We Asked, You Said, We Did

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

We asked

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 24th until March 7th 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.

 

You said

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 (15th December) is too early meaning there was a long break before Christmas and children returning to school too soon after new year (2nd January)
  • Making the longest terms in the winter means more travelling to and from school in the dark
  • Summer term ends too late (23rd 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.

 

We did

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 15th 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.  

We asked

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.

You said

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 did

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.

We asked

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

You said

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

A full engagement report can be viewed here.

We did

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

We asked

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.

You said

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

We did

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

We asked

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.

You said

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.

We did

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

We asked

Between 25 October and 30 November 2021 Bristol City Council asked residents, businesses, and anyone else who enjoys Cotham Hill to comment on three possible permanent schemes. The council developed three designs for a permanent scheme, using feedback received from previous surveys: 

Option A - continues with the closure on Cotham Hill for vehicles between Whiteladies Gate and Hampton Park and Hampton Park and Abbotsford Road and retains private access at number 38. A series of one-ways have been proposed that retain access for residents, businesses and visitors whilst reducing traffic speeds, through traffic and vehicles meeting head on. A ‘school street’ has also been proposed adjacent to St Peters and Paul Primary School. The cycle lane on Cotham Hill between West Park and Hampton Road will be upgraded by installing bollards to separate people cycling from traffic.

Option B – continues with the closure on Cotham Hill for vehicles between Whiteladies Gate and Hampton park and Hampton Park and Abbotsford Road and retains private access at number 38. A series of one-ways have been proposed that retain access for residents, businesses and visitors whilst reducing traffic speeds, through traffic and vehicles meeting head on but this does not include West Park.  A ‘school street’ has also been proposed adjacent to St Peters and Paul Primary School. The cycle lane on Cotham Hill between West Park and Hampton Road will be upgraded by installing bollards to separate people cycling from traffic.

 

Option C – removes the current scheme and changes Cotham hill into a one way street for motorised vehicles, allowing traffic to travel from Whiteladies Road to Cotham Road. By taking out a traffic lane and by removing the existing parking between Whiteladies Gate and Abbotsford Road the footways can be widened and enable space for cycling in both directions. In this design there is no pedestrianised area and space on the high street to carry out trading for businesses is reduced. Reallocation of further road space to create additional space for pedestrians is not possible due to the constraints.  A ‘school street’ has also been proposed adjacent to St Peters and Paul Primary School. The cycle lane on Cotham Hill between West Park and Hampton Road will be upgraded by installing bollards to separate people cycling from traffic.

How we engaged

To ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible the team did the following:

  • Paper copies of the survey with a language template covering 12 languages were created along with a free post envelope
  • Posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey
  • Online survey was compatible with word reader software
  • Local stakeholders and community groups were asked to help raise awareness of the survey
  • Promoted the survey via online social media platforms which appeal to different age ranges
  • Officers conducted two ‘town hall’ virtual meetings with local businesses, stakeholders, and residents to present the three possible schemes and hear feedback

You said

A total of 1527 completed responses to the survey have been captured using the online Smart Survey platform over the consultation period. Of the responses the headline findings are:

  • Over 60% were from residents
  • Over 14% live on Cotham Hill or within 100 yards and nearly 65% live within one mile
  • 80% walk and 40% cycle on Cotham Hill
  • 63% selected Option A, 27% selected Option B and 5% selected Option C and 5% supported no option or didn’t know
  • 37% wanted a bike hangar on their street and put forward 240 road names. Hampton Park, Cotham Hill, Aberdeen Road and Hampton Road were the top 4

59% would like to see street artwork on the carriageway included in the preferred option

We did

We have reviewed the feedback to the survey along with views from local stakeholders, ward members and community groups.

As the results show overwhelming support for Option A, we will progress this scheme to the detailed design stage, with some additions and changes in response to the consultation feedback.

We are now seeking formal approval to deliver the scheme, which is subject to the detailed design work and whether funding is available, and will publish an officer executive decision in the coming months.

Further statutory consultations on aspects of the scheme will take place towards the end of 2022 as part of the legal process for traffic regulation orders.

The full consultation report is available here. 

