"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote:
In article , Robert Woolley
Where is sensible? Down property boundaries? They can move and you
then find, for example, that half of your back garden is in a
different borough.

Half of my back garden *is* in a different parish to the rest of the
property.

Hah! If you're talking parish boundaries, our northern boundary was a
serpentine line that passed through about 6 houses. We're in the process
of rationalising it to its original logical position - along the river
Brent, which is now in a straightish concrete trench.

Colin McKenzie

"Robert Woolley" wrote in message
...

The fence at the back of my garden runs
along the Brent/Barnet boundary....

Next time I want a free ride from Burnt Oak to Cricklewood, I'll wait for
your fence to run past and then I'll jump on it.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

Darryl Chamberlain wrote:
"Nick" wrote in message ...

I didn't claim otherewise. My point was that it was a "reluctanct"
London

borough judging by the councillors I've spoken to. Note that Bexley dropped
the "London Borough" part of its name for most purposes some years ago, and
now goes under the alias of Bexley Council.


It's still formally known as the London Borough of Bexley though.

And damned right too - if it walks like a dog, wags its tail and barks
like a dog, then it's probably a dog, and Welling, Bexleyheath,
Thamesmead, Belvedere, Sidcup, Erith and the rest are all identikit
parts of London suburbia - where's the villages, towns and greenery
that you'd associate with Kent? No, it's houses, houses, houses,
shops, traffic jams and red buses - blow me, it's London!

(the same for much of Bromley borough too - though why Downe, Biggin
Hill and Keston are in there beats me...)

Of course, if you really want to be in Kent, then we'll stop
subsidising your public transport, police and fire services, plus all
the other useful things you get from being part of the capital city.
When you end up a horrible, backward place like Gravesend, please send
us a postcard.

Darryl

I had to call somebody at the London Borough of Bromley today but they
were out, her colleague said that she had gone to London!

Matthew

In article , Matthew Rees
wrote:
I live on the Kingston upon Thames / Richmond border and until
the last boundary revision the borough boundary went through
some properties and even following the boundary revision we
still have some roads which are in one borough but which
receive some services, e.g. refuse collection, from the other
council.

I once worked for R.B.Kingston and the boundaries were not at all
logical. On the NE side the boundary between Kingston and Merton
is the Beverley Brook so properties either side of the A3 fall
into both boroughs, and the station estate at Worcester Park
(Pembury Avenue etc) could only be reached by going out of the
borough into Sutton. A colleague of mine went to deal with an
'illegal' garage being built in Herne Road, Surbiton and was told
sharply that whilst the house was in Surbiton, the garage was in
Elmbridge who had given permission for its erection

--
Tony Bryer

In article , Clive D. W. Feather
writes
In article , Nick
writes
If only it were just a way of administering local government! These were
the kind of words used when GL was created in the 60s. Now, of course, we
have the media referring to such things as "Biggin Hill in south London",
which is completely crazy.
[...]

Of course Biggin Hill is South London.

Gawd, what a whinger.

If you address something to Bexley or
Bromley you put "Bexley, Kent, DA5..." or "Bromley, Kent, BR1...". When you
look on a map it appears that Bexley and Bromley aren't in Kent.

(1) Postal addresses are designed for the convenience of the GPO,
nothing else.
Well said.

We're going through some hassle about this in the area where I live in
the Midlands at the moment because people say that the postcode puts up
their insurance. Well, in a way it does but people's bile is, I think,
incorrectly addressed [1] to the Post Office, who have set up a system
to deliver mail as efficiently as possible not to allow some people to
get competitive insurance quotes. A Post Office spokesman was almost
flailed alive on a local radio phone in a few weeks ago on this subject
and *no one* seemed to see "his" side of the argument (as put here by
Clive).

(2) If Bromley was in Kent, why did the self-centered prats interfere in the
Fares Fair arrangements?
I also suspect that older Bromley (and Bexley, etc.) residents get a far
better deal with their Freedom Passes than do their counterparts in
Kent, Surrey and so on. If I was living in an outer London area I'd be
*delighted* at *being* under GLA administration for that reason alone!
(With my "dual nationality" I am perhaps alone in wishing sometimes that
Birmingham was part of London. Only kidding!)


[1] No pun intended!
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

In article , Clive D. W. Feather
writes
In article , Robert
Woolley writes
Where is sensible? Down property boundaries? They can move and you
then find, for example, that half of your back garden is in a
different borough.

Half of my back garden *is* in a different parish to the rest of the property.

