Parish and Town Council submissions to the City Council electoral review

This PDF document contains all parish and town council submissions.

Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks.

Local Boundary Commission for Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Rhian Dolby

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Parish Council

Comment text:

I live in Badger Farm. We have a residents association in common with Oliver's Battery and most of our children (including my own) go to school there. We have farm more in common in terms of socio-economic factors with Oliver's Battery, Compton and etc. than we do with St Luke ward. It would be a big mistake to put a parished area like Badger Farm in with area. I am a councillor for Badger Farm Parish Council and we work well with our current arrangements.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5012 17/03/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Debbie Harding

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Parish Council

Comment text:

We note that your 3 main considerations in conducting an electoral review are set out in legislation and your aims is to strike the best balance between:-• Improve electoral equality by equalising the number of electors each Councillor represents• Community identify • Provide effective and convenient local government We believe that your proposal to split Twyford and Colden Common Ward does not achieve to meet these aims, and that our proposal of reducing the existing Twyford and Colden Common ward to a 2 Councillor ward does meet your three aims entirely. We cannot stress enough that Colden Common and Twyford share the same challenges and the benefits of sharing the same ward cannot be understated. Listed below is not an exhaustive list to demonstrate this • Speed and volume of traffic – both villages having the busy B3335/4 running through them and the associated problems with HGV Lorries. o Shared aims to provide safe cycle routes and pavement along with road• Aircraft noise • Rights of Way network between the Parishes• Poor public transport, none after 7pm• Shared services o Doctors surgery including a Patients Participation Group o Church services The Benefice is , Colden Common, and Twyford o Shared charities which the beneficiaries are both villages Twyford and District Nursing trust an example o Youth and Community groups which service both parishes o Recently Police neighbourhood team restructures do not align Sporting groups and associations which service both parishes Historically Twyford and Colden Common were one Parish. Despite today being two legal parishes, a very strong joint community identity remains. We believe that Twyford and Colden Common as one ward with two Ward Councillors is the most effective and efficient way of local democracy and best reflects the 3 main considerations as laid down in legislation. Please allow Colden Common and Twyford to remain as one ward.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/4970 17/03/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Adrian Walmsley

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Compton & Shawford Parish Council

Comment text:

We were disappointed to see that your draft proposal does not reflect the points made in our submission to the first round of consultation. We strongly believe that our original submission satisfies all of your legislative objectives much better than does your draft proposal. Our proposal is to combine the existing Compton & Otterbourne ward with Olivers Battery & Badger Farm ward into a new 3-member ward wholly contained with the County’s Winchester Downlands Division. It would • meet the requirement for electoral equality even better (to within about 0.1% of the target number of electors per councillor, using 2020 projections);• be well-connected by roads (A3090, Poles Lane and Otterbourne Road/Main Road) and footpaths • preserve existing ties • enhance community identity by reconnecting us with neighbouring parishes with whom we have shared interests and historic links, and thus • make it easier for our ward councillors to deliver effective and convenient local government. • sit nicely with the strong desire of Colden Common and Twyford that they remain together as a two-member ward. That ward would meet the requirement for electoral equality to within about 0.5%. The attached document explains our reasons in more detail.

Uploaded Documents:

Download

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5099 16/04/2015

Compton and Shawford Parish Council Response to the LGBCE draft warding proposals at https://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/south-east/hampshire/winchester

