Parish Council submissions to the Winchester Council electoral review

Transcription

1 Parish Council submissions to the Winchester Council electoral review This PDF document contains submissions from Parish Councils. 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.

2 From: Elizabeth Billingham Sent: 03 November :43 To: Subject: Boarhunt Parish Council Boundary request The Boarhunt Parish Council agreed that it would be more appropriate to be joined with Wickham due to its links. The Parish has an affinity with Wickham due to history use of services such as buses, doctors, shopping and had a taxi share service that connected to Wickham. It is hoped that the Boundary Commission would take this comment into account when making their decision. 1

3 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 04/11/2014 Winchester District Personal Details: Name: Postcode: Debbie Harding clerk@coldencommon.hants.gov.uk So211UU Organisation Name: Colden Common Parish Council Comment text: Colden Common Parish Council strongly request Twyford and Colden Common remain as one ward in the Local Government Boundary Commission review of Winchester ward boundaries with the ward being represented by two District Councillor positions instead of 3. Colden Common and Twyford share the same challenges for example speed and volume of traffic, aircraft noise, lack of public transport as well as share many shared services such as doctors surgery, church services, youth and community groups. Having two District Councillors which can work together on the shared opportunities and challenges for the two villages will help represent interests and promote community cohesion Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded

4 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 27/10/2014 Winchester District Personal Details: Name: Adrian Walmsley Postcode: SO21 2AT Organisation Name: Compton and Shawford Parish Council Comment text: Compton & Shawford Parish Council comments are set out in full in the attached document. in summary, we are content with our current parish boundary and would not wish to see it changed, except for the correction of one single anomaly. That anomaly is the single property in St Cross Road, the closest dwelling to Bushfield Roundabout, which lies in our parish and ward while all neighbouring properties in that stretch of St Cross Road lie in Winchester St Michaels Ward. On the ward boundaries, our most important requirement is that the parish should be contained within a single district ward. Existing links and natural relationships between parishes should be preserved, geographic boundaries respected and if possible wards should be contained within a single County Division. We have examined possible different combinations with neighbouring parishes into new wards, as set out in the attached document. The combination which works best numerically and preserves existing links is a new 3-member ward created by combining the existing wards of Compton & Otterbourne and Olivers Battery & Badger Farm. Uploaded Documents: Download

5 CS PC Compton and Shawford Parish Council PO Box 565, Winchester SO23 3HG Phone: Web: 22 October 2014 Response to the Boundary Commission review of Winchester District Ward Boundaries Our main requirement is: 1. Our parish in particular, and every other parish in general, should be contained entirely within a single district ward. It follows therefore that: 2. The ward boundary review should be undertaken in conjunction with Winchester City Council s proposed 2015 parish boundary review (Community Governance Review). Considerations specific to Compton & Shawford and its boundaries: 3. The property (and only that property) Overcombe, St. Cross Road SO23 9RX, which today lies within our parish, should be moved into the same ward/parish as its immediately neighbouring properties (currently Winchester St. Michael's). 4. We are content with the rest of our parish boundary (as amended by the 1985 Boundary Commission) and would not want to see any changes to the ward boundary which would require changes to the parish boundary. Specifically, a. On the east, our parish boundary follows the natural line of the Itchen Navigation and coincides with our ward s boundary with Colden Common and Twyford ward. A small slice of the eastern edge of our parish lies within the South Downs National Park. This area extends up to and includes Itchen Farm, and the historic Hockley Viaduct. The Itchen Navigation forms the most natural geographic boundary and should remain as the eastern boundary of our parish. b. To the north, our parish boundary also coincides with the ward boundary. Compton & Shawford extends up to the limit of the unparished areas of Winchester City, and for the most part follows the demarcation line between CIL charging zones 2 and 3. c. To the northwest, our border with the ward containing the densely populated areas of Olivers Battery and Badger Farm follows, for much of its length, historic footpaths. d. Our western boundary with Hursley continues south following well-established paths. e. The southern boundary of our parish was adjusted in 1985 to recognise the development of Otterbourne and this change remains appropriate. f. The rural nature of much of our parish is enhanced and protected by the inclusion within the parish of two important Local Gaps: the Winchester-Compton Street local gap to the north and the Otterbourne-Southdown local gap to the south. See Winchester District Local Plan Part 1 - Joint Core Strategy Policy CP Our district ward currently falls entirely within Hampshire County Downlands Division. It would be convenient if our ward continued to be contained in a single county division. 6. Our district ward, Compton & Otterbourne, has, since 2007, shared almost the same boundary as the ecclesiastical benefice of Compton, Hursley and Otterbourne. It would be convenient for these three parishes to continue to lie within the same district ward.

