Swindon final recommendations

South Swindon

Broadgreen, Kingshill, Old Town & Lawn, Queen’s Park and Walcot

The Conservatives supported our draft recommendations for these wards, noting upon reflection that the railway line which was crossed in their proposed Railway Village ward is a dividing feature and that our proposed wards are ‘more sensible from both a community and numbers perspective’.

The Labour Group identified three concerns with the Commission’s draft recommendations in this area and put forward a revised warding pattern for South Swindon to address these. It identified these issues as the splitting of the Railway Village around Emlyn Square, the splitting of the Walcot community into separate wards, and the geographical size of the proposed Croft & Lawn ward.

We received 14 submissions as part of a campaign organised by the Old Town Residents’ Association, which included many responses from members of the public in Old Town. These comments noted that residents of Old Town identify it as an ‘urban village’ featuring many amenities within walking distance of Old Town Hill. They noted that the area is distinct from other nearby communities and would ideally sit entirely within one ward, but acknowledged that this could prove difficult to achieve alongside good electoral equality. Residents were dissatisfied with the draft proposals, which split the Old Town area into three separate wards; they also noted that existing boundaries split the area between two wards. They proposed including as much as possible of Old Town Hill and surrounding roads (including Cricklade Street, Croft Road, Eastcott Road, Marlborough Road, Pipers Way, Prospect Hill, Victoria Road and Westlecot Road) within one Old Town ward.

We received eight submissions regarding the division of Swindon’s Railway Village between two wards in the draft recommendations. These included comments from seven residents as well as a joint submission on behalf of the Royal Agricultural University and Swindon Heritage Preservation. These respondents noted that the proposed boundary between Kingshill & Okus and Queen’s Park, through Emlyn Square, split the Railway Village – a historical neighbourhood that Swindon Borough Council has identified for revitalisation and promotion as part of its Swindon Heritage Action Zone (HAZ). They suggested that all of the Railway Village should fall within one ward, ideally Queen’s Park, such that the community’s essential elements (including the GWR Park, the Health Hydro and the Parish Church of St Mark’s) are not divided between two separate borough wards.

The Swindon Civic Voice made a submission advocating for a more compact Central ward rather than the larger proposed Queen’s Park ward. It suggested Princes Street and Rodbourne Road as boundaries for this ward, which it argued would be more representative of the modern character of central Swindon.

The Eastcott Community Organisation proposed including the name Eastcott in a Swindon Borough ward. It suggested that the name of Eastcott has historical and cultural significance as a place within Swindon.

A resident objected to the inclusion of Walcot West in the proposed Croft & Lawn ward, stating that this area has more in common with Queen’s Park. A Kingshill resident suggested including this area in the same ward as Queen’s Park.

South Swindon Parish Council made a submission principally concerned with the proposed parish warding arrangements for the parish as set out in the draft recommendations. It suggested that all parish wards for South Swindon should be precisely matched with borough wards, rather than having multiple parish wards falling within one borough ward. It also suggested tweaks to proposed borough wards so that Broadgreen and the Railway Village can be included wholly within wards rather than split between wards.

Councillor Herring of South Swindon Parish Council suggested that Bilborough Drive (and surrounding residential roads) should be included in the proposed Parks ward, as access and connections for the area are via Whitbourne Avenue rather than via routes through Walcot. He also identified two communities which were divided between wards in the draft proposals. These were the Railway Village, as mentioned above, and Broadgreen. For the latter, he noted that streets north of Manchester Road, as far as Wellington Street, are considered to fall within the Broadgreen area. He proposed extending the Broadgreen boundary west to Beales Close and north of Fleming Way and extending the Queen’s Park boundary west to Park Lane.

Councillor Firmin of South Swindon Parish Council made a submission providing further observations in relation to his comments during the initial consultation. He noted that our evidence for dividing Walcot East and Walcot West rested largely on the strength of the boundary at the A4259 (Queen’s Drive), but that this road was no more significant than the road north of Walcot: the A4312 (Drake’s Way). He additionally noted that ‘there is a very longstanding pairing of Walcot East and Walcot West in the same ward’ and that access to Walcot West is more typical at Drove Road due to a bus gate at the Upham Road end of the neighbourhood. He noted, as in submissions relating to Old Town, that the area is split between three proposed wards; he also noted while ‘there are different views as to what constitutes the full extent of Old Town, some of which exceed the maximum number of voters for a three-member ward, there are better options’ to keep as much of the community as possible across no more than two wards. He additionally noted a split of Broadgreen and the Railway Village, both as described above. He echoed the comments of South Swindon Parish Council regarding the alignment of parish wards to borough wards.

A member of the public made proposed alternative wards here in place of Croft & Lawn and Wroughton & Wichelstowe wards. The submission suggested three two-member wards: Lawn & Old Walcot, Wroughton and Wichelstowe & Croft.

