Local Resident submissions to the North Council electoral review

This PDF document contains submissions from Local Residents with surnames K-P.

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.

Local Government Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: Andrew King

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

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

Map Features:

Comment text: I believe these proposed changes to the Parish boundaries of Pill, Easton in Gordano etc are wholly inappropriate.If there are changes to be made, common sense would tell you that with Portishead increasing dramatically, and cost saving exercise could easily be made there by amalgamating and expanding there. As it is, we are a small community constantly fighting for amenities in an area not only starved, but deprived of any real aid form the NS Council and this is a further kick in the teeth to demoralise a community already at rock bottom. For once, it would be nice if NS Council took a long hard look at what we don't have and redressed the balance, rather than removing our only source of fight, our Parish council. This proposal is outrageous and whoever suggested it should not only hang their heads in shame, but resign their position.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2432 23/10/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2432 23/10/2013 From: Nan Kirsen [ ] Sent: 11 September 2013 08:54 To: Reviews@ Subject: Local Government Review

I have had more time to look at the proposals since my email last evening, also I have checked the boundaries of the proposed recommendations.

Tickenham is included in the Gordano ward proposals, which also includes Easton-in- Gordano. These two areas ie; Tickenham/Easton-in-Gordano have no common boundaries but Tickenham does have common boundaries with Nailsea, Clevedon, Portbury, Failand and ,unlike Easton-in-Gordano, whose common boundaries are Pill, Abbot's Leigh and Portbury.

I find the proposal to remove Easton-in-Gordano, the Parish Council which includes Pill and Ham Green , and include it with an area with no common links absolutely incredible, unless this is just a numbers exercise.

This I can fully appreciate needs to be re-appraised but it also needs to reflect local communities with common boundaries at the very least.

I do hope you will take my further views into consideration.

Yours faithfully,

Nan Kirsen

From: Nan Kirsen [ ] Sent: 10 September 2013 19:42 To: Reviews@ Subject: Local Government Reviews.

I refer to the recommendation for one of the proposals in ;Pill Ward to take in Abbots Leigh and Leigh Woods.

I am extremely disturbed about this proposal for many reasons and I am therefore providing a little background.

Pill ward was originally called Easton-in-Gordano ward with two seats, the Parish Council was known as Easton-in-Gordano Parish Council St.George's being one ward and Pill the other.

I was born and brought up here as were my parents, grandparents. etc. and all of the records held at Somerset Archives refer to the Parish Council as Easton-in-Gordano. A few years one of the new councillors decided it was more reflective of the population to refer to it as Pill Parish Council.

The proposal to link Pill, Abbots Leigh and Leigh Woods in isolation would appear to be without valid reasoning, It may have worked if Easton-in-Gordano had been included to make a two member ward, this would certainly have added balance. and this combination has worked for many years.

Pill is second to only Weston-Super-Mare in social deprivation with large numbers of social housing, whilst Abbots Leigh and Leigh Woods, have no social housing and most residents are professionals or white colour workers and most properties change hands in the region of 700,00-1.million pounds and more.

The areas proposed could not be more "poles apart" In fact in the recent past the elected members who covered both Pill and Easton-in-Gordano worked together as the common boundary usually meant there was a joint interest.

I do hope you will take my views into account. I was an elected member for Easton-in- Gordano for many years and leader of the council for your years when it became a Unitary Authority, I feel particularly strongly about this area.

Nan Kirsen.

Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: Bob Langton

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

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

Map Features:

