We asked, you said, we did

The City Council invited public comments on the submission draft of the Littlemore Neighbourhood Plan in accordance with Regulation 16 of the Neighbourhood Planning Regulations 2012.  This consultation offered an opportunity for residents, businesses and others with an interest an Littlemore to express views about the proposed plan and make suggestions on how it may be improved.

Comments were received from stakeholders based in Littlemore and beyond.  Comments were also received from statutory bodies.  A summary of comments received will be published on the Neighbourhood Planning pages of the City Council website in due course.

Following the consultation the submission draft of the plan, supporting evidence and any representations that are made will be sent to an independent examiner.  The independent examiner will consider whether the document:

• meets the Basic Conditions to proceed to a referendum
• is Legally Compliant with the Neighbourhood Planning Regulation

Updates on the progress of the examination will be found on our webpages.

The City Council received an application from the Headington Neighbourhood Forum  to be formally redesignated as a neighbourhood planning forum.  The application was publicised for 6 weeks and comments were invited from the public particularly those residing or working in the relevant neighbourhood area.

In total, there were 18 responses to the Headington Neighbourhood forum redesignation, summarised as follows:

• 9 respondents were in support of the redesignation.
• 4 responses were from statutory bodies (Historic England, Natural England, National Highways, Canal & Rivers Trust) which were general remarks and no specific comments on the redesignation application.
• 5 respondents called for the neighbourhood area to be extended to include Wood Farm.
• 1 respondent raised queries on the reporting on the utilisation and disbursement of Community Infrastructure Levy receipts.

The responses have been considered alongside other matters, and have been included in a report to the Cabinet recommending that the forum is redesignated.  The final decision is expected to be made by Cabinet at their meeting on 22 January 2025.

For your views on how the proposed passenger train services from new stations at Littlemore and Cowley to Oxford city centre and beyond might benefit residents and the local community.

Overall, 170 people responded to either the in-person or online engagement. Furthermore, we also received comments from various groups across the county. There was overwhelming support for the proposal to reopen the Cowley Branch Line for passenger services and introduce the two new stations. 

Many said they would use the stations to visit London, but to encourage modal shift for local journeys, ticket prices must be competitive compared to alternatives. Accessibility for those with disabilities, especially mobility scooter users, was highlighted. Many people who lived nearby said they would access the stations by walking, wheeling or cycling. We also heard from people who were apprehensive about the impact of additional traffic to the stations and associated demand for parking in surrounding streets and shopping centre car parks.

The outputs of this consultation is informing the project's design proposals, as part of the Cowley Branch Line project's "Infrastructure Place Study". This will be considered as part of ongoing decision-making around the proposed reopening of the Cowley Branch Line for passenger services.

For comments on the draft of the Councils Statement of Gambling Policy which had been amended following the scheduled review required under the Gambling Act 2005.

One response was received from a Responsible Authority under the Gambling Act 2005 who had no comments to make on the draft policy.

A report will now be put to the Licensing and Gambling Acts Committee with the view to adopt the draft policy in January 2025.

In April 2024 we ran a six-week consultation inviting comments on both the Wolvercote Neighbourhood Forum and the Summertown & St Margaret Neighbourhood Forum. This consultation was launched after the City Council received an application from both neighbourhood forum groups to redesignate their forums in relation to their originally designated neighbourhood areas. 

Wolvercote 

• We received 61 responses with regard to the redesignation of Wolvercote Neighbourhood Forum.  

• Just over 94% of the responses were in support of the redesignation of this neighbourhood forum (if you include the 9 no comments as support).  

• Other comments related to boundary changes and the group's effectiveness in managing any increased revenue from Community Infrastructure Levy receipts.  

Summertown 

• We received 15 responses regarding the redesignation of Summertown & St Margaret.  

• Just over 86% of the responses were in support of the redesignation of this neighbourhood forum (if you include the 4 no comment as support). 

