High Peak Conservative Association and High Peak Councillors Group Joint Submission High Peak Conservative Association and the Conservative group on High Peak Borough Council would like to take this opportunity to put forward joint proposals for new ward bounding arrangements for High Peak Borough Council (HPBC). We will put forward proposals for the whole borough, but for convenience we will outline our proposals in three parts – covering in turn the Glossopdale, Buxton, and Central (including Hope Valley) areas of the High Peak. Prior to setting out our proposals, we would like to confirm that our proposals are based on the borough retaining 43 councillors, and we have based our proposals on the projected elector data for 2019 which was provided to the LGBCE by HPBC. Our main concern when setting out our proposals is to ensure that the needs of the various communities in the High Peak are well-served, and that community identity is not damaged. Therefore, if we believe that local communities are best served by the existing boundaries, we will propose no changes. On the other hand, we will propose changes to wards where we believe that community identity can be enhanced by different ward boundaries. Our secondary concern is the need for electoral equality. We recognise the need for every elector’s vote being worth roughly the same, along with the need to keep the number of electors in each ward as close to the average as possible. In some wards, these two concerns mean a balance needs to be found between the need for electoral equality and the desire to keep a good sense of community identity. Where these conflict, we will in the majority of cases opt for improving community identity, but we will not do so if this would involve creating a ward with an unacceptable level of electoral inequality. Where possible, we will use natural and geographical boundaries as the starting point for any boundary changes. This has the advantage that physical boundaries such as rivers are easy for residents to identify, and often form informal community boundaries. Where this is not possible, we will try to use boundaries that are obvious to the local community, but may not be obvious by simply looking at a map. We will avoid arbitrary boundaries wherever possible, as we believe these are usually drawn in order to satisfy electoral equality or political convenience at the expense of community cohesion, and can be very difficult for residents to identify. The proposals set out in this submission are illustrated using the 10 maps in the attached Maps document. All maps used contain Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2013. Glossopdale - overview Our proposals for Glossopdale involve a total of 15 councillors (the same as at present) and 13 wards – 11 single-seat wards and 2 two-seat wards. The average ward in Glossopdale is projected to have 3.68% more electors by 2019 than the average for the wider High Peak borough. At present, 5 wards (7 seats) in Glossopdale are more than 10% above or below the average, with another at 9.75% below the average. Our proposals mean that by 2019 there would be no Glossopdale seats greater than 8% from the average, and only 2 seats more than 7% from the average. Glossopdale – detailed proposals 1. Old Glossop ward Our starting point for Glossopdale is the current two-seat Old Glossop ward, which has a current electoral variance of +11.76%. This is not projected to improve by 2019. The southern and eastern boundaries of this ward have no road links to other populated areas, so this ward is a good place to start, and we propose a number of changes to the boundaries of this ward. Firstly, to improve community cohesion, we propose a minor change on the boundary of St. John’s ward and Old Glossop ward, at the southern tip of Old Glossop ward, near Shirebrook estate. This entails the transfer of 4 electors in the Jumble Farm area from Old Glossop ward to St. John’s ward. These electors currently have to drive out of Old Glossop ward (onto Derbyshire Level) to get to anywhere else in the ward, so we believe they would be best served by moving them into St. John’s ward. We also propose to move 4 electors on Derbyshire Level from Old Glossop ward into St. John’s ward. The boundary in that area follows the boundary of the Peak District National Park, and these 4 electors fall just outside that boundary. Moving them into St. John’s ward would see them in the same ward as their neighbours, thus improving community cohesion. We would also transfer 25 electors on Cross Cliffe, Cliffe Road and Lower Bank in Old Glossop ward into Whitfield ward. It is currently not possible for these electors to get to the rest of Old Glossop ward without first leaving the ward, and our proposals would rectify this anomaly by transferring them to a ward they can more easily identify with. Taking into account the need for a reduction in the electorate numbers in this ward, we propose to transfer 159 electors on Corn Street, King Edward Avenue, Riverside Close, Jordan Street and High Street East out of Old Glossop ward and into Howard Town ward. This would not only improve the sense of community in that area – the area has more in common with the adjoining area in Howard Town ward than in Old Glossop ward, indeed, some of the roads are part of an estate, the majority of which is currently in Howard Town ward – but it would also reduce the elector numbers in Old Glossop ward to acceptable levels. However, our main proposal for Old Glossop ward is due to the large development of Shirebrook estate in recent years. When the Old Glossop ward was created in 1999, Shirebrook estate was much smaller than it is now, and it was in two distinct halves, joined by an unpaved road. However, since then it has grown substantially and is now one complete estate, commonly referred to as “Shirebrook estate” or just simply “Shirebrook”. Furthermore, the estate has only two entrances/exists, both crossing over Hurst brook to the north, and is further bounded by Brown Hill to the south and west, and a steep slope up to Derbyshire Level to the east. In addition, the current Old Glossop ward already has two Residents Associations, one for Old Glossop itself and one for the remainder of the ward. That there are two Residents Associations clearly demonstrates that the current two-seat Old Glossop ward is not thought of locally as one cohesive area. Taking into account the strong and easily identifiable natural boundaries for Shirebrook estate, as well as the enclosed nature of the estate and the sense of community this naturally fosters, we therefore propose that Shirebrook estate forms a single-seat ward, with the remainder of Old Glossop ward becoming a single seat ward as well, with Hurst Brook forming the boundary between the two. 1899 electors would transfer from Old Glossop ward to form the new Shirebrook ward, with 1854 electors remaining in Old Glossop ward. This also takes into account leaving 2 electors in the Wind in the Willows hotel on Hurst Road (the road leading to Derbyshire Level at the far eastern edge of the ward, just south of Hurst Brook) within Old Glossop ward rather than transferring them to Shirebrook, as they would otherwise be cut off from our proposed Shirebrook ward. Taken as a whole, the above proposals would create a single seat Shirebrook ward achieving a variance of +7.59% and a single seat Old Glossop ward with a variance of +5.04%. Both are improved from the existing Old Glossop ward variance of +11.76%. With Shirebrook estate now completed, and with almost no room left for further expansion, we expect that as time passes, the elector numbers for our proposed Shirebrook ward would come further into line with the average, making the ward more electorally equal with each passing year. 2. Simmondley ward and Whitfield ward For the reasons previously outlined in Section 1, we propose the transfer of 25 electors from Old Glossop ward to Whitfield ward. Next to Lower Bank (currently in Old Glossop ward but proposed to move to Whitfield ward) is Lower Barn Farm, which is currently in Howard Town ward. We propose to move this to Whitfield ward for the same reasons – that it isn’t possible to get from there to the rest of Howard Town ward without first leaving the ward. This would affect 3 electors. We also propose to transfer 89 electors from the Charlestown area of Simmondley into Whitfield ward. This area has no ties with Simmondley, and residents would be better served by being transferred to Whitfield ward. This would help electoral equality in Simmondley, but to bring it further into line with the average, we also propose to transfer 70 electors from the Dinting Vale area (in the north of Simmondley ward) into Dinting ward itself. As these electors currently think of themselves as living in Dinting, this would also greatly improve the sense of community in the Dinting area. These changes would improve the electoral variance of Simmondley ward to +5.95% (from +10.17%) and achieve a variance for the Whitfield ward of +3.57% (from -3.06%) We also propose a small tweak to the boundary of Simmondley ward and Howard Town ward to remove an anomalous ‘spike’ across Overdale Drive. This would affect no electors.