Local Residents submissions to the North District Council electoral review

This PDF document contains 20 submissions from Local Residents.

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.

Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 03 April 2014 17:01 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Proposed Ward Boundary Changes

From: Robin Cordina Sent: 03 April 2014 16:27 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes

Dear Sirs

I live in 23 Sixty Ares Close, .

I would like to object to the proposed changes to the ward boundaries for North Somerset as depicted by Map B.

I feel the changes would have a detrimental effect on local democracy and the community identity in the parish of Wraxall & Failand.

The Wraxall & Failand Parish is currently well served by two District Councillors, the proposals shown at Map B divides our parish between two wards and four Councillors, who are unlikely to have the experience or affinity with this parish.

The ward boundaries proposed do not reflect the geography of the area or the local communities. The original proposal that associated Wraxall & Failand with Long Ashton referred to as ‘Map A’ is a much better solution. I urge you to revert to this proposal.

Thanks for your consideration

Robin

Robin Cordina Senior Surveyor

Williams Gunter Hardwick is a member of PAI The Independent Commercial Property Consultants Network. More information can be found at www.pai.uk.com. IMPORTANT: This communication and the information contained herein is intended only for the person(s) and/or organisation(s) named above. It may be confidential, legally privileged and protected by law. Please be aware that unauthorised use, copying or disclosure of any or all of its contents may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained herein are subject to Williams Gunter Hardwick Ltd's standard terms and conditions of business. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately, destroying any copies and deleting it from your system.

76

Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 20 March 2014 09:09 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Proposed boundary changes- North Somerset

From: Charles Crawfurd Sent: 19 March 2014 09:42 To: Reviews@ Subject: Proposed boundary changes- North Somerset

Dear Sir I have just learnt with disbelief, the latest crackpot idea to come out of North Somerset Council!

To suggest creating a "superward" of "Churchill and " comprising 9 parishes with 3 councillors shows not only a complete lack of knowledge or understanding of practicalities it also shows the disdain that we are treated by those sitting in their ivory tower in Weston or .

I live in Blagdon, one of the 9 parishes and we are already under the impression of being treated as 2nd class citizens when it comes to Council services and expenditure and to know to try to marginalise us even further is completely unacceptable

I therefore want to record my complete rejection of this ridiculous idea. Frankly the person who came up with it ought to be sacked!

I support Blagdon Parish Council's view that the original proposal put forward by NSC of a Churchill and Blagdon ward is the correct and sensible way forward. Yours faithfully (and very angry!)

Charles Crawfurd Blagdon

186

Cooper, Mark

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 07 April 2014 09:53 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes

Hi Mark,

Please see below submission for North Somerset.

Helen

From: Iris Croome Sent: 05 April 2014 10:56 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Proposed Ward Boundary Changes

Dear Sirs,i wish to object to the proposed changes for North Somerset as shown in Map B,these would have a very detrimental effect on the local community in the Parish of Wraxall with Failand. .I urge you to revert to this proposal

Yours Sincerely Iris Croome

52

Cooper, Mark

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 17 March 2014 10:00 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Review

Hi Mark,

Please see below a submission for North Somerset.

Regards, Helen

From: Nicholas Cush Sent: 16 March 2014 20:06 To: Cooper, Mark; Reviews@ Subject: Re: North Somerset Review

Dear Sirs,

Proposed changes to ward boundaries in North Somerset

Cleeve has no links with Wrington, children go to different ‘feeder’ schools, Wrington to Churchill and Cleeve to Backwell. Our links to Yatton are old and strong, whether that be Church, Schools, Doctors, Libraries or sport facilities. The local families are integrated in the community.

The demographics of Cleeve & Wrington are also a major difference, walking to Yatton is simple, Wrington is over a large hill with no direct bus route. We might as well be linked to any other small Parish in the country as it seems the sole purpose is to even out the numbers and not look at the individual communities involved. We note you are now proposing a 3 councillor ward encompassing Wrington, Congresbury and Churchhill all of whom link into the same Secondary School unlike Cleeve.

Having looked at the response from Wrington Parish Council in June 2013 they do not include Cleeve in any one of their 6 proposed options. From the figures they supply together with those on your own website a two councillor ward could serve a maximum electorate of 7321, Yatton has 6537 and Cleeve 758 if they stay together it would still be within your 10% tolerance (7295).

