Sunderland final recommendations

North-East Sunderland

Deptford & Hendon The Liberal Democrats and the Labour Group were content with our proposed Deptford & Hendon ward, though the Conservatives expressed concern about the relatively high electoral variance of 10%, citing the area as one containing a large number of unregistered voters. They explained that this was due to the large proportion of Houses of Multiple Occupation, the tenants of which they claimed to be more transient than the general population, as well as the area being one in which there were large numbers of both student and foreign national residents.

Differential levels of registration is not a matter we can consider when determining ward boundaries. However, in our new draft recommendations, the streets bounded by Belvedere Road, Claremont Terrace, Stockton Road and Tunstall Road were included in Deptford & Hendon ward for the sake of electoral equality, as the surrounding wards of Grangetown and Barnes & Thornhill had variances of 10% and 8%, respectively. As our final recommendations for South Sunderland are more closely based on our initial draft recommendations, however, this area now fits comfortably into Tunstall & Humbledon ward. We have therefore not included it in Deptford & Hendon. The ward is consequently left with a variance of 5%, as in our initial draft recommendations.

One resident objected to the proposed ward on the basis that areas which identified as Hendon would not be included in the ward. However, as addressed in previous reports, Hendon is too populous to be represented by a single three-councillor ward. Another resident supported the choice of Villette Road as the boundary between Hendon and Grangetown wards owing to its clarity and there being ‘no obvious boundary between Grangetown and Hendon’, as well as many residents of the ‘long streets’ identifying with Grangetown over Hendon. Councillor Ciaran Morrissey also expressed his approval of Villette Road as a ‘clear, natural boundary’. We have therefore based our final recommendations for this ward on the initial draft recommendations, albeit renamed ‘Deptford & Hendon’, as in our new draft recommendations.

Fulwell, Roker and Southwick We received predominantly positive responses to our new draft recommendations for Fulwell, particularly with regard to the boundary with Southwick ward, which we moved back to Newcastle Road from the railway line. This was made possible by moving Marley Potts from Southwick to Redhouse ward (see paragraph 47) and we have therefore confirmed this boundary in our final recommendations. A Seaburn resident commented that this should be included in the name of Fulwell ward but did not provide supporting evidence.

A number of submissions proposed revised boundaries between Fulwell and Roker wards. The Conservatives proposed Neale Street be used a boundary instead of Browne Road and that the boundary follow the rear of Christal Terrace, Dale Terrace, Coley Terrace and Elvington Street. This was proposed as being simpler for electors and on the basis of Elvington Street being part of Roker - though a Neale Street boundary would still place it in Fulwell ward. We were receptive to the argument for greater simplicity in the interests of effective and convenient local government. However, as Neale Street is a relatively narrow street of facing houses, we felt Browne Road with its predominantly side-on housing would be a more appropriate boundary. Drawing the boundary down the middle of Browne Road would also ensure Elvington Street was included in Roker.

The Labour Group and Liberal Democrats welcomed the proposed boundaries. However, while the Labour Group was strongly against any further changes, the Liberal Democrats proposed extending the Roker boundary east of Mere Knolls Road northward to Chichester Road, as with the current boundaries. The submission states that this proposal has come from further discussions with residents. This proposal, taken in isolation, would result in electoral variances of -7% in Fulwell and 6% in Roker.

A resident wrote to say that both the Southwick Green and Dundas Street areas – which are in our proposed Southwick and Roker wards, respectively – should be in the same ward and that areas east of Church Street are significantly different. The same resident also said Clifton Road and Stanhope Road should not be in Roker ward as they were ‘isolated’ and look to Roker Park rather than Fulwell Library. This was supported by another resident who proposed new boundaries for all three wards, extending Southwick ward across North Bridge Street to Roker Avenue, Church Street North and Dame Dorothy Street. They also proposed adding Rushcliffe to Fulwell and moving the boundary between Fulwell and Roker ward to Neale Street, Mere Knolls Road and Chichester Road. This produced good electoral equality in the wards with -2% for Fulwell, -2% for Roker and 0% for Southwick.

