REVIEW OF COMMUNITY BOUNDARIES IN THE COUNTY BOROUGH OF CAERPHILLY

DRAFT PROPOSALS

1. INTRODUCTION
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO DRAFT PROPOSALS
4. ASSESSMENT
5. PROPOSALS
6. CONSEQUENTIAL ARRANGEMENTS
7. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
8. RESPONSES TO THIS REPORT
9. 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 Caerphilly as directed by the Minister for Social Justice and Local Government in his Direction to us dated 17 September 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 3 October 2007 to the Community Councils of Aber Valley, Argoed, Bargoed, Bedwas Trethomas and Machen, Blackwood, Caerphilly Town, Darran Valley, Gelligaer, Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, Maesycwmmer, Nelson, New Tredegar, Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn, Rudry, Rhymney and Van, the Members of Parliament for the local constituencies, 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 (6 December 2007) was given on the Commission's web site.

2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

2.1 We propose that:

• the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly Town and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn be realigned to follow the green line shown on the maps at Appendices C and D;
• a new Cwrt Rawlins Community Ward be created within the Community of Caerphilly as shown on the map at Appendix E;
• the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly and Van be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendix F and that the boundary between the Caerphilly Community Wards of Tonyfelin and Twyn be realigned to follow the blue line at Appendix F;
• the boundary between the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn and the Community of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendix J;
• the boundary between the Trecenydd and Energlyn Wards of the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn be realigned to follow the blue line at Appendix K;
• the boundary between the Community of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and the Community of Caerphilly and be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendix L;
• the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, Maesycwmmer and Bedwas Trethomas and Machen be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendices M and N;
• the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen, Blackwood and Pontllanfraith be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendix S;
• the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Maesycwmmer be realigned to follow the green line shown on the Map at Appendix T;
• the boundary between the Communities of Maesycwmmer and Pontllanfraith be realigned to follow the green line shown on the map at Appendix U;
• the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest be realigned to follow the green line shown on the maps at Appendices V and W; and 
• the Community of Risca should be divided to form two new Communities of Risca West and Risca East as shown on the maps at Appendices X and Y.

In addition we have considered, but at this stage make no recommendations for, the following suggestions:

• three new wards be formed from the area of the existing Caerphilly Community wards of Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin (map at Appendix G);
• changes to the boundary between the Communities of Crumlin and Penmaen (maps at Appendicies O and P);
• a change to the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Argoed (map at Appendix Q); and
• a change to the boundary between the Gelligaer Community wards of Cefn Hengoed and Tiryberth (map at Appendix Z).

3. REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED PRIOR TO DRAFT PROPOSALS

3.1 We received representations from Caerphilly County Borough Council; Aber Valley Community Council; Argoed Community Council; Blackwood Town Council; Caerphilly Town Council; Gelligaer Community Council; Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council; Maesycwmmer Community Council; Nelson Community Council; Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn Community Council; Rhymney Community Council; and two residents. 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 and community ward boundaries in the following areas: Argoed; Bedwas Trethomas and Machen; Blackwood; Caerphilly Town; Cefn Fforest; Crumlin; Gelligaer; Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant; Maesycwmmer; Pengam; Penmaen; Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn; Pontllanfraith; Risca; and Van.

Caerphilly and Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn

4.2 Caerphilly Town Council and Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn Community Council both suggested that the boundary between their Communities be realigned to follow the Nantgarw Road thereby transferring part of the Sunningdale Estate from Caerphilly into Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn as shown at Appendix C and part of the Cwrt Rawlins Estate from Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn into Caerphilly Town as shown at Appendix D. We consider that the suggested realignment of the boundary follows a clearly defined line and resolved the anomalies of the existing boundary, which divided the residential areas of the Cwrt Rawlins and Sunningdale Estates. We also note that the suggestion was supported by both Community Councils. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn be realigned as shown at Appendices C and D.

4.3 Caerphilly Town Council considered that should the suggested realignment of the boundary between their Community and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn be adopted then the warding arrangements for their Community would need to be reviewed as the existing Watford Ward would double in size due to the inclusion of the Cwrt Rawlins Estate. The Council suggested the formation of a new ward named Cwrt Rawlins, which would include the Cwrt Rawlins Estate together with parts of the existing Watford and Castle wards.

