Local resident submissions to the Cheshire East Council electoral review
This PDF contains 34 submissions by local residents R-T
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.
Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: Rainford, Gary Sent: 14 February 2010 13:38 To: Reviews@ Subject: Lyme Handley and our choices Attachments: Parish letter 2010.doc
Dear Committee,
Please find a letter following on from my conversation with James Ansell.
Regards, Gary Rainford.
The views expressed in this email are personal and may not necessarily reflect those of The National Trust unless explicitly stated otherwise. This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, you should not copy it for any purpose, or disclose its contents to any other person. Senders and recipients of email should be aware that, under the Data Protection Act 1998 the contents may have to be disclosed. This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit
02/03/2010
2nd February 2010, Gary Rainford
To the Electoral Review Commission
Further to my correspondence with Mr James Ansell (I believe he has now moved on) regarding the changes to the Parish boundaries and the impact on the parish of Lyme Handley in particular. I’m pleased to report on the feedback gained from my letter updating the Lyme Handley parishioners of the suggested changes and asking for their comment. Although only a small parish with only around 120 parishioners the return either by e-mail, phone call or through meetings has all been in favour of moving to be part of Disley Parish Council. I can supply if required a paper/electronic trail to check on the details if needed.
The condensed reasons are as follows;
1. There is no physical link to the proposed option of Poynton East, as the geographical nature of Lyme Handley is 90% Lyme Park which is owned and run by the National Trust. All main vehicle access is via the North end of the park onto the A6 which joins to Disley and only a long walk out of the South-west of the park gets you to Poynton. It is then a several mile circuitous journey by some form of transport to go to Poynton, so this does not provide for either an effective or convenient electoral link from any perspective. 2. Disley is intrinsically linked to that of Lyme Park and therefore Lyme Handley, as it was the development of Lyme Park over the 600 years owned by the Legh family that allowed for the continued development of Disley. It also provides access to the road system and buses, the railway station, the local shops and doctors. Indeed everything that a local population needs to thrive comes from Disley not Poynton. Everyone has said that they feel their local identity is and always will be with Disley and Poynton East will always feel remote from the parish and its parishioners.
If you would like to contact me regarding any of the items raised please do, as there is a great deal of concern that the matter will be dealt with without the Lyme Handley parishioners having had a fair and reasonable say in this matter.
Yours sincerely, Gary Rainford
Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:10 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
From: robert Sent: 11 February 2010 09:50 To: Reviews@ Cc: [email protected] Subject: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
Dear Sirs, i would like to place on record that as a resident of Adlington in Cheshire i do not agree with the proposed changes to make Adlington part of the Poynton East electoral ward. This is because Adlington has a strong sense of rural community identity, and is much better fitted to other rural communities such as Prestbury and Mottram St Andrew rather than an urban area such as Poynton (East or West). Please take my objection into consideration in your review of this matter.
02/03/2010 Eleanor Gregory
From: Reviews@ Sent: 12 February 2010 16:21 To: Reviews@ Subject: EC website: Online submission
Form summary:
Name : S Rigby
Postal address :
Email address :
Area your submission refers to : Cheshire East
Organisation you belong to : member of the public
Your feedback : Please note as a Resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transferred to Poynton (East or West), merely for the administrative convenience of local Goverment or to equalise the numbers of electors per Councillor (two of your three 'main considerations' in forming the draft proposals). The third 'main consideration', namely 'community identity' seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community.
