Consultation Hub

Your participation makes a difference

When making important decisions about local public services, the city council promises to keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and aspirations, and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

Where it makes sense to do so, we will look to you for advice and innovation in solving problems and incorporate your advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

This website will help you to find and participate in consultations that interest you.

You can also follow us on twitter or subscribe to our RSS feed.

To submit general comments on issues not currently being consulted upon, please use one of our comments, compliments and complaints options.

For information about consultations that started before August 2012, please click here

We Asked, You Said, We Did

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

Leicester local flood risk management strategy approval

We asked:
whether the public, and our stakeholders approved of the changes we made to the Leicester Local Flood Risk management Strategy after listening to their responses to the first draft circulated in September 2014. We contacted everybody that responded to our first consultation, explaining what changes we made based on their feedback.
You said:
The majority was happy with amendments made to the document with one reservation about cycle paths and one comment on proof reading which was not concerning the strategy.
We did:
We saw no need to make further changes, having dealt with the cycle issue via another group. The document went to the executive for approval and will be available to the public in March 2015.

Changing neighbourhood services in your area - North West

We asked:
We asked for people’s views on how neighbourhood services in the North West area of the city could be transformed. We asked for information on how the services are used now and asked people for their opinions on how buildings and services could change.
You said:
That the services provided were more important than particular buildings. That transfer of assets through Community Asset Transfer would be welcomed. That libraries and the functions they perform and likewise the activities in community centres are important for local people. That the services could be combined into fewer buildings, based on location and proximity of other sites. That there should be better advertising of community spaces that are available for hire to increase usage and income. That money could be raised by increasing community room hire charges and other charges and also by asking for voluntary contributions from users of the sites.
We did:
We are now in the process of analysing the responses received in more detail and using these to develop a draft set of proposals that will be consulted upon separately when they have been developed.

Belgrave Road improvements

We asked:
Based on information posted at from 20 October, a simple survey asked people to comment on information on ideas for transforming Belgrave Road. The electronic survey went live on 27 October and closed on 24th. November. People were asked to comment on road layouts, traffic levels, security, landscaping, signage etc. and were asked to offer their own ideas for improvement. Four public consultation sessions were held in the Belgrave area. Every household in the Belgrave/Latimer wards was leafleted and the events were publicised online and through social media. Shops along the Golden Mile were also leafleted and were given posters to display. Other meetings were held with local stakeholder groups. A film was produced on the issues in the area which was watched on ‘You Tube’ 300 times and generated several comments. Information on the website was viewed 289 times. Over 100 businesses were represented at a consultation event at the Belgrave Neighbourhood Centre and the other three meetings saw an attendance of over 50 residents at each meeting. The ideas of shared space and the public meetings received coverage in the loc
You said:
Responses were received via on-line, paper sources and email along with comments submitted via a petition. Majority of respondents were people regularly visiting the area Slower traffic speeds, wider pavements, improved car parking, Landscaping and signage were the most popular areas to improve 24% (22) strongly agreed with the Shared Space concept and 36% (32) Strongly disagreed Tree planting/landscaping, wider pavements, removal of traffic lights were most popular suggestions although each received some favourable response Concern was expressed by disability & access groups over how a potential design could be made safe people who considered 19% (17 people) considered themselves to have a disability Concern was also expressed over the reduction in lanes and what impact this would have on traffic volumes and congestion
We did:
At the Golden Mile Regeneration Group meeting held on 26th November, the results were considered and it was agreed that a working group would be formed comprising resident and business representatives to work with city council officers to take consultation forward to the next stage. The group will come up with the following by the end of March: 1. Identify options and short-list schemes that could be worked up into designs 2. To gain consensus on the preferred scheme 3. To bring option(s) to the next Golden Mile Regeneration meeting, scheduled for 25 March. During this time there will be more consultation with residents, businesses and stakeholder groups. The scope of the project will also be considered in terms of the length of the Golden Mile being considered as part of any scheme i.e. Belgrave Circle to Melton Road inclusive or just to the end of Belgrave Road, as originally discussed. A workshop will take place at City Hall at the end of January / early February

During the consultation process, we ask for your feedback, you tell us and then we make positive changes. Public participation is key to our work. See what happens with We Asked, You Said, We Did.