We Asked, You Said, We Did

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

We asked

We consulted residents, local businesses and organisations about the proposals in our second round of consultation. We held two online chat sessions as well as an online survey to gather views.

A total of 51 surveys were received with 31 stakeholders attending the two live chat sessions. We would like to thank all residents and stakeholders that took the time to share their views.

You said

  • 24 objected to the principle of the scheme while 19 supported it. The main reason for objection was the height of the development and the impact on light of surrounding residents
  • Over half of respondents indicated five storeys was their preference
  • The majority (38) indicated they supported the retention of the tree on site
  • Attendees at the online chat sessions were clear in their support of social housing but not if the level proposed would negatively impact their existing surroundings

We did

In response to feedback from the previous rounds of consultation, the proposed scheme has been amended in a number of ways. We have now:

  •  Amended the design to a smaller building of six-storeys in height
  • Reduced the height and footprint of the building to minimise daylight/sunlight impacts
  • Ensured that all homes have access to a balcony or winter garden

Amended the landscaping scheme to:

  • Ensure that no bins or bike stores are located in the garden space
  • Ensure direct and safe access to the garden for residents
  • Retain the existing London Plane tree at the front of the site
  • Provide the wheelchair accessible home on the ground floor with its own front garden and rear patio.

Additionally, following concerns raised regarding the potential impact of incorporating access to ACAVA studios outdoor areas, we will be considering works to these areas separately to this application to enable further involvement with relevant parties.

We will now be holding two “You said, We did” resident engagement events to show residents how we have adapted the plans to take on board their feedback. The first will be an outdoor in-person event on Saturday 26 June from 10am to 12pm at Whitstable House car park, 21 Silchester Road, W10 6SH and the second an online chat session on Wednesday 30 June from 5.30pm to 7pm.

Following these events, we will finalise the scheme and submit a planning application. Residents will have a further opportunity to comment during the planning process.

We asked

Kensington and Chelsea Council has been working with local residents and providers to deliver the Community Leadership Programme.

With three years of the Grenfell Recovery Programme remaining, we recently launched a consultation to understand people’s views on the Community Leadership Programme. The consultation ran from 18 February 2021 - 9 April 2021. We received 80 survey responses and also held a series of stakeholder engagement activities between November 2020 and April 2021 which included: one stakeholder focus group; feedback from 14 Community Leadership Programme providers; community conversations with 12 local residents; and engagement with the youth forum about how the CLP can be improved to develop young people as leaders.

You said

  • More than half of respondents said that they learnt new things whilst taking part in a Community Leadership Programme (CLP) course and 49 per cent said that the CLP helped them think about what they can offer to the wider community
  • Residents wanted courses and training to focus on fundraising, budget management, IT and community and bid writing
  • Respondents were keen to have a combination of a resident-led steering group and an online voting process to decide what courses should be delivered as part of the CLP
  • Respondents would like to receive information about the CLP through the Council’s social media platforms, texts, WhatsApp groups and face-to-face meetings. Many respondents felt that the website was the best place to get information about the CLP
  • The need for improved marketing of the CLP to engage more residents

We did

What’s next

  • A series of Community Leadership Programme recommendations were discussed by Leadership Team in May
  • Increase the marketing of the Community Leadership Programme to engage a wider audience of local residents
  • Advertise and recruit local people to be part of the Resident Led Panel to co-steer operations of the Community Leadership Programme 2
  • Ensure Community Leadership Programme 1 is complete before we embark on Community Leadership Programme 2 

We asked

Kensington and Chelsea Council has been working with local residents, grassroot organisations and new collectives to deliver the Grenfell Projects Fund.

With three years of the Grenfell Recovery Programme remaining, we recently launched a consultation to understand people’s views about the Grenfell Projects Fund. The consultation ran from 18 February 2021 - 9 April 2021.  We received 99 survey responses and also held a series of stakeholder engagement sessions between November 2020 and April 2021 to capture feedback about the Grenfell Projects Fund.  This included: 1 stakeholder focus group; feedback from over 20 Grenfell project leads; community conversations with 12 local residents; and the facilitation of one Grenfell Community Assembly dedicated to the Grenfell Projects Fund.

