8/7/2017 Local Boundary Commission for England

8/7/2017 Local Boundary Commission for England Consultation Portal

https://consultation.lgbce.org.uk/node/print/informed-representation/10079 1/1

City of Kingston upon Hull

Personal Details:

Name: Sandra Eames

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I wish to give my support for the boundary changes keeping the whole of Kingswood together. As I believe it will benefit the area as a whole.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

1

Carlsson-Hyslop, Dan

From: Michelle EastSent: 28 July 2017 14:20To: reviewsSubject: Hull boundariesAttachments: Leaflet.pdf

Follow Up Flag: Follow upFlag Status: Flagged

Hi, I have had the attached leaflet pushed through my door. I wish to put on record that I am totally opposed to this letter's contents. Garden Village has always been a part of Drypool Ward and I am very upset that a councillor is trying to change the boundaries. There is council housing in Garden Village ‐ I should know, I have lived in it! I also know that there is social housing in Garden Village, managed by Pickering & Ferens. Pickering & Ferens manage a significant amount of social housing in Drypool Ward ‐ including Humber View on Victoria Dock, on streets off Newbridge Road and here in Garden Village. They are better being kept in the same ward. The contents of Councillor Sumpton's letter are divisive and he does not speak for me or my neighbours. I have looked at your website and I 100% support your proposals that keep Garden Village in DRYPOOL. There is absolutely no reason to move us into Holderness. Thank you.

1


From: Paul Edgeworth Sent: 27 July 2017 15:39To: reviewsSubject: Comment: ELECTORAL REVIEW OF KINGSTON UPON HULL: FURTHER DRAFT

RECOMMENDATIONS


Dear Review Officer,

I am a graduate of Hull University and during the earlier round of consultation on your proposals a friend in Hull has forwarded me the link to your boundary review.

I sent feedback at the time because, although I graduated a few years ago, I keep a healthy interest in local politics in the city having been actively involved there when I was a student.

I’ve looked at your revised draft proposals and am really pleased that you took my feedback on board as regards the Wyke and Beverley & Sculcoates wards. I’d be really happy if you could do the same again.

As I said before, the reason for my supporting these wards is as follows. Over my time in Hull I lived in the following streets:-

All three of these are proposed to be part of “Beverley and Sculcoates” ward under both draft and revised draft proposals.

I wrote to support this previously and I do so again. It’s a very coherent ward up and down Beverley Road with good bus and cycle links throughout.

It makes sense to include the Newland Avenue area with Wyke ward as this has a very different feel to it to the streets off Beverley Road, which are much more residential and have a growing Eastern European population at the southern end.

The streets between Temple Street and Norfolk Street that come off Beverley Road (e.g. Somerscales Street, Harley Street etc) are very similar in character to roads like Melwood Grove, Adderbury Grove etc further up, so the inclusion of this area makes sense.

2

In summary – I agree with your proposals for Beverley and Sculcoates and Wyke wards.

Best wishes

Paul Edgeworth

1


From: Ray ElliottSent: 29 July 2017 10:00To: reviewsSubject: Hull City Council boundary review

IwanttowritetoyouinsupportofyourlatestproposalsfortheboundariesofDrypoolWardinHull.I'velivedintheareaformanyyearsandIfeelIhaveagoodideaofthecommunityandtheissuesweallface.ThepreviousproposalswouldhavesplitupDrypool,bymovingpartofGardenVillageintoadifferentward.Thiswouldhavebeenagreaterrorinmyview.GardenVillagehasalwaysbeenapartofDrypool.WeareallonecommunitydownHoldernessRoad,sharingthesameshopsandservices.HivingoffpartofGardenVillageandgraftingitontoanotherwardthatstretchesrightuptoSuttonwouldhavemadenologicalsensefromacommunitiespointofview.ItalsomadenosensefromthepointofviewofStoneferry,asthatcommunitywouldalsohavebeensplit‐andDrypoolwouldhavestretchedfurthernorththanitcurrentlydoes,withlittletoproperlyconnectthenewareaswiththerestoftheward.I'magreatbelieverinthephrase"Ifitain'tbroke,don'tfixit"andIbelieveyouhavemadethecorrectcallbyreturningallofGardenVillagetoDrypoolinyourlatestproposals.Itseemsthenumbersaddup,whichisI'massumingthekeygoalforyou,anditprotectstheboundariesofDrypoolonclear,identifiableboundaries,whichisthemostimportantthingtousasresidents.ThankyouforyourtimeandIhopeyouadoptyourlatestproposalsthatkeepGardenVillageinDrypool.MrElliott