We asked

Between 18 October and 14 November 2021 Bristol City Council conducted an engagement survey asking about the proposed road safety improvement works at the crossroad junction between Kellaway Avenue and Wellington Hill West. As part of the signal’s refurbishment, the proposal was to provide all-round pedestrian facilities by installing new crossings on Kellaway Avenue to the south of the crossroads and Wellington Hill to the west. This would also provide safe crossing points across a busy junction along Horfield Common.

The survey asked residents, businesses and anyone who uses the junction about the level of support for the proposed traffic signal work and focused on two specific elements - tree removal and the safety of the junction.

How we engaged

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

  • 1766 letters were sent out to residents and local businesses in the area explaining the proposals and with a direct link to the survey   
  • Paper copies with a free post envelope were available on request via an email address or phone number
  • Posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey
  • Online survey was compatible with word reader software
  • Local stakeholders and community groups were emailed asking for their views
  • All local councillors were contacted with a link to the survey and asked to promote it to interested parties.

You said

A total of 141 completed responses were received from the survey. The headline findings are:

  • Over 70% of respondents thought the proposals to improve the Kellaway Avenue / Wellington Hill West traffic signal junction was excellent and very good.
  • Thinking about the removal of a tree on the northwest corner of the junction and planting of 8 trees along Wellington Hill West over 50% thought it was excellent and very good, with 14% thinking it was poor or very poor.
  • 80% agreed that the safety of the junction would be improved if the proposals are carried out.
  • 96 free text comments were received and 24 supported the proposals, 5 objected and the other comments asked about waiting restrictions on the junction, crossing facilities (all green phase), junction movements (ban left turn needs to be clearer), rat running (in Abbots Way), cycling improvements needed and need slower traffic speeds.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local stakeholders, ward members and community groups has been reviewed. As the results showed support for the work the signal refurbishment the detailed design will proceed with a view towards starting construction in Spring 2022.

The new signal sequence will run for all 4 pedestrian crossings with all traffic stopped on red which will help with the issue of drivers who currently ignore the banned turns. After the new layout has been implemented the junction will be monitored and reviewed.    

The full engagement report is available here.

We asked

Bristol City Council owns nine leisure centres and swimming pools located across Bristol.  The council also helps to fund the City of Bristol Gymnastics Centre, the Bristol Brunel Academy Fitness Suite and eight school leisure facilities that the public can use. The council prepared a draft Leisure Facilities Investment Strategy, setting out options for how we propose to invest in the city’s leisure facilities. Our proposed approach is to make improvements across the sites which serve the highest number of users and the areas of greatest deprivation.

You said

1,988 people responded to this consultation, the results of which are available in the consultation report.

We did

Following public consultation, cabinet was asked to consider the future operation of the council’s portfolio of leisure facilities with the aim of securing the long-term viability of the swimming pools and leisure centres for public use.  It approved the Leisure Facilities Investment Strategy and the Active Communities Leisure Procurement Strategy.

Cabinet noted that an expression of interest for a Community Asset Transfer (CAT) of the Jubilee Pool in Knowle has been received, which will be considered for progressing to the next stage and that the council has negotiated a 6-month extension of its current contract to allow time for any potential CAT process to be completed

Through the public consultation several organisations have already informally expressed an interest in running Kingsdown Sports Centre, and cabinet approved that all necessary steps will be taken to find an alternative operator for the facility. 

As part of its investment strategy the council is committing a current investment contribution of up to £8m, with the aspiration to leverage further outside investment from potential future operators

It is also proposed that as part of the Bristol Investment Strategy capital investment will be focused on elements of three strategic sites of Easton Leisure Centre, Horfield Leisure Centre and Bristol South Pool, which were subject to the leisure facilities investment public consultation.

Part of the Bristol Leisure Investment Strategy and Procurement Strategy will contribute towards the vision for Bristol’s Sport and Physical Activity Strategy (2020-2025) which aims to ensure that all Bristol citizens have the encouragement, opportunity, and environment they need to lead active, healthy and fulfilling lives.

We asked

The display of the Edward Colston statue in M Shed was a temporary measure to start a conversation with the city. A survey formulated by the We Are Bristol History Commission was the focus of the display which asked citizens what should happen to the statue next.