You said

  • Half of those who responded thought the Grenfell Projects Fund (GPF) was a success and 64 per cent would recommend that a friend or neighbour apply to the GPF
  • Almost half of respondents said the six themes should remain the same (Wellbeing for children, young people or adults, educational opportunities to increase skills, knowledge, enterprise and qualifications, social and cultural events that bring communities together and provide information to increase connections across the community including initiatives to reduce isolation for older people, community safety that increases the safety of everyone, activities for young people and food growing/greening and food-based activities that increase communities coming together and enhances the local environment)
  • The majority of respondents favoured a combination of a resident-led steering group and a public vote for the decision-making process
  • Residents would like to receive information about the GPF through the Council’s social media platforms, texts, WhatsApp groups and face-to-face meetings. Many respondents felt that the website was the best place to get information about the Fund. 

We did

What's next

  •  A series of recommendations were discussed by Leadership Team in May
  • Increase the marketing of the Grenfell Projects Fund 1 to engage a wider audience of local residents
  • Advertise and recruit local people to be part of the Resident Led Panel to co-steer operations of the Grenfell Projects Fund 2
  • Ensure the current Grenfell Projects Fund 1 is complete before we embark on Grenfell Projects Fund 2

We asked

The legacy from the Grenfell tragedy continues to be challenging for the communities affected, and we recognise the importance of taking time to understand existing and potential future needs, and how best to work with partners and commissioned services in order to meet the needs of children and young people for the remaining three years of the Grenfell Recovery programme.

The Council was keen to hear views about proposals for the provision of emotional health and wellbeing services for children and young people in the wider Grenfell-affected community.

An online consultation was launched on 27 January 2021, and ran until 26 March 2021.

You said

The feedback from the consultation included:

  • A strong feeling that despite some improvements in emotional health and wellbeing that there was a clear ongoing need for these services
  • Strong positive feedback on the provision for those currently receiving support
  • A need to better promote awareness of the offer
  • An ask to extend the reach of services and provision to ensure that it reaches as many children and young people as possible
  • Schools are broadly happy with the current offer and there was not a consensus on whether they wanted to directly commission services.

We did

We Will

Following on from what we heard from the consultation, the Council’s key recommendations to its Leadership Team for Emotional Health and Wellbeing Support for Children and Young People include:

  • Recognising the positive feedback from the consultation on existing provision, fund existing providers in schools to deliver refreshed and rescoped emotional health and wellbeing services
  • Recognising the positive feedback from the consultation, fund existing providers in community-based settings to deliver refreshed and rescoped emotional health and wellbeing services, in line with the consultation themes
  • Recognising the feedback on the need for increased and diverse provision in the community, make new funding available for new community-based initiatives to support children and young people’s emotional health and wellbeing.

We will work with providers and other stakeholders, the community and young people to:

  • Increase reach and impact of services
  • Ensure provision is as responsive as possible to changing needs, and that it takes into account significant milestones such as decisions about the future of Grenfell Tower
  • Ensure provision is focused on celebrating the voices of children and young people
  • Make sure that the proposed new community funding supports initiatives that meets the needs of children and young people, and
  • Invite proposals from local community organisations around how they might access and use the new community funding.

We asked

Kensington and Chelsea Council has been working with some brilliant grassroot providers under the ‘Together 4 Grenfell’ umbrella to deliver services for adults in the North Kensington community.

With three years of the Grenfell Recovery Programme remaining, we recently launched a consultation to understand people’s views on these services and the broader offer and how we could improve our offer. The consultation ran from 1 February to 26 March 2021.

We received 97 survey responses and 36 stakeholders attended three focus groups.

You said

What you told us

  • 77 per cent were currently using local services to support their emotional health and wellbeing needs
  • 66 per cent were 'very confident' or 'moderately confident' in accessing services
  • 60 per cent felt the services were publicised to varying degrees of effectiveness
  • 92 per cent currently using Together for Grenfell services said they were ‘very good’ or ‘good’
  • 89 per cent using Together for Grenfell services told us their emotional health and wellbeing had ‘significantly improved’ or ‘slightly improved’
  • 50 per cent said that services meet the diverse and cultural needs of the community ‘very well’ or ‘well’
  • 70 per cent told us they would prefer to receive ‘face to face’ support with 49 per cent preferring ‘online’ support