1


From: Steve ElliottSent: 05 August 2017 09:46To: reviewsSubject: proposed ward boundary changes

Dear Review Officer, Re :- Beverley and Sculcoates Ward I wish to object to the proposed Ward. It would seem to be an artificially constructed attempt to co-join at least three and maybe five distinct communities. The southern part of this proposed Ward contains the most ethnically diverse communities in the City that share common characteristics with Spring Bank, but nothing in common with the wholly white English sections of Beverley High Road. The Fountain Road Estate, and its Community Centre oppose totally this move. The poor central leaning districts of this area, are Council tenants who have nothing in common with the area North of Clough Road, where there are no Council properties. As grant funding is acquired on deprivation indicators and not just LSOA areas, this proposed Ward will potentially take vital funding from some of Hull’s poorer districts that will be “rounded up” by their proposed joining with the more prosperous suburban areas of Beverley High Road. It is also disappointing that the Boundary Commission offered no justification for this Ward other than 28 of the 52 respondents to the last consultation may have supported this proposal. When the current Lib Dem councillors, and their partners were excluded, we understand this was not the case. If any test of public opinion was conducted it is likely that all parts of this proposed Ward would oppose it. This would also be likely the case on Beverley High Road. The Boundary Commission has chosen to ignore other proposed settlements for this area that reflected natural communities. I request that the Boundary Commission consider proposals that reflect the real communities of this area.

best wishes, Steve Elliott

1


From: Steve ElliottSent: 05 August 2017 09:48To: reviewsSubject: Proposed ward boundary changes

Dear Review Officer, Re :- Beverley and Sculcoates Wards We wish to object to the proposed Wards. Hymers Aveue has no connectivity with Myton Ward or Anlaby Road and looks culturally towards the Avenue community. It is obvious from the map that this is a topological fix, as without this community the proposed attempt to lever large parts of Anlaby Road into Myton could not be achieved, as it would not join. Your proposals, seek to cross the natural boundaries of Railway Lines in all directions to achieve this, and this clearly completely conflicts with the community arguments, you are supposed to consider. Clearly this stems from the Boundary Commissions hugely unpopular proposal to split Hessle Road. By adopting the Lib Dem proposal, you merely divide Hyners Avenue instead from its natural community of interest, and divide also the Newington community. There were alternative proposals that kept Hymers Avenue in Avenue Ward and the Stadium in Newington. You chose to ignore them. We urge you look seriously at these proposals as those currently proposed are extremely unpopular and you have no mandate for your proposals for Hymers Avenue or the Stadium area which cut through established community affiliations.


1


From: Steve ElliottSent: 05 August 2017 09:45To: reviewsSubject: Proposed ward boundary changes

Dear Review Officer, Re :- Kingswood Ward We wish to object to the proposed Ward. This proposal proposes the cutting in half of the Bude Road Area, and divides a community that has been in one Ward since the Bransholme estate was built in the 1960s-70s. This proposal splits the Bude school catchment areas in half. The only reason this seems to have occurred is to satisfy the private owners of Kingswood that without this Gerrymander would not be big enough for a three- person Ward. It would appear to be the case that the Boundary Commission disregards the views of poorer residents from a social housing area, caring only for more prosperous home owners. Splitting a community and joining half the residents of the estate across a major road, a huge distance apart, is just plain wrong on every community test. I believe all residents views should be given equal weight and these proposals need rejecting and the Bude area needs keeping as one community like it has been for the last 40-50 years. This proposal would also put half the socially deprived Bude Area in Kingswood Ward, denying it vital funding on all deprivation indicators.