You said

On 3 February 2022, the We Are Bristol History Commission issued a report on the results of the survey alongside six recommendations for the future based on the views expressed by local people. You can download the report here.

We did

The report will now be considered by the Mayor of Bristol and the recommendations will need approval at a Cabinet meeting in April.

We asked

The consultation on the proposal for property licensing schemes in Bedminster, Brislington West and Horfield was open for 10 weeks from 17 March 2021 until 26 May 2021. Individual responses were received via the survey and additional responses were received from organisations and individuals via email and letter.

You said

We received 1,409 responses to the consultation, the results of which are available in the Property licensing scheme 2021 consultation report.

We did

The decsion will be taken at Cabinet on 14 December 2021.

If approved a  public notice will be issued within 7 days of decision and consultees and those affected by the decision will be contacted within two weeks.

We asked

The engagement on Greville Road was open for four weeks from 18 March to 18 April 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. The survey aimed to capture views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved and provide feedback on their own experiences.

The survey also asked people to give their views on some proposals to make Greville Road one-way or make it access-only by closing the road at one end or halfway.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies with a translation offer covering 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to 641 local properties. 25 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. As COVID-19 restrictions prevented face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey, we received 727 responses, which were made up of 608 online and 119 paper copies. Of the responses received, 97% are residents who live within one mile and more than 93% said they walk to the road.

Around 76% of respondents said they like Greville Road because it is “close to North Street shopping area” and 53% said they like the “personality and character of the street”. The most serious problem identified was “the pavements are too narrow” (34%) followed by “the street is busy with traffic” (33.9%). Over 59% of respondents think “maintaining motorised vehicle access to the street” is an essential priority for Greville Road.

Most respondents either disagreed or strongly disagreed with all four of the different road layout options proposed to restrict access to motorised traffic via either a new one-way system or road closure on Greville Road. 48% of comments were against the proposed changes to road layout, commenting either that they were not needed or highlighting concerns that changes would impact other local roads. Here, 22% of comments in this section called for a neighbourhood-wide approach.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders has been reviewed. There were comments for and against the different road layouts proposed throughout the survey, but the responses did not show a consensus among the community. We will therefore not be implementing the suggested changes at this time.

More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report.

We asked

The engagement on Mina Road was open for six weeks from Monday 1 February 2021 to Sunday 14 March 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise in three sections of the road. These were:

  • north of the mini roundabout – between the railway tunnel and where Mina Road meets York Street and James Street;
  • south of the mini roundabout – between the M32 and where Mina Road meets York Street and James Street;
  • the shopping area - between  John Street and the mini roundabout.

In summer 2020 we installed a protected bike lane between the railway tunnel and Mercia Drive using temporary bollards. The survey also asked how well people think the current scheme was working and if they agree or disagree with keeping the bike lane.

The survey aimed to capture views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved in the street environment and provide feedback on their own experiences.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies with a translation offer in 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to 1715 local properties. 25 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. As COVID-19 restrictions prevented face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 824 responses, which were made up of 454 online and 370 paper copies. Of the responses received, 81% are residents and 85% of respondents live on Mina or live within one mile. 87% of respondents said they walk to the road, 66% ride a bike and 52% drive a car or a van.

For the north section of Mina Road, more than 70% of respondents said they like the street for being close to the city farm and close to green spaces. When asked what they viewed as problems, 51% of respondents felt the street is busy with motorised traffic and 50% feel air quality is too poor. More than 50% of respondents think having cleaner air and improving the Concorde Way cycle route are essential and high priorities.

For the south section of Mina Road, more than 78% of respondents said they like the personality and character of the street and it being close to green spaces. 85% of respondents felt the most serious and moderate problems were the street being busy with motorised traffic and poor air quality. Over 55% of respondents felt cleaner air and prioritising more road space for cycling are essential and high priorities.

For the shopping section of Mina Road, 81% of respondents said like the personality and character of the street and 73% of respondents like it for being close to local businesses. 85% of respondents felt the most serious and moderate problem was the street being busy with motorised traffic. 55% of respondents think cleaner air, making it easier to cross the road, and restricting traffic from and to the M32 are essential and high priorities.

