Local resident submissions to the Borough of electoral review

This PDF document contains submissions from residents in Croydon.

The submissions from have been collated into one document. They have been sorted alphabetically, by surname. (C-F)

Starkie, Emily

From: Kay C Sent: 15 April 2017 17:29 To: reviews Subject: Boundary Consultation

I received a leaflet today regarding the proposal to change ward boundaries. I would prefer to be in the Ward as my official address is Kay Cadd

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Martin Carr Sent: 03 May 2017 09:01 To: reviews Subject: Comments on ward boundary review - , Croydon

To whom it may concern

I would like to comment on the proposals for reviewing the ward boundaries in my area. I live in the area. Under the proposed plans this area would be split between 3 wards, which would affect community cohesion.

An alternative plan, proposed by the local Labour councillors, would split Addiscombe into two wards, East and West. This proposal more accurately reflects the natural communities in our area. Also, given the demographics, both wards would be electorally marginal, rather than safe seats. I support this proposal.

Yours faithfully

Martin Carr

1 Starkie, Emily

From: John Cartwright Sent: 19 March 2017 01:38 To: reviews Subject: Croydon

From John Cartwright

Here are my comments on the Draft Recommendations for Croydon:

Generally, I approve of the draft recommendations in most parts, and the Conservative Party's proposals on which they are based, subject to a few tweaks. One "tweak" is substantial (number 1 on my list), the others are minor.

1. In my own area in the middle part of ward (Park Hill, FA5 & FA6) I feel more connection with the Whitgift Estate at the east end of Fairfield ward (FA7) than I do with Addiscombe. The Addiscombe Road is more of a barrier than a unifying factor. We both look to the town centre, but not much to each other. I know more people in FA7 than I do in Addiscombe. In line with your proposals, it would be better to keep Addiscombe road as the main ward boundary between Addiscombe & Park Hill. Park Hill (FA5 & FA6) should be in the same ward as FA7, and therefore part of , not . To compensate, Addiscombe West should be shifted clockwise to include AD3 and, if necessary, the northern part of AD2 and the southern part of AD1. N.B. I do not know the exact electorate figures for each polling district, so I won't be too precise about where exactly the boundary between the two Addiscombe wards should be. The main point is that the eastern half of what is now Fairfield ward should remain intact and be combined with Addiscombe East to form an "Addiscombe East & Park Hill" ward.

2. There is an anomaly in the current boundary between Addiscombe ward and Woodside ward, which was not spotted at the previous review in 1999 and which is perpetuated in your draft recommendations. Canal Walk straddles across the ward boundary, so that some of the electors in Canal Walk are listed in Addiscombe ward even though the only connection is through Woodside. Woodside needs to be adjusted slightly to include the whole of Canal Walk.

3. I approve of the names "Shirley North" and "Shirley South", but the boundary between them should be along the Wickham Road. I do not understand the proposed inclusion in Shirley North of the small Nursery Close/Nursery Avenue (etc.) area, which is to the south of Wickham Road. I suspect this bit may have been tweaked artificially to keep Shirley South within the +/‐10% variation. If so, it should be un‐tweaked. A clear natural boundary in the long term is better than a minor mathematical anomaly in the electorates in the short term (q. v. the proposed "Central" ward which starts off at ‐38%).

4. I am not sure of the placing of the exact boundary between the proposed " & Addington Village" ward and the proposed "Selsdon Vale & Forestdale" ward, which does not simply go along the A2022. I suspect you may have fallen into the lazy trap of using the polling districts as building‐blocks, with SB4 being entirely in S&AV. Again, I don't know the exact electorates so I will leave you to consider it. As far as names are concerned, short simple names are generally to be preferred rather than lots of long names with "and" in the middle. It might be better simply to call it "Forestdale" rather than "Selsdon Vale & Forestdale". (Where does the name "Selsdon Vale" come from? I'm not sure it exists as a place, but the locals would know better than I do.) "Selsdon & Addington Village" is however correct.

5. The current names " East" and "Coulsdon West" should be kept, instead of the slightly confusing "Old Coulsdon" and "Coulsdon Town" which are proposed. The proposed names might be more familiar to the locals in Coulsdon than they are to other people, but the current names are clearer and more meaningful, especially to the multitudes of psephologists all over the country who will be looking at them. There appear to be no changes 1 proposed to Coulsdon East other than the name, and only minimal changes to Coulsdon West, so the current names should be retained.

6. The current name "Croham" should be kept for the proposed "South Croydon" ward. There is substantial continuity between the current ward and the proposed one, and the names of and Croham Valley Road are sufficiently prominent and well‐known to justify keeping the name "Croham" even if it is not otherwise a "place" name. There is another important reason: as a matter of principle, I do not like the name of the borough to be used in the names of wards. The proposed "South Croydon" ward would, in due course, be used as a building‐ block for future parliamentary constituencies, and it is perfectly conceivable that it would be part of a version of a "Croydon Central" constituency rather than a "Croydon South" constituency. It would be confusing, especially for people who are not interested in politics or psephology, to be told or to find that they are simultaneously in "South Croydon" and "Croydon Central" but not "Croydon South", or even to be in "South Croydon" and "Croydon South".

7. "Central" is the correct name for the proposed ward. "Town Centre" would be acceptable; "Central Croydon" would not (for the same reason listed above) (just in case anybody else wants to suggest such a thing).

8. The proposed ward is a good version.

9. The proposed "Crystal Palace & " ward should keep the name "Upper Norwood" but it should NOT include the name "Crystal Palace". The site of the original Crystal Palace was just over the border in Bromley (where there is already a "Crystal Palace" ward), and the general Crystal Palace area straddles across the corners of four or five boroughs (Lewisham, Lambeth and Southwark, as well as Croydon and Bromley). For the same reason given in item number 6, it is conceivable that a future parliamentary constituency might include Crystal Palace ward (from Bromley) AND "Crystal Palace & Upper Norwood" ward (from Croydon). Such an arrangement would be confusing and annoying for psephologists, political activists and electoral administrators, let alone ordinary non‐ political people. Otherwise the proposed boundaries of "Upper Norwood" are good, apart from the possible need to have the south‐east corner tweaked to exclude the whole of what is now SN3 (the Lake and park area).

10. Shorter names are better: "" on its own might be better than " and Pollards Hill". Alternatively, if the name "Norbury" is to be kept, then it would be better and simpler for the two wards to be called "Norbury East" and "Norbury West" rather than "Norbury Park" and "Norbury & Pollard Hill".

11. "" is a good name and should be kept, despite the loss from the proposed ward of the eponymous football ground. As in item 6 above, an alternative proposal for "North Croydon" or anything similar should be rejected.

12. I am struggling to understand the reasoning for the somewhat fiddly squiggliness of the proposed "Bensham Manor East", "Bensham Manor West" and "West Thornton" wards. It would be better to retain two 3‐member wards rather than the proposed three 2‐member wards. A suitable boundary would be the current one, along the London Road, between what is now WT1 and BM1&BM2. In other words, the proposed "Bensham Manor West" should be abolished and divided up between the proposed "West Thornton" and "Bensham Manor East" wards. As far as names go, I have a minor suggestion and a more radical one. The minor suggestion is that the railway line and London Road are generally considered to be oriented in a north‐south direction (even though they look more diagonal on a map), so the names "Bensham Manor North" and "Bensham Manor South" would be better, on the proposed boundaries, than the proposed "Bensham Manor West" and "Bensham Manor East". A more radical suggestion would be to use the name which is in common usage among ordinary non‐political people. In real life (i.e. not in the political bubble), the whole area covered by , Bensham Manor and West Thornton wards are what people think of as "Thornton Heath". The LGBCE should therefore grasp the nettle by the horns and use variations of "Thornton Heath" for all of the wards in the area. The proposed Thornton Heath would be "Thornton Heath East"; Bensham Manor East would be "Thornton Heath Central"; Bensham Manor West would be "Thornton Heath North West"; and West Thornton would be "Thornton Heath South West". If the proposed Bensham Manor West is divided up between the other two wards as suggested, this naming scheme would be more straightforward.

2 Overall, and in general terms, the Draft Recommendations for Croydon are good, but they need to be adjusted in same places. Here endeth my submission.

