We Asked, You Said, We Did

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

We Asked

Do you attend the dentist regularly (within the last 6 to 12 months)?

Do your children attend the dentist regularly (within the last 6 to 12 months)?

You Said

302 adults with children aged 5 years old and under living in Crawley responded.

243 adults responded yes, they attend the dentist regularly

168 adults with children aged 5 years old and under said their child/ children attend the dentist regularly

 

We Did

Updated our records.

Made Oral Health a health priority for Crawley (Health for Families Programme), liaising with local Crawley dentists on how to make the service more accessible to families

Ensure that Oral Health is discussed at Discover Baby sessions

 

We Asked

We asked you to tell us how you used 11 local bus routes across West Sussex.

 

You Said

We received 321 responses to the survey, providing us with useful information about how you use these bus services and any impacts their changes may cause.  

In particular, just over one third of you raised concerns about the plan to withdraw the 74/74A/75 off peak service and replace it by diverting service 100.

We Did

Your feedback was passed to the Transport Planning team to inform the planning process and new timetables.

The plan to cease the 74/74A/75 service has now been cancelled and the service will continue to run with a modified scheme retaining the daytime service. The 100 service will remain unchanged.

You can view the full list of confirmed service changes in the Results section of this project.

All changes will take effect from 23 April 2017

We Asked

We asked you if you are likely to use the new facility when it is ready, and if you had any comments you wish to make about the proposals?

You Said

Fifty-five of you who provided feedback to us, and this is very much appreciated. Of the 55 responses:

  • 69% of you stated that you are either very likely/likely to use the new facility
  • 20% of you said you are either unlikely/very unlikely to use it
  • 11% of you said neither

Many of you provided helpful comments toward the proposals. Some others expressed concerns. The range of topics covered can be summarised as follows:

  • Improvements to Comet Corner, Oystercatcher or Church Lane roundabouts are more urgent
  • Should allow for equestrian use
  • Priority for and safety of cyclists across side road accesses and junctions
  • Connection with existing facilities

We Did

We have reviewed your comments with our design consultants, and changes have been made to the proposals where possible. We will increase the width of the existing traffic island on the A259 at Comet Corner to allow pedestrians and cyclists to safely cross the road there. We will make sure the signing at either end of the proposed facility is clear to help cyclists to find their way around. We are also exploring alternative options to cross the A259 further east of the roundabout at Church Lane and Crookthorn Lane.

There is a separate improvement scheme at Comet Corner currently being prepared and will be implemented shortly.

We Asked

we asked you to look at a number of options for schemes, some of these options had repeated themes and we then asked you rank them in order of preference.

We also asked you to comment on some common themes that could be present at each location.

You Said

Felpham Village Centre – consultation results    

Thank you for responding to the Village Centre Consultation.  There were 158 responses

Vicarage lane Junction:

Using a statistical model to evaluate your ranking responses option two came out ahead followed by option three a close second: 

The prevalent features of these two options were to retain the wider road junction and retain a pedestrian island, to retain a wider crossing point outside the Beauty shop and to have a wide carriageway surface marking.

Limmer Lane Junction:

Using the same statistical model as before option one came out ahead closely followed by option two. These two options include retaining as much parking as possible and to establish a safe crossing point.

Surface colour:

Of those that responded to this question 50% were in favour of a red colour, 24% preferred buff and 26% preferred to leave the surface black.

20mph Limit

71% of respondents supported the village wide limit and 29% did not.

Additional Features

Flower planters were the most desired extra feature with 87 positive responses.

 

 

Flower planters

87

cycle stands

69

Decorative seating

61

wooden bollards

41

 

 

Your Comments

There were 41 mentions of limmer Lane many of which were concerned with excessive speed in this road as well as inconsiderate parking

There were 27 mentions regarding road crossing and zebra crossings

 

 

We Did

Felpham Village Centre – Consultation We Did   

Thank you for responding to the Village Centre Consultation.  There were 158 responses

Vicarage lane:

Having viewed your most favoured choices I have briefed our designer to go away and design the next stage of the proposal keeping your views firmly in mind.  We will look to retain the pedestrian crossing island on the junction and will take a serious look at the possibility of a zebra crossing.

