Local residents submissions to the Royal Borough of and Chelsea electoral review.

This PDF document contains 44 submissions from local residents with surnames beginning A-L.

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

Click on the submission you would like to view. If you are not taken to that page, please scroll through the document.

Lawrence, Arion

From: Waller, Matthew Sent: 06 June 2013 16:54 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Campden Ward

From: Tim Ahern [mailto: Sent: 06 June 2013 16:59 To: Reviews@ Subject: Campden Ward

Dear Sirs

I write to lodge my approval for the proposed new Campden ward.

The new boundaries are now concise – to the west and Hyde Park to the east. It’s simple to describe, easy to understand and reverts to the Campden ward boundaries of some decade ago.

Yours faithfully

Tim Ahern

1

Elena Anikeeva

Member of the public

29/05/2013 09:54

"Dear Sirs

I am against abolition of Brompton Ward in general. And, I am against the area where I live (the part of opposite the Science and Natural History Museums, and Princes Gate Mews), which is currently part of Brompton Ward, being assigned to Queens Gate Ward"". My objections are based on the following:

1) Brompton Ward reflects the historic and traditional boundaries of a long standing community which is part of and - not Queensgate/Kensington. Our nearest bus and tube link directly to South Kensington station and Knightsbridge, including the pedestrian tunnel opposite my home that leads directly to South Kensington tube station. And, geographically, we are in South Kensington/Knightsbridge. These proposals therefore do not reflect local interests and identities.

2) Our area has nothing in common with Queensgate/ and the Councillors for ""Queensgate Ward"" will be more interested the main and western end of their Ward which is dominated by Kensington High Street. Voters in our area will be seriously disadvantaged by being split from the rest of Knightsbridge and South Kensington and represented by Councillors whose main interests lie elsewhere. These proposals therefore do not deliver electoral equality for voters.

3) All the residents in the current Brompton Ward are facing common issues “pressure for longer licensing hours, litter, alcohol-fuelled disruption, late night noise, etc. As an example, splitting the north part of Exhibition Rd from the south (when events frequently take place on both parts at the same time) makes no sense logically or logistically. These proposals therefore will not promote effective and local government.

If, however, Brompton Ward must be abolished, I request that our area (the part of Exhibition Road opposite the Science and Natural History Museum and Princes Gate Mews) be made part of Hans Town ward• so that common issues facing us in Knightsbridge and South Kensington can be addressed by the same Councillors.

Thank you. Yours faithfully

E Anikeeva

Katharina Auer

Member of the public

17/05/2013 14:10

I object to the proposal - Brompton Ward needs to remain. Roger Baresel

Member of the public

27/05/2013 16:06

"I am opposed to the abolition of Brompton Ward, which has served local residents well for many years. The reallocation of residents under the new scheme does not reflect the historical make-up of the local communities.

There are many issues around South Kensington station that require the attention of the councillors, and reducing the number is unlikely to speed the resolution of these problems.

It is well known that RBK&C is one of the most densely populated areas in the country, and a reduction of ward representatives is unlikely to serve the needs of this growing community."

Lawrence, Arion

From: Waller, Matthew Sent: 21 May 2013 13:01 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Consultation on Brompton Ward

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Camilla Barker [mailto: Sent: 21 May 2013 11:17 To: Reviews@ Subject: Consultation on Brompton Ward

> I am, with my partner, a resident in Sumner Place, and am writing in that capacity to oppose the abolition of Brompton Ward. The ward reflects the development of the area over many years, and its abolition will in effect break up a cohesive unit ‐ an unfortunate move which will badly affect the ward's sense of community and its identity. > > Our three councillors have worked hard to serve the community, and I'm not convinced that removing them will delivery any electoral 'equality for voters'; nor will it 'promote...convenient local government'. On the contrary, this move seems to me to be driven by a desire to cut costs no matter what the impact on the community. Amalgamating the ward with others on a piecemeal basis (do the museums really have much in common with Queensgate or Kensington High Street?) will do nothing either for the businesses or for the residents. > > Kind regards, > > Dr Camilla Barker >