We gave the residents’ proposals careful consideration and recognise the good levels of electoral equality they produce in all three wards. However, we concluded that we had not received sufficient evidence in support of such changes at this late stage of the review, which we must balance against the numerous submissions received providing evidence and support for the boundaries as proposed, including in the previous stages of consultation. We have therefore adopted our new draft recommendations with the minor amendment mentioned in paragraph 52 in our final recommendations.

South Sunderland

The majority of the submissions received in response to our new draft recommendations – 81% – addressed our proposals in this area. The majority of these – 73% – were negative. Objections centred principally on the proposed St. Chad’s ward and the inclusion of Plains Farm, the division of Herrington along the A19, the joining of Silksworth with part of Tunstall, the inclusion of part of Humbledon in Grindon & Thorney Close and the addition of parts of Ashbrooke into Grangetown.

As detailed in our new draft recommendations report, these proposals were formulated in response to objections to elements of our draft recommendations, principally Hollycarrside being split between Grangetown and Ryhope wards and parts of Silksworth being excluded from Farringdon & Silksworth ward. We also considered that there was a lack of clarity over whether East Herrington, Middle Herrington, New Herrington and West Herrington constituted a single community, or whether the A19 functioned as a barrier dividing East Herrington and Middle Herrington from the other two. We consider the responses to our new draft recommendations to be decisive and, with the increased community evidence, have put forward final recommendations that more resemble our initial draft recommendations to better address these objections.

Farringdon & Silksworth and Tunstall & Humbledon As mentioned above, a large proportion of the submissions received objected to our proposed St. Chad’s ward and the pairing of Silksworth with part of Tunstall. Two petitions signed by 168 people also opposed the proposed ward. The objections had a high degree of consistency. Our St. Chad’s ward, by including Plains Farm, Farringdon, West Herrington and East Herrington but excluding Lakeside/Gilley Law, was considered by many to be geographically and communally incoherent, grouping together communities which had little in common.

The inclusion of Plains Farm was particularly criticised. One resident, who had lived there since 1963, said Plains Farm had nothing to with Farringdon and even less with Herrington, identifying more closely with Humbledon and Tunstall, and that North Moor Road served as a boundary. Another resident gave the example of running youth clubs and a seniors’ coffee morning and art club in Plains Farm and Humbledon which did not attract anyone from Farringdon or Herrington. Yet another resident pointed out that Farringdon, Lakeside and Silksworth were easily walkable and were served by the same bus route.

The Conservatives’ submission made similar points, such as the shared community centre and social club for Plains Farm and Humbledon residents. They also pointed to the shared Environmental Services ranger for Farringdon and Silksworth as being indicative of the geographical proximity of the two communities. The Conservatives also voiced many of the objections to the proposed Silksworth ward containing a large part of Tunstall, pointing to Tunstall’s greater affinity and proximity to Humbledon and Ashbrooke as well as the large expanse of land between Silksworth and Tunstall. This was also supported by a petition signed by 350 people. Some submissions also objected to the division of Queen Alexandra Road between four wards. Similar objections were expressed by the Ashbrooke, Grangetown, Ryhope and Silksworth News Facebook group, St Michael’s Residents’ Association, Plains Farm, Humbledon & High Barnes Forum, Plains Farm Residents’ Association and Councillor Dominic McDonough.

Having considered these objections, many of which stated unequivocally that the Herringtons functioned as a single community, we have decided to move away from our new draft recommendations and adapt our initial draft recommendations. Although there was some support from the Conservatives, a resident and Ashbrooke, Grangetown Ryhope and Silksworth News for Hollycarrside being returned to Grangetown ward, as in our draft recommendations, we have ruled this out due to the opposition and evidence received from residents in the previous round of consultation.

Our final recommendations for Tunstall & Humbledon therefore differ slightly from our initial draft recommendations. Whereas the boundary between the ward and Grangetown was previously Ashbrooke Range/Greystoke Avenue, we have moved this slightly west to Glen Path, Queen Alexandra Road and Tunstall Road. We appreciate from the evidence received that these residents identify with Tunstall rather than Grangetown. However, to include them in Tunstall & Humbledon ward would result in a -14% variance in Grangetown. Similarly, including Hollycarrside in Grangetown would result in a -19% variance in Ryhope. Ashbrooke is no longer included in Grangetown ward, however, and we have now included Ashbrooke streets west of Tunstall Road in Tunstall & Humbledon, as previously proposed by the Liberal Democrats. This results in a ward with the same electoral variance as our initial draft recommendations, 0%.