John Cartwright

3 Starkie, Emily

From: Jaxxy Cayenne Sent: 27 April 2017 18:08 To: reviews Subject: Boundry Consultation

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

I understand that the area I live in is in Waddon ‐ I live in I feel that the ward my address should be in is South Croydon and not Waddon.

Kind regards

Ms D Cayenne

Get Outlook for iOS

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Alessia Sent: 08 May 2017 12:56 To: reviews Subject: Addition to an existing response to the consultation

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear reviews team,

My name is Alessia Cesana, resident at , and I have sent in a comment last week in the Croydon consultation about the Waddon ward. After having a conversation with a housemate last night it dawned on me that I didn’t stress enough how important it is that the ward is preserved around the community. My previous comment focused on praising the proposal for the north of the ward, where now part of the community is arbitrarily in another ward when there is no rationale for it, and that makes sense given my house is in the north of the ward. I’ve also touched upon the south because of my frequent travel to Purley for the hospital. I want to emphasise, if it isn’t clear, that I meant to support the ward boundaries as proposed by the commission because they reflect historically what the ward has been, and therefore the way the community has developed organically. An example of this is how our local parish church (St Dominic’s Waddon ‐with the area always mentioned in formal documentation, again reinforcing the identity of the parish as Waddon, like its own town and not a part of a bigger borough‐) is located in a central position to cover a parish that is equivalent to the ward, with South Croydon having its own church and parish (St Gertrude’s). The reason I mention this is that the development of the two parish communities as separate ones over the 40s and 50s is a clear example of the development of a Waddon identity tied to a specific geographical area. I believe that both residents and council candidates of all parties decide to be involved in local politics to make sure that the interests of the community are represented, and so I want to praise the commission’s draft for preserving the community in their view of the ward as reflecting as much as possible the ward as it already is, except for the addition of an area that is clearly tied culturally to Waddon. I see this addition as the cherry on top of a cake already perfect as it is.

I hope I was not too late to send over these additional thoughts, and I’m happy for them to be published with my previous ones.

All the best,

Alessia

1 Starkie, Emily

From: sid chana Sent: 05 May 2017 20:02 To: reviews

I wish to object to the Commission’s draft recommendations for my area, as the boundaries proposed fail to reflect the local interests and identities of Addiscombe. I believe a better alternative exists, which more closely reflects local identities while meeting the Commission’s requirements for electoral equality, and effective and convenient local government.

The boundaries proposed for the two Addiscombe wards extend well beyond the Addiscombe neighbourhood. Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate aren’t in Addiscombe and never have been, they do not identify with our area and properties sold in those areas aren’t advertised as being part of Addiscombe. The community boundary, as with the electoral boundary, has always ended at Addiscombe Road.

We have entirely independent facilities for shopping, educating children and practicing religions, consequently the interests and identities of our two separate areas do not overlap. Bundling the two areas together ignores their very different housing types and consequently the differing needs we have for representation on the council. The voice on the council of both areas will be diminished by the draft proposals.

I believe our community would be better represented by having the electoral boundaries overlap with community boundaries. This could be accommodated through one two‐member ward and one three‐member ward, with the southern boundary remaining at its historic location of Addiscombe Road and taking in the Tollgate Estate to the north, the entrance to which is located on the Addiscombe‐side of the signs advertising that drivers are entering Addiscombe.

This would recognise that all the major road, tram and bus routes run through the area, preserve Park as a historic part of the community and avoid splitting up the ASPRA residents’ association.

A new two‐member ward could then be formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Estate and the other low density housing around the parks, ensuring the common interests of that community are represented on the council.

Yours truly, Sent from my iPhone

1 Starkie, Emily

From: sid chana Sent: 05 May 2017 20:00 To: reviews

The Review Officer (Croydon), Local Government Boundary Commission for England, 14th Floor Millbank Tower, Millbank, London, SW1P 4QP

Dear Commission Officer, Your aim: “We also aim to ensure that the pattern of wards reflects the interests and identities of local communities.” I am a resident of , Addiscombe, Croydon and cannot agree with your current draft proposal for Addiscombe. Your proposal does not ensure that the pattern of the wards reflects the interest and identities of the local community, in somecases, the union represents the contrary. For example, Addiscombe West and Park Hill ward and Addiscombe East. The outer boundaries create unnatural communities. The West of Addiscombe has always been defined by the main railway tracks. Residents of Davidson Road and Canal Walk consider themselves as being in Addiscombe ward and I believe this is an ideal opportunity to formally include them. There is a natural boundary of Addiscombe Road to the South of the ward; many residents of Park Hill do not use the five junior schools in Addiscombe, eg. Ark Oval School ‐being a short distance away from Addiscombe Road. Residents of Park Hill tend to send their children to Park Hill School that favours the residents of Park Hill. The children of Addiscombe tend not to get an opportunity to attend the school in Park Hill. People in Park Hill do not use the shops in Addiscombe; they travel west into Central Croydon for their shopping. Over the years, residents of Addiscombe ward and the Ashburton ward – especially roads radiating out from Bingham Road havecreated a natural community through the shared use of the shops stretching along the Lower Addiscombe Road. They have also shared enjoyment of the annual Addiscombe Festival and regular worship at St Mildred’s church and Our Lady of the Annunciation R C Church, both along Bingham Road. Being a few minutes away from the , many residents living off the Bingham Road consider themselves as living in Addiscombe ward, I believe that they should be included in Addiscombe. I, and many other residents, usually from Woodside, Ashburton and Addiscombe, attend the annual Addiscombe Festival Fair, previously known as the Addiscombe Carnival at . Many of the local residents like me enjoy the day feeling and have formed stronger community links by way of this event. I believe that placing Ashburton Park in Shirley ward will make a mockery of our community event. This is an ideal opportunity to being Ashburton Park into Addiscombe where it belongs. Yours Sincerely, Sent from my iPhone

1 Starkie, Emily

From: j channon Sent: 07 May 2017 09:41 To: reviews Subject: Proposed changes to the boundaries of Addiscombe

Good morning,

Having lived in Addiscombe for five years now I feel concerned that the proposed alterations to the boundaries of our wards will not adequately represent the interests of our area. From what I've seen these proposed changes would be extending into areas that have not traditionally been identified as part of Addiscombe and I cannot help but be concerned that this will dilute the political representation for all of us caught up in these changing boundaries.

The current proposition is for Addiscombe to be split between four wards, this does not seem to be in the best interest of the residents of Addiscombe. I fear that the Conservative proposal is more concerned with furthering their party's position in this area and that if it is acted upon that myself and the other residents of Addiscombe will lose our voice in matters of local policy.

I believe that other alterations to the boundaries should be considered, ones that will serve the needs of us Addiscombe residents ahead of any line of party politics. Of the solutions that I've seen, what strikes me best would be to have one two member ward and one three member ward, with Tollgate Estate to the north being established as the northern boundary and the existing southern boundary at Addiscombe road remaining in place.

Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns.

Kind regards, Joseph Channon

1 Starkie, Emily

From: tahera chaudry Sent: 08 May 2017 17:51 To: reviews Subject: South Croydon, waddon ward

To whom it may concern We are keen to be part of the South Croydon ward as we are in the South Croydon postcode and feel more connected to the South Croydon community.

Tahera Chaudry

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Chris Clark Sent: 28 April 2017 22:35 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Boundary Review Submission

Dear Sir/Madam

I have lived in Croydon for 7 years, having bought a shared ownership flat in due to the excellent transport links and proximity to arts venues including the and the Clocktower Cinema

I wish to object to the Commission’s draft recommendations for my area, as the boundaries proposed fail to reflect the local interests and identities of my community. I believe a better alternative exists, which more closely reflects local identities while meeting the Commission’s requirements for electoral equality, and effective and convenient local government.

The boundaries proposed for the two Addiscombe seats and two Shirley seats ignore the different characters and needs within these areas between the isolated, greener, lower density housing surrounding the parks, and the higher density housing in the neighbourhoods of Shirley and Addiscombe.

Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate aren’t in Addiscombe and never have been, as the community and electoral boundary has always ended at Addiscombe Road. We have our own church (not that I’m a religious person at all!), schools and shopping facilities, so the interests and identities of our two separate areas do not overlap.

