sign in sign up
<<
Home , Brownswood (ward), Cazenove (ward), Chatham (ward), Dalston (Hackney ward), De Beauvoir (ward), De Beauvoir Town

Hackney Liberal Democrats Proposal for ward boundaries 2012

Revised

Ian Sharer Reuben Thompson [email protected] [email protected]

1. Introduction This document sets out the proposals of the Liberal Democrat group on Council for the reform of ward boundaries.

2. Rationale We have sought to follow the Local Government Boundary Commission for ’s guiding principles when drawing up these wards: a) Population All these wards except one fall within 8% of the “correct” population figure per councillor at the current time and all should fall well within ten percent at the end of the five year period concerned. b) Natural boundaries Where possible we have followed obvious boundaries such as main roads, canals, railways and rivers, such as the Grand Union Canal, , Clapton Common, Upper Clapton Road etc. c) Community We have sought to integrate those communities who interact within sensible wards – those who shop, socialise and travel together are kept together where possible.

We have developed a mixture of two and three member wards, believing this the best way to meet objectives a and c above. We have used our local knowledge to give input to this process.

We have sought to form cohesive, fair wards based on these values and not the likely political composition of a council on any particular set of ward boundaries.

We have followed the Commission’s recommendation of a status quo as regards the number of councillors at 57.

3. Results We have proposed 23 wards, eleven with three members and twelve with two. From the North East to the South West of the Borough, these are:

a) Springfield Centred round Springfield Park, this ward is bounded by the borough boundary and river in the North and East and by Upper Clapton Road and North Millfields park in the South. It will elect three members.

b) Centred around the Stamford Hill Broadway shopping district and station, this ward stretches from the borough boundary in the north to the western side of the East Reservoir. It will elect two members. We note that there is a significant variance from the average population per councillor at the beginning of the review period. Since most of the building in that area is scheduled for the first two years of the period, we feel this is justified.

c) Following the natural boundaries of Upper Clapton Road, High Street and Northwold Road. It will elect three members.

d) Abney Centred around , this ward follows the natural boundaries of Stamford Hill in the East, the East and West Reservoirs in the North, Seven Sisters Road in the West and Stoke Newington Church Street in the south. It will elect three members.

e) Comprising the North Western corner of the borough, this ward is bounded by the borough boundary on two and a half sides. It includes the Western Reservoir which denotes most of the rest of the border and much of the Woodbury Down redevelopment area. It will elect three members.

f) Millfields Centred around the two Millfields parks, this ward includes most of Clapton to the east of the Clapton Roads and to the borough boundary. It will elect two members.

g) Clapton Comprising the area of Lower Clapton to the west of the Clapton Roads and to the north of . It will elect two members.

h) Stoke Newington Central Centred around the Stoke Newington shopping area, this is a community based ward. It will elect three members.

i) Located immediately to the south of , this ward represents an area with a strong sense of identity and community. It will elect two members.

