Local Resident Submissions to the Doncaster District Council Electoral Review

Local resident submissions to the Doncaster District Council electoral review

This PDF document contains 22 submissions with surnames beginning with 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.

Hinds, Alex

From: Sent: 16 June 2014 20:17 To: Reviews@ Cc: Subject: Boundary divide of Edenthorpe - Letter from a resident

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

I am a resident of Edenthorpe, I have lived in the Parish for over 35yrs, I am very proud of our village and the community|I share it with.

I strongly appose the suggestion that we move the boundary starting at Thorne Rd and taking us back to Armthorpe. Amongst may reasons here are a few:

1) It isn't the Armthorpe community who water the planters in and around our streets. 2) It isn't the Armthorpe community who fund raise to build new football clubs for Edenthorpe's local children. 3) Lets face facts the Local Authority budget has been squeezed by Central Government to save £109 million, who can assure me that this not another cost saving exercise, to the detriment of me, my family and the wider community. 4) Exactly why has this decision come about. 5) What are the benefits 6) How long have the the 'powers that be' known about these changes 7) What assurances will be given to households facing a drop in house prices

In fact we share nothing with Armthorpe not even our bus route. I also have a child who will be attending Hungerhill Comprehensive school in a few years, how will this effect her will she have to go to Armthorpe?

The people in this country have been hammered every which way to save money, with our council elderly homes shutting, day care centre's closing and now you want to change the village we live in to chane - and for whose benefit - Whitehall,Osbourne,or the Coalition ?

I would expect and like to see local councilors speaking up for the community, on this point.

Regards Linda Laurie-Ali

Hinds, Alex

From: Sent: 16 June 2014 21:23 To: Subject: Fwd: Changes to Edenthorpe boundaries and parish's

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

------Forwarded message ------From: Date: 16 Jun 2014 21:06 Subject: Changes to Edenthorpe boundaries and parish's To: Cc:

We are residents of edenthorpe who have attended a shambolic meeting tonight at the edenthorpe communitry centre.

We feel absolutely and totally let down by not only doncaster metropolitan borough council but also out local councillors. To receive a letter from a local resident who happened to overhear a conversation regarding proposed boundary moves is utterly appalling.

If this resident didn't take action herself and post these letters through our doors would we still be in the dark about what could be changing.

Our main concerns are about our local schools and amenities......

We are parents of an eight year old child who currently attends kirk Sandall junior school, if these boundary changes do happen and our part of edenthorpe falls within the parish of Armthorpe will we struggle to get our child into hunger hill school which I can actually see from our house!!!!

Will our house insurance rise being part of Armthorpe parish as I believe the crime rate is higher for that area???

Will the changes affect out house value?????

Do the Armthorpe councillors want to have the burden of the edenthorpe area??

Will we be forgotten about when it comes to local funding???

What hope do we have as local residents if we are mushrooms. Kept in the dark and fed on s**t!!!!!!!!

The questions and worries are endless and I can honestly say I feel no confidence whatsoever that we will be listened to or that our views will be listened to.

I would very much appreciate a response to this email asap as we have not got another meeting arranged for this coming Wednesday.

1 I am sure this will be part of a long list of emails into this inbox tomorrow morning but the residents want and need answers.

Regards Mr & Mrs Levitt

7th August 2014

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to voice my objections to the proposed boundary changes to the ward of Edenthorpe in Doncaster. I would like to state at the outset that I am strongly against any proposed division of the village, and believe that Edenthorpe should remain in our current ward with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun.

I have thoroughly enjoyed living in Edenthorpe, since I moved to the area from West Yorkshire in 1999. I can honestly say that I have never previously experienced in other villages, the strong sense of community spirit, neighbourhood pride and sharing of amenities which is evident in this village. To divide the village along the A18 (a relatively minor single carriage way road) is absolutely outrageous. I, along with hundreds of other residents do not wish to become part of the Armthorpe ward – a village with which we have no obvious links, either transport or community. I would like to offer some further points against the division of Edenthorpe along the A18 :

1. Edenthorpe is clearly one village with a strong community sense – it should not be split! There is a minor road running through Edenthorpe which has numerous designated places for pedestrians to cross – it is not a natural boundary.