When asked for their views on the temporary bike lane, 63.5% either agreed or strongly agreed the bike lane to remain in place,  compared to 21.57% who disagreed or strongly disagreed.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders has been reviewed. It has been agreed to retain the protected bike lane from the railway tunnel and Mercia Drive.

More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report.

We asked

Public consultation on the proposed transport improvements and river restoration works was undertaken between the 21 January 2021 and the 4 March 2021, a period of six weeks.

This sought to build on the feedback generated through an early consultation in February 2020 to improve travel through and within the area. The consultation asked for public feedback on the preliminary designs for transport improvements and river restoration works in Bedminster Green.

You said

Transport Improvements:

388 people respondend to this consultation, the results of which  are available in the Bedminster Green Transport consultation report.

River Restoration:

388 people responded to this consultation online, the results of which are available in the Bedminster Green River Restoration Consultation Report.

We did

Transport Improvements:

The Bedminster Green Transport - You Said, We Did document shows how Bristol City Council is using the community feedback from the Bedminster Green Transport consultation to inform designs going forward.

River Restoration:

The Bedminster Green River Restoration You Said, We Did document shows how Bristol City Council is using the community feedback from the Bedminster Green Transport consultation to inform designs going forward.

We asked

The engagement on Redcliff Mead Lane and Prewett Street was open for four weeks from Monday 1 February to Sunday 28 February 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. The survey captured views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved in the street environment and provide feedback on their own experiences.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies with a language template covering 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to 975 local properties. 25 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. Due to COVID-19 restrictions preventing face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 162 responses to the engagement, which were made up of 50 online and 112 paper copies. Of the responses received 86% are residents who live within one mile and over 94% walk to the road.

Around 60% of respondents like Redcliff Mead Lane and Prewett Street due to it being “easy to walk around - there are good walking routes” and “close to shopping areas” (51%). The most serious problem identified “the air quality is too poor” (42.1%) followed by “the traffic speeds are too high (36.3%). Over 58% of respondents think “more greenery/planters” and “cleaner air” (56%) are essential priorities.

Option A proposed to close Redcliff Mead Lane where it meets Prewett Street but there was no majority support for either option. 44.5% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed and 39.1% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with this option. Option B proposed to close Prewett Street at Proctor House and 46.2% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed and 40.6% agreed or strongly agreed with this option.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders has been reviewed. There were comments for and against the proposed road layout changes throughout the survey, but the responses did not show a consensus among the community.

More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report. 

We asked

The engagement for Beaufort Road was open for six weeks from Monday 18 January 2021 and Sunday 14 February 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. The survey captured views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved and provide feedback on their own experiences.

People were also asked to give their views on a proposal to introduce a series of one-way restrictions on Beaufort Road. This was put forward as a suggestion to reduce the number of motorised vehicles using the road as a through route and reduce the conflict between vehicles travelling in opposing directions.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible, paper copies that included a translation offer in 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to more than 1500 local properties. 20 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. As COVID-19 restrictions prevented face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 785 responses, which were made up of 489 online and 296 paper copies. Of the responses received 93% are residents who live within one mile and 94% said they walk to the road, 75% drive a car or van, and 49% ride a bike.

When asked what they liked about the street, the most popular answer was the street being “close to the cemetery” (59%) whilst 49% liked it for its “large trees and green space”. This was followed closely by “local views” (46%) and “20 mph limit” (44%)

When asked what residents viewed as problems; 85% thought “the street being busy with traffic” was a problem, 67% thought that “traffic speeds were too high”, 62% thought “the road was unsafe to cycle” and 57% thought “not having a dedicated space for cyclists” was a problem. Around 58% thought “pavements were too narrow”, “air quality was poor” and “there was too much noise pollution”.

In terms of priorities: 69% said they want “traffic calming measures to slow traffic”, 59% want “cleaner air”, 58% want “to maintain access for motorised vehicles”, 56% support “changing the traffic direction for example to one way”, and 51% want to “prioritise more space for cycling”.

60% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed with the proposed scheme to amend traffic flow on Beaufort Road.