Limmer Lane:

We feel you are most concerned with having sufficient parking bays but closely concerned with having a safe crossing point.  I will try and progress both of these options into the next stage of the design.

We Asked

The consultation

This is intended as a follow up to my last communication to indicate how we intend to act following your comments and opinions to move forward with the scheme.

You Said

A majority of responses thought we had the right amount of features, however, a large minority felt that there were too many.  Features 3 and 8 were the least popular.  Some of these comments thought that the features were too intrusive, would impede buses and were not suited to the road. We have heard these views and will look to reduce the number of features slightly and to limit their impact on the ordinary road user whilst still reducing the speed of the faster motorists.

Other Roads, including Wroxham Way and Outerwyke Road were of concern to many people who responded.  The concerns raised were sensible and therefore we will look to ensure that the final scheme reflects these concerns and whether we can do something about the speeds here.  We shall undertake a speed measurement in Wroxham Way in particular to understand what the current situation is so look out for my little box on the roadside.

We Did

We will now prepare another more detailed design taking into account what we have heard.  When this is ready I will send out a card and invite you to take a look online at the proposals and invite your comments and opinion before I move to a final construction proposal.

Again my thanks to you for taking part in the survey.

We Asked

  • How can a trader assurance scheme such as Buy with Confidence (BWC) be best promoted in West Sussex?

 

  • What do West Sussex businesses look for in a trader assurance scheme?

You Said

  • BWC members would most like to the scheme promoted in local newspapers.

 

  • Businesses attach high importance to both Trading Standards approval and publicity.

 

  • The affordability of a trader assurance scheme is another key consideration for businesses.

We Did

  • West Sussex Trading Standards is considering future options for BWC in West Sussex, taking into account what would be most beneficial to local businesses and consumers alike.

We Asked

We asked you to tell us what was important to you, your community and the future of West Sussex.  We also asked you about Council Tax, customer service and communities.

 

You Said

2,588 people responded to the survey. ‘Keeping you safe’ came out as the top priority for
residents, followed by ‘providing education and schools’ 2nd and Roads, Transport and Countryside 3rd, followed by a number of other areas. Two-thirds (approx. 67%) of those who responded were in favour of a council tax increase of 3.75% or more.

Common themes for what residents felt was important for the future of West Sussex were:
•striking the right balance between providing affordable housing
•limiting the number of housing developments
•improving and upgrading infrastructure and roads throughout the county.

The results are in and really interesting. You can see a summary here.
 

We Did

West Sussex County Council met and agreed its budget for 2017/18 on Friday 17 February 2017.  The County Council also agreed a council tax increase of 1.95% plus an additional 2% to fund adult social care, providing a total of 3.95%, the equivalent of an extra 92 pence per week for the average Band D household.


For further details about the Budget please visit our West Sussex County Council webpages here.


Further updates will be made to this section by the Summer..

 

We Asked

We asked you to tell us what was important to you, your community and the future of West Sussex.  We also asked you about Council Tax, customer service and communities. This consultation links with the wider public consultation on What Matters To You which can be found here.

You Said

2,588 people responded to the survey. ‘Keeping you safe’ came out as the top priority for residents, followed by ‘providing education and schools’ 2nd and Roads, Transport and Countryside 3rd, followed by a number of other areas.

You can see a summary here.


 

We Did

West Sussex County Council met and agreed its budget for 2017/18 on Friday 17 February 2017. 

The County Council also agreed a council tax increase of 1.95% plus an additional 2% to fund adult social care, providing a total of 3.95%, the equivalent of an extra 92 pence per week for the average Band D household.

For further details about the Budget please visit our West Sussex County Council webpages here.

 

 

We Asked

The Fire & Rescue Service has a statutory duty to consult on, and publish, a 3-5yr ‘Integrated Risk Management Plan’ (IRMP). This is an analysis of the current and projected risk profile in the county and how the Fire & Rescue Service is organised to support local communities through a combination of prevention, protection and emergency response activities.

The consultation sought the views of the wider community on the WSFRS analysis of risks and its approach to risk management planning. Respondents were asked to complete an online questionnaire with a ‘free text’ box for any additional comments, questions or suggestions for service improvement.

