Parish and town council submissions to the Hampshire County Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from parish and town councils. Some versions of Adobe allow the viewer to move quickly between bookmarks. Hinds, Alex From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 05 January 2016 16:24 To: Hinds, Alex Subject: FW: Electoral Review of Hampshire: Draft Recommendations LGBCE Alton division proposals - RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF ALTON TOWN COUNCIL From: Pat Harris Sent: 05 January 2016 15:08 To: reviews <[email protected]> Cc: Subject: Electoral Review of Hampshire: Draft Recommendations LGBCE Alton division proposals ‐ RESPONSE ON BEHALF OF ALTON TOWN COUNCIL Dear Sirs, I refer to your letter dated 17th November 2015 entitled Electoral Review of Hampshire: Draft Recommendations. In your letter you have invited feedback on the draft recommendations and I should be grateful if you would record the following feedback on behalf of Alton Town Council: There was a very strong (unanimous) agreement of objection to the proposals to extricate Holybourne from 'Alton Town' boundary and place within 'Alton Rural' and the council wishes to see Holybourne and Alton remain within the same boundary and retain the status quo. The reasons are as follows: Of the three factors that these proposals aim to bring: 1.) Electoral Equality 2.) Community Identity and 3.) Effective and Convenient Government, the proposal would only satisfy item 1.) Electoral Equality. Where items 2.) and 3.) would apply to most of the rural villages around Alton, they fail to apply to Holybourne which is inextricably bound to Alton within a single CP community. Holybourne Hampshire County Council (HCC) representation would deteriorate as a result of the proposals. The Alton Rural councillor (Cllr. Kemp-Gee) would be spread too thinly covering the 18 rural villages around Alton as well as Holybourne. Under the current arrangement Cllr. Joy simply covers Alton and Holybourne which is clearly more sensible and workable. Holybournes interest are clearly aligned with Alton. Holybourne is the only village represented in Alton Town Council, and effectively so. Holybourne and Alton share the same shopping, leisure and health facilities, the same transport links, schools, are bound by the same residents associations and the boundary between the two is barely noticeable and weak. Holybourne is not truly rural. The common rural interests of the outlying villages are different from those of the urban settlement of Alton and Holybourne. Alton Town Council Boundary should be consistent with the HCC boundary as the issues within each council are similar. Councillors do not object to the idea of the ‘doughnut’ with Alton and Holybourne at the urban centre and rural villages outlying - this clearly reflects the relationships of the local communities in real terms. Councillors are very pleased with the representation they currently receive from their HCC Councillor. Why change from the current, sensible and satisfactory arrangement which works for Holybourne and Alton alike. 1 The proposals put forward would effectively cut the Alton Neighbourhood Plan (which goes to Referendum on Wednesday 24th February) in half!! In summary, Alton Town Council would wish to see the current electoral boundaries retained which works well for the people of Alton and Holybourne and the proposals serve no purpose. Yours faithfully, For and on behalf of Alton Town Council Pat Harris 2 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 Hampshire County Personal Details: Name: Leonard Gates E-mail: Postcode: Organisation Name: Andover Town Council Comment text: Please find attached the first of four documents from Andover Town Council regarding the proposed county division boundaries. This is submitted on behalf of the town council and our town clerk who is currently unavailable. Word document: Response to the boundary commission #1 - our general comments on the proposals and suggestions for alternatives. Uploaded Documents: Download https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/6553 08/01/2016 ANDOVER TOWN COUNCIL RESPONSE TO HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL DIVISION AND ANDOVER TOWN PARISH BOUNDARY PROPOSALS We note the recommendations and accompanying report and fully support a redrawing of boundaries to ensure fairer representation particularly for voters in the Andover North division. 