1

Simon Blanchflower

Member of the public

10/04/2013 20:04 I made a submission during the original consultation period and would like to welcome the draft recommendations that have recently been published, particular those that relate to NW Kensington. I believe that the ward boundaries and names are representative of the both the historic and current communities that exist. The proposed ward of Notting Dale has a clear local identity that many of the local voluntary and community organisations that are based in it would recognise. The southern boundary of this proposed ward that runs to the south of Wilsham Street is a clear boundary in the same way that the , and Clarendon Road are and will aid effective representation by local councillors. Lawrence, Arion

From: Waller, Matthew Sent: 05 June 2013 14:20 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: electoral review RBKC - abolition Brompton Ward

From: Claire Brisby [mailto: On Behalf Of Claire Brisby Sent: 05 June 2013 13:37 To: Reviews@ Subject: electoral review RBKC - abolition Brompton Ward

The Review Officer: Re: electoral review of the Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea As resident property-owners in at the heart of South Kensington in the Borough of Kensington & Chelsea, we write with our objections to the recommended proposal to eliminate the Brompton Ward. The reasons are simply as follows: - The proposed fragmentation of the Brompton Ward and amalgamation into neighbouring wards undermines the objective of the recent and major urban re-development of Exhibition Road now featuring as a main artery of the Brompton Ward and the natural culmination of centuries of historic community development with a generically coherent local identity.

- The Brompton Ward is currently served by a team of committed councillors effectively representing the concerns of the local electorate and la core number of local associations equally efficiently promoting local issues arise from pressures of commercial development on the interests of residents, retailers and recreational/educational institutions in the form of three of 's major museums, central London's largest entertainment hall the Albert Hall and one of the country's leading ccentres of scientific learing at Imperial College.

We entirely endorse the detailed argument objecting to the loss of Brompton Ward addressed to you by letter on 14 May by the Chairman of the Brompton Association and trust that on the evidence of the strongly consistent objection from the Brompton Ward, this proposed boundary review will be withdrawn as inappropriate and invalid. We also expect to hear from you about progress in this matter. Yours sincerely Claire and John Brisby

1

Philip Carraro

Member of the public

22/03/2013 18:22

The re-sizing of the Ward boundaries seems to be a function of reducing the number of councillors, which I would agree with. However, splitting Onslow Square from the rest of the Onslow residential areas does not make sense as we have common interests and this change would complicate our dealing with one voice on issues. Could not the boundary be moved east to the B304 and around the Underground Station and along Harrington Road? regards,

Phil Carraro,

Karen Clark

Member of the public

22/04/2013 17:51 I live in Pembridge Ward. You have taken a piece of it and put into Colville which has a lot of council housing and the largest number of hostels for homeless and vulnerable people. The bit you have taken away from Pembridge does not make sense as the Westbourne Grove boundary was a logical one. Most housing within Pembridge is owned and middle class, this is not the case for Colville. Lawrence, Arion

From: Sent: 29 May 2013 11:04 To: Reviews@ Cc: Lawrence, Arion Subject: Fwd: Proposed Brompton Ward Changes

URGENT, FOR THE ATTENTION OF THE REVIEW OFFICER

Dear Sirs,

Re: Proposed Boundary Changes & obliteration of Brompton Ward

It is with emphatic objection that I write about the proposed dissolving of Brompton Ward from The Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea; by splitting the Brompton Ward between, Queen's Gate Ward, Courtfield Ward & Hans Town Ward. My reasoning being:

1: The north-west area of Brompton Ward has completely different requirements from Queen's Gate & Kensington High Street. Brompton Ward's needs would not be well served by annexing it from a great part of South Kensington & Knightsbridge.

2: Brompton Ward's boundaries are of an historic nature, encompassing; historically & today, a community that shares each other's interests.