Comment text: I find the proposals as they stand most unacceptable, specifically in relation to the community in which I live - that is within the area covered by Pill and Easton-in-Gordano Parish Council. The Parish is an extremely integrated one with a very strong community spirit and is at present well-served by two Ward Councillors, one broadly serving the Pill and Ham green area, and the other Easton-in-Gordano, along with Abbot's Leigh and Leigh Woods. These two Councillors have found it quite possible to attend Parish Council meetings on a frequent basis and to communicate effectively with their electorates: as a result they have been effective at tackling the problems that inevitably arise, especially in relation to the services provided (or otherwise) by North Somerset Council. The existing proposals would work very strongly against this state of affairs, in particular by the creation of the so-called Ward. I can see that, in an office far distant from the reality of North Somerset, this might seem like a reasonably sensible suggestion: in fact it is nothing of the sort. The area of Easton-in-Gordano has virtually no connection with the more general Gordano Valley beyond those of individual acquaintance: links with the villages of Portbury and Abbot's Leigh exist to a certain extent, and the current ward system has promoted a certain level of communication between the various parish councils. Beyond that, the village links more closely with than with, for example, Weston-in-Gordano. It is beyond belief that a single councillor could adequately serve the very disparate needs of this non- community of voters. The preferred approach of the Parish Council in the village, which I support, is to establish a single member ward covering solely the communities of Pill with Ham Green, and Easton-in-Gordano. It is recognised that in terms of numbers of voters this is larger than expected but population growth in the village is likely to be small (unless local plans are very radically changed) and so this situation would not persist for very long, and the coherence of the community would make the task of representing it eminently practical. If the Boundary Commission cannot accept this proposal (and hence run counter to the widespread popular support for it) then a two ward solution taking in the Parish itself along with Portbury, Abbot's Leigh and Leigh Woods, would be the least bad alternative. To be most effective, I would suggest that within this approach, rather than an arbitrary dividing line between the two wards being created, a single two-member ward should be created.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2597 21/11/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2597 21/11/2013 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 18 November 2013 09:06 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Boundary Review North Somerset

From: Roy Lewis Sent: 17 November 2013 22:58 To: Reviews@ Subject: Fwd: Boundary Review North Somerset

Date: 17 November 2013 19:25:34 GMT To: "[email protected]" Subject: Boundary Review North Somerset

My wife and I moved recently from a property in the Pill Ward to a new build in Ham Green that we thought was within the same Ward. Logically and geographically the house is within Pill village and our postal address confirms this. It took some three months of confused contacts with all administrative bodies and Councils to discover the Ward and parish boundary runs along the centre of Lime Tree Grove and a pocket of properties, including ours, are within Abbots Leigh, Easton in Gordano Ward. There seems to be no reason for this, other than historic accident.

The consequence of this discovery was that we had to turn to another councillor for help and advice. He told us that this pocket of houses was an anomaly in his area of responsibility and it was clear in our contacts with the parish council that the same view was shared there. We had established a good relationship with the Pill councillor who was no longer able to offer advice and support. Boundary definition is, therefore, important to us.

Our opinion is that the logical boundary for Pill Ward should be defined by the important link roads and geographic features which define Pill as a single community:

the A369 to its junction with the M5; part of the M5 to the bridge; the River ; and Beggar Bush Lane as proposed but, possibly only to Blackmoor Road and the post code boundary to the Avon if the gathering objections to the inclusion of Abbots Leigh persuade change.

So, we support the proposal to extend Pill Ward towards Abbots Leigh but oppose as illogical the proposal to remove Easton in Gordano out of the parish boundary and thus divide the identity of Pill as one community.

Roy and Cherry Lewis

12

13 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: Ann Lowson

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

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

Map Features:

Comment text: Leigh Woods would be better represented by staying part of Easton in Gordano ward than by being subsumed into Long Ashton. We are much more affected by issues concerning the suspension bridge and the A369 than we are by issues relating to Long Ashton, which is physically cut off from Leigh Woods by Bristol City owned Ashton Court park.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2666 21/11/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2666 21/11/2013 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 15 November 2013 09:13 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Parish boundaries

From: Mary Maddicks Sent: 14 November 2013 20:38 To: Reviews@ Subject: Parish boundaries

Dear Sirs

It has been brought to my attention that a change in parish boundaries is being discussed and I should like to record my objection to the proposal to link Cleeve with Wrington. Our District Councillors live in the Yatton area rather than the Wrington area, and they know the local problems. Cleeve has close community links with Claverham but none with Wrington. Cleeve's children go to playgroup and junior school in Claverham, and Cleeve and Claverham churches share the same vicar. It seems obvious that Cleeve, Claverham and Yatton should share the same District Councillors and I hope you will take this into consideration.

Mary Maddicks

28 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 09 October 2013 15:47 To: Bowden, Tim Cc: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: New ward boundaries for North Somerset

From: Peter Maitland Sent: 09 October 2013 15:16 To: Reviews@ Subject: New ward boundaries for North Somerset

Dear Sir

I am happy with the proposed new ward boundaries shown in the draft recommendations.

