Local Government Boundary Review for the City Council Local Authority

Submission for Stage One (Public Consultation on new ward boundaries) on behalf of:

Nottingham Conservatives

September 2017

1

Contents

Introduction 3 Background 4 Rationale and Methodology 5

Clifton and south of the 7 ; Lenton and University 12 City Centre and the Inner City 16 North Nottingham 24 Nottingham East and the Fringe 32

Appendix 1 40 Appendix 2 41

2

Introduction

This is a submission of proposals for Stage One (Public Consultation on new ward boundaries) for the Local Government Boundary Commission for ’s (the LGBCE) current Review of the Local Authority area.

This submission is on behalf of the members of Nottingham Conservatives and the Conservative Group of Councillors on Nottingham City Council.

The following pages contain a detailed proposed warding pattern for the entire Authority area along with justifications and arguments as to why Nottingham City Council should be restructured with this arrangement. These proposals have been assembled following consultation with members of Nottingham Conservatives from across the City and the Conservative Group of Councillors on Nottingham City Council.

The Review was initiated following the identification of a number of wards in the Authority area that have evolved to have a variance of electors greater than the statutory +/-10% tolerance for electoral equality. These wards are:

: 12%  Bridge: 25%  Dunkirk & Lenton: -27%  Wollaton East & : -34%.

3

Background

The current warding arrangements for Nottingham City Council have existed since the 2000 Local Government Elections and many parts of the city area have changed substantially over the past seventeen years.

As with any major metropolitan city, new developments and investment covering the commercial; residential; education and transport sectors have had a significant impact in the way in which different communities within the city have evolved. Some of these communities have changed very little or not at all; whilst others have changed significantly.

In Nottingham, perhaps the most visible change to the city since the last electoral boundary review has been the reintroduction of trams to Nottingham’s streets in the form of Nottingham Express Transit. This first carried passengers from the north of the city to the City Centre in spring 2004; and then on to Clifton and the south of the city in August 2015. This has had a major impact on the way people travel across the city and has been a catalyst for change along the corridor which it serves.

Overall, this submission proposes a new pattern of wards which hopes to reflect that evolving scene in Nottingham and has not been designed to just cover the minimal of amendments to the existing boundaries that would be required to rebalance the wards which no longer have an equality of electors.

4

Rationale and Methodology

In April 2017 Nottingham Conservatives submitted a proposal for the City Council to continue to comprise 55 councillors. This was also the proposal submitted by Nottingham City Council and the LGBCE have announced that they will be seeking to assemble a warding pattern based around this number of councillors.

Nottingham Conservatives received from the City Council the projected figures for the electorate for the entire Local Authority area. This forecasts that the Authority will represent 211,255 electors by 2023.

With a Local Authority consisting of 55 councillors this equates to 3841 electors per councillor if every councillor is representing an equal number of constituents across the city.

In order to allow for the structural +/-10% tolerance that is permitted with this target for electoral equality the proposals in this submission ensure that no councillor will be representing a number of electors greater than 4225 or less than 3457.

Warding Strategy

Following the changes outlined in the Background above, the overall strategy for constructing the wards in this Submission has been to move away from the existing three-member arrangement to a mostly two-member warding arrangement. This is due to the strong belief of Nottingham Conservatives that the current wards are too large geographically and swamp many of the diverse minority communities within them. This has the negative consequence of providing generally ineffective representation to the often complex issues that are prevalent in some of these communities.

This is very evident in some of the existing wards such as Bridge; ; Clifton North and Radford & Park – all of which are examples of wards that combine communities with little or even no social cohesion; transport connectivity or any other tangible community ties. Even if a three-member warding approach was still adopted following the Review then whilst many of the existing wards would still satisfy the requirement of electoral equality (Radford & Park for instance) many would continue to breach the LGBCE’s other criteria of reflecting the interests and identities of local communities and promoting effective local government.

Additionally, the Nottingham City Council Local Authority is unusual among its neighbouring core cities in that the entire Council is elected in one election (which normally takes place every four years) rather than “by thirds” (where one councillor per ward is normally elected on an annual basis.) This further reduces the case for continuing with the arrangements of three-member wards as a “by thirds” electoral cycle has never been adopted for Nottingham City Council and it is highly unlikely that such an electoral framework will be adopted in the future.

5

Methodology and Submission Structure

Nottingham Conservatives proposal for the future electoral arrangements for Nottingham City Council can be summarised as follows:

 Continuation of 55 councillors to all be elected in one cycle every four years. (As per statutory requirements.)  Assembly of 31 new wards in the following pattern:  1 three-member  22 two-member  8 single-member  Approximately 3841 electors per councillor (with not more than 4225 or less than 3457 per councillor.)

The numbers used to generate these proposals and help ensure electoral equality were provided by Nottingham City Council and these comprise the projected electorate for the Authority area in 2023, five years following the completion of the Review.

Where possible, existing polling districts have been used to construct proposed wards. However where it has been necessary to split polling districts then a Street List (also provided by Nottingham City Council) has been used to calculate the total projected electorate.

The submission is broken down into five broad sections that separately cover the main geographic components of the city. Within each section a list of the proposed wards is given along with their projected number of electors; proposed number of councillors and a justification as to why each is an acceptable ward. The justification is produced to suit the following criteria as outlined by the LGBCE:

 Delivering electoral equality for local voters.  Reflecting the interests and identities of local communities.  Promoting effective and convenient local government and reflecting electoral cycles.

To support the argument for each ward (and provide clarification regarding where those wards should be) maps have been provided showing some of the identifiable communities within the city; as well as the proposed boundaries for the suggested wards.

As stated in the Introduction, these proposals were assembled following consultation with the Conservative Group of councillors on Nottingham City Council and the members of Nottingham Conservatives who represent different parts of the city and interact closely with many of the local residents groups in their respective communities.

6

Clifton and south of the River Trent

The areas of the City covered by the current Clifton North and Clifton South wards are perhaps the most geographically distinctive part of the Authority area due to it being the only area to lie south of the River Trent.

This, coupled with the extensive Queens Drive/Lenton Industrial and Retail areas; as well as the large green space around the river near Clifton Bridge creates a natural boundary between this block and the rest of the City.

The closest point in residential areas either side of the River Trent is on the north of the peninsular; however access between the two communities is still pedestrian-only (via Wilford Toll Bridge) or via tram which uses the same bridge.

Reliable access between the communities south of the River Trent and the rest of the city is restricted almost to road transport only via Clifton Bridge on the A52 and A453 and this is not expected to change in the future.

For these reasons, these proposals follow the rationale that the River Trent remains the boundary between wards south of the River Trent and wards in the rest of the city.

The only significant change in connectivity here is the opening of the Nottingham Express Transit extension from Nottingham Railway Station south to Clifton in August 2015.

Whilst this has had a positive impact on connectivity between Wilford; Clifton and the City Centre, and will continue to do so in the future, there is no evidence to assume that this impact will be substantial enough to consider proposing a ward which incorporates communities on both sides of the River Trent. (For example, The Meadows and Wilford.)

Within the area to the south of the River Trent the following areas can be identified as distinct communities; either by natural boundary, or by demographic and community ties:

1. Wilford (including Wilford and the residential areas alongside Ruddington Lane.) 2. Silverdale. 3. Clifton Estate. 4. Clifton Grove (Fabis Drive Estate) 5. Nottingham Trent University Halls of Residence. (Clifton Campus). 6. Clifton Village. 7. Hartness Road Estate.

