Local Residents (PDF)

Local resident submissions to this local authority’s electoral review

This PDF document contains submissions from local residents.

Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks.

LEWES ELECTORAL REVIEW BOUNDARY CHANGES THAT AFFECT: CHAILEY – WIVELSFIELD – BARCOMBE – HAMSEY

Objection I would like to advise you that as a resident of Wivelsfield Parish I object to the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party which if accepted would lead to the termination the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield and would amalgamate Chailey with Barcombe and Hamsey.

I am advised that both Cllr Davy - Chailey and Cllr Linington – Barcombe and Hamsey do not support the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party.

Cllr Sharon Davy Cllr Sharon Davy is a well respected and well known figure in the Parish of Wivelsfield. Over more than 12 years she has diligently carried out her duties and worked tirelessly in support of the Parish on numerous issues and occasions. She is always in evidence at Parish public gatherings whether for formal reasons or social events. She has good relationships with many residents of the Parish and her views are often sought. Once such instance was her recent initiative to call a meeting and successfully broker an agreement between members of Lewes District Council and Wivelsfield Parish Council / Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group. This led to resuscitation of the pended Wivelsfield Parish Neighbourhood Plan. I should also be noted that Cllr Davy is highly regarded by the members of Wivelsfield Parish Council and has always had a positive and professional working relationship with the Parish Council. Should the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield be terminated, the loss of the services, advice and input on many matters by Cllr Davy would be an inestimable loss to Wivelsfield Parish which will not easily be replaced.

Links, Affinity and Commonality between Chailey Parish and Wivelsfield Parish There is much evidence to substantiate and reflect the joint interests and identity of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Travel from Barcombe and Hamsey is generally south to the town of Lewes. Community groups – Many Chailey and Wivelsfield residents are members of Chailey Commons Society. The local hospice is in the Parish of Wivelsfield but it is on the Wivelsfield /Chailey Parish boundary. It is invaluable when our residents in both Parishes require end of life care. Many residents from both Parishes are volunteers in the facility

Facilities – Shopping Burgess Hill and Haywards Heath are the primary shopping locations for residents in Chailey and Wivelsfield. Both South Chailey and Wivelsfield support Post Offices/small shops for local shopping. There are 3 local pubs. It is unlikely that residents of Barcombe and Hamsey would use these facilities as the residents shop in the town of Lewes and use their own Post Office/village shop. They have their own local pub facilities

Hospital The Princess Royal in Haywards Heath is the main hospital facility for Chailey and Wivelsfield and many residents work in the facility. A large number of residents are volunteers in the hospital. Barcombe residents gravitate to the Queen Victoria hospital in the town of Lewes for non emergency day-unit operations and services, as well as looking towards Brighton General Hospital for more serious treatment.

G.P. and medical centre facilities Chailey and Wivelsfield residents use the South Chailey and Newick medical centres. Some Barcombe residents do use the Newick and South Chailey facilities, but other residents, especially in Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham will look to the town of Lewes for their medical G.P. needs.

Sports The vast majority of residents in Chailey and Wiveslfield use the Triangle Leisure Centre, Burgess Hill or the Dolphin Leisure Centre, Haywards Heath. The majority of residents in Barcombe and Hamsey will use the Leisure Centre in the town of Lewes.

Common Boundary – Chailey Common Chailey and Wiveslfield share the boundary of Chailey Common. This is a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Nature Reserve. Chailey Common bonds many residents of the two parishes in their country pursuits. This is not the case with Barcombe and Hamsey.

Electoral equality – The Lewes District Joint Core Strategy should be considered. It would be appreciated if the Local Government Boundary Commission refers to the Local Plan for factual data. An increase of approximately 40 dwellings by 2030 in South and North Chailey (without windfalls) has been submitted and agreed with the Inspector at the initial Inquiry. The figures submitted by Lewes District Council do not tally with the agreed Local Plan. The figures submitted should be re-examined. The Core Strategy and Local Plan have been agreed by Full Council. (ref. Local Plan page 45, Spatial Policy 2 – Distribution of Housing).