To bring this to a personal level, my ex-girlfriend lived in Cheyne Walk, which is in Addiscombe, and I spent a lot of time visiting her there. It was always very clear to me that I was visiting Addiscombe, which wasn’t where I lived. I very much like visiting the pubs and restaurants on Lower Addiscombe Road, but there is a definite sense of going somewhere else when I do so. It feels different.

Returning to this electoral boundaries issue, I believe our community would be better represented by having a two-member ward formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Estate, Upper Shirley Road and Shirley Avenue. This area would include both sides of Coombe Road as the southern-most boundary, Addiscombe Road as the northern-most boundary with the railway line serving as the boundary to the West.

This would also allow Addiscombe residents, including those in the Tollgate Estate, to have their own voice on the council, through having one two-member ward and one three-member ward covering the community to represent their residents’ very different needs and issues.

I hope you will consider what I've said and adjust your proposals accordingly.

Yours faithfully

Chris Clark

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Stephen Collingwood Sent: 08 May 2017 12:05 To: reviews Cc: Subject: Fairfield ward

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear sirs,

I hope I am not too late to submit my comments concerning ward changes.

I have lived in the Park Hill area for over 35 years (since 1982), my children were educated in Park Hill infants and Junior schools, I am a Church Warden at St Matthews whose parish covers Fairfield and I am a member of the Park hill Resident's Association.

I am concerned that the proposals do not reflect local interests and want to support an alternative that will meet local interests and identities better.

The Park Hill and Whitgift Foundation Estate have a very different identity and needs to those in the Addiscombe area across the Addiscombe Road. It has its own church, schools and shopping facilities, different housing types and densities and access to green spaces.

I support the representation for a two‐member ward formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift estate, Upper Shirley Road and Shirley Avenue. Addiscombe residents including those in Tollgate will then have their stronger voice by having one two‐member ward and one three‐member ward to represent distinct interests and needs.

Best regards

Stephen Collingwood

Sent from my iPad

1

Stuart Collins

02/05/2017

Dear Boundary Commissionaires

I am writing as a resident of Croydon for 44 years, a trustee member of the Shirley Community Centre and resident at the above address for 8 years to object to the proposals for the Addiscombe, Park Hill & Whitgift estates proposed boundaries set out in the Commission’s draft recommendations for Croydon.

I feel these proposals put together several communities with nothing in common, in terms of housing density, social need and geographical areas. I wish to suggest improvements which better meet the stated goals of providing electoral equality, reflecting the identities and interests of local communities and thus promote effective and convenient local government.

The boundaries proposed for the Addiscombe seats ignore the different needs and characteristics of these areas, between the isolated, greener, lower density housing surrounding the parks and higher density housing in Addiscombe and Shirley. Neither Park Hill nor the Whitgift Estate is located within Addiscombe and through my experience through planning issues and socially through several sporting and community organisations I have never heard anyone from those communities say they are from Addiscombe.

In terms of public spending per head on issues of social need and issues caused around the density of housing these two areas have nothing in common with the rest of the actual Addiscombe Communities you are proposing to merge in these new wards. The Council holds details which show the difference in public spending in these areas to those in the more densely populated areas you suggest should go together and it is clear they are vastly different.

Another good measure is the level of recycling rates and fly tipping that are vastly different in areas of high density housing compared to the less densely populated areas like Whitgift & Park Hill estate. In my opinion it’s impossible to claim there’s a common identity across the area when every past review has recognised Addiscombe Road as Addiscombe’s definitive southern boundary since at least 1922.

Addiscombe Residents use different set facilities to those in Park Hill and Whitgift who use facilities in the South, Addiscombe would therefore be better represented by recognising Addiscombe Road as the community’s southern limit and reincorporating the Tollgate Estate to create one two-member ward and one three-member ward.

A new ward could then be formed to the south of similar housing types around the parks, taking in Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate, which identify strongly with one another and contain the Shirley Park Golf Club and Shirley Park Tennis club neither of which identify themselves with Addiscombe. It would also include the isolated, lower density housing around Shirley Avenue where I live which identifies it’s shopping area as Shirley parade rather than Addiscombe high street. To make up numbers the area could then include similarly low density properties along Upper Shirley Road, the South Park Hill area delineated by the main railway line and the old Selsdon railway line, or the area west of here to Conduit Lane between Coombe Road and Croham Road, which was incorporated in the past.

Thank you for considering my thoughts

Yours truly

S. Collins

Stuart Collins

8th May 2018

The Review Officer (Croydon) Local Government Boundary Commission for England 14th Floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SW1P 4QP

Dear Review Officer

I have been shown a copy of the boundary review proposals for Addiscombe and I really cannot understand how this proposal has been put forward.

I have lived in Addiscombe for about ten years, first off of Lower Addiscombe Road and then in my current home If you just look at a map of Addiscombe you will see the roads run down towards East Croydon, east to west yet it is proposed to cut them in half with no explanation. If that wasn’t enough, to consider the area that I live in Addiscombe has any relation to that on the other side of Addiscombe Road living by is a nonsense. The makeup of the homes streets etc. is completely different and any map shows this clearly. Living here as a resident I cannot understand why my community has been connected with South Croydon.

My natural area would be the shops along Lower Addiscombe Road, the Railway Park, Cherry Orchard Road, down to the Tram line. I feel it is only right I have local councillors that represent the area I live in, not a large unrelated chunk of Croydon.

Thank you for the opportunity to put my views forward.

Yours sincerely

Daisy Crisp

Starkie, Emily

From: Anne and Peter Davis Sent: 04 May 2017 09:39 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Review

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear Sir or Madam We have read the LGBCE proposals for re warding Croydon and would like to make the submission below. We have lived in Purley since 1985, have been members of the Purley and Woodcote Residents Association and St Swithuns church. Our children attended local state schools. We do agree with your list of sixteen places of importance in Croydon. They are what we would have chosen. We do feel your proposals for our area, namely Purley, Coulsdon, , , Riddlesdown make a lot of sense, respecting as they do established communities but making a few necessary changes. Our long established communities have grown up in deep chalk valleys along lines of communication . You have avoided creating fake groupings with your proposals. We live in and one welcome change for us that you have proposed is that we cease to be in Coulsdon West ward and would be in Purley and Woodcote ward. This is most welcome since we have always regarded ourselves as Purley and Woodcote people. Coulsdon is quite far from us ! In conclusion we fully support your proposals for our area. Yours Peter and Anne Davis

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Jessica Debba Sent: 02 May 2017 19:20 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Neighbourhood boundary consultation

Dear Review Officer

I wish to object to the commission's draft recommendations for Addiscombe. I feel the boundaries proposed do not reflect our local interests.

I would like to propose an alternative which I feel meets local interests better and also meets the commission's requirements for electoral equality.

The community boundary and the electoral boundary has always ended at Addiscombe road. The boundaries proposed for the Addiscombe wards extend well beyond what has been considered the Addiscombe neighbourhood. For example, Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate Aren't in Addiscombe and do not identify with our area.

Addiscombe enjoys entirely independent facilities for shopping, educating children etc. The community has organically formed this way. Bundling the two separate areas together ignores the fact that they have different types of housing and different needs.

I feel the draft proposal will diminish the voice of both areas. I think the electoral boundaries need to overlap with community boundaries. This way the community would be best represented.

This could be accommodated through one two‐member ward and one there‐member ward, with the southern boundary remaining at its historic location of Addiscombe Road and taking the Tollgate estate to the North, the entrance to which is located on the Addiscombe ‐side of the signs advertising that drivers are entering Addiscombe.

A new two member ward could then be formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Eatate and the other low density housing around the parks, ensuring the common interests of that community are represented on the council.

I look forward to hearing from you regarding my objection.

Kind regards,

Jessica

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Frederic Demay Sent: 10 May 2017 09:14 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Review Attachments: LGBCE.JPG

Dear Sir/Madam,

I have tried to submit this on the 8th & 9th May without much success, I kept getting an error (see screenshot attached).

I am therefore sending this via Email, albeit late now.

Having reviewing the boundary proposed by the LGBCE I feel that it has perfectly delimited the areas concerned, by retaining the community identity while defining strong and identifiable boundaries, especially in wards like West/East Addiscombe, having lived in the ward known as Ashburton for 15 years. I think defining it as Addiscombe East is the right way forward as it is where the main high street of Addiscombe is located, yet it is in the ward called Ashburton, the reason being that the land was historically owned by the Ashburton family.