7

Figure 1A – General identifiable communities south of the River Trent.

Under the current arrangements Wilford; Silverdale and the northern half of the Clifton Estate (including Clifton Grove) have been tied together in the Clifton North ward which is represented by three Councillors.

Ideally it would be a better arrangement for these to be broken down into separate wards due to the diversity of the communities within them. Wilford and Silverdale are perhaps too small to be considered for individual wards however they share a very similar demographic and are separated only by the A52 Clifton Boulevard. To further support this, the extensive green space along the Fairham Brook corridor creates a clear natural boundary between Silverdale and the Clifton Estate. These communities are linked only by the A453 Clifton Lane. Nottingham Express Transit now provides a new transport artery between Wilford and Clifton however, this has not had a significant impact on the cohesion of these communities. (In any case this tram route largely bypasses Silverdale.)

8

The on-the-ground issues frequently raised by residents differ significantly between the Clifton Estate and Wilford; largely due to the natural geography and the strong variance in demography and community ties between the two areas.

The areas identified as Communities labelled 4 – 7 vary significantly in their demography and community needs. However they are too small on their own to sufficiently constitute their own wards.

To further bolster this Nottingham Trent University Halls of Residence (labelled “5”) is typical student accommodation and consequently these are only occupied seasonally and have a high turnover of residents. The remaining areas are virtually entirely residential (no shopping precincts; schools; community centres etc.) and for this reason they are tied strongly to the main Clifton Estate which is separated only by the A453 Clifton Lane.

There is no justifiable reason why councillors cannot continue to effectively represent these areas along with the main Clifton Estate.

(*Nottingham Insight Mosaic Codes refer to data and other information about the City collated and analysed by Nottingham City Council.)

Ward Name Number of Forecast Justification Councillors Electorate Silverdale 1 3977 Wilford is a unique area of the city and has and Wilford largely retained its “village” character. Consequently Wilford has strong intra- community ties and this is demonstrated in the many healthy and active Community Groups. Silverdale is a more isolated community and does have its own, albeit small, shopping precinct on Monksway complete with hairdressers and pharmacy. It is only narrowly separated from Wilford by the A52 Clifton Boulevard and shares some community links with Wilford. (If the A52 did not exist then Silverdale would naturally integrate into Wilford due to the very similar demographic and transport ties.) Whilst Silverdale alone has too few electors and does not have enough unique community issues to warrant being represented separately it makes more logical sense to combine Silverdale with Wilford rather than integrate it with all or part of the Clifton Estate, as per the current arrangement. To further support this, Mosaic Codes from Nottingham Insight* show distinctly different demographics between Wilford, Silverdale and Clifton with codes L, M, N and O being concentrated in the Clifton Estate and the less deprived groups (D, E and F) can be found in the Wilford and Silverdale areas, as well as Clifton Village.

9

Clifton North 2 8293 The Clifton Estate was built as a single development progressively throughout the 1950s and has largely retained a single character and identity; despite its large population and many of the properties having now been sold into private ownership. There are very strong intra-community ties; as demonstrated by the number of primary and secondary schools in the area; the number of places of worship and the substantial shopping and commercial area around Southchurch Drive. For these reasons it is logical to keep Clifton Estate together as closely as possible to enable Councillors to focus on dealing with issues that are unique to this area. The residential areas to the north of the A453 Clifton Lane. (Labelled on Figure 1A as 4, 5, 6 and 7) have too few electors and too few issues to warrant a warding arrangement that gives them their own councillors and so it makes sense to integrate these into the Clifton Estate along arrangements similar to the current boundary. Unlike the current arrangements however it does not make sense to try to create a pattern that incorporates either Wilford and/or Silverdale into the Clifton Estate as this will not provide effective governance due to the very different on-the-ground issues. Clifton South 2 8420 As described above it makes sense for the benefit of the community to keep Clifton Estate together as closely as possible; however due to the large number of electors it is illogical and impractical to cover the main estate with a four- member ward. The most appropriate solution therefore is to split the estate similar to the current arrangement; this will enable the entire estate to be more effectively represented by having four councillors work constructively for the entire estate whilst at the same time having a clearly defined boundary within which councillors can focus on their respective parts of the estate and still continue to suitably represent the smaller communities on the fringe of the estate. Currently this boundary follows the Glapton Lane/Nethergate Stream corridor however this proposal is for it to move to Green Lane. Whilst this also suits electoral equality between the two wards, Green Lane is a much more distinct boundary which is largely recognised by residents as being the “midpoint” of the estate.

10

Silverdale and Wilford

Clifton North

Clifton South

Figure 1B – Proposed warding arrangement for Clifton and the area south of the River Trent. (Note that for simplicity the western boundary of Clifton South is not shown to its full extent to co-terminate with the Authority’s Boundary with the Borough of .)

11

Wollaton; Lenton and University

The large area to the west of the Authority area perhaps has the most diverse population in the city. The area is dominated by the and consequently there is a substantial student community in the area that dilutes the identity of the permanent population.

The area can generally be broken down into the following identifiable communities:

1. Wollaton 2. Estate 3. Lenton 4. University Park and Broadgate Park 5. Dunkirk 6. Lenton Abbey

Figure 2A – General identifiable communities surrounding The University of Nottingham and the west of the city.

12

Ward Name Number of Forecast Justification Councillors Electorate Wollaton 2 6931 The residential areas to the east of Wollaton Park Park are home to a diverse demographic. The Wollaton Park Estate around Sutton Passeys Crescent and Middleton Boulevard are mixed student housing and full-time residents and this trend of demographic continues north to the extensive residential areas north of Wollaton Park (surrounding Wollaton Road and Lambourne Drive). Under the current arrangement these residential areas have been split across three wards – Wollaton West; Wollaton East & Lenton Abbey and Leen Valley. Even with the number of houses in occupation by students around the Wollaton Park Estate it makes logical sense to bring these areas together in one ward due to the geography and shared transport routes into the city. Henceforth the proposed Wollaton Park ward would provide appropriate electoral equality and would lead to more effective governance and representation as this area would no longer be split over three wards. This would also utilise the two stretches of railway (emanating from Radford Junction) as well as the University of Nottingham’s Jubilee Campus and Wollaton Park itself as a strong boundary much more effectively. Wollaton 2 7076 At its heart Wollaton has retained a very distinctive character over the decades and this is supported by the number of Community and Residents Groups active within the area. If the community surrounding Wollaton Road and Lambourne Drive is to be amalgamated into a new Wollaton Park ward (as suggested above) then it makes logical sense to bring the residential areas to the west of Wollaton Park together into one ward. This would enable all of the Wollaton area to be effectively represented by four councillors collectively whilst using Wollaton Park and Martin’s Pond Nature Reserve as a clear boundary between the two components of the community. To the north the railway between Radford and Trowell Junctions would continue to form the community boundary between Wollaton and Bilborough (the residential areas either side of this clearly belong to different communities.) The boundary between Wollaton and Wollaton Park would however need to cross the A609 Trowell Road and Torvill Drive. For this proposed warding arrangement this would largely be unavoidable due to the “east-west” layout of the roads in Wollaton (north of Wollaton Park.)