Attachment : No file uploaded
Form Information
Site Name : Electoral Commission Site Id : 42 Page Standard Name : Consultations and current reviews Page Standard Id : 42911 Page Custom Form Name : Online submissions Page Custom Form Id : 55756 Url : http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online- submissions Submission Id : 84577 Time of Submission : 12 Feb 2010 4:21 pm Submission IP Address : 213.129.83.5
1 Regards Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:07 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: adlington parish cheshire
From: Anton Rodgers Sent: 11 February 2010 19:04 To: Reviews@; Judith Rodgers Subject: adlington parish cheshire
Review Officer (Cheshire East Review) The Boundary Committee for England Trevelyan house Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW
Dear Sir, I wish to make the strongest objection possible to the proposal that Adlington be warded with Poynton West, an area I know very well and which is completely different in character from the rural parish of Adlington being very urban both in housing density and being an industry/retail centre. The residents of Adlington have already voted unanimously to be warded with Prestbury, a parish which has overwhelming synergy with historic Adlington, a fact which todate, I am informed, you have entirely overlooked.
Mr. A.Rodgers
Yours sincerely, Anton Rodgers RIBA MCIArb ACArch Director
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual / organisation to which it is addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error you must not take a copy, distribute it or take any action on it. Please notify the sender as soon as possible. E-mail transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free from viruses etc., therefore you are advised to run your own virus check before opening any attachments received as agp property management company ltd, do not accept any liability whatsoever once an e-mail has been received. The views expressed by an individual in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of agp property management company ltd.
02/03/2010 Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:04 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: ADLINGTON CHESHIRE
-----Original Message From: Judith Rodgers Sent: 12 February 201 To: Reviews@ Subject: ADLINGTON CHESHIRE
Review Officer (Cheshire East Review) The Boundary Committee for England Trevelyan House Great Peter Street London SW1P 2HW
12 February 2010
Dear Sir
I wish to make the strongest possible objection to the proposal that Adlington be joined as one ward with Poynton West, an area which is completely different in character from the rural parish of Adlington, being very urban both in housing density and also being an industry/retail centre.
The residents of Adlington have already voted unanimously to be warded with Prestbury, a parish which has overwhelming synergy with historic Adlington, a fact which todate, I am informed, you have entirely overlooked.
Mrs J Rodgers
--
Yours faithfully
*Judith Rodgers*
P please consider the environment before printing this e-mail
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended soley for the use of the individual / organisation to whom it is addressed. If you have received this e-mail in error you must not take a copy, distribute it or take any action on it. Please notify the sender as soon as possible. E-mail transmissitions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or free from viruses etc., therefore you are advised to run your own virus check before opening any attachments received as AGP Property Management Ltd, do not accept any liability whatsoever once an e-mail has
1 been received. The views expressed by an individual in this e-mail do not necessarily reflect the views of AGP Property Management Ltd.
2 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:09 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Cheshire East Review by Mon 15th Feb 2010
From: Andrew Rowe Sent: 11 February 2010 15:58 To: Reviews@ Subject: Cheshire East Review by Mon 15th Feb 2010
Date 11/02/2010
Att Review Officer,
I am writing with regard the proposal to ward Adlington with Poynton West. As a resident of Adlington and member of the public, I wish for Adlington to remain part of the Prestbury ward. There are a lot of factors that are being overlooked here. Community Identity for one, and we have a lot of history associated with the Prestbury ward. It would seem that this is more down to numbers of electors vs. councillors which is an admin exercise rather than making clear strategic sense to those who live here.
I would like this email to be acknowledged as a representation.
Andrew Rowe
02/03/2010 Eleanor Gregory
From: Reviews@ Sent: 12 February 2010 19:46 To: Reviews@ Subject: EC website: Online submission
Form summary:
Name : Alison Rye
Postal address :
Email address :
Area your submission refers to : Cheshire East
Organisation you belong to : member of the public
Your feedback : Please note, as a resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury ward. It should not be transferred to Poynton(East or West), merely for the administrative convenience of local Government or to equalise the number of electors per Councillor(two of your three "main considerations" in forming the draft proposals). The third "main consideration", namely "community identity" seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to our Adlington community!