Yours

P Maitland Wrington

7 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 18 November 2013 09:07 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Review

From: samason15 Sent: 18 November 2013 01:04 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Review

Thank you for reviewing the ward boundaries in North Somerset and trying to make ward sizes more even, not an easy job. My comments are below

I live in Portishead and your proposal is to have 6 North Somerset councillors for Portishead in four wards, 2 x 1 member and 2 x 2 member. I agree with six councillors but disagree with only having four wards. As far as I am aware Portishead has always had single member wards and should continue to do so. Portishead is built on a hill and down three sides, the terrain means that in many roads on one side of a road you go up steps or a steep drive to the property and on the other side of the road you go down.

This is noticeable in many parts of Portishead including the existing Redcliffe Bay and West wards. Most of these two wards are in the new West ward. This new ward would contain Down Road and part of Nore Road, both main roads in Portishead. There are two roads which connect Nore Road and Down Road, they are West Hill and Hillcrest Road. West Hill would no longer be in West ward. Hillcrest Road is not far from the junction at the top of the hill of Nore Road and Down Road. The only other way of accessing both roads are by very steep footpaths which are mostly steps. Therefore there would be very little road connection between the main roads in the new West ward.

If this was to become a two member ward it would be difficult to look after because of the up and down nature of many of the roads and lack of connection between the Down Road and Nore Road. Both members, unless of the same political party, would have to work the whole area not just half of it. Therefore to make it manageable for everyone I ask for it to continue to be two wards.

This would leave one ward with two members. This should also be split into two to make all wards in Portishead the same. I understand this has been addressed by other responses to your consultation.

Elsewhere I understand there are concerns about the splitting of communities but the one I would like to bring to your attention is Pill and Easton-in-Gordano. They are one community and when you drive through you only know you are in Pill because of a road sign.

Sue Mason

10 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: K Miles

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

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

Map Features:

Comment text: I would like to object to the proposed boundary changes for Pill and Easton-in-Gordano. Why would you cut in half this community? we would lose our burial ground and allotments. Also this area has a lot of history and this would destroy the community. If the reason is to reduce the number of councillors I would like to remind you that not long ago we used to have two so we have already lost 50% of possible councillors.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2489 23/10/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2489 23/10/2013 From: Pete Milner Sent: 16 November 2013 22:31 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed Pill & Easton-in-Gordano electoral boundary changes

I would like to express my opposition to the proposal to change the Pill & Easton‐in‐Gordano electoral boundary. As I understand it Piil would be joined with Abbots Leigh and a large part of Easton in Gordano would be joined with Portbury and other Gordano villages. This seems to make no sense. Currently current parish boundary of Pill and Easton in Gordano has a coherent geographical unity and the villages'populations share local concerns and share facilities. This can't be said of the proposed groupings. The proposals are a recipe for friction, particularly the grouping of Pill and Abbots Leigh, populations with very different aspirations.

Yours sincerely

Peter Milner

1

Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 18 November 2013 09:04 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: PROPOSED CHANGES TO WARD BOUNDARIES IN NORTH SOMERSET

From: Giles Morris Sent: 17 November 2013 15:27 To: Reviews@ Subject: PROPOSED CHANGES TO WARD BOUNDARIES IN NORTH SOMERSET

Dear Sir I have been a resident of Pill/Easton‐in‐Gordano for 34 years (living for about equal time in each village) and would like to register my strong objection to the proposal to attach the two parts of our community to different wards with either Abbots Leigh or Gordano/Tickenham.

This boundary review provides the perfect opportunity for Pill and Easton‐in‐Gordano to be placed in the same ward. We already function as one community with a single parish council, shared amenities and a huge variety of combined community groups and activities. There is no distinct physical or geographical boundary between the two villages and most of us would be unable to say where the technical boundary actually is.

The present arrangement of 2 wards, with Pill separate and E‐i‐G also encompassing Abbots Leigh, makes little sense, but the proposed changes take an unsatisfactory situation and make it even worse. The person who produced such a proposal clearly had no interest in forming logical wards containing natural communities with shared interests. At best they have acted in ignorance of the conditions on the ground, at worst they have disregarded the interests of the electorate to satisfy some spurious political motive.

Local Government exists to serve the interests of the local communities and such communities need to be able to voice their interests and concerns through their elected representatives. Pill and Easton‐in‐Gordano function as a thriving and socially active single community. We need a single councillor to represent our interests. If the economics of N Somerset make it necessary to add other villages to our ward to make the numbers balance, so be it, but any decision other than a single ward for Pill and Easton‐in‐Gordano makes no sense at all.