The 2021 variance data could collectively be +20% over the preferred electoral target, but the proposal of joining Chailey with Barcombe and Hamsey is still 13% over the preferred number of electors and therefore does not fulfill a perfect electoral equality. It is open to question, the recommendation for change, when the proposed Lewes District Council recommendation does not fulfill the ideal criteria. The justification for this variance is simply a +7% difference. This will create an impractical and ineffective collection of parish wards and boundaries that do not reflect the interest and identities of the villages.

The Boundary Commission recognises that perfect electoral equality for all wards is unlikely to be exactly achieved. Chailey and Wiveslfield Parish Councils both strongly support retaining the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Shared Interests – promoting effective and convenient local government – Chailey and Wivelsfield are wholly outside the South Downs National Park. Areas within the ward of Barcombe and Hamsey are in the Park, e.g. Offham, Cooksbridge and parts of Hamsey. Chailey and Wivelsfield planning decisions are wholly decided by Lewes District. Parts of Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham are decided by the South Downs National Park. This does not lend itself to effective and convenient local government.

The criteria for change states that evidence should be established if there are clear identifiable boundaries. Chailey and Wivelsfield is 100% outside of the South Downs National Park boundary. Barcombe and Hamsey include some areas that are within the Park boundary.

Retaining the Chailey and Wivelsfield joint ward reflects the necessary criteria for the local communities to remain as they are.

Links, Affinity and Commonality between Chailey Parish and Wivelsfield Parish

There is much evidence to substantiate and reflect the joint interests and identity of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Transport Links –

Most of the residents of Chailey and Wivelsfield requiring rail transport use the services at Haywards Heath, Wivelsfield and Burgess Hill.

Residents of Barcombe and Hamsey look primarily towards Cooksbridge and Lewes Town railways stations.

Road transport is divided along the following lines:-

Travel from Chailey and Wivelsfield is to the north and west to Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill respectively.

Travel from Barcombe and Hamsey is generally south to the town of Lewes.

Community groups –

Many Chailey and Wivelsfield residents are members of Chailey Commons Society.

The local hospice is in the Parish of Wivelsfield but it is on the Wivelsfield /Chailey Parish boundary. It is invaluable when our residents in both Parishes require end of life care.

Many residents from both Parishes are volunteers in the facility

Facilities –

Shopping

Burgess Hill and Haywards Heath are the primary shopping locations for residents in Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Both South Chailey and Wivelsfield support Post Offices/small shops for local shopping. There are 3 local pubs.

Hospital

The Princess Royal in Haywards Heath is the main hospital facility for Chailey and Wivelsfield and many residents work in the facility. A large number of residents are volunteers in the hospital.

G.P. and medical centre facilities

Chailey and Wivelsfield residents use the South Chailey and Newick medical centres.

2 Some Barcombe residents do use the Newick and South Chailey facilities, but other residents, especially in Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham will look to the town of Lewes for their medical G.P. needs.

Sports

The vast majority of residents in Chailey and Wiveslfield use the Triangle Leisure Centre, Burgess Hill or the Dolphin Leisure Centre, Haywards Heath.

The majority of residents in Barcombe and Hamsey will use the Leisure Centre in the town of Lewes.

Common Boundary – Chailey Common

Chailey and Wiveslfield share the boundary of Chailey Common. This is a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Nature Reserve. Chailey Common bonds many residents of the two parishes in their country pursuits.

This is not the case with Barcombe and Hamsey.

Shared Interests – promoting effective and convenient local government –

Chailey and Wivelsfield are wholly outside the South Downs National Park.

Areas within the ward of Barcombe and Hamsey are in the Park, e.g. Offham, Cooksbridge and parts of Hamsey.

Chailey and Wivelsfield planning decisions are wholly decided by Lewes District.

Parts of Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham are decided by the South Downs National Park. This does not lend itself to effective and convenient local government.

3 Retaining the Chailey and Wivelsfield joint ward reflects the necessary criteria for the local communities to remain as they are.

