We Asked, You Said, We Did

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

We asked

We consulted on our proposal to extend existing Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPO) for three elements of dog control in the city:

  1. Dog fouling
  2. Dogs on leads
  3. Dog exclusion areas

We asked the public and stakeholders if they had any objections to the proposal and provided an opportunity to leave feedback.

You said

337 responses were submitted. Nearly 99% of respondents were members of the public.

In summary, the responses were highly in support of extending all three PSPOs, as follows:

  1. Dog fouling - 95% in favour
  2. Dogs on leads - 91% in favour
  3. Dog exclusion areas - 88% in favour

Additional supportive stakeholder feedback was also received outside of this online process.

We did

All comments have been scrutinised and noted.

The evidence from reports and complaints to our customer services team, and enforcement action taken since the PSPO orders were introduced is in support of them being extended.

We now intend to seek approval from the city mayor to extend the PSPO orders for a further three years. Subject to this approval, notices will be posted in November 2022 confirming reintroduction, and we will publish the renewed orders on our website.

We asked

We sought views on the proposed intordution of a new Zebra crossing

You said

15 valid responses were received to the online consultation. 
  
We also carried out a paper consultation to residents close to the proposed crossing and traffic calming
 
40 letters were delivered. 17 replied (plus 15 online consultation replies)
 
25 (78%) were in favour of the proposed zebra crossing and associated traffic calming, 5 (16%) against and 2 (6%) made no selection.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the Deputy City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme. Work was due to start on site in October 2022 and has now been completed.

We asked

We asked residents and businesses in the Tudor Road area for their views on proposals to introduce a residents parking scheme - in particuler, the following options: 

•    24 hours a day, seven days a week
•    24 hours a day, weekdays
•    8am-6pm, weekdays
•    Weekends 
•    Other times

You said

Out of 2,170 residential properties and businesses contacted, 141 responsed via our online consultation.

Responses showed some streets were against the introduction of a residential parking scheme. However more support was expressed in favour of the scheme towards the southern end of Tudor Road and around Tudor Close where inconsiderate and illegal parking is taking place.

Amongst other comments, 77 responses asked for a 24 hours a day, seven days a week residential parking scheme; 19 responses asked for the scheme at other times; and 18 responses asked for 8am-6pm scheme during weekdays. A further nine responses asked for 24 hours a day during weekdays only scheme; seven responses asked for a weekend only scheme and six for the 10.30-11.30am, weekdays option. Five respondents did not answer the question. 

We did

All comments have been scrutinised and noted. The overall consultation response has been relatively low and inconclusive. Therefore, no further action will be undertaken by the Leicester City Council at present. Whilst the council will not be taking forward resident parking scheme at the moment, it is looking into the issue of ongoing inconsiderate parking in and around the Tudor Close area and how it can be prevented. 

We asked

We asked residents and businesses for their views on a potential resident parking scheme in the Woodgate area. We also asked for views on following options for residential parking: 

  • 24 hours a day, seven days a week
  • 24 hours a day, weekdays
  • 8am-6pm, weekdays
  • Weekends

You said

90 responses in total were received from residents and businesses. Amongst other comments:

  • 44 responses selected 24 hours a day, seven days a week
  • 16 responses selected Weekend
  • 12 responses selected Other
  • 7 responses selected 8am-6pm, weekdays
  • 3 responses selected 10.30-11.30am, weekdays
  • 3 responses selected 24 hours a day, weekdays
  • 33 responses were against the introduction of residential parking in the area.

We did

All comments have been scrutinised and noted. We now intend to carry out a consultation for the 24 hours a day, seven days a week residential parking scheme, which was the most popular option.

We asked

We sought views on the proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit and traffic calming measures in the area.

You said

26 valid responses were received to the onlineconsultation. 22 were in the consultation delivery area. We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the 20mph zone.
 
