We Asked, You Said, We Did

Below are some of the issues we have recently consulted on and their outcomes.

We Asked

The consultation on the Traffic Clean Air Zone options was open for six weeks from Monday 1st July to Monday 12th August. Individual responses were received via the online survey, with people being asked how concerned they are about the health impacts of poor air quality in Bristol. It also sought feedback from citizens, businesses and other stakeholders on the two potential options.

Paper copies of the survey and alternative accessible formats, including language translations, were available on request. Paper copies of the survey were also available in all libraries and the Citizen Service Point. Additional survey responses were garnered through seven drop-in sessions and via face-to-face interviews with the Youth Council and in 11 areas of the city which have historically low response rates, high deprivation and/or high proportions of black, Asian & minority ethnic (BAME) citizens.

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

You Said

We received 5,034 responses to the consultation, the results of which are available here.

5,001 (99%) of the 5,034 respondents answered the question ‘how concerned are you about the impacts of poor air quality in Bristol on your health and the health of your family?’

There is a high level of concern about the health impacts of poor air quality among respondents, and health concerns are higher still among Bristol respondents.

85% of all respondents and 88% of Bristol respondents are very concerned or moderately concerned, with 61% (66% for Bristol respondents) stating they are very concerned and 24% (22% of Bristol respondents) being moderately concerned.

10% of all respondents and 9% of Bristol respondents are slightly concerned.

Only 5% of all respondents and 3% of Bristol respondents are not concerned.

Of the 5,034 people who responded to the Traffic Clean Air Zones consultation, 4,966 (99%) stated how strongly they agree or disagree that Option 1 (Clean Air Zone - private cars not charged) is a good way to improve air quality in Bristol.

More than two thirds of all respondents (69%) agree or strongly agree that Option 1 is a good way to improve air quality (39% strongly agree and 32% agree). This is more than three times the 21% of all respondents who disagree or strongly disagree. 11% neither agree nor disagree.

For Option 1, Bristol respondents share similar views to all respondents, with slightly higher proportions agreeing or strongly agreeing compared to all respondents.

4,971 respondents (99%) stated how strongly they agree or disagree that Option 2 (Diesel car ban) is a good way to improve air quality in Bristol.

More than half of all respondents (55%) agree or strongly agree that Option 2 is a good way to improve air quality (32% strongly agree and 23% agree). This is more than one and a half times the 34% of all respondents who disagree or strongly disagree. 11% neither agree nor disagree (the same proportion as for Option 1).

Bristol respondents view the Option 2 diesel car ban more favourably than all respondents. 59% of Bristol respondents agree or strongly agree, almost twice the 30% who disagree or strongly disagree. 11% neither agree nor disagree that Option 2 is a good way to improve air quality.

We Did

Along with rigorous technical analysis of a number of options, the consultation feedback was used to develop the Outline Business Case (OBC) of the clean air plans which were put before Cabinet on Tuesday 5th November. Following approval by Cabinet, the plans were submitted to the Joint Air Quality Unit (JAQU) for their consideration.

The council is continuing to work closely with JAQU on preparing the Full Business Case for submission next year. As part of the Full Business Case, there will be direct engagement with all businesses and residents affected to help manage implementation, including details of mitigations measures and exemptions. The deadline for the implementation of the plans is March 2021.

For further information on the clean air plans, visit www.cleanairforbristol.org

We Asked

Following a request from the Friends of Marksbury Road Library, we consulted on whether to change the library name to Malago Vale Library or retain the name Marksbury Road Library.

You Said

We received 139 responses to this consultation.

The results were as follows:

  • Retain the name Marksbury Road Library - 67%
  • Change to Malago Vale Library - 29%
  • Other - 4%

We Did

Based on the feedback from the public, the name Marksbury Road Library will be retained.

We Asked

The consultation survey was designed to set out the current position and challenges of homelessness in the city and capture views on the five priories and their associated objectives and approaches, as set out in the draft strategy. It asked how strongly respondents agreed with these priorities and invited any comments in a free text section. It also invited respondents to identify the top five actions (from a list of 16) the city should focus on to reduce rough sleeping and homelessness also with additional comments in a free text section.

You Said

Overall, there were 377 responses to the survey.

The responses to the survey are summarised in the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2019-24 consultation report.

