Local resident submissions to the East Council electoral review

This PDF contains 33 submissions by local residents A-B

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.

Eleanor Gregory

From: Reviews@ Sent: 13 February 2010 17:43 To: Reviews@ Subject: EC website: Online submission

Form summary:

Name : M Akerman

Postal address :

Email address :

Area your submission refers to :

Organisation you belong to : member of the public

Your feedback : Please note, as a Resident of Adlington I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transferred to (East or West) merely for the administrative convenience of local Government or to equalise the number of electors per Councillors. ( two of your "Main Considerations" in forming the draft proposals). The "third" main consideration namely community identity seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to Adlington communuity.

Attachment : No file uploaded

Form Information

Site Name : Electoral Commission Site Id : 42 Page Standard Name : Consultations and current reviews Page Standard Id : 42911 Page Custom Form Name : Online submissions Page Custom Form Id : 55756 Url : http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online- submissions Submission Id : 84593 Time of Submission : 13 Feb 2010 5:42 pm Submission IP Address : 213.129.83.5

1 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:06 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority

From: Pete & Barbara Allen Sent: 12 February 2010 11:30 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority

Good Morning

As a resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transferred to Poynton ( East or West), merely for the administrative convenience of local Government or to equalise the number of electors per Councillor ( two of your three “main considerations” in forming the draft proposals).The third “main consideration”, namely “community identity” seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community!

Barbara Allen

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Virginia Appleton Sent: 12 February 2010 20:24 To: Reviews@ Subject: Rural(including )

I would like to register my support for the reccomendation by East Cheshire that Stapeley rural (including Batherton) be included in the ward,as opposed to South and Stapeley Urban. My reasons are: 1.Stapeley rural(including Batherton) is a rural area,and totally different in character to the urban /estate area of Stapeley which is being urbanised and absorbed into Nantwich. 2.The appearance and atmoshere is still rural and rural village-like,I feel it is important to maintain the historic nature of this area-it has a character much more akin to local villages such as Wybunbury. 3.The children locally attend village schools -Broad Lane and Wybunbury Delves,in keeping with the village(not urban) atmosphere. 4.The countryside atmosphere and village ambience is a valuable resource,and should be preserved for future generations. 5.I feel that if it was absorbed into Stapeley Urban,the character will gradually be gradually destroyed,much to the detriment of Nantwich as a whole.It would be a real shame if the area just became bland urbanisation.

Mrs V.C.Appleton,

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:06 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral Review East Cheshire - Adlington

From: Anne Ashmore Sent: 12 February 2010 11:54 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review East Cheshire - Adlington

Dear Sirs.

Re: Proposed Warding of Adlington with Poynton West.

As a resident of Adlington I am apalled by the above proposal and fully support the Parish Council in not accepting this proposal and still seeking to be warded with Prestbury. Adlington should not be transferred to Poynton (East or West) merely for the convenience of Local Government or to equalise the number of electors per Counciller. Adlington has nothing in common with Poynton which is now classed as a town. Adlington is a rural and agricultural community (which Poynton is not any more) and has far more affinity with Prestbury and surrounding villages. I feel we would lose a lot of our identity if warded with a more urban area like Poynton.

Yours faithfully

H A Ashmore (Mrs)

02/03/2010

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Andy Bailey Sent: 15 February 2010 10:50 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Letter of objection relating to the proposed Adlington Boundary changes Attachments: Letter to James Ansell - Boundary Committee pdf.pdf

FAO Mr Richard Buck

Dear Richard

Please find attached letter of objection relating to the proposed boundary change for Adlington Cheshire.

Regards

Andrew Bailey

From: Andy Bailey Sent: 15 February 2010 10:19 To: '[email protected]' Subject: Letter of objection relating to the proposed Adlington Boundary changes

FAO MR James Ansell – Cheshire East Review Officer

Dear James

Please find attached letter of objection relating to the proposed boundary change for Adlington Chesire.

Regards

Andrew Bailey

02/03/2010 15.02.10

James Ansell Cheshire east Review Officer The boundary Committee Trevalyan House Great Peters Street London SW1P 2HW

FAO Mr James Ansell - Cheshire east Review Officer

Dear Sir

Re: Notification my objection to the boundary reorganisation for Adlington Cheshire

I write to inform you of my and my families objection to the proposed boundary reorganisation which will place Adlington within the Boundary of Poynton East.

We believe that Adlington being a small rural community does not fit in with the more urban communities of Poynton. We believe our interests our best served by remaining within the Prestbury and Tytherington ward.

I trust the above is self explanatory however should you require any further clarification please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours Faithfully

Andrew Bailey

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:04 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: bondary changes

From: harold ball Sent: 12 February 2010 14:21 To: Reviews@ Subject: bondary changes

Please note,as a Resident of Adlington,I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward.It should not be transfered to Poynton East or West ,merely for the administrative convenience of Local Goverment or to equalisethe number of electors per Councillor,two of your three main considerations in forming the draft proposals.The third main consideration , namely community identity seems to be completely ignored,yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community!