4.4 We consider that the realignment of the boundary between the existing Wards of Watford and Castle has merit in its own right as the existing boundary is clearly anomalous and the inclusion of the Cwrt Rawlins estate within the Watford Ward would exacerbate this anomaly. We note the considerable increase in the number of electors in the Watford Ward which would result from the inclusion of the Cwrt Rawlins Estate and therefore we find merit in the Council's suggestion that a new Cwrt Rawlins Ward should be created. We therefore propose the formation of a new Ward comprising the area of the Cwrt Rawlins Estate transferred from the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn together with parts of the existing Wards of Watford and Castle as shown on the map at Appendix E. We propose that this new ward be named Cwrt Rawlins as suggested by the Council. Details of the proposed electoral arrangements for Caerphilly Town can be found at 6.3 below.

Caerphilly and Van

4.5 In the course of the review we noted that there appeared to be an anomaly in the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly and Van. The existing boundary divides the Castle Court Shopping Centre and surrounding buildings. We note that Caerphilly County Borough Council and Caerphilly Town Council had no objection to the suggested change. We therefore propose that the boundary between Caerphilly Town and Van be realigned as shown at Appendix F. As a consequence of this change it appears to us to be desirable to make a minor realignment to the boundary between the Caerphilly Community wards of Tonyfelin and Twyn as shown by the blue line at Appendix F.

Caerphilly

4.6 Caerphilly Town Council suggested that the warding arrangements for the area of the existing Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin Wards of their Community be changed to address an increase in electors in the existing Parcyfelin ward and an anomaly in the boundary between existing Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin Wards. The Council suggested the formation of three new Wards called Parcyfelin, Pontypandy and Tonyfelin as shown on the map at Appendix G. 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. This review is being carried out under Section 54 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 Caerphilly Community that impacts on the electoral arrangements of the Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin wards and do not propose any such change. We therefore make no proposals for changes to the electoral arrangements for the Community of Caerphilly in respect of the Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin wards. A review of community electoral arrangements may be carried out by the principal council of the area under Section 57(4) of the Act and we recommend that Caerphilly County Borough Council consider undertaking such a review.

Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn

4.7 Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council have made two suggestions for an area of the adjoining Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn to be transferred into Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant. The Council put forward these proposals on the basis that the existing boundary divided the Energlyn Estate. Their first proposal is to extend the community boundary southward following Heol Las and Heol Pwllypant as shown at Appendix H. The Council put forward an alternative proposal to extend the boundary further south to the bottom of Court Road as shown at Appendix I.

4.8 We received an alternative suggestion from Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn Community Council that their council area should be extended northwards to include the northern part of the Energlyn Estate currently in the Pwll-y-Pant ward of the Community of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant as shown at Appendix J.

4.9 We consider that the existing boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn is clearly anomalous because part of its line is undefined and divides several properties on the Energlyn Estate. We consider that Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council's proposal shown at Appendix H has some merit as it follows a clearly defined line thereby resolving the anomaly noted above. The Council's alternative proposal at Appendix I appeared to have merit on the same grounds. A site visit to the area revealed however that the road that constitutes the western part of the suggested boundary was blocked by a permanent barrier leaving the last 13 houses at the southern point of the suggested boundary without a direct road link to the area which would be transferred into Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant. We also considered that whilst the boundaries proposed by Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council would be an improvement on the existing boundary they still left the Energlyn Estate divided between Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn.

4.10 We considered that the proposal put forward by Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn Community Council shown at Appendix J had merit in that it combined the whole of the Energlyn Estate within one community and that it was also clearly defined as it follows in part the railway line running through the existing Pwll-y-Pant Ward. The suggested realignment also had the advantage that it followed in part the existing line of the boundary between the Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant wards. We noted that the railway line appeared to divide the south western part of the Pwll-y-Pant ward and this anomaly would also be resolved by Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn's suggested realignment. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn be realigned as shown by the green line at Appendix J.

Penyrheol Trecenydd Energlyn

4.11 Penyrheol, Trecenydd Energlyn Community Council suggested a change to the community ward boundary between the Energlyn and Trecenydd Wards as shown on the Map at Appendix K. We noted that the suggested realignment of the boundary to include Mill Close and Diamond Close within the Energlyn ward was clearly defined and was an improvement on the existing Ward boundary, which divided several properties. We have already proposed significant changes to the boundaries of both the Energlyn and Trecenydd Wards as detailed at paragraphs 4.2 and 4.10 above which would result in a decrease in the number of electors in the Trecenydd Ward from 4,412 to 3,964 and an increase in electors for the Energlyn Ward from 1,369 to 1,626. We consider these to be significant changes to the electorate and will therefore be considering consequential changes to the electoral arrangements for the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn at paragraph 6.5 below.

Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, and Caerphilly

4.12 Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council suggested that an area of the Community of Caerphilly containing two properties on Heol y Gedr off Corbetts Lane as shown at Appendix L be transferred to Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant. We considered that this proposal had merit, as the area in question appeared to be a continuity of an adjacent area of properties in the Pwll-y-Pant ward of Llanbradach. The area concerned was also separated from Parcyfelin ward of Caerphilly by the A468 Road. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Caerphilly be realigned as shown at Appendix L.

Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, Maesycwmmer, and Bedwas Trethomas and Machen

4.13 Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant Community Council suggested that an area of the Community of Maesycwmmer together with an area of the Community of Bedwas Trethomas and Machen to the West of the Llanbradach by-pass be transferred to Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant. We consider that the Council's proposal to use the Llanbradach by-pass as the boundary between these three communities had merit as the by-pass clearly separates the areas in question from the rest of the Communities of Maesycwmmer and Bedwas Trethomas and Machen. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Maesycwmmer be realigned as shown at Appendix M and that the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant and Bedwas Trethomas and Machen be realigned as shown at Appendix N.

Penmaen and Crumlin

4.14 A resident of Oakdale suggested that the part of the settlement of Croespenmaen currently in the Community of Crumlin should be transferred into the Community of Penmaen as shown at Appendix O. We considered that this proposal had some merit as the existing boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Crumlin divides the settlement of Croespenmaen. Following a site visit to the area however it was noted that the boundary suggested by the resident was undefined in several places and in our view did not constitute a satisfactory boundary. We have been unable to determine where a satisfactory boundary could be drawn to achieve the inclusion of Croespenmaen as a whole within either Penmaen or Crumlin.

4.15 We received a representation from Caerphilly County Borough Council who objected to the proposed realignment of the boundary to transfer the whole of Croespenmaen into the Community of Penmaen. The Council suggested a smaller realignment to the boundary to the north west of Croespenmaen as shown at Appendix P.

4.16 From the information that has been provided to us at this stage we are unable to recommend that the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Crumlin be realigned to transfer the whole of Croespenmaen into Penmaen, as we have not been able to determine that the change would be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government in terms of community of interest, service delivery, use of facilities etc. We would welcome further comment on this suggested change.

4.17 The suggested realignment of the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Crumlin put forward by Caerphilly County Borough Council would appear to us to have merit as the area involved has some affinity with similar areas in the Community of Penmaen and the realignment of the boundary is clearly defined. However, from the information that has been provided to us at this stage we are unable to recommend that the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Crumlin be realigned to transfer the area indicated by the Council from Crumlin into Penmaen, as we have not been able to be satisfied that the change would be desirable in the interests of effective and convenient local government in terms of community of interest, service delivery, use of facilities etc. We would welcome further comment on this suggested change.

Penmaen and Argoed

4.18 A resident of Oakdale suggested that the settlement of Manmoel be transferred from the Community of Argoed into the Community of Penmaen as shown at Appendix Q. We consider that this proposal may have some merit as the Community of Argoed is divided by the River Sirhowy and it appears that the residents of Manmoel cannot easily travel directly to the western part of the Community. It is also apparent that there is a reasonably convenient road link between Manmoel and Penmaen. We noted that Argoed Community Council and a local community councillor objected to the suggested change and in particular their concerns regarding Heads of the Valley funding for Argoed Community and various community projects involving Manmoel which had been undertaken in Argoed Community. We also noted Caerphilly County Borough Council did not support the suggested change.

4.19 From the information that has been provided to us at this stage we are unable to recommend the suggested change, as we are not satisfied that the change would be desirable in the interests effective and convenient local government in terms of community of interest, service delivery, use of facilities etc. We would welcome further comment on this suggested change.

Penmaen, Blackwood and Pontllanfraith

4.20 A resident of Oakdale suggested that the settlement of Woodfieldside be transferred to the Community of Blackwood from the Community of Penmaen. The suggested boundary is shown on the map at Appendix R. We also received correspondence from both Caerphilly County Borough Council and Blackwood Town Council who both pointed out that the River Sirhowy formed a long-standing and natural boundary between the two Communities. Caerphilly County Borough Council also considered that Blackwood already had a comparatively large electorate and would not benefit from the additional electorate resulting from such a change. They considered that, if the change were to go ahead, the elected representatives for the Community of Blackwood might become overburdened.