Justification

Common interests and initiatives between Compton & Shawford and Otterbourne • Speed and volume of traffic along the busy Otterbourne Road/Main Road running through our two adjacent parishes • Transport - the Winchester- bus service. • Motorway noise : our parishes are both affected; the long campaign for a low noise surface on the M3 was launched back in 2001 at a joint meeting hosted by Otterbourne PC and chaired by C&S PC • Open Spaces o The Sparrowgrove and Oakwood Copse Conservation Trust was formed a few years ago to purchase and conserve for public enjoyment land sold off by Southern Water. This woodland straddles the boundary between the two parishes. The trust is supported by both parish councils. o Play areas – C&S Parish Council contributed to the cost of play equipment in Otterbourne because parishioners in the south of our parish are likely to use it o A joint interest in preserving the Otterbourne-Southdown local gap to the south (“Winchester District Local Plan Part 1 - Joint Core Strategy” Policy CP18) • Shared services o Williams Garage, convenience store and Post Office located just inside Otterbourne are a valuable resource for C&S parishioners in general and in particular those who live in the southern part of our parish

Common interests between Compton & Shawford, Otterbourne and • Church : These three civil parishes make up the ecclesiastical benefice of Compton, Hursley and Otterbourne • Traffic : the busy Poles Lane, where the Veolia waste station is sited, runs along our border with Otterbourne and into Hursley, so affects all three parishes • Open countryside : over recent years there have been many planning applications for developments in farmland near Silkstead where the boundaries of the three parishes meet. Having all three parishes in the same ward makes it easier to have a consistent approach to planning matters.

Common interests between Compton & Shawford, Olivers Battery and Badger Farm • Historic : Olivers Battery (pre 1956) and parts of Badger Farm (pre 1985) were part of the historic parish of Compton • Church: Before Olivers Battery had its own church, parishioners used to walk to church in Compton. Some still attend Compton Church • Open Spaces : o There is a very good network of well-used footpaths and bridleways around the boundary between Compton & Shawford and Olivers Battery and onwards to Badger Farm. We are looking at joint projects for their upkeep. o Bushfield Camp: this is a very valuable open space, lying mostly in Compton & Shawford but enjoyed by many residents of Olivers Battery and Badger Farm. It forms part of the Winchester-Compton Street Local Gap.

2 Parish Council Response to the LGBCE draft warding proposals at https://www.lgbce.org.uk/current-reviews/south-east/hampshire/winchester

• Services: o the Sainsburys supermarket in Badger Farm is where most residents of all three parishes do their regular shopping, o many residents use the doctor’s surgery in Badger Farm o the shops in Olivers Battery (butcher, post office etc.) are a valuable resource for residents of all three parishes

Observations about ward size Since the last ward boundary changes took effect in 2002, we have been part of a 2-member ward. I am not aware of any feeling that this has put us at a disadvantage, despite the legislative preference for 3-member wards in a district council elected by thirds. We know that the Boundary Commission has to strike a balance between the different aims set out in Schedule 2 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009. We would prefer that you give priority to effective local government and the preservation of local ties, and, where appropriate, show flexibility over the number of members per ward.

Knock-on effects Clearly, implementing our proposals would have knock-on effects for the rest of your recommendations. We note that one of the party groups on the City Council submitted a proposal which came to the same conclusion as us for our area of the district. That is, combining Compton & Otterbourne with Olivers Battery & Badger Farm, and retaining Twyford & Colden Common as a two-member ward. Their proposal was worked through for the whole of Winchester district. Summary We believe that merging the current 2-member wards Compton & Otterbourne and Olivers Battery & Badger Farm into a new 3-member ward is the most effective and efficient solution for local democracy and best reflects the three main considerations laid down in legislation. We understand that all our neighbouring parishes will be making representations consistent with ours. Adrian Walmsley Chairman Compton & Shawford Parish Council 28 March 2015

3

From: Durleypc Sent: 25 Februa To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review of Winchester: Draft Recommendations

Dear Sir,

Attached are the comments from Parish Council on the above Review.

