REVIEW OF COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES IN THE COUNTY BOROUGH OF BRIDGEND

DRAFT PROPOSALS

INTRODUCTION
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS
ASSESSMENT
PROPOSALS
CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT
THE NEXT STEPS

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 We the Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales (the Commission) have completed the first stage of the review of community boundaries in the County Borough of Bridgend as directed by the Minister for Social Justice and Local Government in his Direction to us dated 8 November 2007 (Appendix A).

1.2 The purpose of the review is to consider whether, in the interests of effective and convenient local government, the Commission should propose changes to the present community boundaries. The review is being conducted under the provisions of Section 56(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 (the Act).

1.3 Section 60 of the Act lays down procedural guidelines, which are to be followed in carrying out a review. In line with that guidance we wrote on 14 November 2007 to The Community Councils of Brackla, Bridgend, Cefn Cribwr, Coity Higher, Cornelly, Coychurch Higher, Coychurch Lower, Garw Valley, Laleston, Llangynwyd Lower, Llangynwyd Middle, Maesteg, Merthyr Mawr, Newcastle Higher, Ogmore Valley, Pencoed, Porthcawl, Pyle, Ynysawdre, the Member of Parliament for the local constituency, the Assembly Members for the area and other interested parties to inform them of our intention to conduct the review and to request their preliminary views. We also publicised our intention to conduct the review in local newspapers circulating in the area and asked the Councils to display public notices. Notification of the start of the review and the closing date for representations to be made (24 January 2008) was given on the web sites of both the Commission and Bridgend County Borough Council.

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 We propose that:

the boundary between the Communities of Bridgend, Brackla and Coychurch Lower be realigned to follow the boundary shown in green on the map at Appendix C, and;
the boundary between the Communities of Bridgend and Merthyr Mawr be realigned to follow the boundary shown in green on the map at Appendix D.

3. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE DRAFT PROPOSALS

3.1 We received representations from Bridgend and Porthcawl Town Councils, and Brackla, Coychurch Higher, Garw Valley, Laleston, Llangynwyd, Lower Llangynwyd Middle, Merthyr Mawr, St Brides Minor and Ynysawdre Community Councils. We considered all of these representations carefully before we formulated our proposals. Details of all of these representations can be found at Appendix B.

4. ASSESSMENT

4.1 We have considered suggested changes to community boundaries in the following areas: Bridgend, Brackla, Merthyr Mawr and Coychurch Lower.

Bridgend, Brackla and Coychurch Lower

4.2 We considered the suggestion made by Bridgend Town Council for a change to the boundary between Bridgend and Brackla and Bridgend and Coychurch Lower Communities. In the light of our site visit to the area we formed a view that the present boundary was anomalous in that it divided the Dunraven Business Park and Haywain Court. We noted that Brackla Community Council agreed to the suggested re-alignment of the boundary (no representation was received from Coychurch Lower Community Council).

4.3 The site visit confirmed that the suggested realignment of the community boundary between Brackla, Coychurch Lower and Bridgend followed clearly defined geographical features.

4.4 We are of the view that the suggested change would be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government and therefore propose the change to the boundary between the Community of Bridgend and the Community of Brackla and a change to the boundary between the Community of Bridgend and the Community of Coychurch Lower as illustrated on the map at Appendix C.

Bridgend and Merthyr Mawr

4.5 We noted Bridgend Town Council's suggestion that the boundary between the Communities of Bridgend and Merthyr Mawr should be realigned so as to include Island Farm Road and Island Farm Close within the boundary of Bridgend Town. We also noted the Council's further suggestion to extend the boundary so as take in an area of open land to the west of Island Farm Road to allow for future expansion of the adjacent Science Park. We noted that Merthyr Mawr Community Council however did not consider that any change to their boundary was needed.

4.6 We consider that the current boundary, where it divides the Island Farm estate, to be anomalous and that it would be desirable, in the interests of effective and convenient local government, for the whole of the estate to be in either Bridgend or Merthyr Mawr. We noted that due to its location on the outskirts of Bridgend Town, the Island Farm housing estate appears to have closer links with that community rather than the village and rural areas of Merthyr Mawr. However we are mindful that the transfer of the Island Farm estate from Merthyr Mawr would significantly reduce the electorate of that Community and call into question its continued viability.