13

Dunkirk, 2 8122 The areas surrounding Nottingham University Lenton and and the QMC hospital have become University increasingly converted to student and other short term rental housing. In addition University Park and Broadgate Park consist almost entirely of purpose built student accommodation. Currently this student dominated area is split over the wards of Dunkirk & Lenton; Radford & Park; and Wollaton East & Lenton Abbey. This proposal brings this largely student area together into a single ward two-member ward. The main route into the city along the A52 Road would continue to form the boundary to the north of this area, where communities either side of this road are already very different. To the east it is proposed that the existing boundary (along the Lenton industrial areas and the distinct boundary between Lenton and The Park) continues to form the east edge of this ward.

14

Wollaton Wollaton Park

Dunkirk, Lenton and University

Figure 2B – Proposed new warding arrangement for Wollaton and the areas surrounding Wollaton Park and the University of Nottingham.

15

City Centre and the Inner City

The residential areas immediately around the City Centre comprise a very broad and vibrant mix of communities. Some of these can be clearly defined along geographical lines or lines of community identity; whereas others can be harder to delineate, depending on the history and evolution of the area in question.

As outlined in the Background, one of the objectives of these proposals is to create new wards which better represent the minority communities in the city. The current warding arrangements here are perhaps among the best examples in the Authority area that have tied some of these central communities together very badly – most notably the existing Radford & Park ward combine together two very distinct areas of the city that share virtually no community ties nor any aspect of demographic identity. This makes representation of the two areas very difficult to achieve effectively and consequently it is an arrangement that should be re-evaluated.

The Meadows residential area is a part of the city with very much its own identity and close community ties; but nonetheless, as part of the current Bridge ward it is tied to the completely different areas of the City Centre; and Hockley. The latter of these areas have a very different demographic and very different on-the- ground issues.

The proposals for new warding arrangements in this part of the city seek to reflect the large growth in numbers of residents in the City Centre and Lace Market areas whilst also remodelling the boundaries to more logically reflect these communities.

Within this complex area of the city the following areas can be identified as clear communities and residential areas:

1. Radford 2. City Centre; The Lace Market and Hockley 3. The Park 4. Castle Marina Road Estate 5. The New Meadows 6. The Old Meadows and Victoria Embankment

16

Figure 3A – General identifiable communities surrounding the City Centre and the inner city.

17

Ward Name Number of Forecast Justification Councillors Electorate City 1 3700 Under the current warding arrangement the City Centre south of Parliament Street (including the Lace Market and Hockley areas) has been included in the Bridge Ward which is largely dominated by The Meadows residential area. This is an ineffective arrangement as these city areas and The Meadows are dramatically different neighbourhoods and are separated by a clear and very large boundary extending across the railway around and the commercial district around Nottingham Canal and the intuBroadmarsh Shopping Centre. The City Centre comprises a largely younger and more transient population (including students) mainly in apartments. This contrasts with The Meadows which has a much more stable population in private and social housing with very strong intra-community ties. Frequent issues concerning residents in the City Centre largely revolve around alcohol licensing and the relationship residents have with the many bars and restaurant that share the streets and buildings with them. The ineffectiveness of the current arrangement has been further exemplified by a substantial growth in the population, due in part to the gradual redevelopment of many city centre buildings (in particular in the Lace Market area) which has increased the number of residential properties here over the past five years. Overall, a strong case now exists for the City Centre to now constitute a ward of its own; rather than be ineffectively tied to its neighbouring areas. The Nottingham Station area as well as Maid Marian Way and Lower Parliament Street provide effective natural boundaries here. (The areas beyond which are clearly dominated by communities with a distinctly more residential than commercial feel.) The one area that is a small anomaly to this is the small Cliff Road Estate and adjacent Nottingham One Development nestled at the foot of the Lace Market; off of the A6008 Canal Street. This is a unique community with no major links to its neighbouring areas. However, it is too small to constitute a ward of its own but due to its very close proximity to the City Centre it is reasonable to include this in the proposed City Ward rather than The Meadows.

18

New 1 3592 As a general district; The Meadows covers the Meadows extensive residential area across the south of Nottingham Railway Station to The River Trent and the boundary with the neighbouring Borough of Rushcliffe. Due to extensive redevelopment of the housing that took place throughout the 1970s and 1980s, two distinct communities within the general area have developed. The “New” Meadows is easily identifiable by housing constructed in the Radburn Style and this largely remains the case today (excluding some small additional redevelopment that has taken place since.) This area is also now better linked to the rest of the City following the opening of the Nottingham Express Transit extension in August 2015. (Meadows Way West; Meadows Embankment and Queens Walk are tram stops all comfortably within this residential area.) The Meadows Partnership Trust serves the whole community of The Meadows (offering advice and support on a wide range of issues such as employment; welfare and housing) but this promotes two separate community groups. The New Meadows Tenant & Resident Association (NEMTRA) is the group which focuses on this community. Consequently, a logical way forward of providing more effective representation and electoral equality to this area would be to create a warding arrangement that separates the New Meadows – bounded by the A453 Queens Drive in the west and the fringe between the older and new housing in the east. Embankment 1 3581 From the community structure of The Meadows, albeit working closely together, it is apparent that residents feel the need to have two distinct associations in The Meadows in which to have their issues addressed. The Old Meadows Tenant & Resident Association (OMTRA) supports residents in the Old Meadows. This part of The Meadows is dominated by traditional terraced housing in a “gridiron” layout; which largely predates their neighbours in the New Meadows. The demographic of these residents is largely similar to the New Meadows however there are distinct differences and this is represented in the form of a different Residents Association covering this area. It is thus logical to create a warding pattern that covers this area alone; bounded by the A60 London Road in the east. This ward would also include the small residential development adjacent to Nottingham Canal off of (Meadow Close and Quayside Close). This small area would need to remain represented by this Ward (similar to the

19

current arrangement) due to its isolated position on the edge of the Authority area which renders it too small to constitute a ward of its own. This should not affect the electoral equality or community cohesion of this proposed ward. The Park 1 3699 The Park is perhaps the most unique residential area of the city – this is due to its distinctive architecture; its status as a designated conservation area and its unique relationship with the City Council via its localised management by The Nottingham Park Estate Limited. Therefore it is difficult to find an adjoining neighbourhood that creates a larger cohesive ward and under the current arrangement it has very unusually been grouped with neighbouring Radford to form a three- member ward. This argument is further supported by the Nottingham Insight mosaic data which shows the clear difference between the affluence of The Park and the higher levels of deprivation (and more student-oriented population) of Radford. The 2015 Councillor Annual Report, along with the “My Radford and Park” Newsletter focuses predominantly on Radford; something that demonstrates the underrepresentation of The Park. This proposal would bring to an end this highly undesirable arrangement by effectively uniting in a ward of its own. The councillor of this ward would be able to much more effectively represent the unique requirements of The Park residents rather than having to share responsibility with neighbouring Radford that has a completely different demographic and hence completely different community needs. It would be logical for this ward to follow the natural boundary of The Park Estate whilst largely incorporating residential areas surrounding Standard Hill; and The Ropewalk which share a closer relationship with The Park than their neighbours in the City Centre. This would make Maid Marian Way/Derby Road a distinct boundary in the east. Additionally, the Castle Marina Road Estate (labelled on Figure 3A as area 4) is an isolated community which is currently covered by the existing Bridge ward. The demographic of this small housing development is similar to that of The Park and it is also much closer geographically than it is to The Meadows. The large boundary between this estate and The Meadows (which spans the mainline railway into Nottingham Station; the A453 Queens Drive; Meadows Way West and parts of the NG2 Business Park) makes the argument of

