Liberal Democrat Warding Submission – 27 October 2016 0
The Local Government Boundary Commission for England 2016 - 2018 Electoral Review of Hull City Council
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017 1st August 2017 Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Contents
Page
1) Introduction 2
2) Council Size, River Hull Boundary and 2-Member Wards 3
3) Support for the Wards Proposed by the LGBCE 4
West of the River Hull • Avenue 6 • Beverley & Sculcoates 7 • Boothferry 10 • Derringham 12 • Myton 13 • Newington & St Andrews 15 • Orchard Park 16 • Pickering 17 • University 18 • Wyke 19
East of the River Hull • Drypool 21 • Holderness 24 • Ings 26 • Kingswood 27 • Longhill & Bilton Grange 30 • Marfleet 31 • North Carr 32 • Southcoates 33 • Sutton 34 • West Carr 35
4) Conclusion 36
5) Appendix – Supporting Evidence 39
1
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
1) Introduction
This document forms the response of Hull Liberal Democrats (Liberal Democrats) to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England’s (LGBCE) further draft recommendations of 13 June 2017 (further draft recommendations) made as part of the 2016-2018 Electoral Review of Hull City Council (the review).
This response meets the requirements set out by the LGBCE and in legislation, such as, the 2014 Electoral Reviews: Technical Guidance and Schedule 2 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009.
In preparing this response we have once again actively sought to listen to the concerns, ideas and suggestions of local people and community organisations in Hull. We have taken on board the points made by the LGBCE in their further draft recommendations.
We have collated and reviewed relevant evidence, which informs all of our feedback, and which is included in the appendices of this response.
The Liberal Democrats support the conclusions reached by the LGBCE in their further draft recommendations.
In particular, the Liberal Democrats support the view that the River Hull is a major boundary between communities, and that no ward should cross the river. Therefore, to avoid a ward that crosses the river, a minimum of three two member wards are required.
There are only three areas where the Liberal Democrats seek to make very minor improvements to the further draft proposals. Where the Liberal Democrats have suggested minor improvements, this report will make clear the reasons why and provide evidence in support of what has been proposed.
This document will also address several areas where the LGBCE have specifically solicited public comment in response to the further draft recommendations.
Various local politicians suggested following the publication of the further draft proposals that the set of all-out elections following this review should be delayed by a year. The Liberal Democrats do not share this view and believe any attempt to delay the election is unnecessary. We support the LGBCE’s position that the set of all-out elections following this review should take place in May 2018. The Council’s staff proved how effective they can be during the recent snap General Election and there is no need to doubt their effectiveness in ensuring effective arrangements are in place well in advance of May 2018.
In summary, the Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s further draft recommendations and seek to make only three minor improvements to what has been proposed.
2
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
2) Council Size, River Hull and 2-Member Wards
The Liberal Democrats support the ‘minded to’ size of a 57 member council reached by the LGBCE. A 57 member council would by 2022 lead to each councillor representing about 3,274 electors.
The Liberal Democrats also support the position taken by the LGBCE about the River Hull being a major community boundary.
Whilst an all 3-member pattern of wards would be the preferable, elector numbers do not allow this to happen without a ward that crosses the River Hull. The River Hull is such a major divide in the city that this is simply unworkable.
So ingrained is the River Hull divide in the Hull mind-set that the original Labour Group proposal, which contained a ward that straddled the river, organised its submission into “West Hull” and “East Hull” wards. A recent story about the raising of all the bridges along the River Hull further highlights just how much a community divide the river is:- http://www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/hull-divide-13-bridges- raised-117363.
Extensive evidence in support of the River Hull dividing Hull into two communities, east and west of the river, can be found in the previous Liberal Democrat submissions, and also by simply Google-searching the term (or something similar): “east Hull and west Hull divide.”
It is worth once again noting that, by 2022, east of the River Hull there will be approximately 90,940 electors requiring 27.78 councillors and to the west, approximately 95,680 electors requiring 29.22 councillors.
The electoral population and geography of Hull therefore makes it is impossible to divide the city into 19 x 3-member wards of roughly equal population without one or more of those wards crossing the river.
The Liberal Democrats therefore support the LGBCE’s position that three 2-member wards, but no more, are required. A minimum of three 2-member wards is required to ensure good electoral equality whilst ensuring that no ward crosses the River Hull. We have been persuaded by the LGBCE that 2-member wards should be kept to this minimum in order to give maximum clarity to electors about the city’s electoral cycle.
In summary, we believe the LGBCE have been logical in proposing a warding pattern that does not cross the River Hull, and recommending that 57 councillors should be arranged in 20 wards, with three 2-member wards and 17 x 3-member wards, with 29 councillors west of the River Hull and 28 to the east.
3
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
3) Support for the Wards Proposed by the LGBCE
The Liberal Democrats support the further draft recommendations made by the LGBCE. More specifically the Liberal Democrats support the establishment of all the proposed wards, as follows:
Wards west of the River Hull
1) Avenue 2) Beverley & Sculcoates 3) Boothferry 4) Derringham 5) Myton 6) Newington & St Andrews 7) Orchard Park 8) Pickering 9) University 10) Wyke
Wards east of the River Hull
11) Drypool 12) Holderness 13) Ings 14) Kingswood 15) Longhill & Bilton Grange 16) Marfleet 17) North Carr 18) Southcoates 19) Sutton 20) West Carr
We are satisfied that the wards included in the further draft recommendations will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The Liberal Democrats would however suggest the LGBCE consider making three very minor improvements in their final recommendations. Each of the minor improvements will be discussed in the sections below relating to individual wards.
The report will now examine each ward in turn. The wards have been divided, in line with the city’s community identities, into west and east of the river, and then alphabetically.
4
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Wards West of the River Hull
5
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
1) Avenue Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward with one small amendment.
In broad terms the ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
All three political groups have proposed a very similar Avenue ward. Critically they all propose that the area covered by the Avenues & Pearson Park Residents Association and the Avenues & Pearson Park Conservation Area should not be divided between wards.
It is also clear that as the Avenues, the Dukeries and Ella Street form an interlocking network of streets, there is no way to split them that does not divide areas with a strong sense of community.
The small adjustments to the boundary around Charing Close and Princes Avenue contained in the draft recommendations continue to be supported by the Liberal Democrats.
In our last response we outlined that we considered including the area south of Spring Bank West, between Princes Avenue and Chanterlands Avenue (which we will refer to as the “Hymers triangle,” consisting of Hymers Avenue, part of Spring Bank West, Sunny Bank and Spring Grove) in the Myton Ward, with a corresponding move of the properties off Beverley Road north of Wellington Lane into the Avenue Ward. We decided against the above on the grounds of common identity and note that the LGBCE have taken a different view.
We understand the LGBCE’s argument around the need for electoral equality and the need for clear boundaries to the proposed Myton ward. We accept that having the bulk of residential properties along Spring Bank West in one ward might be beneficial.
The Liberal Democrats would suggest the LGBCE consider making one very minor improvement to the Wellington Lane boundary.
In the further draft proposals, the properties on the south side of Wellington Lane are in Avenue Ward. We feel that the boundary would be clearer and easier to explain to residents if it were to run down the middle of Wellington Lane (see Appendix A).