j) Comprising “The Ladder”, an area with a strong sense of identity, this ward represents the northern part of Kingsland to the west of Stoke Newington Road and follows the borough boundary for most of the rest of its border. It will elect two members. k) Clapton Park Stretching from the to Road and including much of the Marsh, this ward is centred round Clapton Park. It will elect three members. l) Homerton Representing much of the traditional Homerton neighbourhood, this ward’s borders are constrained by those of the strongly identified areas of the to the east and to the south. It is bordered by Mare Street to the west which represents a strong natural boundary. It will elect three members. m) Hackney Downs Representing a community focused area stretching from the North Railway in the south to Downs Road in the north and centred round Hackney Downs park. To the west it borders the railway mainline and to the east the Lower Clapton Road, all natural boundaries. It will elect two members. n) Comprising the eastern part of the Dalston shopping district and stretching from Hackney Downs in the east to the Kingsland Road and from Dalston Lane in the south to the Stoke Newington borders in the north. It will elect three members. o) The Wick is a particularly strongly identified area by community and this ward reflects that. Stretching from the borough boundary in the east to in the west. It will elect three members. p) Centred around London Fields Park, this is a community based ward, though one that includes much of the shopping district. Mare Street represents a strong eastern boundary. It will elect two members. q) Comprising the area round Queensbridge Road and stretching from London Fields in the east to Kingsland Road in the west, Forest Road in the north to the canal in the south, this ward has both strong natural borders and a shared purpose in that its inhabitants make use of the same shops, schools and stations. It will elect three members. r) The area of is one with a very strong identity to the extent that it is oft said that it believes it is in . Bounded by the borough boundary to the north and west and by Kingsland Road and the canal on the other side. This ward will elect two members. s) South Hackney Representing an area of shared enterprise and community, this ward is centred around the Lauriston Road shops and amenities and represents the area to the north of Park and the borough boundary. It will elect three members. t) Representing the southernmost part of the borough to the east of Kingsland Road/ High Street and to the south of the canal, this is one of Hackney’s more city facing wards. It will elect two members. u) Representing the traditional community area of Hoxton and to the west of Kingsland Road, this ward is centred around the amenities of Hoxton Market. To the west, it meets the borough boundary and to the north the canal. It will elect two members. v) Wenlock Representing the part of Hoxton around the , this ward is distinct from Hoxton in that it looks to Islington for many of its shopping needs. It is bordered by the borough boundary to the north and west. It will elect two members. w) South Shoreditch This ward is quite unlike any of the others in Hackney as it is very much an extension of the . With Old Street at its centre, it is bordered on three sides by the borough boundary. It will elect two members.

4. Mathematical rationale We have used the projected population figures from the London Borough of Hackney and the Authority to provide estimates of the number of electors in each ward both now and in five years time.

Name of unitary Electorate Additional Growth in Total Predicted %age Growth to ward 2011 Population 2011 - Electorate to Electorate 2017 2017 2017 2017 BROWNSWOOD 7,889 2050 1025 8,914 11.50% CAZENOVE 8,263 250 125 8,388 1.49% 8,862 350 175 9,037 1.94% CLISSOLD 8,630 400 200 8,830 2.27% DALSTON 10,439 950 475 10,914 4.35% DE BEAUVOIR 9,695 1450 725 10,420 6.96% HACKNEY CENTRAL 8,814 500 250 9,064 2.76% HACKNEY DOWNS 8,819 400 200 9,019 2.22% HAGGERSTON 9,209 900 450 9,659 4.66% HOXTON 10,473 500 250 10,723 2.33% KINGS PARK 7,635 400 200 7,835 2.55% 9,559 200 100 9,659 1.04% 7,823 250 125 7,948 1.57% 7,329 1700 850 8,179 10.39% QUEENSBRIDGE 9,517 500 250 9,767 2.56% SPRINGFIELD 7,144 350 175 7,319 2.39% STOKE NEWINGTON 8,705 450 225 8,930 2.52% CENTRAL VICTORIA 9,556 400 200 9,756 2.05% WICK 8,157 300 150 8,307 1.81% 166,518 6150 172,668

Predicted growth of population in current wards

We took the proportion of each new ward that was previously in each old ward:

New Ward Old Ward Voters 2012 Uplift Voters 2017 Abney Lordship 7782 1.57% 7904 Abney New River 1034 10.39% 1141 Brownswood Brownswood 8291 11.50% 9244 Brownswood New River 786 10.39% 868 Cazenove Cazenove 7839 1.49% 7956 Cazenove New River 497 10.39% 549 Cazenove Springfield 999 2.39% 1023 Clapton Chatham 1018 1.94% 1038 Clapton Hackney Central 3434 2.76% 3529 Clapton Hackney Downs 1584 2.22% 1619 Clapton Park Chatham 368 1.94% 375 Clapton Park Kings Park 7518 2.55% 7710 Clapton Park Leabridge 611 1.04% 617 Clissold Clissold 6099 2.27% 6237 Dalston Dalston 8163 4.35% 8518 Dalston Hackney Central 917 2.76% 942 De Beauvoir De Beauvoir 6227 6.96% 6660 Hackney Down Hackney Downs 5903 2.22% 6034 Haggerston Haggerston 5692 4.66% 5957 Homerton Chatham 6929 1.94% 7063 Homerton Victoria 1881 2.05% 1920 Hoxton De Beauvoir 2978 6.96% 3185 Hoxton Haggerston 856 4.66% 896 Hoxton Hoxton 1607 2.33% 1644 London Fields Hackney Central 4349 2.76% 4469 London Fields Queensbridge 1447 2.56% 1484 Millfields Chatham 312 1.94% 318 Millfields Leabridge 5681 1.04% 5740 Queensbridge Dalston 521 4.35% 544 Queensbridge Haggerston 772 4.66% 808 Queensbridge Queensbridge 7182 2.56% 7366 Shacklewell Clissold 2254 2.27% 2305 Shacklewell Dalston 1298 4.35% 1354 Shacklewell Stoke Newington Central 2550 2.52% 2614 South Hackney Queensbridge 725 2.56% 744 South Hackney Victoria 7765 2.05% 7924 South Shoreditch Haggerston 2110 4.66% 2208 South Shoreditch Hoxton 3500 2.33% 3582 Springfield Leabridge 2885 1.04% 2915 Springfield Springfield 6254 2.39% 6404 Stamford Hill New River 5127 10.39% 5660 Stoke Newington Central Cazenove 465 1.49% 472 Stoke Newington Central Dalston 18 4.35% 19 Stoke Newington Central Hackney Downs 1458 2.22% 1490 Stoke Newington Central Stoke Newington Central 6428 2.52% 6590 Wenlock De Beauvoir 456 6.96% 488 Wenlock Hoxton 5099 2.33% 5218 Wick Chatham 511 1.94% 521 Wick Wick 8043 1.81% 8188

This then allowed us to estimate the population of each new ward both now and in 2017:

# Voters Voters Variance Variance New Ward Cllrs 2012 2017 2012 2017 Abney 3 8,816 9,045 0.77% 3.39% Brownswood 3 9,077 10,112 3.75% 15.58% Cazenove 3 9,335 9,528 6.70% 8.91% Clapton 2 6,036 6,186 3.49% 6.06% Clapton Park 3 8,497 8,702 2.88% 0.53% Clissold 2 6,099 6,237 4.57% 6.94% Dalston 3 9,080 9,460 3.79% 8.13% De Beauvoir 2 6,227 6,660 6.77% 14.19% Hackney Downs 2 5,903 6,034 1.21% 3.46% Haggerston 2 5,692 5,957 2.41% 2.14% Homerton 3 8,810 8,983 0.70% 2.68% Hoxton 2 5,441 5,725 6.71% 1.84% London Fields 2 5,796 5,953 0.62% 2.07% Millfields 2 5,993 6,058 2.75% 3.87% Queensbridge 3 8,475 8,718 3.13% 0.35% Shacklewell 2 6,102 6,273 4.62% 7.55% South Hackney 3 8,490 8,668 2.96% 0.92% South Shoreditch 2 5,610 5,790 3.81% 0.73% Springfield 3 9,139 9,319 4.46% 6.52% Stamford Hill 2 5,127 5,660 12.09% 2.96% Stoke Newington Central 3 8,369 8,571 4.34% 2.03% Wenlock 2 5,555 5,706 4.76% 2.17% Wick 3 8,554 8,709 2.22% 0.45% 57 166,223 172,054 3.89% 4.50% 2,916 3,018

The problem with this approach is that it does not take into account that the majority of development in the old De Beauvoir ward will be in the new Hoxton ward, and we have looked at the proposed developments in the north of the borough around Woodberry Down and have concluded a greater proportion is in the new Stamford Hill ward rather than new Brownswood than the figures show. We have, therefore adjusted the previous table to produce this one:

Voters Voters Variance Variance New Ward # Cllrs 2012 2017 2012 2017 Abney 3 8,816 9,045 0.77% 3.39% Brownswood 3 9,077 9,500 3.75% 8.59% * Cazenove 3 9,335 9,528 6.70% 8.91% Clapton 2 6,036 6,186 3.49% 6.06% Clapton Park 3 8,497 8,702 2.88% 0.53% Clissold 2 6,099 6,237 4.57% 6.94% Dalston 3 9,080 9,460 3.79% 8.13% De Beauvoir 2 6,227 6,300 6.77% 8.02% * Hackney Downs 2 5,903 6,034 1.21% 3.46% Haggerston 2 5,692 5,957 2.41% 2.14% Homerton 3 8,810 8,983 0.70% 2.68% Hoxton 2 5,441 6,085 6.71% 4.33% * London Fields 2 5,796 5,953 0.62% 2.07% Millfields 2 5,993 6,058 2.75% 3.87% Queensbridge 3 8,475 8,718 3.13% 0.35% Shacklewell 2 6,102 6,273 4.62% 7.55% South Hackney 3 8,490 8,668 2.96% 0.92% South Shoreditch 2 5,610 5,790 3.81% 0.73% Springfield 3 9,139 9,319 4.46% 6.52% Stamford Hill 2 5,127 6,272 12.09% 7.54% * Stoke Newington Central 3 8,369 8,571 4.34% 2.03% Wenlock 2 5,555 5,706 4.76% 2.17% Wick 3 8,554 8,709 2.22% 0.45% 57 166,223 172,054 3.89% 4.23% 2,916 3,018

Map of proposed wards. A larger PDF copy of this is also attached. 5. Alternatives considered We considered a variety of alternative scenarios in drawing up these boundaries including but not limited to:

a) Maintaining the current Hackney Central This was dismissed as it would prevent the formation of strong wards around it

b) Crossing Kingsland Road and making a three member De Beauvoir De Beauvoir town has a strong sense of community and this would be compromised by crossing the Kingsland Road in much the same way it currently is by crossing the canal.

c) Crossing Clapton Common east-west This was dismissed as the steep slope down to the river from Clapton Common lends the Springfield area a strong sense of self. We could find no possible wards crossing Clapton Common that did not lack integrity as potential wards.

d) Maintaining the as a natural boundary It was felt that the focal point of Millfields Park was greater than the boundary of Lea Bridge Road

e) Building a Woodberry Down ward Although Woodberry Down is and will remain after redevelopment an area with a strong focus and sense of community, constructing a ward solely of one area of social housing would represent ghettoization and would not be good for the area.

6. Discussion of Hackney Council proposals The Liberal Democrats have submitted this proposal as we are unable to support the proposal put forward by the council two reasons:

a) It is a “sticking plaster” approach – it seeks to maintain the majority of the current wards, regardless of their failings whilst creating new wards with no cohesion at the edges. For example:

i) The new wards on the north eastern side of the borough seem to have been carved out with little regard for geography or community. The proposed Upper Clapton, Stamford Hill East and Stamford Hill West wards are particularly poor. ii) The Woodberry Down ward comprises almost wholly of one estate. This is, as previously mentioned, unhealthy. iii) The proposed Dalston and De Beauvoir ward is at best ungainly and shows no respect for either area’s integrity and the Hoxton North and South wards’ boundaries seem to be dictated with no sensible basis whatsoever, both with each other and with Dalston and De Beauvoir. iv) Meanwhile, the ungainly, confusing and incohesive current Haggerston is kept nigh on untouched.

b) The Council totally failed to consult with the opposition groups regarding the proposals before sending them to the LGBCE. This lack of consultation shows a haste to put forward the proposals that is at best worrying.