3: It is, frankly, in my opinion, not in any way established that this move would "deliver electoral equality for voters" or "reflect local interests and identities" as well as promoting "effective and convenient local government". I, in fact, hold the opposite to be true as the proposal is, to merge the Brompton Ward into other

1 Wards that do not have the same needs or priorities.

4: Brompton Ward's differences being that we are situated in a Conservation & a Residential area which also encompasses . Harrods being the main cause for our social disorder, (the well publicised & documented noisy fast cars driving throughout the area), the litter, parking violations beggars etc…….

We have many Grade I & Grade II listed buildings including those under Article 4 located in Knightsbridge that need a firm hand in the matter of protection from spurious planning applications by avaricious developers & foreign investors, for which urgent action has to be taken before we completely lose what is left of the already partly eroded charm of this 'hanging-in-the-balance' locality!

Brompton Ward simply must be kept in tact. We have 3 councillors, dedicated ones. all of whom are very much needed to take care of the considerable amount of work involved in order to support local residents' plus small business' interests.

It is imperative, therefore, that the proposal to abolish Brompton Ward be REFUSED. I sincerely trust this will definitely be the case.

Yours faithfully,

Vanessa Clyde (Mrs.)

2

Sarah Curtis

Member of the public

19/04/2013 15:50 I agree that it is more logical for the area where I live to be in Campden Ward instead of Holland Ward, thus reverting to the position when we first came to live in the area (1960). It makes a more homogeneous area for the Councillors to represent, covering the whole area of the Phillimore Estate which has no other streets in Holland Ward. Lawrence, Arion

From: Waller, Matthew Sent: 11 June 2013 09:04 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Kensington and Chelsea - Proposed Dalgarno Ward Name

From: Olivia Dando [mailto: Sent: 10 June 2013 21:17 To: Reviews@ Subject: Kensington and Chelsea - Proposed Dalgarno Ward Name

 VIEWPOINT: There is a stronger case for calling the ward ‘ST QUINTIN’ instead of ‘Dalgarno’ as follows:

 The re‐warding resulted in the loss of the name ‘St Charles’ to the neighbouring ward and the end of the heritage name ‘Notting Barns’. However, it also provided the chance to choose a new name.  Yet, the chief historic name which residents still associate with the area today – ‘St Quintin’ – has been overlooked in favour of ‘Dalgarno’ and this seems an unusual decision.  For the majority of the ward is built on the former ‘St Quintin Estate’ (1769) and much lies in the ‘Oxford Gardens/St Quintin Conservation Area’. What is more, the prominent ‘St Quintin Avenue’ demarcates the ward’s boundary whilst ‘St Quintin Gardens’ lies at its well‐known, triangular focal point plus the substantial William Sutton Housing estate is called ‘St Quintin Park’.  Significantly, ‘St Quintin’ is a generic name that residents continue to strongly connect with the area today. This was most recently illustrated with the 2013 launch of ‘St Quintin and Woodlands’ Neighbourhood Area and Forum which traverses the ward (‘St Quintin’ being the name chosen by residents to designate the Kensington and Chelsea section of the area.)  As ‘St Quintin’ has become something of an area label as well as historically linking various sectors of the ward together from the Kensington Gasworks site to the Dalgarno Neighbourhood and the terraced streets beyond, I think it is a more inclusive choice of ward‐name than ‘Dalgarno’.  For ‘Dalgarno’ tends to relate to one specific sector of the ward only – the high‐ density ‘Dalgarno Neighbourhood’ – but the name ‘Dalgarno’ regrettably seems to have little or no connection with any other sectors of the ward. And, as already noted, the ‘Dalgarno Neighbourhood’ itself stands on a piece of the former ‘St Quintin Estate’ with the William Sutton Housing estate section named ‘St Quintin Park’.  In summary, I would respectfully ask in your deliberations to consider ‘St Quintin’ as a superior choice of ward name to ‘Dalgarno’ as it better represents the wider ward;

1 connects with residents; would synchronize with the Neighbourhood Area, Forum and Plan; matches an estate plus two high visibility roads and would maintain historical continuity – continuity which, now that ‘Notting Barns’ has gone – would otherwise be lost altogether from the ward names in this part of .

