Bradford to get new boundaries for some of its council wards

Today, the Local Government Boundary Commission has published its final recommendations for changes to boundaries within the area covered by Bradford Council – and has met with a mixed response.

The Commission is an independent body that redraws boundaries to make sure councillors represent about the same number of electors, and that ward arrangements will help the council work effectively.

It has decided that residents should continue to be represented by 90 councillors, which is the same number as the current arrangements. There will be 30 three-councillor wards, the same as before.

Publishing the recommendations, Professor Colin Mellors, Chair of the Commission, said: “We are very grateful to people in Bradford Council. We looked at all the views they gave us. They helped us improve our earlier proposals.

"We believe the new arrangements will deliver electoral fairness while maintaining local ties.”

A total of 747 people and organisations commented to help decide the new wards.

As a result of feedback, the Commission plans to make changes to Baildon, Bingley East, Bingley West and Shipley wards.

It also plans to rename the previously-proposed Tong Street ward to Holme Wood & Bierley based on the submissions received. Meanwhile, a small amendment will be made to the boundary between Holme Wood & Bierley ward and Wyke ward to include the Lower Woodlands community with the Wyke ward.

Cllr Susan Hinchcliffe, Leader of Bradford Labour Group and Council Leader, said: “I’d like to thank the Local Government Boundary Commission for doing this important piece of work. I’d also like to thank all the community groups and residents who took part. 

"It’s a really detailed, labour-intensive but vital piece of work which will last the district another 20 years. There is no perfect solution but I can see that the Commission have made great pains to try and respect the natural community ties which we are familiar with as local residents.”

Councillor Brendan Stubbs feels the review is a missed opportunity Councillor Brendan Stubbs, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Bradford Council, said: "This Boundary Review is a missed opportunity for the district.

"Since it was started, the Council has had to borrow hundreds of millions from the Government to avoid bankruptcy, begin a huge round of cuts to services, and see a new independent children’s trust take responsibility for most of the children's services department.

"It seems to many residents, that everything except the number of councillors is being reduced. The Boundary Commission has followed the instructions from the Council and the ruling Labour group to retain 90 councillors and have elections 3 out of every 4 years. This costs taxpayers millions every year.

"Power and decision-making have increasingly moved to other bodies. West Yorkshire Combined Authority, The Integrated Health and Well Being Board, Regional schools commissioners and the Children's Trust. Beyond that the Council has shrunk, with fewer employees, reduced annual budgets and a much smaller number of public buildings and amenities.

"These reviews only come around every 20 years this one could have reduced the number of Councillors and followed places like Doncaster, North Yorkshire and many other Councils in setting Elections every four years. Doing that alone would have at least saved taxpayers money – an opportunity missed."

Councillor Matt Edwards is pleased the Commission has listened to the Green partyCouncillor Matt Edwards, leader of the Green Party Group on Bradford Council, said: "We are pleased to see that the Boundary Commission has listened to Green Party submissions and reconsidered their earlier proposals which would have divided communities. We think that on the whole what they are proposing is the right outcome from Bradford district.

“I know many people in Bierley will be relieved that the commission has rejected the attempt by Bradford Labour to gerrymander the boundaries in Bradford South which would have divided their estate between two separate council areas. Similarly, the proposal to split Cottingley between Bingley and Shipley has also been rejected. On a personal level, I am sad to see the community at Lower Woodlands will be moved out of what was Tong Ward and into Wyke Ward.

“Being a councillor is a thankless role most of the time but one of the best parts is being able to represent the community. Keeping communities together must be a top priority regardless of the impact it has on political parties and politicians.”

The Commission said a number of respondents to a previous consultation opposed its draft recommendations, stating that the proposed Wyke and Bierley Woods ward did not reflect the community in that area. The Greens stated that a Bierley Woods community did not exist, and pointed out that the draft recommendations divided the Bierley community between Wyke & Bierley Woods and Tong wards.

It was also argued that the part of Bierley included in Wyke & Bierley Woods ward, namely those to the west of Bierley Lane and south of Walker Street, as well as the small community of Lower Woodlands, had no direct connection to the Wyke area.