4 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Lewes District

Personal Details:

Name: mike dodd

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Dear Sirs I write as a resident of Hamsey Parish for the last 13 years, during which I have been a Parish Councillor for 9 years, the chair of our Neighbourhood Plan amongst involvement in other local groups. I would like to register my strong objection to the proposal to combine hamsey and Barcombe ward with the larger and more populated Chailey and Wivelsfield. The people who represent our parish should be local to it ( therein understanding local needs and residents views ) not from a neighbouring parish where the residents needs might be very different. This proposal smacks of greater centralisation as opposed to Localism, which I and and many in my parish support. yours truly Mike Dodd

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/6175 05/11/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Lewes District

Personal Details:

Name: Peter Hambly

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: n/a

Comment text:

I would like to request that any reorganisation is done on a fair basis that enables councillors to be as close to and accountable to the electors as possible. With this in mind I don't agree with the mix of single and multi-member wards. To make this fairer I think all the wards should be single member so that the member has a small a size electorate as possible to communicate with. I think this fits in with other levels of representation such as Members of Parliament or County Council level i.e. 1 member areas of representation. On this basis if you do think the present arrangement is on the right lines in terms of number of members then Lewes Town should be split in 8 single member wards based generally based within the existing boundaries of the 3 multi-member wards. On this basis elections can still occur once every four years but now the relationship between councillor and electorate would be closer and more accountable. Thank you.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/6082 05/10/2015 Porter, Johanna

From: Gordon Harper Sent: 25 November 2015 10:32 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: Boundary Commission Review - Lewes District - Objection

Dear Ms Porter,

LEWES ELECTORAL REVIEW BOUNDARY CHANGES THAT AFFECT: CHAILEY – WIVELSFIELD – BARCOMBE – HAMSEY

I am a resident of Wivelsfield Parish. I wish to object to the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party which would terminate the joint Ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

My reasons for objecting are as follows:-

Objection I object to the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party which if accepted would lead to the termination the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield and would amalgamate Chailey with Barcombe and Hamsey.

I am advised that both Cllr Davy - Chailey and Cllr Linington – Barcombe and Hamsey do not support the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party.

Cllr Sharon Davy Cllr Sharon Davy is a well-respected and well-known figure in the Parish of Wivelsfield. Over more than 12 years she has diligently carried out her duties and worked tirelessly in support of the Parish on numerous issues and occasions. She is always in evidence at Parish public gatherings whether for formal reasons or social events. She has good relationships with many residents of the Parish and her views are often sought. Once such instance was her recent initiative to call a meeting and successfully broker an agreement between members of Lewes District Council and Wivelsfield Parish Council / Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group. This led to resuscitation of the pended Wivelsfield Parish Neighbourhood Plan. It should also be noted that Cllr Davy is highly regarded by the members of Wivelsfield Parish Council and has always had a positive and professional working relationship with the Parish Council. Should the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield be terminated, the loss of the services, advice and input on many matters by Cllr Davy would be an inestimable loss to Wivelsfield Parish which will not easily be replaced, if replaced at all.

Links, Affinity and Commonality between Chailey Parish and Wivelsfield Parish There is much evidence to substantiate and reflect the joint interests and identity of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Transport Links Most of the residents of Chailey and Wivelsfield requiring rail transport use the services at Haywards Heath, Wivelsfield and Burgess Hill. Residents of Barcombe and Hamsey look primarily towards Cooksbridge and Lewes Town railways stations. Road transport is divided along the following lines:- Travel from Chailey and Wivelsfield is to the north and west to Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill respectively. Travel from Barcombe and Hamsey is generally south to the town of Lewes.

Community groups Many Chailey and Wivelsfield residents are members of Chailey Commons Society. The local hospice is in the Parish of Wivelsfield but it is on the Wivelsfield /Chailey Parish boundary. It is invaluable when our residents in both Parishes require end of life care. Many residents from both Parishes are volunteers in the facility 1

Facilities Shopping Burgess Hill and Haywards Heath are the primary shopping locations for residents in Chailey and Wivelsfield. Both South Chailey and Wivelsfield support Post Offices/small shops for local shopping. There are 3 local pubs. It is unlikely that residents of Barcombe and Hamsey would use these facilities as the residents shop in the town of Lewes and use their own Post Office/village shop. They have their own local pub facilities

Hospital The Princess Royal in Haywards Heath is the main hospital facility for Chailey and Wivelsfield and many residents work in the facility. A large number of residents are volunteers in the hospital. Barcombe residents gravitate to the Queen Victoria hospital in the town of Lewes for non-emergency day-unit operations and services, as well as looking towards Brighton General Hospital for more serious treatment.