It is also identical and again the LGBCE has striked the right balance I believe for Sanderstead, proposing to include part of the Ward currently known as Croham where I have been living for the past several years, although I don't believe stretching it so far past Sanderstead railway station is correct as this part of the Borough is more identified as South Croydon. Many years again, Sanderstead used to be part of Purley/Coulsdon, with Sanderstead Rail Station being at the boundary with South Croydon. I am sure it is a monumental exercise to undertake in redefining boundaries while maintaining community cohesion while maintaining electoral equality.

Kind regards.

Frederic Demay

Sandertead

1

Starkie, Emily

From: neville dick Sent: 06 May 2017 00:35 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Review.

Dear sir

Having lived in Croydon for 49 years. I feel very strongly that the boundaries are perfectly OK as they our.

In my humble opinion there is no point in changes for the sake of change.

Yours faithfully

Mr N S Dick

Get Outlook for iOS

1 Starkie, Emily

From: sandra dodgson Sent: 08 May 2017 11:20 To: reviews Subject: Proposed Ward Boundary Changes - Addiscombe West

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear Review officer (Croydon)

As a resident of more that 25 years, I wish to object to the Commission’s draft recommendations for my area, as the boundaries proposed do not reflect the community identity and interests of Addiscombe. Splitting Addiscombe across different wards goes against the principles on the LGBCE website.

The proposed boundaries extend well beyond those of the Addiscombe community to include Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate, areas that don’t have history or traditions with Addiscombe and don’t identify with the area. Also, the proposed changes cut across the existing transport links and don’t recognise the role of Addiscombe Road as a longstanding boundary recognised in previous boundary reviews over the past 90+ years. The proposed changes would result in the wards becoming less marginal something that is a democratic asset for our area.

I believe that our community would be better represented by having electoral boundaries that overlap with community boundaries. A proposal for two wards for Addiscombe, one of which would provide greater focus for Councillors to take action in our area, with the two being able to work together to continue to provide a coherent voice for the broader community of Addiscombe would be preferable.

Kind regards Sandra Dodgson (Ms)

Member of the Public ‐ Resident

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Steven Downes Sent: 08 May 2017 16:59 To: reviews Subject: Boundary review of Croydon

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to object to the proposed boundaries set out in the Commission’s draft recommendations for Croydon.

My overwhelming initial response was one of abject disappointment, in that the Commission appeared to have done little of its own, original work, and had instead appeared to have relied very heavily on the lobbying from one of two political parties, neither of which had been acting entirely in altruistic interest.

It is in exercises such as this that impartial and independent intervention is needed more than ever, especially when the two leading political groupings within Croydon are acting in self‐interest, and actually fail to represent a significant sized minority of residents in the borough.

Therefore, that the Commission’s initial submission, which has provoked this consultation, should so closely resemble those outlines provided by the Croydon Conservatives is very disappointing Such party biased proposals would serve the people of Croydon very badly if they were to be imposed. Given that the opportunity to conduct these reviews comes along so rarely, this is far too important an exercise for your agency to spurn by simply putting forward the proposals of one political group, for their electoral advantage.

Under the proposals submitted so far, communities or estates have been cut up into parts, in one case with various communities being placed with a splinter of another community that it is not even possible to reach on foot, let alone by car, without travelling outside the newly proposed ward.

My family and I have lived at our present address, on Southbridge Road, for 18 years. Before that, we lived on Avondale Road for almost a decade. My children have attended primary and secondary schools in the area, and I work in the area, and therefore we have a long‐developed appreciation that the area known as South Croydon has a distinctive community feel to it, and yet it has been split and divided between three different wards.

I therefore welcome the proposal to create a South Croydon ward which might better meet the Commission’s stated goals of providing electoral equality, reflecting the identities and interests of local communities, and promoting more effective local government.

However, I do feel that there are important adjustments which might be made to improve the proposals in this particular area.

As noted by the Commissioners, Waddon is already oversized – more voters compared to other wards ‐ in the proposals. By comparison, South Croydon is undersized. More lasting electoral equality can be achieved with minor changes to the proposed border of Waddon to transfer into South Croydon the whole of Pampisford Road and roads immediately off that road, and from the south‐side of Warham Road southwards. These parts of our local area more closely associate with South Croydon, and never consider themselves as part of Waddon.

1

The proposals set out above would enable the Commission’s argument around ‘Places’ and Croydon’s clear natural boundaries to be applied consistently across the borough, producing a set of proposals far more in keeping with the Commission’s three goals.

Yours sincerely,

______

STEVEN DOWNES

2

7th May 2017

Re: Proposed Boundary Change Proposal

Dear Sir/ Madam

I wish to object to the Commission’s recommendations for my area & I feel sure an alternative exists which could meet the Commission’s requirements and would also preserve the community of Addiscombe.

I and my family have lived in Addiscombe for 20 years. My children went to the local school, then Ashburton, now Oasis Academy. My granddaughter now attends Oasis Academy. My grandparents lived in Canning Road Addiscombe and I clearly remember visiting them there. We use the excellent local shops and the library. Addiscombe has a definite community ‘feel’ and many locals refer to it as ‘ Addiscombe Village ‘ . We have also made good use of Ashburton Park over the years and would be devastated if the park with its historic buildings were n longer an important part of Addiscombe. I feel I know Addiscombe well and am very fond of it.

The historic boundary has always been the Addiscombe Road and there seems to me a distinct change as you cross that road in housing types. Residents there use different shops and schools. We would have different needs to be represented to the council and therefore the voices of both areas would be diminished.

Yours faithfully

Linda Driver

7 May 2017 Dear Sir or Madam,

London Borough of Croydon Counter proposal for Bensham Manor ward and West Thornton ward

I write as a resident of Bensham Manor ward in LB Croydon since 1981. I have examined the draft proposals of the Local Government Boundary Commission, particularly their impact upon the above two wards. I have also examined the counter-proposal submitted by the six councillors who currently represent the electors in these wards.

The first question that arises is: are the changes to these two wards as set out in the LGBC draft proposals necessary? Each ward has long been represented by three councillors and it is an arrangement that is accepted and well-understood by local residents. The number of electors in these two wards is broadly similar. There appears to be no obvious requirement that the two wards need to sliced up in order to create three wards each represented by two councillors. It is therefore my view that the changes to the two wards in the draft proposals are unnecessary.

The second question is: are the proposed changes desirable? As a resident of Bensham Manor ward, I have long been familiar with its local identify and boundary. To me, it is geographically coherent and is based on clearly recognised edges in the built environment. Sub-division of the two existing wards into three new smaller wards appears to be arbitrary and would be less easily comprehended. I therefore consider that changes to the two existing wards in the draft proposals are undesirable.

In the light of the above, I write to lend my support to the counter-proposal submitted to the LGBC by the six councillors who represent the existing electors in these two wards. This appears to me to be well argued, soundly based and is likely to reflect the views of many people living in the diverse communities of these two wards.

Yours faithfully,

Peter Durrans

Electoral Review Officer: London Borough of Croydon Local Government Boundary Commission for England 14th Floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SW1P 4QP Starkie, Emily

From: Samir Dwesar Sent: 04 May 2017 21:27 To: reviews Subject: Submission to the Croydon electoral review - Samir DWESAR

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

To whom it may concern,

I write in support of the draft review from the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) in respect of warding arrangements for the London Borough of Croydon, and in particular the Purley, Purley Oaks and Riddlesdown and Sanderstead wards.

I have lived in Purley my whole life and my family home has been on since 1985.

For me, the proposal reflects my locality, respects natural boundaries and minimises confusion and the splitting of natural communities and relevant resident associations, such as the Purley and Woodcote Residents Association and the Sanderstead Residents Association are broadly supportive of the measure.

I understand that the draft scheme proposes the division of Purley into a western three-member ward of Purley and an eastern ward of Purley Oaks and Riddlesdown.

Under the Commission’s draft recommendations, the boundary would be immediately east to the town centre. This would ensure that the main shopping precinct is included within one ward, which is not presently the case. In addition, Woodcote (which was previously split between the Purley and Coulsdon West wards) will now be located in one ward. This change would be welcomed by both community groups and local residents.