We Did

The Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2019-2024 consultation report was taken into account to develop the draft strategy and action plan further before it was considered by Cabinet and was approved on 3 September 2019.

You can read the Homelessness and Rough Sleeping Strategy 2019-2024 here.

Further detail on how the responses to the consultation have shaped the draft strategy and action plan is indicated in Appendix 1.

 

 

We Asked

Bristol City Council is responsible for the funding and management of Public Health in Bristol. The Public Health funding given to local authorities by central government has reduced by an estimated £700m in recent years. Bristol Public Health has reduced its spending by 17.5% since 2015. Bristol City Council needs to make an additional £2m in savings over the next two years because of reduced funding from central government.

This consultation set out proposals to make these savings through a combination of decommissioning and changing services. The services affected will be:

  • Alcohol Brief Advice
  • Children’s Weight Management Services
  • Adults’ Weight Management Services
  • NHS Health Checks Service
  • Stop Smoking Services
  • Substance Misuse Services (Shared Care)
  • Sexual Health Services, including Chlamydia Screening

You Said

303 people and partners responded to the consultation.

Responses to the consultation are summarised in the Consultation Summary and Recommendations Report.

We Did

Our recommendations of changes to proposals due to the consultation response are summarised in the Consultation Summary and Recommendations Report.

This will be presented at the July Cabinet meeting.

We Asked

We consulted on the draft commissioning plan which will form the basis for how Bristol City Council will buy the right type of ‘Help when people need it’ support in the future.

You Said

We Did

We Asked

The council is keeping libraries open while it works with Bristol redisents to find solutions for the library service so it meets the needs of each local area. We want to build a library service that everybody can enjoy.

You Said

We held 12 public meetings and met over 300 people and have published all the ideas and suggestions here. The ideas list is searchable for theme or site.

 

We Did

We are now working with each individual library through the Friends or Community Groups to talk through the priorities.

We Asked

Bristol City Council is responsible for setting the school term and holiday dates for all Community and Voluntary Controlled (VC) schools in the city. The dates were the subject of a consultation running from 28 February 2019 to 18 April 2019.

You Said

The consultation received 25 responses. Feedback has come from various interested groups including parents, staff and governors from Bristol schools and universities. 

The feedback to the proposed dates has been generally positive and the length of the terms appears to be viewed as well balanced and evenly distributed.

Some criticisms of the proposed dates are summarised below:

  • Term dates one and two are too long, particularly for young children. Learning during these terms is negatively affected by pupil absences from tiredness and bad health
  • Term six ending with a three day week may result in poor school attendance 
  • All school holidays should be shorter, especially for Easter and the summer
  • Some councils have tested shortening the summer break, extending holiday days elsewhere
  • The structure for how the school terms are organised should be reviewed and modernised due to the high costs charged by holiday companies in August
  • Holiday dates should be staggered elsewhere in the country, making holidays more affordable, reducing the number of parents taking unauthorised absence
  • A six week summer is too long and it is difficult and expensive for working parents who have to find childcare alternatives

School holiday dates should be co-ordinated nationwide so that children with family and friends in other parts of the UK can see one another and not be affected by school absence

We Did

The dates below for the school term and holidays for the 2020/2021 academic school year have been agreed.

Term 1: Tuesday 1 September 2020 to Friday 23 October 2020 (39 School Days)

Term 2: Monday 2 November 2020 to Friday 18 December 2020 (35 School Days)

Term 3: Monday 4 January 2021 to Friday 12 February 2021 (30 School Days)

Term 4: Monday 22 February 2021 to Thursday 1 April 2021 (29 School Days)

Term 5: Monday 19 April 2021 to Friday 28 May 2021 (29 School Days)

Term 6: Monday 7 June 2021 to Wednesday 21 July 2021 (33 School Days)

Total 195 School Days*

*In the school year 2020/21 pupils must attend for 190 days. School may decide which 5 days in the school year are INSET or non-contact days (days when pupils do not attend).

The full report for this consultation can be accessed here.

We Asked

Bristol City Council consulted on plans to reduce congestion and improve public transport reliability on the A4018 as part of efforts to mitigate the anticipated increase in traffic caused by the Cribbs Patchway New Neighbourhood (Filton Airfield) development.

The consultation ran from 4 February and 17 March 2019.