You Said

We received 80 online responses via the questionnaire and three email responses. Of the 80 (anonymous) responses, 24 included additional comments.

Of the online questionnaire responses received:

  • 87.5% agreed or strongly agreed the CRMP was easy to understand
  • 82.5% agreed or strongly agreed the community risk information was clearly explained
  • 88.75% agreed or strongly agreed that emergency response activity was clearly explained
  • 88.75% agreed or strongly agreed that WSFRS reduces risk through its prevention, protection and emergency response activities.

We Did

Following your feedback an electronic link to the Critical Risk Map that supports the data in the CRMP has been inserted into the document.

Responses to each issue raised via the ‘free text’ section have been published via the Have Your Say Consultation Hub: https://haveyoursay.westsussex.gov.uk/west-sussex-fire-rescue-service/west-sussex-fire-rescue-service-community-risk-man

Having considered the feedback from the consultation and the views of the Environment & Community Services Select Committee, the Cabinet Member for Residents’ Services has endorsed and agreed to adopt the West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service Community Risk Management Plan 2016-20.

We Asked

All responses to the public consultation have been analysed and the Children and Family Centre (CFC) and Library Service teams are now planning how to ensure the best fit of both services for the local community.

There is no immediate plan to relocate any new CFC activities to the library building at this stage, though both teams will continue to work together to improve access to services for all residents

 

 

 

 

 

 

You Said

Thank you for your participation.  All the response to the public consultaiton have been analysed

We Did

There is no immediate plan to relocate any of the Children and Family Centre acitivies to the library at this stage, although both teams will continue to work together to  improve access to services for all residents.

We Asked

Was there anything else in the vicinity that you would like us to know about?

You Said

A good response has been received for the consultation here,20 packs were delivered to local residents with 71 responses which is a 32% response.

  • Old Coastguards indicated 56% in favour of the works with 35% not in favour of all respondents, a small majority but enough for clarity
  • Admiralty Road showed a 72% in favour with 24% not in favour of all respondents, a comfortable majority  in   favour.

Both of these projects have been passed to our contractor for commencement later in the year.

A number of respondents asked for a crossing point suitable for mobility scooters

We Did

THe possibility was looked into and a possible solution found, so this feature has been added to the project plan for delivery later in the year.

We Asked

The County Council on behalf of the governing body of the school proposes to increase the number of places available at the Special Support Centre (SSC) at Parklands Community Primary School by eight places as part of the school expansion. We welcomed your views on the proposal to increase the number of places available in the SSC to 16.

You Said

we received 27 responses to the consultation the results of the survey are below

Support the proposal  16 59.26%
Object to the proposal  5 18.52%
Neither Support or Object to the proposal  6 22.22%
 

We Did

The results of the consultation were passed to the Schools Governing Body for analysis and comment. Their decision to support the expansion from the current eight places to a maximum of 16 was received on the 27/07/2016

We Asked

We asked you to tell us how you used the suspended bus stops along the A24, A264 and A259.

You Said

You provided us with lots of information about the way you use these stops and any impacts the suspension of their use may cause. The results can be seen in the report section of this project.

We Did

The results of the consultation are still being considered and at this time no decision has been made regarding which of the suspended stops, if any, might be brought back into service by constructing bus lay-bys. The use of lay-bys is considered to be the only appropriate method of providing a safe setting down/pick up point on dual carriageway roads where the speed limit is greater than 40mph.

We are currently working out the full cost of providing bus lay-bys. The anticipated cost of providing lay-bys to the stops affected would be considerable and it is not likely that we will be able to bring all of the suspended stops back into service. Any future works would have to be prioritised against other schemes in the forward works programme.

We Asked

Parents for their views and experiences to help shape the operation and delivery of the extended free childcare. West Sussex County Council will introduce the 30 hours of extended free childcare for working parents of eligible 3 and 4 year olds from September 2017.

You Said

• 88% said they ‘definitely would’, ‘very likely’ or ‘fairly likely’ use the additional hours.

• 45% would split their funding over more than one provider if their current provider can only deliver 15 hours.

• 46% would switch provider in order to use the full 30 hours.