Having a Purley Oaks and Riddlesdown ward is something that I supported in the previous consultation, and I am delighted that the Commission has opted to include this in their draft recommendations. This new ward would unite all of Riddlesdown thereby respecting local communities, and includes Purley Oaks Station, and the surrounding roads, which differ from other parts of Purley such as Woodcote.

For the majority of local residents, the natural boundary of Purley and Sanderstead begins at the Purley Downs Golf Club. I therefore welcome that under this proposal, this would be the boundary between Sanderstead ward and the new Purley Oaks and Riddlesdown ward.

I am pleased with the draft recommendations for Sanderstead ward, as it includes the parish of Sanderstead and now includes streets, which used to be in Croham and Selsdon and Ballards, were local residents considered themselves as part of Sanderstead. I have heard of circumstances in which residents of these roads have contacted the Sanderstead councillors as opposed to their actual councillors so this decision is very much welcomed.

It is also welcome news that Sanderstead Station would now be located within Sanderstead ward under this proposal. I have always thought it odd that Sanderstead station is in Croham. This is illogical, and Sanderstead Station must be located within Sanderstead ward. This would also ensure that the active Sanderstead Residents Association‘s definition of the village boundaries is properly respected.

Croydon Council has a ’16 places for Croydon’ plan. This identified in the core strategy as identified neighbourhoods that would be the areas ideally adopted by prospective neighbourhood forums. I strongly believe that the Commission’s proposal respects this plan, particularly in respect of residential character and natural boundaries.

I very much hope that my comments are taken on-board and I will follow developments of this review closely.

Yours faithfully,

Samir Dwesar

1 2

Starkie, Emily

From: Sent: 08 May 2017 18:15 To: reviews Subject: Boundary Consultation

We, Mr & Mrs Edwards and Pamela Wyman reside at We would like to be part of the South Croydon ward as this is our postal address and we are more connected to our community. we have been part of this community for the past 17 years.

Angela Edwards

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ This mail sent through http://www.easynetdial.co.uk

1

The Reviewing Officer for London Borough of Croydon Local Government Boundary Commission for England 14th Floor Millbank Tower Millbank London SW1P 4QP 8 May 2017 Dear Sir or Madam LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY REVIEW OF THE LONDON BOROUGH OF CROYDON - COMMENTS ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS I have lived in Croydon for the last 17 years and had lived in Croydon previously. The job I have had for the last 12 years means I am frequently working all around Croydon. I live in and have done for nearly 12 years. I believe that maintaining the ward boundaries in the New Addington area substantially unchanged is correct. I also agree that the ward names should be New Addington North and New Addington South. I do consider that the boundaries around the New Addington North should not be as tightly drawn as have been proposed. I would suggest the boundaries shown in the map below.

I have lived in different parts of Park Hill and continue to have many friends in this area. Park Hill is a very distinct community. The fact it has its own shops, church and primary school illustrates that. In addition, there are the two parks, Park Hill and Lloyd Park. When I lived there, it was delightful to take the dog for walks in these parks. Talking to others when walking the dog, it was clear that Park Hill in particular is used by residents of Park Hill almost exclusively. In Lloyd Park, there were always lots of local residents, although there were others who drove there from a larger catchment area. However, I can hardly ever recall coming across Addiscombe residents. In fact, the Addiscombe Road divide is, in terms of communities, a very clear-cut one. The style of housing is very different to the North and South of Addiscombe Road. It is also clear that the population mix is very different. For me Park Hill is the area from the railway to Lloyd Park, West to East and from Addiscombe Road to Coombe Road (a road I lived on for a while), North to South. Park Hill rolls naturally into Lloyd Park, Coombe Park and Shirley Hills. Park Hill deserves to be at the heart of a ward in its own right, not just an add-on of a larger ward as it has been for at least 40 years and as it would be under the Commission’s draft recommendations. For me, it is clear that Addiscombe goes from the railway in the West to and the Tollgate estate in the East, from the top of Davidson and Morland Road and the tramline in the North to the Addiscombe Road in the South. I understand that the Addiscombe Road has been a ward boundary for a century. I have referred to the Southern boundary above. In terms of the North, the CR0/SE25 boundary does mark a difference of where people associate with. In terms of the East, I have really enjoyed going to the Addiscombe Carnival in Ashburton Park. For me, this is so clearly Addiscombe. I have a number of friends who live in or near Shirley Road between Lower Addiscombe Road and Addiscombe Road, and they all tell me that, as far as they are concerned, there is no question but that they are Addiscombe residents.

I hope that the Commission will take on board these comments and revisit its proposals accordingly. Yours faithfully Robert Elliott Starkie, Emily

From: FERESHTEH EMAMI Sent: 01 May 2017 16:33 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Review

REF: Croydon Review

Dear Sir or Madam,

I have had the opportunity to study the proposals set out by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) with regard to my borough, Croydon.

I have lived in the London Borough of Croydon for more than 30 years and in my current home in Park Hill for 20 years. I have had an active interest in and have been a member of my local Residents' Association during this time.

I appreciate the amount of work done by the LGBCE and agree wholly with its proposal for my town. I find that your plan is suitable for the town and its growing population. It respects "hard" boundaries such as railway and tram lines, parks and roads.

If I were to make one change, it would be to change the name of Central Ward. While I agree with your proposed boundaries for this ward, the name can be confusing. Is this the same as the parliamentary constituency of Croydon Central? I believe a better name for this ward would be Fairfield. It is a nicer word and would be based on Fairfield Halls, which as you may be aware are undergoing major renovations at present, hopefully resulting in a state‐of‐the art venue we can all be proud of, which could well be the focus point of the new ward.

Once again, thank you for your hard work on this Review and thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Fereshteh Emami

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Phil Emson Sent: 08 May 2017 22:10 To: reviews Subject: Ward boundaries for Addiscombe

Dear Sir/Madam

I am writing to confirm my objections to the proposal to change ward boundaries in Addiscombe. I have lived in Addiscombe for 15 years and feel that the current boundaries reflect a clear geographic and community link within those wards. The proposed wards divide communities and link other areas of Croydon such as Park Hill which have no clear connection with Addiscombe.

Consequently, I would suggest a proposal that would create a separate Park Hill and Whitgift Estate ward so as to keep that community intact. A 2 councillor ward could be created for the East Croydon part of the current Addiscombe ward with the eastern boundary located between Clyde and Elgin Road. This would mean that the East India conservation area would remain within one ward.

A 3 Councillor ward could then be created for the rest of the existing Addiscombe ward. This would re-unite it with the rest of Addiscombe around the whole shopping parade and Ashburton Park, as far as the Ashburton playing fields which border Shirley.

Yours Sincerely

Philip Emson

1

I have lived in Addiscombe for over twenty years and feel that it is very much a community and not just an area in East Croydon. As such, I welcome the ward changes that you propose for Addiscombe East, where I live, and the surrounding wards. I think that the latest proposals are a far better reflection of the different communities and how they cohere and certainly reflect my own experiences of living in the area.

Most of my affiliations are in the area designated as Addiscombe East. The vast majority of my local friends are in this area and particularly those living, like me, on the Whitgift Estate. This is a close‐knit community with an active residents’ association, making representations on numerous occasions in respect of planning issues, transport, policing and amenities. Our local church is St Mildred’s, which sits on Bingham Rod. My children both attended ‘Millies’ playgroup and my daughter belonged to the Brownies, both of which were held in St Mildred’s Community Centre. Many of our friends in the area were formed through these activities.

I have always regarded Addiscombe Road shops as my local shopping area and I try and support them. The area has an increasingly strong community feel, with my husband and I regularly using the local cafes in preference to using the larger chains in East Croydon.

I am also a regular walker and frequently use the Mapledale Road access to Lloyd Park, which is at the end of my road. My walks often extend into Shirley Hills in the proposed neighbouring ward of Shirley South. I also make regular use of Trinity Sports Club gym and swimming pool, so feel some affiliation to this area too but recognise the need to create natural communities of similar size.