The public were consulted on the following plans:

  1. The conversion of Crow Lane Roundabout into a signalised junction, intended to improve traffic capacity and safety.
  2. Bus lanes along the A4018 between Crow Lane roundabout and Greystoke Avenue junction, intended to give public transport priority and improve reliability.
  3. Full signalisation of Charlton Road junction, including a ‘bus only’ right turn northbound off the A4018.
  4. Full signalisation of Greystoke Avenue Junction, intended to improve safety and traffic capacity.
  5. A series of banned turns both onto and off the A4018 along its length, intended to improve traffic flow and give public transport priority.
  6. A new pedestrian crossing on Passage Road near the southern Shipley Road junction, intended to aid pupils of Westbury Primary.
  7. Measures in Westbury Village, including a bus-gate on the High Street and changes to the one-way system, intended to reduce rat-running through the village centre.
  8. Full signalisation of the Westbury Road-Falcondale Road junction, including banned turns, intended to improve safety.
  9. An upgraded, shared-use walking and cycling path alongside the A4018 on the Downs.

You Said

We received almost 3,000 responses to the consultation. In particular, respondents raised concerns regarding the below aspects of the proposals:

  1. The series of banned right turns both onto and off of the A4018 were viewed by respondents as too restrictive for local journeys. This was raised with particular emphasis to the banned right turn to general traffic at Charlton Road, and the banned right turn at Knole Lane.
  2. The measures in Westbury Village, especially the bus-gate restricting general traffic from travelling along High Street, was viewed by residents as too restrictive to local access, businesses, and local life.
  3. Many respondents were not in favour of introducing 24h bus lanes for a variety of reasons, including perceived impact on traffic capacity and current bus provision in the area.

Respondents were largely in favour of some elements of the scheme that support walking and cycling in the area:

  1. The signalisations of Greystoke Avenue junction and Westbury Road-Falcondale Road junction had support from local residents on the grounds of pedestrian and vehicular safety. The proximity of this second junction to several schools was noted as being a key factor.
  2. The pedestrian crossing on Passage Road to enable safer access to Westbury Primary was widely supported by residents as being long overdue, especially in the current absence of a school crossing patrol.
  3. The upgraded shared-use path on the Downs alongside the A4018 received an overall positive view from respondents, who were supportive of giving cyclists a safer alternative to the road on that route.

We Did

We analysed all the responses, and re-designed many elements of the proposals in light of the feedback we received. You can see the full report here.

In particular:

  1. All the measures in Westbury Village were removed from the proposals. The project team plan to work closely with ward members, the local MP, and representative groups to develop a community-led approach to mitigate traffic issues in and alongside Westbury Village.
  2. Banned movements along the A4018 were removed from the scheme, with the exception of the Westbury Road-Falcondale Road junction of the A4018 with Downs Road.
  3. Proposed bus lanes will now operate peak hours only instead of 24h, with the sole exception of lanes that add to existing road capacity rather than re-allocate it.

These revised proposals form part of a bid to WECA for the first stage of funding. This recommendation went before Bristol City Council Cabinet on 18 June, and was approved.

We Asked

We ran a consultation to gather people’s views on whether they would like to see an increase to the current opening hours for Central Library. They were given two options for how increased opening hours could look, an option to keep the opening hours pattern the same, or to suggest their own hours.

Central Library was closed on a Wednesday.

The new proposals were a result of feedback from customers and from the 2017 Libraries consultation. It was part of the work being done to improve and futureproof the service following the decision to retain all 27 libraries.

You Said

We received 951 responses to this consultation.

The results were as follows:

  • 7.3% of respondents preferred Option A
  • 42.4% of respondents preferred Option B 
  • 46.1% of respondents preferred Option C
  • 3.8% of respondents suggested an alternative pattern of opening hours.

We Did

Option C was the most popular and we will be implementing these new hours from late May 2019. We will issue a press release for the exact day two weeks beforehand and will also update the website and opening hours signs at the library.