375 letters were delivered. 133 replied (including via the online consultation) which was a 35% response rate. 
116 (87%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, 14 (11%) against and 3 (3%) made no selection or were unsure.

92 (69%) were in favour of the traffic calming proposals, 35 (26%) against and 6 (5%) made no selection or were unsure.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force later this financial year.

We asked

We sought views on the proposal to introduce a 20mph speed limit in the area

You said

22 valid responses were received to the online consultation. 17 of these were within the consultation delivery area.
  
We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the 20mph speed limit.
 
924 letters were delivered. 184 replied (including the 17 via the online consultation) which was a 20% response rate.

167 (87%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, 18 (10%) against and 6 (3%) made no selection or were unsure.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force.

We asked

In October / November 2021 we undertook a consultation with residents and businesses in the Aylestone Park area of the city to obtain views on a potential residents parking scheme, new one-way streets and controlled pavement parking. 

We asked respondents to give their views on the following options for residential parking: 

•    Residents only, 24 hours a day, seven days a week
•    Residents only, for a limited time period.
•    Residents only, during events at the nearby sports grounds
•    No residents parking scheme at all

We also asked respondents to give their views on introducing one-way streets to help improve safe parking provision and to reduce through traffic.

Finally, we asked for views on introducing controlled pavement parking to help improve safe parking provision.

You said

Approximately 4,600 residential and businesses properties were invited to take part in the consultation. A total of 527 responses were received from residents and businesses in the area (paper and online).

Results showed overall support for some form of residents’ parking scheme in the area with 50% for and 46% against. However, there was greater support for an residents' parking scheme in the north of the consulted area impacted by football match parking, and also closer to the cricket ground. These two areas together gave 57% support for and 41% against. There was overall no support for a residents parking zone further away from these sports grounds, with 65% being against any residents parking scheme.

There was a 61% approval for bringing in new one-way streets.

There was a 55% approval for bringing in controlled pavement parking.

In addition, respondents included many comments for and against residents parking in the area. Very few comments were received regarding one-way streets or pavement parking. 

We did

The overall consultation response showed that there is support for some form of residents’ parking scheme in parts of the consultation area. There will now be further consultation by the Leicester City Council in the areas that showed support for such a scheme.

Further consultation will help be to establish clearer support for any scheme and how it might operate.

If any residents’ parking scheme is progressed after further consultation, then controlled pavement parking and new one-way streets will be included as part of the overall design of any scheme. 

We asked

We asked for views on our draft Gambling Policy for 2022-25. The draft policy had been updated to take account of minor changes to the Gambling Commission's guidance but was not significantly different to the existing policy.

You said

There were 12 responses to the consultation. The comments were generally favourable, with some specific suggestions for minor amendments to the policy.

We did

The draft policy was amended to take account of the consultation responses, namely:

  • removal of a table showing suitable locations for gambling premises
  • additional text relating to risk assessments
  • additional text relating to mandatory and default conditions

The draft policy was approved at Full Council on 25 November 2021 and has been published online. It will take effect on 1 February 2022.

We asked

What improvements would you like to see to the cul de sacs in Clarendon Park?

You said

158 responses were received from street surveys and via this website. Amongst other comments, 34 responses asked for resurfacing of the cul de sacs, 68 people asked for more trees and 22 asked for new cycleways.

We did

Leicester City Council has ordered a refresh of the plants in the planters. One planter on Montague Road is in a poor condition and will be removed completely with a new tree planted in its place. Shared use cycleways will be installed in six of the cul de sacs. This will help to reduce the number of cyclists riding on the footway.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposed 20mph Zone for Abbey Mead School.

You said

Twenty four valid responses were received to the online consultation, 8 of which were outside the consultation delivery area.

We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the proposals - 994 letters were delivered.

In total, 157 people replied (16% response rate).

142 (90%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, 12 (8%) against and  3 (2%) made no selection.

136 (87%) were in favour of the proposed traffic calming proposals 15 (10%) against and  6 (3%) made no selection.