4.21 We consider that the suggested change has some merit in that the settlement of Woodfieldside is divided from the Community of Penmaen by the Sirhowy Enterprise Way and there are road links between Woodfieldside and the Community of Blackwood. We also consider that the suggested boundary could be slightly improved by being extended along the road southwards to transfer a small area of the Community of Pontllanfraith into the Community of Blackwood. This minor change to the suggested boundary would not involve any electors. We are satisfied that the suggested change, with our amendment, would not lead to any significant increase in the responsibilities of councillors nor cause them to be overburdened, as feared by the County Borough Council. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Blackwood and Pontllanfraith and Blackwood be realigned as shown at Appendix S and that the area indicated should be transferred into the Blackwood South Ward.

Pengam and Maesycwmmer

4.22 In the course of the review we noted that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Maesycwmmer was misaligned at Dol Maes on Summerfield Hall Lane. The existing boundary divided the land surrounding Dol Maes rather than following the periphery. Maesycwmmer Community Council had no objection to this minor adjustment to the boundary. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Maesycwmmer be realigned as shown at Appendix T.

Maesycwmmer and Pontllanfraith

4.23 In the course of the review we noted that the boundary between the Communities of Maesycwmmer and Pontllanfraith had become undefined due to developments and could be realigned to follow the clearly defined line of adjacent roads as shown at Appendix U. We noted that Maesycwmmer Community Council had no objection to the northern part of the suggested boundary realignment but objected to the transfer of the five properties south of the A472. The Council considered that the residents of these properties strongly identified with Maesycwmmer.

4.24 It appears to us that the five properties south of the A472 are somewhat detached from the built-up area of Maesycwmmer and that there seems little scope for future development in the vicinity. We note that the area of the five properties is adjacent to the Bryn area of the Community of Pontllanfraith and that there is a footbridge across the A472, which connects these two areas. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Pontllanfraith and Maesycwmmer be realigned as shown at Appendix U.

Pengam and Cefn Fforest

4.25 In the course of the review we noted that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest was anomalous in the vicinity of Borfa Place where it divided a row of 10 properties leaving the end two properties in the Community of Pengam. Caerphilly County Borough Council offered no objection to this minor change in the existing boundary. We therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest be realigned as shown at Appendix V.

4.26 We also noted that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest was anomalous in the area shown on the map at Appendix W. It appeared to us that the substantial number of properties in the Community of Pengam were part of the adjacent development in the Community of Cefn Fforest which had extended across the community boundary. Caerphilly County Borough Council said that local members supported this change to the boundary but pointed out that the current wards of Cefn Fforest and Pengam were policed from different police areas, which could lead to different levels of service being provided to the area. We do not consider that such a possibility is sufficient reason to refrain from addressing what appears to us to be a clear anomaly in the community boundary and we therefore propose that the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest be realigned as shown at Appendix W.

Risca

4.27 In the course of the review we noted that the Community of Risca, which is un-warded, has a long history of being divided into the two local government electoral divisions of Risca East and Risca West. Since the Community of Risca does not have a community council it would not be possible, as part of any review of community electoral arrangements, to create Risca East and Risca West community wards to be co-terminous with the local government electoral divisions. A strict application of the rules governing principal area electoral reviews in future would provide the Commission with the only option for the area being to create a large multi-member electoral division constituted by the whole of the Community of Risca. In order to provide us with as much flexibility as possible during the next review of electoral arrangements for Caerphilly, an alternative would be to create two new communities from the existing Community of Risca, namely the Community of Risca East and the Community of Risca West. We note that Caerphilly County Borough Council had no objection to this suggestion. We consider the existing boundary between the two electoral divisions to be appropriate with the exception of two small changes. The first change to include three properties, adjacent to the canal and accessed via Church Road, in the Risca West Community. The second change to include the whole of a playing field and playground in the Risca West Community. We therefore propose that the existing Community of Risca be dissolved and two new Communities of Risca East and Risca West be created as shown on the map at Appendix X with the addition of the changes outlined above and shown on the map at Appendix Y.

