|
Post by bjornhattan on Feb 14, 2020 23:04:01 GMT
Interested to know what people think of the Reading draft recommendations. Not quite as bad as some of their classics. I would have liked them to have the Oxford Road area all in one ward, rather than being split between Coley, Abbey, and Battle. A lot of the names are an improvement (such as Minster becoming Coley or Mapledurham becoming The Heights, though the latter should probably be Caversham Heights). The Thames ward isn't as awful as it looks at first glance, and is about the best they could do, but I'd have tried to take more from Central Reading and keep the Kennet as a southern boundary. The area around Cemetery Junction (which should surely not be split so much) has nothing in common with the centre of Caversham - with poor transport links and a wide cultural divide. I don't mind a Caversham-based ward taking in areas just over the river such as around the Moderation pub, but having it stretch that far south and east is ridiculous. I will note though I'm not local, so take my thoughts with a pinch of salt.
|
|
|
Post by finsobruce on Feb 15, 2020 10:14:40 GMT
The Thames ward is predictably an absolute abomination. Disappointed they didn't go with "Thames Banks" as a name. Tony Banks, of blessed memory, wanted, when ennobled, to be Lord Banks of the Thames, but the spoilsports wouldn't let him.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 12:30:12 GMT
Interested to know what people think of the Reading draft recommendations. The Thames ward is predictably an absolute abomination. Christ, that horrible. I live in Caversham ward myself and it's just plain wrong to put half of Caversham in with Central Reading over the River. I know there's overspill in Abbey but that is awful. There will be a riot when this gets out in Caversham.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 12:35:59 GMT
Interested to know what people think of the Reading draft recommendations. Not quite as bad as some of their classics. I would have liked them to have the Oxford Road area all in one ward, rather than being split between Coley, Abbey, and Battle. A lot of the names are an improvement (such as Minster becoming Coley or Mapledurham becoming The Heights, though the latter should probably be Caversham Heights). The Thames ward isn't as awful as it looks at first glance, and is about the best they could do, but I'd have tried to take more from Central Reading and keep the Kennet as a southern boundary. The area around Cemetery Junction (which should surely not be split so much) has nothing in common with the centre of Caversham - with poor transport links and a wide cultural divide. I don't mind a Caversham-based ward taking in areas just over the river such as around the Moderation pub, but having it stretch that far south and east is ridiculous. I will note though I'm not local, so take my thoughts with a pinch of salt. As a Caversham local, putting any of Caversham in with Reading is a no- go. We have nothing in common with the Bell Tower area around Caversham road or the Kenavon drive area. They should put the Bell Tower area in Battle if anything and everything east of that in Park.There's nothing wrong with the names, but the wards are awful. I'd of course rename Park to Riverside by putting all the area east of Station Retail Park in it.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,187
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Feb 19, 2020 12:37:49 GMT
The Thames ward is predictably an absolute abomination. Christ, that horrible. I live in Caversham ward myself and it's just plain wrong to put half of Caversham in with Central Reading over the River. I know there's overspill in Abbey but that is awful. There will be a riot when this gets out in Caversham. Pitchforks, get yer luverly pitchforks ...
