Local resident submissions to the Borough Council electoral review

This PDF document contains 28 submissions with surnames L- R.

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.

From: Peter Lambert Sent: 19 June 2014 01:14 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundry Consultation

Dear Sir Madam

I have read the draft proposals from the Boundary Commissioner in respect to Creekmoor and Broadstone in Poole, and I fully support the Boundary Commissioner’s proposals as the least disruptive of the options, with minimal change to the local community that ensures the close community feel of Creekmoor is maintained.

Regards Peter Lambert Kingsley, Paul

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 06 May 2014 09:27 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Boundary changes to Broadstone

Categories: Poole, Submission

From: Simon Lander Sent: 02 May 2014 21:31 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary changes to Broadstone

Dear sirs,

We are writing regarding the boundary changes to the Broadstone Area.

As a resident of we are firmly against any changes to our boundary , we moved here 3 years ago to bring our family up within the Broadstone area, due to the area being very well respected & having great schools , we paid around £250,000 for a house which if it wasn't within this boundary and was in the creekmoor boundary the same size property would have been around £20‐ 30,000 less.

We like living in the Broadstone community and are very happy here & our child is going to one of the Broadstone Schools, we are somewhat confused as to why these changes have been put forward or are going to be put forward as we can see that this would not gain anything from this but would cause a lot of bad feeling amongst the Broadstone residents.

We hope we have put our views across & strongly hope this does not go ahead.

Regards Mr & Mrs Lander

1 Kingsley, Paul

From: A Lewis Sent: 24 June 2014 15:01 To: Reviews@ Subject: Poole Review

Re Broadstone / Creekmoor Boundary changes

Dear Sirs

You will already have received a letter signed by me as Chairman of Broadstone Conservatives. This letter is my personal submission and has no political associations.

NEED TO CHANGE??

As the figures in Broadstone are so close to the Borough average, there should not be any automatic reason to change this Ward, just because Creekmoor is outside the required limits. I know you will have had a lot of submissions from people in the affected roads, expressing very strongly their desire to stay as a part of Broadstone. This is quite understandable and I would ask you to look again to see if Twin Oaks Close, Ribble Close and Lytham Road can stay unchanged. Surely the fewer people who are upset the better.

FUTURE POPULATION FIGURES

The figures which you quote at appendix A show that the population is expected to increase in Broadstone by 294 by the year 2019. With the restrictions in planning currently in place due to the proximity of Nature Reserves, I do not believe that there is scope for that much development. Creekmoor has much more scope for infill, and the projected figure of plus 262 is more likely to be achieved. Please also bear in mind the recently opened retirement apartments in Sopers Lane which I believe has accommodation for 80 residents.

3 WARDS ??

Although the idea of three Wards was not in your proposal, this issue has been kept alive by the Liberal Democrat Party publishing that " we will re‐examine our earlier proposals so see if the numbers can be more evenly balanced ". As they have asked to be allowed to submit a late proposal, they are expected to raise the issue at tonight's, full Council Meeting.

In conclusion, it is such a shame that so much bad feeling has been stirred up because of these changes, and I can why all concerned feel so strongly. Having said that it is by far better than taking many more houses out of Creekmoor, then creating 2 separate Broadstone Wards.

Yours sincerely

Mr E.A. Lewis

1 Kingsley, Paul

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 23 June 2014 09:19 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Proposed Boundary changes to Lytham Road.

Categories: Poole, Submission

From: Gerald Lewis Sent: 22 June 2014 10:51 To: Reviews@ Subject: Fwd: Proposed Boundary changes to Lytham Road.

------Forwarded message ------From: Gerald Lewis Date: Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 1:49 PM Subject: Proposed Boundary changes to To:

Dear Sir or Madam, or who it conserns.

My wife and I are very much against the proposed changes, to our boundry. We both moved last year in to one property after we got married in July, we moved to "Broadstone", I myself moved from Creekmoor, there is no doubt in our minds, that Broadstone, is far more attractive than Creekmoor, property wise and therefor, more sort after, therefor, comes at a higher price.

When we were looking for a property, the price difference between Creekmoor and Broadstone, was substantial, thus it WILL affect our lives when we want to sell.

Yours Truly

Gerry & Jenny Lewis

1 From: David Linzner Sent: 19 June 2014 10:13 To: Reviews@; Subject: Boundary proposals

Dear Sir Madam

I have read with interest the draft proposals from the Boundary Commissioner regarding Creekmoor and Broadstone in Poole and I fully support the Boundary Commissioners proposals as it creates minimum disruption and change to the community and ensures that the unique close community of Creekmoor stays intact.