Yours faithfully, Giles Morris

19 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 14 November 2013 13:30 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset District Council Boundary Changes

From: Dave Mortimer Sent: 14 November 2013 12:48 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset District Council Boundary Changes

This response comes from Linda and David Mortimer, 4

Linda Mortimer

8 years Churchwarden, Holy Trinity Church, Cleeve

3 years Chairman of Court de Wyck School PTA

18 years co-manager – Busy Bees Playgroup – prior to current Stepping Stones Playgroup provision

David Mortimer

7 years – Chair of Governors Court de Wyck CoE Primary School

27 years Governor Court de Wyck

32 years Treasurer Cleeve & Claverham Parochial Church Council - current

29 years Treasurer Yatton Junior Football Club - current

15 years Trustee/Treasurer King George V Playing Field, Cleeve

We write regarding the proposed changes to boundaries for North Somerset Council which will move Cleeve out of the Yatton Ward [currently 3 councillors] and into a single candidate ward along with Wrington.

Over many years there has been support from our District Councillors over many issues relevant to Cleeve residents, but the important ones have always been in relation to children and young people. These issues have nearly always concerned Court de Wyck School and the playgroup and this support has ranged over the years from Greta Lewis in the 1980s to Tony Moulin in present times. Support has been usually direct at source, but occasionally alongside Cleeve Parish Council.

31

The vast majority of children who attend the local educational centres are from the two villages of Cleeve and Claverham; Court de Wyck was set up following on from the closure of Cleeve School in the early 1970s and the Church of England retains an important function at Court de Wyck through its Voluntary Controlled status.

Almost every child who leaves Court de Wyck each year goes onto Backwell School for the continence of their education.

Yatton District Councillors have knowledge of all issues relating to Backwell School, from teaching to bussing in of the children, because Yatton children are part of the same Backwell attending community. The children at Court de Wyck come under tow Parish Councils - Yatton Parish Council for Claverham and Cleeve Parish Council, so there is a commonality among issues that may need District Council as well as Parish Council advice. Children who attend Playgroup all come under the auspices of the Yatton Children Centre.

There are other single issues that are important to Cleeve and Court de Wyck, for example a Walking Bus operated between Cleeve and the School on three days every week. The current Chair of the Governors is our Vicar, who lives in Cleeve.

There is absolutely no contact, connection and correlation with anything to do with Wrington and its education of young people. Wherever the Councillor was situation there would be no understanding of matters in Wrington (whose children attend Wrington Primary and then Churchill School) by a Cleeve based councillor or alternatively no knowledge of issues to do with Cleeve/Claverham/Backwell by a Wrington based councillor.

Turning to other issues, the Church of England plays an important part on the life of the Village of Cleeve. The two churches in Cleeve and Claverham, Holy Trinity and St Barnabas, are a separate Parish within the Yatton Moor Team Ministry. In fact the appointment of the Vicar for Cleeve historically resides in the Vicar of Yatton.

The two Parishes and their priests work closely together as a team, have responsibility for two schools in the Team, Court de Wyck and Yatton Junior School. The two Parishes form part of the Portishead Deanery in the Diocese of Bath and Wells, being the second largest Deanery in the Diocese. Wrington is clearly another Parish but it is also in the Chew Magna Deanery.

Wrington and Cleeve are two villages that are kept separate by one giant hill that enable them to be connected – Wrington Hill and Cleeve Hill.

32

There separateness and differing concerns relate to most things relevant to District Council – we have covered education and religion, but can be added are:

Bus routes are completely different

Main Roads – A370 Cleeve and A38 Wrington

Doctors – Cleeve residents go to Yatton, Backwell or Congresbury. Wrington has its own surgery.

Dentist – Cleeve has its own, plus Yatton.

Library service – Cleeve residents use Yatton.

Shopping – the local Lions Bus takes Cleeve residents to Yatton every week.

In addition Cleeve children play football/rugby at Yatton Junior FC and Yatton Rugby Club.

It looks as if all the Boundary Change report has cobbled together is a number counting exercise to balance out voters against council members, rather than look at the issues and natural linkage between villages.

In summary, even if the numbers of councillors need to be reduced, Cleeve should remain in the ward for Yatton even if there are fewer councillors to represent them.

