Local Residents Submissions to the Elmbridge Borough Council Electoral Review
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Local Residents submissions to the Elmbridge Borough Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from surnames of residents from N to R Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 Elmbridge District Personal Details: Name: Brenda north E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Comment text: I agree with the proposals for the reduction in numbers of Elmbridge councillors but totally disagree with the notion to change my local ward to that of St George's Hill.I want to register my opposition. Our interests are more aligned to Weybridge town & the new Weybridge Riverside ward than to the totally different needs of an entirely different community like St George's. Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5896 21/08/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 Elmbridge District Personal Details: Name: Peter north E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Comment text: I understand that in your proposals for the reduction of Elmbridge Borough Councillors you have suggested moving my local ward of Weybridge South to Weybridge Riverside Ward.I want to register my opposition to that change. It is obvious to me that our interests will be best served by aligning ourselves to the newly formed Weybridge Riverside ward as St George's has a totally different community & different Ward issues. Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5897 21/08/2015 Starkie, Emily From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 24 August 2015 16:41 To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: Elmbridge - objection to LGBCE proposals for Thames Ditton ward From: Oakley, Crispin Sent: 24 August 2015 16:21 To: reviews <[email protected]> Subject: Elmbridge ‐ objection to LGBCE proposals for Thames Ditton ward To: the Review Officer (Elmbridge) Local Government Boundary Commission for England From: Robert & Helen Oakley Dear Sir/Madam. I trust I am not too late for your cut off, but I have only just been informed of the proposals to take all roads east of Portsmouth Road out from Thames Ditton ward and make part of Long Ditton ward. We object strongly to these proposals on that grounds that they run contrary to the LGBCE’s main consideration to reflect community identity. The Thames Ditton & Weston Green Residents’ Association serves this part of Thames Ditton well. These roads, including our own, have always been part of the parish of St Nicholas Thames Ditton and within the KT7 postal code. We look to the shared amenity of Giggs Hill Green and the village of Thames Ditton with its doctor’s surgery, dentist, schools, library and high street shops as the hub of our local community. We would strongly urge you to reconsider these proposals. Your faithfully, Robert & Helen Oakley This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended for the addressee(s) only. If you have received this email in error or there are any problems, please notify the originator immediately. The unauthorised use, disclosure, copying or alteration of this email is strictly forbidden. To find out more about Land Securities, visit our website at www.landsecurities.com 1 Hinds, Alex From: Mayers, Mishka on behalf of reviews Sent: 11 August 2015 16:58 To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: Thames Ditton Ward, Elmbridge Borough Council - objection to proposals From: Sent: 11 August 2015 15:10 To: reviews <[email protected]> Subject: Thames Ditton Ward, Elmbridge Borough Council ‐ objection to proposals FAO The Review Officer (Elmbridge) Local Government Boundary Commission for England 14th Floor Millbank Tower LONDON SW1P 4QP Dear Sir/Madam I am writing as part of your consultation about the proposals to remove voters living in Thames Ditton east of the Portsmouth Road from Thames Ditton ward to Long Ditton ward. Objection: contrary to one of your main considerations, “to reflect community identity”. 1) Our community is Thames Ditton. I cannot understand the logic of declaring that Thames Ditton residents should be part of a ward with which we have little to do, as opposed to the one which is the centre of our community. Our local shops, care homes, schools, churches and station are all in Thames Ditton. We use the Thames Ditton village green, Giggs Hill Green, to exercise ourselves and our pets, and to support our cricket club – which is in Thames Ditton just as we are. 2) Our community in has historically always seen itself as being in Thames Ditton. The traditional Angel pub in the area affected has been a part of our community for centuries and if you look up the Victorian artist John Jessop Hardwick (whose work still sells at auction) who used to live at my address on Angel Road [in the affected area] you will see that he was Churchwarden for the Parish of Thames Ditton since 1881. Address; Objection: contrary to one of your main considerations, “to provide for convenient and effective local government”. 3) The proposed ward boundaries are illogical and will make local government inconvenient and ineffective. 1 Many of the roads affected have their main entrance and exit from the Portsmouth Road (e.g. Gloucester Close, Ditton Lawn, Giggs Hill Gardens, Angel Road, Rythe Gardens) and for four out of those five, plus all homes along the Portsmouth Road, the Portsmouth Road is the only access. Why move electors out of their natural ward? I am copying this letter to a representative of the Thames Ditton & Weston Green Residents’ Association. I think that proves which local community I am part of! Yours Mr. Chris O’Leary 2 Hinds, Alex From: Mayers, Mishka on behalf of reviews Sent: 04 August 2015 09:48 To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: Objection to LGBCE proposals for Thames Ditton (Embridge Council) From: Dominic Otero Sent: 03 August 2015 17:20 To: reviews <[email protected]> Subject: Objection to LGBCE proposals for Thames Ditton (Embridge Council) To the Review Officer (Elmbridge), I’m writing to object to the Boundary Commissions plans to re‐draw the ward boundaries and move myself and neighbouring residents into the Long Ditton ward. We moved to Thames Ditton 2 years ago, attracted by the ability to be part of the vibrant Thames Ditton community. My son regularly plays on Gigs Hill green and is looking forward to playing cricket there when he’s a bit older. He also goes to the playgroup in the Community centre next to the Library and we have made many good friends and established good links with people in the area. We try to use the High Street as much as possible, buying veg at Paull’s and meeting friends at the cafes. I’m also a frequent user of the Thames Ditton forum and try to take part as much as I can in the future planning for the village. (eg the prospective farmers market etc) through our residents association and councillors. Two years in, we’re feeling like a part of community and look forward to strengthening our ties with the area when our children go to school. Breaking the link between our representatives and the village would leave us without a voice to lobby regarding future issues on parking, shops and services in Thames Ditton and it is for this reason I’d like to object and ask that the current boundaries remain. Your sincerely, Dominic Otero 1 Hinds, Alex From: Fuller, Heather Sent: Friday, August 21, 2015 04:05 PM To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: Objection to LGBCE proposals for Thames Ditton (Elmbridge Council) From: Simon Ove Sent: 20 August 2 To: reviews <[email protected]> sals for Thames Ditton (Elmbridge Council) Simon & Sarah Over Dear Sir/Madam, We are writing in response to the proposed breakup of the Thames Ditton Ward, as we wish to raise an objection. We understand that the plans will result in our house being moved from being part of this ward to Long Ditton Ward. Were this to happen it would remove our house from the community that we feel we belong to, i.e. Thames Ditton. Our local doctors' surgery is a short walk from our house, as are our local shops and the schools that we hope our daughter will be able to attend when she is old enough - all within Thames Ditton. A change to the ward boundaries will mean this community link is broken and may lead to problems when applying for or using these services, for example a change to our local surgery or a different catchment area for schools. In addition, our local village green, Giggs Hill Green, runs virtually alongside our house so to have the boundary line run between the two would divide us from where we have always enjoyed spending our free time. In many respects having this village green on our doorstep confirms our place as part of the Thames Ditton community, enhanced by our inclusion within the Thames Ditton Conservation Area Advisory Committee boundaries. With no such committee within Long Ditton this would remove the conservation protection the Thames Ditton committee provides. Finally, the local aspect is particularly key when it comes to local government. Being part of the Thames Ditton ward enables us to come under the jurisdiction of an active Residents' Association. This association looks after the interests of the borough when it comes to local government issues, which would be lost should we be divorced from the community. Without this our local government would be extremely ineffective, offering no support for genuine local issues as the major political parties have proven to be unsupportive of the long term interests of the community.