8th April 2018

Review Officer ( and ) LGBCE 2017 14th Floor Millbank Tower London SW1P 4QP

Re: review

Dear Sir,

I write to express my concern about the proposed changes to the Ward structure and numbers of Councillors in our Borough with specific reference to the North of the Borough.

As I understand the situation, there has been a significant increase in population in the Borough, more specifically in the South of the Borough. In addition there appears to be an ambition to reduce the number of Councillors across the whole Borough, from 51 to 45. Four of the six reduction in Councillors and two of four reduced Wards being in the North, based on a higher average population figure per Ward. The proposal is to combine Walton on the Hill and with into one Ward and to reduce representation to three Councillors over this new combined area.

I have some serious concerns about this proposal, particularly as it affects Tadworth and Walton on the Hill:

There is a long‐standing close relationship between the two villages of Tadworth and Walton on the Hill based on a large number of shared facilities and interests. There is a distinct community feel about the two villages that do a number of things together and I would suggest that TWOAT (Tadworth & Walton Overseas Aid Trust) and TWRA (Tadworth & Walton Residents Association) are two excellent examples of how the villages sit comfortably together.

In contrast there is absolutely no such common theme or interests with Lower Kingswood, which has its epicenter, shops etc., some distance away and with the natural barriers of Walton Heath and the A217 establishing a “hard border” between us. It should be noted that Tadworth and Walton is surrounded on three sides by Green Belt, which again separates us from Lower Kingswood.

Our existing three Borough Councillors in Tadworth and Walton work very hard on our local issues and I cannot see how any one of them could feasibly combine their activity to embrace Lower Kingswood, nor can I imagine how a Councillor based in Lower Kingswood could contribute in any meaningful manner to Tadworth or Walton. It has been said, and I believe it to be true, that the residents in our Ward are quite demanding, and this may be in contrast to those in the south if the Borough.

The natural outcome from such a proposed merger would actually be ineffectual as they would still in effect operate as separate “Wards”, Tadworth with Walton on the one hand and Lower Kingswood on its own.

If there has to be a combination of Wards, and I have to question that premise in the first instance, then it would be sensible to try to combine with an area that has a more natural affinity with Tadworth and Walton. This could be found to the north of the Ward where there are fewer natural borders (i.e. no Green Belt or major arterial roads). To that end Preston would be a much better match as there are common facilities used by residents such as bus routes, local shops and the new leisure center for example.

One final thought, it does seem somewhat perverse that an overall increase in the population in the Borough has been linked to a reduction in our local representation.

I remain hopeful that sense will prevail before this proposed merger goes through to the detriment of our local communities.

Yours sincerely ,

Clive Elcome.

Chairman Tadworth & Walton Residents Association & Jubilee Wood

2/16/2018 Local Government Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal

Reigate and Banstead District

Per•onal Detalls:

Name: Perrys E paron E-mall: Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Wards inside the M25 should be part of London Boroughs and not . So we should have a London Borough of Banstead instead as it's more integrated with London than Reigate.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/nodelprinUinformed-representation/12013 1/1 Owen, David

From: Sent: 02 March 2018 05:51 To: reviews Subject: Boundaries

Hi I live in and I do shop local.but when it comes to care and social events it seems horley should be in w Sussex as even social services expecting us to join in areas far away.and Crawley or even Brighton are nearer for us to get to.horley should change bounderies.

Regards Gillian Evans.

1 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Paul Evans

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Feature Annotations

1: Western end of St John's Rd

2: Easter end of St John's Rd

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013. Map Features:

Annotation 1: Western end of St John's Rd

Annotation 2: Easter end of St John's Rd

Comment text:

I would like to propose that the area north of St John's road but south of Lane, between annotated points 1 and 2, becomes part of St John's and .