The Bierley estate was a big talking point during the consultation process The objectors stated that the two road connections between the areas of Bierley and Wyke were via Mill Carr Hill Road and Bradford Road through the village of Oakenshaw. Oakenshaw village straddles the local authority boundary between Bradford and Kirklees and the road connection in question leaves the district of Bradford for a short stretch. The other connections between the two wards would be via the A6177/A6036 through Wibsey & Odsal ward.

These submissions argued that the M606, the boundary between the existing Tong and Wyke wards, continues to provide the strongest and most recognisable boundary. They noted that the sole crossing of the M606 motorway within the proposed Wyke & Brierley ward was a road servicing the Prologis Park and Industrial Estate, a no-through road, with these limited connections illustrating the lack of community ties between the two areas.

The Greens provided a counter proposal for the six southernmost wards of the authority.

They suggested the current Bowling & Barkerend and Tong wards be left unchanged from the existing wards. This would mean that the existing boundary of the M606 would be retained as the boundary between the Tong and Wyke areas. This proposal would also mean that the Swain Green and Cutler Heights area would be retained in Bowling & Barkerend ward.

It was pointed out that Oakenshaw straddles the boundary between Bradford and Kirklees The Commission had included this area in its proposed Tong ward as suggested by Bradford Council's Labour group in its submission to the initial consultation. The Commission had proposed a boundary between its suggested Bowling & Barkerend and Tong wards of Sticker Lane.

As part of their response to the Commission on the draft recommendations, the Council's Labour group requested that the boundary between Bowling & Barkerend and Tong wards follow Cutler Heights Lane. They stated that this boundary aligned with the new parliamentary constituency boundaries, which the Council uses to determine their Area Committee structure. They argued that a coterminous boundary would provide for effective and convenient local government.

The Greens counter proposal also suggested that Tong ward be renamed Tong Street. They reasoned that Tong village forms only a small part of the ward. Instead, they argued that Tong Street would be more suitable, given it is the ward's main settlement and the name of the main road traversing the ward.

In addition to these proposals, the Greens counter proposal also suggested changes to the northern boundary of Wyke ward as well as changes to the boundaries of Queensbury, Royds and Wibsey & Odsal wards. These changes are a consequence of using the M606 as the boundary between their proposed Tong Street and Wyke wards.

The Odsal area is significant in the consultation Their proposed Wyke ward would mean all electors in properties south of the A6036 Halifax Road/Rooley Avenue, which lie between Horsfall Playing Fields and Odsal Stadium, would be included in Wyke ward. Electors to the east of Odsal Stadium, south of Rooley Avenue and west of the M606 would remain in Wibsey & Odsal ward, as our draft recommendations had proposed.

To provide for electoral equality for all six wards, the Greens also proposed that an area in Wibsey Slack bounded by Reevy Road, Buttershaw Lane, Halifax Road and Wibsey Park Avenue be moved from Royds ward to Wibsey & Odsal ward. They also proposed that Coopers Lane forms the boundary between Queensbury and Royds wards.

They stated that this would mean that Horton Bank Top is wholly contained in Royds ward and that Cooper Lane would form a strong identifiable boundary between Clayton Heights in Queensbury ward and Horton Bank Top in Royds ward.

The view from Queensbury, looking over Clayton towards Bradford (Image: Point and Shoot Photos: T&A Camera Club) The Commission said: "Having considered all the submissions received, we propose that our further draft recommendations are based on the Green’s counter proposal, subject to some small amendments.

"We propose to adopt the Bowling & Barkerend and Tong Street wards suggested by the Greens. We noted the submission from the Council with regard to the inclusion of the Swain Green area in Tong ward and the use of Cutler Heights Lane as a coterminous boundary with the new parliamentary constituency boundaries.