Attachment : No file uploaded
Form Information
Site Name : Electoral Commission Site Id : 42 Page Standard Name : Consultations and current reviews Page Standard Id : 42911 Page Custom Form Name : Online submissions Page Custom Form Id : 55756 Url : http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online- submissions Submission Id : 84583 Time of Submission : 12 Feb 2010 7:46 pm Submission IP Address : 213.129.83.5
1 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: Sent: 02 February 2010 15:40 To: Richard Buck Subject: Fw: Cheshire East Unitary Authority - Electoral Review
----- Or From: To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 6:53 AM Subject: Cheshire East Unitary Authority - Electoral Review
Dear Mr Ansell,
I write with reference to the draft proposals for revised wards in Cheshire East.
As a Handforth resident I welcome the re-establishment of a Handforth Ward - although I note that it includes areas in North Wilmslow (such as Colshaw and areas along Manchester Road to the South of the River Dean) not normally considered part of the village of Handforth.
I also note the Wilmslow West & Chorley with Mobberley ward boundary appears to slice through Lindow Moss - an area of scientific and historical interest - I would suggest that the whole of this area fall under one ward for simplicity and clarity. I would suggest the boundary is moved a few hundred metres to the west to facilitate this (approx to Sugar Brook).
Yours sincerely,
Rob Sawyer
02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: Emma Sheldon Sent: 14 February 2010 15:30 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
As a resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transfered to Poynton [East or West], merely for the administrative convenience of Local Government or to equalize the number of electors per Councillor [two of your three "main considerations" in forming the draft proposals]. The third "main consideration", namely "community identity" seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community!
From:
Got a cool Hotmail story? Tell us now
02/03/2010
Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:10 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Adlington boundary
From: Howard Simpkin Sent: 11 February 2010 11:02 To: Reviews@ Subject: Adlington boundary
For the attention of the Review Officer(Cheshire East)
Dear Sirs
Further to your proposal for warding Adlington with Poynton West, as a resident of Adlington, I strongly object to such a proposal.
This administrative decision is apparently for the convenience of local Government and to restructure the number of electors per Councillor, no consideration has been given to the residents opinions on such a change.
It appears that the concerns of the Adlington community have been completely ignored and I do not find this acceptable.
Yours faithfully
Howard + Jennie Simpkin
Do you have a story that started on Hotmail? Tell us now
02/03/2010
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:11 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: boundaries
-----Original Messa From: Judith Smith Sent: 10 February 2 To: Reviews@ Subject: boundaries
Dear Sir, We live in Dean Drive in the Dean Row area. It has recently come to my notice that there is a proposed change to the boundary between North Wilmslow and Handforth. When these changes are put forward does anyone at all consider consulting the people who will be affected. It seems that people in offices make these decisions, popular or otherwise, without regard for the preferences or those directly concerned. Has there been a survey of what local people want? If not why not? The boundary between Handforth and Wilmslow has been the river for generations.I do not want to be part of Handforth. I shop in Wlmslow and when we moved here we moved to Wilmslow NOT Handforth. When we come to sell our house we want a Wilmslow address not a Handforth one which would make a difference in the value of our house. Please leave well alone or at least have the courtesy to consult residents. Judi Smith
1 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:07 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority
From: Sent: 11 February 2010 19:55 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority
Please note, as a resident of Adlington I strongly want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transferred to Poynton East or West merely for the administrative convenience of local Government or to eaqualise the number of electors per Councillor (two or three of your "main considerations" in foming the draft proposals). The third "main consideration," namely" community identity" seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the principle consideration that matters to the Adlington community ! My daughter was married at Prestbury Church as Prestbury is part of our parish boundary and has been for a very long time, Please let us retain our Community Identity we are an independent village the same as Prestbury.
Linda Spencer
02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:07 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Re Boundary comittee Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority
From: Sent: 11 February 2010 19:29 To: Reviews@ Subject: Re Boundary comittee Electoral review of Cheshire East Authority
Please note as a resident of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It Should not be transferred to Poynton East (or WEST), merely for the administrive convenience of local Goverment or to equalise the number of electors per Councillor(two or three "main considerations" in forming the draft proprosals). The third "main considerations", namely "community identity" seems to be completely ignored, yet it is the prinicipal consideration that matters to the Adlington community !
