ELECTORAL REVIEW OF BROXBOURNE

COUNCIL RESPONSE TO THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT BOUNDARY COMMISSION FOR ’S DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE NEW ELECTORAL ARRANGEMENTS

This document presents the Council’s response to the number of elected councillors, and the names, number and boundaries of wards proposed by the Boundary Commission.

July 2011

Q:\1CEO\ELECTION\BOUNDARIES\BOUNDARY REVIEW 2010\BOUNDARY COMMISSION WARDING SUBMISSION - AUGUST 2011.DOC

1 Introduction

In July 2010, the Council was advised by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (referred to as the ‘Commission’) that it intended to carry out an electoral review of Broxbourne Borough. The first stage of the review on the appropriate number of councillors for Broxbourne (referred to as council size) commenced in September 2010. The Commission, in November 2010, indicated it was minded to adopt a council size of 30 as proposed by the Council. The second stage of the review on proposals for new wards based on the council size of 30 members commenced in November 2010 and concluded on 21 February 2011.

The last boundary review in the Borough took place in 1998 and established the current 13 ward configuration.

Draft Recommendations on New Electoral Arrangements

On 24 May 2011, the Boundary Commission published its draft recommendations on the number of councillors and the names, number and boundaries of wards for the Borough. The Commission announced that it had decided to propose a council size of 30 councillors representing 10 wards with a uniform pattern of three member wards across the Borough which was in line with the Council’s response to the first stage of the review.

Response of the Council to the Commission’s Draft Recommendations

The Council considered the Commission’s draft recommendations on council size, ward numbers and ward boundaries on 26 July 2011. The Council’s formal response to the draft recommendations is that the new electoral arrangements for Broxbourne proposed by the Local Government Boundary Commission for England relating to council size and the number of wards be supported subject to the following specific caveats:

East of the A10

That primarily to the east of the A10 (ward numbers 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 9 and 10) the Commission’s proposals be supported subject to:

(a) an adjustment to the boundary between and South and Theobalds wards in the vicinity of Hedworth Avenue so as the railway line continues as the boundary between the new wards (see Plan 7); and

(b) the Commission being advised that the proposals in paragraph 77 (p13) of its report for Cottage Gardens, Church Lane, are misplaced and Church Lane should be the ward boundary between the proposed Cheshunt North and Cheshunt South and Theobalds wards (see Plan 6).

West of the A10

That:

(c) in light of considerable public disquiet about the Commission’s proposed Goffs Oak and Bury Green ward (ward 4) the Council does not support the

2 Commission’s proposals for the wards to the west of the A10 (ward numbers 4, 5 and 8), which the Council believes do not meet the Commission’s technical criteria on community identity and effective and convenient local government;

(d) the Commission be requested to reconsider its proposals for the boundaries for these three wards and replace them with the Council’s proposed warding arrangements submitted during stage one of the review, subject to Lieutenant Ellis Way forming the boundary between the Goffs Oak and Bury Green/Rosedale wards (see Plan 4); and

(e) if the Commission are minded to proceed with its proposals, as the residential estate south of the Brookfield Centre (Mylne Close - Brookfield Lane West) is with no logic split between two wards under the Commission’s proposals, under any warding arrangement this residential area and the rest of the residential area south of the Brookfield Centre should all be in the same ward (see Plan 5).

In summary for the majority of the new wards proposed for the Borough, the Council supports the Commission’s proposals. However with regard to the area to the west of the A10 in the south of the Borough the Council requests that the Commission substitute its proposals with the warding pattern put forward by the Council during stage 1 of the review subject to point (d) above. The Council’s warding proposals provide for a maximum electoral equality variance of +/- 5% whereas the Commission’s proposals result in wards with a much greater percentage variance.

The Council’s proposals are set out on the following plans and maps:

Document ‘Plans to accompany the Council’s submission to the LGBCE’

Plan 1 - A comparison of the Council’s original proposals and the Boundary Commission’s proposals. Plan 2 - The Commission’s proposals for wards in West Cheshunt. Plan 3 - The Council’s original proposals for West Cheshunt. Plan 4 – The Council’s revised proposals for West Cheshunt, using Lieutenant Ellis Way as the Goffs Oak and Bury Green/ Rosedale ward boundary. Plan 5 – Changes proposed by the Council to the area near Brookfield Lane West, Cheshunt. Plan 6 - Changes proposed by the Council to the area near Church Lane/Cottage Gardens, Cheshunt. Plan 7 - Changes proposed by the Council to the area near Hedworth Avenue, Waltham Cross. Plan 8 – Overview of changes proposed by the Council, incorporating those at Plans 4, 5 and 7.