Where we could improve

  • 69 per cent felt ‘emotional health and wellbeing support for young adults’ was an area of need
  • 66 per cent felt ‘support groups’ were needed
  • 57 per cent felt 'support for elders to tackle social isolation and loneliness’ was a gap
  • 40 per cent felt publicity was not effective and therefore improvement required

We did

What’s next

  • A series of recommendations will be discussed by Leadership Team in May
  • We will be looking at an enhanced counselling and wellbeing service for adults
  • We will be offering additional therapy to over 50s to help tackle isolation
  • We will continue with a hybrid of face to face and virtual offers to meet the community’s needs
  • We are developing a peer support programme for adults in the local community to launch in summer 2021

We asked

We consulted residents, local businesses and organisations about the proposals in our second round of consultation. We held two online chat sessions as well as an online survey to gather views.

A total of 122 surveys were received with 90 stakeholders attending the two live chat sessions. We would like to thank all residents and stakeholders that took the time to share their views.

You said

Here is a snapshot of what you told us:

  •  67 per cent objected to the principle of providing new homes, improved outdoor space and flexible affordable community use/ workspace on the site, with 20 per cent of respondents supporting this
  • When presented with a choice of three building heights for the tallest building (20, 18 and 16 stories), a large percentage of respondents chose not to answer this question. This is likely to indicate that respondents did not support any of these options. A third of respondents (33 per cent) chose 16 stories.
  • 54 per cent objected or strongly objected to the proposed large landscaped central open space with an increased area, surrounded by smaller garden and park areas. This was largely due to respondents being against the scheme or height of buildings or because of the proposed movement of graffiti walls. Twenty nine per cent strongly supported or supported this approach
  • There were mixed views about the location of the ball court. Twenty three per cent would prefer to see a ball court within the newly created open space while 22 per cent wanted a ball court north of Trellick Tower and 23 per cent would prefer no ball court
  • When asked about a preferred location for public art space/graffiti wall, 24 per cent would prefer to see it located north of Trellick Tower, with 23 per cent preferring it to be integrated into the newly created central open space and 22 per cent wanting to see it on the eastern section of Meanwhile Gardens/Great Western Road Bridge. However 36 per cent would like to see the public art space/graffiti wall in another location, the vast majority of these indicating they would like to see it remain in its current location.

We did

Following this feedback and to address these objections, we wanted to go beyond the traditional methods of consultation and have therefore been working closely with CoMMET (The Council of Meanwhile, Metronomes, Edenham and Trellick) and the Cheltenham Estate Community Steering Group (CECSG) in a number of workshop sessions to explain in more detail how the current design for the site was developed and to receive more targeted feedback to inform the next stage of design.

 Following these meetings and the two rounds of consultation, we have increased the rounds of consultation from three to four and are now looking at discussing the updated proposals for the site with the wider community.

 We will also be holding face-to-face events as part of round three to try and reach more members of the local community as we recognise not everyone has internet access so may not have been able to attend the online consultation sessions. It is important that as many local residents as possible who live near the site have their say.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposal to make Bonchurch Road (between Portobello Road and Wornington Road) one-way except pedal cycles and to stop motor vehicles from entering Munro Mews from Bonchurch Road.

You said

We received no objections or comments to this proposal.

We did

We have implemented this proposal.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposal to convert Henry Dickens Court Estate residents’ bay No. 23 to a disabled bay.

You said

We had one letter of support for this proposal.

We did

We have implemented this proposal.

We asked

We asked for views on a number of parking changes.

You said

There were a total of 52 individual proposals, 23 of these proposals generated a total of 59 objections and 123 comments or letters of support. The details of these objections and the Council’s response to the objections can be obtained by emailing trafficorders@rbkc.gov.uk.

We did

We have made all of the proposals permanent as advertised, apart from S244 (Addison Avenue), S251 (Stanley Crescent) and S268 (Egerton Gardens) which were not-progressed.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposal that the charge for use of the Holland Park Car Park would not apply on Christmas Day, Boxing Day, New Year’s Day, Good Friday or a bank holiday.

You said

We received no objections or comments to this proposal.

We did

We have implemented this proposal.

We asked

For views on how the experimental replacement of double yellow line with three residents’ bays opposite 31 Basil Street was working in practice.

You said

We had one objection to the experimental scheme. The details of the objection and the Council’s response to the objection can be found in the proforma

We did

We have made the experimental scheme permanent.

