651.-london-borough-of-brent-and-its-boundaries-with-barnet,-camden,-ealing,-hammersmith-and-fulham,-harrow,-knc-and-westminster

Recommendations

Info

North Circular Road was not the only barrier to movement withinthe Borough and that, were abolition or partition to becontemplated, it might be achieved by means other than thoseproposed by Harrow and the Brent North Conservative Association.34. The creation of two new, separate boroughs of Wembley andWillesden would result in administrative units of approximately129,000 and 126,000 population respectively. We were aware that,in purely numerical terms, units of such a size were comparablewith certain other London boroughs - for example, the RoyalBoroughs of Kensington and Chelsea and Kingston upon Thames.However, we did not consider that there were any overall benefitsto be gained from increasing the number of London boroughs aspart of this review of Greater London. Indeed, our general, view,taking account of our guidance from the Secretary of State, wasthat, where current arrangements clearly failed to provideeffective and convenient local government and major change wasrequired, this should, where possible, be achieved by mergingrather than dividing authorities. More specifically, in the caseof Brent, splitting the authority into two smaller boroughs couldexacerbate the problems of providing effective services inWillesden. Certainly, it seemed unlikely that the increasedburden on resources would lead to more effective and convenientlocal government in Willesden.35. The alternative would have been to amalgamate the two halvesof Brent with their neighbouring authorities. Uniting thenorthern part of Brent with Harrow would have brought togetherareas of generally similar characteristics, and an enlargedHarrow would not be over-large in relation to other outer Londonboroughs. However, there would be difficulties in uniting southBrent with any of its neighbouring authorities, or apportioningit amongst them.36. The five London boroughs adjoining south Brent are, from westto east, Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham, Kensington and Chelsea,Westminster and Camden. To have united the southern part of Brentwith Ealing might, perhaps, have been be the most obvioussolution in terms of shape. However, the two areas are dividedby the industrial estates around Park Royal and North Acton, and11
y the radial routes traversing this part of London, such as theA40, the Grand Union Canal and railway lines.• . •. ••37. We considered the possibility of uniting south Brent withHammersmith and Fulhara, or Kensington and Chelsea, orWestminster;'or dividing it between all three. ..However, such acourse of action would have resulted in major upheaval for thoseauthorities in terms of finance and the provision of services,and would have had significant repercussions on the structure oflocal government in this part of London generally. Moreover,other than in the immediate vicinity of the existing boundary,little evidence of links or similarities between south Brent andthese boroughs could be identified. In our view, any boroughencompassing areas as diverse and unrelated as Neasden andFulham,- or Stonebridge and Soho, would have no obvious centre,and would be unlikely to form a unit of local government any morecohesive than the currently structured London Borough of Brent.While an amalgamation of Willesden with. Camden would have thebenefit of uniting the Kilburn shopping centre in a singleauthority, there would be difficulties in establishing ameaningful boundary between an augmented Camden and the remainderof Brent.38. We concluded that the arguments advanced for the abolitionor partition of Brent were not sufficient, in the context ofeffective and convenient local government, to warrant the majordisruption which would result from such a course of action. Suchrestructuring should, in our view, be considered only in thecontext of a comprehensive reappraisal of the pattern of unitaryauthorities within London as a whole.39. Accordingly, mindful of our guidelines from the Secretary ofState, we took an interim decision to make no proposals for theabolition of Brent, or for its partition into two new boroughs.40. Our interim decision was supported by Brent and by twomembers of the public. We received 93 representations .and threepetitions containing a total of 140 signatures in opposition toour interim decision. Brent argued that the quality of serviceprovision in the Borough had undergone a recent improvement, and12
Page 2 and 3: LOCAL GOVERNMENTBOUNDARY COMMISSION
Page 4 and 5: ; . CONTENTSParagraphsIntroduction
Page 6 and 7: THE RT HON MICHAEL HOWARD QC, HPSEC
Page 8 and 9: .In the notice we said that, from t
Page 10 and 11: espect of these radical suggestions
Page 12 and 13: 21. Two members of the public submi
Page 15: esidents of north Brent for radical
Page 19 and 20: divide Willesden between the Boroug
Page 21 and 22: oundary between authorities_as, in
Page 23 and 24: 35,000 electors) was for the bounda
Page 25 and 26: 65. Harrow suggested that the bound
Page 27 and 28: Broadway (A5), by realigning the bo
Page 29 and 30: library, and had delayed doing so o
Page 31 and 32: north along the Bakerloo railway li
Page 33 and 34: proposal to transfer the college an
Page 35 and 36: ejoining the existing boundary at W
Page 37 and 38: therefore decided to confirm as fin
Page 39 and 40: Bridgewater Road, to the west of On
Page 41 and 42: 121. The Baling Conservative Associ
Page 43 and 44: the area. Brent Trades Union Counci
Page 45 and 46: ear" curtilages of properties in Mo
Page 47 and 48: government. We have . therefore dec
Page 49 and 50: 149. Hammersmith and Fulham, having
Page 51 and 52: e' more effectively and convenientl
Page 53 and 54: South-Kilburn area. . Ten residents
Page 55 and 56: which it received part of its fundi
Page 57 and 58: BRENT'S BOUNDARY WITH CAMDENKilburn
Page 59 and 60: Signed K F J ENNALS (Chairman)G R P
Page 61 and 62: LOCATION DIA«AMIHARROW LBBARNET LB
Page 63 and 64: HARROW LB
Page 65 and 66: HARROW LBEALNG LB
Page 67 and 68:
BRENT LBALING LBC) Crown Copyright
Page 69 and 70:
KENSINGTONAND CHELSEA LB
Page 71 and 72:
MAPNO.CONSEQUENTIAL CHANGESAREAREF.
show all

651.-london-borough-of-brent-and-its-boundaries-with-barnet,-camden,-ealing,-hammersmith-and-fulham,-harrow,-knc-and-westminster

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?