O Dando (local resident)

2 Louise Degenhardt

Member of the public

23/03/2013 12:43

The Onslow Estate should all be in the same Ward for the benefit of residents who are active in community affairs organized as residents of the entire Onslow Estate. Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 22 May 2013 16:38 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Brompton ward

From: alexia [mailto:a Sent: 22 May 2013 16:09 To: Reviews@ Subject: FW: Brompton ward

Dear Sirs, I understand that the Boundary Commission is considering the abolition of the Brompton Ward. We strongly object for many different reasons. The Brompton ward is historically part of the heart of the South kensington develeopment; ie the tube, the museums etc. If you split it up, we in the heart of South Kensington in Thurloe Square will fall under the Queensgate group, who do not share the same values as us re the angle of S.kensington. They are more focused on issues surrounding High Street Kensington.

I do not consider that the new Ward scheme that you are proposing will promote effective and convenient government, nor will it deliver electoral equality for voters and mainly it will not reflect local interests and identities. Many thansk Alexia Florman

1 Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 28 May 2013 08:54 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Boundary changes: proposed loss of Brompton Ward

From: Helen Forbes-Watt [mailto: Sent: 28 May 2013 08:15 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary changes: proposed loss of Brompton Ward

FOR THE URGENT ATTENTION OF THE REVIEW OFFICER

Dear Sir/Madam,

Re: Boundary Changes: Proposed Eradication of Brompton Ward

I wish to register my objection, in the strongest possible terms, to the proposed eradication of Brompton Ward from the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, and to split the Ward between Hans Town Ward, Queen's Gate Ward and Courtfield Ward. The main reasons for my objection are as follows:

1) Brompton Ward reflects the historic boundaries of a very long-standing community.

2) The north-west section of Brompton Ward has nothing in common with either Queen's Gate or Kensington High Street, and it would be seriously disadvantaged by being split from the rest of Knightsbridge and South Kensington.

3) I do not consider the proposed new wards would "deliver electoral equality for voters", "reflect local interests and identities" or "promote effective and convenient local government".

4) Brompton Ward has numerous unique issues, many of which are generated by the presence of Harrods, which is situated within both a CONSERVATION and a RESIDENTIAL area, and has become a magnet for social disorder (including the ongoing problem of noisy, fast cars being driven throughout the neighbourhood). Furthermore, there are many Grade I and Grade II listed buildings within Knightsbridge, which need protection from inappropriate planning applications by greedy developers/foreign investors, and urgent action needs to be taken before the unique charm of this area is further eroded.

I firmly believe all the above points underline the importance of the retention of Brompton Ward, with our own 3 DEDICATED COUNCILLORS to support both local residents and small businesses, and to handle the volume of work involved. I therefore trust the proposal to abolish Brompton Ward will accordingly be REFUSED.

Yours sincerely,

Helen Forbes-Watt (Mrs.)

1

Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 17 May 2013 11:29 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: No to the proposal

From: Freeman [mailto: Sent: 16 May 2013 22:04 To: Reviews@ Subject: No to the proposal

1.Do not agree with the abolition of Brompton Ward which reflects the historic boundaries of a long standing community

2.North west section (what the Boundary Commission calls ‘the museums and streets north of ’) of Brompton Ward has nothing in common with Queensgate/Kensington High Street and will be seriously disadvantaged by being split from the rest of Knightsbridge and South Kensington

3.Do not consider the proposed new Wards will “deliver electoral equality for voters”, “reflect local interests and identities” or “promote effective and convenient local government” – these are the 3 key criteria against which the Commission judge proposed Ward boundaries.