Sports The vast majority of residents in Chailey and Wivelsfield use the Triangle Leisure Centre, Burgess Hill or the Dolphin Leisure Centre, Haywards Heath. The majority of residents in Barcombe and Hamsey will use the Leisure Centre in the town of Lewes.

Common Boundary – Chailey Common Chailey and Wivelsfield share the boundary of Chailey Common. This is a Site of Special Scientific Interest and a Nature Reserve. Chailey Common bonds many residents of the two parishes in their country pursuits. This is not the case with Barcombe and Hamsey.

Electoral equality The Lewes District Joint Core Strategy should be considered. It would be appreciated if the Local Government Boundary Commission refers to the Local Plan for factual data. An increase of approximately 40 dwellings by 2030 in South and North Chailey (without windfalls) has been submitted and agreed with the Inspector at the initial Inquiry. The figures submitted by Lewes District Council do not tally with the agreed Local Plan. The figures submitted should be re-examined. The Core Strategy and Local Plan have been agreed by Full Council. (ref. Local Plan page 45, Spatial Policy 2 – Distribution of Housing).

The 2021 variance data could collectively be +20% over the preferred electoral target, but the proposal of joining Chailey with Barcombe and Hamsey is still 13% over the preferred number of electors and therefore does not fulfil a perfect electoral equality. It is open to question, the recommendation for change, when the proposed Lewes District Council recommendation does not fulfil the ideal criteria. The justification for this variance is simply a +7% difference. This will create an impractical and ineffective collection of parish wards and boundaries that do not reflect the interest and identities of the villages.

The Boundary Commission recognises that perfect electoral equality for all wards is unlikely to be exactly achieved. Chailey and Wivelsfield Parish Councils both strongly support retaining the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Shared Interests – promoting effective and convenient local government Chailey and Wivelsfield are wholly outside the South Downs National Park. Areas within the ward of Barcombe and Hamsey are in the Park, e.g. Offham, Cooksbridge and parts of Hamsey. Chailey and Wivelsfield planning decisions are wholly decided by Lewes District. Parts of Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham are decided by the South Downs National Park. This does not lend itself to effective and convenient local government.

Porter, Johanna

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 27 November 2015 09:42 To: Ward, Lucy; Porter, Johanna Subject: FW: Electoral review for Lewes District

From: Miles Holford Sent: 26 November 2015 20:10 To: reviews Subject: Electoral review for Lewes District

Dear Sir/Madam

In our view Norton, within the parish of South Heighton, should remain in the rural ward of Ouse Valley and Ringmer. It should not become part of Seaford or Newhaven wards for the reasons given below, which we have set out under the headings provided in your guidance documents:

(1) Delivering electoral equality for local voters

Ouse Valley and Ringmer has close to the average number of electors per councillor, both currently, and as predicted for the year 2021. The current variance is -6% (2021: -8%) compared with the District average of 1,817 electors per councillor (2021: 1,993). It therefore makes sense to deliver electoral equality for local voters by leaving Ouse Valley and Ringmer boundaries untouched.

As regards the predicted electoral inequality in Newhaven, we believe that it might be sensible to consider re-drawing the boundaries within the town itself, since the 2021 variance prediction for Newhaven Valley of -24% is roughly balanced by +19% for Newhaven Denton and Meeching.

(2) Reflecting the interests and identities of local communities

Transport links – An effective road system, including the A26 and A27, links all parts of the Ward of Ouse Valley and Ringmer. Almost the whole of the Ward lies in the South Downs National Park , an area of natural beauty used for open-air recreation. There is an excellent network of footpaths and bridleways linking Norton and South Heighton with the National Park, the Ouse Valley, and the other parishes within the Ward.

Community groups - Norton and South Heighton are effectively and conveniently represented by South Heighton Parish Council which is itself in regular contact with the other Parish Councils in the ward through, for example, the Lewes District Association of Local Councils.

Facilities – Most of the Ward of Ouse Valley and Ringmer enjoys the recreational facilities afforded by the South Downs National Park and the Ouse Valley.

