Cheshire West and Chester

Transcription

1 Cheshire West and Chester Linda Nelson Davenham,Moulton and Kingsmead Northwich Leftwich I note the logic of the Commission's proposals, but believe the two proposed wards should be combined because the residents function as a single community despite their different histories. There are good communications between the two proposed wards, including a public underpass which goes under the A533 (and A566), providing a link between Davenham and Leftwich. It emerges by the back of the Secondary School (County High School Leftwich). Many school children use it, as do residents of Davenham to access the Woodpecker Hotel (Premier Inn). For indoor amenity, Leftwich has only the Woodpecker (with no function rooms for hire). The Bowling Green Pub near the railway arches (equally close to Kingsmead and Leftwich) and no Community Centre. Unsurprisingly, residents attending clubs and societies tend to join activities within Davenham, Moulton and Kingsmead, attending theatrical performances by the Davenham Players. Using the Doctors, Dentist, Chemist and Vets in Kingsmead and Davenham, and hiring the British Legion Hall for parties. Some Leftwich residents attend the Davenham Church rather than the Leftwich one and vice-versa. Conversely, Leftwich has a Primary School and a Secondary School attended by most of the children in Kingsmead, Davenham and Moulton. Children who live on both sides of London Road (Kingsmead and Leftwich) both attend Leftwich Primary School. A family Support Unit in Leftwich covers the whole area, and similarly the Brownies Pack. Linked to the above, there is only one small park/play area in Leftwich but there are nine in Kingsmead. Many Leftwich, Davenham children and families use the parks in Kingsmead because they accompany school friends, some of whom live on the other side of London Road. The three ward Councillors often pool their Member's Budget awards to assist with local infrastructure serving the whole community and the Leftwich Park referred to above is currently being redeveloped with match funding provided by all three members. I regard the Community as a close one and believe it would be better served by retaining the three-seat ward.

2 Cheshire West and Chester Rachel Nightingale The stated aims of the Boundary commision with regard to defining wards are: The pattern of wards should reflect the interests and identities of local communities as well as promoting effective local government. However, the proposal to abolish the ward of the Garden Quarter and divide it between Blacon and the City ward goes directly against this. The Garden Quarter has only been a ward since 2009 thanks to the tireless work of residents groups. It is the only thing we have that defines our area, as we are not defined geographically on a map. Official recognition of our existence as a distinct community is dependent almost entirely on our ward status, You can see more in our local plan at for evidence of how we have organised and are a distinct group or our Garden Quarter Facebook page for evidence of our activity. The Garden Quarter ward name currently provides an umbrella for a wide range of activities that are now at the centre of a distinct community but would find themselves pushed to the periphery of separate communities unrelated to us under the proposed changes. We would become a small indistinct part of Blacon or the City Ward despite having our own very special identity which is not represented by either of these two wards. We have a distinct set of community values: inclusive, welcoming, vibrant, campaigning and active and a real will to survive and thrive despite the many challenges in our area. The Garden Quarter is such a vibrant and active community in part because we are under threat from the many Homes Of Multiple Occupancy in our ward due to our proximity to the University and the concentration of students in our area. This leads to a lot of young people living here on a temporary basis which, despite bringing its own vibrancy, is also a real potential threat to community cohesion. Despite all attempts to write us off as a community we have risen to the challenge and organised a residents' association which runs many activities such as a cinema club, gardening club, street parties, Lights switch on, barn dances, neighbourhood promise auctions, traders groups, Christmas markets, firework displays, children's nativities and festivals and promotes strong close links with the local school Chester Blue Coat Primary and church St Thomas's. We also organise events to welcome and include students as part of our community and have had a good degree of success with this. We have achieved the impossible of creating a tight-knit community despite all the odds through hard work, will and determination, and losing our Ward status would be a major blow to our identity. Everyone who comes to our Ward from other parts of Chester and the UK for our festivals and events comments on how lucky we are to have the sense of local community that we do. Every time we can find an excuse we close the road and have a street party! This is very rare for a Ward in a city! We are not a rural idyll but a proud city ward with many challenges. In a time when community links are under threat all over the country we are a fantastic example of how committed, interested residents can come together to organise themselves and provide all the community, young and old, with memorable events and activities that strengthen our bonds and connection. Without ward status we would no longer have a focused councillor to represent us over issues that are of a particularly high priority to our environment, such as HMOs, rubbish, noise and on-road parking. Funding for local projects may also be affected. If we don't officially exist, what do we call ourselves? who will represent us? how will we encourage community social action around issues that affect our area rather than just sitting back and waiting for the council/university/government to do everything

3 for us? Our councillor is highly connected to all our activities, comes to all our residents committee meetings and is heavily involved in the planning and implementing of all our events. It would be devastating to lose someone with such a close connection to and understanding of our community. The Garden Quarter is an area to be supported, encouraged and used as a model for others to copy, not decimated. Removing our Ward status would be a major set back because it is our only 'official' means of identity. We hope to move forward with our community, going from strength to strength. Removing our ward status, our name, our council representative and our identity will do the opposite. Please rethink this plan. Please come and visit us and see what we do, who we are, how we reach out to all sections of our community and attempt to build bridges and promote community harmony. We need our name, we need our ward, we need our councillor. You will not find a community with more challenges and yet more heart and determination in all of Chester and possibly the UK!