This will ensure a clear dividing line starting at the western end of Cranbourne Street that continues right through to Beverley Road. The Welly Club (north side of Wellington Lane) provides a highly visible landmark and point of divide on Beverley Road between the Avenue and Myton wards.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain the ward as proposed with this one very minor tidying amendment that will affect approximately 20 electors.
6
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
2) Beverley & Sculcoates Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
We are aware that this proposal is contentious. Having looked at numerous alternative options, and examined again all the relevant evidence, we remain of the clear view that this proposed ward is the best solution to ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government. Critically, we have seen no evidence that any alternative proposal would better meet these criteria.
Our reasons for supporting the proposal are as follows.
We believe very strongly (as we have made clear above), that no ward should cross the river Hull and that 2-member wards should be kept to the minimum. It is not possible to construct a viable alternative to Beverley & Sculcoates without either:
a) crossing the river to the north, and thus creating wards that do not reflect either the key natural boundary of the city or the natural communities around Kingswood and Sutton Park; b) introducing a series of 2-member wards through the centre and west of the city that are simply unnecessary, as they would further confuse the city’s electoral cycle and lead to poorer community representation than the current LGBCE proposals.
The proposed Beverley and Sculcoates Ward has clear and recognisable natural boundaries. It is bordered by Beverley Road to the west, which is the major arterial road running north/south through the city and a clear and easily recognisable boundary. The eastern boundary is the River Hull that, as has already been mentioned, is the clearest natural boundary in the city. The southern boundary is the officially recognised boundary of the city centre, as designated in the currently adopted Local Plan, which again is a clear divide.
The precedent for a workable Beverley & Sculcoates ward is reflected in the former Beverley Ward that existed from 1983 to 2002 (see Appendix B). None of the communities in the ward have materially changed since then. As the boundary of the predecessor Beverley Ward worked well then there is no reason to think this formation would not do so again.
The only area of the proposed Beverley & Sculcoates ward that was not part of the pre-2002 Beverley Ward is the Fountain Road area, off Beverley Road. Many residents in the Fountain Road area are personally involved in projects in the Sculcoates Lane area or identify their community as being part of the wider Beverley Road community that includes Sculcoates and the historic Sculcoates Parish. The historic Sculcoates Parish includes Fountain Road.
The Council’s Local Plan defines the northern boundary of the city centre as running along Marlborough Terrace and north of Reform Street – a very similar boundary line to the proposed southern boundary of Beverley & Sculcoates ward. It makes clear that properties north of this line are not part of the city centre. This is clear evidence that, just as can be
7
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017 evidenced by the Kingswood Area Action Plan, when no party political considerations are in play, elected councillors of all parties were happy to accept that the homes on Fountain Road are part of the city’s northern corridor, and are not city centre in nature.
There are strong transport links between the communities of the proposed ward. Regular bus services run the full length of Beverley Road, connecting all streets in the ward to each other. In addition to this the 21 bus service directly connects the Trafalgar Estate (Compass Road area) at the northern end of the ward with the Fountain Road Estate at the southern end of the ward (see Appendix C). This is a bus service that has at various times been under threat, so by uniting these two residential areas within the same ward it will be easier for residents and councillors to work together to secure its long-term future.
The proposed Beverley & Sculcoates ward would be a significant improvement from the current Myton ward in terms of public transport links. There are currently no direct transport links from Fountain Road to the Great Thornton Estate, nor to the Marina area. There are not even direct links from Fountain Road down Spring Bank. In contrast, dozens of bus routes run north up Beverley Road, connecting Fountain Road to all parts of the Beverley Road corridor.
The proposed Beverley & Sculcoates ward unites both sides of the Clough Road industrial estate in one ward. Given that there has often been a difference of opinion between the Council’s Planning Committee and the professional planners regarding the use of Clough Road as a retail centre, the proposed ward will enable more effective planning, community representation and decision-making.
The proposed ward will help improve local parks and open spaces. The public park to the south of Newland St Johns Primary School is accessed solely from Clough Road, and is the local park for residents in the streets to the immediate south of Clough Road, e.g. Worthing Street and Ryde Avenue. The Section 106 money that has been received by the Council for the development of the Oak Road Playing Fields, off Beresford Avenue, has been released from the development of the Police HQ on the south side of Clough Road. Currently Clough Road splits this area into two wards (Beverley and Newland wards), whereas the LGBCE proposals unite them in one ward.
The proposed ward will also help give greater focus to the protection and enhancement of the historic Beverley Road Baths. These are some of the last remaining Victorian Public Baths in use in the UK, and are well used by residents from along the full length of the Beverley Road corridor.
There is much crossover between the school catchment areas the full length of the ward. Many children from the Fountain Road area attend Stepney Primary School, and can be seen of a morning using the former railway line (now cycle and footpath) to get from Fountain Road to their school. Similarly, many children in the Worthing Street and Ryde Avenue area cross Clough Road daily to attend Newland St Johns Primary.
In their further draft recommendations, the LGBCE again requested further comments from the public. As you will recall, during the previous round of consultation, we undertook
8
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017 community consultation in the Fountain Road area to ensure local residents’ views are properly considered. We have continued to speak regularly to residents in the area.
It is worth noting that the consultation form distributed by Cllrs Dave McCobb & Mike Ross (see Appendix D) gave people two options that described in neutral terms both the makeup of both the current Myton Ward and the proposed Beverley & Sculcoates Ward. This consultation found a majority of responders supporting Beverley & Sculcoates.
As we stated above, we are aware that there will be opinions on both sides in this matter. We are also aware that the Labour Party oppose the Beverley & Sculcoates ward because they seek to recreate separate Newington and St Andrews wards to the west of the city, and clearly feel that opposing Beverley & Sculcoates ward is the key to achieving this.
We feel that the balance of evidence is instead in favour of the LGBCE’s current proposals. It is in the Newington & St Andrews area that the population has declined most sharply, and therefore only logical that that area sees a reduction in the number of councillors.
As currently proposed, Beverley & Sculcoates ward reflects the city’s key northern transport corridor. The Myton ward reflects the communities that genuinely form part of the city centre and the communities to its immediate west along the key western transport corridors. The Newington & St Andrews ward reflects the regeneration areas in and around pre-war terraces and the historic fishing community. There is simply no need for additional 2-member wards in this area as these wards already effectively represent the natural communities in central, northern and west Hull.
For all of these reasons, we continue to support Beverley & Sculcoates ward as the best fit to natural communities along the city’s northern corridor, and Myton as the best fit to communities in and to the west of the city centre. Any of the alternatives that have been put to us would be a worse fit to natural communities and introduce a series of unnecessary 2-member wards.
The Liberal Democrats therefore feel that this ward will effectively represent the Beverley Road area. There is no overriding reason for an alternative solution and no evidence that any alternative would be better. We therefore urge the LGBCE to retain this ward in the final recommendations.
9
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
3) Boothferry Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward with one small amendment.
As it stands, in broad terms the ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
For the most part the ward has clear and well defined boundaries on all sides as well as acceptable electoral equality. The proposed ward sensibly takes in Costello Playing Fields and the associated cottages, previously in Pickering Ward. This move sees all the Anlaby Park Conservation Area represented in one ward.
The ward loses a small section in the north of the ward to Derringham Ward. However, given the railway line to the north-east and the East Riding on all other sides, it is the only logical action to provide Derringham Ward with good electoral equality.
