Middlesbrough further draft recommendations
Explore our further draft recommendations for new wards in Middlesbrough
The Commission has published further draft recommendations for new wards in Middlesbrough.
This map displays our proposals. Scroll down to find out how we arrived at these recommendations.
Click on the layers in the list in the bottom right hand corner of this map to switch between the different boundaries.
Explore your area
In the map below we discuss each area of the borough. This detail is also available in our report.
East Middlesbrough
Berwick Hills & Park End, Brambles & Thorntree, North Ormesby & Boyds and Pallister & Priestfields
South-East Middlesbrough
Marton East and Marton West
South-West Middlesbrough
Hemlington North, Kader, Stainton & Hemlington South and Trimdon
East Middlesbrough
Berwick Hills & Park End, Brambles & Thorntree, North Ormesby & Boyds and Pallister & Priestfields
6 We received 11 submissions in response to our draft recommendations for North Ormesby & Brambles and Thorntree & Town Farm wards. Several of these submissions were critical of North Ormesby and Brambles being grouped in a single ward. Three residents cited high levels of social deprivation in North Ormesby as generating large amounts of councillor casework which, in their estimation, required a dedicated councillor, as at present. The Labour Group made the opposite case, however, arguing that areas with high levels of deprivation should not form single-councillor wards due to the burden this places upon said councillor.
7 Two residents argued for an extra councillor but, as the existing ward already has an electoral variance of 15%, this would only increase electoral inequality. Brambles & Thorntree councillor Graham Wilson spoke out against the proposals on the basis that residents know him and dislike change, but these do not relate to our statutory criteria, and we cannot therefore take them into consideration.
8 Brambles & Thorntree Community Council argued that the two communities which form the existing ward have a shared identity, although it did not provide further evidence of this, and that pairing Brambles in a ward with North Ormesby would disrupt this. Other reasons given were the potential loss of ongoing community projects and increased housing development putting pressure on infrastructure, though we did not consider that the submission satisfactorily explained how this related to ward boundary changes.
9 We were mindful that the Council’s initial submission made a similar case while providing detailed evidence to support its proposals. For example, the submission evidenced the community cohesion of North Ormesby with its high street, market, two primary schools, several places of worship, health centre, Community Hub and residents’ association. The submission also pointed out that Brambles and Thorntree are neighbouring estates with no physical boundaries between them, unlike Cargo Fleet Lane separating them from Pallister to the west and Longlands Road separating them from Boyds to the north.
10 However, at the time of drawing up our draft recommendations, we had favoured the Labour Group’s amendments to the Council scheme in East Middlesbrough, owing to the high levels of electoral inequality in the Council’s proposals. These included variances of 34% for Berwick Hills & Park End, -39% for Pallister, -28% for Netherfields & Priestfields and 11% for Brambles & Thorntree. North Ormesby & Boyds, however, had a variance of -4%. Although two of the Labour Group’s proposed wards also had electoral inequality, these were brought within 10% of the borough average through some relatively minor boundary changes.
11 With the above in mind, we revisited the Council’s initial proposals to explore whether the variances could be improved while also respecting the separate community identities of North Ormesby and of Brambles and Thorntree. In doing so we maintained the Council’s and the Labour Group’s proposals for nine councillors in the area and redistributed them where necessary. For example, the Council’s proposed Berwick Hills & Park End ward displays strong and clearly identifiable boundaries along the railway line, Longlands Road, Ormesby Road and the borough boundary, while entirely containing the Berwick Hills and Park End estates. As detailed in the Council’s submission, the ward contains three schools, several shopping facilities, a library, medical and fitness facilities, and one of the Council’s community hubs. However, the ward would have an electoral variance of 34% under the two councillors proposed by the Council which is significantly beyond what we would consider to be acceptable.
12 This variance can be significantly lowered, however, by allocating an additional councillor to the ward. With three councillors the ward would have 11% fewer electors per councillor than the borough average by 2029. This can also be brought down to -10% with the addition of Dorrien Crescent to the ward, which we consider to better reflect community identities and effective and convenient local government, as it is accessed from Ormesby Road.
13 To correct the -39% electoral variance in the Council’s proposed Pallister ward we have followed the principle, established in Berwick Hills & Park End, of using the main roads in the area as ward boundaries and extended the ward southwards to the borough boundary to include the Priestfields estate. This results in a 0% electoral variance for this two-councillor Pallister & Priestfields ward, being only 18 electors short of the borough average. While we note that Pallister and the Priestfields estate are not directly linked, being divided by Unity City Academy and Town Farm Allotments, both are accessible to each other along Cargo Fleet Lane and Ormesby Road. We note from the Council’s submission that there are “no major community facilities” in their proposed Netherfields & Priestfields ward, but that Pallister contains several, including the community centre in Pallister Park, the East Middlesbrough Events Centre, and one of the Council’s community hubs. We would be especially interested to hear from residents of Priestfields about whether they make use of these amenities.