"The Commission is not obliged to consider parliamentary constituency boundaries when proposing ward boundaries. Whilst we note the argument about coterminosity, were we to include the Swain Green area in Tong Street ward, whilst retaining the existing boundary of the M606, then Tong Street ward would have an electoral variance of 16% by 2029. We consider that we have not received strong and persuasive enough evidence relating to our three statutory criteria to justify proposing a ward with that level of electoral inequality. However, we would be interested in receiving further evidence about this decision from affected electors during consultation.

The M606 was said to create a 'strong boundary'

"We were persuaded by the evidence we had received that the M606 provided such a strong boundary that it should form the ward boundary in this area. Given this decision, we accept that consequential changes are required to Queensbury, Royds, Wibsey & Odsal and Wyke wards to ensure electoral equality across wards.

"We consider that the changes proposed by the Greens in their counter proposal reflect local communities in the area, particularly the revised boundary between Queensbury and Royds wards along Cooper Lane. We also consider that the inclusion of the area to the south of the A6036 Halifax Road/Rooley Avenue in Wyke ward uses a strong and identifiable boundary. We do propose one small change to the area that the Greens suggested including in Wibsey & Odsal ward. We instead propose the boundary between Royds and Wibsey & Odsal wards follows the rear of properties on Fairfield Grove and Glendale Close, so that the former is in Royds ward, and the latter is in Wibsey & Odsal ward.

"Our further draft recommendations are for six three-councillor wards of Bowling & Barkerend, Queensbury, Royds, Tong Street, Wibsey & Odsal and Wyke with electoral variances of 10%, -9%, -8%, 3%, -7% and -10% respectively by 2029.

"We consider these wards to reflect local communities and we are eager to hear further evidence on these further draft recommendations."

The make-up of the Baildon ward was debated during the consultation In respect of Baildon, Bingley East, Bingley West and Shipley, the Commission said it had received a substantial number of responses opposed to its draft recommendations.

It said: "Our draft recommendations for this area transferred the settlement of Eldwick from Bingley ward to a proposed Baildon & Eldwick ward. This proposal allowed us to achieve electoral equality for both wards, as the existing Bingley ward is forecast to have 20% more electors than the average for the district by 2029.

"In addition, we had recommended a Bingley Rural ward that moved Denholme parish into Worth Valley ward and used the River Aire as the boundary between Bingley ward and Bingley Rural ward. Our proposed Shipley ward followed the boundaries of the existing Shipley ward, except for a small amendment to provide a more identifiable boundary with Baildon & Eldwick ward along Green Lane. This proposal meant that the part of Baildon parish currently in a Shipley ward remained in a Shipley ward.

"Around 70 of the 191 submissions we received referenced our proposals in this area. Bradford Council Labour Group (‘the Labour Group’) and the Greens both supported the draft recommendations, and a local resident wrote in support of the proposed Bingley ward.

"The remaining submissions relating to this area all opposed the inclusion of Eldwick in Baildon & Eldwick ward. These submissions came from Baildon Town Council, Bingley Town Council, Bradford Council Conservative Group, two Bingley Town Council councillors, Eldwick & Gilstead Gala Association and 62 local residents.

The Bingley area was a topic of hot debate during the consultation "These submissions provided a great deal of community-based evidence demonstrating the strong ties that the Eldwick area has with the wider Bingley area. The submissions also stated that there is a lack of community ties between Eldwick and Baildon, including the lack of any public transport over Baildon Moor along Bingley Road, a road which several submissions stated can be frequently closed due to harsh weather.

"In addition to these submissions, the Bradford Council Conservative Group (‘the Conservatives’) objected to the continued inclusion of part of Baildon parish in Shipley ward, a view supported in a handful of other submissions. The Conservatives, in their objection to the inclusion of Eldwick in Baildon & Eldwick ward, reiterated their initial submission that moved the Eldwick area to Wharfedale ward. We also received a mixture of support and opposition regarding the inclusion of Denholme parish in the neighbouring Worth Valley ward.

"As part of their submission, Baildon Town Council offered a counter proposal which they considered better met the Commission’s statutory criteria than the draft recommendations.

"Baildon Town Council proposed a Baildon ward that was made up of the entirety of Baildon parish plus the inclusion of 38 electors in the settlement of Low Springs within Bingley parish. This proposal would see the part of Baildon parish currently in Shipley ward placed into a Baildon ward.