Boothferry Ward’s expansion along Anlaby Road to include Parkfield Drive, Springfield Road, Northfield Road and Woldcarr Road is a sensible addition the ward. These streets are a continuation of the Cardigan Road, Roslyn Road and Meadowbank Road community already contained within Boothferry Ward and are similar in demographic and housing type. Residents in these streets use the same shops, bus routes and schools.
The Liberal Democrats would suggest the LGBCE consider making one minor improvement to the boundary between Boothferry and Myton wards.
The further draft recommendations include Alliance Avenue and De La Pole Avenue in Boothferry ward. This results in Boothferry ward having an 8% imbalance, the largest difference from electoral equality of any ward in the further draft proposals. In comparison, neighbouring Myton ward has 0%. This makes Boothferry ward significantly larger than any other three-member ward in the further draft proposals.
Furthermore, we believe that Alliance Avenue and De La Pole Avenue are much more closely linked to Albert Avenue and the Victorian terraces leading into the city centre than they are to the 1920s and 1930s suburban style houses on Parkfield Drive. Curzon Street links Albert Avenue and De La Pole Avenue and it is a residential street lined with houses. This results in a very awkward boundary at the junction of Curzon Street and De La Pole Avenue, and a similarly confusing boundary on Spring Bank West, where the terraces on the south side up to De La Pole are included in Boothferry but the continuation of the run beyond De La Pole is in Myton. In contrast, whilst Alliance Avenue and Parkfield Drive are connected by Alliance Lane, this is essentially a small cut-through with no properties on it.
We therefore believe that it would provide for a clearer and more understandable boundary, better reflect the nature of local communities and improve electoral equality, to include Alliance Avenue and De La Pole Avenue in Myton, rather than Boothferry (see Appendix E).
10
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
This would move approximately 500 electors from Boothferry to Myton, making Boothferry less of an outlier in terms of electoral equality. It would also ensure all the Victorian era housing along Spring Bank West up to the railway bridge would be contained in one ward. Alliance Avenue has many more rented properties and HMOs on it, whereas from Parkfield Drive westwards the area is much more suburban and owner occupied.
Parkfield Drive is not part of the KCOM Stadium residential parking zone where as Alliance Avenue and roads to the east are. Parkfield Drive residents specifically chose not to be part of the KCOM Stadium parking zone when surveyed by the Council. Parkfield Drive residents would also for the most part look to Anlaby Road for shopping whereas the Alliance Avenue and De La Pole communities have corner shops within the community.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to improve electoral equality by moving the boundary between Myton and Boothferry to between Parkfield Drive and Alliance Avenue.
11
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
4) Derringham Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The position taken by the LGBCE to extend the ward slightly south in two places is sensible. We support the LGBCE’s decision that the railway line provides the natural and identifiable boundary between Derringham Ward and Wyke Ward and strongly feel this should not be crossed.
It is difficult to see how electoral equality could be improved in any other way than that proposed because the ward is pressed between the boundary with the East Riding to the north and west, and the clear boundary of the train tracks in the east. The inclusion of the Sorrel Drive area, inaccessible by road to the south, into Derringham Ward is supported.
The proposed ward would also see Wold Road ‘reunited’ which is welcomed. The extension of the ward down Calvert Road is sensible as communities north and south of County Road South are all served by similar bus routes, visit Fred Moore Library and use Wymersley Park.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain this ward as proposed in the further draft recommendations.
12
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
5) Myton Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward, with the two minor amendments outlined in the Avenue and Boothferry ward sections above.
With the relatively minor amendments we have suggested, this ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The proposed Myton ward has clear boundaries. Rawlings Way forms a clear divide between the Great Thornton Estate and the more traditional terraced communities of Hessle Road. It has been an effective ward boundary since 2002 and the Hull Royal Infirmary is a useful landmark in this regard. Rawlings Way is quite difficult to cross on foot apart from the pedestrian crossings at Hessle Road and Anlaby Road, with only one crossing between them.
Anlaby Road is a very busy key arterial route that forms a clear boundary line between communities. It is very difficult to cross during the day because of the amount of traffic. Using Anlaby Road as the boundary to the north of the Newington & St Andrews ward is consistent with how key arterial routes have been used elsewhere in the city, for example Beverley Road to the north, Holderness Road between Holderness and Southcoates wards, and Holwell Road as the key dividing line through Bransholme.
Both the 2000 and 2015 iterations of the Council’s Local Plan use Park Street as the western boundary of the City Centre. The proposal for a two-member “Central ward” put forward by the Hull Labour Group in the last round of consultation separates the part of the city centre west of Ferensway from the rest of the city centre, and we do not support this. The Liberal Democrats believe that the city centre should all be represented in one ward to ensure that effective and convenient government is provided to residents and businesses in the area.
With our suggested amendment, the Myton ward coherently reflects a series of distinct communities in the city centre and to its west, namely:-
• the City Centre itself, which is currently defined by the Council’s Local Plan 2000 and by the Draft Local Plan 2015 currently in production; • the Thornton Estate (see http://ukhousing.wikia.com/wiki/Thornton_Estate), bordered by Ferensway to the east, Anlaby Road to the north, Hessle Road to the south and Rawlings Way to the west; • the Spring Bank area, which includes pre-war terraces off Spring Bank to the north and post-war Council properties between Spring Bank and Anlaby Road; • the Walton Street car park, used for Hull Fair, and the pre-war terraces and small council estate residential community to the west of the KCOM Stadium (Alliance Avenue, De La Pole Avenue, Albert Avenue & Walton Street).
The proposed Myton Ward is much more coherent than the current Myton Ward because all of the communities that make it up lie to the west of the city centre and follow the unfolding western arterial routes along Hessle Road, Anlaby Road and Spring Bank/Spring Bank West. The inclusion of the Fountain Road area (which the Council’s own plans define
13
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017 as part of the northern corridor, not the city centre) in the current ward makes the current ward less coherent than the LGBCE’s further draft proposals as Fountain Road looks north, not west.
The KC Stadium is very much a city centre facility – the approaches to it are from Derringham Street over footbridges with clearly signposted and well-used pedestrian routes to Paragon Station. The proposed Myton ward would include all the entrances and exits to the KC stadium in the same ward, giving a clear focus to the issues of cleanliness and traffic management that arise due to matches and performances at the stadium.
The proposed ward would also, for the first time, unites the streets most directly affected by the staging of the annual Hull Fair – namely Walton Street and Lowther Street (currently in the existing Newington Ward) and Spring Bank West, Sunny Bank and Hymers Avenue (currently in the existing Avenue Ward). This would allow for more effective engagement and consultation of local residents regarding the staging of the fair.
We are pleased to note that the LGBCE agreed with our view that the problems raised by the Hessle Road community concerning the St Andrews/Myton boundary in the first round of consultation in this area can be best addressed within the footprint of the proposed Myton and Newington & St Andrews wards, and urge you to retain this approach again.
Earlier in this report (see “1. Avenue Ward” above and Appendix A) we argue for a minor amendment to the boundary between Avenue and Myton wards that affects a very small number of properties.
Also covered earlier (see “3. Boothferry Ward” above and Appendix E) we argue for moving Alliance and De La Pole Avenues from Boothferry to Myton in order to achieve greater electoral equality and to better reflect the natural communities of the pre-war terraced streets near the KCOM Stadium. Alliance Avenue, De La Pole Avenue and Albert Avenue form part of the same network of streets and should be in the same ward. They are a more natural fit within Myton ward than Boothferry. This affects about 500 electors and the rationale for this has been comprehensively covered above.