Gelligaer

4.28 Gelligaer Community Council suggested that the boundary between the Gelligaer Community wards of Cefn Hengoed and Tiryberth should be realigned to transfer the area of Glan-Rhymney Farm from Cefn Hengoed into Tiryberth as shown at the map at Appendix Z. They pointed out that the area, which contained a housing development, had no direct road link with the Cefn Hengoed Ward. Such a change would constitute a change to the Community's electoral arrangements. Whilst we consider that this suggestion may have merit in view of the reason put forward by the Council we are unable to propose this change, as there have not been any changes to the community boundary for Gelligaer, which would justify such a consequential change to the Community's electoral arrangements. We would recommend that Caerphilly County Borough Council consider undertaking a review of the community electoral arrangements for Gelligaer Community Council in light of this suggested change.

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 Bedwas Trethomas and Machen, Blackwood, Caerphilly Town, Cefn Fforest, Crumlin, Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant, Maesycwmmer, Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn, Pengam, Penmaen, Pontllanfraith, Risca and Van should be realigned in the area under review to follow the boundaries shown in green on the maps at Appendices C, D, F, J, L, M, P, S, T, U, V, W, X and Y.

5.2 As a result of the proposed changes outlined at 5.1 above we also propose that the boundaries between the Community Wards of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn and Caerphilly be realigned as to follow the boundaries shown in blue on the maps at Appendices E, F and K.

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

5.4 This report details our draft proposals for change to the community boundaries in the County Borough of Caerphilly 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 authority, 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 Caerphilly County Borough Council.

Community Council Electoral Arrangements

6.2 The Community of Caerphilly Town is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Bryncenydd, Castle, Parcyfelin, Tonyfelin, Twyn and Watford. The following table shows the number of electors and councillors for each ward.

* Electors per Councillor

6.3 Under our proposals for the Community of Caerphilly Town would be divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Bryncenydd, Castle, Cwrt Rawlins, Parcyfelin, Tonyfelin, Twyn and Watford. Of the existing Wards of Bryncenydd, Tonyfelin and Twyn which remain unchanged by our proposals we consider that the existing level of representation is satisfactory. We consider that the existing Parcyfelin Ward has an acceptable level of representation and as it will only be subject to a minor reduction in electorate under our proposals we consider that the existing level of representation will remain satisfactory. The Watford Ward currently has 2,654 electors represented by 2 councillors. Under our proposals the electorate will reduce to 1,337 and we therefore propose that in order to maintain a similar level of representation it would be necessary to reduce the number of councillors to 1. We have noted that under the current electoral arrangements the existing Castle Ward has a disproportionate level of representation compared with the other wards. The electorate of the Castle Ward will also fall from 1,687 to 1,497 under our proposals and therefore we propose that the number of councillors for the Castle Ward be reduced from 3 to 2. The new Cwrt Rawlins Ward which will be created by our proposals will have an electorate of 1,955 and we consider that 2 councillors would provide a level of representation for this Ward which would be in-keeping with the rest of the Community of Caerphilly. The following table shows the proposed number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.4 The Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Energlyn, Penyrheol and Trecenydd. The following table shows the number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.5 Our proposals for changes to the boundaries of the Communities of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn, Caerphilly and Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant the Trecenydd Ward will result in significant changes to the areas and electorates of the Trecenydd and Energlyn Wards and in view of this we are minded to look at the electoral arrangements for the Community as a whole. We consider that it would be desirable to include in our proposals the change to the boundary between the Trecenydd Ward and Energlyn Ward as outlined at paragraph 4.11 above and as shown on the map at Appendix K. Under our proposals for the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn the Energlyn Ward will increase by 425 electors to 1,794 and the Trecenydd Ward will decrease by 616 electors to 3,796. We consider that the existing number of councillors for Energlyn and Trecenydd of 2 and 5 respectively provides an appropriate level of representation for these wards. However, we have noted that under the proposed changes the Penyrheol Ward would have a disproportionate level of representation with 5 councillors resulting in a ratio of 590 electors per councillor. In order to maintain a similar level of representation to the other two Wards in the Community we propose that the number of councillors for Penyrheol be reduced from 5 to 4. The following table shows the proposed number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.6 The Community of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Llanbradach, Pwll-y-Pant and Wingfield. The following table shows the number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.7 Under our proposals for the Community of Llanbradach and Pwll-y-Pant the Pwll-y-Pant Ward will decrease by 253 electors to 229. The Pwll-y-Pant Ward is currently represented by the minimum number of councillors and has the lowest ratio of electors to councillors in the Community and therefore we do not consider that any change to the existing electoral arrangements is necessary. The following table shows the proposed number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.8 The Community of Bedwas Trethomas and Machen is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Bedwas, Trethomas and Machen. Our proposals for the Community do not involve the transfer of any electors and therefore the existing community electoral arrangements will continue unchanged.