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: David Bamford Sent: 12 February 2010 18:37 To: Reviews@

Please note, that as residents of Adlington,Cheshire we are opposed to the proposed transfer to Adlington from the Prestbury ward to Poynton (East or west). It appears that this decision has been taken purely for administrative convenience of the local government or to equalise the number of electors without consideration of "community identity". We feel that the interests of Adlington ,being a rural community would be more likely to be affiliated to those of the Prestbury ward and wish these sentiments to be taken into consideration when considering the appeal against this boundary change Jane & David Bamford

02/03/2010

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:10 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Adlington's boundary

From: rebecca barker Sent: 11 February 2010 13:36 To: Reviews@ Subject: Adlington's boundary

Please note, as a resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of the Prestbury Ward. It should not be trasferred to Poynton(East or West), merely for the administrative convenience of local government or to equalise the numbers of electors per councillor (two of your three main considerations in forming the draft proposals). The third main consideration, namely community identity seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community!

Mrs R Barker

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:12 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral View of Cheshire east Authority

From: Ecosteam Sent: 10 February 2010 14:07 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral View of Cheshire east Authority

Please note as a resident of Adlington i want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury ward.it should not be transferred to poynton east or west, merely for admin convenience of local government or to equalise the number of electors per councillor.( two of your 3 main considerations in forming the draft proposals) The third main consideration, namely community identity seems to be completely ignored, yrt it is the principal consideration that matters for the adlington community. Paul Barrell

02/03/2010

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: jbellamy Sent: 12 February 2010 21:17 To: Reviews@ Cc: James Ansell Subject: Re: Boundary Committee Future Cheshire East Council Ward Boundaries

Dear Boundary Committee,

We would like to object in the strongest possible terms to the Boundary Committee’s recommendation that Stapeley Rural should be included in Nantwich South as a two seat ward. Our reasons are as follows:

z Stapeley Rural has no affiliation to Stapeley Urban: the latter is a densely built up estate and the former is principally ribbon development in open countryside

z Occupants of Stapeley Rural consider it to be an area with views over farmland and open countryside and accept the lack of adjacent urban amenities

z The line drawn by Peter Destapleigh Way forms a natural division and there is little, if any, interaction between the two very different communities

z Stapeley Rural is not part of Nantwich

z Broad Lane School, firmly in Stapeley Rural, is a Church of School in the parish of St Chad's, Wybunbury

z The residents of Stapeley Rural are in the parish of Wybunbury and their local church is St Chad's, Wybunbury; to be a member of St Mary's, Nantwich requires a separate application process

z Cheshire East Council firmly recommends that Stapeley Rural is identifiable with surrounding rural locations and the preceding points completely support their view

z Finally, until the development of the Cronkinson Oak estate, the area north of the Water Gardens was never thought of as part of Stapeley. It would be outrageous if a newly created enclave should be allowed to absorb a well established rural area

We trust that you will give our views very serious consideration.

Yours faithfully,

J R Bellamy and K J Bellamy

02/03/2010

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Tim Bowden Sent: 25 January 2010 08:59 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Proposed boundary change between and

From: Bill Beton Sent: 22 January 2010 20:55 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary change between Wilmslow and Handforth

Dear Boundary Committee,

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed changes to the Wilmslow/Handforth electoral wards.

I live on Finney Drive, which is in the area south of the that is proposed to be moved into the Handforth electoral area.

The natural and logical boundary between Wilmslow and Handforth is the River Dean. It has always been so, and I cannot see any good reason why this should be changed.

I DO NOT live in Handforth, and I DO NOT wish to be part of a Handforth electoral ward.

I would be very grateful if you could respond to my email, confirming receipt, and also confirming that my views will be presented to the Boundary Committee.

Many thanks in advance.

Kind Regards,

Bill Beton

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Tim Bowden Sent: 25 January 2010 08:59 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Proposed boundary change between Wilmslow and Handforth

From: Gill Beton Sent: 22 January 2010 21:24 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary change between Wilmslow and Handforth

Dear Boundary Committee,

I am writing to strongly object to the proposed changes to the Wilmslow/Handforth electoral wards.

I live on Finney Drive, which is in the area south of the River Dean that is proposed to be moved into the Handforth electoral area.

The natural and logical boundary between Wilmslow and Handforth is the River Dean. It has always been so, and I cannot see any good reason why this should be changed.

I DO NOT live in Handforth, and I DO NOT wish to be part of a Handforth electoral ward.

I would be very grateful if you could respond to my email, confirming receipt, and also confirming that my views will be presented to the Boundary Committee.

Many thanks in advance.

Kind Regards,

Mrs Gill Beton e

02/03/2010

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: meriel boyd Sent: 12 February 2010 23:12 To: Reviews@ Cc: Robert Boyd Subject: electoral review of Cheshire East Authority name: Meriel Boyd address:

area submission refers to: Cheshire East organisation you belong to: member of the public

To: Review Officer (Cheshire East Review) The Boundary Committee for England Trevelyan House Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW

I wish you to note that I strongly oppose the proposal to ward Adlington with Poynton West, an entirely different type of area, and wish to be warded, instead, with Prestbury, an area of similar character.