As we covered earlier (see “2. Beverley & Sculcoates Ward”above), we are aware that there is a strong difference of opinion around the Fountain Road and the central / west Hull wards. However, we feel that introducing additional 2-member wards will not only unnecessarily complicate the city’s electoral cycle, in terms of effective community representation, it would result in a pattern of wards that is *worse* than that which is currently proposed by the LGBCE. We believe that, with the amendments we have proposed, Myton is a very coherent ward that will enable very effective representation of the city centre and the communities to its west.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain Myton ward as currently proposed, with the amendments to Wellington Lane and Alliance and De La Pole Avenues as detailed in this report.
14
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
6) Newington & St Andrews Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The proposed ward has clear and well defined boundaries. Rawlings Way to the east follows the same line as the current St Andrews boundary. In the north the boundary Anlaby Road until the border with the Boothferry ward. We have outlined in the Myton ward section why Rawlings Way and Anlaby Road make strong boundaries in this area. The railway line is another strong boundary as it cannot be crossed on foot except at Hawthorn Avenue.
It was clear in the last round of consultation that people didn’t view the rear of the Boulevard as a boundary. We listened to this feedback and proposed the use of Rawlings Way instead, and we are pleased that the LGBCE has adopted this proposal. Informal approaches to community leaders suggest that the boundary as per the further draft proposals meets with resident approval.
The ward would see all the Hessle Road community (see Appendix F) represented by one 3- member ward. Despite major road improvements and other alterations from the 1950's to the 1980's the traditional terraced properties on either side of Hessle Road, from Monmouth Street in the west to Rawlings Way in the east, retain a clear community identity as “Hessle Road”. Once the main route from Hull to Hessle, the street is still very well used as a shopping area. This new ward proposed by the LGBCE reflects this and includes all these streets in the same ward for the first time.
As well as a shared history, many of the people who live in the Hessle Road area use local shops or the Hessle Road Asda. Hessle Road provides the main transport link for most people in the area. Many buses run the length of Hessle Road providing common transport links. Most children in the area attend Chiltern Primary School, the Newington Academy, the Boulevard Academy, or Adelaide Primary.
Formerly terraced streets either side of Hawthorn Avenue have over the last ten years been the subject of significant regenerations schemes. Housing at Woodcock Street, Westbourne Street, Eastbourne Street etc (St Andrews Ward) and Haltemprice Street, Ringrose Street, Rhodes Street, Cecil Street etc (Newington Ward) have been knocked down and replaced under the Newington & St Andrews (NASA) regeneration scheme. The proposed Newington & St Andrews Ward would place this whole area (see Appendix G) in the same ward which will help give a focus to its continuing regeneration and development.
What has emerged through the LGBCE’s consultation has made a significant improvement on both what the Liberal Democrats originally submitted and on the LGBCE’s initial draft proposals. We are very happy to support the consensus position that has emerged.
For the reasons stated above the Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
15
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
7) Orchard Park Ward
The Liberal Democrats accept the proposal for this ward.
We accept that the ward as proposed can ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government. As proposed the ward has clear boundaries, in particular Beverley Road. The electoral equality of the ward is good.
However, whilst we accept that the ward does meet these criteria, we still believe that the alternative arrangement of Orchard Park and University wards that we suggested in our response to the last round of consultation would be preferable. Our alternative proposal used Endike Lane as a clearer and simpler boundary between the two wards, to enable all the long numbered avenues either side of Ellerburn Avenue to be in the same ward.
We also believe that the properties between the Beverley & Barmston Drain and Beverley Road have a commonality of interest with Beverley Road and would be a better fit with University, not Orchard Park.
We appreciate and acknowledge that the LGBCE visited the site to look at this proposal, and accept from reading the latest report that at this further draft stage the LGBCE is not looking to make significant changes to wards. For this reason the Liberal Democrats can reluctantly accept the LGBCE’s proposed ward, despite our preference for our alternative configuration.
The Liberal Democrats therefore accept the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
16
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
8) Pickering Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
We welcome the fact that the Gipsyville community (see Appendix H) has been united and included wholly within the ward. We also agree with the railway line to the east of North Road being a sensible dividing line.
The Gipsyville community has much more in common with the other communities in the proposed Pickering Ward than it does with communities to the east of the railway line. Gipsyville shares the same library as the Boothferry Estate and Hessle High Road area, at the south of North Road. They share the same shops on Hessle High Road as the Summergroves community and are well linked by bus routes along Hessle High Road and Boothferry Road.
Gipsyville underwent significant regeneration around 12 years ago, when new houses were built, roads resurfaced and lighting upgraded. The new housing built is very similar to that built in the Summergroves area and many of the same issues are shared by those residents.
Pickering Park is at the centre of the proposed ward. The active Friends of Pickering Park community group draws in volunteers from across the communities in the new ward, including Gipsyville, Pickering Road, Summergroves and the Boothferry Estate. Gipsyville has much weaker connections to the parks in the existing Newington Ward – with West Park a significant distance away.
Most secondary school children in the Gipsyville area attend Sirius Academy (formerly Pickering High School), which further unites them with the rest of the proposed new Pickering Ward.
For the reasons stated above the Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
17
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
9) University Ward
The Liberal Democrats accept the proposal for this ward.
We accept that the ward as proposed will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
As detailed above (see “7. Orchard Park”), in our response to the previous round of consultation, we had suggested an alternative in this area.
However, we accept that at this further draft stage the LGBCE is not looking to make further significant changes to ward boundaries.
As proposed the ward has good electoral equality and clear boundaries, in particular Cottingham Road and Beverley Road.
The Liberal Democrats therefore accept the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
18
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
10) Wyke Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
This ward was originally proposed by the Labour Party and was not part of our original proposals. However, we have carefully reviewed the available evidence and we are happy to support the Wyke ward in the last round of consultation. We support it again now.
The LGBCE proposed Wyke ward is very similar to the former Newland ward that existed before the previous boundary review in 2001 (see Appendix I). None of the communities in the ward have materially changed since 2001. As the boundaries worked well then there is no reason to think they would not do so again. In reverting to boundaries similar to those before 2001 Goddard Avenue (currently split down the middle) would be reunited.
The Bricknell Avenue and Chanterlands Avenue North areas have strong community links with the Newland Avenue area. This whole area is strongly influenced by the student population and forms part of the city’s wider university community, from the academics living on Chanterlands Avenue North and Newland Park to the students and recent graduates living in streets off Newland Avenue and in neighbouring streets like Goddard Avenue, Kenilworth Avenue and Fairfax Avenue.
The main secondary school in the proposed ward is Kelvin Hall which serves the community across the proposed ward, with many children from the Newland Avenue area attending Kelvin Hall School and Bricknell Primary School on Bricknell Avenue.
Newland Avenue is a strong shopping and leisure area in this part of Hull. Many people in the current Bricknell Ward use the facilities, shops and restaurants on Newland Avenue on a regular basis. There is a strong affinity from many across the proposed ward for the Newland Avenue area. Residents in the current Bricknell ward take a keen interest in the Newland Avenue area and consider themselves part of the same community. For example, the Facebook page “Newland Avenue: Its Rubbish”, which is dedicated to the immediate vicinity of Newland Avenue, was established by a Bricknell resident.