David Linzner

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Poole

Personal Details:

Name: George Llewellyn

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: N/A

Comment text:

It would appear that the Cowslip Road area remains in Broadstone If this is the case I think that it is a correct finding. It it important that Cowslip Road remains in Broadstone as outlined in my original email.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/3255 17/04/2014

Kingsley, Paul

From: Brian Lloyd Sent: 23 June 2014 11:49 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: Borough of Poole electoral review

Categories: Poole, Submission

Dear Mr Kingsley,

It is a pity that your colleague Alison Evison did NOT inform residents in Poole that she would be going on maternity leave until the last minute. Her name has been widely circulated recently in Poole, has the person to write to with their views on the BC proposals on the electoral review for the BOP, and she has obviously been aware for a considerable time that she would be having maternity leave, so why leave it to the last minute to advise residents of Poole of this fact!

I strongly object to the proposals of the BC for all electors in the the Twin Oaks Close, Lytham Road. Ribble Close, York Road, Nos 97 to 133 York Road, York Close, Woods Edge, Edwina Drive and the north side of Chetwode Way to be summarily transferred to Creekmoor Ward. particularly when you have been informed that they object strongly to this proposal.

The BC proposals fail to comply with Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009 in that it fails to consider,

1) It does not reflect the identities and interests of local communities,in this case Broadstone, and in particular o the desirability of arriving at boundaries that are easily identifiable o the desirability of fixing boundaries so as not to break any local ties

The boundaries are not easily identifiable and electors in the roads identified above, instead of being a 10 minute walk from the centre of Broadstone, will under the BC proposals be 3/4 times this distance from the centre of Creekmoor, were they have no interest nor ties

All the ties of these electors are with Broadstone, the library, the shops, the schools, the PO, the local churches, the pubs the local shops, doctors surgeries, the British Legion the Memorial Hall, the Sports Centre, the banks and building societies etc,etc.

2) It does not secure effective and convenient local government for the Broadstone electors who are being moved to the Creekmoor Ward against their will. In the 2011 local elections, Broadstone electors registered 12,997 votes to elect 3 councillors, compared with Creekmoor were their electors registered 6,819 votes for 3 councillors.

Does the BC really think that moving a few hundred electors from Broadstone, against their will, to Creekmoor is going to make any difference? The most likely result will be that those electors forcibly removed from Broadstone, will refuse to vote in the Creekmoor Ward since there is NO LINK with any facilities in Creekmoor

Still the bureaucrats in the BC will be happy, the number of electors per councillors will be closer than it is now. The BC would be better employed getting electors to vote rather than ensuring there is an equal number of electors per councillor. How can the BC claim that "each elector’s vote being worth the same as another’s', when electors choose NOT TO VOTE. In the 2011 local elections, it required 4332 votes from their electors to elect of 3 councillors and in Creekmoor 2273 votes for each of their 3 councillors. Is this what the BC claims that "each electors vote being worth the same as another"?

This is what happens when all the BC considers is elector numbers per ward, and not the other important parts of the Local Democracy, Economic

1

From: To: Subject: Boundary Changes - Poole, Dorset Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 10:19:56 +0100

Dear Alison Evison,

I am writing to you regarding the proposed changes to the boundaries within the Borough of Poole. I would like to lodge my strong objection.

I live in , which it is proposed to be moved from Broadstone to Creekmoor. What? that is ridiculous. There is no connection whatsoever between my road and Creekmoor. Edwina Drive, and its surrounding area, has always been a part of Broadstone. I have lived in Broadstone (originally in Okeford Road) since 1973, and there is a strong sense of identity in the Broadstone area. Many people here - including myself - still call Broadstone 'The Village', and are very happy to be a part of it. We have no connection whatsoever with Creekmoor! Who on earth has come up with this ridiculous idea??

Many of us, myself included, belong to organizations in Broadstone (for example the Broadstone British Legion, where I attend several clubs and regularly play snooker). There is absolutely no connection whatsoever with Creekmoor. To move my road to Creekmoor would be to take no account whatsoever of local circumstances and connections which have existed for as long as any of us have lived here. There is a proper sense of community in Broadstone, which is seriously threatened by this proposed change. I therefore hope that you will ensure that this totally ridiculous proposed change will never take place, not now or ever in the future.