 

We did

As a result of the support of the proposals, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force in Spring 2022.

We asked

We asked for views on various school term date options covering 2022/23 up to 2026/27.

You said

A total of 5,514 responses were received to the online consultation.

3,628 respondents (65.8%) chose Option A to keep the existing pattern of term dates, which matches the Leicestershire County Council dates.

1,143 chose Option B and 625 chose Option C. 

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the Deputy City Mayor for Education and Housing has approved the implementation of the dates set out in Option A. These can be viewed on the Leicester City Council website.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposed Egerton Avenue area 20mph speed limit.

You said

Three valid responses were received to the online consultation, each of which were within the consultation delivery area.

We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the 20mph speed limit - 291 letters were delivered.

In total, 84 people replied (29% response rate).

75 (89%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, 8 (10%) against and 1 (1%) made no selection.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force in Spring 2021.

We asked

We asked for your views on our draft  ‘Social Care and Education Participation Approach’ which outlines the department’s commitment to creating opportunities for children and young people to share their views on matters affecting them and details how this should be approach.

The approach is framed on the Lundy Model to ensure that children and young people recognise their rights and that their voices are heard.

You said

A total of 62 surveys were completed and returned: 69% respondents identified as professionals, 24% identified as young people and 7% as other. 


15 young people completed the online survey. Of those, just over half suggested they had participated in decision making before and all but one of the young people felt that opportunities to participate are important. All the young people who responded felt the approach would provide more participation opportunities.

Young people reported that the approach document seemed effective and versatile and commented on the clear layout and colourful readability of the document. They also noted that the approach is inspiring and that it would encourage young people to make decisions. 
 
Three professionals who do not work with children and 40 professionals who do work with children completed the survey. All who answered felt that the approach makes sense and is clear and the majority (95%) thought that the approach helped them to understand what a good participation opportunity looks like. Professionals noted that the approach is young person centred and has clear and concise language.

People also appreciated the use of symbols throughout the document. The feedback received indicated that it was useful to have a framework and to look at different levels of participation.
 
91% of professionals agreed that they could apply the Lundy model to their work with young people and over three quarters suggested they would use the template provided. Those who didn’t indicated this is due to the amount of time required to fill it in, the fact that they already use other forms or that their role wouldn’t necessitate it.

100% of the professionals recognised that opportunities to participate are important and they also all noted that they understood their duty to support participation under Article 12.
 
Just 7% of respondents self-identified as neither a young person nor a professional. This included one person who is a member of the public, one person who is a care leaver and another who is an admin worker working in children’s centres. They commented that the approach is interesting and but identified some concerns that there is not enough money or staff capacity to support the true participation. One person suggested that consideration needed to be given to how to engage with young people in ethnic minority communities. 

We did

We amended the approach document to include direct quotes from people who responded to the consultation and introduced it as our formal approach. Training is supporting the roll out of the approach to staff.

We asked

We sought residents’ views on the proposed 20mph zone.

You said

Residents of 1,226 properties in the area were consulted. 265 (22%) responded and of these 236 (89%) are in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme.

We asked

Shoudl we apply a 20mph speed limit in the area?

You said

12 valid responses were received to the online consultation (plus two duplicates):

  • 10 were within the consultation delivery area
  • Two were in Leicester city

We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the 20mph speed limit:

612 letters were delivered. 123 replied including 10 by online consultation which was a 20% response rate.

112 (88%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, 14 (11%) against and 1 (1%) were unsure (including online consultation outside the area).

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force in spring 2020.

We asked

Should we inroduce traffic calming measures in the area?

You said

Seven responses were received to the online consultation:

  • Five were within the consultation delivery area
  • Two were in Leicester city

We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area:

88 letters were delivered. 39 replied including five by online consultation which was a 44% response rate

31 (77%) were in favour of the proposed traffic calming, 8 (18%) against and 2 (5%) were unsure (including the two responses outside the area).