Linda and David Mortimer

33 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 18 November 2013 11:59 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Boundary Changes

7 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: Lionel Munn

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: N/A

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

Map Features:

Comment text: The new boundaries seem fair and equitable to me - I have no objections.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2600 21/11/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2600 21/11/2013

October 2nd 2013

To whom it may concern,

Re: Boundary Changes to North Somerset

I have been studying the map for the proposed boundary changes to North Somerset. It seems that the map has been redrawn without any thought of how the local community will be affected

The first thing that manifests itself to me is that the local area here is made up from three combined villages: Easton in Gordano, where I live, Pill and Ham Green. This conurbation acts as one community and there is a great deal of interaction for instance 1) when a major decision is needed on something which affects all three villages e.g. dock development, bus routes, green belt, change of land use, planning permission, etc.. 2) when events are staged and celebrated as a community e.g. Pill Regatta, Pill Rag, Christmas lights,

In all cases what affects one of these villages also affects the other two and therefore having one separated into another council ward seems ridiculous. Decisions made by the council on issues to do with Pill and Ham Green are far more important to residents of Easton in Gordano than those concerning people living at the opposite end of the Ward in the outskirts of Clevedon.

I would therefore recommend that It is more sense to keep the ward boundary as it was, extending up to the main A369 portishead Bristol road, containing all the properties and residents of Easton in Gordano.

Yours faithfully

Hilary P. Murphy

Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 10 October 2013 11:33 To: Bowden, Tim Cc: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset proposal to move Cleeve from Yatton ward to Wrington ward by Boundary Commission Attachments: Comments.doc

From: Marianne Pitman Sent: 10 October 2013 11:07 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset proposal to move Cleeve from Yatton ward to Wrington ward by Boundary Commission

I have attached my comments as above. Thankyou Marianne Pitman

6

Dear Sir/Madam October 10th 2013

Removal of Cleeve from Yatton to Wrington ward,North Somerset

I was bewildered to find that it had been suggested that Cleeve should share a district councillor with Wrington. Wrington is at the base of an approximately seven hundred foot hill Broadfield Down on the south and Cleeve is at the northern base .Not surprisingly the only direct link a narrow road, single track in places, can be impassable in snow, ice and heavy rain. Also this means that few people shop or join activities in Wrington unless they have a family link. There are no direct bus services even through another village, which do not involve changing buses. We constantly have to fight for appropriate bus services in which district councillors play a major part in securing a satisfactory outcome. It is unlikely that Cleeve’s needs will be high on the priorities of a councillor with a far larger population in Wrington and different needs.

Our needs for many services mirror those of Yatton much more closely. Most of us would identify with the activities,clubs and amenities including schools in Yatton if they are not provided in Cleeve. On its western boundary the houses in Cleeve are only separated by an 18-acre field from one of the local primary schools and village halls and substantial housing including shops. While appreciating that councillors will need to have a larger electorate and that large new estates will need to be accommodated, have you considered making larger wards and amalgamating more villages and then allowing councillors to work out how to represent the local community using their more detailed and intimate knowledge of local needs. Possibly looking at the parish patterns developed by the Anglican, Methodist or Catholic churches might help as they are already changing to accommodate expanding populations. For example Congresbury, Puxton, Hewish and Banwell are working towards joining with West Wick an expanding area on the outskirts of Weston. Yatton Moor was formed from Cleeve and Claverham, Kenn and Kingston and Yatton sometime ago.

I believe Cleeve was split from Yatton just after the WW11 so it is not surprising the links are very strong having been developed over centuries. I appreciate the enormity of your task but feel that the proposed solution will work to the disproportionate disadvantage of those of us who live in Cleeve no matter how well meaning a Wrington councillor is.

In summary I believe that Cleeve has very strong links with Yatton and it will be to nobody’s advantage to put it in Wrington ward.

Hoping that this is helpful Marianne Pitman Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 2

North Somerset

Personal Details:

Name: Angela` Probyn

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

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

Map Features:

Comment text: Re: Leigh Woods becoming part of Long Ashton Ward: I am NOT in favour of what is in effect a small offshoot of the suggested new Long Ashton Ward. Long Ashton has important but completely different issues from Leigh Woods. We have more in common with the area abutting the A369 and the access to the suspension bridge - the suggested Pill Ward.

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2661 21/11/2013 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 2 of 2

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk//node/print/informed-representation/2661 21/11/2013