6 Response from Compton & Shawford PC We have looked at four possible new possible combinations of our parish with neighbouring parishes in the light of the desired changed ratio of electors to elected members. Though each option has its pros and cons, a new ward with working title Downlands South, combining the existing ward of Compton & Otterbourne with Olivers Battery & Badger Farm preserves existing links between parishes which are at present in the same ward, works out the best numerically: its electorate would neatly justify a three-member ward, respects natural geographic boundaries, is entirely contained within the County s Downlands Division. More details of this, and the other possible combinations we examined, are shown on the following pages. Adrian Walmsley Chairman 22 October

7 Methodology Response from Compton & Shawford PC Examine possible ward configurations of our parish with neighbouring parishes, using the projected number of electors per district councillor, as shown in the adjacent table. The projected change in electorate for the wards in question is small (under 5%) and has been ignored. Current wards The councillors 2014 column shows the number of councillors each parish deserves based on its electorate, totalled by ward. It s shown to the nearest one-tenth of a councillor (hence the small rounding errors in some totals). The councillors 2015 column shows the effect of the changed ratio of electors per District Councillor. Electors District Councillors Current Projected Electors per councillor Scenario 1 (Preferred) a new Downlands South Ward Pros: A new Downlands South ward formed by merging Compton & Otterbourne with Olivers Battery & Badger Farm ward is exactly the right size for a 3 member ward. Existing intra-ward links between neighbouring parishes are preserved. Both Olivers Battery (pre 1956) and parts of Badger Farm (pre 1985) were part of the historic parish of Compton. The new Downlands South ward lies entirely within the County s Downlands division, so we already all share our County Councillor. Colden Common & Twyford remains unchanged and has the right population to become a 2 member ward. Cons: Badger Farm and Olivers Battery have a different profile to the rest of the proposed new ward. They are more built-up and fall in CIL Charging Zone 2 (Winchester Town), whereas Compton & Otterbourne ward lies in CIL Charging Zone 3 (Market Towns & Rural Areas). 3

8 Response from Compton & Shawford PC Scenario 2 Twyford joins Compton & Otterbourne Pros: The enlarged Compton & Otterbourne justifies 2 members. Twyford and Shawford have a common interest in the Itchen Navigation and Water Meadows. Many Twyford residents use Shawford Station and Compton & Shawford residents use Twyford surgery. Cons: Twyford and Colden Common are neighbours on the eastern side of the Itchen and have a shared interest in the B3335/B3354. They may not wish to be placed in separate wards. The enlarged Compton & Otterbourne would be split across two County divisions, and straddle the natural geographical barrier of the Itchen Navigation which forms the current ward and parish boundary. Although the enlarged Compton & Otterbourne would warrant two members, this arrangement does not address Olivers Battery & Badger Farm. It would also leave the challenge of finding another parish with which Colden Common could be combined into a new ward. Scenario 3 Olivers Battery joins Compton & Otterbourne Pros: An enlarged Compton & Otterbourne would justify 2 members. If Badger Farm could be added to St Luke, that resulting ward would justify three members. Olivers Battery has historic links with Compton, from which it split in It used to look to Compton for school, church and the sports club. Cons: OB and BF may not wish to be split into separate wards. Present day Olivers Battery has much stronger links with Badger Farm. Its residents use the facilities at the Badger Farm complex (superstore, doctors surgery etc), and Badger Farm residents use the shops in Olivers Battery. Although Badger Farm is adjacent to Stanmore (St. Luke s Ward), there appear to be no roads or even paths that cross the boundary between the two, so Badger Farm residents are more likely to look to Olivers Battery than to St. Lukes. 4

