Consultation Hub

Welcome to the Bristol City Council Consultation Hub.  This site will help you find and participate in consultations that interest you.  Recently updated consultations are displayed below; alternatively, search for consultations by keyword, postcode, interest etc.

To keep up-to-date of new consultations, subscribe to our automated email notifications or 'Like' Ask Bristol on Facebook.

If you are looking for advertisement of Traffic Regulation Orders (TRO's) or Temporary Traffic Regulation Orders (TTRO's) you can find them on the council's website.

Residents Parking Schemes (RPS)- please visit our dedicated web pages for what's happening in your area

If you would like information on any of our consultations in another format, including paper copies, please
telephone 0117 922 2848 or email: consultation@bristol.gov.uk.

Featured: Corporate Strategy 2017 – 2022

We welcome your views on the Corporate Strategy for 2017 to 2022. We are consulting you... More

Closes in 4 weeks

Open Consultations
Driverless Vehicles Survey
Broom Hill Blackberry Hill Improvements
Windmill Hill local traffic scheme
West of England Joint Spatial Plan (JSP) and Joint Transport Study
Parental Survey on the Free Early Education Entitlement
See All Open Consultations
Closed Consultations
Spike Island Residents' Parking Scheme Review
St Pauls Residents' Parking Scheme Review
Southville Residents' Parking Scheme Review
Easton & St Philips Residents' Parking Scheme Review
Bedminster East Residents' Parking Scheme Review
See All Closed Consultations

We Asked, You Said, We Did

Here are some of the issues we have consulted on and their outcomes. See all outcomes

We Asked

We asked for comments on the proposed ‘Oral health Promotion Strategy for the populations served by four local authorities of Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol, South Gloucestershire and North Somerset. We wanted to know whether the strategy would be a useful guide for partner organisations working collaboratively.  We also wanted to know if the key priorities set out reflected the current needs of all people in relation to oral health promotion. 

You Said

There were 77 respondents to the consultation. 90% were from individuals and 10% from organisations representing groups of people with specific needs. 

The vast majority (97%) of respondents agreed with the strategic vision of improving oral health of all people. Of the five strategic priorities, promoting healthier food and drink choices that are lower in sugar received the strongest support (96% strongly agreed) whilst the strategic priority on supervised tooth brushing and free tooth brushes received the lowest support – though still very supportive – with 91% of the respondents strongly agreeing to the priority.

Of the comments received, key themes raised by people include:

•                    Access to NHS dentists and the cost of dental treatment

•                    Provision of dental care for those with disability

•                    questions about  fluoridation of water (this is not within the remit of this strategy)

•                    Quality of oral health care provision

Supportive suggestions were made about

•                    Including oral health promotion within primary care contacts , such as GPs, Midwives, health visitors and family support workers

•                    Working with dentists and dental practitioners to raise awareness on  oral health promotion

•                    Teaching of oral health promotion to people working in the wider community and voluntary sector; care, social and education staff, in particular for young children, people dependent on care and carers.  

We Did

The high level priorities and objectives set out in the strategy were largely supported by the public consultation. However,  a number of points were raised that relate to the delivery of the strategy. This feedback has been taken in to account in the development of the Oral Health Promotion Delivery Plan, that sets out a life course approach to improving oral health.  It includes evidence based interventions that relate specifically to young children, vulnerable groups (the homeless, drug and alcohol users, those with disability), carers, older people and people living with dementia as well as ensuring oral health promoting activities also reach the working population. Teaching and training of community staff are core components of this plan.

Some issues raised by the consultation are beyond the scope of this strategy, such as water fluoridation and patient experience of dental services. The four local authorities work closely with Public Health England, NHS England as well as local dental professionals to ensure we support the promotion of good oral health among our communities and encourage equitable access to dental services. Specific issues raised have been communicated to the relevant organisation.

If you would like to hear more about, or get involved in, promoting oral health within our communities across Bath and North East Somerset, Bristol, South Gloucestershire and North Somerset, please contact Paul Harwood, Dental Public Health Consultant at Public Health England on paul.harwood@phe.gov.uk  or contact Jon Roberts, Chair of the Oral Health Promotion Steering group, on Jonathan.Roberts@n-somerset.gov.uk .

We Asked

We ran a public consultation on the Spatial Framework and two companion documents, the Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) and the Public Realm Guide. The consultation ran from 3rd March and 14th April 2016 and an accompanying survey received 72 responses. An additional 24 letters were received. The consultation’s primary aim was to collect feedback from key stakeholders and members of the public, and then use this feedback to inform further development of the document.

You Said

The majority of respondents were supportive of the objectives and approach of the Framework, and responses were tailored to the relevant sections of the document.

Some areas for further development became apparent through the collation of responses, including concerns about amount and nature of public space, land use (desire for more residential uses), the need for public transport improvements, barriers to connectivity, the need for parking guidance and the retention of historic assets

We Did

The document has been updated following the consultation. Some examples are given below, but detailed responses are available in the Statement of Community Involvement.

  • Land use guidance has been amended to encourage a greater proportion of residential floor space;
  • Transport plans have been updated to reflect the latest position in respect to the arena and Temple Gate projects, as well as other emerging city council transport projects in the area;
  • The section on heat networks has been retitled ‘Environmental Design and Construction’ and redrafted to incorporate guidance on a range of environmental measures;
  • Further work is planned to respond to the need for a residential parking standard for the zone;
  • The Framework’s guidance on public spaces has been strengthened to include an aspiration to increase tree coverage by 50%, place greater emphasis on accessibility for people with mobility difficulties and to propose opportunities for formal and informal play spaces within Temple Quarter near Totterdown Basin and Avon Street Market.

The intention is that the Spatial Framework be a living document that is periodically updated, so it will remains relevant as the area changes and as new challenges and opportunities emerge.

We Asked

We asked voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations what they thought about our co-designed proposals for a new approach to grant funding.

You Said

We asked a local VCS organisation, Voscur, to help us to consult with over 150 VCS organisations and they did this through existing events, organising specific consultation events and organising a discussion programme about our proposals on Ujima radio.  We also held a number of events specifically for equalities-led organisations and ran a survey.  In total we talked to and received feedback from 225 people who were from over 170 VCS organisations (as well as from individuals and people from statutory organisations).  There was positive broad support for the proposals but people told us how the details could be improved and what their concerns were.  Voscur wrote a report with their headline findings.

We Did

We collated all the feedback from Voscur, our own consultation sessions, the survey and from letters and telephone calls.  We shared this feedback with the Prospectus co-design working group in March and we used it to shape our design of the final VCS Grants Prospectus.  We had two co-design working group meetings to talk about the consultation feedback and the changes that we needed to make.  The last co-design working group meeting was in May and since then the council has worked to make those changes and write the final prospectus.

We have made many changes as a result of the consultation and these are the main ones:

  • People liked our aim to reduce disadvantage but some people seemed confused about our aims and values.  We have now agreed three impacts for the fund: reducing disadvantage and inequality, improving health and wellbeing, increasing resilience.
  • People thought the values were too aspirational, were not clear enough and were not really values.  We have revisited our approach and have now agreed four clear ‘ways of working’ for organisations funded through the prospectus pooled grant.
  • People thought some of the 7 challenges were very prescriptive, some were very loose and people suggested more and different challenges.  We have decided to focus the prospectus on 5 challenges which are broad and interlinked.
  • We asked people what grant cycles would work best in a four-year prospectus and how we could make savings if needed.  As a result we have decided to offer 2-year small grants so that we can respond flexibly to changing or new need and 4-year medium and large grants.  We will be introducing tapers in years 3 and 4 for the medium and large grants.