We did

The feedback from this survey, along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local, will be used to inform designs as part of the Liveable Neighbourhood strategy. More information about what we engaged on and the results of this survey are available in the full report.

We asked

The engagement on Overton Road was open for six weeks from Monday 11 January 2021 and Sunday 7 February 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. The survey captured views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved in the street environment and provide feedback on their own experiences.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible, paper copies with a language template covering 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to more than 700 local properties. 20 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. Due to Covid19 restrictions preventing face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 322 responses to the engagement, which were made up of 177 online and 145 paper copies. Of the responses received 92% are residents who live within one mile and walk to the road with 46% riding a bike and 43% driving a car/ van.

From the respondents most liked the closeness to Gloucester Road (89.1%) whilst 45% liked that it is easy to walk around and 45% liked the character of the street.

 68% thought pavements are too narrow over 50% thought cycle parking was a moderate or serious problem with a similar number wanting dedicated space for cyclists.

In terms of priorities: 66% wanted wider pavements, 60% wanted motorised traffic restricted, 57% wanted more greenery and planters, 55% wanted it made easier to cross the road, 55% wanted more space for community amenities, 53% wanted prioritised space for cycling, and 20% wanted motorised traffic maintained.

75% agreed with the proposed scheme to close access from Gloucester Road and free text responses showed majority support for closing the street and total closure from both ends rather than just Gloucester Road end.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders has been used to help decide on next steps. A few proposals to maximise pedestrian space in the area have been designed and will be discussed with local businesses to ensure they meet loading requirements before being subject to local consultation. More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report. 

We asked

The engagement survey for Dean Lane was open for four weeks from Monday 11 January 2021 to Sunday 7 February 2021. People were asked about the street environment, what they liked about it, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. People were also asked to comment on proposals to install a protected bike lane along Dean Lane. The survey aimed to capture views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses Dean Lane to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved and assess the appetite for the protected bike lane.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies with an offer of language translation included in 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to 1,023 local properties. 30 posters were also put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. Due to Covid-19 restrictions preventing face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 737 responses to the engagement, which were made up of 571 online and 166 paper copies. Of the responses received, 87% are residents who live within one mile from Dean Lane and over 92% walk to the road, almost 56% use a car/van, and over 54% use a bicycle. Over 72% of respondents use the road over 3 to 4 times a week.

When asked what people already like about the street environment on Dean Lane, “close to Dame Emily Park” and “close to shopping areas” are the most popular with 51% of respondents selecting these options. Meanwhile, 75% of respondents say, “pavements are too narrow” is a serious or moderate problem, 64% say “the street is busy with traffic”, 59% think “there is not a dedicated space for cyclists on the road” is a problem, and 58% say “the road feels unsafe to cycle on.” “Widen pavements” was ranked as essential/high priority by 66% respondents, and “make it easier to cross” by 64% respondents.

Over 63% of respondents agree or strongly agree with implementing a protected bike lane on Dean Lane, and 23% disagree or strongly disagree.

The main themes that came through the free text boxes were the road being unsafe to cross, speeding traffic, narrow pavements, and blind corners.  

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders is currently being reviewed. More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report.

We asked

The engagement survey for Langton Court Bridge and the surrounding area was open for four weeks from Monday 11 January 2021 to Sunday 7 February 2021. People were asked about the street environment around Langton Court Bridge, what they liked about it, what they would improve and what would they prioritise. The survey aimed to capture views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the road to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved, and to see what appetite existed for closing the bridge to motorised vehicles.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies were posted along with a free post envelope to 1,040 local properties. Surveys included a translation offer in 12 languages. 30 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. As COVID-19 restrictions prevented face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 665 responses, which were made up of 389 online and 276 paper copies. Of the responses received, 90% are residents who live within one mile from Langton Court Bridge and more than said they 87% walk to the road, 72% use a car or van, and 39% use a bicycle. More than 70% of respondents said they use the bridge three to four times a week.