We asked

We asked for views on the proposal to convert four three metre long sections of residents’ parking to tree pits and double yellow lines along Harcourt Terrace.

You said

We had ten objections and 18 letters of support to the proposal. The details of the objections and the Council’s response to the objections can be found in the decision report.

We did

We have made the proposal permanent, but we are proposing to convert a total of three Pay-by-Phone visitor parking bays in Harcourt Terrace to residents’ parking to compensate for this loss of parking. We are also proposing converting residents parking in The Boltons and Tregunter Road to six Pay-by-phone bays to increase the amount of visitor parking in the area. These proposals to the change in parking will be consulted upon in June 2021.

We asked

We asked for your views on the conditions of the existing playground and outdoor gym situated within Little Wormwood Scrubs with the aim of refurbishing both facilities based on the feedback received. Questions centred around which pieces of equipment should be removed/added, which materials you would like to see used and what additional features you would like to see included (e.g. educational, safety etc.)

You said

In total, 112 members of the local community expressed their views through a consultation survey.

Outdoor Gym

  • Of the respondents who outlined that they had used the outdoor gym, a total of 36 per cent outlined that, overall, they were ‘satisfied’ (six per cent very satisfied, 30 per cent satisfied) with the outdoor gym equipment. Whilst a total of 30 per cent of respondents outlined that, overall, they were ‘dissatisfied’ (nine per cent very dissatisfied, 21 per cent dissatisfied) with the outdoor gym equipment.
  • A total of 54 per cent of respondents preferred a ‘combination of both calisthenics and other fitness equipment’ as part of the refurbishment. A total of 30 per cent selected that they would prefer ‘a variety of fitness equipment only’. Whilst eight per cent of respondents preferred ‘Calisthenics (body weight) equipment only’ as part of the refurbishment
  • A total of 72 per cent of respondents outlined that they used the ‘pulldown exerciser’ and the ‘chest press’, whilst a total of 70 per cent used the ‘leg press’.
  • Additional Features included: Better Surfacing, stretching area and clearer instructions on how to use the equipment

Playground

  • A total of 15 per cent of respondents outlined that they were ‘satisfied’ with the toddler playground area. A total of 63 per cent of respondents outlined that overall, they were ‘dissatisfied’ (18 per cent very dissatisfied, 45 per cent dissatisfied) with the toddler playground area.
  • A total of 78 per cent of respondents outlined that the ‘Jumper/Trampoline’ should be included in the refurbishment, and 75 per cent felt the ‘Seesaw equipment’ should be part of the refurbishment.
  • A total of 90 per cent of respondents outlined that they, or their children, used the ‘swings’ and 80 per cent used the ‘slide’.
  • Additional features included: Improved surfacing and a range of new equipment

We did

The results have been used to inform the tender and subsequent redesign of the playground and outdoor gym. Feedback has been used to specify what equipment and theme local residents want to see.

We asked

In five seperate focus groups we asked attendees three main questions: What do you think are the most important crime and disorder issues for the Safer Kensington and Chelsea Partnership to tackle and why? What should the partnership do to tackle these issues? And how can communities and residents play their part?

You said

In total, 17 residents attended these focus groups and there were some common themes that came from these detailed discussions and the experiences of residents who attended. These included:

  • Exploitation of young people and knife crime or violence among young people
  • Antisocial behaviour and the impact of drug related crime in local neighbourhoods
  • Hate crime and other forms of violence including domestic abuse.

Attendees also shared how other forms of crime worried them including burglary and robbery. There was also a concern that crime rates will go up after the immediate impact of the pandemic.

We did

The Community Safety Survey has now been launched get more responses alongside the detailed feedback that was received at the focus groups. The results of both of these consultation phases will be reported to the Safer Kensington and Chelsea Partnership in April 2021. Alongside crime and disorder analysis the Safer Kensington and Chelsea Partnership will agree its priorities and the Community Safety Plan will be written. This will be a Key Decision Report and will be taken to the Council’s Leadership Team in Autumn 2021.

We asked

For your views on the proposed amendments to the Council's traffic orders.

You said

The traffic order change proposal did not receive any comments.

Comments were received to the draft key decision report and the Council’s responses to those can be found in the appendix to the Key Decision report

We did

The traffic order change proposal was adopted.

We asked

For the views of tenants and leaseholders on the draft Resident Involvement Strategy.