In light of the significant level of response received regarding the division of Old Town and the Railway Village in this area, we are proposing an amended warding arrangement which we consider better reflects local community ties. It is partially based on the revised pattern put forward by the Labour Group, with adjustments to reflect comments on local communities made by Councillors Firmin and Herring.

We propose a three-member Old Town & Lawn ward comprising a significant element of Old Town, as well as the areas of Lawn, Croft, East Wichel and Okus. We consider that this ward will better serve residents of Old Town who expressed their dissatisfaction with ward boundaries that split the community between three wards. We consider that the largest extent of Old Town, as described in some submissions, is too large for a three-member ward. We consider that our final recommendations here include more of Old Town in one ward than the existing wards or draft recommendations, which include boundaries at or near Devizes Road, Newport Street and Wood Street, and that they better facilitate representative adjacent wards.

We propose a three-member Queen’s Park ward similar to the draft proposals but with adjustments along three of its boundaries to reflect community evidence received in those areas. At the northeast of the ward, we propose transferring residential roads east of Wellington Street to Broadgreen such that the Broadgreen community is undivided within one ward. At the northwest of the ward, we propose transferring roads east of Park Lane into Queen’s Park such that the entirety of the Railway Village neighbourhood falls within Queen’s Park ward. At the south of the ward, we propose running the boundary behind houses along Bath Road. We note that our proposed boundary here includes only small sections of Eastcott Road and Victoria Road in Old Town & Lawn, even though these areas were identified as parts of the Old Town community; however, we consider that with a forecast electorate variance of -8%, it is not appropriate to transfer any additional areas of Queen’s Park into Old Town & Lawn without resulting in a ward with poor electoral equality here.

We propose a two-member Kingshill ward which transfers the southern elements of the Okus neighbourhood and parts of Old Town to Old Town & Lawn, and which transfers the Railway Village area east of Park Lane to Queen’s Park.

We propose a two-member Broadgreen ward including roads east of Wellington Street, as described above, and with a southern boundary of Drake’s Way at its east end. We were persuaded by the comments of Councillor Firmin, who noted that this road was as significant a boundary as Queen’s Drive which we previously proposed to divide Walcot East and Walcot West. We were not persuaded by the suggestions of Councillor Herring to move the boundary to Beales Close, as we considered that area to be more similar to central Queen’s Park. We do not think the Labour Group’s proposed name of County Ground is as reflective of the ward area as Broadgreen.

We propose a two-member Walcot ward including both Walcot East and Walcot West neighbourhoods. As noted above, we were persuaded by Councillor Firmin’s comments on the links between these areas, as well as the strength of Drake’s Way as a northern boundary. We were additionally persuaded by the Labour Group’s comment regarding the large geographical size of the proposed Croft & Lawn ward, and consider that aligning Walcot West to Walcot East allows for more effective and convenient local government for both the Old Town & Lawn and Walcot wards.

We were not persuaded by the suggestions of the Swindon Civic Voice, as we consider that the Central ward it proposed would not reflect the alternative evidence we received from other respondents. We additionally consider that Queen’s Park is a more representative name for the larger ward in our final recommendations.

We note the comments of the Eastcott Community Organisation regarding the inclusion of Eastcott in a ward name. The area of Eastcott is proposed to be included across three wards, and we are not persuaded to include the name in only one of those wards.

We do not consider the two suggestions in Walcot West and Kingshill, which both requested being included in Queen’s Park ward, are persuasive. There is no reasonably sized ward which could accommodate these areas together. We are also not persuaded by the arrangement proposed here featuring a Wichelstowe & Croft ward; we consider that such a ward divides the Old Town community in a way that would not reflect the community identity of the area that we have been told about.

We consider that Queen’s Park ward as included in the Labour Group’s revised pattern divides Old Town in an unsatisfactory way. We consider that our proposed northern boundary of Old Town & Lawn, which runs along Church Road and Union Row, and above The Lawn, allows for more of Old Town to be included in one ward.

We note the comments from South Swindon Parish Council, and have put forward parish warding arrangements aligned to our final recommendation wards as it requested. We are grateful for the detailed comments of Councillors Herring and Firmin, which acknowledged the concerns of respondents in the first consultation and proposed alternatives that we have adopted in our final proposals.

Parks

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported our proposals here and we received no other comments.

As noted above, Councillor Herring of South Swindon Parish Council suggested including the Bilborough Drive area in Parks ward rather than in a Walcot ward.

We consider that Bilborough Drive (and surrounding roads) is better accessed from Parks ward; however, including this area in that ward would result in Parks ward having a forecast electorate 17% greater than the average for Swindon by 2030. We consider this too great of an imbalance to include in our proposals.

We therefore recommend a two-member Parks ward as previously proposed as part of our final recommendations.

