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 the new market a clear route between the centre and stations
Council evidence reports construction progressing on the new city-centre market, with improved walking connections part of its design.
The market could support food businesses and make a useful pedestrian connection. Those benefits need working entrances, accessible routes and an operating venue.
Who could lead: Aberdeen City Council.
- Start now
Confirm the current construction position and explain the walking routes available during works.
- Over the next few years
Coordinate the market’s opening, tenant arrangements and accessible links towards Union Street and the stations.
- Over the longer term
Check route use, business occupancy and upkeep after opening, and address barriers identified by users.
How to judge progress
Starting point: New city-centre market: Construction reported progressing; completion not verified.
Measure: Confirmed opening, occupied business space, accessible connections and maintenance performance.
Trade-off: Construction and servicing can disrupt nearby businesses; successful trading requires continuing demand, not just a completed building.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
New city-centre market →
Proposal
Make council homes safe and bring empty homes back into use
The Scottish Housing Regulator identifies unresolved housing-service and safety concerns in its April 2026 engagement plan.
Proposed response: publish progress on overdue safety work and safely re-let empty homes, while protecting suitable accommodation for people who are homeless.
Evidence
Who could lead: Aberdeen City Council, with regulatory oversight.
- Start now
Set out the remaining safety checks, remedial work and empty homes, with realistic completion dates.
- Over the next few years
Resolve the repair and staffing bottlenecks that delay safe re-letting, and report service improvements.
- Over the longer term
Maintain inspections and compare homelessness outcomes and re-letting times over consistent reporting periods.
How to judge progress
Starting point: Regulator engagement plan published 2 April 2026; the review does not establish that the required improvements are complete.
Measure: Outstanding electrical work, days to re-let homes, suitable temporary accommodation and sustained tenancies.
Trade-off: Re-letting faster must not mean skipping repairs or suitability checks. No extra housing capacity is assumed from an uncosted proposal.
Cost: No costed delivery assessment has been established here. These are proposed sequences, not funded promises or completion deadlines.
Council-home safety and empty-home improvements →
Proposal
Make room for homes people can afford
The average home price is £131,000 (July 2026) in Aberdeen City council area. This is about £66,000 lower than the Scotland average for the same month.
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.
- 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 £131,000 (July 2026) in Aberdeen City council area.
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 →
Council-home safety and empty-home improvements →
Proposal
Connect local skills to local opportunities
38.1% of people aged 16 or over had a degree or higher (20 March 2022) in Aberdeen City council area. People aged 16+ with a degree or higher ranged from 17% in Northfield/Mastrick North to 56.4% in Hazlehead/Queens Cross/Countesswells — a gap of 39.4 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 Hazlehead/Queens Cross/Countesswells and Northfield/Mastrick North; 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: 38.1% with a degree or higher; 20 March 2022. People aged 16+ with a degree or higher ranged from 17% in Northfield/Mastrick North to 56.4% in Hazlehead/Queens Cross/Countesswells — a gap of 39.4 percentage points. 20 March 2022; 13 of 13 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 higher →
Evidence: People aged 16+ with no qualifications →
New city-centre market →
Proposal
Target safety work where problems repeat
Recorded-crime figures cover the whole Aberdeen City council area; they do not identify individual wards.
These are police-recorded crimes under Scottish counting rules. They cannot be ranked alongside the mapped incidents shown for other UK nations.
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.
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.
New city-centre market →
Beach park and pedestrian connections →
Council-home safety and empty-home improvements →
What still needs an answer
Delivery costs, current service capacity and residents’ experience need to be assessed before choosing a programme. The time bands describe a possible sequence, not promised delivery dates.
Project locations have not been matched to official ward boundaries. No ward-specific delivery claims are inferred.
Costs, funding and benefits are only reported where the selected official evidence states them; blank fields are not zero.
Some dated project updates have elapsed target dates. A newer completion record is needed before changing their delivery status.
The regulator’s April 2026 requirements are retained as dated concerns. Current outstanding safety-work counts and evidence that the concerns have been resolved have not been verified.