• Other comments related to ensuring that the neighbourhood forum does more to represent the entirety of the population within the forum area.  

We analysed all of the comments received and summarised the consultation responses at Cabinet and will share these with both forums too. We have also ensured that both neighbourhood forums have been redesignated and we look forward to supporting both groups to continue their neighourhood plans.    

In March 2024 we launched the new online form for General Register applications (social housing). It is very important for us to get it right in terms of useability and accessibility.

The online form has replaced the previous system where applicants downloaded an editable PDF form from our website and were then asked to email in any supporting evidence. This was very difficult for customers to use, especially on mobile devices. It was also difficult and time-consuming for staff to process and assess the applications, leading to a backlog which is currently 5 and a half months. It was an urgent priority for Housing Needs to improve this service.

We designed the form so it’s shorter, easier, and more accessible for people to use and easier to upload documents. It will be easier for officers to process, and we hope it will reduce the backlog meaning that people will know the result of their application quicker.

You gave some valuable feedback in terms of how easy the form was to use and how helpful the additional guidance was. The vast majority of feedback was overwhelmingly positive.

We are addressing these any areas for change you have recommended. The digital form allows us to update and make small changes quickly and easily as soon as issues arise.

We have been receiving applications with ease and processing times will start to improve.

For your feedback on our proposal to update the City Council byelaws for Parks and Open Spaces, which have not been updated for nearly 30 years. We launched a widely publicised, open-to-all online questionnaire and reached out proactively to a wide range of stakeholders connected to our green spaces.

We received a total of 523 responses to the online survey, along with additional comments and suggestions via email and letter. We reviewed all responses to gauge support or opposition to the proposals, and to identify general themes, concerns, and suggestions.

• Strong Support for Updates: A majority (60%) of respondents supported the proposed updated byelaws overall.
• Backing for Individual Byelaws: Most individual byelaws proposed received significant majority support.
• Cycling Considerations: A majority supported lifting the blanket ban on cycling in parks. However, there was strong sentiment to retain the ban in Hinksey Park (except on designated routes), and in the Trap Grounds and Lye Valley nature areas to protect fragile habitats.
• Play Area Usage: While there was general support for addressing misuse of play areas by teenagers, many respondents questioned enforcing an age limit. It was suggested to handle misuse through a general byelaw on causing obstruction or annoyance.
• Impact Awareness: Most respondents did not feel the updated byelaws would unduly impact them, except in the case of cycling in parks, reflecting mixed views on the potential impacts on both cyclists and pedestrians.
• Old Byelaws: There was significant support for revoking outdated byelaws on ball games, tree climbing, and wild swimming.
• Shotover Country Park: A majority supported including Shotover Country Park under the general park byelaws, revoking its existing set.

Based on your feedback, the draft updated byelaws will be revised to address your concerns and suggestions.

The Council will now take the time to carefully consider all proposals and recommendations. If we decide to move forward, the updated proposals will be advertised again for further public comment later this year.

Byelaws provide essential rules to ensure everyone can enjoy, feel safe in, and respect our public spaces. They also protect habitats, wildlife, and the wider environment.

“We are grateful to everyone who took the time to share their views during this consultation. Your feedback is invaluable in helping us shape byelaws that protect our cherished parks and open spaces while ensuring they remain safe and enjoyable for all. We are committed to carefully considering all comments and will continue to engage with the community as we refine these proposals.” Councillor Chewe Munkonge, Cabinet Member for a Healthy Oxford 

You can read more about the proposals here

It is well documented and experienced by people living in the city that there is a shortage of available housing of all tenures. To get a better understanding of people’s experience and view of how we should tackle the city’s housing shortage, awareness of empty dwellings in the city and persons affected.

We also asked what your thoughts were on whether the council should intervene by contacting owners of empty dwellings.

From the responses we can see that over 60% were aware of empty dwellings and that they had or knew of people who had experienced problems finding housing. This providing affirmation that people in the city are having problems finding a home.