Meriel Boyd February 12, 2010.

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Robert Boyd Sent: 13 February 2010 09:54 To: Reviews@ Subject: RE: electoral review of Cheshire East Authority

To: Review Officer (Cheshire East Review) The Boundary Committee for England Trevelyan House Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW

I wish you to note that I oppose the proposal to ward Adlington with Poynton West. The reasons put forward for the proposal are weak. Furthermore, Adlington forms part of the ecclesiastical Parish of Prestbury a status which correctly reflects the ethos, local geography and history of Adlington. It would be more appropriately linked with Prestbury for civil purposes..

Thank you,.

Sir Robert Boyd,

February 12, 2010.

02/03/2010 Page 1 of 2

Eleanor Gregory

From: Alan Brennan Sent: 25 January 2010 07:39 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Parish Council - Electoral Review of Cheshire East Unitary Authority

Hi,

Received an out-of-office message when I sent the below to James so I thought it prudent to re-send it to you.

Could you please acknowledge the parish council's objections and confirm that this is sufficient notification for them to be acted upon?

Thank you.

Alan Brennan, Clerk to Gawsworth Parish Council

From: To: [email protected] CC: Subject: Gawsworth Parish Council - Electoral Review of Cheshire East Unitary Authority Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 15:04:33 +0000

Hi James,

Gawsworth Parish Council wishes to make a formal representation to object to the proposed splitting of the Parish of Gawsworth into two parish wards i.e. Gawsworth Village Parish Ward and Gawsworth Moss Parish Ward. It simply asks for the status quo to prevail i.e. that Gawsworth Parish remains a single ward for parish election purposes.

Further, it understands that the splitting of the parish into two wards is a consequence of the proposal to move the Gawsworth Moss area of Gawsworth parish (from the Gawsworth Borough Ward) into the Moss Borough Ward. It follows that Gawsworth Parish Council also wishes to make a formal representation to object to this proposal too. Again it simply asks for the status quo to prevail so that the whole of the Parish of Gawsworth lies within the bounds of a single borough ward. The Parish Council understands that it is usual for a parish to be wholly contained within a single borough ward and hence it respectfully requests that Gawsworth is not made an exception to this rule.

These representations are being made not just by the Parish Council but also on behalf of the vast majority of residents in the Gawsworth Moss area who also strongly object to the proposals and adamantly wish to remain as part of Gawsworth.

Could you please acknowledge the parish council's objections and confirm that this is sufficient notification for them to be acted upon?

Thank you.

Regards,

Alan Brennan, Clerk to Gawsworth Parish Council

02/03/2010

Eleanor Gregory

From: Reviews@ Sent: 12 February 2010 20:07 To: Reviews@ Subject: EC website: Online submission

Form summary:

Name : Dr E H Burke

Postal address :

Email address : e

Area your submission refers to : Cheshire East

Organisation you belong to : member of the public

Your feedback : I have lived in the area for 42 years and have always felt attachment to Prestbury either through the church or the many social clubs that myself and now my own children belong. I have always identified with being part of Prestbury Ward. I see know good reason to change this boundry other to provide a convenience for the local goverment. There is no community identity with Poynton which has it own well established separate identity. To change the status quo of our community for some balancing of a few votes seems ill advised and very inconsiderate of the wishes of Adlington residents. My family and I therefore want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward .

Attachment : No file uploaded

1 Form Information

Site Name : Electoral Commission Site Id : 42 Page Standard Name : Consultations and current reviews Page Standard Id : 42911 Page Custom Form Name : Online submissions Page Custom Form Id : 55756 Url : http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online- submissions Submission Id : 84585 Time of Submission : 12 Feb 2010 8:07 pm Submission IP Address : 213.129.83.5

2

Page 1 of 1

Eleanor Gregory

From: Des Butler Sent: 13 February 2010 20:20 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary Committee for New Ward Boundaries in Cheshire East

Dear Boundary Committee

I, ( Des Butler) property owner in , wholeheatedly support the recommendations to incorporate Stapeley Rural Parish with that of Wybunbury, Hough, Chorlton, Doddington, Hatherton, & Parish areas, as one seat of two in Nantwich South.

Using Peter Destapleigh Way as the boundary, between the new ward and the other Nantwich South ward, (incorporating Stapeley Urban is a logical step) as it represemts the views of the residents more proportionatley..

The main reasoning is that Stapeley Rural is as it implies rural, and not part of the Nantwich Town.

It has more in common with the southerly villages, and rural areas.

The local children attend the rural primary schools of Broad Lane and Wybunbury, as well as living in the area, and these have close links via the Delves Estate in Doddington and also with Bridgemere.

I trust that my considered point of view is taken into account in any deliberations over this decision.

Thanks

Des Butler

02/03/2010