Personal Details:

Name: Linda Ellis

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I live in what is now Bricknell ward which will become part of the new Wyke ward. I am very pleased with the outcome of the changes for my area but haveconcerns regarding other nearby parts of the town. Avenue/Myton Boundary - I see that the western end of the boundary follows the railway line until theChanterlands Avenue/Spring Bank junction when it turns along Spring Bank. this has the effect of cutting off Hymers Avenue and Sunny Bank fromChanterlands Avenue which is where the area's natural connections lie. Residents shop on Chanterlands Avenue and children go to school there. I wouldpropose that the boundary continues to follow the railway line and keeps the Avenue ward intact. Beverley& Sculcoates Ward - I have to say that the wardlooks as if it has been made up from all the bits that didn't fit elsewhere. it joins communities that only have the east side of Beverley Road in common asthey are a mixture of council and private housing and a wide range of incomes. Each community has more in common with the people on the western side ofBeverley Road. So I would like to recommend that the boundaries of Myton, Avenue, Wyke, University and Orchard wards be extended across Beverley Road asfar as the River Hull, thereby keeping natural communities together and separating unrelated areas. Thank you Linda Ellis

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

1


From: Glynis Everett Sent: 07 August 2017 11:20To: reviewsSubject: Re: Kingswood hull boundary review


Hi to who ever is concerns

I would really like to see the new proposals for the Kingswood United boundary review excepted.

Kind regards

Glynis

1


From: Ben FellSent: 02 August 2017 12:12To: reviewsSubject: PROPOSED BEVERLEY & SCULCOATES WARD – HULL CITY COUNCIL



PROPOSED BEVERLEY & SCULCOATES WARD – HULL CITY COUNCIL

I am a resident of the proposed Beverley & Sculcoates ward and I am writing to SUPPORT the proposed new ward boundary for my area.

Please consider the following reasons for supporting Beverley & Sculcoates ward:‐

∙ Having lived for a number of years in a ward with two councillors, it would seem sensible for as many wards as possible to have three councillors;

∙ If our ward is to change, it makes sense to extend it south down Beverley Road, as the Sculcoates Lane area is similar to the Fountain Road area;

∙ I also support extending the ward north up Beverley Road, as using Beverley Road as a ward boundary in the way proposed is sensible;

∙ Beverley Road is a major route in and out of the city and as such is a clear and recognisable natural boundary;

∙ There are good transport links all along Beverley Road;

∙ Many people in our area use Beverley Road baths and other facilities along Beverley Road;

∙ Prior to 2002 this area was in the old Beverley ward that ran south down Beverley Road and had three councillors – there were no problems with that boundary.

I am therefore writing to support the proposed Beverley & Sculcoates ward. Please include it in your final recommendations.

Yours faithfully,

2

Benedict C.Fell

Sent from my iPhone

1


From: Will Fielding Sent: 01 August 2017 19:38To: reviewsSubject: Ward Boundary Changes, Hull

Dear Boundary Commission,

I’m Will Fielding and I live at in Hull. I’m currently in the Myton Ward and under your proposals I would continue to be.

I wrote in as part of the last consultation and I’m pleased you took my feedback on board. Please stick with it again this time.

I’ve looked at your latest set of proposed ward boundary changes for the area where I live and want to give the same feedback as I gave to the last round of consultation:‐

I support your proposal for my area. It means Myton Ward is focused on the city centre and the area to the west of the city centre, rather than going up Beverley Road which should be with north Hull.

Your new Myton ward is based on all the roads that lead to the west, which makes sense as it’s a west Hull and city centre ward.

I support your Beverley & Sculcoates ward – I think people who live off Fountain Road have more in common with Sculcoates and the areas further up Beverley Road than they do with the city centre or the Thornton Estate. Getting from Fountain Road to Thornton by bus involves changing in the city centre whereas there are loads of buses that go north up Beverley Road. Some even do a loop round both Bridlington Avenue / Fountain Road estate and the Compass Road estate at the other end of Beverley Road, so it’s easier to get around that way.

Before moving to I lived on I also support your proposal for a Wyke Ward. My street backed onto Goddard Avenue and Goddard Avenue is currently split between two wards. This was a problem trying to get councillors to tackle issues like speeding traffic on Goddard Avenue and the different ward councillors didn’t agree about green open space in the area. It would be good to put Goddard Avenue back together in one ward to solve this kind of problem.

Given that Hull has elections by thirds I don’t think there should be any more 2 member wards than what is required to avoid having a ward that crosses the river. Ideally I wouldn’t have any 2 member wards but I agree with you that it would be daft in Hull to have a ward that crosses the river – people feel very strongly about the east Hull / west Hull divide in this city.