In contrast, Park Hill sits adjacent to the Whitgift Estate but to me it is an entirely different community. People speak of the Whitgift Estate and Park Hill as two distinct areas and identities. None of my local friends live in Park Hill and this is perhaps no accident; the two communities are different with separate ‘pulls’ and interests, so I think it is very natural to divide Addiscombe West & Park Hill and Addiscombe East into two wards. I also know a number of people who live North of Addiscombe Road and I have some very good friends who live in Elgin Road, which I view as part of my local area. The character and style of the houses are far more in keeping with those to the east of Elgin Road than the smaller properties which lie west of Elgin Road, so personally, it would seem sensible to include Elgin Road in Addiscombe East.

I have no other changes to suggest as I think that your proposals for Croydon seem sensible and to have effectively captured the distinct communities in the area.

8 May 2017

Re: Review of Local Government boundaries – London Borough of Croydon

Background information

I was born and grew up in North Croydon, and lived there until the age of 18. I moved with my family in 1970 to what is now the Fairfield Ward, living at successive addresses in the Park Hill area: Turnpike Link, Chichester Road and Green Acres. In 1993, I moved to my current address in the Addiscombe Ward. This submission deals with proposals relating to the current Addiscombe and Ashburton Wards and also the area comprised in the current Fairfield Ward.

When I lived in Park Hill, I was a member of the Park Hill Residents’ Association. I was a LEA appointed Governor of Archbishop Tenison’s Church of England High School in Selborne Road, Park Hill from 1987-91 and of St Mary’s Roman Catholic High School in Woburn Road, Central Croydon, also from 1987-1991.

I served four terms as a councillor for Addiscombe between 1986 and 2002. I was Chair of Governors of Oval Primary School in Cherry Orchard Road between 1991 and 2007. I was also a governor of Ashburton Primary School (located in the current Ashburton Ward) from 1987-1991. I was a LEA appointed governor for both schools. I served as a Council-nominated Trustee of the Sir Philip Game Centre in Morland Road from 1986-1990 and from 1998-2006. In this latter period, I was Vice Chair of the committee of Trustees.

After my retirement as a councillor in 2002, I served from 2002 to 2004 as Chair of the Council’s Addiscombe, Woodside and Ashburton Neighbourhood Partnership. (In 2001, the Council set up ten Neighbourhood Partnerships for the purpose of involving residents in decision-making. Each partnership was comprised of two or three local government wards.)

I am an active member of the East Croydon Community Organisation (“ECCO”), currently acting as their “Clean and Green Street Champion” in which capacity I organise community clean-up days and seek to promote campaigning on local environmental issues.

1

The LGBCE proposal for Addiscombe West and Park Hill and Addiscombe West

I have read with care the LGBCE’s preliminary proposals. I am extremely concerned that these proposals seek to tie together quite distinct areas and communities across the Addiscombe Road on the basis of evidence which is thin, partial and selective. My knowledge of the Park Hill area is set out in my comments at page one above and page five below in support of the creation of a Lloyd Park ward.

I have read in draft the submission of one of my ward councillors, Sean Fitzsimons. The first eight years of Cllr Fitzsimons’ service as councillor overlapped with my last eight years. Between us, we have given 35 years of service as councillors for the Addiscombe ward.

I strongly concur with Cllr Fitzsimons’ scholarly and comprehensive submission that the Addiscombe Road should remain as a ward boundary for the reasons he sets out. I merely add one supporting point of my own, which I suggest is a telling piece of evidence. In the period that I was Chair of the Addiscombe, Woodside and Ashburton Neighbourhood Partnership, covering an area in which over 40,000 people live, there was never any suggestion from any individual, community group or political party of any colour that the Neighbourhood Partnership should include residents from the southern side of the Addiscombe Road. Equally, there was never any representation from any individual or community group or political party of any political colour from the southern side of the Addiscombe Road that they were misplaced in the Fairfield, Heathfield and Shirley Neighbourhood Partnership, and would be more appropriately placed with those living in the area to their north. (These Neighbourhood Partnerships continued in existence until 2011, when they were dissolved by the Council for financial reasons.)

Where I differ from Councillor Fitzsimons and the proposal set out by the Council’s majority group is that Addiscombe should be divided into a two-member western ward and a three-member eastern ward.

I am concerned that this proposal gives excessive weight to the view of some residents who live close to , and feel a sense of living in a specific East Croydon community to the north of the Addiscombe Road. I live extremely close to East Croydon Station myself, and understand such a view.

But it is only be about 25% of those in the proposed Addiscombe West ward who have quite a strong sense of living in East Croydon. These are people living in an area bounded by Addiscombe Road to the south, Oval Road to the north, Cherry Orchard Road to the west and Clyde Road to the east.

That leaves 75% of residents of the proposed Addiscombe West ward living on the Lower Addiscombe Road and immediately to the north and south of the Lower Addiscombe Road who to the best of my knowledge do not have any great sense of living in East Croydon. They do not have residents’ associations seeking to speak for them. I am concerned that a forced marriage may be in store for these 75% of residents of Addiscombe West. The LGBCE need to consider how much weight ought properly to be given to views expressed on behalf of the 25%.

2

My neighbours and I who identify with East Croydon continue at the same time to retain a strong Addiscombe connection. We shop in the Lower Addiscombe Road, where there is a large Co-op and a specialist butcher and fishmonger and a myriad of hardware shops and florists which you do not get in Central Croydon, and we buy our takeaways there. We get our petrol in the “Tesco garage” at the corner of Leslie Park and Lower Addiscombe Roads.

An alternative proposal for the place of Addiscombe

I propose that the Addiscombe area is divided into two wards which retain as far as possible the status quo which has endured for a century. Retention of a status quo is not in itself a criterion which the LGBCE has set. However, where the status quo reflects – as it does in this area – the continuing existence of distinct and cohesive communities, the LGBCE may properly consider that one of its two most important criteria is brought into play, and be slow to replace something which is known and understood without very strong reason.

In putting forward this proposal, I take into account and indeed broadly adopt the statement of my M.P., , in his oral submission to the Parliamentary Boundary Commissioners:

“My third point would be that the Addiscombe and Ashburton wards go together because the community of Addiscombe sits between those two wards. The district centre runs along a road called Lower Addiscombe Road and about half of it is in the Addiscombe ward and half of it is in the Ashburton ward. Th Addiscombe tram stop, which is about as close as you can get to the centre of the community, actually sits on the ward boundary between those two wards. The Ashburton ward contains the Addiscombe and Spring Park Residents’ Association.”

The proposal which I set out takes account of Mr Barwell’s point that the centre of the place of Addiscombe is close to the Addiscombe tram stop. (There is obviously no exact location for the centre of the place of Addiscombe.)

I invite the LGBCE to create a three-member Addiscombe West ward with the following boundaries:

 On the southern side, the Addiscombe Road from Cherry Orchard Road to Ashburton Road  On the eastern side the tram line at the corner of Lower Addiscombe Road, then along the southern side of the Lower Addiscombe Road itself up to where it is opposite Inglis Road, and then along the western side of Inglis Road across the junction between Highbarrow Road and Grant Road, up through the area to the east of Windermere Road and Amberley Grove and Gowlland Close up to the junction of Morland Road and Blackhorse Lane  On the northern side from the junction of Morland Road and Blackhorse Lane, above the northern end of Meadvale Road and western side of Northway Road and northern side of Beckford Road through the junction between Canal Walk and Towpath Way to the railway line

3

 On the western side the railway line from just west of the Canal Walk and Towpath Way junction down to East Croydon Station

The advantages of that which I propose are as follows:

(i) it is numerically satisfactory – about 12,400 electors for a three-member ward;

(ii) it is respectful of the boundaries of the community of Addiscombe as identified by many community members and community groups, not least the Conservative Member of Parliament and the Labour councillors;

(iii) many of the boundaries (i.e. the Addiscombe Road, the tram line and the railway line) are extremely strong, and the others are satisfactory;

(iv) although the boundary on the northern and part of the eastern side is weaker than the others, it is based on the boundary of the Addiscombe West and Park Hill ward proposed by the LGBCE itself, and is clearly a viable boundary, therefore;

(v) it is as co-extensive with the current boundaries of the Addiscombe ward as it is possible to get taking into account the numerical criterion;

(vi) (following from the preceding point), it maintains as far as it is feasible to do so the well-understood status quo which has endured satisfactorily for nearly a century, and which reflects community connectivity;

(vii) it keeps Morland Road in one ward;

(viii) the East India conservation area is retained in one ward;

(ix) the Addiscombe shopping parade from Inglis Road eastwards is retained in one ward, i.e. Addiscombe East. (For the distance of about 100 metres, there would be a section of the southern side of Lower Addiscombe Road in Addiscombe East, and the same distance on the opposite side of the Lower Addiscombe Road (where there are no retail outlets) in Addiscombe West.)