9 Response from Compton & Shawford PC Scenario 4 New Lower Itchen Valley Ward Pros: The resulting 3 member ward would facilitate the shared interest of C&S and Twyford in the Navigation and Water Meadows. By adding Hursley to OB+BF, the resulting ward (almost) justifies two members. Cons: The ward would be divided by the natural geographic barrier of the Itchen Valley. For example, the Itchen Navigation forms part of the eastern boundary of the Test and Itchen area in Hampshire s Countryside Access Plan. The ward would be split across two Hampshire County Divisions: Winchester Downlands and Itchen Valley. We are unaware of much interaction between either Twyford and Otterbourne, or between Colden Common and Otterbourne or Compton & Shawford. Hursley s links with OB+BF are unknown. 5

10

11

12 From: Durleypc Sent: 01 November :28 To: Subject: Ward Boundary Review Consultation Dear Sir, Please find attached letter from Durley Parish Council regarding their comments on the possible Ward Boundary changes at Winchester City Council. Thank you. Anne Collins (Mrs) Clerk to Durley Parish Council 1

13 Durley Parish Council Homefield Clerk: Mrs. Anne Collins Kytes Lane Telephone/Fax: Durley Southampton address: SO32 2AE 1 st November, 2014 Dear Review Officer, Consultation of Boundary Ward Review Changes - Winchester City Council Durley Parish Council held its Monthly Parish Council Meeting in September and agreed to send their comments regarding the possible Ward changes to Winchester City Council, however we now feel that it is necessary to send our comments onto your Office as Winchester City Council appears to be suggesting that they would like Durley Parish Council to join a Ward with Bishops Waltham Parish Council which is a Town Council and very much larger in population and facilities. Bishops Waltham is now classed as a Town and Durley is a very small rural village and has rural characteristics. In our original response to the Consultation held by Winchester City Council it was agreed by Councillors that the present Ward should remain unchanged with 4 small Parish Councils put together e.g. Curdridge, Durley, Upham and Owslebury. These are all small Parish Councils and work well together when required and have similar problems within their communities e.g. fly-tipping, poaching on farm land etc. whereas the larger parish of Bishops Waltham has anti-social behaviour and other more urban issues to deal with. Bishops Waltham along with the 4 smaller parishes work together well, but if one of the smaller parishes are singled out to work alongside a large parish they will lose their identity and the larger parish would automatically take the lead. Durley Parish Council feels strongly that smaller parishes should not lose their identity and agree that 4 smaller parishes working together and in the same Ward as at present is the way forward. Please could you take these comments on board and not put Durley parish with Bishops Waltham parish in the same Ward, but retain the present system of having Curdridge, Durley, Upham and Owslebury in the same Ward which has worked well for a number of years. Thank you for your consideration. Yours sincerely, Anne Collins (Mrs) Clerk to Durley Parish Council The Review Officer (Winchester) Layden House, Turnmill Street, London EC1M 5LG

14 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 04/11/2014 Winchester District Personal Details: Name: Postcode: Adrian Reeves clerk.headbourneworthy@parish.hants.gov.uk SO22 6JA Organisation Name: Headbourne Worthy Parish Council Comment text: Headbourne Worthy Parish Council would wish to see the ward boundaries changed so that it was combined with Kings Worthy rather than with Sparsholt (as at present) or with Wonston and Micheldever. In addition it is considered that, because of the local geography, it would wish to remain as a two member ward. Adrian Reeves Parish Clerk Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded

15 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Page 1 of 1 04/11/2014 Winchester District Personal Details: Name: Adrian Reeves Postcode: SO23 7PJ Organisation Name: Kings Worthy Parish Council Comment text: Kings Worthy Parish Council wish to see the ward boundaries adjusted so that Headbourne Worthy is included in the existing Kings Worthy ward. Uploaded Documents: None Uploaded

