Consultation Hub

We asked for your views on the proposed 20mph zone for the Montrose School area.

We received six responses to the online consultation from outside the consultation area. Three responses were for both the proposed 20mph speed limit and the proposed traffic calming and three responses were both against the proposed 20mph speed limit and the proposed traffic calming.

A paper consultation was also delivered directly to local residents. We had 600 responses to this, representing a 25% response rate. Of these responses, 443 people (74%) were in favour of the 20mph speed limit and 340 (57%) were in favour of the proposed traffic calming.

As a result of the support for the proposal, the city mayor has approved implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force in late spring 2019.

We consulted on a proposal to end the funding that Adult Social Care (ASC) provides to six housing associations. The funding is used to provide support services to residents living in 31 non-council sheltered housing schemes. These services support people who, in most cases, do not meet the council’s threshold for care and support.

As part of the consultation the council wanted to understand whether the six housing associations could continue to provide some form of support to these residents without ASC funding.

Council officers worked closely with the six housing associations and their residents to gauge views on the proposal. In total we met with 111 people through 13 meetings. 95 of those people were residents and 16 were housing association staff.

The meetings were held in the day rooms of schemes affected across the city to ensure they were accessible to the residents.

As part of the main consultation we received 207 responses.

Responses were received from a range of stakeholders although 67% of responses received were from the residents of the 31 sheltered schemes.

Comments made through the focus group meetings and responses from consultation surveys indicated residents were concerned about losing the funding for their support service. They were also clear about the value they derived from that service. Where there were clear plans in place from the housing association to mitigate against the impact of the proposal, residents felt reassured.

The main comment in terms of how the service met their needs was that they valued the wellbeing support as a way of helping residents remain independent.

The support, residents felt, also helped to reduce isolation and loneliness. Residents described it as a lifeline in terms of supporting their ability to participate in the community of the scheme/s.

The council has decided to end the funding for the ILS sheltered support service.

Although residents raised valid concerns about the impact of the proposal, the consultation process enabled council officers to understand how residents in these schemes would continue to be supported, without ASC funding.

All six housing associations demonstrated well developed ideas for continuing the support. Some of the proposals may require residents to pay for support in the future but council officers were reassured that residents would be fully consulted on those proposals.

Other forms of support, such as volunteer roles and good neighbour initiatives will also be considered, and this will help mitigate against some of the impact residents raised around loneliness and isolation.

We asked for views on new powers that would allow the council to increase premiums for properties that have been empty and unfurnished for two years or more from April 2019.

• 84 responses were received, 63 of whom were also residents of Leicester.
• A majority of respondents (60%) supported introducing one or more of the premiums outlined. 39% supported no change.
• 44% of respondents said the changes would have no or little impact on them personally, 26% said they would impact financially but this was justified, and 30% would be financially impacted and felt this was unjustified.
• 71% of respondents felt there should be some exemptions, although there was no agreement as to who these should apply to.

The consultation feedback was presented to full council on 15 November 2018. A decision was made to adopt the proposed premiums of 100% for homes empty for more than two years in 2019/20, and to approve in principle adopting further premiums for homes left empty for five and ten years in 2020/21 and 2021/22.

The council decided to adopt the government recommended exemptions for occupants serving in the Armed Forces and self-contained annex properties.