review the play facilities and station interchange with disabled users and resolve identified barriers.
- Over the longer term
Track reliability, maintenance and use rather than continuing to report openings as new achievements.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Salisbury River Park play area: Play area opened; Salisbury station forecourt: Remodelled forecourt open. See the dated project evidence.
Measure: Facilities available, access barriers resolved, maintenance response and use of the station interchange.
Trade-off: These are separate projects with different owners. Their opening does not prove that every part of the wider River Park programme is complete.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Salisbury River Park play area →
Salisbury station forecourt →
Proposal
Keep flood protection working after the opening
The first River Park phase has reduced flood risk. Its walls, channels and riverside spaces still need maintenance and inspection.
Proposed response: publish who maintains each asset and keep flood preparedness visible alongside the park’s leisure use.
Evidence 1 · Evidence 2
Who could lead: Environment Agency, Wiltshire Council and Salisbury City Council.
- Start now
Confirm the remaining works, maintenance responsibilities and how residents report damage or blocked routes.
- Over the next few years
Publish inspection and maintenance progress and assess further phases against confirmed funding.
- Over the longer term
Review performance after high-water events and update the flood-risk assessment as conditions change.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Environment Agency update of 13 September 2024: reduced River Avon risk to more than 350 properties; most phase-one works complete.
Measure: Inspections completed, defects resolved, access maintained and verified funding for additional phases.
Trade-off: Flood defences reduce risk but cannot eliminate it. Later phases should not be described as delivered without fresh evidence.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Salisbury River Park play area →
River Park flood protection and riverside habitats →
Proposal
Replace Trowbridge’s ageing play equipment accessibly
The town council proposes replacing deteriorated play equipment with a more inclusive facility. Its published progress still shows funding and approval work to complete.
This is a local delivery priority; the wider authority totals cannot establish this project’s effects.
Evidence
Who could lead: Trowbridge Town Council.
- Start now
Confirm safe current provision and the funded scope.
- Over the next few years
Test designs with families and disabled users.
- Over the longer term
Verify opening, accessibility and maintenance.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Trowbridge town-centre play park redevelopment: Design and approval stages; summer 2027 completion target.
Measure: Safe usable play facilities.
Trade-off: A target date does not prove funding or construction completion.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Trowbridge town-centre play park redevelopment →
Proposal
Keep Melksham’s campus accessible to nearby communities
The leisure and library campus is an existing public facility. The 2024 capital report confirms its opening and later finishing work.
This is a local delivery priority; the wider authority totals cannot establish this project’s effects.
Evidence
Who could lead: Wiltshire Council.
- Start now
Review affordable sessions and travel information.
- Over the next few years
Adjust provision to local needs and access barriers.
- Over the longer term
Monitor participation and building condition.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Melksham Community Campus: Opened August 2022; final equipment and payment reported in July 2024.
Measure: Affordable usable services.
Trade-off: An opened building does not remove cost or travel barriers.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Melksham Community Campus →
Proposal
Keep Salisbury’s flood works maintained
Most first-phase River Park works were complete in 2024; later phases depend on funding.
Progress should be checked against the named project and the needs of its users.
Evidence
Who could lead: Environment Agency, Wiltshire Council and Salisbury City Council.
- Start now
Publish remaining work and maintenance responsibilities.
- Over the next few years
Inspect assets and resolve defects.
- Over the longer term
Review performance after flooding.
How to judge progress
Starting point: River Park flood protection and riverside habitats: Most phase-one works reported complete in September 2024; later phases depend on funding.
Measure: Maintained protection and safe riverside access.
Trade-off: Finished landscaping does not guarantee protection in every flood.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
River Park flood protection and riverside habitats →
Proposal
Make room for homes people can afford
Average private rent is £1,082 a month (August 2026) in Wiltshire council area. This is £377 lower than the England average for the same month. Homes rented privately ranged from 8.5% in Salisbury St Francis & Stratford to 47.8% in Tidworth East & Ludgershall South — a gap of 39.3 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 Tidworth East & Ludgershall South and Salisbury St Francis & Stratford; 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: Average private rent is £1,082 a month (August 2026) in Wiltshire council area. Homes rented privately ranged from 8.5% in Salisbury St Francis & Stratford to 47.8% in Tidworth East & Ludgershall South — a gap of 39.3 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 98 of 98 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 monthly rent →
Evidence: Average home price →
Proposal
Plan homes and care around an older population
21.9% of people in Wiltshire council area were aged 65 or over (21 March 2021). People aged 65 or over ranged from 4.3% in Tidworth North & West to 33.9% in Mere — a gap of 29.6 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 Mere and Tidworth North & West; 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: 21.9% aged 65 or over; 21 March 2021. People aged 65 or over ranged from 4.3% in Tidworth North & West to 33.9% in Mere — a gap of 29.6 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 98 of 98 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 →
Proposal
Bring support closer to people in poor health
4.2% of people reported bad or very bad health in Wiltshire council area (21 March 2021). Across England, the figure was 5.2%. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 2% in Tidworth North & West to 7.4% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 5.5 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 Melksham Forest and Tidworth North & West; 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: 4.2% reporting bad or very bad health; 21 March 2021. People reporting bad or very bad health ranged from 2% in Tidworth North & West to 7.4% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 5.5 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 98 of 98 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 →
Proposal
Connect local skills to local opportunities
34.2% of people aged 16 or over had a degree or equivalent (21 March 2021) in Wiltshire council area. Across England, the figure was 33.9%. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 8% in Chippenham Pewsham to 22.7% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 14.7 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 Melksham Forest and Chippenham Pewsham; 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: 34.2% with a degree or equivalent; 21 March 2021. People aged 16+ with no qualifications ranged from 8% in Chippenham Pewsham to 22.7% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 14.7 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 98 of 98 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 →
Salisbury station forecourt →
Proposal
Target safety work where problems repeat
Mapped police records are available for neighbourhoods in Wiltshire 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.
River Park flood protection and riverside habitats →
Proposal
Turn published plans into visible progress
5 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.
Salisbury River Park play area →
Salisbury station forecourt →
River Park flood protection and riverside habitats →
Trowbridge town-centre play park redevelopment →
Melksham Community Campus →
Proposal
Target support where disadvantages overlap
Households facing two or more measured disadvantages ranged from 7.7% in By Brook to 23.5% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 15.8 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 Melksham Forest, 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 7.7% in By Brook to 23.5% in Melksham Forest — a gap of 15.8 percentage points. 21 March 2021; 98 of 98 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 →
Salisbury River Park play area →
Trowbridge town-centre play park redevelopment →
Melksham Community Campus →