Thank you – I hope you will take these points into consideration.

With best wishes,

Will Fielding

1


From: elspeth finlaySent: 01 August 2017 22:19To: reviewsSubject: Hull Council Boundary Review

Dear LGBCE,

Thanks for the email following my comments about your draft proposals for Hull’s ward boundaries. Here is my feedback on your further draft proposals.

I moved in late 2015 from to which is currently in the Avenue ward. Under your further draft proposals it remains there, and I support this. The Avenues and Pearson Park form a community and shouldn’t be split up; similarly it’s impossible to separate the Dukeries streets from the Avenues without disrupting a natural community. The railway lines to the north and west, and Beverley Road to the east, are all clear boundaries. I support your proposal for Avenue ward as it retains the heart of the current ward and reflects natural communities.

My former home on is once again proposed to be in a Beverley and Sculcoates ward. I support this proposal also. There shouldn’t be a ward that crosses the river – people in Hull think of the river as a very clear dividing line. You also shouldn’t have a ward that crosses Beverley Road into North Hull Estate or Orchard Park – these are very different communities. Therefore a Beverley & Sculcoates ward is the only logical proposal that makes sense of north East Hull.

Please keep both of these wards as you have proposed them in your final recommendations.

Best wishes,

Elspeth




Personal Details:

Name: Steve Gardham

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

I am appalled at the proposal that parish boundaries should be changed just to even up a few voters. This will result in whole communities that have workedtogether for many years being split with no real consideration of natural and existing boundaries. I support the Labour Party's proposals as set out in Marchthis year.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

1


From: Tony Garner Sent: 28 July 2017 16:49To: reviewsSubject: Hull Review

Re: Hull Review

Good afternoon,

I write to you as a resident of East Hull.

I would like to express my support for the Labour Group's Boundary Review Proposals from March 2017. After looking at the draft proposals the Labour submission seems far more logical than other suggestions in that it seeks to ensure historic local communities are brought together for representation.

The current Beverley and Sculcoates proposal is ridiculous in that it is an artificial construct bordering 9 Wards with extremely different social, economic and cultural differences. The inclusion of this Ward and a reluctance to cross the River with a Ward, even though local Government Area Committees have operated this way for many years, then impacts on the rest of the City proposals.If you genuinely want natural communities than this Ward as proposed in draft form simply must be revisited.

I hope you reflect on your proposals and bring forward a proposal that truly does reflect natural communities.

Kind regards,

T Garner

FAO Local Government Boundary Review for England – Hull Review


Re :‐ Beverley and Sculcoates Ward

I wish to object to the above proposed Ward boundary changes. It would seem to be an artificially

constructed attempt to co‐join at least three and maybe five unconnected communities.

The southern part of this proposed Ward contains the most ethnically diverse communities in the

City that share common characteristics with Spring Bank, but nothing in common with the wholly

white English sections of the northern part of Beverley Road.

The Fountain Road Estate, and its Community Centre oppose totally this move. The less affluent

central leaning districts of this area are Council tenants who have nothing in common with the area

North of Clough Road, where there are no Council properties. As grant funding is acquired on

deprivation indicators and not just LSOA areas, this proposed Ward will potentially take vital funding

from some of Hull’s poorer districts that will be “rounded up” by this proposed joining with the more

prosperous suburban areas of Beverley High Road.

It is also disappointing that the Boundary Commission offered no justification for this Ward other

than 28 of the 52 respondents to the last consultation may have supported this proposal. When the

current Lib Dem councillors and their partners were excluded, we understand this would not be the

the case. If a true test of public opinion was conducted it is extremely likely that all parts of this

proposed Ward would oppose it, and that would also be the likely outcome on Beverley High Road.

The Boundary Commission has chosen to ignore other proposed settlements for this area that

reflected natural communities. I request that the Boundary Commission consider proposals that

reflect the real communities of this area.

Hon. Alderman David W Gemmell OBE



Re :‐ Beverley and Sculcoates Wards

I wish to object to the proposed Wards. Hymers Aveue has no community connectivity with Myton

Ward or Anlaby Road But logically looks culturally towards the Avenues Area. It is obvious from the

map that this is a topological fix, as without this community the proposed attempt to lever large

parts of Anlaby Road into Myton could not be logically be achieved.