As stated above (in “4. Derringham Ward”) the railway line from Hull to Cottingham provides a strong community boundary to the west of the proposed ward – and has always been the boundary between Derringham and Bricknell (and the previous Newland Ward).
For the reasons stated above the Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
19
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Wards East of the River Hull
20
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
11) Drypool Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
Most importantly the proposed ward keeps the Garden Village community contained wholly within the Drypool ward – which had been divided by the previous draft proposal.
The proposed Drypool ward contains the whole of the Garden Village Conservation Area (see Appendix J) and ensures that established community links with the rest of the ward, in particular the Holderness Road shopping area, the historic Parish and Reckitts, remain intact.
In the previous round of consultation a significant number of members of the public wrote in to express their concerns with the previous proposals to split both the Garden Village and Stoneferry communities between Drypool and Holderness wards. We expressed similar concerns and are pleased that the LGBCE have carefully considered the evidence and points raised and revised their proposals.
As proposed, the ward has strong and clear boundaries. To the south and west it is bordered by the Humber Estuary and the River Hull. To the east it is bordered by Newbridge Road, which is a clear community divide between streets that look to Holderness Road and those that look more towards Preston Road.
The LGBCE’s proposed boundary between Drypool ward and Holderness ward follows an identifiable community boundary between Laburnum Avenue and Westcott Street, which has been a well established community boundary for many years. It then follows a northern boundary around the rear of the Liberty Green development and the Chamberlain Business Centre. This much better marks the boundary of the Stoneferry community than both the existing ward boundary and that in the LGBCE’s initial draft proposals. It ensures all streets (both residential and commercial) that identify as Stoneferry are united within Holderness ward, allowing for that community to be better represented.
The proposed Drypool ward contains a number of social housing areas that are scattered across the ward, particularly those managed by Pickering & Ferens. These include the “Havens” in Garden Village, Humber View on Victoria Dock and housing off Wentworth Way and Ripon Way. With all these properties being managed by the same company and having shared interests it is important that they are retained within the one ward.
Similarly, there are pockets of council housing across the whole ward, including Acacia Drive in Garden Village, Barnsley Street and Victor Street off Holderness Road. These areas are all part of the same community, identifying themselves as Holderness Road.
21
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Drypool is a historic parish, mentioned in the Doomsday Book. The Church of England Parish of Drypool still exists and its boundaries include the whole of the current Drypool Ward. The main church of the parish is St Columba’s on Laburnum Avenue, Garden Village. The church draws its community from across the current Drypool Ward, with a second church at the other end of the ward on Victoria Dock. Again, the LGBCE’s further draft proposals ensure this community is kept together within Drypool Ward.
Garden Village was built by Reckitts (still a major employer in Hull) to house its workers over 100 years ago. The Reckitts factory is still located in the current and LGBCE proposed Drypool ward, off Dansom Lane. Many residents in Garden Village still work at Reckitts. Reckitts are still involved heavily with the community in Garden Village, helping to fund the community centre on Elm Avenue. More detail on the links between Reckitts and Garden Village can be found in the Council’s character statement for the Garden Village Conservation Area.
As mentioned above, Garden Village has a well-established “Conservation Area” status, due to its unique history and character. The latest proposals from the LGBCE ensure the conservation area is wholly within Drypool Ward. The western boundary of the Garden Village Conservation Area runs awkwardly down, and cuts across, several streets. This would not provide a clear ward boundary.
We welcome the decision of the LGBCE to reflect this in their further draft proposals. In contrast, at the other side of the conservation area the boundary between Laburnum Avenue and Westcott Street is a clear boundary, as the properties on Westcott Street do not have access rights from their homes directly into the “tenfoots”.
The Garden Village Conservation Area has a forty-year-old residents’ association – The Garden Village Society. They hold regular public meetings and have represented the interests of the Garden Village community at various Council meetings over the years. They actively input into planning applications in the Conservation Area, as well as the wider Drypool Ward area. From conversations we have had with people involved with the Society we understand that they are supportive of Garden Village remaining in Drypool ward.
The majority of residents in the Garden Village community use shops and facilities on the Holderness Road Shopping Corridor between Mount Pleasant and Laburnum Avenue/Southcoates Lane (which is wholly contained within the LGBCE further draft proposals for Drypool ward). The most convenient supermarket for residents in Garden Village is ASDA at the Mount Pleasant end of this stretch.
The former Garden Village Library was moved to Mount Pleasant on Holderness Road 10 years ago, and is still used by large numbers of Garden Village residents.
The main health surgery in the area is on Morrill Street and most residents in Garden Village use it – in fact several are on its patient users’ committee. The further draft proposals from the LGBCE ensure that Garden Village remains within the same ward as this facility.
22
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
By retaining Garden Village within Drypool Ward, along with the facilities and amenities outlined above, the LGBCE is ensuring that residents have an easier path to express their views and make representations to the Council on any future changes to these services and facilities, as they will all be represented by the same councillors.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
23
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
12) Holderness Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The ward will effectively represent the identity of local communities. As outlined above (see “11. Drypool Ward”), the Holderness ward as now proposed will ensure that the whole of the Stoneferry community is united within the same for the first time.
Pavilion Close, on the south side of Chamberlain Road (currently in Drypool ward) is much more a part of the Stoneferry community and the community further up James Reckitt Avenue than it is with Garden Village and the rest of the current Drypool ward.
Similarly, the new development at Liberty Green is only accessible by road via Chamberlain Road. This new build community is still growing but very much views itself as part of the same community as the homes on the north side of Chamberlain Road, much more so than Garden Village. It makes much more sense for it to be united with the Stoneferry community, with which it shares its nearest local shops on Chamberlain Road.
There have been various resident groups in the Stoneferry community and residents across Stoneferry are currently working together to establish a new residents’ group that covers the whole of the Stoneferry area (between Chamberlain Road and Leads Road). The Stoneferry community centres around the Rockford Playing Fields and Stoneferry Primary School. The primary school is the only public building in the area and is used regularly for resident meetings for the Stoneferry area. Efforts to get this new resident group up and running – and plans to generally improve the Stoneferry community – will be improved by the LGBCE’s further draft proposals, which properly unite Stoneferry.
The Stoneferry Road corridor, between Sutton Road and Chamberlain Road, (see Appendix K) has one of the highest levels of poor air quality in Hull, due to the congestion in the area. It is currently all contained within Holderness ward and, thus, is a clearly defined area. It is currently subject to a planned new road junction redesign to try and deal with the issues. By placing this corridor entirely within Holderness ward, rather than split between Holderness and Drypool (as it was in the initial draft proposals), the LGBCE improves the ability of councillors and the council to deal with this pressing issue.
For residents in Stoneferry the nearest supermarket (as it is for the rest of the current Holderness Ward) is Morrisons, at the other end of Holderness Road to the ASDA at Mount Pleasant. Their local doctor’s surgery is the East Park Practice on Holderness Road, next to Morrisons. They use the smaller “corner shops” in the Chamberlain Road and Stoneferry area, which are the same ones used by other residents in the current Holderness Ward and the links between them have recently been improved with a new footpath across Rockford Fields. Stoneferry Primary School is the school that most children in the streets off Chamberlain Road attend, as well as the children from the rest of Stoneferry to the north.