4.7 In the course of our consideration of Island Farm estate we considered two possible alternatives for the realignment of the boundary between Merthyr Mawr and Bridgend Town. The first option which we considered would be to transfer the whole of the Island Farm estate from the Community of Merthyr Mawr into the Community of Bridgend Town and to amalgamate the Communities of Merthyr Mawr and Laleston in order to address the implications for the viability of Merthyr Mawr. The second option would be to realign the boundary between the Communities of Bridgend Town and Merthyr Mawr so as to transfer the whole of the Island Farm estate and adjacent land into Merthyr Mawr from Bridgend as shown by the green line on Appendix D. We put these two options to Bridgend Town Council.

4.8 A response was received from Bridgend Town Council stating that they favoured option 1. However, they wished to put forward a further proposal as their preferred course of action: that the electors identified in Island Farm Estate as Merthyr Mawr electors to be transferred to Bridgend Town, the remaining electors to be re-allocated to the most geographically appropriate Community Council namely Bridgend Town or Laleston Community Councils.

4.9 The Bridgend Town Council challenged the premise that Merthyr Mawr Community Council can act sufficiently on behalf of their community in its current capacity and that electors would be best served if the proposed alterations were fully considered.

4.10 We noted that whilst both Laleston and Merthyr Mawr Community Councils supported the suggestion to transfer the whole of Island Farm estate and adjacent land into Merthyr Mawr, Bridgend Town Council did not support this. Bridgend Town Council presented an alternative proposal but did not present any detailed representations to substantiate their statement that Merthyr Mawr Council could not act sufficiently on behalf of their community in its current capacity or give reasons how those electors would be better served. We noted that the alterations proposed by Bridgend Town Council would lead to the abolition of Merthyr Mawr Council. In the absence of detailed information we do not feel able to support the proposal from Bridgend Town Council.

4.11 Accordingly, we are therefore of the view that the suggested change (option 2) would be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government. The division of the Island Farm Estate by the present boundary is not acceptable and the area should be contained within one community. Option 2 will achieve this and in addition will extend the existing boundary of Merthyr Mawr to include a number of additional properties. The revised boundary will also be co-terminous on the eastern side with the county boundary to provide an improved definition of the community. We therefore propose the change to the boundary between the Community of Bridgend and the Community of Merthyr Mawr as illustrated on the map at Appendix D. A site visit was made to the area where it was determined that the suggested boundary followed clearly defined geographical features.

Coychurch Higher and St Bride's Minor

4.12 We considered the suggestion by Coychurch Higher Community Council to include the areas of for Heol Llan and Heol Llaethog within their Community, due to the close proximity of their boundaries and because, according to Coychurch Higher Community Council residents of this area use their Council as a conduit to complain to Bridgend County Borough Council. We have clarified the extent of the area involved and the suggested boundary is shown on the map at Appendix E. We do not consider however that the suggested boundary constitutes a clearer demarcation between the two communities than does the existing boundary. At this stage, from the information that has been provided, we are not satisfied that the change would be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government.

Laleston

4.13 We noted the suggestion from Laleston Community Council that because of inequalities in representation caused by recent housing development, changes should be made to the electoral arrangements of their community. Whilst there appears to us to be merit in reviewing the electoral arrangements of the community we are unable to do so as part of this review.

4.14 This review is being carried out under Section 56 of the Act which allows us to make proposals for the electoral arrangements of a community that are consequential on a change to the community boundary. We have received no suggestions for a change to the boundary of the Laleston Community. In respect of our proposal for a change to the boundary of the Community of Merthyr Mawr we are minded to combine what would remain of that Community with the Community of Laleston (see 6.4 below). If after considering comments received in respect of these our Draft Proposals we remain of this view then there may be scope at that stage to consider any consequential changes to the electoral arrangements of Laleston Community Council. We therefore make no proposals for changes to the electoral arrangements for the Community of Laleston at this stage.

5. PROPOSALS

5.1 Having considered the evidence available to us at this stage of our review we propose that the boundaries of the Communities of Brackla, Bridgend, Coychurch Lower and Merthyr Mawr should be realigned in the area under review to follow the boundaries shown in green on the maps at Appendices C and D.

5.2 Detailed maps to a larger scale showing the proposed new boundaries can be inspected at the offices of Bridgend County Borough Council and at the office of the Commission in Cardiff.

5.3 This Draft report details our proposals for change to the community boundaries in the Bridgend County Borough Council and we would welcome comments on the proposals.

6. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS

6.1 In considering the various changes to the community boundaries it was also necessary for us to take account of the effects on the electoral arrangements for community councils and the principal area, which would result from these changes. This section of our report details our proposals for consequential changes to the electoral arrangements. We would also welcome comments on this aspect of our report. The electoral statistics used in this report were provided by Bridgend County Borough Council.

Community Council Electoral Arrangements

6.2 The Community of Brackla, which is not currently warded, has 8,466 electors represented by 11 councillors (769 electors per councillor). Under our proposals the number of electors in the Community of Brackla will reduce by 11 to 8,455 electors. We are of the view that this decrease as a consequence of the boundary change is not so significant as to require a decrease in the number of councillors representing the Community of Brackla.

6.3 The Community of Coychurch Lower, which is not currently warded, has 1,034 electors represented by 7 councillors (148 electors per councillor). Under our proposals the number of electors in the Community of Coychurch Lower will remain unchanged and so we make no proposals for a change to the electoral arrangements of the Community of Coychurch Lower as a consequence of the proposed community boundary change.

6.4 The Community of Merthyr Mawr, which is not currently warded, has 214 electors represented by 7 councillors (30 electors per councillor). Under our proposals the number of electors in the Community of Merthyr Mawr will increase by 395 to 609 electors.

6.5 The Community of Bridgend is currently divided, for Community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Morfa, Newcastle and Oldcastle. The following table shows the number of electors and councillors for each ward.

Community	Ward	Electors	Councillors	E/C*
Bridgend	Morfa	3,477	6	580
	Newcastle	4,402	7	629
	Oldcastle	3,811	6	635
		11,688	19	616

* Electors per Councillor

6.6 Under the proposals the number of electors in the Oldcastle ward would decrease by 395 to 3,427 (11 transferred from Brackla and 395 transferred to Merthyr Mawr). We noted that no change is necessary in the number of councillors in order to maintain a similar level of representation to that which currently exists within the Community of Bridgend. We do not therefore propose an increase in the number of councillors.

County Borough Council Electoral Arrangements

6.7 The Brackla Electoral Division consists of the Community of Brackla and currently has 8,466 electors represented by 4 Councillors. The proposed change to the boundary between the Communities of Brackla and Bridgend would mean the number of electors in the Brackla Electoral Division would decrease to 8,455.

6.8 The Oldcastle Electoral Division consists of the ward of Oldcastle of the Community of Bridgend and currently has 3,811 electors represented by 2 Councillors. The proposed change to the boundary between the Communities of Brackla and Bridgend and the proposed change to the boundary between Bridgend and Merthyr Mawr would mean the number of electors in the Oldcastle Electoral Division would decrease to 3,427.

6.9 The Bryntirion, Laleston and Merthyr Mawr Electoral Division consists of the Community of Merthyr Mawr and the Laleston/Bryntirion ward of the Community of Laleston and currently has 5,796 electors represented by 2 Councillors. The proposed change to the boundary between the Communities of Bridgend and Merthyr Mawr would mean the number of electors in the Bryntirion, Laleston and Merthyr Mawr Electoral Division would increase to 6,191.

6.10 We are of the view that for all of the above electoral divisions the changes to the number of electors as a consequence of the proposed boundary changes are not so significant as, at this time, to require either an increase or a decrease in the number of councillors representing each electoral division. During the next three years we are due to conduct a review of the electoral arrangements for all principal councils in Wales and we anticipate that we will receive directions from the Welsh Assembly Government to guide us in the conduct of the review. At that time we will look in detail at the electoral arrangements for Bridgend County Borough Council and will take into account any changes that arise from these proposed changes to community boundaries.

7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

7.1 We wish to express our gratitude Bridgend County Borough Council and the Community Councils for their assistance and to all persons and bodies who made representations to us.

8. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT

8.1 All observations on this draft report should be sent to:

The Secretary

Local Government Boundary Commission for Wales

Caradog House

1-6 St Andrews Place

Cardiff

CF10 3BE

not later than 1 December 2008.

9. THE NEXT STEPS

9.1 When we have considered the comments made to us in response to this draft report we shall submit our recommendations to the Welsh Assembly Government in the form of a report and proposals. It will then fall to the Welsh Assembly Government, if it thinks fit, to implement our recommendations either with or without modifications.

MRS S G SMITH LLB (Chair)

Mr P J WOOD (Deputy Chair)

REV. HYWEL MEREDYDD DAVIES BD (Member)

E H LEWIS BSc. DPM FRSA FCIPD (Secretary)

September 2008

29/9/2008