Your proposals, seek to cross the natural boundaries of Railway Lines in all directions, and this clearly

completely conflicts with the community arguments that you are supposed to take into

consideration. Clearly this stems from the Boundary Commission’s hugely unpopular proposal to

split Hessle Road. By adopting the Lib Dem proposal, you merely divide Hyners Avenue from its

natural community whilsy also dividing the Newington community.

There were alternative proposals that kept Hymers Avenue in Avenue Ward and the Stadium in

Newington. You chose to ignore them but we urge you look seriously again at these proposals. The

current proposals are extremely unpopular and you have no mandate for your recommendations for

Hymers Avenue or the Stadium area which cut through established community affiliations.

Hon Alderman David W Gemmell OBE



Re :‐ Kingswood Ward

We wish to object to the proposed Ward.

This proposal suggests the cutting in half of the Bude Road Area. This divides a community that has

been part of one Ward since the Bransholme estate was built in the 1960s‐70s. It also splits the

Bude school catchment areas in half. The only reason for this appears to be to satisfy the section of

private house owners of Kingswood that without this Gerrymander would not be big enough for a

three‐ person Ward.

It would appear to be the case that the Boundary Commission disregards the views of poorer

residents from a social housing area, caring only for more prosperous home owners. Splitting a

community and joining half the residents of the estate across a major road, a huge distance apart, is

just plain wrong on every community test.

I believe all residents views should be given equal weight and these proposals need rejecting and the

Bude area needs keeping as one community like it has been for the last 40‐50 years. This proposal

would also put half the socially deprived Bude Area in Kingswood Ward, denying it vital funding on

all deprivation indicators. Retaining Communities as an entity is supposed to be the policy of

governments of all persuasion; this proposal goes totally against that philosophy.

Hon Alderman David W Gemmell OBE

1


From: anne gillespieSent: 28 July 2017 11:37To: reviews


Dear Sir, I would like to oppose the proposed moving of Hymers and Sunnybank as these areas have more in common with Avenue Ward than anlaby Rd. I also oppose the artificial cont=struct of Beverley and Sculcoates ward. In addition, I oppose the Bransholme proposals to split Bude Rd community. I do, however, support Labour's plan for wards as proposed in March 2017. Yours, Anne Gillespie.




Personal Details:

Name: Mark Gorog

E-mail:

Postcode:

Organisation Name:

Comment text:

Hi I live on the original Kingswood and see it as that. Why should the new builds being erected be called Kingswood when they are closer to the north carrboundry. I am totally against the changes as are residents of Parnham Drive who this will effect if it went ahead.

Uploaded Documents:

None Uploaded

1


From: EmailSent: 02 August 2017 12:27To: reviewsSubject: Hull Review


Anita Gray

2 August 2017 Dear Sir or Madam I am writing in response to the second consultation on the boundaries for Hull City Council. I live in the Summergroves area of Pickering ward and I support the proposals that have been suggested. I am really pleased to see that the proposals have the Gipsyville area in one ward and that Pickering Park remains the centre of the ward. To me, it makes perfect sense that the park stays central to Pickering Ward and the communities around it stay together. Thank you for taking the time to read my comments. Yours faithfully Anita Gray

1


From:Sent: 25 July 2017 15:59To: reviewsSubject: Avenues Hull Ward Boundary


Dear Sir/Madam

Regarding the proposed new boundaries for Avenues Ward in Kingston upon Hull, I am writing to oppose the moving of Hymers and Sunnybank as it has far more in common with the Avenue Ward than Anlaby Road and Thornton Estate.

I am opposing opposing the artificial constructed Beverley and Sculcoates Ward as it seeks to join artificial unrelated communities with little in common.