16 From: Elizabeth Billingham Sent: 25 October :06 To: Subject: Oliver's Battery Boundary comments Please find below the comments from Olivers Battery regarding the boundary review: The Parish Council of Oliver's Battery, Winchester felt that they would like the commission to consider that they have an affinity with Compton due to the strategic gap and would hope that this was take into consideration when reviewing. -- 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

17 Cooper, Mark From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 29 October :22 To: Cooper, Mark Subject: FW: Review of Ward Boundaries in Winchester City Council (WCC) District Attachments: Review of Ward Boundaries Letter.doc From: Jim Watson Sent: 28 October :30 To: Cc: Subject: Review of Ward Boundaries in Winchester City Council (WCC) District Sirs, In connection with your electoral review of Winchester City Council; Southwick & Widley Parish Council would wish to formally submit our comments and views to the Commission. Please see these in the attached letter to yourselves. Regards Jim Watson Chair, Southwick & Widley Parish Council 1

18 Southwick and Widley Parish Council 19 Okement Close, West End, Southampton, Hants, SO18 3PP 28 th November 2014 To: The Review Officer (Winchester) Local Government Boundary Commission for England Layden House Turnmill Street London EC1M 5LG Dear Sirs, Review of Ward Boundaries in Winchester City Council (WCC) District The Parish Councillors for Southwick & Widley have been examining the potential impact of the Boundary Commission s Review and have used figures from their Web Site as the basis for our comments and observations. Southwick & Widley Electoral District Southwick & Widley (Polling District XW), currently form half of the electoral ward of Boarhunt and Southwick (WG & XW), both being predominantly rural farming areas and villages with a total electorate of However, Southwick & Widley Parish also extends to the MDA known as the West of Waterlooville and is responsible for just over 75% of the development area, which has outline planning permission to develop over 3,500 dwellings. Indeed, the projected Electorate for 2020 is determined to be 3,284 and is of course dependent upon market conditions being favourable. It is the view of Southwick & Widley Parish that this projection figure is optimistic as a target for 2020; however, it could be achieved by Future requirements We have taken account of the indication that WCC will reduce the number of Ward Councillors to around 45 in number, constituting geographical groups of 3 member wards, each with around 6,500 to form the basis for new ward electorate areas. Options for Southwick & Widley Parish Standing Alone is not a realistic argument for Southwick & Widley, our electorate projections only justify 1.5 Ward Councillors and we would not therefore put forward this as a proposition. Alignment with Denmead Parish, with whom we already work closely, could initially appear appealing until consideration is given to the 2020 electorate projections, when it becomes clear that the total combination of both Parishes would exceed 9,500 electors. Our conclusion for this option is in support of that proposed by Denmead

19 Parish; that by 2020 Denmead will have a total electorate of over 6,600, enough to justify its continued existence as a three member ward in its own right, and should maintain its current social cohesion. Alignment with Wickham Parish was also suggested and considered by this Council. But a ward extending some 10 miles in length from Waterlooville to Shedfield would not be practical to administer effectively with such a diversification in sociological components. Whilst the potential electorate numbers of 6756 might meet the desired target we concluded that effective representation of the needs and wishes of the inhabitants of the villages of Southwick & Boarhunt would not be met fairly. Alignment of Swanmore and Newtown with Boarhunt and Southwick appears to be the most compelling option for our Council. Linking the Parishes of Southwick & Widley, Boarhunt, Soberton and Swanmore would establish a potential electorate totaling 7187, using the figures provided by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England. But, if the West of Waterlooville MDA grows at its current rate, that figure would only reach just under 6000 by the year Furthermore, this alignment of existing Parishes would retain a common historic heritage associated with the Southwick Estate and establish a single ward with common interests. Retain Southwick & Widley and Boarhunt Parishes as a Two Member Ward because of the special factors associated with the West of Waterlooville MDA. This Council strongly supports the suggestion proposed by Denmead Parish Council, in that there are special considerations to justify a two member ward option for the Ward of Boarhunt and Southwick. This slowly expanding development (part of the Southwick electoral district XW) will take over a decade to reach completion. Initially it is the view of this Council (and shared by Denmead Council) that the area of the MDA will best develop alongside the existing Boarhunt and Southwick as a two member ward whilst a shadow Parish Council for the MDA is promoted and developed by both Denmead and Southwick & Widley Parish Councils. Special Factors to Consider Southwick & Widley as Part of the Major Development Area is a special and significant factor that must be considered in all future decisions. The new development being built West of Waterlooville will have just over 80% of its geography placed within Winchester City district and 75% (of that 80%) forms part of Southwick & Widley Parish. We have worked closely with Denmead Parish Council (who cover the remaining 25% - of the 80%) and are convinced that the demographic of the MDA will require its own representation of interests and could conceivably become a Parish in its own right in due time. With this in mind and with the recognition and approval of Winchester City Council, a group of Denmead and Southwick & Widley Parish Councillors, already exists in the form of the West of Waterlooville Advisory Group. They have co-opted residents from both the Taylor Wimpey and Grainger building development areas, together with appropriate Ward Councillors, County Councillor and interested Council Officers to promote the interests of the new community that is emerging. We see this as a key step to creating transitional management over what could be a ten year period before the MDA has sufficient numbers of electorate to become ready to stand alone as a new single Parish entity.