Paul Spencer
02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:09 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Adlington Boundary
From: Sylvia Spurrell Sent: 11 February 2010 17:42 To: Reviews@ Subject: Adlington Boundary
Please note, as Residents of Adlington, I want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. It should not be transferred to Poynton (East or West) merely for the administrative convenience of local government or to equalise the number of electors per Councillor [two of your “main considerations” in forming the draft proposals]. The third “main consideration”, namely “community identity” seems to have been completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to the Adlington community!
From: Mr & Mrs V Spurrell
02/03/2010 Page 1 of 2
Eleanor Gregory
From: Tim Bowden Sent: 25 January 2010 08:59 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: CHESHIRE EAST REVIEW - BOUNDARIES AT WYCHWOOD PARK, WESTON
From: Lance Stephens Sent: 22 January 2010 17:38 To: Reviews@ Subject: CHESHIRE EAST REVIEW - BOUNDARIES AT WYCHWOOD PARK, WESTON
Thank you for keeping me fully informed of the review process following my earlier submission. Having read your provisional findings from the last round of consultation, there are two aspects about which I remain uneasy.
The first concerns the device of dividing Weston and Basford Parish between two Cheshire East wards. This seems to be a very unusual suggestion and I understand that it is driven by mainly arithmetic considerations rather than the more pertinent factors such as community identity and links to local facilities. The outcome does not therefore commend itself as it is at odds with local realities and perceptions.
One benefit of this particular suggestion is that it accepts that the Wychwood communities should be kept together, with Wychwood Park and Wychwood Village representing very similar developments adjoining each other on either side of the A531. However, that leads us back to a fundamental problem with the existing boundaries affecting Wychwood Park.
My earlier submission was written under the mistaken impression that you could consider changes to Parish boundaries, whereas you have now clarified that this is not the case (at least in the present stage of the exercise). That being so, we are left with the anomaly of a parish boundary running through the heart of Wychwood Park. This section of boundary correctly reflects the rural nature of the area in previous centuries but is now very inappropriate.
The presence of this boundary arbitrarily divides Wychwood Park between two parishes. I have established that the Park is thereby also split between two of Cheshire East’s Local Area Partnerships, which is even worse. Similarly, it appears that we are also split between two of the local policing areas. This is all highly unsatisfactory.
In assessing your provisional conclusions, I lack your breadth of vision on the legal and equality aspects or your resources to analyse the electoral balances of different proposals. My own thinking is therefore a more pragmatic assessment based on local realities. These would suggest the following preferred solution.
The principle of keeping Wychwood Village and Wychwood Park together is sound and should be retained but should also be extended to include all of the Park within one parish. This would help to remove all of the anomalies I have noted above plus any others of which I may not be aware. There would then be debate on which parish we should go into.
I commented last time that most Wychwood residents look towards Weston for their very
02/03/2010 Page 2 of 2
local facilities, including playgroup, school, Post Office, village shop and pub. By contrast, neither Hough nor Chorlton offers the same range. Hough Village Hall is well used but the village lacks most other facilities and even the pub there has now closed. If Weston does not provide what is sought, then the most likely alternatives are Shavington, Nantwich, Crewe and Sandbach.
Therefore my preferred outcome would be to see a unified parish ward covering all of Wychwood as far west as the main railway line, which is the most obvious boundary. This ward should form part of an extended Weston Parish rather than being attached to a parish based on the other side of the railway. Subjectively, I would also see the whole area, together with the rest of Weston Parish, as part of Haslington ward rather than being split off from the rest of the parish at the Borough level of local administration.
The only other alternative which comes to mind is if the two Wychwood communities in their entirety are sufficiently large to have their own parish.