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Feb 19, 2020 12:54:33 GMT
Not quite as bad as some of their classics. I would have liked them to have the Oxford Road area all in one ward, rather than being split between Coley, Abbey, and Battle. A lot of the names are an improvement (such as Minster becoming Coley or Mapledurham becoming The Heights, though the latter should probably be Caversham Heights). The Thames ward isn't as awful as it looks at first glance, and is about the best they could do, but I'd have tried to take more from Central Reading and keep the Kennet as a southern boundary. The area around Cemetery Junction (which should surely not be split so much) has nothing in common with the centre of Caversham - with poor transport links and a wide cultural divide. I don't mind a Caversham-based ward taking in areas just over the river such as around the Moderation pub, but having it stretch that far south and east is ridiculous. I will note though I'm not local, so take my thoughts with a pinch of salt. As a Caversham local, putting any of Caversham in with Reading is a no- go. We have nothing in common with the Bell Tower area around Caversham road or the Kenavon drive area. They should put the Bell Tower area in Battle if anything and everything east of that in Park.There's nothing wrong with the names, but the wards are awful. I'd of course rename Park to Riverside by putting all the area east of Station Retail Park in it. Is Bell Tower the area around the Moderation pub? I have to admit my thoughts on natural communities in Reading are shaped partly by the fact the main bus route from Oxford runs through Caversham and then along past there, so I've always felt the areas seemed somewhat similar, but that could be completely different to the actual ties in the area.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 12:56:09 GMT
Christ, that horrible. I live in Caversham ward myself and it's just plain wrong to put half of Caversham in with Central Reading over the River. I know there's overspill in Abbey but that is awful. There will be a riot when this gets out in Caversham. Pitchforks, get yer luverly pitchforks ... Yep, the local hardware shop will probably be able to charter a bus to the council offices with profits from selling sharp implements.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 13:00:56 GMT
As a Caversham local, putting any of Caversham in with Reading is a no- go. We have nothing in common with the Bell Tower area around Caversham road or the Kenavon drive area. They should put the Bell Tower area in Battle if anything and everything east of that in Park.There's nothing wrong with the names, but the wards are awful. I'd of course rename Park to Riverside by putting all the area east of Station Retail Park in it. Is Bell Tower the area around the Moderation pub? I have to admit my thoughts on natural communities in Reading are shaped partly by the fact the main bus route from Oxford runs through Caversham and then along past there, so I've always felt the areas seemed somewhat similar, but that could be completely different to the actual ties in the area. Yes Bell Tower is bounded by Caversham Rd, the rail line and Richfield Avenue. We have little to do with them, Reading is a bit like a mini Stoke-on-Trent, Reading town centre is like Hanley with Woodley, Caversham, Tilehurst,Coley,Whitley and Earley kind of surrounding the town centres as quite distinct satellite towns. Half the problem is that most of Earley and Woodley aren't in the Borough despite clearly being part of Reading and the same applies for a lot of Tilehurst and its suburbs Calcot,Purley,Kentwood and Beansheaf.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 13:24:56 GMT
As a Caversham local, putting any of Caversham in with Reading is a no- go. We have nothing in common with the Bell Tower area around Caversham road or the Kenavon drive area. They should put the Bell Tower area in Battle if anything and everything east of that in Park.There's nothing wrong with the names, but the wards are awful. I'd of course rename Park to Riverside by putting all the area east of Station Retail Park in it. Is Bell Tower the area around the Moderation pub? I have to admit my thoughts on natural communities in Reading are shaped partly by the fact the main bus route from Oxford runs through Caversham and then along past there, so I've always felt the areas seemed somewhat similar, but that could be completely different to the actual ties in the area. What I'd do to sort this out is as follows-: . South of the River, I'd put the Bell Tower area into Battle as that has a shared school catchment and good transport links now they rebuilt the Cow Lane bridge. The new ward boundary would be drawn along from the Caversham Road railway bridge along Caversham Road then along Brigham Rd to the river. That should make it a reasonable ward. They should then extend Coley ward from the Bath Road to the Oxford Road bounded by the IDR. They would be a reasonable compromise for Coley and take enough electors off Abbey to put the area east of Brigham Road, north of the rail line and west of the Reading Bridge approach road by Thames Water HQ into Abbey. Then put the remaining part of their proposed Thames ward(east of the Reading Bridge approach road) into Park, as that is under-electorate and needs that area to be within a reasonable level of variance. It would then be renamed Newtown because Newtown would be the bulk of the new ward. Cemetery Junction would be a good name but it focuses too much on the east end of the ward. . North of the River, I'd move all the area south of Gosbrook Road/Church St back into Caversham as it is an integral part of Caversham. To remedy this, I'd move the area bounded by Peppard Road to the west, Henley Road to the south and Chiltern Road to the east into Emmer Green ward. Most of this is in the Henley Road area, not Caversham and fits much better in this ward than in Caversham. To stop this ward being over electorate,I'd probably move the part of Emmer Green ward bounded by Peppard Rd to the east, Kidmore End Rd to the north and Evesham Rd to the south into Heights ward. This is an unfortunate compromise, because this includes Emmer Green Primary and St Barnabas Church, which are recognisably in Emmer Green. But it has to be done to sort out the Caversham debacle.