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: JOHN ERNEST FELIX

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I OBJECT TO THE PROPOSALS FOR THE TATTENHAMS WARD BOUNDARIES The proposed boundaries appear to be arbitrary, at present they appear to be well defined with Tattenhams Corner Village at its hub incorporating shops medical centre and library. Historically I understand that adjoining independent Resident Associations have worked together to establish the existing boundaries represented by active local councillors in local issues and this should not be lost or diluted.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Catherine Fell

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

First can I say that apart from the link to Reigate and Banstead none of the links on the previous page worked for me all got error 404. Secondly I can understand why you are trying to make the ward system more equitable but I fear that it is not easy to do so. The populations of the existing wards vary as do the number of councillors representing them, they also tend to fall naturally into the areas that are communities. I for example live in the Reigate Hill ward and shop often in Redhill as well as Reigate however I do know a large number of my neighbours who would not consider shopping in Redhill. It's hard to see how you are going to rearrange the boundaries of the wards in order to make the ratio of residents to councillor the same and satisfy peoples idea of belonging to a community. Also as far as I can see although I'm all for saving ratepayers money the councillors we have are kept very busy and I can't help wondering if it's logical to reduce their numbers.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Anthony Flanagan

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I agree with the boundary changes and as a resident of Linkfield Street Redhill I feel more aligned and closer to central Reigate than Redhill. The new proposals appear to make sense in terms of the division of the wards across the area.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded 3/1212018 LocalGovemment Boundary Commission for England Consultatlon Portal

Reigate and Ben•te•d Di•trict

Personal Detalls:

Name: Reb� fNleetDne l!·m•II: Poncode: Org•nl..tlon Name: Future Annollltion1

Earlswood

South Park "- RI

be,. rights 2013. Map Feature,:

Annotadon 1: This to become part of South Park &am wood hatch

Annotation 2: This area to become part ot Meadvale & St John's

Annotadon 3: This area to become part of Meadvale & st John's

Annotadon 4: This area to become part of Redhil West

comment text:

Tb tidy and mabl more loglcill boundaries

Uploaded Documentl:

None Uploaded

https:l/eonsultation.lgbce.org.uk/nodelprintlinformed-representationl12330 1/1 Owen, David

From: Pat & Les Fryer Sent: 08 April 2018 16:03 To: reviews Subject: Reigate and Banstead review

This e‐mail is sent to object to proposals to transfer a number of roads from Tattenhams Ward to Nork Ward.

Tattenham Crescent, Tattenhams Library, Tattenham Health Centre, Tattenham Corner Station, Tattenham Village Shops etc. all to be transferred from Tattenhams to Nork Ward??? All these locations have been established for many years and fully recognised in the surrounding area. The majority of our councillors live in the roads mentioned in your proposals. What is to happen to them?

Most residents of the listed roads would consider the shops at Tattenham Corner to be at the heart of their community, with very few visiting Nork (over a mile away) frequently.

We already feel out on a limb here in Tattenhams. We pay our council tax to Reigate & Banstead, but we live in the constituency of & Ewell (Chris Grayling our M.P.) Please don’t isolate us any more.

This proposal would not reflect the interests of the local community (one of your criteria for assessment). In addition there is a perfectly appropriate existing boundary dividing the wards in Yew Tree Bottom Road.

L. Fryer

1 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Michael Fuller

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

The survey and consultation should be withdrawn. It is not designed to be inclusive. It is not designed for mobile (which the majority of people use) and comparative data is not supplied. It is therefore invalid and a waste of public money. Those responsible should not be paid. Please send a valid consultation to my email address. I am a member of the electorate not a member of the public. How do you validate my status and hence my right to comment? This is very poor. You do not say which user account this relates to. Since it won't recognise my Reigate and Banstead account this is also misleading.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Owen, David

From: Paula Ghinn Sent: 08 April 2018 18:33 To: reviews Subject: Reigate and Banstead Review

I would like to object in the strongest possible terms at the proposed changes that would transfer some of Great Tattenhams into Nork ward. My main reasons are as below.