I shall await your further conclusions with interest.
Lance Stephens
02/03/2010 Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:09 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
From: Jack Warrington Sent: 11 February 2010 15:10 To: Reviews@ Subject: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
Sirs
My name is Halina Stokes joint owner of 28 Legh Road Adlington,and I wish to register my opposition to the proposal to transfer Adlington to Poynton East electoral ward.
Adlington is currently a part of the Prestbury and Tytherington ward and is essentially a rural area as opposed to the urban area of Poynton and I wish to retain this status
I believe that the interests of the residents of Adlington are best served by the present administration and wish to retain our community identity.
Halina Stokes
02/03/2010
Eleanor Gregory
From: Susan Storey Sent: 13 February 2010 22:13 To: Reviews@ Subject: ELECTORAL REVIEW OF CHESHIRE EAST AUTHORITY
I wish to lodge an Online comment with regards the above:-
As Residents of Adlington for the best part of 30 years we want Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward, and not transferred to Poynton (East or West) merely for the administrative convenience of local Government or to equalise the number of electors per Councillor (which we believe were 2 of your 3 'main considerations' in forming the draft proposal.. However the third, 'main consideration' "community identity" appears to have been completely ignored, yet it is the principal consideration that matters to Adlington Community.
A & S Storey
Area submission refers to: Cheshire East Organisation I belong to: Member of the Public
1
Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:07 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Adlington in Cheshire East
From: Brian W Taylor Sent: 11 February 2010 17:52 To: Reviews@ Subject: Adlington in Cheshire East
From
For many years Adlington has been grouped with Prestbury for voting purposes. Indeed Adlington is part of the Parish of Prestbury. Prestbury is mainly rural as is Adlington, whereas Poynton is undoubtedly suburban.
I understand that one of the considerations to be taken into account is 'community interest'. There is little or no community interest between Adlington and any part of Poynton, whereas there is significant community interest between Adlington and Prestbury.
For the above reasons we wish to remain part of the Prestbury Ward and not be transferred to Poynton.
Brian W Taylor
Resident and member of the public
02/03/2010
Eleanor Gregory
From: Reviews@ Sent: 12 February 2010 21:46 To: Reviews@ Subject: EC website: Online submission
Form summary:
Name : J TRUEMAN
Postal address :
Email address :
Area your submission refers to : Cheshire East
Organisation you belong to : member of the public
Your feedback : As a resident ot Adlington, I want Adington to remain part of Prestbury Ward . My Family have been farmers in
Adlington for over 100 years . It should not be transferred to Poynton (East or West) just for the administrative convenience of local Government.Community identity is very important,and should never be ignored.
Attachment : No file uploaded
Form Information
Site Name : Electoral Commission Site Id : 42 Page Standard Name : Consultations and current reviews Page Standard Id : 42911 Page Custom Form Name : Online submissions Page Custom Form Id : 55756 Url : http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/boundary-reviews/open-consultations/online- submissions Submission Id : 84590 Time of Submission : 12 Feb 2010 9:46 pm Submission IP Address : 213.129.83.5
1
Page 1 of 1
Eleanor Gregory
From: William Morrison Sent: 12 February 2010 16:10 To: Richard Buck Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
From: Sue Turnbull Sent: 11 February 2010 09:13 To: Reviews@ Cc: Subject: Electoral Review of Cheshire East Authority
Dear Sirs, In relation to the Boundary Committee's proposed changes to Cheshire East Authority, i would like to place on record that as a resident of Adlington i would like Adlington to remain part of Prestbury Ward. I do not think it appropriate to transfer Adlington to Poynton (East or West). My reasons for objecting are that Adlington has a very strong rural community identity which is not in keeping with a more urban area such as Poynton, but which is much more suitably placed together with other similar rural wards such as Prestbury and Mottram St Andrew.
Yours faithfully,
Susan Turnbull (Mrs)
02/03/2010