|
|
|
Post by evergreenadam on Feb 19, 2020 15:28:06 GMT
Is Bell Tower the area around the Moderation pub? I have to admit my thoughts on natural communities in Reading are shaped partly by the fact the main bus route from Oxford runs through Caversham and then along past there, so I've always felt the areas seemed somewhat similar, but that could be completely different to the actual ties in the area. Yes Bell Tower is bounded by Caversham Rd, the rail line and Richfield Avenue. We have little to do with them, Reading is a bit like a mini Stoke-on-Trent, Reading town centre is like Hanley with Woodley, Caversham, Tilehurst,Coley,Whitley and Earley kind of surrounding the town centres as quite distinct satellite towns. Half the problem is that most of Earley and Woodley aren't in the Borough despite clearly being part of Reading and the same applies for a lot of Tilehurst and its suburbs Calcot,Purley,Kentwood and Beansheaf. It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs.
|
|
|
Post by Davıd Boothroyd on Feb 19, 2020 15:29:37 GMT
It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs. The City of Norwich writes: Hold my beer.
|
|
Chris from Brum
Lib Dem
What I need is a strong drink and a peer group.
Posts: 9,187
|
Post by Chris from Brum on Feb 19, 2020 15:45:26 GMT
It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs. The City of Norwich writes: Hold my beer. The City of Nottingham writes: Outtamyway!
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Feb 19, 2020 15:56:47 GMT
The City of Norwich writes: Hold my beer. The City of Nottingham writes: Outtamyway! Half of Newcastle's population, and nearly all of its attractions, are outside the city limits (and mostly in Gateshead!)
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,854
Member is Online
|
Post by jamie on Feb 19, 2020 16:22:26 GMT
The City of Nottingham writes: Outtamyway! Half of Newcastle's population, and nearly all of its attractions, are outside the city limits (and mostly in Gateshead!) Maybe this is my bias showing but Gateshead feels like more of its own place than the rest of these example. It is relatively large and on the other side of the river. Conversely, a lot of these other are just a collection of small suburbs which have no real reason to be separate. It’s the bits north of the Tyne that really stick out as Newcastle in everything but council area (I see you North Tyneside constituency).
|
|
|
Post by bjornhattan on Feb 19, 2020 16:37:10 GMT
Half of Newcastle's population, and nearly all of its attractions, are outside the city limits (and mostly in Gateshead!) Maybe this is my bias showing but Gateshead feels like more of its own place than the rest of these example. It is relatively large and on the other side of the river. Conversely, a lot of these other are just a collection of small suburbs which have no real reason to be separate. It’s the bits north of the Tyne that really stick out as Newcastle in everything but council area (I see you North Tyneside constituency). I suppose it depends on how you see Gateshead. If you separate it into Gateshead, Whickham, Blaydon, Birtley, and so on, none of those are really big enough to be comparable to Newcastle (even Gateshead isn't that much larger than Beeston once you include the latter's suburbs). I obviously want to see Gateshead as its own place (to the extent I will feign annoyance if someone from down south thinks I'm from Newcastle), but realistically that isn't quite true. Though there is probably at least one definition of Gateshead which would be more populous than Newcastle, which would really turn the tables! (Hebburn and Prudhoe could definitely be included, Washington very nearly was in the 1970s iirc, and even Chester le Street is debatable).
|
|
jamie
Top Poster
Posts: 6,854
Member is Online
|
Post by jamie on Feb 19, 2020 16:48:14 GMT
Though there is probably at least one definition of Gateshead which would be more populous than Newcastle, which would really turn the tables! (Hebburn and Prudhoe could definitely be included, Washington very nearly was in the 1970s iirc, and even Chester le Street is debatable). Oh please God no! Birtley needs to join Chester Le Street in Durham, not bring even more with it. And that’s without mentioning Blaydon constituency including Birtley despite no connections as well as whatever the hell Lamesley ward is. On a more agreeable note, definitely bring Prudhoe in. It is pretty much the same as the western end of Gateshead council and I see no reason they be separated (see also Mickley, Ovingham and Wylam).
|
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 13,656
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Feb 19, 2020 17:26:07 GMT
Yes Bell Tower is bounded by Caversham Rd, the rail line and Richfield Avenue. We have little to do with them, Reading is a bit like a mini Stoke-on-Trent, Reading town centre is like Hanley with Woodley, Caversham, Tilehurst,Coley,Whitley and Earley kind of surrounding the town centres as quite distinct satellite towns. Half the problem is that most of Earley and Woodley aren't in the Borough despite clearly being part of Reading and the same applies for a lot of Tilehurst and its suburbs Calcot,Purley,Kentwood and Beansheaf. It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs. I have an aunt who lives in Early - which is so close to the centre of Reading that it is as Reading as it can be - yet it's in Wokingham. Even Reading University isn't in Reading. I've posted before that the council boundary should be the motorway.