We shall be opening the Central Library on the following pattern from late May this year:

Option C -   52.5 hours

Monday

  9.30am - 5pm

Tuesday

  9.30am - 7pm

Wednesday

  9.30am - 5pm

Thursday

  9.30am - 7pm

Friday

  9.30am - 5pm

Saturday

  10am - 5pm

Sunday

  1pm - 5pm

We Asked

Bristol’s inclusive and sustainable economic growth strategy is focused on productivity-driven growth, together with the fair distribution of economic contributions and benefits. It also takes as a guiding principle that economic growth should not come at the expense of environmental and health standards. Accordingly, this strategy concerns itself with economic, social and environmental outcomes.
 
This Action Plan has been co-produced with a wide range of agencies and organisations across the city, but it will still benefit from further consultation to garner greater engagement and agreement. The aim is for the action plan to provide the framework for delivering the Strategy.

This Action Plan should serve as the starting point for developing and influencing a wide range of projects across Bristol City Council, the City Office and key delivery partners to guide a more focused and collaborative approach to inclusive and sustainable economic growth.

We consulted on the themes, priorities, and actions in this Action Plan.

You Said

We received 22 responses to the Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth Action Plan consultation.

We asked for comments on the proposed actions to deliver the Inclusive & Sustainable Economic Growth Strategy. You told us that many of the proposed actions were low priority. Due to this, we will focus on the actions identified as higher priority.

We asked for your views on the ways we will measure successful delivery. You told us that many of the metrics were unnecessary. Due to this, we have produced a more concise sets of metrics and will use them to report progress each year.

We Did

As a result of the online consultation and discussions with key stakeholders across the city, the action plan and associated metrics have been rationalised. There are now a set of 83 actions, across three timescales – short (to 2020), medium (to 2028) and long (to 2040) – and seven key metrics that will be used to report on the effectiveness of the action plan in delivering the strategic objectives. A full report on the consultation, together with the revised action plan and metrics, will be presented to Cabinet this summer.

We Asked

Overview

Bristol City Council has high aspirations for its children and young people (CYP) with special educational needs and disability. To improve educational outcomes for these citizens, Bristol wants to review and improve Bristol’s ‘top up’ funding process supported by clear guidance, support and policy for CYP, their Parent/Carers and all educational settings across the city.

The council wants to make the Top Up process more transparent and make sure this money is allocated fairly across all different education settings To do this the council needs to review its guidance about the standards all education settings must meet for all children and young people with SEND and high needs, and how they make sure everyone is included. This guidance is known as the ‘Bristol Universal Descriptors’ (BUDs).

A public engagement survey  enabled  key stakeholders to be able to give us their views on ‘what works well’ and ‘what needs to be improved’ 

Stakeholder engagement:

  • Engagement survey- Nov & Dec 2018 which had over 5000 social media hits, 262 survey replies
  • Stakeholder events January 2019, 100 professionals from education, health and social care as well as parent/carer groups.
  • Collaborative work with Inclusion in Education Group  (IAG) and other professionals
  • Working groups held in February, March, April and June.

We asked:

The engagement asked the following:

Do you agree with the following statements?

  • The current top up process is transparent and money is allocated fairly across all education settings.
  • Children, young people and their parents/carers have a clear shared understanding of how all children and young people should be supported by the education setting they attend.
  • Education settings know how to successfully support children and young people with SEND using the notional budgets and what would count as extra Top Up support. 
  • The current Top Up process panel day is an effective way of assessing the needs of children and young people and Top Up funding requests.
  • The current Peer Panel Top Up process works well.
  • The two panels a year, held in November and May, are enough to ensure all requests for Top Up funding children and young people are considered.
  • The current administration of the Top Up process works well
  • The information and evidence provided to the Top Up panel on the day is sufficient.
  • The current Bristol Universal Descriptors accurately describes the needs of children and young people with SEND

You Said

  • Two top up panels a year are not enough. The majority wanted monthly panels
  • Discontinue area top up panels for consistency of decision making. This would mean that schools are less likely to be paneling requests within their cluster area and all areas can be moderated in the say way across the city
  • Need to have more professionals attending panels. This would mean that there are more variety of professional across education, health and social care.
  • Yearly top up funding agreements are not enough. This creates a lot of additional work for SENCOs as they have to reapply more frequently. It was suggested that it could be at key stage.
  • There is a repetition of work to achieve top up decisions. The top up request form is a duplication of other documents and is time consuming to complete
  • High quality paperwork seems to succeed rather than the needs of the CYP. The view was the decision was down the way the paperwork was completed rather than actual needs of the CYP.
  • How do we ensure consistency of support across schools?
  • CPD needed for SENCOs around process and funding. There is no current training program for SENCOs and panel members including refresher training