24
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
The further draft proposals from the LGBCE ensure that residents living within these areas are properly united with these facilities.
The ward also has clear and identifiable boundaries. The boundary between Holderness and Drypool has been comprehensively covered in the above section on Drypool ward.
The River Hull is the boundary to the west, Holderness Road to the south east, Ings Road to the north east and Sutton Road to the north. These are all clear boundaries. Whereas in Drypool ward, Holderness Road is lined by shops and brings the community together, at the proposed boundary between Holderness and Southcoates wards it is a dual carriageway with a central reservation. This makes it much more a barrier between communities. Ings Road and Sutton Road form part of the city’s outer ring road, meaning they are hard to cross due to the volume of traffic.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
25
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
13) Ings Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The LGBCE specifically asked for comments on the name of this ward. We feel that the name ‘Ings’ is appropriate and unless a compelling argument is made in the next round of consultation it should remain ‘Ings’. The new ward that has been proposed is almost entirely made up of the Ings Estate – which makes the name ‘Ings’ more appropriate than ever before.
The current 3-member Ings ward is an artificial construct combing parts of several different communities. Sections of the current ward to the north associate much more closely with Sutton Village, with many addresses in that area being officially “Sutton-on-Hull”. Some of those streets are currently split right down the middle. The LGBCE’s proposals rectify this issue.
The LGBCE’s proposed 2-member ward brings the focus of the ward much more squarely onto the Ings Estate, whilst returning those sections of Sutton back into Sutton Ward. We support the small tweak to the boundary between Sutton and Ings which sees all parts of the Ings Estate (i.e. road names from neighbourhoods of London), fall under the proposed Ings ward. We also actively support the move to see Wembley Park Avenue, Sutton House Road and Abbots Close included in the proposed Sutton ward.
For the reasons stated above the Liberal Democrats support the LGBCE’s proposed ward.
26
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
14) Kingswood Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
In this area of the city, the LGBCE have made significant changes since the initial draft proposals, based on the views of the Kingswood Residents Association. Like Newington & St Andrews ward, ward boundaries around Kingswood and Bransholme have been significantly improved through the consultation process. We wholeheartedly support the decisions reached by the LGBCE in the further draft proposals and urge the LGBCE to continue to support the active and thriving Residents Association by finalising these further draft proposals.
The ward as proposed has strong and clear boundaries. It uses Wawne Road as a boundary between Kingswood and the North Bransholme Estate which the LGBCE recognised in the further draft recommendations is a clear boundary between communities. It uses Holwell Road as its eastern boundary from Kingswood to Tiverton Road. In the south the boundary would wrap round Tiverton Road and along the middle of Bodmin Road, then the southern boundary of the Kingswood Area Action Plan, before encompassing the Selset Way community and reaching the River Hull. The western boundary would be the River Hull and the northern boundary would be with the East Riding.
The ward as proposed is the best possible fit to the natural Kingswood community. The Kingswood community is defined by the Kingswood Area Action Plan (see Appendix L) and under these proposals would be represented in a single ward. It would also include the Waterside Park development to the rear of the Kingswood Retail Park and streets in the Bodmin Road / Bude Road area that front directly on to either Bude Park or Wilberforce Woods.
Including the Waterside Park area in the ward makes sense as residents there consider themselves to live in Kingswood. Their homes are only accessible via roads in the Kingswood Leisure Park and the nearest community centre is Kingswood. The LGBCE previous proposals had included this area within the proposed West Carr ward, which they are cut off from by major roads. The revised proposals from the LGBCE much better reflect the clear community identity in this area.
Residents in the Bodmin Road and Bude Road area have a direct interest in the delivery of the Kingswood Area Action Plan. Their homes directly face the public open green spaces at Bude Park and Wilberforce Woods. Many residents in these streets already look to Kingswood for their shopping and leisure – which is much nearer to them than the North Point Centre on Bransholme. Crossing Bude Road to use ASDA is much more common for these residents than travelling further afield.
27
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
This Bodmin Road and Bude Road area also contains the nearest Children’s Centre to Kingswood and is the one used by residents of Kingswood. Its local primary school is part of the same trust as the new Kingswood Parks Primary. The LGBCE’s latest proposals ensure the vast majority of children in the area will now attend schools within the same ward in which they live. Bodmin Road church reaches out onto Kingswood for its congregations and service users for its social and family groups.
Kingswood is a comparatively ‘new’ community with a unique identity in Hull. No other area of the city has experienced such a growth in new housing over the past 20 years as Kingswood. The Kingswood Area Action Plan September 2016 outlines the scale of growth for the area, how the community will develop and the geographical extent of that community. This is the part of the city that is current most under-represented, and we particularly welcome the further draft proposals in that they address this.
This Area Action Plan defines the boundaries of what is considered the Kingswood community. It is worth noting that this plan commanded unanimous cross-party support when presented to a meeting of the Full Council of Hull City Council – i.e. when no electoral considerations are at play, all parties supported this definition of Kingswood.
Throughout the period of growth on Kingswood the community has always been contained within a single council ward – the current Kings Park ward – along with half of the Sutton Park community. Prior to the previous review in 2001 the area that is now Kingswood was contained within the Stoneferry ward (see Appendix M) – along with all of the Sutton Park community and the parts of Bransholme to the west of Holwell Road.
At all times this part of the city has had strong, identifiable, boundaries. These include the River Hull to the west, the East Riding boundary to the north and Wawne Road to the north east (between Kingswood and North Bransholme). During the period of the Stoneferry ward there was a further strong boundary to the east along Holwell Road.
In the previous round of consultation the Kingswood Residents Association strongly objected to the draft proposals that saw the Kingswood community divided into two different wards. We supported the community in this and amended our own proposals to reflect the clear views expressed by Kingswood residents.
We are pleased to see that the LGBCE has taken on board those concerns and are now proposing a 3-member Kingswood Ward that includes the entirety of the Kingswood community as defined by the Kingswood Area Action Plan. We support this.
There are three distinct communities in this part of the city – Bransholme, Kingswood and Sutton Park. Bransholme is the largest, Kingswood the second largest, and Sutton Park the smallest. It therefore makes sense for Bransholme and Kingswood to be the focus of the 3- member wards (North Carr and Kingswood respectively) and Sutton Park the 2-member ward (West Carr).
28
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
The establishment of a 3-member Kingswood ward based on the area covered by the Area Action Plan, and those immediate neighbours who have a direct interest in its delivery, is the best possible solution in this part of the city.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrts wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
29
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
15) Longhill & Bilton Grange Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The ward has clear boundaries, including Hopewell Road and the Holderness Drain. The electoral equality of the ward is good. We welcome the fact that the Bilton Grange Estate is largely contained in a single ward.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain this ward as proposed in the further draft recommendations.
30
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
16) Marfleet Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward with one small amendment.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The ward has clear boundaries such as Hopewell Road to the north and the Holderness Drain. The electoral equality of the ward is also good.
The LGBCE has stated that the Holderness drain is a good community boundary. Therefore, we would suggest that this should continue to be the boundary right up to the Humber estuary. This would mean Alexandra Dock being moved from Marfleet ward to Southcoates ward (see Appendix N).
There are a number of issues around Alexandra Dock that directly impact on the nearest households, which are located in Southcoates ward rather than Marfleet ward. These include recent problems with anti-social behaviour on the new public footpath around the dock and noise from industry in the area. This does not impact on any households within the proposed Marfleet ward, as they are a significant distance away.