Regards,

Jay Freeman

1 Francesca Gavaudan

Onslow Neighborhood Member of the public

11/04/2013 13:14 "At first glance, splitting in two Onslow square is not a constructive way of going forward. They way Brompton ward had its limits seemed to respect more the community living in the area. The part of Gloucester road (Courtfield Ward) has always been slightly separated from South Kensington. I suppose that one of the reasons is of the shopping area layout. If I do my shopping I go to South Kensington. When I take the tube, I go to South Kensington and not Gloucester Road which is further away. Also, I would like to have a say in the redevelopment that will be taking place.

Kind regards, Francesca Gavaudan"

Please reply to the Chair: Susie Parsons 171 Oxford Gardens London W10 6NE UK tel: 44(0)7968 801948 email: [email protected]

www.golbornelife.co.uk.

Arion Lawrence Review Officer (Kensington & Chelsea) Layden House 76‐86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG 4 May 2013

Dear Mr Lawrence

ELECTORAL REVIEW OF KENSINGTON & CHELSEA

We have received a letter dated 19 March 2013 from the Local Government Boundary Commission for setting out the Commission’s draft recommendations for Kensington & Chelsea.

As you are aware from our various submissions to the Commission, the Golborne Forum, which is open to everyone living or working in the Golborne ward of North Kensington, aims to:  give local people a voice on the big issues affecting the community;  make the case for Golborne to help bring funding into the area;  consult and communicate with Golborne people about what’s going on.

In view of this remit, we are delighted that the Commission has accepted our proposal for a three‐member Golborne ward and for maintaining the current ward boundary with the exception of the small area which crosses Ladbroke Grove at the north west. We are particularly pleased that the Commission has recognised our argument that the Westway is a clear and defining boundary and is not proposing to remove the south‐eastern corner of Golborne ward. We would like to congratulate and thank the Commission for listening well to the views of local people in putting forward the proposals for Golborne ward

Yours sincerely

Monday, 20th May

Review Officer (Kensington & Chelsea) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1 5LG

Dear Sir,

BROMPTON WARD

I write as a lifetime resident of Brompton Ward, where we have a strong local identity. We face increasing challenges of commercialisation along Brompton Road and around South Kensington and we need a voice to protect us from its impact on our peace and quiet. Our problems do not resemble those of the Cadogan Estate and Kensington High Street.

Quite apart from the historic cohesion of the Ward, it makes no sense to divide the Museums from the tube station built to serve them.

Our Ward Councillors have been diligent and effective and I urge you to look again at the proposed abolition and division of this Ward. We need someone in local government with a commitment to our concerns.

Yours faithfully,

Joanna Goodwin

Olivia Graham

Member of the public

24/03/2013 17:03

"As a local resident of 40 years standing, plans to abolish Brompton Ward make absolutely no sense. I therefore object to the proposed ward boundary changes.

First Hans Town (aka Knightsbridge/) is completely different in character to South Kensington. Ignoring this will result in a forced marriage with no benefit to either.

Secondly, it is proposed the two iconic South Kensington museums (NHM & V&A) are to be separated from South Kensington to become part of Queensgate. Why? South Kensington is the natural centre for the museums and residents living in the area. Concerns need to be seen holistically, and it would make more sense to draw the proposed boundaries north to south than west to east. Brompton Ward is ideally situated to focus on the numerous issues pertaining to the Museums, Exhibition Road, and South Ken tube station.

Third, we have three excellent Brompton Ward Counsellors. All have worked hard to get to grips with the issues, and are now doing a wonderful job representing local views, constructively balancing the tensions between relevant parties.

