If the hustle and bustle in the cityscape of London were a movie, than the public space is the stage and the urban texture its décor. The movie would be about culture - city life - and the people who are in it will be its social actors. the different identities of the social actors makes the film heterogeneous by nature. But there is an unbalance in this discourse and it is almost opaque due to the acceptance of it. The decorations, the forms and the infills of the urban texture are not in sync with the many communities that are present in the city. London is one of the most diverse cities in the world looking at its people and their backgrounds. Not even half of its users is British by origin. This number will probably become even less in the future due to the trend of urbanisation. If we look at the architecture and the urban texture of the city it doesn’t show an accurate representation of its users inhabiting the city. At the same time social cohesion of neighbourhoods are depriving due to segmentation and isolation of everyday life. The gap between rich and poor is increasing, activities become more and more digitized and short term population is rising. The determinative architecture stems mainly from the history of England and is part of its culture. that is a natural course of events and there is nothing wrong with that. However to obtain a better understanding of each other, both on an individual as an group level, it is important that people can relate oneself with someone else. Architecture is the most effective asset to make this happen.