• For parents who do not use any childcare – 25% would consider using formal childcare such as a nursery, pre-school or a childminder for their child if they could use 30 free hours of childcare.

• For parents currently in work, 56% would increase their work hours or look for another job if able to use the additional 15 free hours of childcare.

• 20% who are currently not working would look for work to become eligible for the additional 15 hours.

• For parents with another child 39% would start using formal childcare or increase the childcare used for other children.

We Did

We shared the findings of this parent survey with West Sussex Early Years childcare providers who will be planning to deliver the extended free childcare. The implications from this survey are being considered against current sufficiency of childcare mapping and capital requirement assessments.

You can access the full summary report in the results section above.

We Asked

We asked whether you supported specific elements of our Draft Walking and Cycling Strategy 2016-2026. 388 responses were received, including 27 from organisations such as walking groups, cycling groups, and parish councils. 

You Said

92.5% supported the strategy objectives
81.2% supported our approach to infrastructure design and safety
82.2% supported our behavioural change activities (e.g. cycle training, promotion of sustainable travel)
74.5% supported our approach to identifying potential infrastructure improvements
74.2% supported our proposed action plan
42.3% told us they thought something was missing from the strategy

Several respondents provided helpful comments or expressed concerns. These covered a wide range of topics and are summarised in the consultation report above.

We Did

The draft strategy has been updated in response to your comments. Amendments include:
• Clearly stating that any new infrastructure installed will be designed to cater for all non-motorised users, including wheelchair users, the elderly, people with mobility impairments, mobility scooter users, trike users, and cycles with trailers.
• Clarifying that all objectives have equal status (numbering does not reflect their importance).
• Making Objective 4 clearer, to illustrate how walking and cycling support economic development
• Linking with public transport
• Stating that we are also developing an asset management strategy that will ensure that roads, pavements and cycleways are safe and available for use and repaired at the most economically advantageous time
• Removed some of the superfluous technical information in Chapter 5
• Removed duplicate schemes from the list in the appendix. We have also changed the term ‘Rate No.’ to ‘Scheme ID’ as a number of respondents thought the ‘Rate No.’ reflected the scheme’s priority ranking.
• Providing examples of recent behavioural change initiatives and their results as an additional appendix to the strategy
• Providing information about segmentation tools that will help to inform funding bids as an additional appendix to the strategy

The next steps: The draft strategy was presented to the Environmental and Community Services Select Committee on Friday 8th July. Members agreed their support for the strategy and to recommend it for adoption by the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport. Cabinet Member decision will follow in due course.

We Asked

We published the draft Joint Minerals Local Plan in April 2016 so that you could Have your Say, in accordance with Regulation 18 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (as amended). We wrote to approximately 3000 individuals and organisations, informing that The Plan, a Sustainability Appraisal, and a number of technical evidence documents were published. The Plan was also presented at the North Mid Sussex and Chanctonbury County Local Committee meetings, and a public exhibition was hosted in Steyning.

You Said

In total, 744 responses were received during the consultation; 671 of these were submitted by individuals, and 73 from organisations.

All responses are available to view at the following link. Please note, this document is 919 pages long, and may take a while to load.

A summary of responses, as well as the Authorities’ response, are provided within our Outcomes Report.

We Did

Comments received as a result of the consultation have helped to inform the preparation of the Proposed Submission Draft Joint Minerals Local Plan. Following consultation, a number of changes have been made to the plan with two of these being substantive – the change to the boundary at the Ham Farm site allocation, and the safeguarding of two temporary wharves on the Western Harbour Arm of Shoreham Port.

The Proposed Submission Draft Joint Minerals Local Plan was published in January 2017, for a period of representations, in accordance with Regulation 19 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (as amended). This period will end on 13 March 2017. For more information, or to make formal representations on the Plan, please see www.westsussex.gov.uk/mlp.

Once the representations period ends, the Plan, all relevant evidence, as well as the representations received, will be submitted to Government. The representations will be considered by an independent Planning Inspector at a future Independent Examination on the soundness and legal compliance of the Plan.

We Asked

We asked West Sussex residents for their views on the proposed changes to the Household waste recycling sites. The consultation ran from 16th May 2016 until 12th June 2016.