Yours Faithfully Nicholas Cush

From: "Cooper, Mark" To: "[email protected]" Sent: Wednesday, 12 March 2014, 15:41 Subject: North Somerset Review

Dear Mr Cush,

My colleague has passed me your email via our website and I am writing in response. The further consultation in North Somerset has not ended. The consultation is open until the 7th April and further details can be found here - http://www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/south-west/somerset/north-somerset-fer 199 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 27 March 2014 11:06 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Council Boundary Review - Winford Ward

From: martin.cutlan Sent: 26 March 2014 12:11 To: Reviews@ Subject: : North Somerset Council Boundary Review - Winford Ward

Dear Sir,

Re: North Somerset Council Boundary Review - Winford Ward

We wish to make objections to the current proposal affecting windford ward, making a two member Long Ashton ward thus including Regil, Felton and Winford, aand Dundry Reasons:

1) Long Ashton is very different. It is a small town compared with the other Green Belt villages. It is urban in nature, It's needs are very different to the rest of the proposed ward's. Winford's direct links to Long Ashton is blocked by two busy 'A' roads and a railway line. As Long Ashton is by far the largest part of the proposed two member ward, councillors would tend to come from there and Long Ashton would be their primary focus. Councillors from Long Ashton would have different priorities and concepts to village based councillors. Rural communities have substantially different needs to urban areas. We feel it would be very difficult to have a fair representation of the existing Winford ward's villages needs.

2) Felton has a common of some 100acres that need managing. Long Ashton does not have this issue.

3) Long Ashton doesn't have an international airport whereas the other three parishes either have an airport or are closely affected by it. Issues such as aircraft noise levels and airport traffic could get neglected.

4) Councillors attendance at Parish Council meetings would become more difficult and attention to local issues in a rural area with single track roads, pothole and drainage problems might well not receive much attention.

5) Dundry and Winford civil parishes are at the extreme edge of North Somerset and great efforts have to be made to gain the attention and support of North Somerset Officers to ensure we get our fair share of spending.

6) Winford has a composting site to manage.

We understand that the remit of LGBCE is to reduce the number of councillors from 61 to 50. The initial proposal to group the existing Winford and Dundry ward with the additional civil parishes of Barrow Gurney and Flax Bourton was much better and we feel this would be the best option. An alternative would be have Long Ashton as a separate ward with one councillor and Winford, Dundry and Barrow Gurney as a separate ward with one councillor, possibly with the addition of Butcombe.

Yours sincerely,

Martin & Denise Cutlan

143

Cooper, Mark

From: Bowden, Tim Sent: 12 March 2014 14:18 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Revised boundary proposal for Leigh Woods

Tim Bowden Review Manager Local Government Boundary Commission for Layden House 76-86 Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG

Tel: 020 7664 8514 www.lgbce.org.uk

It would help us if you would take a few minutes to answer a few questions about your experience of how we dealt with you.

How are we doing? - Click on this link to give us your views

From: Roger Davies Sent: 12 March 2014 12:13 To: Reviews@ Subject: Revised boundary proposal for Leigh Woods

Dear Sir/ Madam

We wish to support the revised proposals for our area of North Somerset. We wish to be part of the 2 member Pill and ward as we feel this would best serve our local connections which lie along the A369, as our previous representations have stated. Leigh Woods, about 270 households, would like to stay part of the Easton in Gordano ward as Leigh Woods is primarily affected by the A369 and the Clifton Suspension Bridge, concerns more closely allied with , and Easton in Gordano than Long Ashton. The revised proposals ensure we stay as nearly as possible the same as present, even with the reduced number of Councillors, ie part of the Easton in Gordano ward. lies between us and Long Ashton and our community is affected by the suspension bridge and A369 unlike Long Ashton.

Yours sincerely Roger Davies Judith Davies

1

Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 02 April 2014 11:30 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: North Somerset Parish Boundaries

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Mike Davis Sent: 02 April 2014 11:26 To: Reviews@ Subject: North Somerset Parish Boundaries to the Review Officer,

I write as a resident of Winford and, more importantly, as the Chairman of the Parish Plan Steering group that produced the “Wenfre Parish Plan” 2009 ‐ 2019, for Felton, Regil and Winford, copies of which were lodged with North Somerset Council.

In reading through the Boundary Commission’s proposals in the letter to Mike Jackson, dated 12th February, it seems to me that the 70 submissions opposing the plan A suggestions for the 3 wards of Gordano & Wraxall, Long Ashton and Easton‐in‐Gordano probably came from articulate, politically active members living close to the suburbs of as against the representations you might have had from any residents of the rural, pleasant and probably ‘sleepy’ community of Winford Parish. Our concerns may be mainly rural but we do have Bristol International Airport to contend with.

In reading through your 6 page letter containing the Pan B proposals Winford is mentioned once, in the last line, almost as an afterthought. As chair of the Parish Plan group I do not relish explaining the disappearance of the parish of Winford before the end of the our plan in 2019!

I respectfully submit my opposition to the adoption of Plan B and think that, between the 2 plans, plan A would be better. I also object to the disappearance of the name of Winford in your Plan B. If the new ward was called Long Ashton and Winford it would better reflect it’s geographical area, north to south.

