Named local schemes and plans, with the responsible body and the latest stage established by the source checked. A proposal, funding announcement and completed project are different things.
277–278 Oxford Street, Swansea
Y Storfa community hub
The former Oxford Street premises have been refurbished for a city-centre community hub.
Practical completion recorded; final-cost decision approved · evidence dated 2026-07-16
Responsible body: Swansea Council
What the source says: The council decision entry says the update concerns final costs following practical completion and records recommendations approved. This alone does not establish an independently measured service outcome.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No official project-to-ward mapping has been verified; no ward allocation is inferred from the city name.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
FPR7 Redevelopment of 277–278 Oxford Street — Y Storfa →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make Y Storfa work as an everyday community hub →
Connect local skills to local opportunities →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →Swansea Civic Centre site
Civic Centre waterfront redevelopment
Homes, leisure uses and public spaces are being considered for the waterfront site.
Detailed proposals being developed · evidence dated 2025-07-15
Responsible body: Swansea Council and Urban Splash
What the source says: The July 2025 council page describes possible uses and future public feedback. It does not establish final planning consent, a fixed scheme or completion.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No official project-to-ward mapping has been verified; no ward allocation is inferred from the city name.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
Civic Centre site →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make room for homes people can afford →
Connect local skills to local opportunities →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →St Thomas waterfront site, Swansea
St Thomas waterfront: planning and project development
The project can move forward with planning and development work. A further council decision is needed before contractual or funding commitments.
Project-plan recommendations approved in September 2026; later commitments require further approval · evidence dated 2026-09-16
Responsible body: Swansea Council and Urban Splash
What the source says: The public record marks the recommendations approved for the September Cabinet decision. It permits progress on planning and project development, while explicitly reserving contractual and funding commitments for later approval. The main report is not public.
Next thing to establish: What is the approved cost, including ongoing maintenance?
Progress, funding and source
- Cost
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Funding
- Not established by the evidence checked.
- Area covered
- No verified current ward footprint is assigned. The named site or council-wide remit is not proof of benefits to every ward.
No verified ward footprint is assigned.
St Thomas Waterfront Site Redevelopment: public decision record →
Source checked 2026-10-17. A plan or announcement is not proof of completion.
Questions for the next progress report
- Which funding is committed, and what remains conditional?
- Which neighbourhoods are covered by an official project plan, and which benefits still need testing?
- What is the next published milestone, and what evidence will show residents benefit?
Make waterfront benefits clear before funding commitments →
Make room for homes people can afford →
Connect local skills to local opportunities →
Target support where disadvantages overlap →
How to track delivery →What this local evidence covers
32 of 32 wards
Have at least one valid census comparison with the whole council. Missing measures stay visible.
Read the neighbourhood evidence →3 reviewed plans and projects
3 have a source-dated stage; 0 have some funding evidence; 0 have some cost evidence. These counts do not prove that funding or costs are complete.
Check each project →0 verified ward links
Project locations cannot be treated as a map of who benefits. Each record explains any verified ward association.
Read the sources and limits →What is still missing
The reviewed local schemes are a selected evidence collection, not a complete council capital programme.
Current service capacity, incomes, waiting lists, school demand and project outcomes need additional verified local evidence before firm claims can be made.
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.
The St Thomas public decision establishes only the approved planning-development stage. The exempt report has not been accessed; costs, home or job counts and a construction timetable are not inferred.