Best wishes,

Anne Collins (Mrs) Clerk to Durley Parish Council

1

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: John Thornton

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Hambledon Parish Council

Comment text:

Hambledon Parish Council is happy to be in the Central Meon Valley ward. We should like, however, to propose two amendments. is a nearby village with which Hambledon has many cultural, geographical and social links. Both have similarly strong links with (which is in the proposed Central Meon Valley ward). For these reasons we should like to see Droxford added to this ward. Waltham Chase does not seem a natural fit with the other villages in the proposed Central Meon Valley ward, being geographically and culturally closer to Bishops Waltham and . For this reason we feel that Waltham Chase would sit more naturally in either the Bishop's Waltham ward or the Whitely and Shedfield ward. It is our view that a Central Meon Valley ward including Droxford rather than Waltham Chase would much better satisfy the criterion "that the pattern of wards should, as far as possible, reflect the interests and identities of local communities." Dr John Thornton Chairman, Hambledon Parish Council

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/4973 17/03/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Adrian Reeves

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Parish Council

Comment text:

Dear Sirs This is to inform you that, following a meeting of the Kings Worthy Parish Council on the 16th March 2015, the Council wishes to record its support for the proposed ward boundary changes that affect Kings Worthy. Our understanding is that the new ward would include Kings Worthy, , the new Barton Farm housing development, and a section of South . We also are in favour of the ward being named ' Ward' Stewart Newell Chairman

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5075 26/03/2015

This Parish Council wishes to make the following response to your draft report & recommendations:

1. Despite understanding that the draft recommendation at paragraph 29 has been invoked through the Warding proposal separating Harestock and Littleton into two new WCC election wards, it does not take into account the following:

All Parish Councillors represent the interests of the whole of the Parish Council area, they make no differentiation between when they are considering the best ways to maintain and improve the facilities and services for the local community. Segregating the 11 members to force 8 to represent Harestock and 3 Littleton would undermine this cohesive inclusive parish councillor approach to its business and thus its service to its community. Despite the fact that there are currently 10 members in post at present, over the last 5 years there has never been more than 5 of our 11 members who have come from Harestock efforts made to try and increase that number. It is understood that members can live within 3 miles of the Parish Council and do not have to actually reside in the Parish, but the reality of this situation is that it is considered highly unlikely that there will be 8 members on the Parish Council willing or prepared to represent Harestock as opposed to representing the Parish area as a whole.

Finally, the vast majority of the Parish Council owned assets that it has to maintain through the income it receives via the precept and any other income it can generate, sit in the village of Littleton. There is only one playground in Harestock that is owned by the Parish Council as opposed to the huge public recreational facilities it owns in Littleton. There is nothing that the Parish Council could acquire in Harestock even if it could afford it. All the area of Harestock is either built upon or there only remain tiny pockets of public open space there. Therefore to suggest that 8 of the 11 members of this Parish Council should represent Harestock as opposed to the Parish as a whole once again potentially undermines the best efforts of this Parish Council to maintain and improve its public assets to best advantage of the local community and visitors.

Bearing in mind the points above, it is therefore requested that this draft recommendation be withdrawn.

2. If the recommendation is not withdrawn, this Parish Council, in accordance with the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, requests that WCC undertakes a community governance review of this Parish Council.

3. This Parish Council also believes that it is incorrect to place the new Barton Farm community into the Kings Worthy Parish Council area. It has been stated by WCC in recent papers on progress with that development that it should be integrated into Harestock. in Harestock will be provided with extra sporting facilities across the existing Andover Road on Barton Farm and it was understood that one of the reasons for making Andover Road into a pedestrian friendly access road at the conclusion of the development is so that the communities of Barton Farm and Harestock might further be integrated. It is therefore suggested that Barton Farm should become part of the St Barnabas Ward.

Thanks

1 Chris

Christopher Tee Clerk to Littleton & Harestock Parish Council

2

From: Stevie Kavanagh Sent: 17 March 2015 12:47 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary

At the New Alresford Full Town Council meeting the Council reviewed the boundaries of the Town and would request that the following areas be included in the New Alresford boundary:

Bakeland Gardens Verna; Cottage Southside of the Bypass

Minute No. 3409 (12th March 2015) Changes to Parish Boundary. Resolution: To request the following locations to be included within the New Alresford boundary: ‐ Bakeland Gardens/Vernal Cottage/Southside of Bypass. Proposed: Cllr. Power. Seconded: Cllr. Griffiths (AGREED) Clerk to write requesting change

I would be grateful if you could confirm that receipt of this request.