1) It will split up the community around Tattenham Corner village centre.

2) Tattenham Corner village centre is based around a large shopping centre, with over 25 shops and restaurants, and includes a filling station, supermarket, chemists, post office and wine bar.

3) It also includes a medical centre, a volunteer-run community library, railway station and bus routes on to Epsom, the Preston estate and Tadworth.

4) The community as a whole is served by its own primary school in Shawley Way.

5) The community as a whole is within the of the United Church of St Mark in Great Tattenhams. St Mark’s has its own Tattenhams scouts and guides units, and a wide range of community groups.

6) The community is served by its own residents’ association.

7) The Tattenham Corner Community charity organises Christmas activities and summer fetes on the green around the shopping area.

8) Yew Tree Bottom Road and the Reigate Road form a strong and identifiable boundary between Nork and Tattenhams.

As a long term resident for almost 20 years, I have been proud to be associated with Tattenhams. My 3 children all went to Shawley Community Primary. Many of our close friends were made because of the strong community we have here. I was a volunteer governor at Shawley and currently volunteer for the Tattenham Corner Community group where we arrange some lovely community functions with Tattenham Corner as the core focus and the reason we all come together. It makes no sense whatsoever to hive it off it would move me into Nork, a community I do not associate with all.

Thank you for considering my comments.

Paula Ghinn

.

1 3/26/2018 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Alan Goddard

E-mail:

Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Nork Ward Boundary to be retained together with its three councillors. If the ward is to be lost then it should join Tattenham Ward because it too overwhelmingly votes for Residence Association candidates. The combined ward would however have the largest electorate in the council and therefore need seven councillors [3 Nork, 3 Tattenham and 1 extra to maintain the voter/councillor ratio] Another reason to maintain Nork and Tattenham wards unchanged is because they represent local opinions against the hegemony of the Conservative dominated council wards.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/12426 1/1 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Philip Goddard

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Three layers of local government for Horley (Town, Borough & County) is excessive and inefficient. Further, all types of councillors have a very low profile; they appear passionate and well-meaning but it is not clear that they have the level of influence necessary to represent their constituents/constituencies effectively. A far smaller number of councillors that have greater powers, the time to understand the real issues affecting a particular locality and with responsibility to take action proactively would be better. "You get what you pay for" so perhaps that small number should be paid and/or have greater resources at their disposal to allow them to deliver results.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Joanna Grimstone

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Constituents living close to the northern boundary of the Meadvale & St John's ward would generally consider themselves more a part of Reigate, rather than a resident of Redhill or Woodhatch.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Linda Groves

E-mail:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

The community I identify with is the one that fits the current Meadvale and St John's boundaries. I visit the Swing common and duck pond, the golf course and Redhill Common and see St John's school and St John's church as key parts of the community. If the area had to grow, I feel it should go towards Reigate Central, as I do most of my shopping in Reigate town centre and use Priory Park, and Reigate Hill. would be the other option, however, my only connection with it is that I use Earlswood railway station for my train journey to and from work.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Andrew Hall

E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name:

Comment text:

See attached letter

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Owen, David

From: Carole Hamilton Sent: 08 April 2018 15:57 To: reviews Subject: Reigate and Banstead Review

To whom it may concern.

It has recently been brought to my attention that there will be a review of ward boundaries in the near future. I appreciate it is necessary and important to equalise the number of residents in each ward. However I am against the proposition of splitting the Tattenham's community. We are well served by our established Residents' Association representatives. The Tattenham Ward IS the community around Tattenham Corner with its shops, station, doctors and library. Nork has its own separate centre in Nork Way. I believe there is a better alternative to breaking up the Tattenham's community. It would make much more sense to me to join Tattenham Ward with Preston as it is already included in bus routes and would not split any established ward.

I would be grateful if you would seriously consider this option when you review the ward boundaries.

