|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 17:50:06 GMT
If you're using a 10% range, then you can stick a lot closer to the existing borough boundaries. Every borough east of the Lea can stand alone, as can Hackney, TH and Westminster. Islington and Camden can go with the city, Barnet can stand along and Enfield and Haringey can pair for six seats. Harrow and Brent then pair for six (they could theoretically stand alone); Hillingdon gets three; Ealing, H&F and K&C get 7 (with Acton going with Shepherds Bush); Hounslow goes with Twickenham and Richmond goes with Kingston. I haven't bothered looking at the rest of South London and a few of those arrangements may be a little tricky, but for the most part I'd minimise cross-borough seats unless you're working to 5%. But if you have a 10% threshold it doesn't quite work in practice unless you were to split wards. For example I was playing around with this earlier and Waltham Forest on more or less the old boundaries but with a 10% threshold Walthamstow is below quote - you'd logically add Chapel End which then puts Chingford under quota. Adding Monkhams solved not only that but the fact that its pretty hard to draw three seats wholly in Redbridge without one being over quota. The best bet might be to use the polling district feature on boundary assistant. The electorates are a little out of date but work well enough for this purpose |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 18:18:51 GMT
Yeah, some seats came out badly because I tried to preserve other areas. I'm working to a 10% thereshold, I'll change it to 5% instead if they used it at the time.My Hammersmith-Chiswick seat was so awful (mostly because I desperately tried to avoid a Sheperd's Bush-Chiswick seat) I deleted it and more than 10 other seats and uploaded the map incomplete. What do you mean by 'at the time'? If you mean from 1973 onwards when the GLC had 92 seats, there was no threshold of that kind. Seats were just assigned to each borough so there would have been a very wide range of electorates so no need for cross-borough seats? |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 18:24:31 GMT
The East End and what used to be the Essexy part of London are by far the easiest parts to draw.
Havering- 3 seats
Barking & Dagenham- 2 seats
Redbridge + Waltham Forest - 6 seats
Newham - 3 seats
Tower Hamlets - 3 seats
Hackney - 3 seats
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 19:14:27 GMT
The East End and what used to be the Essexy part of London are by far the easiest parts to draw. Havering- 3 seats Barking & Dagenham- 2 seats Redbridge + Waltham Forest - 6 seats Newham - 3 seats Tower Hamlets - 3 seats Hackney - 3 seats And even then you managed to get Havering wrong.. |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 19:28:38 GMT
The East End and what used to be the Essexy part of London are by far the easiest parts to draw. Havering- 3 seats Barking & Dagenham- 2 seats Redbridge + Waltham Forest - 6 seats Newham - 3 seats Tower Hamlets - 3 seats Hackney - 3 seats And even then you managed to get Havering wrong.. Should I move Hylands to Honchurch, Squirrel's Heath to Romford and, Upminster to Upminster (Oops   )? |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 19:34:43 GMT
And even then you managed to get Havering wrong.. Should I move Hylands to Honchurch, Squirl's Heath to Romford and, Upminster to Upminster (Oops )? I've not completed yet and I will probably redo to reduce the borough crossings I do have. In Havering though its obvious that Hylands should be in Hornchurch, Squirrels Heath in Romford and Upminster in er.. Upminster. There may be a temptation to depart from boundaries that were used in the past, as otherwise it can be a bit boring I suppose, but in some cases those boundaries were as they were for a reason (ie they made sense). Same in Barnet, I'd more or less recreate the four seats that existed before 1997 |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 19:37:28 GMT
Should I move Hylands to Honchurch, Squirl's Heath to Romford and, Upminster to Upminster (Oops )? I've not completed yet and I will probably redo to reduce the borough crossings I do have. In Havering though its obvious that Hylands should be in Hornchurch, Squirrels Heath in Romford and Upminster in er.. Upminster. There may be a temptation to depart from boundaries that were used in the past, as otherwise it can be a bit boring I suppose, but in some cases those boundaries were as they were for a reason (ie they made sense). Same in Barnet, I'd more or less recreate the four seats that existed before 1997 Yes, I just finished making a version with no borough crossings that is much improved in my opinion. I unfortunately, had to split Woolwich though. |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 19:38:42 GMT
The East End and what used to be the Essexy part of London are by far the easiest parts to draw. Havering- 3 seats Barking & Dagenham- 2 seats Redbridge + Waltham Forest - 6 seats Newham - 3 seats Tower Hamlets - 3 seats Hackney - 3 seats . I'd go along with the rest of your seats in East London except for Tower Hamlets. Everything North of the A11 in a Bethnal Green and Bow seat then the other two are more or less the old boroughs of Stepney (less Spitalfields) and Poplar (less Bow) |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 19:56:32 GMT
Using polling districts certainly does give a lot more room for manouvre if avoiding crossing borough boundaries  |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 20:02:12 GMT
Using polling districts certainly does give a lot more room for manouvre if avoiding crossing borough boundaries Not sure I agree with your Ilford seats, as Gants Hill is split and moving Chadwell and Seven Kings wards to Ilford North doesn't make a lot of sense from what I know. |
|
|
|
Post by rcronald on Mar 1, 2023 20:38:07 GMT
No Borough splits and only using local authority quotas: I honestly don't know how to properly draw Brent without ruining it, so I decided to leave the borough alone. Greenwich, Haringey, and Wandsworth are admittingly not well drawn, but I think the map as a whole is decent.  |
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 20:57:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 21:02:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 21:09:13 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 1, 2023 21:13:23 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 4, 2023 13:24:43 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Mar 14, 2023 18:19:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Mar 14, 2023 19:23:48 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by kevinlarkin on Mar 14, 2023 19:36:50 GMT
It will be included in a future release. There are a couple of other new features I am working on, one of which should be simple but because I didn't design it in from the start is beginning to get a bit messy. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2023 23:53:08 GMT
It will be included in a future release. There are a couple of other new features I am working on, one of which should be simple but because I didn't design it in from the start is beginning to get a bit messy. Do you actually have electorate figures by MSOAs or is it population based? |
|
)?