4 10/9/2017 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Cheshire West and Chester Anna Nilsen The Boundary Commission's 'Electoral Reviews: Technical guidance' (April 2014, p.10) states that the criteria to which they must have regard in an electoral review are equality of representation, reflecting the identities and interests of local communities, and securing effective and convenient local government. It also highlights 'the desirability of fixing boundaries which are and will remain easily identifiable, and which will not break local ties'. In the case of Garden Quarter Ward, the proposal neither reflects the identity and interests of the community nor promotes effective local government in fact it does the exact opposite by dividing the community in two and marginalising the two parts in separate wards, thereby depriving the community of effective representation. As far as equality of representation is concerned, the proposal does not improve the ratio of residents per councillor in Chester. For Garden Quarter Ward, the proposal would result in: 1. Loss of identity: GQ is a cohesive community with a strong identity which it has fought long and hard to have recognised in its ward name (which reflects the historic orchards and gardens to which its main artery, Garden Lane, led). The canal, far from being a boundary (there are four bridges within the ward), is a second artery of the community. Residents on both sides of the canal use the same shops and pubs, go to the same medical centre, worship in the same churches, enjoy the same open spaces, take their children to the same school, attend the same university. Placing the ward boundary along the canal would cut this community in half and threaten its identity. 2. Weakened community: GQ residents have come together and organised activities, events and festivals since long before achieving official recognition of their unique community identity. Splitting GQ and attaching the two parts to different wards would considerably weaken this community the two parts would become at best peripheral to their new wards, particularly to Blacon, which has its own identity and needs, and from which GQ is separated by open fields and the A5480 a much more significant barrier than the canal. One particular consequence of splitting the community into two different wards is that it might become far more difficult for the community to secure funding for its events and activities. For evidence of the community's strong identity and cohesiveness see the Garden Quarter's facebook page at and its Community Plan at 3. Loss of representation: GQ is a strong community of permanent residents and a large and growing student population; it has unique characteristics and needs which other parts of the city do not have (e.g. a high density of houses in multiple occupation). It is currently represented by a councillor it knows and trusts, who is familiar with the area and has worked extremely hard for the community. It makes absolutely no sense to split the ward along the canal as the community would then lose access to a single councillor who knows the whole area and its particular needs. The two halves of the community would become peripheral to two different wards and the community would lose the effective representation it currently has. The proposal for Garden Quarter Ward is unacceptable. It fails to meet any of the Boundary Commission's criteria; worst of all, it breaks strong local ties by proposing to place the two halves of a vibrant and cohesive community in different wards. This in no way serves the interests of the community; in fact it deprives the community both of its identity and of effective representation. The proposal should be abandoned and Garden Quarter Ward left as it is. 1/1

5 11/3/2017 Local Government Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Cheshire West and Chester Graham Nilsen I live in what is currently the Garden Quarter ward. This is a cohesive area with a strong community spirit; many of the problems are shared by the entire ward. You propose to split the ward into two, along the canal. The canal does not act as a natural boundary, being easily crossed by several bridges; many of our community facilities are within walking distance on the other side of the canal. You propose adding us to Blacon, from which we are separated by about 1km of fields and the A5480 Deva Link, a road carrying heavy traffic - much more of a barrier than the canal. We rarely use Blacon's facilities - they are significantly further away and accessing them would involve crossing that road: instead, all of our links are across the canal (Garden Lane shops and pubs, Bluecoat Primary School etc) and then into the centre of Chester. Thus, what you propose would split what is currently a coherent entity and add us onto another ward with which we have few geographical or social links. Politically, we would become irrelevant. I see no benefits to doing this and ask that, instead, you keep Garden Quarter intact. 1/1

6 Carlsson-Hyslop, Dan From: Sent: 05 November :32 To: reviews Subject: Cheshire West and Chester - Elton & Mickle Trafford ward I have no objection to the proposed boundaries of the new ward but wish to suggest an alternative name. The existing Chester Villages ward name successfully achieved community cohesion for a string of rural settlements on the fringe of Chester. There is little or no interaction between villages at the Chester end of the proposed new ward such as Guilden Sutton and Mickle Trafford and Elton, which is a larger, possibly dissimilar community some distance away with its own priorities and issues and close to industry. It may be relevant that Elton has in the past been linked to the nearby large manufacturing town of Ellesmere Port in other proposals. Helpfully communities in the new ward are all linked by the River Gowy which flows through the general area. 'Gowy' has previously been associated with ward names and has the advantages of not only being a recognisable description applicable to the district but is free from association with any one particular community. I therefore urge the Commission to build on the proven success of Chester Villages and designate the ward Gowy Villages. On a small but important point as to the boundary of the new ward along the A41 in Guilden Sutton, I am pleased the mapping appears to show the relatively recently approved new parish boundary agreed by the borough council but would object if the detail reveals it has reverted to the previous boundary along Hare Lane in Pipers Ash which divided that hamlet between two parishes. D Norbury 1