Yours sincerely,

Stevie Kavanagh,Town Clerk,

New Alresford Town Council

1

From: Elizabeth Billingham Sent: 07 April 2015 15:30 To: Reviews@ Subject: Olivers Battery Parish Council response

Dear Boundary commission

This was delayed due to internet issues over the bank holiday.

Apologies for lateness

Regards

-- Elizabeth Billingham Clerk to Olivers Battery

Please note that I work part time but I will aim to get back to you within 48 hours. If the matter is urgent please call the above number.My main office hours are Monday, Tuesday and Thursday.

1

C/o Clerk – E Billingham

Clerk:

Dear Sirs

Oliver’s Battery Parish Council

Introduction

The Oliver’s Battery Parish Council (OBPC) note that the Boundary Commission has an open mind about its final recommendations and that every representation will be considered.

OBPC also notes that the Boundary Commission is required to propose a pattern of wards for Winchester that delivers:

• Good electoral equality with each councillor representing a similar number of voters. • Community identity that reflects both community interests and links such as transport and facilities. • Strong, easily identifiable boundaries. • Effective and convenient local government.

There does not appear to be a specific obligation to ensure a uniform number of members per ward only that each councillor represents a similar number of voters. Authorities, that have whole council elections, have been able to have a mixture of single, two and three member wards. The Boundary Commission’s self imposed requirement for compelling evidence to justify departing from a presumption of a uniform pattern of three member wards, due to the decision by Winchester City Council to elect by thirds, is too high a threshold and entirely subjective. Surely there could be exceptions if supported by the representations of the relevant parish councils, who already have established ties with neighbouring councils and are closest to the public and consequently best placed to understand the local identities, interests and issues.

The proposed new ward comprising Oliver’s Battery, Hursley, Otterbourne and Colden Common, whilst achieving good electoral equality, does not properly reflect community interests and identities nor does it provide for effective and convenient local government. Alternative ward composition

OBPC proposes an alternative ward comprising Badger Farm, Compton & Shawford, Hursley, Oliver’s Battery and Otterbourne which meets all of the above criteria.

Equality of Representation

It creates a ward with the appropriate number of voters for three members.

Community identity, interests and links

The proposed ward merges two existing two member wards, Oliver’s Battery & Badger Farm and Compton & Otterbourne (which includes Hursley).

Existing intra-ward links between neighbouring parishes are preserved. Oliver’s Battery and parts of Badger Farm were part of the historic parish of Compton.

Sainsbury’s at Badger Farm is the main supermarket for the proposed new ward and the independent local shops at Oliver’s Battery, ie post office, dentist offering national health services, butchers, pet shop, hairdressers etc also attract custom from the other parishes.

The Doctors’ Surgery and the Community Centre located on Badger Farm are used by residents of Oliver’s Battery and the other parishes. Oliver’s Battery and Badger Farm have a joint community association and the local Community News is delivered to both communities.

Many children in Badger Farm go to the pre-school and primary school in Oliver’s Battery. Children from Oliver’s Battery, Badger Farm, Hursley, Compton and Shawford go to the Kings secondary school.

The combining of Oliver’s Battery, Badger Farm and Hursley will provide a better defence against speculative planning applications for developments on green field sites within and bordering the parishes which are contrary to the Winchester District Local Plan Part 2, such as the planned 350 house development at Pitt Vale.

The protection of the strategic green areas identified in the Winchester District Local Plan Part 2, such as between Oliver’s Battery and Compton and Oliver’s Battery and Hursley, would be reinforced.

Badger Farm Road runs between the Badger Farm and Oliver’s Battery parishes and both parish councils are currently working together on issues related to the road safety.