Whilst this change has no impact on the number of electors, we feel it would be more sensible to include Alexandra Dock in Southcoates ward, as it was before the 2001 review. This would have the added advantage of ensuring the Holderness Drain is used as a boundary right up to the Humber estuary.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain the ward as proposed with this one very minor tidying amendment that will affect no electors.
31
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
17) North Carr Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
This 3-member ward uses Wawne Road as a boundary between Kingswood and North Bransholme. We feel this is a very clear, well known and natural boundary. It then uses Holwell Road as its western boundary from Kingswood to Sutton Road.
Holwell Road is a distinctive boundary in the Bransholme area. It is a clear route through the area, bordered on either side by open green space. Bransholme was designed with a network of arterial roads to take traffic away from pedestrians and Holwell Road is the main arterial road. As such it makes a very clear and easily identifiable boundary in Bransholme.
Wawne Road has served as the ward boundary between Kingswood and North Bransholme since at least 1983. Holwell Road was the boundary between the Stoneferry and Noddle Hill wards from 1983 until the 2001 review. We are pleased to see the LGBCE is retaining this boundary in its latest proposals. The boundaries of this proposed North Carr ward are almost the same as the Noddle Hill Ward (see Appendix O) that existed previously, so there is precedent for these boundaries.
Holwell Road forms a genuine community divide within the Bransholme estate. Residents to the east of Holwell Road look towards the North Point Centre as the focal point of their community, but residents in the Stroud Crescent area look as much towards the local shopping centres on Cheltenham Avenue and Grandale in Sutton Park as they do towards North Point.
As stated above (see “14. Kingswood Ward”) there are three major communities in this part of Hull – Kingswood, Bransholme and Sutton Park. The LGBCE’s new proposals effectively contain all of Kingswood within one ward (Kingswood) and all of Sutton Park in another ward (West Carr).
Because of the size of Bransholme it is impossible to include everywhere that considers itself “Bransholme” in one 3-member ward. However, the sections included in the LGBCE’s proposed Kingswood and West Carr wards are communities that are on the periphery of Bransholme and look as much to facilities on Kingswood or Sutton Park respectively as they do to facilities on the far side of Holwell Road.
North Bransholme, The Garths and Central Bransholme will be united in one North Carr ward with clear and easily recognisable boundaries down Wawne Road and Holwell Road. These boundaries also have precedent in the former Noddle Hill and Stoneferry wards.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
32
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
18) Southcoates Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward with the minor amendment outlines in the Marfleet ward section above.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
All three political parties have proposed a similar Southcoates ward. The proposed ward broadly conforms to the submissions made by the three parties and it continues to have the support of the Liberal Democrats. The proposed ward has good electoral equality. It also has clear boundaries, most notably Newbridge Road and Holderness Road.
As previously stated (see “16. Marfleet ward”) it might be best if Alexandra Dock were included in Southcoates ward with Holderness drain boundary extending to the Humber estuary.
The Liberal Democrats therefore urge the LGBCE to retain the ward as proposed with this one very minor tidying amendment that will affect no electors.
33
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
19) Sutton Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The further draft proposals for Sutton ward address the issue that people who consider themselves part of the wider Sutton-on-Hull community are split across a number of wards in the Sutton Ward established in 2001.
The LGBCE further draft proposal creates a ward with the historic Sutton village at its the core. Most importantly, people who are part of the Sutton community but until now have been incorrectly placed in Ings Ward (the east side of Howdale Road, Spring Cottage, Wembley Park area etc.) are reunited in one ward.
The division of the Howdale Road estate down the middle in the 2001 review was an artificial and confusing divide. The LGBCE proposals correct this.
People who live in Sutton House Road, Mead Street, Minster Close, Abbotts Close and Wembley Park Avenue consider that they live in Sutton village. They do not think of themselves as living in Ings. They use shops in Sutton Village and the local shopping parade on Ings Road near Sutton House Road and Wembley Park Avenue, not shops on the Ings Estate.
The boundaries of Sutton Ward would now include Sutton Golf Club, which makes a lot of sense as it is clearly (by the name) a facility located in Sutton. We also feel the addition of electors in Truro Close and Leads Road from Bransholme West is a sensible addition – they are very clearly Sutton residents and the housing type is distinct from Bransholme.
We therefore support the LGBCE amended proposal for Sutton Ward, and also endorse the tweak made to Wembley Park Avenue and the Balham Avenue areas.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
34
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
20) West Carr Ward
The Liberal Democrats support the proposal for this ward and suggest it remains the same in the final proposals.
The ward will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government. In particular we support West Carr being established as a 2-member ward.
There are three large and distinct communities in this part of the city – Bransholme, Kingswood and Sutton Park. Of these Bransholme is the largest, Kingswood is the second largest and Sutton Park is the smallest.
It therefore makes sense that there is a 3-member Bransholme Ward (North Carr), a 3- member Kingswood Ward and a 2-member ward that includes Sutton Park (West Carr). The proposed ward would mean the whole of the Sutton Park community would be contained in one ward. Holwell Road and Sutton Road are clear and easily identifiable boundaries.
Within the Bude Road loop there are two very distinct housing types – the brick built properties we are proposing for the Kingswood Ward, and the “Caspon” built properties to the south which are of similar design and build to those in the Stroud Crescent area. These “Caspon” properties have specific issues to do with long term maintenance. Over the years there have been many discussions about how to bring them up to a modern standard and regenerate that area. The LGBCE proposal would keep all the “Caspon” style properties contained within one ward, West Carr Ward (see Appendix P).
At the previous review in 2001 Sutton Park was unnaturally divided between Kings Park Ward and Sutton Ward. Our proposal would reunite that community, whilst also linking in all the “Caspon” style properties to the north and east between Sutton Park and Holwell Road. This makes sense as all of this community uses the same local shops – Grandale on Sutton Park and share the same community facilities, schools and churches. We also understand that the proposed boundaries have been endorsed by the Sutton Park Residents Association.
Sutton Park will be kept together in one ward, as will the “Caspon” properties that have specific repair and maintenance needs and whose residents look towards the local centre on Grandale as their local shopping centre.
For these reasons, the Liberal Democrats wholeheartedly support the LGBCE’s further draft proposals and urge you to retain the proposals as now outlined.
35
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
4) Conclusion
In conclusion, the 20 wards proposed by the LGBCE in the further draft recommendations will ensure equality of representation, reflect the identities and interests of local communities, and ensure effective and convenient local government.
The Liberal Democrats accept and support the LGBCE ‘minded to’ size of a 57-member council and wish to see elections by thirds continue.
The Liberal Democrats also support the principle of the River Hull being a clear and identifiable boundary in the city.
Furthermore, the Liberal Democrats support the position taken by the LGBCE that maximum of three 2-member wards is needed to ensure that no ward crosses the river. No more than three 2-member wards are required.
The Liberal Democrats support the establishment of all the wards proposed by the LGBCE in their further draft recommendations.
It should be noted that in supporting the further draft recommendations we are accepting and supporting a warding pattern that is significantly different to our initial proposal. Our support has come about because we have listened to Hull’s communities, have weighed up all the evidence and have been persuaded by the LGBCE’s arguments.
