wards, which coincide closely with our own initial submissions and those of Yate Town Council. As noted in our original submission, the two Yate wards represent different, but connected, communities that use different schools and facilities. Yate as a whole forms a quite distinct community from neighbouring Chipping Sodbury and the villages to the town’s North and West. It would be inappropriate to include parts of neighbouring parishes in either of the Yate unitary wards. The Commission’s proposals for Yate serve convenient and effective local government, as well as reflecting existing community identities. We strongly support the views of Yate Town Council that the Yate north ward should be split into two parish wards and consider their proposals the best way of doing this for the reasons they give. Emmersons Green We support the Commission’s proposals for Emmersons Green. Frenchay & Downend and Staple Hill & Mangotsfield We accept the Commission’s proposals for these areas. Winterbourne We support the Commission’s proposals for Winterbourne. Bitton and Oldland Common We strongly support the Commission’s proposal for Bitton and Oldland Common on the basis that it reflects community identity and represents electoral equality. Hanham, Longwell Green and Parkwall and Warmly We accept the Commission’s proposals for these areas. An alternative scheme to the proposed Boyd Valley, Frampton Cotterell, Sodbury Vale, New Cheltenham, Kingswood, and Woodstock wards The Commission acknowledged that Boyd Valley is a very large ward, and requested comments on its make-up. We feel that for a single ward to span ten parishes, would be detrimental to the objective of aiding effective and convenient local government. This would be particularly true in the event that the ward returns councillors from two different parties, making it far harder to share out the responsibilities of serving such a vast area. We also have similar concerns about the proposed 3-member Frampton Cottrell ward. Should Frampton Cottrell return members from two or three political parties, the task of working across such a large ward could be excessive for a single councillor and so impede effective and convenient local government. Additionally, under the Commission’s current proposals Westerleigh parish will be served by five South Gloucestershire councillors, which we believe does not help to serve effective and convenient local government. We therefore propose that the Commission’s proposed boundaries are amended in the following ways: • That Tytherington, Rangeworthy and Iron Acton parishes be joined with Wickwar Parish to create a 1-member Ladden Brook ward and leave a 2-member Frampton Cottrell ward. • That the Old Sodbury ward of Sodbury Parish be joined with the Westerleigh ward of Westerleigh Parish, the rural parts of Dodington Parish, and Pucklechurch Parish to create a 1-member Pucklechurch ward. • That Wick and Abson, Doynton, Cold Ashton, and Dyrham and Hinton parishes be joined with the Common ward of Siston Parish, to create a 1-member Wick and Siston ward. • That Marshfield and Tormarton parishes be joined with Acton Turville, Hawkesbury, Badminton, Horton, and Old Sodbury parishes to create a 1-member Cotswold Edge ward. • That Kingswood, Woodstock, and the unparished part of the proposed New Cheltenham ward be re-warded as two 3-member urban wards. Each of these proposed wards would remain within the acceptable variances from average (see the accompanying appendix). Our proposed Cotswold Edge would be closer to electoral equality by 2023 than would the Commission’s proposed Sodbury Vale ward, and by uniting most of the villages within the South Gloucestershire section of the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, it would unite communities with common interests and identities. By ensuring that the Siston Common and Siston Rural are within the same 1-member ward, the number of South Gloucestershire Councillors serving Siston parish is reduced from 6 to 3, helping to aid effective and convenient local government. The Commission’s proposed New Cheltenham ward is currently part-parished, part unparished. Combining the unparished part of New Cheltenham with neighbouring unparished areas would help to aid effective and convenient local government, as unparished areas have a different financial relationship with South Gloucestershire to parishes. Proposed minor changes to Westerleigh parish ward boundaries We would like to propose two minor changes to the ward boundaries within Westerleigh parish, to more accurately reflect community identity. We believe that the houses along Westerleigh Road between Westerleigh and Yate (see map) should remain in Westerleigh parish ward, rather than moved into Coalpit Heath parish ward, as proposed by the Commission. This stretch of Westerleigh Road is close to Westerleigh village, forms part of that community, and is separated from the village of Coalpit Heath by a railway line and fields. While placing this stretch of Westerleigh Road with Coalpit Heath ward would make for a neater ward boundary, our proposal will make more sense from the perspective of the community living there. We would also propose that the boundary of Coalpit Heath ward be extended slightly (see map) so that Henfield Hall, the adjacent playing field, and the mobile home next to the Hall (belonging to the caretaker of Bitterwell Lake) are moved from Westerleigh parish ward, as proposed by the Commission, into Coalpit Heath parish ward, where they more naturally sit from a community perspective. Based on figures provided to us by South Gloucestershire Electoral Services, we estimate that these two changes would increase the electorate of Westerleigh parish ward by around 20 electors by 2023, and reduce the electorate of Coalpit Heath parish ward by the same.