Oliver’s Battery and Compton & Shawford share a good network of well used footpaths and bridleways which link into Badger Farm. Councillors from Oliver’s Battery and Compton & Shawford work together in connection with the joint upkeep of certain paths.

Oliver’s Battery and Badger Farm are currently liaising about the maintenance of Whiteshute Ridge, an area of important grassland that lies between the two parishes.

Adjacent to Whiteshute Ridge is Bushfield Camp an open space which, although lying mostly in Compton & Shawford, is also enjoyed by residents of Oliver’s Battery and Badger Farm. Any future proposals for development of this land would require a joint response from all three parishes.

All the communities look towards Winchester and have issues connected to high levels of commuting.

The A3090 from Winchester to Hursley, Poles Lane from Hursley to Otterbourne, the road from Otterbourne to Winchester past Shawford through Compton and Badger Farm Road complete a good set of road connections between all the main communities.

Effective and convenient local government

The new proposed ward lies entirely within the County’s Downlands division, so the ward would share one County Councillor. The proposed ward could be called Downlands South.

Colden Common

Regarding Colden Common, which was proposed to be part of a new ward including Oliver’s Battery, Hursley and Otterbourne, OBPC support a “new” ward of Colden Common and Twyford which meets the statutory criteria, ie equality of representation (albeit for two members), community identity, interests and links (both are on the same road consequently sharing the same traffic issues etc, shared services, eg doctors, church, community groups etc), they currently form a ward and are of sufficient size to help the council deliver effective and convenient local government. Conclusion

For the reasons outlined above, OBPC believes that our preferred ward composition of Badger Farm, Compton & Shawford, Hursley, Oliver’s Battery and Otterbourne better reflects the three main considerations laid down in legislation and will provide for effective and convenient local government.

Brian Mitchener Chair, Oliver’s Battery Parish Council

Elizabeth Billingham Clerk to Oliver’s Battery Parish Council

From: julie Ayre Sent: 18 March 2015 14:17 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review of Winchester Submission

Dear Sirs

Please find attached submission from Otterbourne Parish Council to the recommendations report.

Mrs Julie Ayre Clerk Otterbourne Parish Council

1

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Mchael Cleary

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Owslebury Parish Council

Comment text:

Owslebury Parish Council considers the proposed Twyford and Upper Meon Valley Ward to be inappropriate. It is simply too large an area and would militate against effective and convenient local government. At present district councillors attend every parish council meeting and this greatly assists the parish in the execution of its duties and in its dealings with the district council. The number of parishes and the extent of the area covered by the proposed Ward would not, in the Council's view, enable district councillors to attend parish council meetings with the same frequency as at present. Nor does the proposed Ward reflect the interests and identities of local communities. The link between Owslebury and Twyford is catered for in the proposed Ward. However, Owslebury has far more in common with Colden Common and Upham than it has with the other parishes in the proposed Ward where the real life contact and related issues are minimal. The Parish Council would suggest further consideration be given to this matter including the creation of 3 one member Wards rather than the proposed single Ward with 3 members.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5015 17/03/2015

Dear Sirs

I feel it is incumbent upon me to voice very real local concerns regarding your proposals for new electoral boundaries..

Shedfield and are two very small villages (approx 750 houses between them). Together with the village of Waltham Chase (950 houses) we comprise the Parish of Shedfield.

You apparently intend to split our Parish by joining Waltham Chase Ward to thus becoming part of the Central Meon Valley electoral area.

As if that split is not destructive enough , Shedfield and Shirrell Heath Ward you intend to join to ! This I cannot comprehend at all.

Shirrell Heath - where I am a resident - is classed as an 'unsustainable' village. We have no shop, we have no Post Office, we have no pub - and most inconvenient of all - we have NO public transport of any kind.

Shedfield fares a little better than this - but not by much!