20 Conclusion In conclusion, this Council would urge the Local Government Boundary Commission for England to make a special consideration and take the view that the interests of this area are best met by either retaining Southwick & Widley and Boarhunt Parishes as a Two Member Ward or aligning Swanmore and Newtown with Boarhunt and Southwick as a Three Member Ward. But 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. Cllr James Watson Chairman For and on behalf of, Southwick & Widley Parish Council Copies to: Boarhunt & Southwick Ward Councillor Denmead Ward Councillors Boarhunt Parish Council Denmead Parish Council Soberton Parish Council Swanmore Parish Council Yours sincerely Jim Watson Chair of the Parish Council

21 -----Original Message----- From: Aileen Garside Sent: 04 November :18 To: Cc: Subject: Electoral Review of Winchester City Council Dear Sir/Madam, I am writing with regard to the electoral review of Winchester City Council. The Parish Council only meets every two months and therefore unable to respond until today, following the meeting this evening. The Parish Council resolved to make the following comment: Having considered several options, the Parish Council would suggest the ward boundary comprise Swanmore, Droxford, Soberton and Hambledon. Yours faithfully, A Garside Clerk to the Swanmore Parish Council 1

22 From: Elizabeth Billingham Sent: 03 November :31 To: Subject: Twyford Parish Council boundary comment The Twyford Parish Council after much consideration feel that due the shared facilities they feel most associated with Colden Common and would like the Commission to consider a two councillor ward with Colden Common and Twyford. Elizabeth Billingham Clerk to Twyford Parish Council twyfordclerk@gmail.com Tel: 1

23 From: Upham Parish Council Sent: 01 November :10 To: Subject: Electoral Review of Winchester Dear Sir, Attached are the comments from Upham Parish Council on the Electoral Review of Winchester. Please could you add these comments to the review. Yours faithfully, Anne Collins (Mrs) Clerk to Upham Parish Council 1

24 1 st November, 2014 Dear Sir, CONSULTATION ON WARD BOUNDARIES FOR WINCHESTER CITY COUNCIL Upham Parish Council discussed the present Ward Boundaries and agreed that Upham Parish Council would like to continue to be in a Ward with 3 other smaller parishes of a similar rural size. These parishes being Durley, Owlslebury and Curdridge. These 4 parishes have worked well over the years as rural parishes and pull together when there are bigger issues to discuss. We believe that Winchester City Council are suggesting that either Upham or Durley should be taken out of the Ward that they are in at present and merge in with a much larger Town Council Bishops Waltham. We believe that this will be to the detriment of the smaller parish whether this be Upham or Durley. We would urge you to keep the present Ward Boundary and keep Upham, Durley, Owlslebury and Curdridge as one Ward and Bishops Waltham (which still has more growth over the next 20 years) as a separate Ward. Yours faithfully, Anne Collins (Mrs) Clerk to Upham Parish Council The Review Officer (Winchester), Layden House, Turnmill Street, London EC1M5LG