2. There is a far greater natural boundary between Edenthorpe south side (Fieldside estate where I reside) and Armthrope – the A630 is a fast moving access road to the motorway, and then there are acres of farmland adding to the division. If we were to become part of the Armthorpe ward, accessing the amenities would be impractical and often unsafe for Edenthorpe residents (Eg. Children walking to school should catchment areas alter, pensioners accessing Post Office, etc)

3. In support of point 2, there are no direct public transport links to Armthorpe – the two villages are not on a bus route. In contrast, the entire village of Edenthorpe is linked by bus services, many of which continue on to serve Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun.

4. Edenthorpe as a whole is self sufficients – it has it own supermarkets, pubs, cafes, doctors, dentists, shops, post office, bank, etc, and does not need to be linked to Armthorpe. These facilities are accessed and enjoyed by all of the village.

5. Community spirit – Edenthorpe is a strong community which has worked hard to build amenities which serve both sides of the village, such as the community centre and Church Balk Pavillion – how would these facilities be split / funded if our ward was divided?? They shouldn’t have to be!

6. In addition to point 5, many of Edenthorpes voluntary community groups work in partnership with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun – I repeat, there is an immense feeling of community spirit and neighbourhood support, which we do not want obliterating by the proposed boundary change.

7. It has also been brought to our attention that a similar proposed boundary change to Hatfield was avoided owning to their obvious sense of community. Edenthorpe has the same, if not stronger argument along these lines, with countless groups working both within the village and with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun. How this argument can be used for their village and not ours is ridiculously unfair.

8. There are longstanding church links within the current Edenthorpe, Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun ward.

9. Schools – something I feel particularly strongly about as the parent of two primary age children. The primary schools in the ward at present are the feeder schools for our villages’ “outstanding” secondary school, Hungerhill. They form the pyramid which provides a superb standard of education for our wards youngsters. If the boundary was to change, my children’s primary school would technically be in the Armthorpe ward – how would this affect catchment areas in future? As resident of 15 years in Edenthorpe (400m from the high school), I want my children to attend Hungerhill – not risk a 60mph road and farmers fields to access Armthorpe Comprehensive!

10. Edenthorpe is an expanding village with continual housing development. I realise that the proposed boundary changes are all related to numbers, and an attempt to reduce councillor numbers and save money. Why divide Edenthorpe in an attempt to facilitate this cut back, when it is a growing, flourishing village, which functions superbly with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun, and has lno natura link to Armthorpe?

11. Following on from this financial point, if Edenthopre south was to become a minority section of Armthorpe, how likely is it that our distant part of the ward would receive our entitlement of funding? I do not believe that Armthorpe councillors, serving their 10, 000+ residents, would willingly divert funds to the neighbouring village in order to maintain and upgrade facilities. We would become the poorer relation!

12. If the proposed change went ahead, we would simply be tagged onto Armthorpe to make up their numbers for 3 councillors, and help reduce the total number of Doncaster councillors, and ultimately cut costs.

13. There are many other points I could raise against the proposed boundary change, eg. Affect on house prices, insurance, etc....they are too numerous to mention

In conclusion I would like to reiterate my opening statement – I strongly object to the proposed division of Edenthorpe – a thriving, supportive and friendly community. I wish to remain in the current ward with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun, and not merged with the Armthorpe ward.

Many thanks for reading this letter,

Yours sincerely

Helen Liddle

Porter, Johanna

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 04 August 2014 09:05 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: FW:

From: Margaret Lightfoot [ Sent: 03 August 2014 08:55 To: Reviews@; Subject:

Reg: Proposed Edenthorpe ward Boundary Changes.

