Peckham Ward
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Fuller, Heather From: Fuller, Heather Sent: 17 November 2015 08:50 To: Ward, Lucy Subject: FW: Southwark ward boundary review Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Categories: In progress From: Roger Giess [mailto Sent: 16 November 2015 20:27 To: reviews <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Southwark ward boundary review Further to my earlier email, I need to correct a slight error in our submission over the intended boundary between the proposed North Walworth and Burgess Park wards. The part of FAR1 that is to be placed in our proposed Burgess Park was incorrectly described. A further 451 electors should have been included with the 625 placed in a ward with FAR2,3 and 4. These are electors living south of a line from Walworth Road through the centre of Liverpool Grove then through Faraday Gardens to Portland Street. This combined area of 1,076 electors is the Church Commissioners' Walworth Estate which we would not want to split. We are proposing to balance this by switching from Burgess Park to North Walworth the 509 current electors in EWL4 at addresses north west of a line from Old Kent Road through the middle of Surrey Square to the western end of the polling district. This confirms our intention that East street should be within a single ward, North Walworth. Apologies for our error and the confusion. Roger Giess On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 3:03 AM, Roger Giess > wrote: Please find attached the submission of Southwark London Borough Council Lib Dem group to the consultation on warding arrangement for the borough of Southwark. I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any queries or if we can assist in any way. Roger Giess 1 2 Southwark Borough Council Liberal Democrat Group Local Government Boundary Commission for England review of warding arrangements for Borough of Southwark Southwark Council Lib Dem Group submission Introduction This is the submission of Southwark Borough Council Liberal Democrat Group to the LGBCE review of warding arrangements for the London Borough of Southwark. New ward boundaries are needed as 7 of the current 21 wards vary from the average electorate by more than 10% and this situation will grow worse by 2021. Following consultation on council size the LGBCE has recognised the broad consensus for retaining a council of 63 members. We are therefore proposing a warding scheme for Southwark for a 63 member council with a mix of 1, 2 and 3 member wards. We have used the local knowledge of the many members of the Lib Dem council group, past and present, from all parts of the borough to draw up these proposals. We are confident that they respect local community ties well and provide for convenient local government in line with the statutory criteria. We have been able to use many of the natural boundary lines of Southwark's built environment. Current Position The review has been triggered by imbalances in ward electorates. This imbalance results from extensive residential development in the north of the borough, leading to oversized wards in the north and undersized wards in the south. Part of this is the conversion of commercial/office land uses to residential use. Another element relates to major regeneration schemes on social housing estates. These strong trends will continue so that electorates are forecast to rise in the north and parts of the centre of the borough, notably in Bankside (in CAT1), Elephant & Castle (CAT3, 4 and 5), Rotherhithe (SDO2 and ROT2), parts of Bermondsey (GRN1 and RIV5) and the Aylesbury Estate (FAR3). The lack of comparable development in the more suburban south of the borough means these wards are now becoming unacceptably over-represented, despite their essentially static electorates. The nature of this recent and anticipated development is that certain geographically very small areas which currently have small electorates will see new residential developments of considerable scale and density. In the most extreme cases, polling District CAT1 is forecast to see a doubling of its local electorate from under 2,500 to over 5,000 by 2021 while Polling District SDO2 is projected to increase from under 1,000 to over 3,000 as the Canada Water Masterplan development is built out. The same is the case with the estate regenerations in EW1 (the Heygate/Elephant Park) and FAR3 (the Aylesbury Estate). Any ward including such sites will inevitably be significantly overrepresented on the 2014 electorate figures, before this new building, or be significantly under represented afterwards. We have accommodated this in our scheme. Given the LGBCE's statutory criteria and stated practice we are proposing a warding arrangement that ensures no ward will be outside the 10% tolerance by the time the 5-year horizon is reached - indeed all will be within 5% by 2021. However our scheme also ensures that electoral imbalances will significantly reduce in time for the next scheduled borough council elections in 2018. We have matched our proposed new wards against the schedule of anticipated development provided by the borough council that informed the 2021 electorate projections. Using this we calculate that by 2018 around half our new wards will be within 4% of the average while only 3 of our 26 proposed wards will be outside the 10% range (Elephant & Castle East, Burgess and Surrey Docks). In all three cases they will remain a little undersized until the identified major building schemes are completed a year or two later. We understand that the borough council itself is not making a formal submission on warding arrangements. A cross-party group agreed the submission for a 63-member council but this group has not attempted to produce a warding arrangement. However, council officers have made available to us the schedule of anticipated developments to 2021 that have informed the electorate projections provided to the LGBCE. However, it does not appear to have been possible to provide the electorate numbers for the particular month's register used for council's reported base electorate for 2015. Therefore where we have split current polling districts we have had to use current street electorates as a base rather than the figures the LGBCE has for 2015. The variance is generally a few percent lower across the whole borough. With the Council's technical assistance we have been able to correctly match future developments from the schedule to the correct part-polling district. We are therefore confident that any variation is very minor and broadly consistent across all wards in the borough. This appears the only practical way to propose wards that split current polling districts. As polling districts are designed to very different criteria than wards we consider it inevitable that a new warding arrangement will involve splitting current polling districts. We are grateful for the Council's technical assistance in getting our calculations as strong as they can be in the time allowed. We would be happy to provide further information about our methodology if needed, but we are clear that this is a marginal point in terms of the final scheme. We set out in the following pages our proposed new wards.. Bankside and Borough Northern parts of Cathedrals and Chaucer, those parts of Grange and Riverside wards west of Shad Thames/Tower Bridge Road. This is the north west corner of the borough around Blackfriars Rd and Borough High Street. The northern part of Cathedrals ward is Bankside and includes the southern entrance to Blackfriars station, Tate Modern, The Globe Theatre and parts of the South Bank. There is a Business Improvement District covering this area and also Borough High Street - but not any further east. A separate BID operates around London Bridge. This is Southwark’s parts of central London's "Zone 1" travel area and is identified in the council’s planning policy as its “Central Activities Zone” to distinguish it from areas to the east. It is the scene of recent and projected major residential building, much of it the conversion of former commercial premises to house those who want easy access to the City immediately across the river. Much of this area is part of the historic "Old Southwark" referred to in the name of the Parliamentary Constituency. In considering the best pattern of wards here we first considered whether there should be a ward crossing the A3 (Borough High Street) at this point. We have decided against this. Firstly because there is the right electorate within the current Cathedrals ward to account for 5 councillors without the need to cross the main road. Also we were not convinced that Borough High St acts as a strong focus for residents from each side of the road rather than marking a clear dividing line. Much of the commercial activity on the A3 here is for the large daytime population working nearby, but living elsewhere, rather than local residents. In any case that commercial activity largely ceases south of Borough tube station where the road is a clear split of communities. There is a break in residential development around Borough Market/Southwark Cathedral at Tower Bridge Rd as there are only a tiny number of electors in the area around London Bridge Station. We know of few if any community groups identifying specifically as “Borough” that cross the road to unite east and west of the A3 here. “Borough” is typically associated with the western side and linked with Bankside as in the BID. We next considered the wards on the eastern side of Borough High Street. We consider the the A100 (Tower Bridge Rd), to form a natural boundary from the central Bermondsey area to the east which has a much clearer residential character.