There is no appeal process. If the application is decline it can’t be resubmitted until the next 6 monthly panel

We Did

Following the engagement  survey we listened to what everyone said and arranged the following:

  • Two stakeholder events with parent/carers representation, Education, Health and  Social care professionals to look the next steps
  • A number of workshops in collaboration with the IAG and other professional to formulate the proposed changes in  preparation for public consultation

Public consultation plans

We are also currently putting together proposals to address the other issues raised during this engagement work, which will be consulted on at a later date. These proposals will centre on:

  • Panel timetables
  • Top up request processes
  • BUDs
  • Top up award duration
  • Workforce development
  • The documents required for Top Up applications
  • The high needs funding model
  • Decision panel feedback
  • Handbook for professionals

Special schools

The above proposed changes for Top Up affect all mainstream settings across ages 0-25. Therefore this does not include special schools at this stage. Following the consultation and then implementation of the new process, there will be further public consultation regarding the current funding process for special schools.

We Asked

The proposals for an informal crossing point were included in the planning application documents. In terms of the consultations carried out on the original consent there was a site and press notice and 63 neighbours consulted; all the plans were available to view online.

There was an informal consultation from 7 December 2018 to 11 January 2019.

You can read further details in the Frequently Asked Questions and Way Forward document.

In addition to the informal consultation, we carried out a technical study and pedestrian count.

You Said

There were 67 separate comments on the proposals with 61 objections, 5 in favour and 1 neutral.

We Did

Bearing in mind the level of objection in mind, it is proposed that the design is revisited. The new proposals will be submitted as a variation to the original condition on the planning application and officers will ensure that affected frontagers are consulted as part of this process.

You can read further details in the Frequently Asked Questions and Way Forward document.

We Asked

Bristol City Council has a duty under the Children and Families Act 2014 to provide impartial, confidential and accessible information, advice and support to children and young people with special educational needs and/or a disability (SEND), and their parents or carers, regarding their education, and any health or social care needs related to their education.  This support is delivered in Bristol through the SEND Information, Advice and Support Service (SENDIAS service).

Bristol City Council and Bristol, North Somerset and South Gloucestershire Clinical Commissioning Group propose to re-commission Bristol’s SENDIAS service from 2019-2022 with an increased budget of £140,000 each year.

Many of the changes to the new service are required to meet national Information, Advice and Support Minimum standards.

We would like to know what you think about our proposals for some aspects of the future service which are additional to what is required in the minimum standards.

You Said

We Did

We Asked

The proposals for waiting restrictions (double yellow lines etc.) at junctions, resident driveways and school access points to prevent obstructive parking and to provide informal crossing places for pedestrians were consulted on between 7 December 2018 and 4 January 2019.

You Said

Bristol City Council received overwhelming support for the scheme improvements and there have been a number of additional requests for double yellow lines across driveways.

We Did

We have now drawn up a waiting restriction scheme which in order to install, will need to go through a Statutory Consultation process for the Traffic Regulation Order required.  This is a sometimes lengthy legal process which will involve placing a Notice of Intent in the local press and posting Notices on site to advertise the proposals.  Depending on the nature and level of objections and support for the scheme, the Director: Management of Place, Bristol City Council will decide if it is appropriate to pursue the scheme.  The proposed highway works will be progressed separately and should be installed by the end of the year.

We Asked

Bristol City Council is proposing to introduce an additional licensing scheme to 12 central wards in Bristol subject to Cabinet endorsement.

This consultation asked about a revised fee structure for this scheme. You can see the full consultation details here.

You Said

We received 257 responses to this consultation, the results of which are available in the consultation report.

We Did

The licensing scheme was approved by Cabinet on 2 April 2019. The scheme goes live on 8 July 2019.

Further information on property licences

We Asked

The consultation on the Council’s 2019/20 budget was open for six weeks from 5 November 2018 until 17 December 2018. Individual responses were received via the survey and face-to-face interviews, and additional responses were received from organisations and individuals via email.

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

You Said

We received 4,644 responses to the Budget consultation 2019/20, the results of which are available in the Budget 2019/20 consultation report.

