We Asked, You Said, We Did

whether the Council should introduce a new parallel crossing on Ladbroke Grove at the junction with Blenheim Crescent.

Forty-four responses were received; 25 in support (57 per cent), 15 objections (34 per cent) and four support in part (9 per cent).

After considering the responses received to the consultation, the Director for Highway and Regulatory Services has decided to proceed with introduction of the scheme on which we consulted, with the exception of the amendment below:  

• Not to implement the proposed advisory cycle lanes on Ladbroke Grove in order to retain the pedestrian islands on the northern side of the junction.

whether the Council should introduce a new zebra crossing and footway extensions on Ledbury Road, at the junction with Talbot Road. 

Thirty-six responses were received; 24 in support (67 per cent), eight objections (22 per cent) and four support in part (11 per cent).

After considering the responses received to the consultation, officers recommend that the Director for Highway and Regulatory Services proceed to introduce a new zebra crossing and footway extensions on Ledbury Road, at the junction with Talbot Road, with an amendment;

• Subject to detailed design and visibility displays, to shorten some of the lengths of footway proposed to make the scheme parking-neutral by shortening the length of footway widening on south-west Talbot Road (to create two parking bays) and south-east Ledbury Road (to create one parking bay before the vehicular crossover).

whether the Council should introduce two-way cycling in the section of Pavilion Road between Hans Crescent and Basil Street. 

Five responses were received; three in support and two objections.  

After considering the responses received to the consultation, the Director for Highway and Regulatory Services has decided to proceed with introduction of two-way cycling in the section of Pavilion Road between Hans Crescent and Basil Street, with one proposed amendment to shorten the resident parking bay north of Hans Crescent by three metres.

whether the Council should introduce two-way cycling in the section of Cathcart Road between Redcliffe Gardens and Hollywood Road. 

Twenty-five responses were received; 14 objections, 10 in support and one support in part. 

After considering the responses received to the consultation, the Director for Highway and Regulatory Services has decided to proceed with introducing two-way cycling in the section of Cathcart Road between Redcliffe Gardens and Hollywood Road, with one proposed amendment to implement an advisory (dashed) rather than mandatory (solid line) cycle lane.

Whether a School Street closure should be implemented on Airlie Gardens, for Holland Park School.

Seven responses supported the School Street in part, three respondents supported in full and five respondents objected to the proposals. 

After considering the evidence for the proposal and the grounds for those objecting, or partially objecting, the Director for Highways and Regulatory Services has agreed to proceed with the School Street on Airlie Gardens.

If we should consolidate existing rental e-bike bays for e-bike and e-scooter use and if we should install 54 new rental e-bike parking bay locations across the borough, to help reduce footway obstructions caused by rental e-bikes. 

The Council received 567 responses to the consultation.  Please see the consultation report for the breakdown of responses to individual proposed locations.

The Council is proceeding with the proposal to consolidate existing rental e-bike bays for e-bike and e-scooter use and implementing 27 of the proposed rental e-bike parking bays, as below:

Whether the Council should introduce a new zebra crossing, on Royal Hospital Road, on the northeast side of Ormonde Gate and West Road.

We received 38 responses to the consultation. 23 responses (60 per cent) were from people who supported the proposals, six (16 per cent) agreed in part with the proposals and nine (24 per cent) objected to the scheme.

A full summary of the consultation replies, and the Councils responses can be found by clicking the link below.

Following consideration of all the comments received, the Director of Highway and Regulatory Services has decided to proceed with the introduction of the zebra crossing on Royal Hospital Road.

The scheme will proceed to detailed design, and we will give formal notice of the zebra crossing prior to implementation. Following our consideration of any responses to the statutory notice, we hope to construct the crossing by the end of the 2026-27 financial year. 

We asked for views on four proposals in the March 2026 Housing Parking Changes.

We received no objections to any of the Housing parking proposals.

We have made the traffic order as originally advertised.

We asked for views on 60 proposals in the March 2026 Miscellaneous Parking Changes.

We received a total of 11 objections across 9 of the on-street parking proposals.

We have made the traffic order as originally advertised.

We recently carried out a six-week consultation and asked your views on the draft Housing Enforcement Policy. This relates to the new tenancy rules in the private rented sector.  The Renters’ Rights Act requires the Council to enforce the new rules and have a policy explaining how it will do this. Thank you to everyone who provided feedback.

We consulted with residents and stakeholders through an online survey and engagement activities.

The online survey asked four questions:

1. Do you find the policy clear and easy to understand overall?

2. Do you support the main aims of the policy?

3. Is there anything you expected to see in the policy which is not there?

4. Do you have any other comments about the policy?

We received 20 responses through the online survey.

• 60% found the policy clear and easy to understand overall

• 50% of respondents supported the main aims of the policy

• 40% expected to see something in the policy which was not there.

There were a range of views expressed during the consultation:

• About 64% of comments related to disagreeing with the legislation generally, rather than the policy specifically

• This included views on the duty placed on councils to enforce the rules and the perceived negative impact of the Act on the private rented sector

• Some landlords asked for clarification about specific tenancy rules

• Some respondents said the policy was too legalistic and should have more plain English, and others said it lacked enough detail, such as the protection given to vulnerable tenants.