20

continuing to group these areas difficult to justify. Currently, Castle Marina electors have to vote at Queens Walk Community Centre which is a substantial distance away. By including this estate in The Park ward there is the opportunity to have a much more conveniently sited polling station; perhaps in the Castle Boulevard area. Radford 2 7160 Radford covers a large area of the inner city with large portions of student accommodation for both of the city’s universities. The housing is predominantly traditional semi-detached housing with high rise apartments and other smaller residential complexes. The boundaries of Radford can be naturally defined by the railway (between Lenton North and Radford Junctions) and Derby Road to the south. The boundary to the north is probably less well defined perhaps due to the continuation of the style of housing and demographic into . Consequently there is no justification for significantly amending the current boundaries of this ward. The key exception being the loss of The Park into its own ward as outlined above; where the A6200 Derby Road would form the new logical boundary between these two wards. Under this proposed arrangement Radford would now be represented by two Councillors (effectively losing one to The Park). This would enable Councillors for the two areas of Park and Radford to represent their constituents more effectively due to the greater community cohesion offered by a “Radford-only” ward. The only other change would be the loss of some of the current ward to the north. This would achieve better electoral equality for this ward and would allow the areas better defined as Hyson Green to be separated from Radford as appropriate. (See next entry for further information on this.)

21

Hyson Green 2 7632 The residential area surrounding the consists of Hyson Green and stretches to Radford; Basford and ultimately to Sherwood. Currently most of this residential area comprises the Berridge ward, but Hyson Green is a distinctly recognisable part of the City with a strong community identity. This proposal would create a new Hyson Green ward by effectively remodelling this area to provide stronger representation and identity to Hyson Green. This proposal would still use Gregory Boulevard and the Forest Recreation Ground as a distinctive boundary between Hyson Green and the south of the city. It also incorporates some of the residential areas around the A610 Alfreton Road currently covered by the Radford & Park ward. Victoria 2 7318 The extensive residential areas around Nottingham Trent University (City Campus) and The Arboretum share little intra-community ties largely due to their proximity to the City Centre and their dominance by the student population; which is highly transient. Similarly, the population on the northern side of St. Ann’s (surrounding Woodborough Road) shares loose connections to St. Ann’s but the community here also has a number of students and turns more towards the City Centre for its amenities. Combining these areas with a City Centre ward would be difficult for providing electoral equality and the largely transient population across the city centre area provides little community cohesion. The logical conclusion would be to provide a ward which covers the residential areas to the immediate north of the City Centre/Arboretum area and the Huntingdon Street/Woodborough Road area. This would provide ideal electoral equality for a two- member ward and ensure fair representation to an area with a broadly similar demographic. Parliament Street provides a clear “split” in the City Centre from which to separate this ward from the other areas of the City Centre and in the north this residential area clearly ends at the Forest Recreation Ground; which would provide a natural boundary between here and Hyson Green.

22

City The Park

New Meadows Embankment

Figure 3B – Proposed warding arrangement for the City Centre and its immediate surroundings.

Hyson Green

Victoria

Radford

Figure 3C – Proposed warding arrangement for the inner city areas.

23

North Nottingham

The vast suburban areas to the north-west of the City (beyond the railways) are dominated by archetypal suburban estates and large municipal estates such as Aspley; Broxtowe; Strelley and Bilborough. All of these were built progressively from the inter-war years through to the 1950s. This area also covers places such as that have retained a different character with stronger historical ties; despite having now been absorbed into the wider city.

The existing warding patterns have largely reflected this and these proposals will continue to keep to the existing community lines wherever possible; whilst simultaneously renewing them to reflect the natural evolution of their respective populations and the objective to see more effective, community focused representation via smaller wards.

The following areas can be largely identified as distinct communities:

1. Bilborough 2. Beechdale 3. Broxtowe 4. Aspley 5. Hempshill Vale 6. 7. Basford 8. 9. Bulwell 10. Rise Park 11. 12. Bestwood

24

Figure 4A – Identifiable communities in the north of the city.

25

Ward Name Number of Forecast Justification Councillors Electorate Beechdale 2 7983 The communities in the north of the city could be more effectively represented by smaller wards that do not swamp the minority areas. This proposed new Beechdale ward would more effectively represent the residential areas and communities in the Western Boulevard and Beechdale Road areas. The majority of this area has previously been covered by the poorly assembled Leen Valley ward, which has not been an identifiable community and was clearly created out of the remaining residential areas that could not be absorbed into neighbouring wards. This proposal would make more effective use of the two nearby railways as boundaries. (The stretches of line from Radford Junction to Trowell Junction in the west and to Kirkby Lane End Junction in the north.) This would also have the impact of giving greater and more effective representation to the compact residential areas close to Hollington Road and Freemount Drive which are at present swamped by the larger neighbouring Bilborough ward. Bilborough 2 7891 This proposed ward largely keeps the purpose- built Bilborough Estate together as one ward; similar to the existing arrangement. Under a two-member ward arrangement. However, this community can be more effectively represented by truncating the boundary appropriately and allowing the peripheral residential areas beyond the main Bilborough Estate to be represented separately. The earlier entry for Wollaton notes that the railway immediately to the south of Bilborough should remain as the boundary between here and Wollaton due to the strong difference in communities either side. To the north the B6004 Strelley Road clearly divides the Bilborough and Strelley/Broxtowe areas and this would therefore provide an ideal new boundary for the north of this ward.

26

Broxtowe 2 7246 Despite being geographically close to neighbouring Aspley; the Broxtowe Estate has retained a separate distinctive community character. This is partly due to its nature as a purpose-built estate and also due to its layout. Consequently, it would be logical to incorporate this, as best as possible, into a separate ward. This, however, would be difficult to achieve and still provide electoral equality. Therefore, the proposal is to keep the Broxtowe Estate at the heart and also include the nearby communities around Strelley Road. These areas share the same demographic; the same bus routes to the rest of the city and are broadly covered by the same school catchment areas. This would be a sensible solution that does not allow Broxtowe to be swallowed by neighbouring Aspley or Bilborough. Following this the B6004 Broxtowe Lane is a suitable boundary between Broxtowe and Aspley – the shopping precinct along here acts as a focal point for both communities whilst also acting as an appropriate community delineation. To further bolster this, the Broxtowe Country Park to the north of the estate strengthens the boundary between the estate and the Aspley and Cinderhill areas. Aspley 2 8151 Similarly to neighbouring Bilborough and Broxtowe, Aspley is a predominantly purpose- built estate and has very much retained its strong community ties and demography as a direct result of its design and its stable population. It would therefore be logical to keep this together as closely as possible; similar to the current arrangements to ensure continued effective representation of this area. Consequently, the proposal is to keep this ward formed along its current boundaries. However, Broxtowe would now be segregated into its own ward (as outlined in the previous entry) with a new boundary between Aspley and Broxtowe along the B6004 Broxtowe Lane. Cinderhill 1 4003 Cinderhill is a part of the city that has its own strong identity and yet has largely been coupled with neighbouring Basford; clearly a result of the prevailing three-member ward system that has been used across the Authority area. As has been proposed with other patterns across the city (such as The Park and City) this proposal attempts to resolve that issue by taking this community and developing it into a ward of its own – more strongly utilising the nearby railway (and coincident Nottingham Express Transit route) as the clear boundary which has long separated Cinderhill from neighbouring Basford and Highbury Vale. To the west the A610