Identifiable boundaries - The existing parish boundaries are well-defined and identifiable and, for the most part, delineate rural from urban areas.

Parishes - Ouse Valley and Ringmer Ward consists of a number of parishes of similar character, typically rural settlements surrounded by farmland: South Heighton , Tarring Neville, Beddingham, Firle, Glynde and Ringmer.

Shared interests – Norton is a rural settlement of some 20 houses. It faces similar rural issues to those of the other rural parishes within the ward of Ouse Valley and Ringmer. It is sensible that it should remain in the parish of South Heighton, which is a rural parish covering a tract of the South Downs National Park. By contrast, the neighbouring wards of Seaford West and Newhaven Denton and Meeching are managed by town councils and concerned with urban issues such as residents' housing (see Seaford Residents Voice - Home).

(3) Promoting effective and convenient local government

1 Ouse Valley and Ringmer Ward is governed effectively and conveniently by its three councillors. We feel well represented amongst a broader community having similar issues and concerns. We see no reason to change the Ward’s boundaries.

Yours faithfully

Miles Holford,

Electors/inhabitants of Norton, Seaford, East Sussex

2 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Lewes District

Personal Details:

Name: Miles Holford

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I submitted an email to [email protected] on 26 November 2015 but have not yet had an acknowledgment. As the deadline for submissions is tomorrow, 30 November, I am attaching a pdf of my email here so that I can be certain that you receive it.

Uploaded Documents:

Download

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/6252 30/11/2015 %"# #'( "# ($ $%#%

$ " "#

#'($ "#&

&#$) "'!#

+'8 #/8 '*'3

4 5;8

# ! "!% #!

;9+ %'22+? '4* "/4-3+8 .'9 )259+ :5 :.+ '<+8'-+ 4;3(+8 5, +2+):589 6+8 )5;4)/2258 (5:. );88+4:2? '4* '9 68+*/):+* ,58 :.+ ?+'8 $.+ );88+4: <'8/'4)+ /9 )536'8+* =/:. :.+ /9:8/): '<+8'-+ 5, +2+):589 6+8 )5;4)/2258 : :.+8+,58+ 3'1+9 9+49+ :5 *+2/<+8 +2+):58'2 +7;'2/:? ,58 25)'2 <5:+89 (? 2+'

9 8+-'8*9 :.+ 68+*/):+* +2+):58'2 /4+7;'2/:? /4 +=.'<+4 =+ (+2/+<+ :.': /: 3/-.: (+ 9+49/(2+ :5 )549/*+8 8+ *8'=/4- :.+ (5;4*'8/+9 =/:./4 :.+ :5=4 /:9+2, 9/4)+ :.+ <'8/'4)+ 68+*/):/54 ,58 +=.'<+4 %'22+? 5, /9 85;-.2? ('2'4)+* (? ,58 +=.'<+4 +4:54 '4* ++)./4-

! ! ! ! !! "!

! @ 4 +,,+):/<+ 85'* 9?9:+3 /4)2;*/4- :.+ '4* 2/419 '22 6'8:9 5, :.+ &'8* 5, ;9+ %'22+? '4* "/4-3+8 2359: :.+ =.52+ 5, :.+ &'8* 2/+9 /4 :.+ #5;:. 5=49 ':/54'2 !'81 '4 '8+' 5, 4':;8'2 (+';:? ;9+* ,58 56+4'/8 8+)8+':/54 $.+8+ /9 '4 +>)+22+4: 4+:=581 5, ,55:6':.9 '4* (8/*2+='?9 2/41/4- 58:54 '4* #5;:. +/-.:54 =/:. :.+ ':/54'2 !'81 :.+ ;9+ %'22+? '4* :.+ 5:.+8 6'8/9.+9 =/:./4 :.+ &'8*

"!% " 58:54 '4* #5;:. +/-.:54 '8+ +,,+):/<+2? '4* )54<+4/+4:2? 8+68+9+4:+* (? #5;:. +/-.:54 !'8/9. 5;4)/2 =./). /9 /:9+2, /4 8+-;2'8 )54:'): =/:. :.+ 5:.+8 !'8/9. 5;4)/29 /4 :.+ ='8* :.85;-. ,58 +>'362+ :.+ +=+9 /9:8/): 995)/':/54 5, 5)'2 5;4)/29

! @ 59: 5, :.+ &'8* 5, ;9+ %'22+? '4* "/4-3+8 +405?9 :.+ 8+)8+':/54'2 ,')/2/:/+9 ',,58*+* (? :.+ #5;:. 5=49 ':/54'2 !'81 '4* :.+ ;9+ %'22+?