3 Supporting Information for Council’s Position

(a) Waltham Cross and Cheshunt South and Theobalds

The Commission’s warding proposals in the south of the Borough depart from the use of the railway line to delineate between the new Waltham Cross and Cheshunt South and Theobalds wards in the Hedworth Avenue area. The Commission is asked to continue with the line of the railway as the boundary in this area which will result in nearly 300 electors in the new Cheshunt South and Theobalds ward being transferred to the new Waltham Cross ward. The electoral numbers have no significant effect on the average variances of the respective wards.

(b) Cheshunt North and Cheshunt South and Theobalds

The Commission’s proposals set out in paragraph 77 of its report for Cottage Gardens, Church Lane, are considered to be misplaced. The entrance to the cul- de-sac of Cottage Gardens is off Church Lane. It is no different to the (much larger) cul-de-sac of Hobbs Close 50 metres to the east, similarly off Church Lane. Church Lane should be the ward boundary between the proposed Cheshunt North and Cheshunt South and Theobalds wards to provide the appropriate delineation between the wards. There is no material effect on electoral representation from this suggestion.

(c) West Cheshunt

The Council has noted the Commission’s concerns (p11, 12) over the Council’s warding pattern are expressed in broad terms. The Commission suggest that its proposed modifications in West Cheshunt would

“… better reflect apparent communities, provide improved transport links within wards and provide clearer boundaries …”.

The Council respectfully submits there is no factual evidence to substantiate these points in the Commission’s documentation. Moreover, the factors identified by the Commission have little to do with warding and the relevant criteria.

1 The Commission’s reference to public transport links

The Borough’s transport networks are a ‘given’, and are not affected by the warding arrangements. The dominant transport ‘desire lines’ and routes in the Borough are north-south. East-west desire lines and routes are much weaker. The flows of travellers from Goffs Oak and from Bury Green to transport ‘nodes’ and ‘hubs’ are dominated by either this north- south pattern, or by the destinations outside the Borough altogether. The east-west routes through the areas of Bury Green and Goffs Oak are through routes which serve a wider areas than these wards. Bus routes follow the principal road network. These converge on Cheshunt Old Pond and Waltham Cross bus station. Only the 242 bus route can be said to link the areas of Bury Green and Goffs Oak together. The two areas of Goffs Oak and Bury Green look to different train stations on different rail routes from London termini: Bury Green looks to Cheshunt whereas Goffs

4 Oak looks to Station. Thus, the Council considers that transport routes and ‘nodes’ do not support the Commission’s proposal.

2 Community make up and identity

Goffs Oak and Bury Green are two different communities. The Commission’s proposed wards do not reflect community identities as perceived by residents themselves, or as made manifest in the geography of the areas. The Government’s own analysis of the 2008 Place Survey sees Bury Green as completely different from Goff Oak. In socio- economic terms, the resident population of the two areas are very different from each other. Car ownership rates, population characteristics and other aspects of the index of relative social deprivation differ also. The Bury Green ward was specifically identified by the Government following the 2008 Place Survey as an area where perceptions about crime and anti-social behaviour, the role of the family, perceptions about young people, levels of volunteering and community engagement, and its views about living in the locality were at odds with the national and averages. As a result, Government funding via the Connecting Communities initiative was provided to support the ward. There has been a muted response from Bury Green residents to this electoral review for the very reasons which led to the Government’s Connecting Communities project to stimulate community engagement and community self- confidence in Bury Green: there is not yet as cohesive internal sense of community in Bury Green as there is in Goffs Oak. Specifically as a result of this programme, a local residents’ association has been formed, reinforcing the particular identity of the Bury Green area. (See Appendix ‘A’).

Community cohesion in Goffs Oak

Goffs Oak has its own WI and Comrades’ Club, and its own annual carnival/community day. Goffs Oak has one of the four locations in the Borough where the annual Remembrance ceremony takes place at the village centre. Goffs Oak village centre has its own annual Christmas tree and lights, part-funded by Goffs Oak residents.

Council refuse pilot of 2008

Goffs Oak was chosen as one of the two pilot areas for the Council’s transformational ‘purple sack’ waste reduction exercise in 2008 because the area was so different in socio economic terms and waste disposal behaviours from the rest of Cheshunt and Waltham Cross.

3 Geography

The Commission proposes that separate communities with their own identity separated by large areas of Green Belt, i.e. open countryside, are brought together. The geographic ‘connectivity’ between Goffs Oak and Bury Green is limited. Residents of either area do not have occasion to visit the other area.