Yours faithfully,

Carole Hamilton

Right-click or tap and hold here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlook prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Virus-free. www.avg.com

1

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Gill Hardwick

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

We live a stones throw from Tattenham Corner shops and very much a part of the Tattenham community with its village atmosphere strongly supported by our dedicated and very effective councillor Nick Harrison . We use the medical centre, shops, butchers, hairdressers etc and feel very much part of that busy thriving community. The change of boundary would mean we would come under Nork which is way out of our area. We would lose that feeling of being part of the successful village atmosphere which we have come to value enormously and which we have played an important part in cultivating over the years. I cannot imagine living 2 minutes walk from the centre of the Tattenham community and not being part of that community. To be part of Nork seems ludicrous and I strongly oppose the proposal.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: SUSAN HARPER

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Completely object to proposed changes! Why not split from the other side of the Reigate Road with the Roads that even back on to Nork Park!!!! strongly object to the community around Tattenham Corner being split. Most importantly Tattenhams is home to the Health Centre & Library which will quite clearly remain at Tattenham Corner but not in the Ward. concerned the most local Primary School (Shawley Community) for nearly all our Residents will be moved to another ward. Baring in mind Nork already has one primary school (Warren Mead) in their ward. I know parents at the school are not happy about this. It will mean a split in support and most likely less of a priority as this school does not serve the residents of Nork. The community is served by its own residents’ association. Yew Tree Bottom Road and the Reigate Road form a strong and identifiable boundary between Nork and Tattenhams. Geographically it makes absolutely no sense to seperate the roads north of Great Tattenhams into Nork ward. Upon studying the map it is relatively easy to identify much more suitable options beyond Reigate Road & Tattenham Way.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Jeff Harris

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I am concerned that the current boundaries for wards in the north of the borough do not reflect communities and in many cases they don't reflect county council Divisional boundaries either. Suggested changes make this worse.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: john hayns

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I believe the proposed boundaries for the new BANSTEAD VILLAGE Ward are basically sound. There would though be merit, I suggest, in extending the Ward marginally to the East to include the whole of Lane as far as the Seaman`s Mission. This would include just a few extra electors in Woodmansterne Lane and the two small closes of Barn Close and Stag Leys Close which are more allied to Banstead Village than Woodmansterne I suggest. Thank you.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Joan & Trevor Heard

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

We have lived in the Tattenham's area for forty years. Our children attended Shawley Way Community School and attended various activities centred around St Marks Church. My husband helped out with Tattenham Residents Association. This is a close knit community centred around Tattenham Corner shops, library, Doctors, Church etc. and to even consider dividing the community up in this way would be totally detrimental. Reigate Road is a natural border between Nork and Tattenhams. If we want to do anything regarding community matters Tottenham Residents Association is who we turn to because their members reside in the area. WE ARE TOTALLY AGAINST THIS BOUNDARY CHANGE!!

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Owen, David

From: Gillian Hein Sent: 08 April 2018 17:53 To: reviews Subject: FW: Electoral Review, Reigate and Banstead Attachments: Boundary Review 27.3.2018.doc

Dear Review Officer,

Reigate and Banstead –Tadworth and Walton

I live in Tadworth and Walton Ward and consider that the current boundary reflects our community ties. To the South and West there is Green Belt, to the East Green Belt and the A217 and to the North, Green Belt and the Preston Estate.

I appreciate it is difficult to get the numbers to add up, but we have far closer ties to the Preston Estate than Lower Kingswood to the South which we understand is the favoured option even though separated by common land. Its links are with Kingswood and not Tadworth and Walton.

If we have to merge with Lower Kingswood, I request that the cul de sacs on the north side of Shelvers Way remain with Tadworth as all vehicle traffic has to go south into Shelvers Way. Access by car into Preston would have to be via the A217/ Reigate Road or Preston Lane. We use the shops in Tadworth, via Tadorne Rd/ Cross Rd., also the station and church halls etc. Residents in these cul de sacs look south apart for the leisure centre and then most users drive there, and not northwards towards Tattenham Corner..