The feedback from the consultation has helped us to finalise the policy, which you can find here:

• In terms of landlords wanting clarification on specific tenancy rules, this information is available in the government’s guidance for landlords. A link to the government’s housing hub is available on the Council’s website

• In response to concerns that the policy was too legalistic, we produced a plain-English summary of the policy. This makes the aims of the policy and how it works easier to understand

• We highlighted that tenant vulnerability may justify increasing a financial penalty above the starting point.

Whether the Council should introduce a new zebra crossing, on Abbotsbury Road, by the North Abbotsbury entrance to Holland Park.

We received 77 responses to the consultation.

Fifty responses (65 per cent) supported the proposal in full, believing that the proposal would increase safety and reduce speeds.

Six (eight per cent) supported the proposals in part and three of those also suggested an additional zebra crossing be implemented south of the proposal, by Holland Park’s ‘Ted’s Gate’ entrance.

Twenty-one (27 per cent) objected to the scheme believing that pedestrian crossing demand at the location is low and that the proposal would increase congestion and traffic on Abbotsbury Road.

A full summary of the consultation replies, and the Councils responses can be found by clicking the link below.

Following consideration of all the comments received, the Director of Highway and Regulatory Services has decided to proceed with the introduction of the zebra crossing on Abbotsbury Road, in the location proposed by the North Abbotsbury entrance to Holland Park.

The scheme will proceed to detailed design, and we will give formal notice of the zebra crossing prior to implementation. Following our consideration of any responses to the statutory notice, we hope to construct the crossing by the end of the 2026-27 financial year. 

The Panel survey on making the borough safer launched in January 2026 and focussed on gaining a better understanding of what makes local people feel safe and gain an insight into Panel members’ experiences of crime and antisocial behaviour as a witness and/or victim. This is the fifth time this survey has been undertaken and provides comparative data over the past five years to identify any changes in opinions, attitudes and experiences and other trends in the data. 

• Overall feelings of safety –  Over three quarters (77 per cent) of Panel members feel safe to some extent when out and about in their neighbourhood during the day, however, this drops to just under half (49 per cent) at night. Forty-eight per cent of Panel members agreed that there were places in their neighbourhood they were worried about visiting including badly lit areas and public transport hubs/stations. 
• Crime levels -  Forty-six per cent of Panel members felt the crime levels in their neighbourhood are average, with 23 per cent feeling they are high/very high and 31 per cent feeling they are low/very low. Sixty-one of Panel members felt that the amount of crime in their neighbourhood over the last 12 months is about the same, whilst 26 per cent felt there was more crime and 12 per cent less crime.
• Community safety priorities –  There are currently six community safety priorities, two of which are new: hate crime and serious acquisitive crime. Of the six priorities, drug related offences (as in previous years) is viewed as the biggest problem alongside the new priority serious acquisitive crime (59 per cent each).
• One thing to make you feel safer where you live – The most mentioned measures were a more visible/increased police presence, improved street lighting and better enforcement/penalties for crime/ASB.
• Impact of measures on crime and antisocial behaviour – Panel members felt that high visibility of police/uniformed Council officers (95 per cent) would have the biggest impact on crime and antisocial behaviour. This was followed by enforcement against antisocial behaviour and environmental improvements for local neighbourhoods (both 91 per cent).

The full results of the survey were taken to the Safer K and C Board which has senior representation from council services, police, criminal justice agencies and health services, thus ensuring senior decision makers from across key stakeholders are aware of the results. This year the findings has been used to refine the Violence Against Women and Girls and Modern Slavery Strategies, as well a general service planning over the year. Where possible details on where respondents do not feel safe will inform operational taskings for CCTV, Street Enforcement Team and Police. The council has installed 19 additional CCTV cameras this year as this survey reported it makes residents feel safer. Results will also be used to ensure we continue to focus on the crime and antisocial behaviour priorities of our residents. The results will regularly be used throughout the year as community safety projects are developed to help inform them and develop better community responses. 

We regularly go to this report throughout the year as we develop community safety projects to help inform them and develop better community responses.

An online consultation was undertaken via the Council’s Consultation and Engagement Hub and promoted through housing newsletters, leaflets and posters in housing receptions. The consultation included a draft Pet Policy and was open from 1 February 2026 to 15 March 2026. A total of ten responses were received.

Feedback received has been used to amend the policy where appropriate.

Changes made include: 

• Strengthening links to the Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) Policy in relation to issues such as dog fouling and noise.
• Confirming the Head of Neighbourhoods as the officer responsible for considering appeals, and clarifying key timelines.
• The section on emotional support animals has been expanded to provide greater clarity and detail.

The policy confirms that Kensington and Chelsea Council's Housing Management will maintain a record of all pets on its estates and ensure that appropriate permissions are in place.

Whether the Council should add sinusoidal road humps to Bassett Road, following a successful application for Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy (NCIL) funding by local residents.

We received 94 responses to the consultation. Eighty of the responses (85 per cent) were in favour of the proposal, and 14 (15 per cent) objected to the scheme.