14 The addition of Priestfields to the Council’s proposed Pallister ward renders Netherfields unviable as a ward of its own as, even as a single-councillor ward, it would still have 36% fewer electors per councillor than the borough average by 2029. Adding it to the Council’s proposed Brambles & Thorntree ward, however, improves the variance of this ward from 11% under two councillors to -4% under three. Furthermore, we note that the estate is well connected with Thorntree via both Kenmore Road and Cargo Fleet Lane. We have chosen to maintain the existing ward name of Brambles & Thorntree but we would be interested to hear from residents and interested parties as to whether ‘Brambles, Thorntree & Netherfields’ would better reflect local community identity.
South-East Middlesbrough
Marton East and Marton West
15 We received 32 submissions in response to our draft recommendations for Marton, many of which were critical of our placement of Marton Manor in Marton East ward and the Brass Castle Lane area in Nunthorpe ward. The Labour Group, for example, argued that Marton Manor was better linked with Marton West, with Stokesley Road serving as an effective boundary with Marton East ward. The group further argued that the new Ladgate Woods housing estate (also known as Orchid Gardens) should be included in Marton West ward with Marton Manor, as it falls within the catchment area of Marton Manor Primary School and a cycle track connects the two estates.
16 Marton West Community Council also supported including Marton Manor in Marton West ward. It noted that the existing Marton West ward lacks a local church or other community facility, which has hitherto led to Marton West Community Council meetings being held in Marton Methodist Church in Marton East ward which it stated was ‘the community centre in Marton Manor’. This was supported by Councillor David Jackson, who is also vice-chair of the Community Council, and several residents who pointed out that the shops, pubs, and sports facilities in Marton Manor would be a welcome addition to the ward. Two residents put forward that the A174 is a significant barrier between Marton Manor and Marton West, though we note this could also be said of Marton East ward either side of this dual carriageway.
17 We have been persuaded, on the basis of the evidence presented, that the inclusion of Marton Manor and Ladgate Woods/Orchid Gardens in Marton West ward would best serve the community identity of the area. We have therefore adopted these proposals as part of our further draft recommendations.
Nunthorpe
18 We received 69 submissions in response to our draft recommendations for Nunthorpe. These were from Grey Towers Residents’ Association, Marton West Community Council, Nunthorpe Parish Council, councillors David Jackson and Morgan McClintock of Middlesbrough Borough Council and Jon Rathmell of Nunthorpe Parish Council, and 63 residents. Almost all wrote in support of Borrowby Rise and Plantation View being added to Nunthorpe ward, as in our draft recommendations, and thus including the entire Grey Towers Village housing development within the same ward.
19 A large proportion of the submissions also opposed the inclusion of Brass Castle Lane, Bridle Woods, De Brus Park, Middlesbrough Golf Club and Newham Hall Farm in Nunthorpe ward, as in our draft recommendations. At the time we observed the area to be significantly removed from the rest of Marton West ward and sharing a more rural nature with Nunthorpe. However, we also observed that access from Nunthorpe ward was mainly via farm tracks, so requested further evidence to substantiate or refute this proposal. A number of residents pointed out that, other than ‘informal pathways’, access to the area was only possible via Brass Castle Lane. This would necessitate leaving Nunthorpe ward from Dixons Bank onto Brass Castle Lane in Marton West ward, only to then re-enter Nunthorpe ward further along Brass Castle Lane.
20 Councillor Morgan McClintock of Middlesbrough Borough Council wrote to say his discussions with residents led him to believe that ‘this would reduce, rather than enhance, our sense of community identity’, as there was a consensus that Nunthorpe extended no further than Plantation View. A resident of De Brus Park also described Marton West as ‘a very well organised neighbourhood community which I want to remain a part of.’ On the basis of the evidence we have received throughout the review, we have concluded that the interests of community identity and effective and convenient local government would be best served by the Brass Castle Lane area remaining in Marton West ward. This also reduces the electoral variance of Nunthorpe from 10% in our draft recommendations to 9%.
21 Councillor Jon Rathmell of Nunthorpe Parish Council wrote to propose that Low Gill View be added to Nunthorpe ward from Marton East, in which it is presently included, because it is accessible only from Gypsy Lane in Nunthorpe. We note that this is a recent housing development which has been built since the completion of the last review in 2013 which added Yew Tree Grove and what is now Milan Grove for similar reasons. We gave this proposal careful consideration but decided against including it in our further draft recommendations. This is because, while this may raise issues with effective and convenient local government, adding Low Gill View and Beau Gardens to Nunthorpe ward increases the electoral variance to 11%. We consider that further evidence is required to justify this variance, particularly in respect of the community identity of residents in the area. We would therefore especially welcome submissions from residents of Low Gill View and Beau Gardens about where they access local amenities such as shops, schools, places of worship and community centres, and the community with which they most identify.
South-West Middlesbrough
Hemlington North, Kader, Stainton & Hemlington South and Trimdon
22 About half of the 244 submissions we received in response to our draft recommendations concerned south-west Middlesbrough. Almost half of these concerned the green spaces between Blue Bell Beck/Saphwood Beck and the boundaries of our proposed Acklam West & Whinney Banks, Brookfield & Trimdon and Kader wards. These areas were included in our proposed Stainton & Stainsby Hall Farm ward to follow the boundaries of a proposed housing development in the area.