There is a term “ if it is n’t broke don’t fix it”!

We have recently purchased a property in Edenthorpe which we chose for as any one does the location the amenities the refined area, which we are now aware is in the proposed split within the boundary of Armthorpe. If we wanted to have lived in ARMTHORPE our purchase would have been some what cheaper so as a new resident if this so called change is passed for the sake of the amount of councillors how would the housing market rectify its values , would we and many others be compensated for loss!! Edenthorpe is its own welcoming community and has been for years, we agree with all the points people have put forward .The proposals put forward are a travesty to a thriving community in an already stressed Doncaster Town which is more for the benefit of councillors not for the electorate.

Yours

Mr & Mrs M Lightfoot

Sent from Windows Mail

1 Egan, Helen

From: John Linsley) Sent: 23 July 2014 21:47 To: Reviews@ Subject: Ward boundary review, Doncaster Attachments: Comments on Ward Boundary Review - v2.docx

Dear Sirs,

Please find my comments attached, which I hope that you will consider very seriously. Can you please confirm receipt of this e-mail.

Yours sincerely,

John Linsley

Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlo ok prevented automatic This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. download of this picture from the In ternet.

1 Comments on Ward Boundary Review – Doncaster District, Torne Valley Ward

Whilst the requirement to reduce the number of Doncaster Ward Councillors to 54 is welcomed, and the required ward criteria accepted, the breaking up of the existing southern rural Torne Valley ward is largely unnecessary, totally illogical and arbitrarily treated and, seemingly, politically motivated. Equality of electorate apart, the proposals in this area are totally against the required criteria.

It is accepted that the Torne Valley ward is a very large geographical area and, currently between the thresholds for 2 or 3 councillors proposed for the wards – so some ‘tweeking’ is necessary.

The creation of a Rossington & Bawtry ward is, particularly illogical as they are totally diverse, and individually defined, communities with obvious cultural differences.

Rossington is a former mining village, and is an existing self-contained (self-sufficient) urban parish and, indeed, currently its own ward. It has good bus links with Doncaster town centre. Bawtry is an historic market town, within a rural setting, and having its own town council.

The two areas are several miles apart, being separated by a vast expanse of countryside, and divided by the East Coast main line. They certainly have vastly different identities, different issues, and service delivery priorities. Rossington is a remote community, which lies to the west of the A638, and is totally separated from any other area within the Borough.

The draft proposal states that Rossington is currently too large to be a two member ward. It is actually 19.2% over threshold (5 year projection figures) but, as mentioned, is a currently recognised remote and distinct community with its own ward. In line with the proposals, due to its distinct community and relatively small confined area, it could easily be served by 2 Councillors despite being over the threshold. This being in line with the draft proposals for Thorne and Armthorpe.

The draft proposal is that Tickhill becomes a single member ward, which contravenes the current electoral cycle for the Borough. Tickhill, like its close neighbour Bawtry, is a small market town and the two current Torne Valley ward towns have an obvious, and well recognised, affinity with each other, business links, and similar issues. They both have a high conservation value, and are within rural areas. They are geographically close, being linked by the A631, and are currently joined as a Bawtry & Tickhill policing neighbourhood. So why create a single member ward, within the Borough, only in this particular instance? The sensible scenario is to create a new Tickhill and Bawtry ward, which conforms to the normal 2 or 3 ward councillor proposal. In order to achieve equity of electorate for a 2 councillor ward then part of the existing Torne Valley ward also needs to be linked to this new ward. The obvious links are the existing Torne Valley ward links of Austerfield and the Wadworth/ Loversall parishes. The combined electorate for the new Tickhill and Bawtry ward would be 8865, which passes the threshold test (4.6% variance).

Austerfield has considerable reliance on Bawtry for its services eg. medical centre, library, post office and shops. It is geographically very close to Bawtry. Wadworth/Loversall have similar links to Tickhill. The proposed Finningley ward would be exactly the same as the existing ward, but reduced in size from the draft proposal by the removal of Austerfield back to its existing links with Bawtry. The new Finningley electorate would be 12,395 which is still within threshold for 3 councillors (variance -2.5%).