6.9 The Community of Blackwood is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Blackwood Central, Blackwood North, Blackwood South and Cefn Fforest East. The following table shows the number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.10 Under our proposals for the Community of Blackwood the Blackwood South Ward will increase by 685 electors to 1,980. In order to maintain a similar level of representation to that which currently exists in the Community of Blackwood we propose that the number of councillors representing the Blackwood South Ward be increased from 3 to 4. We have also noted the disparity in representation for the Cefn Fforest East Ward and we consider that the appropriate level of representation for this Ward is 4 councillors. The following table shows the proposed number of electors and councillors for each ward.

6.11 The Community of Van is currently divided, for community electoral purposes, into the community wards of Brynau, Lansbury and Porset. Our proposals for the Community do not involve the transfer of any electors and therefore the existing community electoral arrangements will continue unchanged.

County Borough Council Electoral Arrangements

6.12 The St. Martins electoral division consisting of the Castle, Twyn and Watford wards of the Community of Caerphilly Town currently has 5,921 electors represented by 3 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly Town and Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn would see a rise in the number of electors to 6,423.

6.13 The Penyrheol electoral division consisting of the Community of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn currently has 8,780 electors represented by 4 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn, Llanbradach and Caerphilly would see a fall in the number of electors to 8,535.

6.14 The Llanbradach electoral division consisting of the Community of Llanbradach currently has 3,427 electors represented by 2 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Llanbradach, Penyrheol Trecenydd and Energlyn, Caerphilly, Maesycwmmer and Bedwas, Trethomas and Machen would see a fall in the number of electors to 3,174.

6.15 The Maesycwmmer electoral division consisting of the Community of Maesycwmmer currently has 1,763 electors represented by 1 councillor. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Maesycwmmer, Llanbradach and Pontllanfraith would see a fall in the number of electors to 1,743.

6.16 The Bedwas & Trethomas electoral division consisting of the Community of Bedwas, Trethomas and Machen currently has 7,919 electors represented by 4 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Bedwas, Trethomas and Machen and Llanbradach would see no change to the number of electors.

6.17 The Blackwood electoral division consisting of the Community of Blackwood currently has 6,339 electors represented by 3 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Blackwood, Penmaen and Pontllanfraith would see a rise in the number of electors to 7,024.

6.18 The Penmaen electoral division consisting of the Community of Penmaen currently has 3,878 electors represented by 2 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Penmaen and Blackwood would see a fall in the number of electors to 3,193.

6.19 The Pontllanfraith electoral division consisting of the Community of Pontllanfraith currently has 6,329 electors represented by 3 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Pontllanfraith, Maesycwmmer and Blackwood, would see a rise in the number of electors to 6,349.

6.20 The Pengam electoral division consisting of the Community of Pengam currently has 3,004 electors represented by 2 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Pengam and Cefn Fforest would see a fall in the number of electors to 2,758.

6.21 The Cefn Fforest electoral division consisting of the Community of Cefn Fforest currently has 2,659 electors represented by 2 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Cefn Fforest and Pengam would see a rise in the number of electors to 2,905.

6.22 The Morgan Jones electoral division consisting of the Bryncenydd, Parcyfelin and Tonyfelin Wards of the Community of Caerphilly currently has 5,037 electors represented by 3 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly Llanbradach and Van would see a fall in the number of electors to 5,033.

6.23 The St. James electoral division consisting of the Communities of Van and Rudry currently has 4,398 electors represented by 3 councillors. The proposed amendment to the boundary between the Communities of Caerphilly and Van would see no change to the number of electors.

6.24 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. Within the next few years we are due to conduct a review of the electoral arrangements for all of the 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 Caerphilly 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 Caerphilly 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 12 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)

October 2008

---

[About] [News] [Publications] [Boundary] [Electoral] [Community] [Home] [Web Map] [Links] [Cymraeg] [Enquiry] [Search]

10/10/2008