Over 60% said you felt it appropriate for the council to intervene or contact owners of empty dwellings to ensure they are brought back into use. Those who did not agree reflected on time scales for renovation work and that it was not for the council to interfere in the private interests of an individual.

The consultation has been successful in providing us with an understanding of individuals experiences and perceptions of empty dwellings in the city. This in turn helps us to react accordingly.

Further publicity and explanations around the topic are required to support an understanding, describe and explain why the council is keen to ensure no empty dwelling is left vacant without good cause.

The council is committed to providing advice and support to owners of empty dwellings rather than taking formal action. Please visit our empty homes webpage which provides reasons why the council is concerned about dwellings left vacant and what it can do to help.

Where a property has been empty for over 2 years the council endeavour to work with the owners to bring them back into use. Only if it seems that the owner is either unable or unwilling or where there are public health issues will the council consider stepping in and using formal action. The key to any action taken by the council is to assist in housing provision within the city.

In March 2024, we asked for your comments and feedback on the highest priority areas for the Council in the next four years. We wanted to know whether these are the right issues and actions for the Council to focus on.

The Council Strategy 2024-28 sets the approach we will take over the next four years to achieve our vision for Oxford, with the city’s economy continuing to grow through science and tech and being a thriving place for independent businesses. We will nurture strong inclusive communities and be a welcoming and supportive place for people from all backgrounds to work, live and visit.

You provided us with valuable feedback. You said that housing was the most important issue for you, with the economy and thriving communities your next most important issues.

A number of our respondents also provided extra comments on your priorities. The most common issues related to traffic and transport issues, particularly LTNs (Low Traffic Neighbourhoods) and public transport, which are the responsibility of Oxfordshire County Council.

Based on your feedback, the responses to the consultation showed overall agreement with the priorities we have focused on in our Council Strategy 2024 to 2028, and no significant changes were made.

Although there were a number of comments relating to traffic, transport and LTNs, these fall under the responsibility of the Oxfordshire County Council as the Highways Authority, and we are not able to develop in-depth policy on transport. Our strategy has committed to using our influence to improve public transport and supporting cycling and active travel, which bring benefits to travel and health in the city.

Find our more about Our Strategy 2024-28 

Thank you for taking part in the consultation on Oxford City Council’s website earlier this year. Your feedback has been invaluable in helping us refine and enhance the site. 

We carried out a range of work about a year ago to improve the Council’s website, including upgrading the look and structure of the site, reducing the overall number of pages and documents, and making accessibility improvements. 

During February, we asked for your feedback on the new website to help inform us as we made further improvements.

In total, 95 people responded to the consultation giving us great insight in what we can do better for you;

• 56.6% felt the search function didn’t return helpful or relevant results, making it hard to find what you were looking for.
• 37.9% mentioned encountering broken links, missing information, or technical glitches while using the site.

We received over 700 comments in the free-text boxes, with feedback covering a wide range of topics. Some raised concerns about the website’s use of cookies and the accessibility tools, while others asked for more information on specific topics like local events, section 80 demolition notices, and the dog warden.

A number commented on the website’s design. Some felt that there was too much white space, that the search box was too large, or that there weren't enough images to break up the content. Others requested a login function so you could save your progress on forms, which would make returning to incomplete tasks easier.

You also let us know what was working well for you;

• 59% of you found the page layout easy to navigate, describing it as “straightforward” or “very straightforward.”
• 62.1% appreciated the clear and helpful information provided on the website.
• 80% said the text size, colour contrast, and navigation felt accessible and user-friendly.
• 88.4% were satisfied with the website’s fast loading speed.

We’ve taken your feedback seriously and made several improvements to the website, particularly focusing on the search function and addressing technical issues:

• Duplicate webpage IDs: We identified and fixed an issue where old webpage IDs were reused when transitioning to the new website, which caused multiple pages to show up incorrectly in search results.