Uploaded Documents:
Download (https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/download document? file=draft%2F1509811629 Appendix+with+Lib+Dem+proposed+revisions.xlsx) wards, which coincide closely with our own initial submissions and those of Yate Town Council. As noted in our original submission, the two Yate wards represent different, but connected, communities that use different schools and facilities. Yate as a whole forms a quite distinct community from neighbouring Chipping Sodbury and the villages to the town’s North and West. It would be inappropriate to include parts of neighbouring parishes in either of the Yate unitary wards. The Commission’s proposals for Yate serve convenient and effective local government, as well as reflecting existing community identities. We strongly support the views of Yate Town Council that the Yate north ward should be split into two parish wards and consider their proposals the best way of doing this for the reasons they give. Emmersons Green We support the Commission’s proposals for Emmersons Green. Frenchay & Downend and Staple Hill & Mangotsfield We accept the Commission’s proposals for these areas. Winterbourne We support the Commission’s proposals for Winterbourne. Bitton and Oldland Common We strongly support the Commission’s proposal for Bitton and Oldland Common on the basis that it reflects community identity and represents electoral equality. Hanham, Longwell Green and Parkwall and Warmly We accept the Commission’s proposals for these areas. An alternative scheme to the proposed Boyd Valley, Frampton Cotterell, Sodbury Vale, New Cheltenham, Kingswood, and Woodstock wards The Commission acknowledged that Boyd Valley is a very large ward, and requested comments on its make-up. We feel that for a single ward to span ten parishes, would be detrimental to the objective of aiding effective and convenient local government. This would be particularly true in the event that the ward returns councillors from two different parties, making it far harder to share out the responsibilities of serving such a vast area. We also have similar concerns about the proposed 3-member Frampton Cottrell ward. Should Frampton Cottrell return members from two or three political parties, the task of working across such a large ward could be excessive for a single councillor and so impede effective and convenient local government. Additionally, under the Commission’s current proposals Westerleigh parish will be served by five South Gloucestershire councillors, which we believe does not help to serve effective and convenient local government. We therefore propose that the Commission’s proposed boundaries are amended in the following ways: • That Tytherington, Rangeworthy and Iron Acton parishes be joined with Wickwar Parish to create a 1-member Ladden Brook ward and leave a 2-member Frampton Cottrell ward. • That the Old Sodbury ward of Sodbury Parish be joined with the Westerleigh ward of Westerleigh Parish, the rural parts of Dodington Parish, and Pucklechurch Parish to create a 1-member Pucklechurch ward. • That Wick and Abson, Doynton, Cold Ashton, and Dyrham and Hinton parishes be joined with the Common ward of Siston Parish, to create a 1-member Wick and Siston ward. • That Marshfield and Tormarton parishes be joined with Acton Turville, Hawkesbury, Badminton, Horton, and Old Sodbury parishes to create a 1-member Cotswold Edge ward. • That Kingswood, Woodstock, and the unparished part of the proposed New Cheltenham ward be re-warded as two 3-member urban wards. Each of these proposed wards would remain within the acceptable variances from average (see the accompanying appendix). Our proposed Cotswold Edge would be closer to electoral equality by 2023 than would the Commission’s proposed Sodbury Vale ward, and by uniting most of the villages within the South Gloucestershire section of the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, it would unite communities with common interests and identities. By ensuring that the Siston Common and Siston Rural are within the same 1-member ward, the number of South Gloucestershire Councillors serving Siston parish is reduced from 6 to 3, helping to aid effective and convenient local government. The Commission’s proposed New Cheltenham ward is currently part-parished, part unparished. Combining the unparished part of New Cheltenham with neighbouring unparished areas would help to aid effective and convenient local government, as unparished areas have a different financial relationship with South Gloucestershire to parishes. Proposed minor changes to Westerleigh parish ward boundaries We would like to propose two minor changes to the ward boundaries within Westerleigh parish, to more accurately reflect community identity. We believe that the houses along Westerleigh Road between Westerleigh and Yate (see map) should remain in Westerleigh parish ward, rather than moved into Coalpit Heath parish ward, as proposed by the Commission. This stretch of Westerleigh Road is close to Westerleigh village, forms part of that community, and is separated from the village of Coalpit Heath by a railway line and fields. While placing this stretch of Westerleigh Road with Coalpit Heath ward would make for a neater ward boundary, our proposal will make more sense from the perspective of the community living there. We would also propose that the boundary of Coalpit Heath ward be extended slightly (see map) so that Henfield Hall, the adjacent playing field, and the mobile home next to the Hall (belonging to the caretaker of Bitterwell Lake) are moved from Westerleigh parish ward, as proposed by the Commission, into Coalpit Heath parish ward, where they more naturally sit from a community perspective. Based on figures provided to us by South Gloucestershire Electoral Services, we estimate that these two changes would increase the electorate of Westerleigh parish ward by around 20 electors by 2023, and reduce the electorate of Coalpit Heath parish ward by the same.
Uploaded Documents:
Download (https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/download document? file=draft%2F1509811629 Appendix+with+Lib+Dem+proposed+revisions.xlsx)