1: General comments on the boundary commission proposals: Andover North: The text refers only to polling districts VM and VN. No mention is made of the transfer of the town centre (UP), Picket Twenty (VO) or King Arthur’s Way (SF) to Andover West. These proposals do not reflect community identities. Andover South: We agree with proposals to use the railway line as the western boundary but this should be followed to the southern edge of the town. Houses to the north and west of the line fit more naturally into the Andover West division. Andover West: The proposed transfer of King Arthurs Way (SF) does not reflect the local community identity. The River Anton should continue to form the boundary between Andover North and West. Representation of Andover parish: Andover currently has by three county councillors, two shared with the neighbouring parishes. The new proposals mean we will share a fourth county councillor. It is possible to draw the boundaries so that two divisions are completely in Andover parish. Boundaries should also reflect the local wishes to incorporate Burghclere Down and Augusta Park into the parish of Andover. Population increases: The projected voter increases in Andover North have been inaccurately distributed across the entire Alamein and St Mary’s wards. Most of the increases are in four polling districts to the east of the town - Augusta Park (UO and WC), Picket Twenty (VO) and Picket Piece (US). Any new boundaries must adequately reflect these increases. The current proposals do not. 2: Specific concerns regarding the boundary commission proposals: Picket Twenty (VO): is a part of Andover lying north of the A303 with close links (community centre, school bus services and population) with the rest of Andover. This community should not be transferred to Test Valley Central.. King Arthurs Way (SF) has strong community links with the rest of Alamein ward (shared bus service, federation of schools and community association). This community should not transfer to Andover West but remain in Andover North. Town Centre (UP) with the exception of one block of flats (Clarence Court) fits more naturally with the rest of St Mary’s/Andover North than with Andover South. The natural boundary is the River Anton. This area should remain in Andover North. Burghclere Down (VK): has close ties with urban Andover (shared community centre and bus services). It is the wish of both Abbotts Ann and Andover parish councils to transfer this community to Andover parish and Andover South. Weyhill Road: (TU western part): west of the railway line has better community, commercial and transport links with Harroway ward to the north than with the rest of TU polling district. The railway line forms a natural boundary. This area should be transferred to Andover West. 3: Summary: We believe the proposals do not adequately reflect local communities or natural boundaries. A more equitable and representative boundaries are Andover South - the A303, railway line, River Anton and London Road. Andover North - London Road and River Anton. Andover West - the A303, railway line and River Anton. 4: Modifications to boundary commission proposals: We are content with most of the proposals but suggest the following 1. Retain the Town Centre (except Clarence Court) and King Arthurs Way in the Andover North division. 2. Transfer the parishes - Enham Alamein (Alamein ward) and Faccombe, Hurstbourne Tarrant, Tangley and Vernham Dean (Bourne Valley ward) to Andover West. But retain the urban polling district WC (Enham Alamein) in Andover North. 3. Transfer Burghclere Down and Picket Twenty from Test Valley Central to Andover South and the area west of the railway line and south of Weyhill Road from Andover South to Andover West. 4. To balance numbers between Andover West and Test Valley Central transfer Amport ward (Amport, Grateley, Monxton and Quarley parishes), all south of the A303, to Test Valley Central. 5: Comments regarding Andover Town parish wards: Andover Town currently has nineteen not eighteen councillors. The new proposals do not accurately reflect future voter numbers and will lead to significant variances in voters per town councillor in the three new wards of Alamein West, Andover Down and St Marys West. Alamein ward will be over-represented compared to Harroway, Millway and Winton wards. The distribution of councillors in St Mary’s cannot be justified by the expected increase in voters. Just one councillor should be required for St Marys West giving a total of five councillors for the existing St Mary’s ward area and seventeen for the whole town. ATC proposals for county divisions allocate most of Andover Town parish to the Andover North and Andover South divisions. Harroway and a part of Millway ward are allocated to Andover West and Burghclere Down to Andover South. Separate wards would be required for that part of Millway ward transferred, and the areas of St Mary’s transferred to Andover South. Burghclere Down would become a separate ward of Abbotts Ann and polling district WC a separate ward of Enham parish. Andover Town Council, Abbotts Ann Parish Council and Smannell Parish Council are seeking a community governance review with the intention to include both Burghclere Down (VK) and Augusta Park (UO and WC) in an enlarged Andover parish. If this and a planned review of borough ward boundaries occurs the above proposals would become academic as we would expect all the parish wards to be reviewed at that time. In the meantime we would value the opportunity to talk directly to the boundary commission regarding the ward boundaries for Andover. ANDOVER TOWN COUNCIL RESPONSE TO BOUNDARY COMMISSION #2 Andover Town Council has the following specific concerns regarding the Boundary Commission draft proposals for Andover.