• Press releases: Many of you mentioned that press releases were cluttering the search results, making it hard to find relevant content. To fix this, we now automatically remove press releases after 12 months, reducing the total number from about 2,000 to just 300.

• Third-party portals: The website hosts 13 embedded applications (such as consultation, Freedom of Information, and parking portals). We have reskinned and upgraded all of these to align with the new website design, ensuring they meet current accessibility and data protection standards.

• Additional fixes: We’ve made a range of smaller improvements, including:

  • Fixing the feedback form.
  • Stopping third-party applications like YouTube from setting cookies on users' computers without permission.
  • Reworking the ‘contact us’ page to make it more user-friendly.
  • Adding a translations page, allowing the site to be translated into over 60 languages.

We’ve also reviewed all 700+ comments and, where possible, addressed your concerns. If you raised issues about broken links or trouble with search results, these should now be fixed.

Finally, while some design choices (like white space and a large search box) were intentional for accessibility and mobile responsiveness, we’ve noted your feedback and will continue to monitor and improve the user experience. We are also looking into options to introduce a login function so you can save your progress on forms, as requested.

We are aware that there are still some areas that need improving and tweaking with the website. We are now going through every page on the website systematically to try to improve the content, including to improve the clarity of pages, user journeys, and the accessibility of documents. We are also looking to make improvements to the webchat function and feedback forms. 

If you have any additional feedback or feel your concerns have not been fully addressed, please use the “Rate this page” feedback form at the bottom of the webpage that your comments refer to. These comments will come directly through to the website team. 

Finally, thank you to everyone who shared supportive comments about the project. We’ve made hundreds of thousands of changes over the past year, and your recognition of that effort means a lot to the team. 

An online public consultation was conducted by Oxford City Council over an 8-week period, running from December 4th, 2023, to January 31st, 2024. The consultation aimed to gather feedback from residents regarding the council's proposal to revoke the existing 23 Smoke Control Areas in Oxford and replace them with a single Smoke Control Area covering the entire administrative area of the city.

The consultation comprised a series of questions aimed at gauging residents' opinions and experiences related to smoke control measures and their impact. Questions covered topics such as residency within the city, existing exposure to smoke control areas, personal experiences with smoke nuisance, types of heating appliances used at home, awareness of health impacts from wood burning, familiarity with council awareness campaigns, and agreement with the proposed expansion of Smoke Control Area legislation.

Based on the responses received during the consultation, several key findings and concerns were identified:

• Most respondents expressed support for expanding Smoke Control Area legislation, although some were unsure or had reservations.
• Concerns were raised regarding the potential impact on vulnerable populations and the need for adequate compensation.
• Comments highlighted broader concerns about air quality, enforcement measures, awareness raising, and inclusion of boating communities.
• Residents emphasised the importance of ongoing communication and education on smoke control issues.
• Some expressed concerns about potential unintended consequences, such as a shift to non-sustainable fuels or insufficient time for appliance changes.
• Respondents noted that urban bonfires were a source of smoke and nuisance.

These insights informed the council's decision-making process and future actions regarding the proposed expansion of Smoke Control Area legislation in Oxford.

Read more on our Smoke Control Areas

In preparation for the 2024-25 budget, we sought our communities’ and citizens’ input on several proposed changes, including potential increases in council tax, adjustments to charges for services like garden waste collection and car parking, and the allocation of funds towards key priorities such as council housing and climate initiatives. The consultation aimed to understand the public's views and preferences, ensuring that the final budget reflected the city’s needs and values.

The public engagement process provided us with diverse and insightful feedback. Many respondents emphasised the importance of generating additional income through council-owned companies like Oxford Direct Services Ltd and Oxford City Housing Ltd. This was seen as a prudent way to support council services without overly burdening residents.

Opinions were mixed regarding the proposed 2.99% increase in council tax. While some residents supported the increase as a necessary measure to maintain essential services, others expressed concerns about the financial burden it might impose, particularly on low-income households.

