The thread about Dartford started me thinking. Which is the stupidest
boundary in London?

I can think of 2 candidates..

LB Richmond is absurd. Putting Twickenham and Richmond in the same borough
makes no sense, when the only transport links between the two halves of the
borough are 2 road bridges, 1 rail bridge, and a few pedestrian links.

The borough boundary down the middle of Edgware High Street is ridiculous. I
particularly like the way you travel westward away from Edgware High Street
and are greeted by signs that read "LB Harrow - Welcome to Edgware". I'm
sure that as you drive southward from Macedonia you see similar signs that
say "Greece - Welcome to Macedonia"

--
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 writes
The thread about Dartford started me thinking. Which is the stupidest
boundary in London?

It all goes back to ancient parish boundaries.

LB Richmond is absurd. Putting Twickenham and Richmond in the same borough
makes no sense, when the only transport links between the two halves of the
borough are 2 road bridges, 1 rail bridge, and a few pedestrian links.

Why should transport links be a factor. A borough s just a way of
administering local government.

Look at an old map of SW Middlesex. See the borough of Twickenham. You
need to group boroughs together in order to form larger units for easier
administration - why not Richmond?

The borough boundary down the middle of Edgware High Street is ridiculous. I
particularly like the way you travel westward away from Edgware High Street
and are greeted by signs that read "LB Harrow - Welcome to Edgware".

Just because you find a sign amusing you concur that a borough boundary
is 'ridiculous'? Why is that sign more amusing than one which might
read 'LB Barnet - Welcome to Edgware'?

The A5 (being on old Roman road) would have been the ancient parish
boundary. So long as that does not affect service delivery, why bother
fiddling with the boundary today?

--
Dave

...

LB Richmond is absurd. Putting Twickenham and Richmond in the same
borough
makes no sense, when the only transport links between the two halves of
the
borough are 2 road bridges, 1 rail bridge, and a few pedestrian links.

Why should transport links be a factor. A borough s just a way of
administering local government.

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.

I am tired of reading GLA material through my door addressed to "Dear
Londoner". They quite clearly have an agenda to Londonise the outer
boroughs that have not previously ever been described as
south/east/west/north London. I have no major problem with the
administrative top tier of local government being based at London Bridge
rather than Maidstone, but I do have a problem with my area having to be
rebranded to "London" because of it.

Most maps also show these administrative areas, and so they do impact on
"where you live". Maybe maps shouldn't be drawn with administrative
counties/areas so prominently. 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. I am sure
that confuses people.

Nick

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.

(2) If Bromley was in Kent, why did the self-centered prats interfere in
the Fares Fair arrangements? If you want a say in London affairs, then
damn well admit you're in London and stop moaning.

--
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

"Clive D. W. Feather" wrote in message
...

If Bromley was in Kent, why did the self-centered prats interfere in
the Fares Fair arrangements?

Because they were part-funding 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

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

On Sat, 26 Jul 2003 17:31:11 +0100, Ian Jelf
wrote:
In article , Clive D. W. Feather
writes

(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!

Tell me about it. The grief we get from the WOOPies about not being able
to get free travel while all those nasty people from Kingston & Sutton
get it and come shopping to "our" Epsom is nobody's business.

--
Mike Pellatt (no longer a councillor so can call them WOOPies safely....)
Epsom & Ewell. In Surrey. Just. But just over 120 years ago The Oval
was in Surrey....

From: Dave
Date: 19/07/2003 12:53 GMT Daylight Time

Why should transport links be a factor. A borough s just a way of
administering local government.

And a very silly one at that. In many of the outer boroughs houses that face
each other across the same street and are identical in every respect attract
different amounts of council tax because the borough boundary runs right down
the middle of the road. That boundary might have made sense when there was just
farmland on either side of it, but why didn't anyone bother to tidy things up
after the houses were built?

And how much time is wasted at council tax payers expense by over paid
bureacrats in town halls all over the place scrambling about to find out if
theirs is the odd numbered side of a street or the even numbered side when
someone complains that a street light's out or something similar?

On 19 Jul 2003 16:52:01 GMT, are (Acrosticus)
wrote:

From: Dave
Date: 19/07/2003 12:53 GMT Daylight Time

Why should transport links be a factor. A borough s just a way of
administering local government.

And a very silly one at that. In many of the outer boroughs houses that face
each other across the same street and are identical in every respect attract
different amounts of council tax because the borough boundary runs right down
the middle of the road. That boundary might have made sense when there was just
farmland on either side of it, but why didn't anyone bother to tidy things up
after the houses were built?

And how much time is wasted at council tax payers expense by over paid
bureacrats in town halls all over the place scrambling about to find out if
theirs is the odd numbered side of a street or the even numbered side when
someone complains that a street light's out or something similar?

Remarkably little. It'll be readily available information

Boroughs have agreements between themselves re carriageway
maintenance.

One maintains the road and bills its neighbour for half the cost.


A borough has to have a boundary somewhere!


Rob.
--
rob at robertwoolley dot co dot uk

From: Robert Woolley
Date: 19/07/2003 19:11 GMT Daylight Time

A borough has to have a boundary somewhere!

Agreed. But please place it somewhere sensible. Imagine for example that my
original query had related to someone complaining their dustbin hadn't been
emptied, instead of a street light being out: what would these cosy little
highways agreements have contributed to sorting that one out in a cost
efficient manner? Close to naff all I suspect!