The LA ran a public consultation on the following dates.

Term 1 - 1st September 2023 to 20th October 2023 (36 Days)

Term 2 - 30th October 2023 to 15th December 2023 (35 Days)

Term 3 - 2nd January 2024 to 9th February 2024 (29 Days)

Term 4 - 19th February 2024 - 28th March 2024 (29 Days)

Term 5 - 15th April 2024 - 24th May 2024 (29 Days) 

Term 6 - 3rd June 2024 - 23rd July 2024 (37 Days)

Total 195 School Days

The consultation ran from January 24^th until March 7^th 2022 and was circulated via head teacher bulletins and with support from the BCC communications team to school and parents. Information was posted on the BCC Citizen Space consultation page where all feedback was collated.

We received 22 responses to the consultation.  The majority of these were in support of the dates proposed although we did receive some responses with alternative suggestions.  Overall, responses against the dates focused two considerations.  These have been summarised below, along with a response to each point on behalf of the LA.

1. Feedback on the chosen dates

• Starting term on a Friday puts extra pressure on teachers and makes booking holidays for the end of summer difficult
• The end of term 2 (15^th December) is too early meaning there was a long break before Christmas and children returning to school too soon after new year (2^nd January)
• Making the longest terms in the winter means more travelling to and from school in the dark
• Summer term ends too late (23^rd July)  

2. Feedback on general sceduling of school term and holiday dates.

• Summer holidays are too long.  This time would be better used by extending all end of term holidays to two weeks
• It is wrong to align the dates to the rest of the country.  Changing this would bring the cost of holidays down.

Every school year decisions need to be made concerning term length and where to place half term and end of term holidays.  

We understand it is not favourable to start the term on a Friday and we accept that full school weeks would a preference, but this does not always fit with the school calendar.  The law dictates that LA maintained schools meet for the equivalent of 190 school days.  We timetable for an additional 5 dates for non-contact or INSET days.  Therefore, we generally expect schools to use this time as one of their allotted INSET days, allowing schools to prepare for the start of the school term.   

Breaking up on the 15^th December means that children have a longer holiday period before Christmas rather than further into the new year.  When consulting on previous term dates we have received comments stating that ending the school term closer to Christmas day is problematic in school because it is unproductive as children are distracted and a longer period after New Year is wasted time.  In summary, this is about individual preference which does vary.  Future term dates may require term 2 to end nearer to Christmas.  

When setting term length, we activity try and make the terms similar in length.  However, this is not always possible as Easter is not a fixed date.  Feedback from schools in the past has been critical of over long terms which lead to fatigue, illness and school absence.

Summer term in the past has generally ended around the third week of July.  Alternative dates were considered whereby the school year ended mid-week, not on a Friday.  However, based on feedback from previous term date consultations this is unpopular and doing so has repercussions on school attendance.  

We fully understand the difficulties schools and parents/carers face in organising learning and attendance during term times.  We also appreciate that it can be challenging for working parents/carers trying to arrange childcare during half terms and holidays. 

Some LAs in England have taken the action to change the structure of their school terms in the past, reducing the summer holiday to 5 weeks, adding the additional week the October half term, the aim being to reduce the length of the autumn terms and allowing parents the potentially more flexibility and affordable holidays. The argument against this is the impact on those families relying on consistency year on year and across different schools and LAs.  Furthermore, if this structure was to become the norm, the nature of the new calendar could mean demand and the price of holidays would simply be moved to another point in the year.  If a change was considered in the future it would be in full collaboration with our neighbour LAs and a full a public consultation would be held, accordingly.

Year on year we collaborate with other LAs to consider the best options available, in the best interest of schools and families and to provide consistency.  We include the concern for parents/carers with child siblings in different schools and those commuting across LA borders.  On occasions in the past, when the dates have not been aligned to a neighbouring LA the feedback has been negative from those families impacted.

Having communicated with colleagues within education at BCC and co-ordinating with Bath & North East Somerset, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire objections were discussed and the dates have been and agreed.  Therefore, the decision was made to proceed with the proposed dates.  

Between 29 November 2021 and 16 January 2022 Bristol City Council asked residents, businesses, and anyone else who uses this area to comment on a proposed permanent scheme.

The council had developed the designs for this proposed scheme using feedback received from surveys relating to the temporary scheme that was introduced in September 2020.

To ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible we:

• sent set letters to 1,974 households and businesses in the local area
• produced paper copies of the survey with a language template covering 12 languages along with a freepost envelope
• created an online survey that was compatible with word reader software
• asked local stakeholders and community groups to help raise awareness of the survey
• promoted the survey via social media platforms which appeal to different age ranges
• held on-street drop-in sessions at key locations
• hosted two ‘town hall’ virtual meetings with local businesses, stakeholders and residents

A total of 565 surveys were completed using the online Smart Survey platform. Headline findings were:

• 44 per cent of respondents were local residents, 69 per cent live within two miles of the scheme, 33 per cent work in the area, 45 per cent are regular visitors
• 70 per cent of respondents tend to walk through the area, 65 per cent tend to cycle, 45 per cent tend to drive
• 78 per cent agreed with the proposed changes overall (with an approval range of 76-80 per cent across the different sections of the scheme)
• 66 per cent approved of bus stop boarders
• There was over 75 per cent support for cycle hangars at all three of the potential locations that were consulted on

You can read the full consultation report here. Alternative formats of the report are available on request. 

We have reviewed feedback from the survey, along with the views of local stakeholder groups and ward members.

As there is a good level of support for this scheme, we will progress it to the detailed design stage with some additions and changes in response to consultation feedback.

We will then seek formal approval to deliver the scheme, which will be subject to the detailed design work and the availability of funding. An Officer Executive Decision will be published in the coming months.

If delivery of the scheme is approved, further statutory consultations will be carried out as part of the legal process relating to traffic regulation orders.

The Mead Street engagement survey ran from 22 November to 7 January 2022.  It asked for feedback on a set of guiding principles and emerging concepts to inform the regeneration of Mead Street and inform a Mead Street Development Brief. 

The information below reflects the feedback from the online survey that was available via the Temple Quarter website.  Two public drop-in events also took place on 22 and 23 November at LPW House which provided local businesses and residents the opportunity to discuss the emerging principles.  A briefing with local community organisations also took place online.

The emerging principles were:

• Make it a place people want to live and work, are proud of and which is representative of the community that live there.
• Provide better routes for sustainable travel.
• Create high-quality places: public realm, place-making and a sustainable and low carbon neighbourhood.
• Green space at the heart of the new neighbourhood and ecological enhancements

A summary of the responses to the engagement can be viewed here. 

A full engagement report can be viewed here.

You can read our response in the document above.  We are consulting on the Mead Street Development Brief, which includes principles for change in the area, until Monday 4 July. You can take part here: bristol.gov.uk/meadstreetbrief

The South Bristol Youth Zone consultation took place between 16 November 2021 and 2 January 2022 and sought views from the public on the proposed South Bristol Youth Zone.

The South Bristol Youth Zone consultation sought feedback on the following.

• Proposal for a Youth Zone to be built in South Bristol
• Proposed location of the Youth Zone
• Respondents’ reasons for disagreeing with the proposal to build a Youth Zone in South Bristol or the proposed location.
• Ideas and suggestions for how young people can travel to and from the site safely.

The South Bristol Youth Zone consultation comprised information about the proposal to build a Youth Zone in South Bristol and an online survey.

We received 184 responses to the consultation, the results of which are available here.

The consultation feedback will be be used to shape the Full Business Case which will be considered by Cabinet on 7 June 2022.

The consultation on the council’s 2022/23 budget was open for six weeks from 5 November 2021 until 17 December 2021. Individual responses were received via the survey and additional responses were received from organisations and individuals via email.

More information about what we consulted on is available in the consultation survey.

We received 1,304 responses to the Budget consultation 2022/23, the results of which are available in the Budget 2022/23 consultation report.

Increase in Core Council Tax 2022/23

A majority (842 respondents, 65%) favour an increase in core Council Tax to support general services in 2022/23*. Of these:

• 582 (45% of all 1,304 respondents) favour a 1.99% increase;
• 260 (20%) favour a 1% increase;
• 444 (34%) would prefer no increase to core Council Tax and;
• 18 (1%) did not give a view.

Increase in Adult Social Care Precept in 2022/23

A majority (740 respondents, 57%) of respondents favour an additional 1% Adult Social Care Precept (on top of core Council Tax) to support the delivery of adult social care.**

539 (41%) respondents would prefer no increase to Social Care Precept in 2022/23.

25 (2%) did not give a view on Social Care Precept.

Six proposed approaches to saving money and generating income

1,281 (98%) of the survey respondents gave their views on one or more of the of six money saving and income generating approaches that are proposed to bridge the forecast budget gap in 2022/23. Of these:

• 95% agreed with the proposal to improve efficiency;
• 90% agreed with the proposal for digital transformation;
• 87% agreed with the proposal for propery and capital investment;
• 78% agreed with the proposal to be more business-like and secure more external resources;
• 65% agreed with reducing the need for direct services;
• 51% agreed with redesigning, reducing or stopping services. 

*1.99% is the maximum amount the council can raise Council Tax in 2022/23 without holding a local referendum. This limit is set by government. 

** The council is allowed to add a Social Care Precept of up to 1% to Council Tax in 2022/23. This is in addition to the permitted increase of up to 1.99% for core Council Tax.

The decision will be taken at Full Council on 15 February 2022.