The proposed Edlington and Warmsworth ward would be reduced in size from the draft proposal by the removal of Wadworth and Loversall. The new electorate would be 12,032 which is still within threshold for 3 councillors (variance -5.4%). The negative variance helping to recognise the relatively large geograhical size, and councillor representation.

These simple changes would retain the total requirement of 54 councillors, recognise the need for equal electorate representation, as well as maintain existing parish boundaries, reduce geographical ward sizes so that they are more easily managed by their councillor representatives’, and more appropriately recognise the needs of the different types of community.

John Linsley

Bawtry resident Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Doncaster District

Personal Details:

Name: John Linsley

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I have made some more realistic proposal regarding the old Torne Valley Ward - see the uploaded document

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/3639 30/07/2014 Egan, Helen

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 24 July 2014 09:27 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: FW: Ward boundary review, Doncaster Attachments: Comments on Ward Boundary Review - v2.docx

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

From: John Linsley) [ Sent: 23 July 2014 21:47 To: Reviews@ Subject: Ward boundary review, Doncaster

Dear Sirs,

Please find my comments attached, which I hope that you will consider very seriously. Can you please confirm receipt of this e-mail.

Yours sincerely,

John Linsley

1 Comments on Ward Boundary Review – Doncaster District, Torne Valley Ward

The creation of a Rossington & Bawtry ward is, particularly illogical as they are totally diverse, and individually defined, communities with obvious cultural differences.

John Linsley

Bawtry resident Egan, Helen

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 30 July 2014 13:34 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: FW: Ward boundary review, Doncaster Attachments: Comments on Ward Boundary Review - v2.docx; Letter to LGBCE.doc; Ward Boundary Proposal_jpg

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

Hi Jo,

Please see sub below for Doncaster.

Regards, Helen

From: John Linsley) [m Sent: 29 July 2014 11:32 To: Reviews@ Subject: Fw: Ward boundary review, Doncaster

Dear Sirs,

Please find attached a letter suggesting a modification to my original proposal. This would require even less changes, and leave the Edlington and Wadworth Ward as per your proposal, but still remove the undemocratic single councillor ward proposal for Tickhill, and create a new Tickhill and Bawtry (2 councillor) Ward. Rossington would still become a 2 councillor ward. Hope that this makes sense. Yours sincerely,

John Linsley

From: John Linsley Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 9:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Ward boundary review, Doncaster

Dear Sirs,

Please find my comments attached, which I hope that you will consider very seriously. Can you please confirm receipt of this e-mail.

Yours sincerely,

John Linsley

1 Right-click here to download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Outlo ok prevented automatic This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active. download of this picture from the In ternet.

2 Comments on Ward Boundary Review – Doncaster District, Torne Valley Ward

The creation of a Rossington & Bawtry ward is, particularly illogical as they are totally diverse, and individually defined, communities with obvious cultural differences.

John Linsley

Bawtry resident

Tel: (Mobile) Email:

29 July 2014

The Review Officer LGBCE Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG

Dear Sirs

Re: Ward Boundary Proposals – Doncaster Borough

Please find attached my comments regarding the proposals in respect of the existing Torne Valley Ward. I have e-mailed my comments, but thought that it is such an important issue that I am also writing and enclosing a map of suggested boundary revisions. Apologies, as the map is a rather small scale print from your web-site.

I have spoken to many local residents in Bawtry, and surrounding areas, and they all feel the same about the current proposals. However, most people take the view that they will not able to change things and are, therefore, not making any submission. Austerfield Parish are particularly incensed by the proposed split from Bawtry, and I believe that the Parish Council are making comment.