23 However, we heard from a great many residents that these green spaces are much-used by residents of Acklam and Trimdon, who had also worked to give Acklam Meadow and Mandale Meadow registered village green status. One resident, speaking about Acklam Meadow off Newfield Crescent, described it as being ‘in constant use by local schools, sports groups, and all locals’. They added that village green status was granted in 2018 after a concerted community effort to prevent development taking place on the land, and that Stotford Walk Beck was granted ‘green wedge’ status in 2014 for similar reasons. We recognise the importance of these green spaces to local communities on the east bank of the becks and have drawn the ward boundaries of our further draft recommendations accordingly.
24 A number of submissions also argued against our grouping of communities either side of the A174 dual carriageway in our proposed Stainton & Stainsby Hall Farm ward, noting that this was an effective barrier between Stainton to the south and Stainsby to the north. One resident noted that there exists a farm road linking either side of the A174 but that ‘no one’s actually sure if we’re officially allowed to use it.’ The road does appear to be publicly accessible from Low Lane in Stainton but ends abruptly on the other side at the entrance to the farm, at which point a sign informs travellers there is ‘no public right of way’. This leaves one lane of the A1040, through which our draft recommendations boundary follows, as the only access point between the two communities.
25 A number of submissions were critical of both the geographical size of our proposed Stainton & Stainsby Hall Farm ward and its capacity to accommodate future planned growth. For example, Councillor David Coupe, who represents the existing Stainton & Thornton ward said he expected the electorate of the ward to exceed even that of a two-councillor ward in the next decade due to further development in Stainton, Thornton and Hemlington Grange. Our legal requirement is to have regard to the forecast electorate five years after the completion of our review, and we note that our proposed ward is forecast to have a variance of 9% by 2029, which is at the upper end of what we would consider to be good electoral equality. Councillor Coupe proposed moving Hemlington Grange from the ward into a Coulby Newham South ward, as in the Council’s scheme. However, we rejected this proposal in our draft recommendations because the proposed two-councillor Coulby Newham South and Coulby Newham North wards had electoral variances of 11% and -33% respectively, and because we had received submissions from residents of Hemlington Grange citing their connections to amenities in Stainton.
26 Stainton & Thornton Parish Council expressed similar concerns about development and proposed maintaining the existing boundaries of the ward with two councillors, which would have an electoral variance of -10% by 2029 according to the current forecast. However, including Stainsby Hall Farm in Brookfield & Trimdon would result in a 32% variance.
27 A further criticism of our draft recommendations was directed at our grouping of Brookfield with Trimdon and its consequent separation from Kader ward. The existing ward’s councillors, Jim Platt and Sharon Platt, argued that Brookfield should continue to be a part of Kader ward due to it being ‘the heart of our community’ in the sense that the majority of the amenities used by residents of the ward were in Brookfield, including all its churches and community centres and most of its shops. We received only one submission, from a resident, specifically in favour of joining Brookfield and Trimdon. However, the reason given was because the resident believed they would ‘inherit’ Councillor Dennis McCabe, which is not a factor to which we can give consideration.
28 Having considered all the evidence received, we have decided to depart from our draft recommendations in an effort to secure a better balance of our three statutory criteria. Our further draft recommendations propose a two-councillor Trimdon ward similar to the existing ward and that proposed by the Council, save for the transfer to Kader ward of Cotherstone Drive, Gatenby Drive, Grisedale Close, Runswick Avenue, Sedgefield Road, Topcliffe Drive, and the section of Earlsdon Avenue which runs parallel to them. This brings the variance of Trimdon ward down from 12% to 1%. We have also excluded the farm mentioned in paragraph 24, as this is accessed from the other side of the A174.
29 Our proposed Kader ward is likewise similar to the existing ward and that proposed by the Council, save for the exclusion of Adcott Road, Bewley Grove and Cowley Road. A resident wrote to say that this area identified strongly with Acklam and that Acklam Road was considered a natural boundary between the two communities. This also means the ward boundary would no longer be drawn down the middle of Hall Drive, as at present, thus improving effective and convenient local government. Nonetheless we would particularly welcome further evidence from residents about whether they identify more with Acklam or Kader.
30 South of the A174 we are proposing a three-councillor Stainton & Hemlington South ward and a single-councillor Hemlington North ward. We very carefully considered the alternatives proposed to us but, for the reasons given above, we did not consider these to be viable options. Furthermore, although we considered the unification of Hemlington in our draft recommendations to be particularly conducive to local community identity, we consider that our further draft recommendations offer the best balance of all three statutory criteria. In drawing the boundary between the two wards we sought to follow geographic features which already divide the various clusters of housing in Hemlington, such as the edge of Hemlington Lake and green spaces. Only Cass House Road, Dalwood Court and Hemlington Hall Road are divided between wards, and only in areas where there are breaks in housing. Both wards are forecast to have good electoral equality by 2029.