Where do you think there is any connection whatsoever with Whiteley? Whiteley is a burgeoning urban area - growing by the minute!

From Shedfield and Shirrell Heath there is no transport whatsoever to that area - it cannot possibly constitute our 'local shopping area' since, even by private car, there is no feasible direct route from Shirrell Heath/Shedfield to Whiteley.

These 2 areas have no connections of any description - so how would we be able to 'share' the same three District Councillors? Our needs are never likely to coincide! Indeed, our needs are much more likely to conflict.

In our two we have a maximum vote count at about 1500 - much, much less than Whiteley and its environs - so whoever/whatever this area votes for we will simply be outvoted by Whiteley area. Basically we will have no vote at all.

I would not presume to advise you on how this can best be resolved - but I do know that your proposal is totally out of order and unacceptable.

Yours faithfully

Jess Bond Chair, Shedfield Parish Council

1

legislation1 and are to:

 Improve electoral equality by equalising the number of electors each councillor represents

 Reflect community identity

 Provide for effective and convenient local government

We note and accept the argument put forward to align Southwick & Parish within the electoral ward of Wickham to improve electoral equality by equalizing the number of electors each councilor represents. However, we believe that this is a short sighted view which totally fails to accommodate known future development within the ‘new’ ward of Wickham.

The proposal to effectively cut a swathe from the northern part of the MDA will do little to “Reflect community identity”. In fact it will segregate a new and developing community. We would argue that this step does little to support or encourage ‘Localism’, where we are trying to establish a new community and new parish to cover the interests of the whole of the MDA.

Furthermore, this decision, to separate the development area between two Wards, Wickham and , does not support the notion to “Provide for effective and convenient local government”. To the contrary, electors within the MDA will be segregated between two different Wards, each setting different precepts with a result in differing council tax for those living within the same community.

Challenging the Logic

Surely, if the Commission follows it’s own review criteria (Improve electoral equality by equalising the number of electors each councillor represents), then the proposal to weight these proposals upon ‘equalizing the number of electors’, based only upon projected figures for development, is in our view unsound in the current market. The MDA will not grow as fast as forecast by the Commission.

The Commission has acknowledged the aspiration of establishing a new and separate Parish for the whole of the community within the MDA. This supports the community view and the formal position of both Denmead Parish Council and the Parish Council of Southwick & Widley. This is a ‘Localism’ initiative to reflect the community identity for those who live or will live within the MDA.

This being the case, we can see no logical reason to separate and segregate the community area, designated as a new parish, between two different Wards as is now being determined within the Commission’s proposal.

Looking at the third review criteria of the Commission – ‘Provide for effective and convenient local government’ – Splitting the northern part, or any part, of the MDA across two Ward areas is not an action that will enable a single identity for a newly emerging community. Different representation, different council tax rates and different administration layers on a local level will not help to support this new community.

Conclusion

In conclusion, this Council would urge the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to review their proposal for the ward boundary changes affecting the North East part of the MDA and not draw a line across our community. We believe that the interests of this new community are best served in the future by keeping the area as a unified entity.

The simplest way to achieve this is to incorporate what is the current Denmead Ward Polling district WR2, into the proposed Ward area for Wickham. This approach will provide a cohesive foundation upon which the area can grow.

Alternatively, the whole of the MDA area should be incorporated into Denmead Ward.

Again, we would also wish to press the Commission to accept that its current boundary review should ensure that no additional hurdles are placed in the way of enabling this new community (of the MDA) being represented by its own Parish Council and to ensure that all of it’s interests are incorporated within one, not two Wards.