 

 

 

You Said

 We received 4899 responses and comments from residents, Parish town Councils and District and Borough Councils and in terms of sufficiency, constitutes the largest number of consultation responses ever received by West Sussex County Council.

• The majority of respondents understood the necessity to achieve the required savings from our services but they wanted assurance that the site would be open at hours that suited their lifestyles

• Respondents expressed concern that the proposed changes to these services would result in an increase of fly-tipping across the County and an increase in traffic at each of the HWRSs

• Respondents supported the introduction of a charge to dispose of tyres

• From the responses received it was clear that there was some confusion regarding the types of materials that are determined by legislation as non-household waste. Respondents did not support charging to dispose of non-household waste.

 

We Did

The Cabinet Member for Residents Services determined that changes to the HWRSs were essential in achieving the required savings in the department budget. Following consideration of the consultation responses and communication with District and Borough Councils the following changes of service will be introduced on the 1st October 2016:

 

  • There will be changes to the opening hours of all HWRSs and changes to the opening days of 8 out of 11 sites

 

  • Charges will be introduced on all HWRSs for the disposal of non-household waste materials and car and vans tyres. Sites will no longer accept LGV, tractor and mobile plant tyres.

 

  • The provision of most Mobile Household Waste Services in Chichester will cease by the 1st October except in Selsey and The Witterings which will be provided with these services on a fortnightly bases after the 1st October

 

You can also find full details of all the changes taking place at Household Waste Recycling Sites at www.recycleforwestsussex.org/changes

 

You can view the decision report here

 

 

We Asked

We asked for views on the current and future provision of Adult & Community Learning in West Sussex, in order to help inform what type of Adult Education service we will provide in the future. We asked for information around the reasons why people undertook Adult Learning, what courses they would be interested in studying, and what they hoped to get out of it. We also asked for personal information around age, gender, religion etc.

You Said

576 responses were received.

The main reasons respondents stated for taking part in Adult Education are to learn something new, meet new people, and improve health & wellbeing.

Types of course that the majority of users would like to see include Arts & Crafts, Languages, and Computers.

The most significant barriers to attending Adult Education courses are courses not available nearby, courses not suiting needs, job commitments, and cost of courses.

45% of respondents are prepared to travel upto 5 miles to attend a course, with a further 38% prepared to travel up to 10 miles. Only 5% of respondents are prepared to travel 16 miles or further.

We Did

The information provided as part of this survey will help inform the future provision of Adult Education.  It will be passed on to Aspire, as the current provider of Adult Education, in order to inform their future curriculum and course planning

We Asked

West Sussex residents and schools were asked for their views on the draft SEND Strategy and Action Plan, including whether they agreed with the aims and objectives of the strategy and our vision for achieving them.

 

You Said

83% of respondents agreed with the aims and objectives of the Strategy and 79% agreeing with our vision for achieving them.  The key themes that emerged were concerns that mainstream education is not suitable for all children with SEND and that there should be more focus on, and resource for, specialist provision. 

We Did

The Strategy has been updated following the consultation to reflect the feedback provided. You can find the final strategy document in the related documents section below. The Action Plan is in the process of being updated with further detail on how the recommendations will be implemented and will be published shortly.

We Asked

We asked whether the information in the Transport Policy Statement was clear and whether it could be improved.

 

 

 

You Said

Several respondents gave helpful information to enable us to update the Transport Policy Statement. One respondent felt information regarding 3in1 was unclear (it was under review at the time of the consultation). One respondent felt that walking and cycling were not promoted

We Did

The Policy Statement has been updated with information provided by respondnets. The information about the 3in1 scheme has been updated following the Council’s decision to cease the scheme. No changes were made in respect of promoting walking and cycling as this is more appropriately included in the Cycling and walking strategy.

We Asked

Our residents what they thought of four different resources/materials we had created for our Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) awareness campaign that were aimed at Parents and Carers as well as the general public.

You Said

We needed to work on our CSE leaflet and poster but the Facebook images and campaign page worked well.

