South Tyneside Final Recommendations
Explore our Final Recommendations for new wards in South Tyneside
Overview
The Commission has published final recommendations for new wards in South Tyneside.
This map displays our proposals. Scroll down to find out how we arrived at these recommendations.
Click on the layer list in the bottom right hand corner of this map to switch between the different boundaries
West
Bede, Fellgate & Hedworth, Hebburn North, Hebburn South, Monkton and Primrose
In response to the new draft recommendations there was general support for much of our proposals for this area and some limited objections. South Shields CLP and South Shields CLP – Simonside & Rekendyke Branch expressed general support for the new draft recommendations but argued that the boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards, that runs along the rear of the properties on Drummond Crescent, is not clear, noting it divides a few houses on Bainbridge Avenue. They proposed running the boundary along Henderson Road, arguing this would be a stronger boundary.
Councillor Leask argued that Henderson Road creates a clearer boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards. A number of members of the public argued that the boundary between these wards should run along John Reid Road, but failing that it should run along Henderson Road.
A number of members of the public expressed support for the proposed ward names particularly where the new draft recommendations returned to names based on the existing ward names. Another member of the public put forward a number of objections to elements of our proposals in this area, but did not provide any evidence to support these objections. We received a few objections to the proposals for Monkton from members of the public, but these did not propose alternatives or provide supporting evidence.
We have given careful consideration to the evidence received, noting a mixture of general support and also some objections. However, the only proposal with any evidence to support it is the suggestion for changing the boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke ward. We note the argument that our new draft recommendations separate two properties on Bainbridge Avenue from the rest, but consider while Henderson Road would provide a clear boundary, it would divide the community in that area. In addition, it would worsen electoral equality in both Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards from 8% fewer and 4% more electors than the borough average by 2029 to 10% fewer and 6% more, respectively. On balance, given the weaker boundary and worse electoral equality, we are not persuaded to adopt this amendment. It should be noted that the arguments for using John Reid Road, while proposing a clear boundary, result in very poor electoral equality with Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards having 17% fewer and 14% more electors than the average by 2029. There is not sufficient evidence to justify this poor level of electoral equality.
We are therefore confirming our draft recommendations for this area as final. Our final recommendations are for three-councillor Bede, Fellgate & Hedworth, Hebburn North, Hebburn South, Monkton and Primrose wards. These would have 8% fewer, 10% fewer, 10% more, 6% more, 3% more and 5% more electors than the borough average by 2029, respectively.
North East
Biddick & All Saints, Simonside & Rekendyke and Whiteleas
In response to the new draft recommendations there was some general support for our proposals for these wards. However, as discussed in the ‘West’ section above, while South Shields CLP and South Shields CLP – Simonside & Rekendyke Branch expressed general support for the new draft recommendations, they argued that boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards, that runs along the rear of the properties on Drummond Crescent, is not clear, noting it divides Bainbridge Avenue. They proposed running the boundary along Henderson Road, arguing this would be a stronger boundary. Councillor Leask argued that Henderson Road creates a clearer boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards. A number of members of the public argued that the boundary between these wards should run along John Reid Road, but failing that it should run along Henderson Road.
We have given careful consideration to the evidence received. As discussed in the West section, we note the argument for changing the boundary between Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke ward. We note the argument that our new draft recommendations separates two properties on Bainbridge Avenue from the rest, but consider while Henderson Road would provide a clear boundary, it would divide the community in that area. In addition, it would worsen electoral equality in both Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards from 8% fewer and 4% more electors than the borough average by 2029 to 10% fewer and 6% more, respectively. Therefore, we are not persuaded to adopt this amendment. It should be noted that the arguments for using John Reid Road, while proposing a clear boundary, result in very poor electoral equality with Bede and Simonside & Rekendyke wards having 17% fewer and 14% more electors than the average by 2029. There is not sufficient evidence to justify this poor level of electoral equality.
We are therefore confirming our draft recommendations for this area as final. Our final recommendations are for three-member Biddick & All Saints, Simonside & Rekendyke and Whiteleas wards. These would have 1% fewer, 4% more and 3% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029, respectively.
Beacon & Bents, Harton, Horsley Hill & Westoe Crown, West Park and Westoe
In response to the new draft recommendations we received a mixture of support and objections for this area.