These reasons alone should be more than suffice to realise the importance of leaving Brompton Ward as it is. The Brompton Association is highly effective and respected. It is doubtful that Hans Ward whose area extends beyond Knightsbridge could do the same with such a diverse population. "

Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 10 June 2013 08:55 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Ward Boundary changes in Kensington and Chelsea

From: Eve Harris [mailto: Sent: 09 June 2013 22:01 To: Reviews@ Cc: Subject: Ward Boundary changes in Kensington and Chelsea

Dear Sir,

I am fully in agreement with all the facts and arguments of the Brompton Association exposed so cogently by the Chairman Sophie Andreae in her letter to the Review Officer (RBKC), Local Government Boundary Commission for England. The Association has clearly made serious research into the rather feeble reasons why the Boundary Commission want to abolish the Brompton Ward, which as many people have pointed out reflect the historic boundaries of a long standing community. The proposed cobbling together of the so‐called north west section with various adjoining Wards is a meaningless exercise because it has no bearing on the precise nature of this Ward. It would further rob us of electoral equality for voters in this Ward, would rob this area of its local interests and identities and it certainly would not in my view (and that of many I have spoken to) promote effective and convenient local government. I believe these are the 3 key criteria against which the Commission judge proposed these Ward boundary changes.

I would also say that this exercise would rob us of three particularly effective Ward Councillors who have been extraordinarily diligent in our part of the Ward dealing with, for example, the endless problem of the noise from St Pauls Church which can be quite insupportable for so many of the local (elderly) residents in Onslow Square and parts of Onslow Gardens; many other problems too in this local area (drop‐outs urinating on our steps and so on) and I really wonder if we would get the same level of attention from Councillors from more distant parts.

I urge the Boundary Commission to take serious note of the residents’ views and the serious and measured suggestions of the Brompton Association and the Onslow Neighbourhood Association – it would be comforting to know that there are officials in this area who will actually read what the residents are saying to them.

Yours sincerely,

Eve Wakelin Harris,

.

1 Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 28 March 2013 16:22 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Custom Form Submission Received

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 28 March 2013 14:32 To: Reviews@ Subject: Custom Form Submission Received

- Custom Form Submission Notification

Custom Form Submission Received

Review Editor,

A new custom form submission has been received. The details of the form submission are as follows:

Submission Information

Custom Form: Online submissions form (#183)

Form URL: http://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-consultations/online-submissions-form Submission ID: 1786 Time of Submission: Mar 28th 2013 at 2:32pm IP Address: ::ffff:90.218.39.91

Form Answers

Name: Sarah Havens Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Postcode: Email Address: Area your submission Kensington & Chelsea refers to: Organisation you member of the public belong to: Your feedback: I am very concerned about the re-districting of the Norland ward down to two representatives. I fear the new boundaries will eliminate some of the diversity that exists with the current wards and just create safe seats where councilors will not have to consider the broadest view possible when representing the citizens of the borough. File upload:

This communication is from LGBCE (http://www.lgbce.org.uk) - Sent to Review Editor

1

Michelle Jackson

Member of the public

31/05/2013 16:30

"I fully support the proposed new boundary for ""Chelsea Riverside Ward"", and that this ward will retain three Councillors as a ward of this size needs three Councillors.

I strongly object to the suggestion put forward in paragraph 84 of the report, which was to separate World's End from the east at Beaufort Street. I live in Lots Village, which is the area to the west of World's End, and the suggestion does not consider the needs of our community at all." Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 28 May 2013 08:57 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Eradication of Brompton Ward in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: juniper Jenks [mailto Sent: 24 May 2013 19:07 To: Reviews@ Subject: Eradication of Brompton Ward in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

To the Review Officer of the Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, Local Government Boundary Commission for England

Dear Sir

I am writing to protest at the proposal to abolish Brompton Ward and to merge it with its neighbouring wards.

Brompton Ward is a long‐standing community with not merely fine residential squares and streets and the commercial outlets that serve the residents, but also the great museums and the underground station of South Kensington which was built to serve the museums, the churches and educational institutions which are part of the greater whole of our capital city.