Yours sincerely

Jim Watson – Chair of the Parish Council For and on behalf of, Southwick & Widley Parish Council

Copies to: & Southwick Ward Councillor Denmead Ward Councillors Denmead Parish Council Wickham Ward Councillors

Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Debbie Found

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Parish Council

Comment text:

South Wonston Parish Council objects to the of South Wonston being split between the Wonston & Ward and the Kings Worthy Ward. The Parish Council wishes to have the whole Parish within one ward, enabling the Ward Members to represent the Parish more appropriately.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/5011 17/03/2015 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1

Winchester District

Personal Details:

Name: Ralph Scaiff

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name: Twyford Parish Council

Comment text:

Whilst putting Twyford and Meon Valley may seem to make numerical sense. Twyford's historical cultural and political ties are with Colden Common with which Council we have always had a close working relationship. The suggested grouping makes no sense except in numerical terms, and destroys the ability of one councillor to see the overall picture of the parishes south of Winchester. Please please reconsider Ralph Scaiff Vice Chairman Twyford Parish Council.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/4721 17/03/2015 TWYFORD PARISH COUNCIL

Response to the Draft recommendations on the new Electoral Arrangements for Winchester City Council.

It was with dismay Twyford Parish Council noted the proposed changes to its ward. The strong Twyford/Colden Common union has been abandoned in favour of an extensive East/West link ranging from Shawford to where the west is as different to the east as Wales is to East Anglia.

The Case against Shawford and Upper West Meon Shawford and Upper West Meon have two natural physical features dividing them from Twyford. In the case of Shawford, the River Itchen forms a natural barrier and while the two communities are adjacent to each other, they effectively face back to back and operate similarly. Upper West Meon is located in a separate valley with the high ground by Longwood dividing the two regions. The only common features are the countryside and both parishes being within the SDNP. There is no a direct road interlinking the parishes, no collaboration has occurred and both face different challenges.

The Case for Twyford and Colden Common The bond between Colden Common and Twyford Parish Councils is extremely strong following two decades of working closely together and regularly interact jointly when situations arise. Traffic and housing are two particular shared interests where collaboration is at its greatest. To a lesser extent both parishes also have matters in common with Morestead and Owslebury and on occasions have worked together.

The Twyford-Colden Common union is cemented by five important features; physical, health, spiritual, security and education.

Physical Both parishes are essentially urban with surrounding countryside have a common boundary. Both share a common border and are linked by a major commuter road, B3335, which presents significant traffic issues to both parishes. There is a secondary interlinking road and numerous footpaths joining the parishes.

Health Twyford’s doctors’ practice is a mixture of rural and urban. The surrounding area it covers takes in Colden Common, Morestead, Owslebury and Shawford. It is an extremely large practice and in order to meet the health needs of the communities, it maintains a small, but essential, second surgery in Colden Common which benefits the residents of both parishes and those from further afield such as Owslebury and Morestead.

Spiritual The Anglican benefice of Colden Common, Twyford, Morestead and Owslebury was formed relatively recently with the vicar based in Colden Common and his assistant priest in Twyford. Through the good offices of the vicar, the benefice has united and is forging ahead, once again strengthening the bond of the four communities, in particular Twyford and Colden Common who were most affected by the change.

Security Twyford, Colden Common, Owslebury and Morestead come under the control of the neighbourhood watch based in Bishops Waltham and are part of one beat ranging from Southwick to Twyford. Upper West Meon and Shawford are not part of this beat and are in separate patrol areas. The common urban security issues experienced by both Twyford and Colden Common are therefore monitored jointly and successfully so that each parish is kept fully informed. It is unlikely that the same joint collaboration will be maintained by three separate sections of the police force.

Education Twyford, Colden Common and Owslebury each have successful primary schools in their parishes. Most of the children from these schools tend to follow on to the same senior school in Winchester. This creates a bond among them where friendships extend from one community to another.

Summary and Recommendation Twyford Parish Council suggests that some degree of flexibility must be applied to the formation of electoral boundaries whereby the strict application of numbers is loosened in favour of establishing wards that have matters in common.

The Parish Council submits that Twyford and Colden Common should remain together as a two councillor ward as its preference. A combination of Twyford, Colden Common and Morestead/Owslebury as a three councillor ward is a secondary option.