South Shields CLP and South Shields CLP – Simonside & Rekendyke Branch and a number of members of the public proposed renaming Horsley Hill ward as Horsley Hill & Westoe Crown, reflecting the inclusion of the Westoe Crown area in the ward. Another member of the public expressed support for the Horsley Hill name.
A number of members of the public argued that Highfield Drive should be included in Westoe ward, rather than Horsley Hill ward, arguing residents look there rather than Horsley Hill.
Councillor Leask and a number of members of the public expressed support for the inclusion of Highfield Drive in Horsley Hill ward, pointing out that it makes sense to have both sides of the road in a single ward. Councillor Leask and a few members of the public also supported the inclusion of Hutton Row in Horsley Hill ward, although Councillor Leask pointed out that it creates an ‘odd boundary on the map’, so it could be in Westoe ward. A few other members of the public stated that Hutton Row should be in Beacon & Bents ward.
A few respondents objected to the inclusion of Westoe Crown in Horsley Hill ward. They argued it would be better situated in Beacon & Bents ward as put forward in the original draft recommendations. They argued that the area looks to the coast or to elsewhere for facilities, but not south to Horsley Hill. Some suggested that otherwise it would be better suited in Westoe ward.
Councillor Maxwell expressed support for the draft recommendations for Harton ward, particularly the inclusion of the area around St Peter’s Church in Westoe ward, and stated that Marsden Road provides a clearer boundary. They and a member of the public also expressed support for the new draft recommendation for not dividing the Marsden Estate.
We received a number of comments about the Hepscott Terrace area – this area was included in Westoe ward under the original draft recommendations, but transferred to West Park under the new draft recommendations to provide a stronger boundary and reflect the pedestrian-only links. A few members of the public argued that this area looks to Westoe, not West Park, rejecting the argument that these roads only have pedestrian access to Sunderland Road. They argued that residents do look across Sunderland Road into Westoe ward for services. They expressed support for the existing boundary as used in the original draft recommendations, or a modified version of this.
A member of the public argued that while the new draft recommendations included South Shields & Westoe Sports Club in a Westoe ward, it excluded a small area of the Westoe Conservation Area, around Alansway Gardens, and suggested that this area should be included in Westoe ward. Another member of the public supported the new draft recommendations for moving away from a boundary on Morpeth Avenue, stating this provides a clearer boundary.
Councillor Yare expressed support for the new draft recommendation for West Park ward.
We have given careful consideration to the evidence received, noting a mixture of support and objections.
While there were arguments in favour of retaining Highfield Drive in Westoe ward, rather than transferring it to Horsley Hill ward as proposed in the new draft recommendations, we remain unconvinced that the existing boundary – splitting the road between the two wards – provides a clear boundary. Arguments for placing the entire road in Westoe ward have also not been persuasive and we note the road links to Cheviot Road and Horsley Vale in Horsley Hill ward. Furthermore, some respondents supported the new draft recommendations, arguing that it results in a clearer boundary. On balance, we are not persuaded to move away from the new draft recommendations and are confirming that Highfield Drive will remain in Horsley Hill ward.
With regards to Westoe Crown and Hutton Row, while there was some limited argument for including this area in Beacon & Bents ward, this is not possible while securing a warding pattern with good electoral equality. Adding this area would result in Beacon & Bents having around 22% more electors than the borough average by 2029. In addition, we note that there was support for our proposals to include this area in Horsley Hill ward. On balance, given the poor electoral equality that would result from changes, and the support for the new draft recommendations, we are confirming them as final.
Finally, in relation to Horsley Hill ward, we note the support for including Westoe Crown in the ward name. Since Westoe Crown is a constituent part of the ward, we think this should be reflected, so are naming it Horsley Hill & Westoe Crown ward.
We have considered the mix of support and objections for our proposals for West Park and Westoe wards. However, we are not persuaded by the suggestion to revert the boundary along Warwick Road between the wards, as proposed in our original draft recommendations. While we acknowledge that some residents may access services in Westoe ward, we believe our proposed boundary along the rear of Sunderland Road is clearer. In addition, returning this area to Westoe ward would result in West Park ward having 17% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029. We are not persuaded to adopt a ward with this poor level of electoral equality in this area.