The case for the linkage between Tickhill and Wadworth/Loversall is, perhaps, not as strong as that for Bawtry and Austerfield. If these 2 parishes were to remain part of the proposed Edlington and Wadworth Ward (as you currently propose), then the electorate figures would still pass the threshold test. The revised Tickhill and Bawtry Ward would have an electorate of 7797 (variance -8%) and the Edlington and Wadworth Ward would be 13,100 (variance 3%).

The current proposals are not logical in many areas, and seem to have been put forward purely with regard to electorate numbers – closely following the Labour Party’s original submission. The proposals appear to ignore many of your own criteria about the interests of local communities, and effective and convenient local government. I know that representations are also being made by many other areas of the Borough along similar lines.

Can you please seriously consider the attached suggestions. Hopefully, the point is argued reasonably well, and that common sense will prevail when your final proposals are published.

Yours sincerely

John Linsley

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Doncaster District

Personal Details:

Name: June Linsley

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Feature Annotations

7:6:5:3:4: 8: 2: 1: 9: Tickhill & Bawtry Ward

Map Features:

Annotation 1:

Annotation 2:

Annotation 3:

Annotation 4:

Annotation 5:

Annotation 6:

Annotation 7:

Annotation 8:

Annotation 9: Tickhill & Bawtry Ward

Comment text:

Apologies as having trouble with the map. The proposals for much of the Borough, and particularly the old Torne Valley Ward are ill-conceived. Rossington is a clearly defined parish/ward, which should remain separate as a 2 councillor ward. Rossington does not have any affinity with Bawtry. Bawtry & Tickhill are very similar small market towns, and it is sensible to retain their close relationship as a new Ward. Austerfield relies very much on Bawtry for many of its amenities and services. It is only a mile from Bawtry and should remain part of that ward. You could argue similarly for Wadworth with Tickhill. The newly created Ward would then be of sufficient size for 2 councillors, and thus remove the senseless scenario of a single councillor ward for Tickhill - which certainly does not provide electoral equality.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/3640 30/07/2014 Porter, Johanna

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 21 July 2014 13:19 To: Porter, Johanna Subject: FW: Edenthorpe boundaries

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: carl lister Sent: 20 July 2014 13:37 To: Reviews@ Subject: Edenthorpe boundaries

We move to Edenthorpe last June and the hole purpose was so that my children could go to Hunger Hill and now I'm being told we will not automatically get in even though it is only a two minutes walk from my house. I think this is ridiculous that you can just change our boundary with no obviouse advantage at all for us.

1 Hinds, Alex

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 18 June 2014 09:19 To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: EDENTHORPE, DONCASTER, SOUTH YORKSHIRE

From: Sent: 18 June 2014 09:08 To: Reviews@ Cc: Subject: EDENTHORPE, DONCASTER, SOUTH YORKSHIRE

I would like to wholeheartedly oppose and reject any proposal to divide Edenthorpe, Doncaster, South Yorkshire into two separate member wards.

We have only recently moved into Edenthorpe village and one of the reasons we did so was the community spirit. Under your new proposal our house would come within the Armthorpe ward which I find ridiculous. Please reconsider your proposal and take into account the strong feelings of the community.

Regards Sue Logan

************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************

The content of this email (and any attachment) is confidential. It may also be legally privileged or otherwise protected from disclosure.

This email should not be used by anyone who is not an original intended recipient, nor may it be copied or disclosed to anyone who is not an original intended recipient.

If you have received this email by mistake please notify us by emailing the sender, and then delete the email and any copies from your system.

Liability cannot be accepted for statements made which are clearly the sender's own and not made on behalf of Network Rail.

************************************************************************************** **************************************************************************

Review Officer Doncaster Review Local Govt. Boundary Commission Layden House, 76-86 Turnmill St. London EC1M 5LG.