Similarly, there were divided views on the suggestion to increase charges for garden waste and car parking. Some participants acknowledged the need for these increases to support the council's financial health, while others were wary of the impact on affordability, especially for frequent users of these services.

There was also significant discussion around council tax support. Many respondents felt that maintaining a strong support system was crucial to help vulnerable residents cope with financial challenges. Additionally, there was a broad consensus on the need for substantial investment in social housing, energy efficiency projects, and initiatives to combat climate change, reflecting a strong community commitment to sustainability and social equity.

Considering the valuable feedback received, adjustments were made to the final budget:

• Council Tax: After careful consideration, the council decided to proceed with a 2.99% increase in council tax. This decision balances the need to fund essential services with the recognition of the financial pressures faced by residents.   
• Council Tax Support and Investment Priorities: In response to the feedback, the council has maintained robust support for low-income residents, ensuring they continue to receive necessary assistance, and this fully mitigates the impact of the increase in council tax for those on the lowest incomes. Furthermore, significant investments have been allocated to enhance social housing, improve energy efficiency, and fund climate change initiatives. These actions align with the strong public support for creating a more sustainable and equitable community.
• Garden Waste & Car Park Charges: While recognising the mixed feelings on these charges, the council has implemented a moderate increase. This measure is necessary to cover the rising costs of service provision and to continue offering high-quality services without compromising other budgetary areas.

The adjustments made in response to public feedback demonstrate our commitment to incorporating community input into our decision-making processes. We believe these changes strike a balance between fiscal responsibility and addressing the needs and concerns of our residents.

Supporting information, appendices and more information can be found here.

Thank you for your participation and contributions to shaping the future of our community.

Oxford Health and Oxford City Council met in the Summer of 2023 to discuss an opportunity to create a city funded electric taxi rank bay at the JR hospital in the context of the Go Ultra Low Taxi (T-GULO) project. We are delighted to announce that we have agreed with the hospital to install two E-taxi rank bays.

Oxford City Council therefore gave notice that it intended to locate a new Hackney Carriage rank at the John Radcliffe Hospital, Headley Way, Oxford under the provisions of Section 63 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976

Location:- John Radcliffe Hospital, Headley Way, Oxford – 3.6 metres from the outside of the entrance to the Children’s Hospital, West Wing, for a distance of 13 metres northwards, to accommodate 2 vehicles (E-taxis only).

The rank will be accessible daily, 24 hours a day

A public consultation was conducted for a period of 28 days. The question was asked if persons agreed or disagreed to the addition of the rank and what comments, if any, they had.

There were responses in support to proposed rank, there were concerns that the space should be for disabled persons.

It is important to note that all of our licensed Hackney Carriages are wheelchair accessible and can assist in the transportation of persons with disabilities.

The results of the consultation will be analysed and a decision will be made by the relevant officers and committee’s whether adoption is suitable. 

The City Council carried out a Proposed Submission Draft (Regulation 19) Consultation on the Oxford Local Plan 2040 between 10 November 2023 and  5 January 2024.  The consultation offered the opportunity to express views on the soundness of the plan, as defined by the tests of soundness set out in paragraph 35 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). 

We received a wide range of representations, from residents, landowners, businesses and institutions on whether they considered that the plan meets the tests of soundness.  Some of the representations included proposed modifications to specific policies and sections of the plan in order to make them sound, as well as suggestions for additional policies or site allocations that should be included in the draft plan for submission.

We are currently analysing the representations and producing officer responses to specific points where required. The representations and officer responses will be collated in a summary report that will be made available in due course. The report will also indicate where we propose to make modifications to the plan based on the received feedback.

The City Council carried out a consultation on the CIL Partial Review Draft Charging Schedule (CIL Regulation 16) which proposes changes to CIL rates between 10 November 2023 and 5 January 2024.  

The consultation offered the opportunity to express views on the proposed changes to CIL rates, the supporting evidence base and any other comments relating to the CIL consultation.