In the event that the LGBCE reject that which I am submitting, I support the impressively evidenced proposal advanced by Councillor Sean Fitzsimons.

The complementary two-member Addiscombe East ward which I would ask the LGBCE to consider would be circumscribed by the same northern, southern and eastern boundaries as those shown by Cllr Fitzsimons, but would not extend to the west of the tramline save for a small area bounded on the south by Lower Addiscombe Road from the junction of Inglis Road to the tramline and including the following roads to the north of that up to Dalmally Road, and including Addiscombe Avenue, Camborne Road, Capri Road, Coniston Road, Dalmally Road, Everton Road, Inglis Road (eastern side), Highbarrow Road and Sundridge Road.

4

Such a ward would constitute a cohesive community reflective of the eastern area of the place of Addiscombe. The housing in the roads immediately to the west of the tramline and north of the Lower Addiscombe Road is constituted of the same mixture of semi-detached and terraced houses mainly of a pre-world war two vintage as characterises the parallel and adjacent roads to the east of the tramline.

Such a ward would be numerically acceptable, containing as it would about 8,050 electors. It would ensure that the Addiscombe traders conducting their business in the District Centre from the junction of Inglis Road with Lower Addiscombe Road to the western extent of that District Centre would be able to put forward common interests to the same set of councillors.

Proposed Lloyd Park Ward

I set out my personal knowledge of the Park Hill area in paragraph two of page one above.

Further, I continued to have an active interest in the Park Hill area after I moved to Addiscombe, as my parents continued to live in Maybourne Grange, Turnpike Link, CR0 5NH. My sister and I eventually sold my parents’ flat in 2015.

I have read carefully the LGBCE proposals for Croydon.

I support the creation of a Central Ward on the proposed boundaries. It is broadly co- extensive with the ward which existed until Croydon became a London borough. The ward was depopulated in the 1960s during the transformation of Central Croydon into a commercial centre, and is now being repopulated. The residents of this soon- to-be densely-populated area certainly comprise a distinctive community.

The community of Park Hill has much in common with that of the Whitgift Estate to the east, and also with residents of the roads to the south between the Coombe Road and the Croham Road, an area which is effectively South Park Hill, and indeed South Park Hill Road has two bus routes going down it linking Croham and Coombe Roads. These roads were part of the Fairfield Ward from its inception until the conclusion of the 1999 Local Government review of Croydon. There was no demand at that time from the residents themselves to be taken away from Fairfield/Park Hill.

There is a significant social congruence between the communities of the Whitgift Estate, Park Hill and South Park Hill. There is an extremely high proportion of owner occupation. The preferred state primary school is Park Hill Juniors in Stanhope Road. The many who own dogs walk their dogs in Lloyd Park. They tend to shop in Central Croydon, and those who commute use East Croydon Station as their starting-point. Many of those who are members of the Church of England worship at St Matthew’s Church in Chichester Road.

5

Park Hill has its own estate agents, Pedders. Pedders are the successor agency to Wates, who were the builders of the Park Hill estate, and who for many years also were estate agents. When my sister and I sold our parents’ flat, we used Pedders, the specialists for the area. The fact that a community has its own specialist estate agency highlights that it is quite a strong and distinctive community.

I invite the LGBCE, therefore, to create a ward which includes the Park Hill, Whitgift and South Park Hill areas, bounded on the north by the southern side of Addiscombe Road, bounded on the south by the northern side of Coombe Road, bounded on the west by the railway line, and bounded on the east by the eastern boundary of the Whitgift Estate and Conduit Lane. I support the idea that such a ward be named Lloyd Park ward, because Lloyd Park is environmentally the important feature of the ward, there is a Lloyd Park tramstop and in order to commemorate the name of the family who gave the land to the people of Croydon.

I have spoken in recent weeks to several friends who live in Park Hill and are members of the Park Hill Residents’ Association. None consider themselves to live in the place of Addiscombe or to have a significant identity of interest with those who live in the place of Addiscombe. They identify far more closely with the Whitgift Estate.

The Lloyd Park Ward would constitute a cohesive community. This community formed the Eastern part of the Fairfield Ward between 1965 when Croydon became a London borough and 1999. The ward would also be numerically acceptable as on projected population figures for 2022 there be would be nearly 8,300 electors.

Yours sincerely

Jerry Fitzpatrick

6

Starkie, Emily

From: Madeleine Fitzsimons Sent: 02 May 2017 20:45 To: reviews Subject: Disagree

I strongly disagree with the new boundary proposals and would be very dissapointed as resident of Addiscombe if the new boundaries goes ahead. I have lived here for 13 years and are very pleased how the local community is working and I can't see any benefits of possible changes.

Regards Madeleine Fitzsimons

Sent from my iPhone

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Ellen Forrester Sent: 07 May 2017 21:13 To: reviews Subject: proposed changes to Addiscombe Ward boundaries

My husband and I have been residents of Addiscombe for 31 years, raising two children, now adults. As such we are very much at home here and know well all that Addiscombe offers, I therefore feel qualified to comment on the proposed boundary changes.

My key objection to the proposed changes to Addiscombe Ward boundaries is Elgin Road, that is part of the East India Conservation Area and represented by the well established and active HOME RA, is not in the same ward as the rest of the HOME RA ward. It seems that the Davidson Road and Park Hill communities are illogically lumped in with the Addiscombe when they are communities in their own right. And the logical Southerly boundary has got to be Addiscombe Road.

I look forward to your response on this matter.

Yours sincerely Ellen Forrester

1

Starkie, Emily

From: Lisa Francis Sent: 06 May 2017 22:35 To: reviews Subject: Croydon Neighbourhood boundary consultation

> > Dear Review Officer > > I wish to object to the commission's draft recommendations for Addiscombe. I feel the boundaries proposed do not reflect our local interests. > > I would like to propose an alternative which I feel meets local interests better and also meets the commission's requirements for electoral equality. > > The community boundary and the electoral boundary has always ended at Addiscombe road. The boundaries proposed for the Addiscombe wards extend well beyond what has been considered the Addiscombe neighbourhood. For example, Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate Aren't in Addiscombe and do not identify with our area. > > Addiscombe enjoys entirely independent facilities for shopping, educating children etc. The community has organically formed this way. Bundling the two separate areas together ignores the fact that they have different types of housing and different needs. > > I feel the draft proposal will diminish the voice of both areas. I think the electoral boundaries need to overlap with community boundaries. This way the community would be best represented. > > This could be accommodated through one two‐member ward and one there‐member ward, with the southern boundary remaining at its historic location of Addiscombe Road and taking the Tollgate estate to the North, the entrance to which is located on the Addiscombe ‐side of the signs advertising that drivers are entering Addiscombe. > > A new two member ward could then be formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Eatate and the other low density housing around the parks, ensuring the common interests of that community are represented on the council. > > Kind regards, > > Lisa Francis > >

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Andrew Frazer Sent: 19 March 2017 18:26 To: reviews Subject: Re:- Purley Wards

Good morning

I very much support the draft recommendations you have e‐mailed to me in respect of the boundary proposals for South ‐West Croydon and in particular the Purley wards. I believe this to be a very good proposal for Croydon and should be adopted please.

Best regards Andrew Frazer

‐‐‐ This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Daniel Sent: 04 May 2017 20:33 To: reviews Subject: Boundary Review Submission regarding Addiscombe

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

84 Grant Road Addiscombe Croydon

CR0 6PG

To whom it may concern,

I am writing to object to the Commission’s draft recommendations for my area, which do not reflect the makeup of Addiscombe and the needs of its residents. I live in and have lived in several other addresses locally, including on Addiscombe Road and Coniston Road, and went to Woodside Primary School.