A full summary of the consultation replies, and the officer responses can be found in the attached document.

Following consideration of all the comments received from residents and councillors, the Council has decided to proceed with the introduction of the road humps on Bassett Road.

Whether the Council should add sinusoidal road humps to Oxford Gardens, following a successful application for Neighbourhood Community Infrastructure Levy (NCIL) funding by local residents.

We received 100 responses to the consultation. 90 per cent of respondents were in favour of the proposal, 9 per cent objected to the scheme, and 1 per cent supported in part.

A full summary of the consultation replies, and the officer responses can be found in the attached document.

Following consideration of all the comments received from residents and councillors, the Council has decided to proceed with the introduction of the road humps on Oxford Gardens.

Whether the Council should implement its proposed streetscape improvements on the section of Gloucester Road between Kynance Place and Kensington Gate.

One hundred and eighty responses were received to the consultation, of which one hundred and fifty-eight were from residents, eleven from visitors to the borough, and eleven from businesses. Eighty per cent of respondents supported the proposals in full or in part, nineteen per cent objected to the proposals and one per cent had no opinion.

In March 2026, after consideration of all responses to the consultation, the Lead Member for Environment and Planning made a Key Decision to implement the scheme with some amendments:

a)           Investigate opportunities for additional and/or improved loading and visitor parking facilities on Gloucester Road or adjacent side roads.

The full Key Decision can be found on the Council's website.

We asked for views on the proposed bus and coach ban in Elsham Road and Russsell Road area.

We received no objections, and received letters of support from eight residents.

We have proceeded to make the ban permanent, effective from 25^th August 2026.

Whether the Council should progress design work and implement streetscape improvements on the section of Stratford Road between Marloes Road and Allen Street.

Sixty - three responses were received to the consultation, of which 72 per cent supported the proposals in full or in part, with 28 per cent objecting to the proposals.

In March 2026, after consideration of all responses to the consultation, the Council decided to implement the scheme with some amendments to address key concerns raised in consultation:

1. Retain more Pay by Phone parking capacity on Stratford Road and seek to provide additional capacity on Marloes Road at the junction with Stratford Road to achieve a neutral overall parking impact.
2.  Reduce the length of the footway extensions at the entrance to Blithfield Street by three metres on both sides of the street in order to limit the impact on parking capacity on the street.

The full Council Decision can be downloaded on the Council’s website, this includes a revised scheme plan.

An online survey launched on the Council’s Consultation and Engagement Hub and was promoted via housing newsletters, leaflet and posters in housing receptions. The consultation included a draft of the Housing Fraud Policy for residents to consider and feedback on and was open from 3 November 2025 to 18 January 2026 receiving a total of nine responses online in addition to an email sent separately.

The feedback received has helped make ammendments to the Policy, which can be seen below.

Wording has been strengthened to reinforce that investigations are evidence led and impartial, with the investigators primary role being to gather and present facts to inform decision making.

The policy has been updated to reemphasise confidentiality, confirming that referral sources are not disclosed and anonymous reporting is permitted.

Several consultation responses raised broader concerns relating to:

• Resident engagement structures and governance
• Allegations of bias or organisational conduct
• Housing management practices and complaints handling
• Wider safeguarding and anti-retaliation frameworks

While these issues are acknowledged, they fall outside the scope of the Housing Fraud Policy, which is specifically intended to address the prevention, detection, and investigation of housing fraud. These matters are more appropriately considered under separate policies, procedures, or governance frameworks (e.g. Housing Management, Complaints Policy, Corporate Anti-Fraud Strategy, and resident engagement arrangements), where they can be addressed in the appropriate context. The consultation report has been passed to Resident Engagement Team and Complaints Team where it will be considered.

Outcome of the consultation on proposed charges for self-funders and Appointeeship services: 

Kensington and Chelsea Council proposed new charges for those who choose to use the Council to administer their non-residential care through a self-funding care scheme, as well as those residents where we act as the Appointee for State Benefit. An Appointee is a person or organisation authorised by the Department for Work and Pensions to manage benefits for someone unable to do so themselves due to mental incapacity or severe disability. 

A consultation was carried out between November 2025 and January 2026 where we wrote to all Adult Social Care service users, including those who would be affected by the proposals.

Of the 132 people who are self-funders in the borough, we received a total of seven responses, with five people opposed to the proposals. We also received three responses for the Appointee for State Benefit, with two opposed and one supportive of the proposals.

All public sector bodies are in very difficult financial circumstances and councils are under pressure to continue to support their most vulnerable residents and deliver core frontline services for all residents, but with significantly less money because of the Government’s Fair Funding Review. Kensington and Chelsea must make £108 million of savings over the next four years and in these circumstances, together with the comparatively low response rate to the survey, the Council felt it should continue with the proposals it put forward.

Self-funders are not eligible for council-funded care under the Care Act 2014 because they have savings of more than £23,250 and people do not need to use the Council to administer these services.

Although the Council is introducing charges, these council services will continue to offer good value for money and are below what other councils already charge their residents for the same service.  

If any self-funder affected by this decision does become eligible for support under the Care Act 2014, their case will be reassessed.