We received a range of representations on the proposed CIL rates and the evidence base which underpins the proposals.  Some of the representations proposed modifications to the rates proposed and there also were suggestions about how the evidence base could be improved.

We have been taking the time to acknowledge the responses made to the consultation and have been working hard to consider if modifications should be made to the charging schedule.

We also have been taking a look at if the evidence base needs to be further updated. All representations, officer responses and modifications will be collated in a summary report that will be made available in due course.

For people’s views on the current policy in regards to emissions criteria for licensed Hackney Carriage Vehicles.

The responses in favour of keeping the policy as it currently is along with being in favour of changing the implementation date.

The results of the consultation will now be put before the General Purposes Licensing Committee.

Following a request from the City of Oxford Licensed Taxi Association to amend the Hackney Carriage Tariff for Oxford City, we asked for view on the proposed new tariff.

There was an overwhelming response in support to proposed new tariff, there was however some concerns in relation to the use of tariff 2 for weekend and late-night economy work along with some concerns that the tariff would be too expensive as proposed.

The results of the consultation will now be put before the Vice Chair of the General Purposes Licensing Committee and following discussions with the Licensing Authority and Legal Services a further report will be put before the Full Council.

We asked for the public’s views on the option for a “Little Wheels and Wet Play Park” in Hinksey Park on the old Hinksey Splash site.  

• 311 people surveys completed. A very high response rate, demonstrating the importance of this play facility, both to the local community and beyond 

• 80% of respondents used the former splash facility 

• Postcode analysis reveals respondents are from within the local community, wider city and across Oxfordshire. This confirms Hinksey is a destination park that needs to meet the desired play provision of a wide catchment area 

• 74% thought the enclosure should be open all year round 

• 74% supported the idea of a dedicated space where younger children can develop their motor skills on balance bikes 

• When asked if their children would use a Little Wheels & Wet Play Park, the majority 68% said they were very sure or somewhat sure they would use the facility. 17% said they were somewhat unsure or very unsure 

• Some respondents were in favour of the multi-use design, whereas some had concerns about combining the two facilities within the same enclosure 

• Other respondents suggested alternative idea’s including a café, natural play, imaginative & creative play and something for older children. 

The results of the consultation have provided evidence to support a large external funding application to the FCC Community Action Fund. This funding is not guaranteed, and the project would also be reliant on other sources of funding yet to be agreed. We will find out in March whether the funding applications have been successful. 

We asked for the public's views on a new Dog Control Public Spaces Protection Order.  The Order would last for three years and apply to the whole of the Oxford City local authority area. 

The Order would create the following offences:

1. A person must put their dog on a lead if required to do so by an authorised officer.
2. A person may not be in charge of any more than four dogs in a public place.
3. A person in charge of a dog must pick up their dog’s faeces.
4. A person in charge of a dog must not let it enter a children’s play park.

The Order would not apply to private land and there were exemptions for assistance dogs.

• Over 150 people responded to the survey with:
• • 85% of respondents disagree with allowing dogs into children’s play parks. 
  • 92% of respondents felt that owners should pick up their dog mess anywhere in the city.
  • 69% of respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement that dog owners should not be restricted on the number of dogs under their control at any one time.
  • 85% of respondents said that owners should put their dog on a lead if asked by a Council or Police Officer.
  • 77% of respondents agreed that dogs should be kept on leads at all times in the city centre.

Oxford City Council's Cabinet met on the 13th and approved the Order.  Council Officers, the police and other approved persons can enforce the Order.

We asked whether the proposed policies were easy to understand and gave a clear explanation of how decisions were made in relation to residential enforcement.

Details of how to appeal the decisions should be included in the policies and details of the training that officers, who carry out such enforcement work.

We have amended the draft policies to include details of the appeal procedure and the training that officers receive. A report is being submitted to Cabinet in January 24 for approval of there-drafted policies.