Furthermore, if plan B was adopted, I feel that there should be some restriction placed on voting powers in the election of the 2 proposed candidates. With the votes in Barrow Gurney, Dundry and Regil, Felton and Winford totalling 2,782 compared to Long Ashton at 4,207 it could result in BOTH elected councillors coming from Long Ashton, indeed they could even be next‐door neighbours! This possibility certainly merits your attention.

These views are also shared by my wife.

Regards,

Mike Davis

97

Cooper, Mark

From: Egan, Helen Sent: 01 April 2014 09:23 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: For the attention of Mark Cooper

Hi Mark,

Please see the below submission for North Somerset.

Regards, Helen

‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐ From: Mary DONALDSON Sent: 31 March 2014 10:07 To: Reviews@ Subject: For the attention of

Dear

We are writing to endorse the recommendation of Pill and Easton in Gordano Parish Council that we support Map B in the LCBC proposals. This shows a ward represented by two councillors covering the whole of Pill and Easton in Gordano, together with Portbury, Abbots Leigh, Leigh Woods and Failand.

With best wishes,

Mary and George Donaldson,

123 Cooper, Mark

From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 07 March 2014 08:42 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Boundary Changes Attachments: Boundary changes due to reduction in North Somerset District Councillors from 62 to 50.htm

From: Mike Ducker On Behalf Of Mike Ducker Sent: 06 March 2014 18:41 To: Reviews@ Subject: Boundary Changes

We feel this represents failry our views on this matter

Mr and Mrs Ducker, Leigh Woods residents for over 40 years

1 From: Kate Sent: 06 March 2014 18:00 Subject: Boundary changes due to reduction in North Somerset District Councillors from 62 to 50

Attachments: Map_A_-_Draft_Recs_Further_Consultation.pdf; Map_B_- _New_wards_Further_Consultation.pdf; ChiefExe-FurtherConsultation-2014-02-12-PDF (2).PDF Dear All

It seems our representations have been listened to and we are now proposed to be lumped in with Abbots Leigh, Pill and Easton in Gordano rather than Long Ashton. That is, we are nearer where we are at the moment after the reduction in District Councillors and this revision keeps our representation along the A369 corridor, and as it stands Carl Francis-Pester (if reelected) would continue to be our District Councillor.

Do look at the maps A and B and compare our situations. Map A shows the boundaries as first envisioned, Map B shows the revised boundaries following our first round of comments.

We all need to comment in favour of the revision(again) if we want it to go through. are unhappy as their parish ends up being split and they will be mobilising residents to comment against these proposals.. Please write in favour (if you are) to [email protected] stating North Somerset by 7 April. My submission went like this please feel free to copy and paste or amend!

We wish to support the revised proposals for our area of North Somerset. We wish to be part of the 2 member Pill and Easton in Gordano ward as we feel this would best serve our local connections which lie along the A369, as our previous representations have stated. Leigh Woods, about 270 households, would like to stay part of the Easton in Gordano ward as Leigh Woods is primarily affected by the A369 and the Clifton Suspension Bridge, concerns more closely allied with Abbots Leigh, Portbury and Easton in Gordano than Long Ashton. The revised proposals ensure we stay as nearly as possible the same as present, even with the reduced number of Councillors, ie part of the Easton in Gordano ward. Ashton Court lies between us and Long Ashton and our community is affected by the suspension bridge and A369 unlike Long Ashton.

Thanks Kate

I've copied this below from the LGBCE document The independent Local Government Boundary Commission for England has opened a new phase of public consultation in its review of North Somerset Council’s ward boundaries.

Local people have until 7 April to have their say on new proposals for ward boundaries in the rural parts of the district.

Last year, the Commission held a public consultation on proposals for new ward boundaries across North Somerset. The Commission has listened to the views put to it during consultation and now proposes to make changes to the plans to reflect local evidence. Due to the significance of the proposed changes in the rural parts of the district, the Commission is re-opening its consultation with local people to see what they think of the new recommendations.

The consultation is limited to the Commission’s new proposals in the North and East of the district. Details of the recommendations, including maps of the proposals, are available on the Commission’s website at www.lgbce.org.uk or at the dedicated review page for the electoral review of North Somerset at www.lgbce.org.uk/all-reviews/south-west/somerset/north-somerset-fer.

North of the district

In its draft recommendations for the North of the district, the Commission had proposed four single-member wards called: Gordano Valley, Long Ashton, Pill and Winford. In response to views expressed to it during public

file:///U|/...ue%20to%20reduction%20in%20North%20Somerset%20District%20Councillors%20from%2062%20to%2050.htm[13/03/2014 10:33:39] consultation, the Commission now recommends a pattern of three two-member wards called: Gordano & Wraxall, Long Ashton and Pill & Easton-in-Gordano. In particular, the new recommendations avoid dividing the parish of Pill & Easton-in-Gordano between wards.

file:///U|/...ue%20to%20reduction%20in%20North%20Somerset%20District%20Councillors%20from%2062%20to%2050.htm[13/03/2014 10:33:39]