27

Nuthall Road would continue to act as an appropriate boundary between Cinderhill and the Aspley Estate. For the past decade Cinderhill has been more effectively linked to Basford and the south of the City following the opening of Nottingham Express Transit. However, this has not catalysed the integration of the stable population in Cinderhill to the other neighbouring communities along the tram route. Indirectly, however, it has helped to give Cinderhill a stronger identity as the community is now served by its own dedicated tram stop. To the north, the now landscaped colliery spoil land on the site of the former Cinderhill Colliery (Phoenix Park) acts as a substantial boundary between Cinderhill and Bulwell and these are linked only by Cinderhill Road. This new arrangement would give much more effective representation to the Cinderhill community. Hempshill 1 3700 Bulwell is a distinct part of the city with a strong Vale identity due to its nature as a historic market town. The three-member ward system has had the same effect as other parts of the city of allowing smaller communities to be swallowed by larger areas and this is the case with Hempshill Vale within the current Bulwell ward. Nestled to the immediate south of Bulwell and north of the site occupied by the former Cinderhill Colliery, this is a community that is distinctly separate from neighbouring Bulwell and is therefore not currently represented very effectively. The natural solution would be to assemble Hempshill Vale into a separate ward, away from Bulwell with boundaries that follow the railway; Phoenix Park and Hempshill Lane as these clearly surround this community. Basford 2 8309 Along with Bulwell, Basford is a community with a strong character and a deep historical identity. Due to the area being progressively absorbed into the wider city it is much more challenging to easily identify its boundaries. The current Basford ward covers a substantial area as it is a three-member ward. This proposal is to redefine the boundary to give more effective representation to neighbouring Cinderhill. It is therefore logical to further utilise the railway (and coincident Nottingham Express Transit route) as a clear boundary between Basford and Cinderhill. The A6514 Western Boulevard/Valley Road would largely continue to act as the southern boundary of this proposed ward. This proposal also incorporates the small Stockhill residential area surrounding Lincoln Street, as this area is also very much identified as Basford and shares close community ties with the wider

28

Basford area (despite lying on the opposite side of the railway.) This would also enable this proposal to meet electoral equality. Bulwell 2 7432 As mentioned above, Bulwell is a historic community that has long developed strong intra- community ties and a distinct identity of its own; greater than that of its neighbouring communities. This has prevailed even as the area has been progressively absorbed into the wider city. Developments in transport over recent decades, including the opening of a railway station adjacent to Bulwell’s commercial centre in 1994 (served by trains direct into the city) followed by an adjacent tram stop on the Nottingham Express Transit network in 2004; (with direct services to the city and ) have enabled Bulwell to become further integrated into the city and the surrounding area. Nonetheless it has still maintained a strong commercial hub of its own for the surrounding areas including Cinderhill; Basford and Highbury Vale. The community identity of Bulwell is also further bolstered by the many community groups and the naming of some public services such as local schools (Bulwell Academy for instance). The existing three- member ward of Bulwell represents this area relatively effectively and this proposal is only for it to lose the communities to the south of the current ward (Cinderhill and Hempshill Vale) as per the previous entries. Overall this will allow stronger representation of Bulwell and these surrounding communities. Bulwell 2 7327 The existing ward of Bulwell Forest is another Forest clear example of a ward which brings together a number of diverse communities ineffectively. Bulwell Forest; Rise Park; Highbury Vale and the Top Valley Drive Estate have been collected within one boundary, despite all being distinctly separate communities. This proposal seeks to end this current arrangement by separating Highbury Vale and Top Valley from Rise Park in the north. Highbury Vale is a densely populated community to the immediate north of Basford. The railway and route of Nottingham Express Transit to the west would continue to form the distinct boundary with Bulwell; Cinderhill and Hempshill Vale. To the north the A611 Hucknall Road and Bulwell Forest Golf Course form a very strong, distinctive boundary between Highbury Vale and the Top Valley Drive estate; and this is something which is not reflected in the current warding arrangements but is proposed here to form the new divide between Bulwell Forest and Rise Park/Top Valley.

29

Rise Park 1 3503 Rise Park (the extensive residential area surrounding Drive West) is a more recent development than neighbouring areas. It is home to a larger number of white collar workers and a much greater level of affluence than Highbury Vale, south of Bulwell Forest Golf Course. It has strong community ties and is represented by the very active Rise Park Action Group (RPAG). Under the current warding arrangement this area has been poorly tied to Highbury Vale in the south, despite these areas sharing little integration. The railway and the A611 Hucknall Road to the west act as a distinctive natural boundary at the edge of the Rise Park development and the current Bulwell Forest ward boundary to the east (following the edge of Rise Park) and would continue to be an appropriate boundary for this new Rise Park ward. Overall, this would ensure that Rise Park and the Top Valley Road Estate are much more effectively represented. Bestwood 2 7982 The existing Bestwood Ward comfortably covers the extensive residential areas that constitute the Bestwood and Bestwood Park Estates; built in a similar fashion to Bilborough and Aspley from the inter-ward period through to the 1950s. Again, similarly to Bilborough and Aspley, Bestwood has developed a relatively strong community identity and has a broadly similar demographic of residents. For this reason there is no substantial justification to dramatically reorganise the existing ward boundaries in this part of the city. However minor alterations have been proposed here in order to improve the effectiveness of Bestwood’s representation by reducing the size of the ward. As Figure 4C demonstrates this proposal would see the residential area around the A611 Hucknall Road and Southglade Road (currently beyond the ) moved away and into the proposed Sherwood North ward. This would keep the Bestwood and Bestwood Park Estates together as per the current arrangement whilst giving the area greater electoral equality and stronger representation.

30

Cinderhill

Broxtowe Aspley

Beechdale

Bilborough

Figure 4B – Proposed warding arrangement for the north-west areas of the city.

Rise Bulwell Park Bestwood

Bulwell Forest

Hempshill Vale

Basford

Figure 4C – Proposed warding arrangement for the north of the city and communities around Bulwell.

31

Nottingham East and the Gedling Fringe

The east of the city is heavily residential; however the mix of housing is much more diverse than in the north of the city. Residential estates such as Mapperley Park comprise a large number of historic and architecturally unique properties; with a high level of affluence. In contrast areas such as St. Ann’s and parts of comprise higher levels of social housing whereas traditional terraces and some semi-detached suburban style housing dominate Sherwood; Carrington and .

Many of these communities still share very strong intra-community ties and have a very distinct identity – largely in part due the similar demographics within each area as well as the commercial and social hubs which bring these communities together. This is particularly evident in Sherwood and Mapperley where some of the largest commercial centres outside of the City Centre exist. (Although the commercial centre in Mapperley lies just outside the Authority boundary, in the .)