The ward boundaries which have been proposed to cover Addiscombe extend well beyond the area normally understood as such, into Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate. I have relatives who live in Park Hill, and I am well aware that they are dramatically different areas. It is extremely unlikely that we would cross paths whilst doing the shopping, for example, because nearby transport networks are primarily lateral (e.g. Lower Addiscombe Road, Addiscombe Road, Coombe Road) and not longitudinal. Whilst residents of Addiscombe look towards the shopping areas on Lower Addiscombe Road, with the difficult‐to‐cross Addiscombe Road as the community’s historic boundary, Park Hill residents are more likely to be centred on Coombe Road and utilities in South Croydon. Similarly, I am heavily dependent upon the tram network, like many other residents of Addiscombe and unlike many of those who live further away in Park Hill.

Consequently, I visit a barber on Lower Addiscombe Road and use the nearby shops; my relatives visit barbershops in central Croydon. As previously mentioned I went to Woodside Primary School and also attended the nursery school on Tunstall Road. Parents who live in Park Hill do not usually send their children to Addiscombe. The properties sold in both areas are very different, and people living in Addiscombe (including myself) are more likely to commute into other areas of south London.

I would be extremely concerned about an electoral rearrangement which compromises the integrity of Addiscombe’s natural community, and which would potentially force councillors to place the interests of Park Hill above those of Addiscombe. I have discussed this matter with my relatives in Park Hill and they feel equally worried about the prospect of the reverse situation. Both areas require a distinct voice on the council.

I believe that this can be achieved through an alternative proposal, which would maintain Addiscombe Road as the southern electoral boundary. By splitting Addiscombe into a two‐councillor ward and a three‐councillor ward (the former including the Tollgate Estate, which naturally would be included within the Addiscombe community), and establishing the areas around Lloyd Park and Park Hill Park (including the Whitgift Estate) as a separate two‐ councillor ward, the Commission would ensure that the distinctive character of each area is adequately represented.

1 This would also mean avoiding the break‐up of local residents’ associations, which would hinder local people’s ability to hold their representatives to account.

I hope that my concerns will be considered and look forward to hearing of the outcome of this consultation.

Yours sincerely, Daniel Frost

2 Starkie, Emily

From: Tony Frost Sent: 04 May 2017 12:48 To: reviews Subject: Addiscombe Boundaries

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Dear Sir/Madam

I feel that I should email as I have heard about the draft recommendations for boundary changes in Addiscombe. I spent the majority of my life, up to the age of 40, in the area and still have family and friends who we visit regularly, I also return daily for my work. We lived in Coniston and Dalmally Roads, my son lives in and we know people through the whole area, including clients of my local business. My wife and I went to school in the area as well as both our children who went to Woodside. Our children attended local clubs including cubs and brownies; they were Christened at St Mildred’s in Bingham Road. We always feel that Addiscombe is a very friendly, self sufficient community with its own shops, schools and services. The boundaries have been in place for nearly a century and it seem unnecessary to extend past the current Addiscombe Road boundary. Including Park Hill and the Lloyds park area means that Addiscombe will not be fully represented as these proposed areas will have conflicting values to those of the community.

The difference in property value is massive and residents of the proposed additional areas will have contrary values and priorities. Transport systems run through Addiscombe, not into Park Hill and Whitgift, the proposed areas do not rely on our shops, schools and facilities. I am sure that both areas will be better served if kept separate, neither will feel that the new terms give them a true voice on the council.

I believe that the community boundaries should match the electoral ones with the historic location of Addiscombe Road forming the southern boundary and allowing Park Hill to have its own ward to represent their residents priorities.

Another concern is policing, as including the proposed areas is likely to deflect attention away from Addiscome itself. We were unfortunately burgled in both our homes, the police were stretched enough without being concerned with looking after our more affluent neighbours in Whitgift.

I would like to think that these proposals will be considered and reflected on, leading to a more sensible outcome for all local residents.

Regards

Tony Frost

1 Starkie, Emily

From: Fuller, David Sent: 08 May 2017 08:30 To: reviews Subject: Objection to the proposed boundary changes for Addiscombe

Dear Sirs, I am writing to object to the draft recommendations to change the proposed boundaries for Addiscombe. I cannot see that the proposed changes help to improve the coherence and interests of the local area.

I have lived in Croydon in various wards for nearly forty years and I am familiar with the individual identities, the ‘feel’, the interests and style of community in various different parts of the borough. For the past seventeen years I have lived in Addiscombe, my children have been to school here, we have attended clubs and activities, used libraries and parks, shopped, socialised and played sport in the area. Addiscombe is very different from Park Hill and Whitgift and deserves its own representation. Throwing these areas together ignores each area's different needs for representation on the council and is as important to Whitgift and Park Hill as it is to Addiscombe.

Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate are not part of Addiscombe. They are distinct, separate areas with their own communities and identities. They do not belong together in any way. Each area has its own facilities – schools, shops, places of worship, styles of housing, interests and community ‘feel’ and needs its own representation. For instance Addiscombe has its own unique issues – the Lesley Arms, the desperate parade of shops on the Lower Addiscombe Road and fly tipping at the end of Alexandra Road to name but a few. If the three boroughs were to be brought together it is my concern that these local issues will be lost amid other broader issues and we will all suffer as a consequence.

A better alternative, which reflects local identities while meeting the need for electoral equality, and effective and convenient local government, would be for the electoral boundaries to overlap with the community boundaries.

This could be accommodated through one two‐member ward and one three‐member ward, with the southern boundary remaining at Addiscombe Road and incorporating the Tollgate Estate to the north, the entrance to which is located on the Addiscombe side of the signs advertising that drivers are entering Addiscombe.

This would recognise that all the major road, tram and bus routes run through the area, preserve Ashburton Park as a historic part of the community and avoid splitting up the ASPRA residents’ association.

A new two‐member ward could then be formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Estate and the other housing around the parks, ensuring the common interests of that community are represented on the council.

Yours truly,

Dave Fuller Addiscombe resident

This e-mail message, and any attachment, are intended only for and are confidential to the addressee. Any views expressed in this e-mail message or in any attachment are solely those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Brewin Dolphin Holdings Plc or Brewin Dolphin Limited. If you are neither the addressee, nor an authorised recipient from the addressee, please notify us of receipt, delete this message from your computer system, and do not use, copy or disseminate the information in or attached to it in any way.

We do not accept liability to any person other than the intended addressee who acts or refrains from acting on any information in this e-mail message or any attachment.

Though our e-mail messages are checked for viruses, we do not accept liability for any viruses which may be transmitted by, through, with or in this e-mail message. Recipients are expected to take their own steps to ensure that e-mail messages are checked for, and free from, viruses. 2 Starkie, Emily

From: Sent: 07 May 2017 14:38 To: reviews Subject: Objection to the proposed boundary changes for Addiscombe

I am writing to object to the draft recommendations to change the proposed boundaries for Addiscombe. I cannot see that the proposed changes help to improve the coherence and interests of the local area.

I have lived in Croydon in various wards for over forty years and I am familiar with the individual identities, the ‘feel’, the interests and style of community in various different parts of the borough. For the past seventeen years I have lived in Addiscombe, my children have been to school here, we have attended clubs and activities, used libraries and parks, shopped and socialised in the area. Addiscombe is very different from Park Hill and Whitgift and deserves its own representation. Throwing these areas together ignores each area's different needs for representation on the council and is as important to Whitgift and Park Hill as it is to Addiscombe.

Park Hill and the Whitgift Estate are not part of Addiscombe. They are distinct, separate areas with their own communities and identities. They do not belong together in any way. Each area has its own facilities – schools, shops, places of worship, styles of housing, interests and community ‘feel’ and needs its own representation.

A better alternative, which reflects local identities while meeting the need for electoral equality, and effective and convenient local government, would be for the electoral boundaries to overlap with the community boundaries.

This could be accommodated through one two-member ward and one three-member ward, with the southern boundary remaining at Addiscombe Road and incorporating the Tollgate Estate to the north, the entrance to which is located on the Addiscombe side of the signs advertising that drivers are entering Addiscombe.

This would recognise that all the major road, tram and bus routes run through the area, preserve Ashburton Park as a historic part of the community and avoid splitting up the ASPRA residents’ association.

A new two-member ward could then be formed of Park Hill, the Whitgift Estate and the other housing around the parks, ensuring the common interests of that community are represented on the council.

Yours truly,

Vanessa Fuller Addiscombe resident

1