We have also considered a suggestion from a member of the public to include the Alansway Gardens area in Westoe ward to reflect the Westoe Conservation Area. We note that this area accesses on to Wood Terrace and overlooks the sports club. This area contains relatively few electors and transferring it would only slightly worsen electoral equality in West Park ward to 10% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029, while Westoe ward would improve to 8% below the average. On balance, we are persuaded to include this change in our final recommendations.
Our final recommendations are for three-councillor Beacon & Bents, Harton, Horsley Hill & Westoe Crown, West Park and Westoe and wards. These would have 5% more, 1% fewer, 7% more, 10% fewer and 8% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029, respectively.
South East
Boldon Colliery and Cleadon Village & East Boldon
In response to the new draft recommendations there was general support for our proposals for this area, particularly Cleadon & East Boldon ward. Cleadon & East Boldon Branch Labour Party, Councillor Curtis, Councillor Herbert and 15 members of the public expressed support for the new draft recommendations for this ward. Cleadon Action Group and four members of the public also supported the proposals, but argued that Cleadon & East Boldon should be renamed Cleadon Village & East Boldon. A respondent reiterated objections to the original draft recommendation to link part of Cleadon Village with Cleadon Park.
A member of the public objected to a ward linking Cleadon with East Boldon. Another member of the public suggested a small amendment between Boldon Colliery and Cleadon & East Boldon moving the golf club and cemetery. Finally, a member of the public proposed renaming Boldon Colliery, giving a number of suggestions, but stating that ‘West Boldon’ should be in the name.
We have given careful consideration the evidence received. We note the support for our proposals, particularly the Cleadon & East Boldon ward. We note that there are some objections and a suggestion of a minor modification to the boundary with Boldon Colliery. However, given there was no evidence to support these objections and given the support for the new draft recommendations, we are confirming our proposals for Boldon Colliery and Cleadon & East Boldon ward as final.
We note the suggestions of name changes. Given support from a number of respondents, we are persuaded to rename Cleadon & East Boldon as Cleadon Village & East Boldon, noting this helps further differentiate it from Cleadon Park ward. We have considered the suggestion that the Boldon Colliery name be amended, but we note that the respondent proposed various options, without giving strong evidence for which should be adopted. When taken into consideration that we received no other evidence to change this name, we are retaining ‘Boldon Colliery’ as the ward name.
Our final recommendations are for three-councillor Boldon Colliery and Cleadon Village & East Boldon wards. These would have 8% more and 15% more electors that the borough average by 2029.
Cleadon Park & Harton Moor and Whitburn & Marsden
In response to the new draft recommendations two members of the public objected to the inclusion of Harton Moor in Cleadon Park ward, arguing that the area is cut off and that you have to cross two major roads (John Reid Road and King George Road). They also argued that the residents here look elsewhere for services. Another member of the public expressed support for the Cleadon Park ward. A member of the public objected to the inclusion of the north area in our Whitburn & Marsden ward, stating it has no relationship with Whitburn. South Shields CLP suggested renaming Cleadon Park as Cleadon Park & Harton Moor, reflecting that Harton Moor is a distinct and well-established community.
We have given careful consideration to the evidence received. We note the objections to the proposals for Harton Moor. While this area is somewhat separate from the rest of the ward and we recognise the point made about the ward spanning two main roads, Harton Moor does have road links to the rest of the ward via Temple Park Road across the roundabout with John Reid Road and King George Road. In addition, removing this area would leave Cleadon Park ward with 21% fewer electors than the average. We also note the objection about the north area of Whitburn & Marsden ward, but removing this would leave that ward with 33% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029.
Given the poor electoral equality that would result from addressing these objections, the only way to address it would be to redraw the boundaries in neighbouring wards. We do not consider there to be sufficient evidence or support to justify this. Therefore, we are confirming our new draft recommendations for these wards as final.
We do, however, propose including the name ‘Harton Moor’ in the Cleadon Park ward. As discussed above, we are unable to transfer Harton Moor out of the Cleadon Park ward as this would result in poor electoral equality. However, we are happy to reflect its inclusion in Cleadon Park ward by incorporating it in the ward name.
Our final recommendations are for three-councillor Cleadon Park & Harton Moor and Whitburn & Marsden wards. These would have 11% fewer and 9% fewer electors than the borough average by 2029, respectively.