Stratton, Covingham and Liden

Badbury Park, Eldene & Liden and Covingham & Nythe

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported the draft recommendations for these wards. One local resident supported the proposed Badbury Park, Eldene & Liden ward, noting that ‘these areas share school and health provisions and would suit forming one community’. Another resident agreed with the pairing of Eldene & Liden but opposed the inclusion of Badbury Park.

A resident of Covingham & Nythe supported the draft proposals for the ward, noting that the existing warding arrangement in this part of Swindon is confusing to residents and that the suggested draft pattern is an improvement.

Councillor Firmin, of South Swindon Parish Council and whose submission has been addressed in the preceding section of this report, additionally raised concerns regarding the Meadow Way area of Badbury Park which lies on the eastern side of the A419. Although the area is currently in both Ridgeway ward and South Swindon parish, this is an anomaly due to the creation of South Swindon as a parish (2017) postdating the most recent ward boundary review of Swindon Borough Council (2015). As such, we are confirming our draft recommendations to include Meadow Way in Badbury Park, Eldene & Liden ward to avoid the creation of an unviable parish ward here. Unviable parish wards are those which we consider would have too few electors (typically fewer than 100) to be effectively represented at parish level.

We propose to retain the Badbury Park, Eldene & Liden and Covingham & Nythe wards as outlined in our draft recommendations, in light of the support for this pattern. We do not consider that Badbury Park can be better represented in an alternative warding pattern with good electoral equality.

Lower Stratton and Upper Stratton

The Conservatives supported the draft recommendation Stratton wards. The Labour Group reiterated its preference for Barnes Road and Fitzwarren Court to be included in Upper Stratton rather than Lower Stratton, citing greater connectivity to the new housing in that area via Kingsdown Road to Upper Stratton rather than the A419 to Lower Stratton. Councillor Vallender, of the existing St Margaret & South Marston ward, made a submission in support of the draft recommendations which made a division between the urban Lower Stratton area and the rural community of South Marston.

Three residents living in the Merton Avenue area of Stratton St Margaret parish supported the draft recommendations, which transferred the area from the existing Gorse Hill & Pinehurst ward into the proposed Upper Stratton ward, in line with local parish boundaries.

Two residents suggested that Constable Road should be included in Upper Stratton ward, with another suggesting that all of Headlands Grove should also be included. Although we acknowledge that this allows for greater internal access within the ward, due to a parish ward boundary, any small adjustments here would result in unviable parish wards and therefore we cannot amend ward boundaries accordingly. As noted above, we consider that a parish ward would be unviable if it contains too few electors, as is the case for Constable Road.

One resident proposed using the railway line as a boundary between the Covingham and Stratton areas but did not provide evidence for this suggestion. This submission also suggested names of Stratton St Margaret and Stratton St Philip.

A member of the public proposed transferring roads between these two wards for access reasons. Specifically, they suggested including Coronel Close, Oak Garden, Sanders Close and Windbrook Meadow in Lower Stratton, where they have greater links. They also proposed transferring most of the area south of the railway line (identified as Greenbridge) from Lower Stratton to Covingham & Nythe with the rest of that area transferred to Broadgreen.

We consider that the minor amendments between Lower Stratton and Upper Stratton around Coronel Close are appropriate, as they allow for more effective and convenient local government and good electoral equality. We are not persuaded that the proposals at Greenbridge reflect community ties, as they require a ward which crosses the Stratton parish boundary at Broadgreen.

Although we have not received any submissions specifically regarding Barnes Road and Fitzwarren Court, upon further reflection we consider that the Labour Group’s proposals from the initial warding pattern here do allow for more effective and convenient local government. The Kingsdown Road (B4141) appears to provides more direct access to the nearest communities within Stratton St Margaret parish, including the similar new development at Woodland Close. In contrast, we consider that the Highworth Road (A361) does not provide as strong a link to the further Lower Stratton area.

As part of our final recommendations, we therefore recommend Lower Stratton and Upper Stratton wards largely in line with our draft proposals but with two small amendments: the transfer of roads around Coronel Close (as described above) from Upper Stratton to Lower Stratton, and the transfer of Barnes Road and Fitzwarren Court from Lower Stratton into Upper Stratton. We consider that these ward names are the most appropriate descriptors for these respective areas.

West Swindon

Lydiard, Freshbrook & Toothill and Shaw & Westlea

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported the draft recommendation wards in West Swindon, as the proposals there aligned with their respective original submissions. The Labour Group did suggest that Lydiard, Freshbrook & Toothill should be renamed to the more succinct Lydiard Park, as the ward area covers the whole of Lydiard Park, ‘a major Swindon landmark and facility’.