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to be installed in the spring 2020.

We asked

We asked your views on our draft placement sufficiency and its aims and priorities.

You said

In total, 66 surveys were completed and returned. The majority of responses were received by staff (41%) or foster carers at Leicester city (30%). Comments were also received from providers in the city and a single foster carer from an Independent Fostering Agency (IFA). Notably, 8% of our responses were from children currently or previously in care.

  • 88% of all respondents supporting the aims and ambitions identified in the strategy.
  • 46% of respondents said we currently have the right mix of homes for our young people, 27% said they didn’t know or wasn’t sure and 23% didn’t respond.
  • 77% of respondents said they were aware of the demands and challenged placed on the local authority in finding suitable homes.
  • Collectively 74% agreed with our priorities and actions for the next 3 years for each area of work: foster care, residential care, support living and commissioning, 6% disagreed and 20% were unsure or didn’t respond.
  • A range of comments were received which: evidenced the need for improvement, informed action planning and delivery and provided examples for working more collaboratively in the future.

We did

We published our final strategy and delivery plan are available online.

This final version incorporates the views of children in care, care experienced young people, staff, foster carers and local providers.

Our plans will now be delivered by relevant services and overseen by the governance structure set out in our strategy. More detailed plans, which include many of the recommendations and comments put forward in this consultation, have been given to relevant departments to continue to improve services going forward.

We asked

We asked "Should we apply a 20 mph speed limit in the area and install traffic calming features"

You said

250 responses were received by post from the Letchworth Road North area. Of these 80% were in favour of the speed limit reduction and 61% in favour of the traffic calming features.

 

230 responses were received by post from the Dovelands area. Of these 86% were in favour of the speed limit reduction and 63% in favour of the traffic calming features.

75 responses were received electronically on the council’s consultation website. Of these 81% expressed support for the proposals in both areas.

843 letters were sent to residents in the Letchworth Road north area giving a response rate of 29%. 741 letters were sent out to residents in the Dovelands area giving a response rate of 31%.The results show clear support for the 20 mph speed limit and traffic calming features.

We did

As a result of the support for the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force later in 2020 (subject to delays caused by Coronavirus).

We asked

We consulted on our proposal to apply a three year extension to existing Public Spaces Protection Orders in relation to three elements of dog control in the city from 1 December 2019 - 2022.

  1. Dog fouling
  2. Dogs on leads
  3. Dog exclusion areas.

We asked the public and stakeholders if they were opposed to the proposal and provided an opportunity to leave feedback.

You said

Summary of consultation responses:

Do you have any objections to this Public Space Protection Order for Dog Control being extended for a further three years? - Objection Fouling

Yes - 8

No - 55

 

Do you have any objections to this Public Space Protection Order for Dog Control being extended for a further three years? - Objection dogs on leads

Yes – 10

No - 53

 

Do you have any objections to this Public Space Protection Order for Dog Control being extended for a further three years? - Objection Dog Exclusion

Yes - 13

No - 50

 

A total of 90.4% of all responses were from public and 9.6% from stakeholders.

We did

Based on the consultation results and the evidence of need held by Leicester City Council on customer reports and complaints of dog control issues and enforcement action undertaken since the implementation of the PSPO orders for Dog Control on 1 December 2016, we propose to seek approval from the City Mayor to extend the PSPO Orders for a further three years.

We asked

We proposed the introduction of a 20mph speed limit in the Morland Avenue area.

You said

Six responses were received to the online consultation, five of which were within the consultation delivery area and one outside.

We also carried out a paper consultation to residents in the area covered by the 20mph speed limit.

111 letters were delivered. 48 replied including six by the online consultation which was a 43% response rate.

38 (79%) were in favour of the proposed 20mph speed limit, nine (19%) against and one (2%) were unsure.

We did

As a result of the support of the proposal, the City Mayor has approved the implementation of the scheme which is scheduled to come into force late 2019.