I fully support Labour’s plan for wards as proposed in March 2017. Yours sincerely Thom Grealy

1


From: Christine Green Sent: 02 August 2017 10:56To: reviewsSubject: Changes to Drypool and Holderness wards, Hull City Council


YourlatestproposalsforDrypoolandHoldernesswardsmakemuchmoresensethanthepreviousonesproposed.MerseyStreetAcademyisattendedbymanychildrenfromGardenVillage,theWoodhallStreetareaandtheterracedstreetsoffHoldernessRoad–likeMersey,Durham,SevernandBarnsleyStreets.Itisattheheartofthelocalarea.Whenitwasunderthreatofclosuretenyearsagoitwasparentsfromacrosstheareathatgottogethertofighttokeepitopen.Keepingallofthiscommunitytogetherinonewardisthebestpossibleoption.Alltheseareasalsosharethesameplayarea(BrackleyPark)betweenBrackleyCloseandDunscombePark.TheStoneferrycommunityfurthernorthhasit'sownfacilitiesatLindengateandRockfordFields.ItmakesperfectsenseforGardenVillageandtheWoodhallStreetareatobeinthesamewardasBrackleyPark,withRockfordAvenueandMayvilleAvenueareasinthesamewardasRockfordFields.Pleaseadoptyourlatestproposals,keepingGardenVillagewithinDrypoolwardandStoneferrywithinHoldernessward.MrsChristineGreen

1


From: Tony Greening Sent: 04 August 2017 17:46To: reviewsSubject: Boundary

Dear Review Officer, Re :‐ Kingswood Ward We wish to object to the proposed Ward. This proposal proposes the cutting in half of the Bude Road Area, and divides a community that has been in one Ward since the Bransholme estate was built in the 1960s‐70s. This proposal splits the Bude school catchment areas in half. The only reason this seems to have occurred is to satisfy the private owners of Kingswood that without this Gerrymander would not be big enough for a three‐ person Ward. It would appear to be the case that the Boundary Commission disregards the views of poorer residents from a social housing area, caring only for more prosperous home owners. Splitting a community and joining half the residents of the estate across a major road, a huge distance apart, is just plain wrong on every community test. I believe all residents views should be given equal weight and these proposals need rejecting and the Bude area needs keeping as one community like it has been for the last 40‐50 years. This proposal would also put half the socially deprived Bude Area in Kingswood Ward, denying it vital funding on all deprivation indicators.

Beverley and Sculcoates Ward 1

Dear Review Officer, Re :‐ Beverley and Sculcoates Ward We wish to object to the proposed Ward. It would seem to be an artificially constructed attempt to co‐join at least three and maybe five distinct communities. The southern part of this proposed Ward contains the most ethnically diverse communities in the City that share common characteristics with Spring Bank, but nothing in common with the wholly white English sections of Beverley High Road. The Fountain Road Estate, and its Community Centre oppose totally this move. The poor central leaning districts of this area, are Council tenants who have nothing in common with the area North of Clough Road, where there are no Council properties. As grant funding is acquired on deprivation indicators and not just LSOA areas, this proposed Ward will potentially take vital funding from some of Hull’s poorer districts that will be “rounded up” by their proposed joining with the more prosperous suburban areas of Beverley High Road.

2

It is also disappointing that the Boundary Commission offered no justification for this Ward other than 28 of the 52 respondents to the last consultation may have supported this proposal. When the current Lib Dem councillors, and their partners were excluded, we understand this was not the case. If any test of public opinion was conducted it is likely that all parts of this proposed Ward would oppose it. This would also be likely the case on Beverley High Road. The Boundary Commission has chosen to ignore other proposed settlements for this area that reflected natural communities. I request that the Boundary Commission consider proposals that reflect the real communities of this area.

Beverley and Sculcoates Ward 2

Dear Review Officer, Re :‐ Beverley and Sculcoates Wards We wish to object to the proposed Wards. Hymers Aveue has no connectivity with Myton Ward or Anlaby Road and looks culturally towards the Avenue community. It is obvious from the map that this is a topological fix, as without this community the proposed attempt to lever large parts of Anlaby Road into Myton could not be achieved, as it would not join. Your proposals, seek to cross the natural boundaries of Railway Lines in all directions to achieve this, and this clearly completely conflicts with the community arguments, you are supposed to consider. Clearly this stems from the Boundary Commissions hugely unpopular proposal to split Hessle Road. By adopting the Lib Dem proposal, you merely divide Hyners Avenue instead from its natural community of interest, and divide also the Newington community. There were alternative proposals that kept Hymers Avenue in Avenue Ward and the Stadium in Newington. You chose to ignore them. We urge you look seriously at these proposals as those currently proposed are extremely unpopular and you have no mandate for your proposals for Hymers Avenue or the Stadium area which cut through established community

Regards Mr & Mrs T Greening

Sent from my iPad