The Liberal Democrats wish to make clear our support for wards which the LGBCE specifically solicited public comment on in the further draft recommendations, namely:
• Beverley & Sculcoates • Myton • Newington & St Andrews • Kingswood • North Carr • West Carr
The Liberal Democrats also wish to make clear our support for the Drypool and Holderness wards proposed by the LGBCE in the further draft recommendations.
Beverley & Sculcoates ward would provide good equality of representation. It would also ensure that the community living between the River Hull and Beverley Road (both of which the LGBCE has identified as key community divides) is effectively represented in a single three-member ward.
Myton ward has clear boundaries with a core based around the city centre. It would include all the entrances and exits to the KC stadium in the same ward and, for the first time, unite the streets most directly affected by the staging of the annual Hull Fair. We urge the LGBCE
36
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017 to retain Myton ward as currently proposed, with the amendments to Wellington Lane and Alliance and De La Pole Avenues as detailed in this report.
The Liberal Democrats agree with the LGBCE that the Newington & St Andrews ward in the further draft recommendations would ensure that all the Hessle Road community is represented within one ward. This would address the concerns raised by members of the public in previous round without the requirement for more two-member wards.
The Liberal Democrats also support the Kingswood, North Carr and West Carr wards included in the further draft recommendations. There are three distinct communities in this part of the city – Bransholme, Kingswood and Sutton Park. Bransholme is the largest, Kingswood the second largest, and Sutton Park the smallest. It therefore makes sense for Bransholme and Kingswood to be the focus of the 3-member wards (North Carr and Kingswood respectively) and Sutton Park the 2-member ward (West Carr). The establishment of a 3-member Kingswood ward based on the Area Action Plan, and communities who have a direct interest in its delivery, is the best possible solution.
The Liberal Democrats fully support the further draft recommendations proposals for Drypool and Holderness wards. We believe the proposed boundary between the two will ensure that the Garden Village and Stoneferry communities’ identities are better represented and equality of representation secured. Most significantly the wards represent what residents of Stoneferry and Garden Village called for in the previous round of consultation.
As part of this submission the Liberal Democrats have argued for three minor amendments to what has been proposed in the further draft recommendations. The suggested improvements have been made to gain increased equality of representation, to reflect the identities and interests of local communities better, and to ensure effective and convenient local government.
We ask that the LGBCE carefully consider the views and evidence we have provided, in this response and previous ones, when determining what their final recommendations will be.
The arrangement of wards proposed by the Liberal Democrats in this submission, including the three minor amendments, can be found in the table below – three wards whose numbers are affected by our minor proposed changes are highlighted in bold.
37
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
38
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
5) Appendix - Supporting Evidence
All proposal maps were created using: Map data 2017 Google, Imagery 2017 Digital Global, Getmapping plc, Infoterra Ltd & Bluesky, The GeoInformation Group.
Appendix A.
Map of the suggested minor change to the Avenue and Myton ward boundary (in red).
Appendix B.
Map showing the pre-2001 Act arrangement of Beverley Ward.
39
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix C.
Map showing the 21 Bus Route through the Compass Road and Fountain Road estates. Source: EYMS 2016.
Appendix D.
Details of the results of a consultation undertaken by Councillors Dave McCobb and Mike Ross in the Fountain Road area.
Introduction & Context
The Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) is currently reviewing ward boundaries in Kingston upon Hull.
The LGBCE draft proposals for the Beverley Road corridor create a new “Beverley & Sculcoates” ward that combines most of the current Beverley ward with the eastern half of the current Newland ward and the north east section of the current Myton ward.
This proposal has been well received in Beverley and Newland wards. As serving councillors for Beverley and Newland wards respectively, Cllrs Dave McCobb & Mike Ross wanted to gauge public opinion on this proposal in the area proposed to be included in “Beverley & Sculcoates” that is currently within Myton ward (almost all of polling district MYTF).
Methodology
In the first week of February 2017 Cllrs Dave McCobb and Mike Ross distributed a letter in MYTF explaining the LGBCE proposals.
The letter was sent to the 431 households where one or more resident has participated in at least one local election in the last ten years.
Each household was provided with a Freepost mechanism to return the survey for free.
40
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Residents were invited to choose one of two contrasting statements designed to asses where people’s instinctive community association lies.
The two statements were as follows:-
Option A – “I think where I live has more in common with Sculcoates and other parts of Beverley Road”
Option B – “I think where I live has more in common with the City Centre and the Thornton Estate.”
Response Rate
A total of 25 surveys were returned, representing the views of 37 individual residents.
This is a 6% response rate. This is considered a reasonable response rate for a survey of this nature compared to industry standards.
Responders were evenly spread across MYTF as follows:-
Quantitative Feedback
26 residents (70% of responders) selected Option A (“Beverley & Sculcoates”)
11 residents (30% of responders) selected Option B (“Myton ward”).
41
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Qualitative Feedback
Residents were invited to send additional comments explaining their choice.
Reasons residents gave for supporting Option A included:-
- A general association with “Beverley Road” as community identity and corresponding lack of common interest with the city centre, Thornton estate and Spring Bank areas;
- Personal involvement in projects in the Sculcoates area; - A sense of identity around Beverley Road and the historic Sculcoates Parish; - A sense that Beverley Road is becoming run down and that uniting more of it in one ward could help tackle this; - Little engagement in local issues from current ward councillors and a hope that this would improve if the area were in a new ward.
Reasons residents gave for supporting Option B included:-
- Avoiding unnecessary changes; - Walking distance to city centre; - A hope that being put in the same ward as the city centre would result in an increase in cleansing standards and in infrastructure investment as the pedestrian parts of the city centre have recently seen significant capital investment (this resident seemed unaware of the current boundaries).
Appendix E.
Map of the suggested minor change to the Boothferry and Myton ward boundary (in red).
42
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix F.
Map showing the Hessle Road community (in pink) of West Hull. Source: Ordnance Survey data and Royal Mail 2015.
Appendix G.
Map showing the Newington and St Andrews regeneration area, which includes the full length of Hawthorn Avenue. Source: Newington and St Andrews Area Action Plan 2010.
43
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix H.
Map showing the Gipsyville Estate community (in pink) of West Hull. Source: Ordnance Survey data and Royal Mail 2015.
Appendix I.
Map showing the pre-2001 Act arrangement of Newland Ward. Source: Hull City Council – Member Support archives 2002.
44
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix J.
Map showing the boundaries of the Garden Village Conservation Area. Source Hull City Council 2017.
Appendix K.
Map showing the Stoneferry Road Corridor. Source: HULL CITY COUNCIL STONEFERRY ROAD CORRIDOR & WIDER NETWORK TRANSPORT STUDY: 2016.
45
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix L.
Map showing the Kingswood Area Action Plan – September 2016. Source Hull City Council 2016.
46
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix M.
Map showing the pre-2001 Act arrangement of Stoneferry Ward. Source: Hull City Council – Member Support archives 2002.
47
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix N.
Map of the suggested minor change to the Southcoates and Marfleet ward boundary (in red).
Appendix O.
Map showing the pre-2001 Act arrangement of Noddle Hill Ward. Source: Hull City Council – Member Support archives 2002.
48
Liberal Democrat Response to the Further Draft Recommendations of 13 June 2017
Appendix P.
Map showing the Caspon housing area (in pink) in the West Carr area. Source: Hull City Council 2015.
49