4,521 (97%) of the 4,644 respondents stated the level Council Tax increase they would support in 2019/20, from the five options provided:

  • The option which received most support (40% of respondents) was a 4% increase in Council Tax. 
  • The option with the second highest level of support (25%) was ‘no increase to Council Tax’.
  • 17% would prefer a Council Tax increase of 3%. 
  • 10% of respondents would support a 2% increase
  • 8% would prefer a 1% increase.

We Did

The consultation feedback was taken into consideration in developing final recommendations for the council’s budget which were put to Full Council on 26 February 2019. Full Council agreed the council’s budget for 2018/19.

Council Tax will rise by 3.99%, which includes 1% to support Adult Social Care.

The approved General Fund net revenue budget for the year 2019/20 totals £376.3m.

The approved capital budget for the years 2019/20 - 2023/24, totals £856.8 m.

The approved Schools budget totals £356.9m for 2019/20, which will be funded by the Dedicated Schools Grant.

Further details are available on the Full Council meeting page.

We Asked

The commissioning intentions were laid out to the providers and public and as a part of the consultation five questions were asked within it. An open question was asked to allow for an opportunity to demonstrate and concern or agreement that may not have previously been captured. The consultation focused on collecting feedback on these questions. Feedback was analysed using the following methods.


1. Consultation questionnaire – the questionnaire asked for peoples comments’ on the questions within the strategy. To view the consultation questionnaire, see Appendix A.
2. Consultation events- the events asked for people’s responses to the consultation questions.
3. Emails from providers who have expressed an interest in tendering for this provision
4. 1:1 Interviews and Group sessions with people of lived experience of advocacy

You Said

We received 65 responses to the consultation survey, the results of which are available in the Advocacy and Healthwatch Commissioning consultation report.

We Did

Stage 1
We will publish the final Advocacy and HealthWatch Commissioning plan after Cabinet in February. This will set out the new model for commissioning services.
 

Stage 2
We plan to launch the formal tender process. It is envisaged this will be in Quarter 1 2019.

We Asked

The draft Bristol Transport Strategy went out to public consultation in the Autumn of 2018. The consultation consisted of a number of engagement measures, which included:

  • A questionnaire;
  • An online simulator tool to identify transport priorities;
  • A video and social media content;
  • Questions within the Citizens Panel survey;
  • Engagement with community groups across the city;
  • Presentations at events and forums across the city;
  • An easy read and audio version made available;
  • Materials distributed to libraries across the city.

You Said

In total, 3,189 responses were received and over 5,000 individual comments were analysed. The vast majority of respondents strongly agreed or agreed with the objectives and the approaches of the draft strategy, therefore these will remain in the final draft.

The draft Bristol Transport Strategy sets out approaches that seek to invest in sustainable transport modes and includes transformative measures such as mass transit and the consultation has shown that this approach is widely supported by the public.

We wanted to explore the public’s view on how we seek to fund the measures set out in the draft Bristol Transport Strategy and there appears to be support for road user charging and workplace parking levy, subject to the details of such schemes, which would need to be identified in future studies. Increasing council tax or business rates to fund transport schemes are not well supported and we will reflect this in the final edit.

We Did

We have created a report outlining the approach to consultation and the responses received. We are now preparing to take this report, along with the suggested edits to the draft Bristol Transport Strategy as a result of the comments received, up the decision pathway to Cabinet in July 2019 with a view to publish the final Bristol Transport Strategy in the summer.

We Asked

As part of the Safer Routes to Schools schemes, a zebra crossing and raised table was proposed on Bamfield located on a route to and from Perry Court E-Act Academy. 

You Said

The result of the consultation were on the whole positive for the proposed Zebra Crossing and speed table on Bamfield.

We Did

The proposal has been passed to the Traffic Regulation Order team for the legal process where there will be a formal consultation process.

We Asked

As part of the ‘Safer Routes to Schools’ schemes, a Zebra Crossing and raised table was proposed on Novers Lane. This was proposed for a location on a route to and from Greenfield E-Act Academy. 

You Said

The result of the consultation were on the whole positive for the proposed Zebra Crossing on Novers Lane.

We Did

The proposal has been passed to the Traffic Regulation Order team for the legal process where there will be a formal consultation process.’