The proposal for new warding arrangements in this part of the city continue to follow, as with other parts of the city, the pattern of moving away from a three-member ward system to better represent the smaller communities within existing wards as well ending the trend of combining communities that share few ties.

The following communities can be identified in this part of the city:

1. North Sherwood (“The Dales”) 2. Sherwood 3. Carrington 4. Mapperley Park 5. Thorneywood/Mapperley 6. St. Ann’s 7. Bakersfield 8. Sneinton

This can be more clearly seen on Figure 5A.

32

Figure 5A – Identifiable communities in the east of the Authority area.

33

Ward Name Number of Forecast Justification Councillors Electorate Sherwood 2 7687 Sherwood, perhaps, has one of the strongest North community identities in the City. This is clearly evident through the vibrant commercial and social centre that stretches a substantial length of the A60 Road and serves as a centre for the community around Sherwood and neighbouring Mapperley Park. (This commercial district has grown in its diversity to a level where it has helped Sherwood to depend significantly less on the City Centre.) Nonetheless Sherwood is still very reliably connected to the City Centre by an extensive bus network. The community identity here is further strengthened by the number of active community groups and traders’ associations that identify themselves with Sherwood. (These include the Carrington Tenants’ and Residents’ Association; Edwards Lane Tenants’ and Resident’s Association; Sherwood Estate Tenants’ and Residents’ Association and the Sherwood in Nottingham Community Group which is very active on social media.) In order to reflect the evolving demography of Sherwood and provide more effective representation, this proposal would see the existing Sherwood ward broken down into two logical components – Sherwood North would cover the more suburban and affluent part of the district; where the demographic is distinctly different from that in the south of the community. (This is also reflected heavily in the style of the housing.) The A6514 Valley Road (and the adjacent Valley Road Park) already provide a natural boundary between the two parts of Sherwood and hence this should form a logical boundary between these new wards. Additionally, Sherwood North should also contain Southglade Road and Gainsford Crescent residential areas from the existing Bestwood Ward as these share a similar demographic to the north Edwards Lane area of Sherwood. This proposed two-member ward would enable councillors to focus on the issues raised in this part of Sherwood more effectively.

34

Sherwood 2 7816 As described above the district of Sherwood has South a very strong community identity and these proposals would keep the existing warding arrangement largely in its current form in order to maintain a level of continuity for the community. But, more effective representation can be achieved by splitting Sherwood into North and South wards as Sherwood South has a very different demographic and style of housing. This is evident in the estates around Carrington and around the south end of Edwards Lane and the A60 Mansfield Road. The population in this area has a larger mix of ages; is more ethnically diverse and is much more transient. The natural boundary that exists along the A6514 Valley Road; Perry Road; the rear of HMP Nottingham and Valley Road Park provides a logical boundary between the two areas of Sherwood as this would not split any significant transport arteries or community groups. The outcome of this proposal would be four councillors able to represent the diverse parts of Sherwood; Carrington and the Sherwood Dales more effectively than the current three councillors are able to do. This ward of Sherwood South would keep the more dense community around Carrington and the Sherwood commercial district together as one ward; largely utlising the existing ward boundaries (the A611 Hucknall Road and ) as the appropriate edge of the ward. Mapperley 2 7836 Mapperley is a part of the city with a strong identity and good intra-community ties. The broader Mapperley community however straddles the Authority’s boundary and extends into the neighbouring Borough of Gedling; which is where Mapperley’s social and commercial hub lies (along a short stretch of the B684 Mapperley Plains Road). The extensive residential area covered by the existing Mapperley ward in the City of Nottingham comprises the Mapperley Park Estate and surrounding residential area. Due to the current ward being a large three-member ward it extends to an area far beyond what can be considered “Mapperley” and therefore greatly impedes the effectiveness of the representation and governance of Mapperley itself. Mapperley Park is a distinctive community with its leafy, tree-lined avenues and large houses. It forms part of a conservation area and is represented by the Mapperley Park Residents Association. This proposal keeps the Mapperley Park Conservation Area at the heart of the ward and

35

truncates the eastern boundary back from Thorneywood and St. Ann’s to sensibly just cover the residential areas that share the closest demography with Mapperley Park and the Borough of Gedling border areas. This would keep the Mapperley Park Estate united with its neighbouring residential areas and continue to utilise Hungerhill Allotments and Sycamore Park as a logical boundary between Mapperley and St. Ann’s. Berridge 3 11091 The existing Berridge ward covers the densely populated residential areas to the north of The Forest Recreation Ground and west of Sherwood. The area is very well linked to the rest of the city via a number of bus links; and since 2004 by Nottingham Express Transit which dissects the edge of the ward. The community identity and bonds here are weak and the identity of the area is split between Sherwood and Carrington in the east and Hyson Green in the west. The area surrounding Hyson Green Market is effectively part of Hyson Green in its identity, community ties and above all its ‘continuity’ with Hyson Green, thus it should be separated from Berridge to form part of the proposed Hyson Green ward. Overall the area covered by the remaining Berridge area has very similar demographics – a substantial number of single home occupiers; as well as a mixed immigrant population and a sizeable level of typical inner-urban deprivation. Because of the need for electoral equality, it is not feasible or realistic (with the exception of the Hyson Green area) to further divide the Berridge ward. This submission thus proposes, with the exception of Hyson Green Market, to keep this ward as per the current arrangements following the sensible boundaries along Gregory Boulevard and the A611 Hucknall Road in the east and the railway/Nottingham Express Transit in the west. Thorneywood 2 8322 The residential area surrounding The Wells Road currently constitutes part of the existing Mapperley ward despite not being part of the Mapperley community. Other than geography, the housing estates across Thorneywood and the eastern edge of St. Ann’s share no ties to Mapperley. For example, there are different residents’ associations, community groups, commercial centres and transport arteries. The style and age of the majority of the housing across the area spanning The Wells Road; Porchester Road and beyond the B686 Carlton Road (along with the broadly similar demographic) render it logical to group together

36

the extensive that spread the length of the Authority’s boundary with the Borough of Gedling. This would have the impact of allowing Mapperley to be more effectively represented (as outlined in the previous section) whilst also allowing the residential areas in Thorneywood and Bakersfield to be grouped into a ward which does not split any of their community ties. The demographic largely comprises families and a growing graduate/ex-student population. St. Ann’s 2 7708 St. Ann’s is an area that comprises mainly social housing developed during the 1970s in an area once largely occupied by Victorian housing. Like many other social housing developments across the city this has given St. Ann’s a unique identity (in part due to its distinctive housing) and strong intra-community ties which prevail still today. St Ann’s also has a very strong ethnic minority population; which has existed in the area over many family generations and has contributed significantly to the identity of the community. For these reasons, it is logical to keep this community together under the existing warding arrangement as closely as possible. The same principle that has been applied throughout the proposed warding arrangement for the rest of the city of reducing the ward sizes has been used here with St. Ann’s. Here, the residential areas around the City Centre end; and around Alexandra Park near Woodborough Road have been moved into the proposed new Victoria ward in order to allow the central St. Ann’s community (emanating from the community hub on St. Ann’s Well Road) to be more effectively represented. When identifying appropriate boundaries in this area the B686 Carlton Road provides a very strong and clear boundary between St. Ann’s and Sneinton and whilst the demography between these two areas is broadly similar the two areas do not share many community ties and are not cross-dissected by any significant transport links. To the north, St. Bartholomew’s Road/Thorneywood Rise (the boundary between the current St. Ann’s and Mapperley wards) provide an obvious boundary between St. Ann’s and Thorneywood – and this is clearly demonstrated by the distinct change in style of housing on each side of these roads. As outlined in the Mapperley entry – Hungerhill Allotments and Sycamore Park provide a clear and very wide boundary between the St. Ann’s and Mapperley communities and this should continue to form the northern boundary of this proposed redefined St. Ann’s ward.

37

Colwick 2 7765 Sneinton is another community within the City Wood and that has a lengthy history, despite having been Sneinton absorbed into the wider city area. Housing in the area is dominated by a mix of traditional terraced and semi-detached housing as well as high-rise apartments which have been built in recent decades. There is a strong social and commercial hub that focuses around the unique Sneinton Market and this has been amplified in recent years as part of the City Council’s “Creative Quarter” initiative. Sneinton very much has its own community identity and organisations such as the Sneinton Neighbourhood Forum (the first such forum in Nottingham) have further bolstered this. For reasons of electoral equality however it is difficult to provide a logical ward that just comprises the Sneinton community and it would be difficult to integrate it with neighbouring St. Ann’s due to the latter’s distinct community identity. (The two areas share integrated catchment areas for primary schools and The however this is largely the only connection between the two areas.) However, Greenwood Road; Road and the A612 Daleside Road East provide a natural artery from Sneinton through to the residential areas on the edge of the City (including Bakersfield and the small community on the edge of Colwick Country Park) so it would be logical to assemble a ward covering these areas. This pattern largely already exists in the form of the current Dales ward which functions effectively so consequently there is little reason why assembling a ward from Sneinton and the small communities on the edge of the Authority area would not continue to work effectively.

38

Sherwood North

Sherwood South

Berridge Mapperley

Figure 5B – Proposed warding arrangements in Sherwood; Mapperley and Carrington.

Thorneywood St. Ann’s

Colwick Wood and Sneinton

Figure 5C – Proposed warding arrangements for the east of the city.

39

Appendix 1

Summary of proposed wards by existing polling districts.

Note that polling districts marked (*) are split; as indicated by their respective map.

Ward Number of Forecast Variance Constituent Polling Map Councillors Electorate (%) Districts Aspley 2 8151 6 ASPA; ASPD; ASPE, LEEA* Figure 4B Basford 2 8309 8 BASA; BASB; BASE*; Figure 4C BASF; BASG; BASH* Beechdale 2 7983 4 BILE; LEEA*; LEEB; LEEC*; Figure 4B LEED Berridge 3 11091 -4 BERA; BERB; BERC; Figure 5B BERD; BERF; BERG Bestwood 2 7982 4 BESA; BESB; BESC; BESD; Figure 4C BESE Bilborough 2 7891 3 BILC; BILD*; BILF, BILG Figure 4B Broxtowe 2 7246 -6 ASPB; ASPC; BILA; BILB; Figure 4B BILD* Bulwell 2 7432 -3 BULA; BULB; BULC; BULF; Figure 4C BULG Bulwell Forest 2 7327 -5 BUFB; BUFC*; BUFD; Figure 4C BUFE; BUFF Cinderhill 1 4003 4 BASC; BASD; BASE*; Figure 4B BASH*; BULD* City 1 3700 -4 ANNH*; BRIB Figure 3B Clifton North 2 8293 8 CLND; CLNE; CLNF; CLNG; Figure 1B CLSA*; CLSC*; CLSD Clifton South 2 8420 9 CLSA*; CLSB; CLSC*; Figure 1B CLSE; CLSF; CLSG Colwick Wood and 2 7765 1 ANNH*; DALA; DALB; Figure 5C Sneinton DALC; DALD Dunkirk, Lenton 2 8122 6 DUNA; DUNB; DUNC; Figure 2B and University WLAC; WLAD; WLAE Embankment 1 3581 -7 BRID; BRIE Figure 3B Hempshill Vale 1 3700 -4 BULD*; BULE Figure 4C Hyson Green 2 7632 -1 ARBA; ARBB; BERE; Figure 3C LEEC*; RPAA Mapperley 2 7836 2 MAPA; MAPB; MAPC; Figure 5B MAPD New Meadows 1 3592 -6 BRIA*; BRIC Figure 3B The Park 1 3699 -4 BRIA*; RPAF Figure 3B Radford 2 7160 -7 RPAB; RPAC; RPAD; RPAE Figure 3C Rise Park 1 3503 -9 BUFA; BUFC* Figure 4C Sherwood North 2 7687 0 BESF; BESG; SHEA; SHEB; Figure 5B SHEC Sherwood South 2 7816 2 SHED; SHEE; SHEF; Figure 5B SHEG; SHEH Silverdale and 1 3977 4 CLNA; CLNB; CLNC Figure 1B Wilford St. Ann’s 2 7708 0 ANNC; ANND; ANNE; Figure 5C ANNF; ANNG; ANNH* Thorneywood 2 8322 8 DALE; DALF; DALG; MAPE; Figure 5C MAPF Victoria 2 7318 -5 ANNA; ANNB; ARBC; ARBD Figure 3C Wollaton Park 2 6931 -9 LEEE; WLAA; WLAB; Figure 2B WOWA*; WOWB; WOWC Wollaton 2 7076 -8 WOWA*; WOWD; WOWE Figure 2B

40

Appendix 2

Details of split Polling Districts (existing).

Current Polling Streets Proposed Streets Proposed District ward ward ANNH* Camden Close Colwick Anstey Rise St. Ann’s Dakeyne Street Wood and Bath Street (See page 46.) Harold Court Sneinton Bloomsbury Court Harold Street Boston Street Haywood Court Brook Street Haywood Street Byron Court Henry Street Carlton Road Keswick Street Chedworth Close Sneinton Road Clarence Street Upper Eldon Street Denstone Road Walker Street Devon Street West Walk Elford Rise Lane (part) Foxrose Courtyard Handel Street Keswick Court Longden Mill Lowdham Street Morley Court Park View Court Robin Hood Street Rothley Avenue Southwell Road Spalding Road St Chads Road St Cuthberts Road Victoria Terrace Walton Avenue Walton Terrace Westhorpe Avenue William Bancroft Building Windmill Close Windmill Lane (part) Road BASE Bowness Avenue Cinderhill Academy Close Basford Broad Walk Arkers Close Coniston Avenue Bramble Close Furness Road Browns Croft Grange Road Clover Green Llanberis Grove Coriander Drive Nuthall Road David Lane Overdale Road Evans Road Stockhill Circus Lindum Road Stockhill Lane Michael Rayner Court Thorndale Road Mill Street Bar Lane Percy Street Commodore Court Towlsons Croft Grasmere Avenue Violet Close Manor Croft Alpine Street Old Bar Close Church Street Lincoln Street Nottingham Road Romans Court The Mill Close

41

BASH Charlesworth Basford Bar Lane Cinderhill Avenue, Fearnleigh Drive Radford Road Haversham Close Western Boulevard Pembridge Close Wilkinson Street The Edge (Bar Lane) Bucklow Close Aslockton Drive Hayling Drive Broadhurst Avenue Hollben Court Luton Close Totland Drive Nuthall Road Whitechapel Street Pennant Road Bracknell Crescent Didcot Drive Newport Drive Reydon Drive Basford Road Hensons Row Bailey Street Churchfield Terrace Marlow Avenue Mount Pleasant Nottingham Trent University (Whitemoor Road), Tintern Drive Whitemoor Road BILD St Agnes Close Broxtowe Astwood Close Bilborough St Leven Close Beechdale Road St Martins Gardens Bracken Close St Michaels Avenue Calveley Road Strelley Road Camrose Close Yatesbury Crescent Chingford Road Denewood Crescent Dylan Mews Fircroft Avenue Harvey Road Highwood Avenue Larkwood Close Oakmead Avenue Stanwick Close Wigman Road BRIA Ainsworth Drive New Avocet Wharf Park Anmer Close Meadows Curlew Wharf Castleton Close Dunlin Wharf Hatley Close Heron Wharf Hawthorn Close Kingfisher Wharf Hawthorn View Teal Wharf Hope Close Turnstone Wharf Royston Close Castle Marina (Castle Briar Court Boulevard) Colliery Close Flamingo Court Osman Close Plover Wharf Soudan Drive The Quays (Castle Quay Barra Mews Close) Bosworth Walk Causeway Mews Hawthorn Court Meredith Close Beardsley Gardens Crammond Close Phoenix Close Saffron Gardens Ayton Close Balfron Gardens Gifford Gardens Levick Court Middle Furlong Gardens 42

Middle Furlong Mews, Strome Close Strome Court Deering Court Gritley Mews Kelso Gardens Lothmore Court Lybster Mews Riverside Farm Tarbert Close BUFC Camomile Close Bulwell Adelaide Grove Rise Park Celandine Close Forest Ballerat Crescent Charlock Close Brisbane Drive Comfrey Close Darwin Close Darnal Close Freemantle Walk Hellebore Close Glenorchy Crescent Kingsmoor Close Hornsby Walk March Close Kempsey Close Rigley Drive Manly Close Rugby Close Shellburne Close Beauclerk Drive Pine Hill Close Burndale Walk Bush Close Coney Walk Crossdale Walk Ferny Hollow Close Nettlecliff Walk Syke Road Verder Grove Warrener Grove Bowlwell Avenue Buxton Close Pingle Crescent Tenter Close BULD Bagnall Cottages Hempshill Cinderhill Road (part) Cinderhill Cinderhill Road Vale Eastwood Street (part), Garton Close Cinderhill Walk Leonard Street Anford Close Moore Street Bonington Close Potters Hollow Bromley Close Tannin Crescent Brook Close Bulwell High Road Calder Walk Clayfield Close The Cliff Commercial Road Courtleet Way Coventry Road Crabtree Road Donbas Close Drysdale Close Dursley Close Faulconbridge Close Gilead Street Greasley Street Haswell Road Hempshill Lane Hoefield Crescent Hoefield Crescent Lathkill Close Lillington Road Lodgewood Close Main Street Market Place Newmarket Road 43

Northall Avenue Odesa Drive Paddock Close Quarry Avenue Ravensworth Road Robinsons Hill Springhead Court Stafford Avenue Station Road Steadfold Close Stock Well Stockton Street Strelley Street Willow Hill Close CLSA Falconwood Clifton Cavell Close Clifton Gardens, South Clifton Hall Drive North Finchley Close Clifton Hall Hartness Road Farriers Green Hawksley Gardens Garrett Grove Juniper Close Holgate Osprey Close Home Farm Betula Close Morgan Mews Hartness Road Nethergate Crusader Court Orchard Close Hartness Road Yew Tree Lane Linden Avenue Alwood Grove Maris Close Clifton Green Myrtus Close College Drive Primula Close Gervase Gardens The Leys Glapton Lane Thymus Walk Groveside Crescent Veronica Walk Leabrook Close Access Road (Fox Milldale Close Covert Lane), Parkland Close Arbutus Close Village Road Camelia Avenue Eucalyptus Avenue Jasmine Close Lilac Court Mimosa Close Pieris Drive CLSC Chepstow Road Clifton Gardendale Avenue Clifton Farnborough Road South (part), North Haltham Walk Chalfield Close Pennard Walk Waterdown Road Southchurch Drive Dalehead Road Bexwell Close Green Lane Clouds Hill Widecombe Lane Dartmoor Close Havenwood Rise Pinewood Gardens Fordham Green Old School Close Tintagel Green Whitegate Vale Bransdale Road Maydene Close Yewdale Close Cliffmere Walk Gardendale Avenue (part), Ridgmont Walk Walcot Green Highwray Grove Middlefell Way Waterdown Road 44

(part), Wycombe Close Bournmoor Avenue Inglewood Road Meadowvale Crescent, Brandish Crescent Burtness Road Cliveden Green Mosscroft Avenue Penshore Close Whiteways Court LEEA Aspley Park Drive Aspley Chapman Court Beechdale Aylestone Drive Clough Court Bexleigh Gardens Cropton Crescent Bramble Gardens Gaynor Court Dalemoor Gardens Pearce Drive Elmdale Gardens Robins Wood Road (part) Grannis Drive Webb Road Greendale Gardens Beechdale Road Aspley Lane Creamery Close Glencairn Drive Dairy Square Kingsbury Drive Robins Wood Road (part), Woodrow Avenue LEEC Newcastle Terrace Beechdale Alfreton Road Hyson Newtondale Close Chadwick Road Green Staindale Court Darley Avenue Staindale Drive Darley Road Swaledale Close Ashwell Gardens Tynedale Close Churchside Gardens Wensleydale Close The Poplars Denehurst Avenue Field Maple Drive Melbourne Court Meadow Brown Road Newcastle Farm Plantation Side Drive, Rosebay Avenue Nuthall Road Wades Avenue Newlyn Drive Newlyn Gardens Western Boulevard Aspley Lane Edgbaston Gardens Grace Drive Headingley Gardens Homefield Road Leacroft Road Oval Gardens Trafford Gardens Aberford Avenue Garforth Close Naburn Court Orchard Court Whitemoor Avenue Wilkinson Street Wistow Close Albert Avenue Cyril Avenue Edward Avenue Haslemere Road Lodge Close Nuthall Gardens Western Gardens Bryan Court Guardian Court Lambert Gardens St Margarets Avenue 45

WOWA Archer Crescent Wollaton Barnum Close Wollaton Caxmere Drive Park Bolero Close Far Rye Bridge Road Grantleigh Close Cottage Walk Hallowell Drive Dean Close Harris Close Middle Nook Lambourne Drive Torvill Drive (part) Reynolds Drive Torvill Heights Rudge Close Ewell Road Callaway Close Knole Road Christopher Close Pembury Road Courtney Close Sunny Row Crawford Close Welwyn Road Jayne Close Liddell Grove Torvill Drive (part) Russell Avenue Russell Crescent Birdsall Avenue Bramcote Lane Dovecote Drive Hirst Crescent May Avenue Rectory Avenue The Square Cedar Grove Court Crescent Rectory Gardens St Leonards Drive Tranby Gardens Russell Drive Thornton Close Trowell Road

*From ANNH – Huntingdon Street and the Marco Island Development have been moved into the City ward.

46

Issued to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England on the fourth of September 2017.

Nottingham Conservatives

Tel:

www.nottinghamconservatives.org.uk

47