! " $.+ +>/9:/4- 6'8/9. (5;4*'8/+9 '8+ =+22*+,/4+* '4* /*+4:/,/'(2+ '4* ,58 :.+ 359: 6'8: *+2/4+':+ 8;8'2 ,853 ;8('4 '8+'9

;9+ %'22+? '4* "/4-3+8 &'8* )549/9:9 5, ' 4;3(+8 5, 6'8/9.+9 5, 9/3/2'8 ).'8'):+8 :?6/)'22? 8;8'2 9+::2+3+4:9 9;885;4*+* (? ,'832'4* #5;:. +/-.:54 $'88/4- +

! ! @ 58:54 /9 ' 8;8'2 9+::2+3+4: 5, 953+ .5;9+9 : ,')+9 9/3/2'8 8;8'2 /99;+9 :5 :.59+ 5, :.+ 5:.+8 " 6'8/9.+9 =/:./4 :.+ ='8* 5, : /9 9+49/(2+ :.': /: 9.5;2* 8+3'/4 /4 :.+ 6'8/9. 5, =./). /9 ' 8;8'2 6'8/9. )5<+8/4- ' :8'): 5, :.+ #5;:. 5=49 ':/54'2 !'81 ? )54:8'9: :.+ 4+/-.(5;8/4- ='8*9 5, '4* '8+ 3'4'-+* (? !$ )5;4)/29 '4* )54)+84+* =/:. ;8('4 /99;+9 9;). '9 8+9/*+4:9 .5;9/4- 9++

! !# #! # ! /9 -5<+84+* +,,+):/<+2? '4* )54<+4/+4:2? (? /:9 :.8++ )5;4)/22589 &+ ,++2 =+22 8+68+9+4:+* '354-9: ' (85'*+8 )533;4/:? .'

% " "$

Porter, Johanna

From: KATHRYN JEPSON Sent: 27 November 2015 17:40 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: Boundary Changes

Dear Sir

LEWES ELECTORAL REVIEW BOUNDARY CHANGES THAT AFFECT: CHAILEY – WIVELSFIELD – BARCOMBE – HAMSEY Objection

I would like to advise you that as a resident of Wivelsfield Parish I object to the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party which if accepted would lead to the termination the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield and would amalgamate Chailey with Barcombe and Hamsey. I am advised that both Cllr Davy - Chailey and Cllr Linington – Barcombe and Hamsey do not support the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party. Cllr Sharon Davy

Cllr Sharon Davy is a well respected and well known figure in the Parish of Wivelsfield. Over more than 12 years she has diligently carried out her duties and worked tirelessly in support of the Parish on numerous issues and occasions. She is always in evidence at Parish public gatherings whether for formal reasons or social events. She has good relationships with many residents of the Parish and her views are often sought.

Once such instance was her recent initiative to call a meeting and successfully broker an agreement between members of Lewes District Council and Wivelsfield Parish Council / Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group. This led to resuscitation of the pended Wivelsfield Parish Neighbourhood Plan.

I should also be noted that Cllr Davy is highly regarded by the members of Wivelsfield Parish Council and has always had a positive and professional working relationship with the Parish Council.

Should the joint ward of Chailey and Wivelsfield be terminated, the loss of the services, advice and input on many matters by Cllr Davy would be an inestimable loss to Wivelsfield Parish which will not easily be replaced. Links, Affinity and Commonality between Chailey Parish and Wivelsfield Parish

There is much evidence to substantiate and reflect the joint interests and identity of Chailey and Wivelsfield. Transport Links –

Most of the residents of Chailey and Wivelsfield requiring rail transport use the services at Haywards Heath, Wivelsfield and Burgess Hill.