We have nothing in common with Queensgate nor Kensington High Street and splitting off Brompton Ward from the rest of Knightsbridge and South Kensington would be a serious disadvantage to all those who live in the Ward and those who have a living to make in the Ward.

We have currently 3 excellent Councillors who know the needs of the Ward ; to split up the Ward would mean that we would lose these Councillors and put us under others who have no knowledge of the special problems and concerns of our neighbourhood.

I do not believe that the proposed new Wards will serve the inhabitants better than what we have now in Brompton Ward as it stands. It will not necessarily result in greater electoral equality for voters, reflect local interest and identities, or promote more effective local government.

The Village of South Kensington is a rare and important community existing in one of the largest Cities of the World. It should not be eradicated. The boundaries do not need changing and change for the sake of change is costly and in this case, unnecessary.

I have lived in Brompton Ward for over 15 years and implore the Commissioners to reconsider the proposals for change.

Yours sincerely,

JUNIPER JENKS

1 Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 17 May 2013 11:29 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Kensington and Chelsea boundary reviews

From: Francois Jourdain [mailto:f Sent: 17 May 2013 08:17 To: Reviews@ Subject: Kensington and Chelsea boundary reviews

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am writing you to express my opposition to the proposed new boundaries of RBKC wards.

The disappearance of the Brompton ward is not a good idea. The Brompton Ward is a very coherent area that includes both side of Brompton Road, the museum area and South Kensington. The proposed split of the Brompton ward between the Queensgate and the Hans Town ward would create significant disruptions:

 Brompton Road would be split between 2 wards. It does not really make sense. The RBKC area on the north side of Brompton is quite small and is economically and socially linked to the South side rather than to the Queensgate area.  The museums and the Oratory Church are naturally part of South Kensington. The South Kensington area south of is the natural feeder to these institutions. It is also shown by the continuity of Exhibition Road project: why would one want to split this very nice social area between two wards?  There is historical coherence in the Brompton Ward.

At least, the Brompton Ward should be included in the Hans Town ward, with a larger number of Councillor.

Respectfully.

1 Peter Kanssen

Member of the public

18/05/2013 06:47

"the boundary between Colville and Golborne folllowing the Westway is generally a good idea however at the eastern end of it it runs through a building (Westbourne Studios) and an area that is only accessible from Golborne is put in Colville. better to have the bit to the east of the footbridge in Golborne. this is my first look at this site, the consultation has not been widely publicised, I came across it only by chance"

Lawrence, Arion

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 17 April 2013 15:45 To: Lawrence, Arion Subject: FW: Custom Form Submission Received

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 17 April 2013 15:13 To: Reviews@ Subject: Custom Form Submission Received

- Custom Form Submission Notification

Custom Form Submission Received

Review Editor,

A new custom form submission has been received. The details of the form submission are as follows:

Submission Information

Custom Form: Online submissions form (#183)

Form URL: http://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-consultations/online-submissions-form Submission ID: 1817 Time of Submission: Apr 17th 2013 at 2:13pm IP Address: ::ffff:82.16.158.159

Form Answers

Name: George Law Address 1: Address 2: Address 3: Postcode: Email Address: Area your submission Kensington & Chelsea refers to: Organisation you member of the public belong to: Your feedback: I wish to support the proposal in the draft recommendations with regard to Campden and Holland Wards to make Holland Walk the western boundary of Campden Ward. At present, we are in Holland Ward, but almost completely cut off from the rest of Holland Ward , which is west of Holland Park. File upload:

This communication is from LGBCE (http://www.lgbce.org.uk) - Sent to Review Editor

1

Charles Williams of Elvel

Member of the public

23/05/2013 09:26

It is a mistake to propose the abolition of Brompton Ward. We have three excellent councillors and could not possibly be as well served by councillors from Queensgate or Hans Town. Furthermore, Brompton has an identity of its own, comprising the parish, the museums and the area round the Underground Station. It is a long standing community and should not be ripped apart.