Our Farringdon & Silksworth ward is also based on our initial draft recommendations, albeit with the southern boundary extended to the existing boundary around St. Matthew’s Church, Cambridge Road, Pembroke Avenue, Orr Avenue and Park Avenue. This ward is expected to have an 8% electoral variance by 2029.

Doxford Park, Grangetown and Ryhope Our final recommendations for Doxford Park differ from both our initial and new draft recommendations based on the evidence received. The inclusion of Lakeside/Gilley Law in the ward in our new draft recommendations, which was done on the basis of electoral equality, proved to be unpopular. The Conservative submission pointed out the geographical distance between the area and the rest of Doxford and commented that many residents were elderly and either shopped locally or used buses to shop in Silksworth or Farringdon. The area is now part of our proposed Farringdon & Silksworth ward.

As mentioned above, the southern boundary of our proposed Farringdon & Silksworth ward follows the existing Silksworth ward boundary and, as such, we have included the remaining houses on the west side of Burdon Road, as well as those west of Eltham Road and south of Tunstall Bank/Tunstall Hope Road, in Doxford Park ward. All these properties are included within the boundaries of the existing Doxford ward, and we note that they are well connected to the rest of the ward via Burdon Road.

A final adjustment to our Doxford Park ward has been to move the boundary with Ryhope to the new Rotary Road. This was raised in multiple submissions, from councillors Heather Fagan and Lindsey Leonard and by a resident of Rockcliffe, who questioned why they had been included in Doxford Park ward when the rest of the estate was in Ryhope ward. Our boundary had been drawn around the locations of new developments in the area, the majority of which are on the Doxford side of Rotary Road. However, as pointed out by Councillor Leonard, the road was not yet present on all mapping. We have nonetheless taken these comments into account and drawn the boundary down Rotary Road, placing Rockcliffe in Ryhope ward.

Grindon & Thorney Close We received 67 submissions in response to our proposed Grindon & Thorney Close ward, the majority of which were supportive of keeping Grindon, Hasting Hill, Springwell and Thorney Close estates together. However, we did also receive 14 submissions from residents, Councillor Stephen O’Brien, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats, which opposed the inclusion of part of Humbledon west of Ettrick Grove in the ward. This had been done for reasons of electoral equality, as the area could not be included with the rest of Humbledon Hill in St. Chad’s ward without creating electoral inequality in the ward.

However, as this is no longer necessary, we have instead adopted our initial draft recommendations for Sandhill (renamed Grindon & Thorney Close) with a very minor amendment to the boundary with Barnes & Thornhill ward so that all of the Barnes Park Extension is included in Barnes & Thornhill. This was in response to a resident’s submission about the division of Barnes Park and does not affect any electors. Our final recommendations for Grindon & Thorney Close ward maintain the unity of Grindon, Hasting Hill, Springwell and Thorney Close estates.

Coalfield

Herrington & Newbottle, Hetton, Houghton North, Houghton South & Hetton Downs and Penshaw & Shiney Row We received 144 submissions in response to our new draft recommendations for the Coalfield area, a large number of which opposed the use of the A19 as a ward boundary to divide East Herrington and Middle Herrington on one side and New Herrington and West Herrington on the other. This included a petition signed by 67 people.

Two residents pointed out that the two sides of the A19 are accessible on foot via public footpaths and via public transport. An overwhelming number of submissions made also described Herrington as a single community. We have carefully considered the evidenced received and have been persuaded that reverting to our initial draft recommendations for the Coalfield area in our final recommendations will provide a better balance of our statutory criteria. Our final recommendations differ only in that we have carried over the names ‘Penshaw & Shiney Row’ and ‘Herrington & Newbottle’ from our new draft recommendations for Shiney Row and Herrington, respectively. We consider these ward names to be more representative of local communities.