Drifting off topic, I know but I've always wondered about situations
like that. How does your Council Tax work? Does each authority levy a
charge (or aren't these particular parish councils precepting ones?
--
Ian Jelf, MITG, Birmingham, UK
Registered "Blue Badge" Tourist Guide for
London & the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In article , Richard J.
writes
Personally, having been brought up in Orpington and Bromley in the 1940's
and '50's, I viewed my parents' insistence that we were in Kent as
absurd.
Kent was where you went for a day out. We were quite clearly part of the
Greater London conurbation, as a quick glance at an Ordnance Survey map
made
clear even then. To draw boundaries through the middle of suburbs and
pretend one side is London and the other is Kent doesn't make any sense
except for historical studies.

I always considered that the best definition of "Greater London" was the
area served by the red "Central Area" buses, pre 1970. But that's only
my personal opinion!

Incidentally, if I have one other point to make in this interesting if
sometimes heated debate, it's a thought that occurred to me when I saw
the first posting to it by John Rowland: *wherever* you put boundaries
in built up areas, there will be *some* anomalies.

I realise that, but the difficulties that council boundaries create for
projects means that council boundaries should be placed where it is least
likely that a project will need to span them. From that point of view,
council boundaries should run through residential areas, and where possible
give a *WIDE* berth to libraries, leisure centres, municipal dumps and every
other council run facility - that way, people have democratic control of and
financial responsibility for the services that they use.

I don't know if Edgware High Street has Christmas lights, but if so, does it
need negotiation every year between the two boroughs which control the
streetlamps on the different sides of the road?

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In article , Richard J.
writes
Personally, having been brought up in Orpington and Bromley in the
1940's
and '50's, I viewed my parents' insistence that we were in Kent as
absurd.
Kent was where you went for a day out. We were quite clearly part of
the
Greater London conurbation, as a quick glance at an Ordnance Survey map
made
clear even then. To draw boundaries through the middle of suburbs and
pretend one side is London and the other is Kent doesn't make any sense
except for historical studies.

I always considered that the best definition of "Greater London" was the
area served by the red "Central Area" buses, pre 1970. But that's only
my personal opinion!

Incidentally, if I have one other point to make in this interesting if
sometimes heated debate, it's a thought that occurred to me when I saw
the first posting to it by John Rowland: *wherever* you put boundaries
in built up areas, there will be *some* anomalies.

I realise that, but the difficulties that council boundaries create for
projects means that council boundaries should be placed where it is least
likely that a project will need to span them. From that point of view,
council boundaries should run through residential areas, and where
possible
give a *WIDE* berth to libraries, leisure centres, municipal dumps and
every
other council run facility - that way, people have democratic control of
and
financial responsibility for the services that they use.

I don't know if Edgware High Street has Christmas lights, but if so, does
it
need negotiation every year between the two boroughs which control the
streetlamps on the different sides of the road?

AIUI there's a standing "Christmas Streetlights" sub-committee of the
Streetlighting committee.

"Cast_Iron" wrote in message
...

"John Rowland" wrote in message
...
"Ian Jelf" wrote in message
...
In article , Richard J.
writes
Personally, having been brought up in Orpington and Bromley in the
1940's
and '50's, I viewed my parents' insistence that we were in Kent as
absurd.
Kent was where you went for a day out. We were quite clearly part of
the
Greater London conurbation, as a quick glance at an Ordnance Survey
map
made
clear even then. To draw boundaries through the middle of suburbs
and
pretend one side is London and the other is Kent doesn't make any
sense
except for historical studies.

I always considered that the best definition of "Greater London" was
the
area served by the red "Central Area" buses, pre 1970. But that's
only
my personal opinion!

Incidentally, if I have one other point to make in this interesting if
sometimes heated debate, it's a thought that occurred to me when I saw
the first posting to it by John Rowland: *wherever* you put
boundaries
in built up areas, there will be *some* anomalies.

I realise that, but the difficulties that council boundaries create for
projects means that council boundaries should be placed where it is
least
likely that a project will need to span them. From that point of view,
council boundaries should run through residential areas, and where
possible
give a *WIDE* berth to libraries, leisure centres, municipal dumps and
every
other council run facility - that way, people have democratic control of
and
financial responsibility for the services that they use.

I don't know if Edgware High Street has Christmas lights, but if so,
does
it
need negotiation every year between the two boroughs which control the
streetlamps on the different sides of the road?

AIUI there's a standing "Christmas Streetlights" sub-committee of the
Streetlighting committee.

Sorry I should have said it is a joint committee with representatives from
both councils and the various traders organisations as well as the police
and WI.

In article , Matthew
Malthouse writes
} Kent has been around a *long* time. The reason we have an Archbishop of
} Canterbury rather than one of London (the obvious centre for a province)
} is because Kent was at war with everyone else.

The reason was that Kent had a Christian queen, Bertha, who brownbeat
her hubby Ethelbert into giving Augustine a chuch.
[...]

I don't dispute it. But I thought there was also an issue with Kent
being at war with the surrounding pagan territories.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address