Regards,

Malcolm V. Lowe BA

Kingsley, Paul

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 16 April 2014 11:05 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Proposed Creekmoor/Broadstone Changes

Categories: Poole, Submission

From: Gill Mears Sent: 16 April 2014 09:54 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed Creekmoor/Broadstone Changes

Dear Sirs,

I understand that the changes making our Road, , part of Creekmoor. We thoroughly object to this proposal and would like our view registered. We are geographically part of Broadstone, not Creekmoor, and wish to remain as such.

Yours faithfully

Gillian and Michael Mears

1

From: Sarah Pillow Sent: 16 June 2014 18:42 To: Reviews@ Subject: Broadstone Ward Boundaries

We support the BC’s recommendations for minimum change of the Ward Boundaries between Broadstone and Creekmoor, and reject any proposal to form 3 separate Wards.

Robert and Sarah Pillow From: Ronald Planner Sent: 23 June 2014 14:19 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: Fw: Proposed Boundary Changes - Broadstone Dorset

On Friday, 20 June 2014, 13:14, Ronald Planner wrote:

Dear Ms Evison

My wife and I live in and are writing to strongly object to our road being earmarked to fall within the boundary of Creekmoor.

Broadstone is our village and is one mile away, unlike Creekmoor which is much further. Our doctor, dentist, chiropractor, library and supermarket, together with other local shops in our community are all in Broadstone. Creekmoor has very little and we have no cause ever to visit it and are therefore nothing to do with that area.

We are very much part of the Broadstone community, having nothing in common with Creekmoor, and wish to remain part of it.

Regards

Ronald and Reidun Planner

From: ROD PLAYFORD Sent: 19 June 2014 14:32 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary change Boradstone to Creekmoor, Poole, Dorset

Hi,

I am somewhat disturbed by the proposed subject boundary change that will affect me. I currently live in , . To find I may possibly be considered to be living in Creekmoor in anyway, shape or form, is a disgrace. Had I wanted to live in and vote for a Creekmoor Ward Councillor I would have purchased a house there.

If the perception is that more people will be on the voting register for Creekmoor Ward and will therefore possibly swing the vote in someway, then I would suggest that most, myself included, will not traipse the extra distance to vote for a councillor in a Ward that hitherto has had no function for our part of BROADSTONE.

You can therefore count me as a NOT IN FAVOUR of any proposed or intended boundary change here.

Regards - Rod Playford (who enjoys living in BROADSTONE, shopping in BROADSTONE and voting in BROADSTONE)

Kingsley, Paul

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 24 June 2014 10:24 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Ward Boundaries between Broadstone and Creekmoor.

Categories: Poole, Submission

Hi Paul,

Please see sub below for Poole.

Regards, Helen

From: Wilf Prevost ] Sent: 23 June 2014 21:19 To: Reviews@ Subject: Ward Boundaries between Broadstone and Creekmoor.

To:‐ Review Officer (Poole Review), The Local Government Boundaries Commission for England, Layden House, 76‐78 Turnmill Street’ London EC1M 5LG

I support the Boundaries Commission (BC) recommendation for minimum change of the Ward Boundaries between Broadstone and Creekmoor, and reject any proposal to form 3 separate Wards.

1

Kingsley, Paul

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 30 April 2014 11:47 To: Kingsley, Paul Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Poole: draft recommendations

Categories: Poole, Submission

Hi Paul,

Please see the submission below for Poole.

Regards, Helen

From: Susan and David Ridd Sent: 27 April 2014 20:25 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review of Poole: draft recommendations

Sir,

I’m writing to object to the proposed local government boundary changes which I understand will place Twin Oaks Close, Broadstone in the Creekmoor ward.

I regularly shop in Broadstone high street which is less than ten minutes walk from my house, my place of work is in Broadstone, my doctor is in Broadstone, I walk in the recreation ground in Broadstone every day, I use Broadstone library, I’m a member of the Broadstone Residents Association and also a member of the Broadstone Community Choir which meets in Broadstone!

Creekmoor is further away. I seldom have any need to visit Creekmoor and feel no affinity or connection to its community whatsoever.

I realise that the proposed changes will not stop me continuing my various activities within Broadstone but I believe that Twin Oaks Close is an integral part of Broadstone and should be included in a Broadstone ward. To me the most logical boundary between Broadstone and Creekmoor is the Broadstone Way. Twin Oaks Close is on the “Broadstone” side of this road.

Yours faithfully,

Susan Ridd

1