Around 69% of respondents said they like Langton Court Bridge and the surrounding street environment due to it being “close to St Anne’s Park”. The most serious problem identified with 57% of respondents was that “the pavements are too narrow” followed by 37.9% saying “access for disabled people is poor” and 37.2% saying “the street is busy with traffic”. Around 36% of respondents think “maintaining motorised vehicle access to the street” and “making it easier to cross the road” are essential priority areas.

55% of respondents disagreed with the suggestion to close the bridge to motorised vehicles, and 40% were in favour.

The main suggestions that came through the free text boxes were, restoring the pavement on both sides of the bridge, reducing speeding traffic, and wider pavements.

We did

As the responses did not show consensus in the community, we are not planning on implementing the suggested road closure at Langton Court Bridge. The feedback from this survey, along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders, has been reviewed to help us consider other possible walking and cycling improvements on the street. Alternative proposals for the road have now been drafted and once finalised these will go out to consultation.

More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report.

We asked

A six-month statutory consultation was undertaken, from 2 August 2020 to 1 February 2021, to receive objections on the permanent introduction of bus lanes and other supportive measures that would change how general traffic accesses some parts of the city centre.

An Experimental Traffic Order was used to install 24hr bus priority routes over Bristol Bridge and at key points accessing the city centre. Priority was provided to public transport, taxis, cycles and pedestrians travelling through the central area of Bristol.

The six-month consultation period meant the public could experience the advantages and disadvantages of the priority measures, before giving their feedback on whether they should be permanent. 

For further information on the Bristol Bridge Experimental Traffic Order, visit:  www.bristol.gov.uk/transport-plans-and-projects/changes-bristol-bridge

You said

  • 865 representations were received in response to the statutory consultation.
  • 527 (61%) were objections, of which 40 expressed some support in principle.
  • 338 (39%) were comments of full support.

Please read the following document providing summary of the public objections received and our response based on it.  Objection summary and Officer responses.

We did

The consultation feedback was included in an objection report for consideration by the Interim Director Economy of Place, who subsequently reached a decision on 29 June 2021 to make the Experimental Traffic Order measures permanent.

In making the decision, it was considered that the scheme would achieve elements of the council’s wider transport policies and strategies to achieve cleaner air and transform travel in the city.

A copy of the *objection report as signed by Interim Director Economy of Place can be received upon request by emailing transport.engagement@bristol.gov.uk

* NB: The objection report provided upon request will be redacted for data protection and GDPR purposes. Relevant policy and strategy documents are referenced within the report

We asked

The engagement on Rosemary Lane was open for six weeks from Monday 16 November 2020 to Sunday 24 January 2021. People were asked about their street environment, what they liked about the street, what they would improve and what would they prioritise and if they felt closing the road to reallocate road space to the local community was important. The survey captured views from residents, businesses and anyone who uses the street to help build a picture of what people would like to see improved in the street environment and provide feedback on their own experiences.

Individual responses were received via the online survey and, to ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible in a multi-cultural ward, paper copies with a language template covering 12 languages were posted along with a free post envelope to 4137 local properties. 25 posters were put up in the local area to raise awareness of the survey. Local stakeholders and community groups were also asked to help raise awareness of the survey and it was promoted via social media platforms. Due to Covid19 restrictions preventing face to face engagement, the team offered virtual chats and phone appointments to anyone who didn’t want to submit a written response but wanted to ask questions and provide feedback.

You said

From this survey we received 569 responses to the engagement, which were made up of 172 online and 397 paper copies. Of the responses received 92% are residents who live within one mile and over 82% walk to the road.

Nearly 80% of respondents like Rosemary Lane due to the “open green space”. Over 50% like Rosemary Lane because “it is easy to walk around e.g. good walking routes” and because it has “playground and children amenities”. The most serious and moderate problem identified was that “the street is busy with traffic” (45.4%) followed by “traffic speeds are too high” (43%). Over 50% of respondents think “cleaner air”, “traffic calming measures to slow traffic” and “more greenery/planters are essential and high priorities when totalled together.

Over 35% of respondents answered that temporarily closing the road to reallocate road space to the local community was of “very high importance”, whereas 29% felt it was “not at all important”.

We did

The feedback from this survey along with the engagement with local businesses, community groups and local stakeholders is currently being reviewed. More information about what we engaged on and the results are available in the full report.