|
|
|
Post by lancastrian on Feb 19, 2020 18:40:33 GMT
Is Bell Tower the area around the Moderation pub? I have to admit my thoughts on natural communities in Reading are shaped partly by the fact the main bus route from Oxford runs through Caversham and then along past there, so I've always felt the areas seemed somewhat similar, but that could be completely different to the actual ties in the area. What I'd do to sort this out is as follows-: . South of the River, I'd put the Bell Tower area into Battle as that has a shared school catchment and good transport links now they rebuilt the Cow Lane bridge. The new ward boundary would be drawn along from the Caversham Road railway bridge along Caversham Road then along Brigham Rd to the river. That should make it a reasonable ward. They should then extend Coley ward from the Bath Road to the Oxford Road bounded by the IDR. They would be a reasonable compromise for Coley and take enough electors off Abbey to put the area east of Brigham Road, north of the rail line and west of the Reading Bridge approach road by Thames Water HQ into Abbey. Then put the remaining part of their proposed Thames ward(east of the Reading Bridge approach road) into Park, as that is under-electorate and needs that area to be within a reasonable level of variance. It would then be renamed Newtown because Newtown would be the bulk of the new ward. Cemetery Junction would be a good name but it focuses too much on the east end of the ward. . North of the River, I'd move all the area south of Gosbrook Road/Church St back into Caversham as it is an integral part of Caversham. To remedy this, I'd move the area bounded by Peppard Road to the west, Henley Road to the south and Chiltern Road to the east into Emmer Green ward. Most of this is in the Henley Road area, not Caversham and fits much better in this ward than in Caversham. To stop this ward being over electorate,I'd probably move the part of Emmer Green ward bounded by Peppard Rd to the east, Kidmore End Rd to the north and Evesham Rd to the south into Heights ward. This is an unfortunate compromise, because this includes Emmer Green Primary and St Barnabas Church, which are recognisably in Emmer Green. But it has to be done to sort out the Caversham debacle. There's no alternative but to cross the river somewhere if you want all 3 member wards. At 121002 forecast electors in the borough and 16 wards that's 7562 per ward, the maximum variance is 10% so 8318 is the maximum size (or it might actually be 10.5%, so a maximum size of 8356, because they've proposed a ward with 8350). So 3x 3 member wards can accommodate at most 24954 (or 25068) electors. There are 25226 forecast electors north of the river.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 23:00:55 GMT
Yes Bell Tower is bounded by Caversham Rd, the rail line and Richfield Avenue. We have little to do with them, Reading is a bit like a mini Stoke-on-Trent, Reading town centre is like Hanley with Woodley, Caversham, Tilehurst,Coley,Whitley and Earley kind of surrounding the town centres as quite distinct satellite towns. Half the problem is that most of Earley and Woodley aren't in the Borough despite clearly being part of Reading and the same applies for a lot of Tilehurst and its suburbs Calcot,Purley,Kentwood and Beansheaf. It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs. Exactly, because it means that Reading doesn't have the council tax base it should when Wokingham and Newbury can use our tax to invest heavily in their end of the borough. I personally think because a lot of the people in the suburbs like to think they don't live in Reading and will fight tooth and nail to stay in West Berks/Wokingham.
|
|
Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells
Independent
Standing for election to the position of Chief Cyber Yob of VUK Forum
Posts: 2,092
Member is Online
|
Post by Disgusted Of Tunbridge Wells on Feb 19, 2020 23:05:17 GMT
It seems odd given what an economic powerhouse Reading is, that a Greater Reading local authority has not been created. There must be few large towns so badly separated from their suburbs. I have an aunt who lives in Early - which is so close to the centre of Reading that it is as Reading as it can be - yet it's in Wokingham. Even Reading University isn't in Reading. I've posted before that the council boundary should be the motorway. I very much agree about the council boundary. My maternal grandmother grew up in Pitts Lane in Woodley and went to school in Earley in the 1930's, so that's interesting.
|
|