1 Residents of Barcombe and Hamsey look primarily towards Cooksbridge and Lewes Town railways stations.

Road transport is divided along the following lines:- Travel from Chailey and Wivelsfield is to the north and west to Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill respectively. Travel from Barcombe and Hamsey is generally south to the town of Lewes.

Community groups –

Many Chailey and Wivelsfield residents are members of Chailey Commons Society. The local hospice is in the Parish of Wivelsfield but it is on the Wivelsfield /Chailey Parish boundary. It is invaluable when our residents in both Parishes require end of life care. Many residents from both Parishes are volunteers in the facility Facilities –

Shopping - Burgess Hill and Haywards Heath are the primary shopping locations for residents in Chailey and Wivelsfield. Both South Chailey and Wivelsfield support Post Offices/small shops for local shopping. There are 3 local pubs.

It is unlikely that residents of Barcombe and Hamsey would use these facilities as the residents shop in the town of Lewes and use their own Post Office/village shop. They have their own local pub facilities Hospital - The Princess Royal in Haywards Heath is the main hospital facility for Chailey and Wivelsfield and many residents work in the facility. A large number of residents are volunteers in the hospital.

Barcombe residents gravitate to the Queen Victoria hospital in the town of Lewes for non emergency day-unit operations and services, as well as looking towards Brighton General Hospital for more serious treatment. G.P. and medical centre facilities - Chailey and Wivelsfield residents use the South Chailey and Newick medical centres. Some Barcombe residents do use the Newick and South Chailey facilities, but other residents, especially in Hamsey, Cooksbridge and Offham will look to the town of Lewes for their medical G.P. needs. Sports - The vast majority of residents in Chailey and Wiveslfield use the Triangle Leisure Centre, Burgess Hill or the Dolphin Leisure Centre, Haywards Heath.

The majority of residents in Barcombe and Hamsey will use the Leisure Centre in the town of Lewes. Common Boundary – Chailey Common

Porter, Johanna

From: A SIMONIAN Sent: 24 November 2015 08:41 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: Boundary Changes

LEWES ELECTORAL REVIEW BOUNDARY CHANGES THAT AFFECT: CHAILEY – WIVELSFIELD – BARCOMBE – HAMSEY

I am advised that both Cllr Davy - Chailey and Cllr Linington – Barcombe and Hamsey do not support the recommendations of the Lewes District Working Party.

Links, Affinity and Commonality between Chailey Parish and Wivelsfield Parish There is much evidence to substantiate and reflect the joint interests and identity of Chailey and Wivelsfield.

Transport Links – Most of the residents of Chailey and Wivelsfield requiring rail transport use the services at Haywards Heath, Wivelsfield and Burgess Hill. Residents of Barcombe and Hamsey look primarily towards Cooksbridge and Lewes Town railways stations. Road transport is divided along the following lines:- Travel from Chailey and Wivelsfield is to the north and west to Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill respectively. Travel from Barcombe and Hamsey is generally south to the town of Lewes. Community groups – Many Chailey and Wivelsfield residents are members of Chailey Commons Society. The local hospice is in the Parish of Wivelsfield but it is on the Wivelsfield /Chailey Parish boundary. It is invaluable when our residents in both Parishes require end of life care. Many residents from both Parishes are volunteers in the facility

Hospital The Princess Royal in Haywards Heath is the main hospital facility for Chailey and Wivelsfield and many residents work in the facility. A large number of residents are volunteers in the hospital. Barcombe residents gravitate to the Queen Victoria hospital in the town of Lewes for non emergency day- unit operations and services, as well as looking towards Brighton General Hospital for more serious treatment.

Shared Interests – promoting effective and convenient local government –

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Lewes District

Personal Details:

Name: Sheila Tomkinson

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

i consider that Ouse Valley and Ringmer should remain within Lewes Disttrict Council area, due to its proximity to Lewes town. If it were to be moved to Wealden, it would be difficult for me and others without private transport to visit district council offices.Following the completion of the Ringmer to Lewes cycle and footpath, it is easy to waldk into Lewes. I consider Lewes to be my area as I go into Lewes 5 days out of seven.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/6181 12/11/2015