We additionally received five submissions from local residents concerning these wards. Three of these were in support of the draft recommendations, noting that Westlea will now fall entirely within one ward. One submission noted that the proposed wards cover large areas that are not always geographically well-linked, but accepted that in most cases there is not a better alternative. One submission proposed names of West Swindon North and West Swindon South for these two wards, to make them more inclusive and less cumbersome.

We consider that, in light of the degree of support expressed for boundaries here, the draft recommendation boundaries for these wards should be retained in our final recommendations. We do not consider that there is sufficient evidence to alter the names of the wards; we consider that Lydiard Park is not representative of the various neighbourhoods that comprise Lydiard, Freshbrook & Toothill ward. We also consider that West Swindon North and West Swindon South do not provide any more accurate a description of the ward areas than the proposed names.

We therefore recommend retaining Lydiard, Freshbrook & Toothill and Shaw & Westlea wards as proposed.

Haydon Wick

Haydon Wick and Priory Vale

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported the draft proposal wards for Haydon Wick parish. Haydon Wick Parish Council also made a submission in support of the draft recommendations and reiterating its position in the initial consultation to favour a pattern with two three-member wards for the parish.

A member of the public made a submission advocating for including parts of Haydon Wick parish in St Andrews wards to the north; specifically they suggested including Oakhurst in St Andrews West and Abbeymeads in St Andrews East.

We do not consider that the proposal described above reflects Haydon Wick Parish Council’s comments in both consultations, which identified the parish area as a strong community best represented by two three-member wards coterminous with the parish boundaries. We therefore propose confirming the Haydon Wick and Priory Vale wards as outlined in our draft recommendations, as final.

St Andrews

St Andrews East and St Andrews West & Tadpole

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported the draft proposal wards for St Andrews parish. St Andrews Parish Council also made a submission in support of the draft recommendations, noting that those recommendations followed the original submission it made during the initial consultation.

Two residents of Abbeymeads noted that the area south of Thamesdown Drive (A4198) had stronger links to Haydon Wick than to St Andrews.

We received several submissions from residents of St Andrews West. Two of these respondents suggested using Tadpole Lane as the boundary between the two St Andrews wards, as originally proposed by the Labour Group during the initial consultation, noting that the area felt distinct from the rest of the parish. Six respondents commented in support of the draft recommendation boundaries but all of these suggested that the Tadpole area (also referred to as Tadpole Farm and Tadpole Garden Village) represents a significant community within the ward, one which is well understood by local residents. They noted that changing the name would ‘follow the naming and language conventions of the locals’. One resident supported the draft boundaries with no comments on the names of the wards.

We propose retaining the boundaries between the two St Andrews wards as outlined in our draft recommendations. As noted above, we are not persuaded by the proposals of the member of the public who argued for wards crossing the parish boundary between Haydon Wick and St Andrews. We consider that there is strong local evidence to include Tadpole in the name of the western ward, and we are therefore recommending names of St Andrews East and St Andrews West & Tadpole for these two wards.

Rural North

Blunsdon, Highworth and South Marston

The Conservatives and the Labour Group both supported the draft proposed wards for the rural north of Swindon.

Highworth Town Council proposed that all of Highworth parish be included within the two-member ward for the town, including Hampton Turn and Sevenhampton. One resident also suggested including both Hampton Turn and Sevenhampton in Highworth ward, noting that they shared more common interests with the town than with either of the more distant settlements at South Marston and Stanton Fitzwarren. Councillor Apps of Highworth Town Council made a submission in support of the draft recommendations.

South Marston Parish Council supported the draft recommendations, noting that a single-member ward allows for a clear link between the councillor and the community. It also noted that this arrangement would better suit the management of the New Eastern Villages, a large incoming housing development which fall within the ward’s boundaries.

Councillors Tomlin and Tucker of Stanton Fitzwarren Parish Council both made submissions suggesting that Stanton Fitzwarren is better aligned with villages to its north, including Blunsdon and Hannington, rather than with South Marston. A resident of Stanton Fitzwarren echoed these views and felt that the A361 functioned as a logical boundary between the village and the South Marston area.

We note the comments of Highworth Town Council and the Stanton Fitzwarren parish councillors, and consider that these suggestions would allow for wards with greater community ties for both Blunsdon and Highworth wards. Although a Highworth ward coterminous with Highworth Town Council would have a forecast variance of 12%, we consider that the links of Hampton Turn and Sevenhampton are much stronger with Highworth than with villages to the south. Including Stanton Fitzwarren in Blunsdon rather than in South Marston would leave both wards at an acceptable forecast variance, and although the boundary between these parishes, which would become the ward boundary, does divide the South Marston industrial estate we note that it does not impact electors.

We therefore propose amendments to these three wards. We propose a Blunsdon ward comprising the parishes of Blunsdon, Castle Eaton, Hannington and Stanton Fitzwarren, a Highworth ward comprising Highworth and Inglesham parishes and a South Marston ward coterminous with South Marston parish.