5

Local amenities and services

In terms of GP primary care, Goffs Oak looks to the Valley View and Cuffley surgeries but the Bury Green residents are dispersed widely across several different Cheshunt general practices. Goffs Oak has its own library whereas Bury Green looks to Cheshunt Library at the Old Pond. There is separate allotment provision in Bury Green and Goffs Oak. Both communities have their own local recreation fields and sports grounds and residents in one area do not need to visit the other area for these facilities.

Goffs Oak has its own two primary schools and its own village hall. St Mary’s Church and St Mary’s School are both located in and serve those aspects of community life in Bury Green. The rural nature of Goffs Oak is illustrated by the fact it has an agricultural industry - there are 14 farms in the Goffs Oak area.

Local retailing

Bury Green residents predominantly shop at the Old Pond. Goffs Oak is served by the village stores, Hammondstreet shops and Cuffley Village Centre.

4 Historical Continuity

The previous boundary review took place in 1998 and resulted in the existing 13 ward configuration for the Borough. Prior to the 1998 review there were 14 wards and in the Commission’s final recommendations which established the current Goffs Oak ward, part of the southern area of the former Flamstead End ward was transferred to the Goffs Oak ward. This suggests that under the Commission’s community identity criteria in 1998 the relationship between Goffs Oak and the southern part of Flamstead End was recognised as a community whereas under the Commission’s latest proposals, the Hammondstreet area which is polling district ANB in the current Goffs Oak ward is to be relocated to the new Hammondstreet ward.

(d) Goffs Oak and Bury Green and Rosedale

In requesting the Commission to adopt the Council’s proposals submitted during stage 1 of the review for the Goffs Oak and Bury Green area, the Council is mindful of the Commission’s wish to achieve distinct and defined geographical boundaries to delineate respective wards. The Commission is therefore requested to utilise Lieutenant Ellis Way as a dual carriageway and a clear, hard, permanent boundary between the Council’s proposed Goffs Oak and Bury Green/Rosedale wards. This proposal will affect less than 50 electors and therefore is not material in relation to the percentage variances against the electoral representation average across the Borough.

6 (e) Hammondstreet

If the Commission are minded to proceed with its proposals, as the residential estate south of the Brookfield Centre (Mylne Close - Brookfield Lane West) is with no logic split between two wards under the Commission’s proposals, the Council request that under any warding arrangement this residential area and the rest of the residential area south of the Brookfield Centre should all be in the same ward. Approximately 200 electors are affected. This area should be added to the same ward as the Whitefields estate placed in.

7 Ward Names

The names of the wards under the respective proposals of the Council and the Commission are set out below. The Council has asked these ward names be commended to the Commission.

Council Proposed Ward Names Commission’s Proposed Ward Names 1 Hoddesdon North 6 Hoddesdon North 2 Hoddesdon Town and Rye Park 7 Hoddesdon Town and Rye Park 3 Broxbourne 1 Broxbourne 4 Wormley and Turnford 10 Wormley and Turnford 5 Goffs Oak 4 Goffs Oak and Bury Green 6 Flamstead End 5 Hammond Street 7 Cheshunt North 2 Cheshunt North 8 Rosedale and Bury Green 8 Rosedale and Flamstead End 9 Cheshunt South and Theobalds 3 Cheshunt South and Theobalds 10 Waltham Cross 9 Waltham Cross

8

Appendix ‘A’

Examples of community Identity - voluntary bodies

The following are some specific examples of community groups and activities with a specific Goffs Oak focus listed in the Council’s index of local voluntary bodies:

2nd Goffs Oak (Methodist) Scout Group Scout Headquarters, Playing Fields Valley View, Goffs Lane Goffs Oak

Goffs Oak Village Day & Carnival Received grant from the Council for use of GO playing fields (and rubbish clearance) for summer fete, up to 2008.

Goffs Oak Women’s Institute Ants Cottage Woodgreen Farm Silver Street, Goffs Oak

At this year’s Council Open Day in July, (which takes place in the Bury Green ward) a representative from the Bury Green Residents’ Association distributed leaflets to raise awareness of this body.

9 Plans to accompany the Council’s response to the LGBCE August 2011 Plan 1 A comparison of the Council’s proposals and the Boundary Commission’s proposals Plan 2 The Commission’s proposals for wards in West Cheshunt Plan 3 The Council’s original proposals for West Cheshunt Plan 4 Using Lieutenant Ellis Way as the Goffs Oak and Bury Green/ Rosedale ward boundary Plan 5 Brookfield Lane West Plan 6 Church Lane Plan 7 Hedworth Avenue Plan 8 Detail of key changes to LGBCE proposals