21 July 2014.

Dear Review Officer,

With regard to the proposed boundary changes to Edenthorpe, Doncaster it clearly demonstrates that you reviewers of the ward boundaries have no idea of the depth of feeling your proposals have to the local community as you draw a pencil line on a map which has no correlation to the needs and understanding of the community. Do you not learn from history? It is only a two or three decades ago that you changed the wards in this area and amalgamated Armthorpe with Edenthorpe. It was an unmitigated disaster which after about 15 years was rectified to the relief of all concerned when Edenthorpe was separated from Armthorpe and placed and returned, as was wished, with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun. You are now proposing to revert back to that unworkable ward but only putting half of the village into the new Armthorpe ward. We do not want that at any cost.

We are proud of our growing village and our commitment to the village and are under no illusions as to disadvantages that will be placed on the village if we are divided and hived off into Armthorpe. Armthorpe has its own identity and does not have a shared vision of a joint community like we already have with Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun.

We fully understand that these boundary reviews have come about by the need to reduce the number of ward councillors as whole in Doncaster M.B.C.. If required Edenthorpe, Kirk Sandall and Barnby Dun who at the moment have three ward councillors would be better off with two rather than amalgamate with Armthorpe to preserve us being represented by three councillors.

We ask you to fully reject the proposal of linking part of Edenthorpe with Armthorpe and keep the village intact regarding ward representation.

Roger and Sandra Lowe. Hinds, Alex

From: Sent: 19 June 2014 11:55 To: Reviews@ Subject: objection to proposed ward boundary changes to Edenthorpe.

Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged

HI I AM WRITING THIS MESSAGE TO STRONGLY COMPLAIN ABOUT THIS PROPOSAL.I AM 55 YRS OLD AND LIVED IN THE VILLAGE MOST OF MY LIFE AND WAS BROUGHT UP IN THIS VILLAGE. WHY NOT JOIN THE OTHER SIDE OF EDENTHORPE WITH KIRK SANDAL OR WHY EVEN THINK ABOUT SPLITTING EDENTHORPE. i THINK IT IS RIDICULOUS AND IF I WANTED TO BE PART OF ARMTHORPE I WOULD HAVE LIVED THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE.WE ARE A LOVELY VILLAGE AND I AM PROUD TO SAY I LIVE IN EDENTHORPE AND WOULD LIKE TO KEEP IT THAT WAY.ALSO WHAT ABOUT THE OLDER GENERATION AS THIS IS GOING TO BE VERY HARD FOR THE AS WELL AS CONFUSING. KIND REGARDS MARGARET AND STEVE LOWTH.

25 July 2014

Reviews Officer Doncaster Review Local government Boundary Commission for England Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG email: [email protected]

Dear Sir,

We would like to voice our objections on the proposed plans by the Boundary Commission to move Marr from its current Sprotbrough Ward to the proposed Adwick Ward. We are a small rural/farming community and have more ties and commonalities with our neighbouring villages and to our current ward of Sprotbrough than to the predominantly mining community base of Adwick.

Marr has a rich history of being closely associated with its neighbouring villages and Sprotbrough with connecting public byways that have stood for centuries. Residents of Marr are very unlikely to frequent for business or pleasure, to the areas within the proposed new ward. Marr has beautiful rolling fields which are a delight to stroll across towards Sprotbrough and these paths are indeed frequently used by ramblers.

It does not seem to be in the best interests of the residents of Marr that simply for the sake of equalising numbers in order to ensure that the newly proposed Adwick Ward has electoral equality, that Marr should become shunted from a long-standing association with Sprotbrough and risk losing our rural identity.

At a recent Marr Parish meeting it was firmly believed by all that Adwick, Carcroft, Woodlands and Skellow have more common ground with each other than they do with the rural villages such as Marr, Brodsworth and Hampole. They were predominantly coal extraction villages and the sprawling suburbs that they have become have grown out of mining in their areas. In stark contrast, Marr and many of its surrounding villages developed around farming and agriculture and as a result the people and lifestyles are vastly different.

We whole heartily support our Marr Parish Meeting in its proposals and the Joint Rural Parish submission.

Yours faithfully,

Mr. A. Lukaszewski Mrs. C. Allison