Thank you,

Gillian Hein

1 Owen, David

From: Margaret Herring Sent: 08 March 2018 12:37 To: reviews Subject: Boundary Reviews

We live in the north of the borough of Reigate & Banstead, ie Banstead. By distance we are much closer to Sutton and Epsom than Reigate. We often shop and visit Epsom and Sutton, but rarely go to Reigate which is 8 miles away. Our local general hospital is in Epsom or for specialties we go to St Helier or the Royal Marsden in Sutton. I would prefer to be linked to Sutton, so that we could have more buses to the station there. Banstead station is not near the town and is only a branch line with an infrequent service. Kind regards Magaret Herring

1 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Joanna Hills

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

It would have made it easier to comment if you had told us the existing situation as well as the proposed (ie I’ve had to work out from googling that the intention is to reduce from 50 councillors down to 45). Just as a note to avoid any unintended consequences, particularly as the council is currently hugely dominated by one party, care should be taken not to allow any boundary changes to unnecessarily potentially threaten the ability of those few non-ruling-party councillors to be elected.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Owen, David

From: Ian Hislam Sent: 03 April 2018 11:29 To: reviews Subject: Reigate & Banstead Review

Dear Sir/Madam

I am emailing to complain about the proposed changes to the boundaries around Tattenham which are appalling and make no sense whatsoever when bearing in mind the community involved.

1) To split the community in Tattenham makes no sense ‐ this is a thriving community which in recent years has actually seen residents and businesses make even more of an effort to keep the community together and involve everyone in this. Summer fetes and Christmas fairs on the green in the village have been new over the past few years and been very popular, and as a resident for 10 years I can easily say that this is the best community atmosphere this area has had certainly in my time in the area.

2) This area has many shops, restaurants, supermarkets, chemist, wine bar, a medical centre, a community library that the community themselves successfully fought to keep open thanks to local volunteers. We also have schools, a filling station, and a train station used by many commuters for access into London that resides in Zone 6 (something that even Epsom yet cannot boast). This list alone should give Tattenham for more weight and precedence over areas like Nork, and to reduce Tattenham's councillors and boundaries is bizarre.

3) We also have a Residents Association, councillors continually voted in at elections ahead of the main political parties, proof if proof were needed that the local community not only believe strongly in this, but also in the area they live in. Tattenham is it's own village, it is not on a par with Nork and should be treated as such.

4) We have an active church, including scouting movements which again have very close ties to the local school and community as a whole.

To take half of this thriving community and change it to a Nork Ward boundary makes absolutely no sense and will be hugely detrimental to the community that local residents have worked so hard to build over the last few years.

I would never in a million years call myself a resident of Nork, I am nowhere near Nork, I am in the heart of Tattenham Corner, less than five minutes walk from Tattenham shops, Tattenham Library, Tattenham School, Tattenham Train Station. To change my boundary to Nork is ridiculous. All my contributions, financial and time, are to Tattenham community. When I am ill I go to Tattenham Health Centre, when I go to work I travel from Tattenham train station, and when I go shopping I use Tattenham shops. Nork residents use Nork, Tattenham residents use Tattenham Corner.

These boundary proposals completely disregard the area, the community and everything that goes on short term on a day to day basis and also long term with a real sense of community spirit. Christmas fayres and trees in the green, a library for old and young to enjoy ‐ all of these are ONLY possible through Tattenham residents and businesses giving up their time and donations to give something to the community.

1 I urge these proposals to be rejected out of hand as they clearly serve no beneficial purpose whatsoever to a currently thriving community.

I would also point out that at no stage have I have any literature through my door about this, and that these proposals are trying to be sneaked through without properly addressing the thoughts and concerns of residents is very poor.