We Did

So far we have made the following changes based on your feedback:

  • Parent and Carer leaflets:
    • Added in opening times for the phone numbers available.
    • Changed the black background to white to make it easier to read.
    • Tweaked the titles of the sections.
    • Changed some of the wording in the ‘How Can I support them?’ based on suggestions from one of the participants.
    • Changed the front cover to read ' How to get help if you think a child or young person is being sexually exploited’, rather than son/daughter as it was agreed that it may be a friends child a person may have concerns over.
    • We have added a line in the ‘Spot the Signs’ section saying ‘You may think some of these signs are normal for a teenager, but you know your child better than anyone else and if you think their behaviour is out of character then you need to speak to them or seek support.’ As it was felt that a number of the "indications" to look out for are normal behaviour in teens and not necessarily indicative of abuse.

 

  • CSE poster updates to be advised as we had a lot of valid input into changes that could be made but we need to work this into a suitable format within the space of the A4 poster.

We Asked

We asked whether you supported the addition of an uncontrolled crossing point at Snooks Corner.

You Said

We have had a 45% response rate receiving 79 responses from the 175 packs sent out, predominantly using the pre-paid return envelopes, only three used the online ‘Have Your Say’ website.

96% of all responders thought the crossing was a good use of resources

84% of responders would use the crossing regularly and a further 10% infrequently

We Did

71% of responders think we have placed the crossing in the right place, although 20% thought not.  After reviewing the comments on preferred alternative positions (many were not practical or did not conform to road standards) it has been decided to progress with the majority view. 

The crossing has been added to the works programme for this summer

We Asked

We asked you to provide us with feedback on our new look 'Your Space' webpages.

 

You Said

You told us yuo wanted to see different images on menu screens, and in content, and suggested new areas of content for this website, e.g. Laeaving Care.

 

We Did

We are currently working on trying to  update the images.  We are also looking at content pags for 'Leaving Care'. 

 

We Asked

We asked how you currently used the 50 bus service and what the impact would be on you if it was not available. 

You Said

We received 57 responses to the consultation. Your feedback, together with travelling passenger data, told us that usage of the service was considerably reduced later in the night.

We Did

The 50 bus timetable has been amended to remove the last two Monday to Saturday journeys departing from Chichester Bus Station at 22.25 and 22.55

You can access the full service timetable from the following links:  

Stagecoach 50 - Chichester Bus Station - Summersdale

Stagecoach 50 - Summersdale - Chichester Bus Station

We Asked

During an eight week public consultation in early 2016 we asked you to rank your preference for the three options below and your preferred timings if any changes were made.

  • Cease the scheme
  • Cease with mitigation for 16-19s on low income
  • Keep the scheme as is

We also asked if you had any further comments or concerns.

The consultation was widely advertised to all 3in1 users, non-card holders, schools, colleges, transport operators and other organisations.

You Said

Over 2,500 responses were received representing 2% of the overall eligible population. 75% of you were existing card holders or parents of card holders.

96% of you ranked keeping the scheme as it is as your first preference, with 1% opting to cease the scheme and 3% opting to cease the scheme with mitigation. Opposition to ending the scheme decreases incrementally when more notice is given.

Many of you also provided additional comments and feedback (summarised in the Decision Report) - the area of greatest concern being the high cost of bus fares for young people.

We Did

We had to look at the cost of running the overall scheme against the number of people who use it (5% of the eligible population) and the ever growing pressures on other areas of our work – especially across our children’s and adults’ services. It was therefore decided that the 3in1 card scheme, which costs £1.2m a year, would cease on 31 December 2016.

We have taken steps to mitigate the loss of the 3in1 card, and have liaised with bus operators, schools and colleges to consider travel concessions in the absence of the scheme. Bus operators are now offering their own discounts for young people and students. Further information on this is available on their websites and at www.your3in1.co.uk

Students from families assessed as being on a low income can also apply for help with travel costs from the 16-19 Bursary Fund, and should ask at their school or college for further information. Help is also available for young people from low income families aged up to 16 years old (Year 11 and below) subject to eligibility criteria.

All cardholders who have paid the application fee, and have a card with an expiry date after 31 December 2016, will be entitled to a proportional refund of the fee. A letter with further information will be sent to all eligible cardholders by the end of January 2017.