7 Carlsson-Hyslop, Dan From: Marc Novak Sent: 03 November :22 To: reviews Subject: Cheshire and Chester West electoral Review Re: Consultation on draft recommendations for electoral review of Cheshire West and Chester Council Mr Marc Novak Dear Sirs, I have lived in Chester since 2001, initially renting an apartment within the city walls ( and then in 2005 I became a resident owner of a property ) in the Garden Quarter. Since moving to Chester, there has been a palpable sense of shared community in these locations. From a community point of view, they act as one. There's a spirit of sharing, helpfulness and a collective will to improve the local area. Having grew up in Manchester, I have witnessed the change and the negative impact that can occur when boundary changes are made. Before outlining my own concerns and comments to the proposed boundary changes, I would like to give me my support for the letter Cllr Bob Rudd sent to you on this matter. Cllr Rudd has invaluable knowledge of the local area and his comments are accurate and fair. My own concerns and comments: I believe the proposed boundary changes will have a negative impact, are unnecessary and lack foresight. Due to the following reasons. 1. The projected increase in voter numbers in the garden quarter/city centre ward are questionable. The vast majority of properties erected in this ward are student accommodation. As you know Chester attracts a very high percentage of international students along with attracting students from other counties across the UK. With this in mind, I would suggest that the increase in "eligible" voter population may not have calculated correctly. The method used for these calculation has not been made available or included in the proposed boundary change notice. I believe this is a huge omission, which in itself should halt any further decisions around the boundary changes, until the calculation method(s) have been made public and reviewed. 2. Loss of local community spirit. As noted earlier, the garden quarter has a quality to it that has been hard fought for and earned. It is more than just a point on a map, it is a community of people who care about Chester and the local area. Changes to the boundary would destroy the work and effort that so many have put into the local area. A evidence of this, you may recall that it was the residents of the Garden Quarter who saved one of the oldest buildings in the Old Port area. This is of course the Electric Light Building on new crane street. I'm sure that you would agree that this historic building is an asset to Chester. This is just one example among many, where without the residents of the Garden Quarter, this historic building would have been destroyed. 1

8 3. The existing boundary makes practical and geographical sense. If any changes were required I would suggest that Deva link road should in fact be the boundary between the garden quarter/city centre wards and Blacon, this is a clear well established geographical boundary. 4. Property values may decline; the boundary changes may negatively impact property prices. 5. Insurance costs may increase; Car, house and building insurance may increase. With regards to the last 2 points. Should the proposed boundary changes be approved; any negative financial impact to me will be pursued, with a view to obtaining compensation. With this in mind, it is imperative that if you do approve the proposed boundary changes, that you have sufficient compensation funds/insurance in place to accommodate any claims. I urge the electoral review board to consider all of the points highlighted in my letter and also the concerns raised by residents of the Garden Quarter. I would also urge the electoral review board alter the boundary plans to ensure that the Garden Quarter is not destroyed. Sincerely Marc Novak 2

9 Cheshire West and Chester jean oakes We agree with Little Budworth council, that we are more connected to Tarporley than Winsford, with residents using schools, doctors and facilities in Tarporley. Stephen & Jean Oakes

10 Cheshire West and Chester Siobhan O'Brien Re. dividing the Garden Quarter ward between the City and Blacon: The Garden Quarter faces distinct issues which are very different from those facing the city or the Blacon community and we need to be represented by a councillor who will address the needs of our community. Being the location for the main campus of the University of Chester raises issues such as the growing number of HMO's and the studentification of the area, something that will become more pressing if the proposed School of Medicine is approved. We have worked long and hard to grow and improve our community for both long term residents and students, and officially being named The Garden Quarter in 2009 acknowledged our distinct identity and location. The canal does not border the Garden Quarter it runs through the middle of it, and using it as a dividing line completely splits our community. The Boundary Commission said that "wards should reflect the interests and identities of local communities" but this boundary change will split our community and rob us of a voice in local government. The two other wards, City and Blacon, have very different issues to the Garden Quarter and have representatives who speak up for them. We will be tacked onto these wards and our problems will not be a priority when placed beside their established issues, so our concerns will be marginalised and our voice lost. We need our own elected representative who can be our voice on the council, who is accountable to the residents of this community and who supports the projects that help us to flourish.

11

12 9/4/2017 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal Cheshire West and Chester John Oneill What shire does Runcorn come under, as we seem to be in the hands of a Liverpool Lord Mayor 1/1