Regards

Mr I Hislam Tattenham Corner resident

2 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Peter Hodgson

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I live in Banstead and have done now for 25 years. With regard to community , local shops and banks,transport hubs ( bus stops train stations), GP surgeries,schools & churches ,leisure facilities all of these that I and my family use,are situated in the Borough of Reigate and Banstead. But- I and the residents of 6 other roads in the Cuddington part of Banstead are “ politically “ placed in the London Borough of Sutton. All theses roads are connected to the Banstead Road, which has 3 different areas of control ( Epsom & Ewell, Sutton, Reigate & Banstead) in a very short distance of space less than 1 mile. I would ask the commission to look into the possibility of moving the current area known as Cuddington back into Surrey boarders. I do not consider myself a resident of Cheam nor Sutton - my local council offers very little help to the area here apart from a shoddy weekly bin service. Local councillors and MP’s have shown no interest in this small Banstead community in either literature or deeds. In fact apart from the income from the local council tax , which one assumes is considerable as most properties would be band G or H this area is basically ignored. The reason why I am contacting you is in fact that I receive a magazine from Reigate and Banstead “”Borough News” even though I am not a resident of that borough which is more than I get from LBS,informing me of this consultation. From that I assume that the Council wants to engage with me a “ local resident “ which I am but not politically. As I live in Banstead I would like to part of the Borough that covers Banstead not hived off to some spurious body which does not represent the people of my local community. In this case that is the Borough of Reigate & Banstead and I fail to see why this part of Banstead remains out of the Borough .

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Owen, David

From: Nikki Hooper Sent: 01 April 2018 21:07 To: reviews Cc: Subject: Reigate and Banstead review

Don’t change the boundary. I am a Scout Leader at 1st Tattenham’s Scout group, if you change the boundaries how are we supposed to be Tattenhams? There is already an established Banstead and Nork groups, we would lose our identity and individuality. . Object to the arbitrary separation of the roads north of Great Tattenhams into Nork ward. . It will split up the community around Tattenham Corner village centre. . Tattenham Corner village centre is based around a large shopping centre, with over 25 shops and restaurants, and includes a filling station, supermarket, chemists, post office and wine bar. It also includes a medical centre, a volunteer‐run community library, railway station and bus routes on to Epsom, the Preston estate and Tadworth. . The community as a whole is served by its own primary school in Shawley Way. . The community as a whole is within the parish of the United Church of St Mark in Great Tattenhams. St Mark’s has its own Tattenhams scouts and guides units, and a wide range of community groups. . The community is served by its own residents’ association. . The Tattenham Corner Community charity organises Christmas activities and summer fetes on the green around the shopping area. . Yew Tree Bottom Road and the Reigate Road form a strong and identifiable boundary between Nork and Tattenhams. If this plan is implemented, Tattenhams residents would be left without TRA councillors or an effective residents association to protect their interests.

Sincerely Nikki Hooper Assistant Scout Leader 1st Tattenham’s Scout Group

1 Owen, David

From: Jacqui Hunt Sent: 22 March 2018 09:42 To: reviews Subject: boundaries

We in Horley feel more a part of Crawley and Gatwick. We shop in Crawley and go to the cinema there and many Airport staff live here. So we do not think that Reigate should be our council. In fact Horley used to be a part of Gatwick and I dont know why Reigate wanted Horley. or did they ? Thank you J Hunt

1 Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Patricia Jane Illingworth

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Feature Annotations

1: Include all of Tattenhams Ward bounded by Reigate Road2: I have tried to draw a line to and including A217 within to illustrate Nork

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013. Map Features:

Annotation 1: Include all of Tattenhams Ward bounded by Reigate Road to and including A217 within Nork

Annotation 2: I have tried to draw a line to illustrate

Comment text:

I feel that dividing Tattenhams Ward as outlined above and adding a trance to Nork may distribute the voters more equally

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Michelle Karpel

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

No change is required to the Banstead Village ward. It is considered that the ward for Chipstead, Hooley and Woodmansterne is too large.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: John Kemp

E-mail:

Comment text:

I live in the Tattenhams ward and am a member of the Tattenhams Residents Association and a volunteer at the Tattenhams Community Library. I have seen the local authority's proposal which suggests moving part of the ward (to the north of Great Tattenhams) to Nork ward. This makes no sense to me and is physically splitting the local community of Tattenham Corner in two. The current community includes a flourishing local shopping centre, medical centre and library. The major primary school for the area is also included in the area to be relocated. It would make more sense to extend the Tattenhams boundary into Preston ward which is already closely associated with Tattenhams using our shops, library and medical facilities. The school and Childrens Centre ( Primary) also has close links with Tattenhams. Reigate & Banstead's proposal , as well as being an illogical would undermine the current culture and community spirit in the area. and

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Graham Kent

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Feature Annotations

1: Suggested boundary between Woodmansterne and Banstead Village

Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database rights 2013. Map Features:

Annotation 1: Suggested boundary between Woodmansterne and Banstead Village

Comment text:

I strongly believe the land north-west of Woodmansterne village should be included in Banstead Village as people who reside in that area tend to be more involved in community life in Banstead rather than Woodmansterne.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Christine King

E-mail:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I understand that the Council proposes to cut off the Ward/roads North of Great Tattenham & move them into Nork Ward. I object....as we have a large community spirit with Residents out living in Tattenham Ward many of us taking part in various activities surrounding the Church of St Marks/ Shawley School/ the library (run by volunteers from Tattenham Ward. If this Ward is sliced up we would find various charity Community Events & Summer Fetes would not have their current organisers. I personally belong to Tattenham community choir which would have decreased attendance in view of a boundary divide. . We are very happy with the way our area is being run by our Residents Association Councillors . It would appear that they will not be able to stand if the split of Ward takes place since they live at present in Tattenham Ward. I object to the separation of the roads north of Great Tattenhams.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: ALLAN LAZARUS

E-mail:

Postcode:

Comment text:

I most strongly object to my property, which is at present is in Tattenhams Ward, being incorporated into Preston Ward in the proposed boundary changes - with all the negative implications entailed! My negative impressions of particular parts of that area have been formed from several unfortunate observations over many years that I am aware of since 1984. I just cannot understand why our excellent functioning Ward has to be messed about with - to the extent of splitting our road -Great Tattenhams -into two different Wards, and thereby destroying the community spirit that now exist with Tattenhams R.A., etc.. If you are determined to make Boundary changes, please could you not consider a much more workable and less disruptive solution - by uniting both sides of Great Tattenhams Road into THE NEW NORK WARD. I hope that the strong views of Great Tattenhams residents are taken into consideration in your consultations. Thanks Allan Lazarus & Household