You said

The draft strategy was co-designed by a steering group of residents, tenants, leaseholders and Council officers.

With a subsequent survey so that all tenants and leaseholders could have their say if they wished.

This feedback led to a finalised strategy.

We did

The Council’s Leadership Team agreed the strategy on 10 February 2021 and it includes a ‘menu’ of involvement including:

  • Joining committees representing residents’ associations, tenants, and homeowners, such as the Tenants’ Consultative Committee
  • Sitting on interview panels for resident-facing Council roles
  • Shaping Council performance targets for issues such as cleaning, repairs and anti-social behaviour
  • Becoming a member of the editorial board for Housing Matters, the Council’s quarterly housing magazine, and advising on website content.

We asked

For your feedback and suggestions on the proposed budget for 2021/22.

You said

Five respondents completed the feedback survey.

  • Two were in support of the proposals, two opposed and one chose to ‘neither support nor oppose’
  • A number of suggestions and comments were put forward by respondents

We did

  • Lead Members welcomed the feedback from residents and considered the responses and suggestions
  • We provided responses to the suggestions/comments in the Key Decision Report 
  • Approved the budget on 3 March 2021 at Full Council

Feedback will be considered as part of shaping spending plans going forward

We asked

For your views on the RBKC Ceremonies Service, your expectations for your marriage or civil partnership ceremony and the associated fees, and how we could further develop our offer.

You said

Your reasons for having a ceremony with RBKC Registrars

  • The iconic location
  • The convenient booking process

What you valued most about your ceremony experience with RBKC Registrars

  • The customer service you received
  • The online booking process
  • The availability
  • The cost
  • The running of the day

What you felt could be improved

  • The communications leading up to the ceremony
  • The cost

When asked about a potential Premium Ceremony Offer, you thought this should include

  • The option to livestream your ceremony to guests
  • Meeting your registrar ahead of the day
  • A personalised ceremony

Your views on an independent celebrant ceremony

  • 44 per cent of respondents were not interested in using an independent celebrant
  • 21 per cent were interested in the idea of their registrar also performing an independent celebrant ceremony

Your views on ceremonies being delivered through a wholly owned trading company

  • 24 per cent of respondents were not supportive of the idea
  • 16 per cent of respondents would support this
  • 58 per cent of respondents did not know

We did

Resident and customer feedback and ideas have enabled us to create a forward plan of new service developments, to improve the customer journey and expand customer choice. This includes:

  • Developing a premium ceremony package for customers wishing to opt for a more tailored experience
  • Focusing on our customers’ pre-ceremony experience, including our communications
  • Further developing our own “celebrant” offer for customers wishing to have their ceremony outdoors or in alternative venues
  • Increasing the number of open day and walk-around events we host in Chelsea Old Town Hall, including virtual tours

We have also completed the prize draw that went alongside the survey, entering all those who submitted their contact details for that purpose. The lucky winner has been contacted and will receive a £100 discount for their upcoming ceremony planned for 2022!

We asked

We asked for your views on the proposals.

You said

Three local residents, organisations and businesses attended our two live chat sessions and seven completed the feedback survey.

Thoughts on the plans for new homes 

  • Four respondents supported the plans
  • Three respondents strongly objected to the plans

Thoughts on improvements you’d like to see on site

  • Enhanced street lighting
  • Pedestrian access from Treverton Street 
  • Enhancements to community garden

Thoughts on size of new homes

  • Three respondents would like to see properties with three or more bedrooms

 

We did

The feedback will be taken into account in the next phase of the consultation exercise.

We asked

We asked for your views on the proposals.

You said

Thoughts on the plans for new homes

  • Six of eight responding to the survey supported the principle of providing some new social rent homes on the site
  • However, one strongly objected

Thoughts on improvements you’d like to see on site

  • Five of eight would like to see better use of the site and provision of shared outdoor space
  • Half (four) would like to see creation of a safer environment

Thoughts on size of new homes

  • Half (four) would like to see two bed properties 
  • Three respondents would like to see three or more bedroom properties

Thoughts on most important aspects of the site

Comments covered topics including

  • the provision of new homes;
  • having a well-designed building on the street;
  • that people living nearby are treated with dignity and respect;
  • and that the garden business currently on the site is moved to a suitable site

We did

The feedback will be taken into account in the next phase of the consultation exercise.