"They proposed that Bingley parish be divided between Bingley East and Bingley West wards. Bingley East ward would be made up of most of the existing Bingley ward, but with the Bingley Central & Myrtle Park area moved into Bingley West ward. The remainder of the Bingley West ward would be composed of the parishes of Cullingworth, Harden and Wilsden, and part of the village of Cottingley, numbering around 485 electors on streets connected to Manor Drive. The remainder of Cottingley village would be included in Shipley ward.

"When considering these further draft recommendations, we have considered all the evidence we received and have balanced these against our three statutory criteria. While we note the support for the draft recommendations from the Labour Group and Green Party Group, we consider that the proposal submitted by Baildon Town Council better reflects local communities than our draft recommendations.

How the Bingley West, Bingley East, Baildon and Shipley wards would look (Image: Boundary Commission) "Therefore, as part of our further draft recommendations, we are recommending a Baildon ward almost identical to that proposed by Baildon Town Council. We propose two minor changes to their suggested ward, by retaining the slightly amended boundary around Esholt Hall, as proposed in our draft recommendations, to reflect the access of a handful of electors into Esholt village.

"We also do not propose to include the settlement of Low Springs in Baildon ward. To do this would require us to create a parish ward for the settlement within the Bingley Town Council area. This parish ward would only have 38 electors and it is the Commission’s policy to not create parish wards with less than 100 electors, as we consider they do not provide for effective and convenient local government.

The slightly amended boundary around Esholt Hall looks set to be retained

"We also agree that Bingley parish should be divided into a Bingley East ward and a Bingley West ward, as suggested by Baildon Town Council. This is necessary to achieve electoral equality, given a three-councillor ward covering the entire Bingley Town Council area would have 64% more electors than average by 2029, and the existing Bingley and Bingley Rural wards are forecast to have 20% and 18% more electors by 2029, respectively.

"We noted Baildon Town Council’s proposal to divide the town following the railway line from the boundary with Keighley until Bingley station, then the Leeds-Liverpool Canal and Kingsway/Gloucester Road/Cornwall Road, but we determined that this boundary is not as strong as following the railway line for its entirety within Bingley parish.

"Accordingly, we propose that the railway line forms the boundary between our Bingley East and Bingley West wards, with every area to the east of the line in Bingley East ward and the remaining part of Bingley parish in either Bingley West (along with Cullingworth, Harden and Wilsden parishes) or Shipley ward.

"Having considered all the various options, we came to the view that it was not possible to provide a warding pattern that did not divide a settlement within Bingley parish between wards, while ensuring a good level of electoral equality. Baildon Town Council suggested that Cottingley be divided between Bingley West and Shipley wards. We agree that this represents the best solution in this area to reflect our statutory criteria.

Cottingley Hall Care Home was mentioned as a reference point during the consultation

"We however propose a different boundary within Cottingley. We propose that the boundary between Bingley West and Shipley wards runs from Bradford Road, follows the rear of Cottingley Hall Care Home and then to the rear of the streets off the north side of Manor Road and Airedale Avenue and then to the south of the Cottingley Wood Estate. We propose that all electors to the south of this boundary are included in Shipley ward and electors to the north, on the streets off or around Manor Drive, are included in Bingley West ward. The inclusion of this area into Shipley ward will ensure electoral equality across wards, given a Shipley ward made up just of Shipley parish would have an electoral variance of -12%.

"Our proposed Shipley ward is therefore composed of the parish of Shipley, plus the area of Cottingley mentioned in the paragraph above.

"We are particularly eager to hear further evidence in this area to help inform our final recommendations. This can be in support or opposition to these further draft recommendations, or the initial draft recommendations. We will consider all the submissions we received in preparation of our final recommendations.

"Our proposed further draft recommendations for this are for four three-councillor wards of Baildon, Bingley East, Bingley West and Shipley. These wards will have electoral variances of 8%, 3%, -8% and 9% by 2029, respectively."