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Gwyn Lockett

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

04/04/18 Dear Sirs, I am writing to raise my concern and deepest anger at the proposed ward changes planned for Tattenhams. It must be said that clearer and more direct communication from the council about this at a MUCH earlier stage would have been appreciated and may have reduced some of the panic and anger that this proposal has caused. Recognising that The Boundary Commission use 3 criteria to objectively assess ward boundaries, these being: 1. to equalise the number of voters in each ward 2. to reflect the interests and identities of local communities 3. to set boundaries which are sensible and easy to identify. I shall therefore direct my concerns at that those very 3 criteria. 1. Having looked at the existing map of Nork Ward I fail to see how making part of Tattenhams Ward added to the already huge Nork Ward is going to equalise voters!!!! Plus, I would like to add, my current polling station is in Great Tattenhams which would now be in Tattenhams Ward when myself and my husband would be in Nork Ward. I have to also add that I very much doubt the Residents Association of Nork would be as interested in the wellbeing of my immediate community as the Tattenhams Residents Association would be - whose main councillors and committee live predominantly in the roads that you intend on shifting. This very much looks like an under handed political manoeuvre. If I can’t vote for my local Residents Association and Conservative are to blame, then my vote has to go to the opposition or not vote – this proposal is thus affecting my right to vote for a party who serves my interests. 2. I live in one of the roads being affected, my family have close links with the library, Tattenham Health Centre and the shops in OUR LOCAL parade. We participate in the Tattenham Corner Community Committee events whose slogan is – ‘By the Community, For the Community’ and yet your plans intend on literally ripping that community in half! My concerns and my enthusiasms will not be for goings on at Nork Parade of shops or the Nork Community Centre so how can my interests and identity be reflected in these proposed Ward changes. My concerns will be with the roads, services and goings on in my community at Tattenham Corner IN Tattenhams Ward. I do not want to be in a Ward that does not reflect my concerns and interests, I do not want to be detached from my local community and I do not want to lose the great unity and political service done by Tattenhams Residents Association and the community connections we all have in Tattenhams. 3. As for your last criteria – this must be a joke! Your proposed changes mean that Tattenham Crescent will not actually be in Tattenhams Ward!!!! Downland Way that leads directly out onto the parade at Tattenham Corner (I believe the council refer to this as Tattenham Village) would not be considered within the Ward. Even more ludicrous – Tattenhams Library and Tattenhams Health Centre would not actually be in the ward of their namesake. Please explain to me how this is considered setting the boundaries as sensible and easy to identify. It also looks as though Shawley Community Primary School would not be in the same Ward as the church and local shops that is has close links with and is in fact moving into a Ward that already has 2 other schools (Warren Mead - if I my research is correct). Yew Tree Bottom Road and Reigate Road provide a more easily identified boundary so fits far better with your own criteria!! To be honest, at this point I cannot even conceive how these proposed Ward changes will impact and affect my family in the future – will my house value be affected, will my local council tax be spent in an area that has no benefit to my family and community? Will I have to change polling stations, will funding to my children’s school be influenced differently? Will my voice ever be heard in the same way and be respected as it currently does with the Tattenham Residents Association, united Church of St Marks, Tattenham Corner Community Committee, Tattenhams Library? I fear not, and I fear that these proposed changes will see a great divide and deterioration in the Tattenhams area (which is to all intense and purposes IS and will always be where I live). This may be the councils plan – weaken the area form within and then sweep in and wipe out the area as a whole?! If this is the case, then it is in very poor taste and with lack of judgement that you do this, as we will not go down without a fight!!! I have endeavoured to look at the proposal rationally and calmly but no matter which angle you take, none of your own criteria are being met by this proposal. At a push may be your number crunching could prove that it will balance out the people of voting age but even that is under threat when some residents close to Tattenham Corner will not be able to vote in their best interests come polling day for local elections. Yours Sincerely, Mr Gwyn Lockett

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Peter Lowe

E-mail:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Ward Boundary's need to be adopted in relation to community and local amenities. We currently have a postcode, yet live in , part of Banstead. Our closest village and shops are Banstead. We pay our rates to Banstead yet we are told we are in Tadworth due to our postcode. Instead of giving priority to community issues, you need to get the absurd arrangements sorted so that issues affecting the public can be accurately reflected upon.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Janet Ludbrook

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I object very much to this merging. Not the least because the local residents in Tattenhams ward AND Nork ward have not been consulted. Like most local government officials you are trying to do this by the back door. This will doubtless save money in the short term but what about the long term? We are already the forgotten portion of Reigate and Banstead. Reigate, Redhill and Horley have all the activities and there is very little for us. You only have to read the Reigate and Banstead magazine to see this.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded Reigate and Banstead District

Personal Details:

Name: Gill Luff

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

"If it ain't broke - don't fix it " says the old adage - something which is completely relevant in this review. Tattenhams is a thriving village with the shops at Tattenham Corner and the railway station at its heart. There is also a library volunteered by the local community, a school, a church and its own residents association. By dividing up the ward as is the proposition it will rip the heart from the community. Why does the LGBC think this is a good idea? In these days of violence and unrest surely we should be encouraging community spirit!

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded