IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Anyone recognise this market?
Simon Kirby
post Aug 7 2016, 09:42 PM
Post #21


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 7 2016, 07:24 PM) *
A fine distinction Blackdog! In effect, you are saying administrative boundaries have no value. I'd not disagree, because this means that the idea of stripping out all the 'services' from local government and delivering them all by national agencies would be far more practical. That would mean having no WBC at all, a very small compact NTC which comprised of a Mayor and Councillors to the County's Lord Lieutenant.

That's certainly the model I'd like to see, with the majority of what WBC does absorbed by national agencies. I would however keep the parish level of local government to run parks and allotments, though I'd stop tje chair of the parish council being styled "mayor" as that ceremonial anachronism puffs them up and puts an unhealthy distance between council and parishioners. I would instead encourage pubs and such to field "mock mayors" along with Jack o' the green, May queen, hobby horse, lords of misrule, and whatever else keeps the powers that be from taking themselves too seriously.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Aug 7 2016, 11:23 PM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 7 2016, 07:24 PM) *
A fine distinction Blackdog! In effect, you are saying administrative boundaries have no value. I'd not disagree, because this means that the idea of stripping out all the 'services' from local government and delivering them all by national agencies would be far more practical. That would mean having no WBC at all, a very small compact NTC which comprised of a Mayor and Councillors to the County's Lord Lieutenant.

Not at all, administrative boundaries are important in the obvious ways. I'm simply saying that historically county boundaries had little to do with administration - a situation to which Berkshire has returned.

Until County Councils were imposed in 1880ish there were no problems with administrative areas (hundreds, poor law uniions, parishes, etc) overlapping county boundaries. Once county councils were created these overlaps suddenly became a problem and forced a redrawing (in 1895) of many boundaries to ensure that the smaller administrative regions fell entirely within and could became fully subservient to the county council.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 8 2016, 07:07 AM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 8 2016, 12:23 AM) *
Not at all, administrative boundaries are important in the obvious ways. I'm simply saying that historically county boundaries had little to do with administration - a situation to which Berkshire has returned.

Until County Councils were imposed in 1880ish there were no problems with administrative areas (hundreds, poor law uniions, parishes, etc) overlapping county boundaries. Once county councils were created these overlaps suddenly became a problem and forced a redrawing (in 1895) of many boundaries to ensure that the smaller administrative regions fell entirely within and could became fully subservient to the county council.


Doesn't really explain why the 'ceremonial county' is defined by the arbitrary 1974 revision does it? What was the sudden problem that meant for these ceremonial purposes, Wantage was no longer included, but Slough was? I must admit, it's not just make believe, you couldn't make up!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Aug 8 2016, 08:02 AM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



If WBC is only letting West Berkshire residents use the WBC dumps I guess NTC will want to exclude non-Newbury residents from shopping in the market.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 8 2016, 02:38 PM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



Well, we could apply these rules properly! For those wanting to hang on to tradition and the old ways, why don't we make anyone claiming benefits (poor relief) do so only in their parish of birth.

Actually, this latest juvenile spat does at least graphically demonstrate that delivering public services through local councils is now time expired and actually works against the interests of the residents. The sad thing is that us suckers actually pay real money for these stupidities.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Aug 8 2016, 03:35 PM
Post #26


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 8 2016, 03:38 PM) *
Actually, this latest juvenile spat does at least graphically demonstrate that delivering public services through local councils is now time expired and actually works against the interests of the residents. The sad thing is that us suckers actually pay real money for these stupidities.

And on top of that you ridiculously have to travel down the hill to within 10 yards of the Hampshire border and back up the hill again just to get to the tip recycling centre!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Aug 9 2016, 12:09 AM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 8 2016, 08:07 AM) *
Doesn't really explain why the 'ceremonial county' is defined by the arbitrary 1974 revision does it?


Can't argue with that one - as far as I'm concerned Berkshire's northern boundary is the Thames - except in the Abingdon Wallingford area where its the eastern boundary!

And Slough is in Buckinghamshire!

When they were selling the 1974 debace there were plenty of assurances that the county boundaries weren't changing, it was all just and administrative rationalisation. Total bo11ocks. I could almost excuse the discarding of 2000 years of history if it was done rationally; but it was a typical Whitehall fudge that failed totally to fulfill the original concept.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 9 2016, 05:33 AM
Post #28


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 9 2016, 01:09 AM) *
Can't argue with that one - as far as I'm concerned Berkshire's northern boundary is the Thames - except in the Abingdon Wallingford area where its the eastern boundary!

And Slough is in Buckinghamshire!

When they were selling the 1974 debace there were plenty of assurances that the county boundaries weren't changing, it was all just and administrative rationalisation. Total bo11ocks. I could almost excuse the discarding of 2000 years of history if it was done rationally; but it was a typical Whitehall fudge that failed totally to fulfill the original concept.


I wish there was a 'like' button, I could have used it!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JeffG
post Aug 9 2016, 08:26 AM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,762
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 56



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 8 2016, 04:35 PM) *
And on top of that you ridiculously have to travel down the hill to within 10 yards of the Hampshire border and back up the hill again just to get to the tip recycling centre!

At least you and I can still use our nearest recycling centre, unlike the people of Tilehurst, Calcot etc. And the small detour is probably just as well, considering the speed traffic travels up that hill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 9 2016, 08:39 AM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 9 2016, 09:26 AM) *
At least you and I can still use our nearest recycling centre, unlike the people of Tilehurst, Calcot etc. And the small detour is probably just as well, considering the speed traffic travels up that hill.


It's a small price to pay compaired to the superb levels of service in all the other respects for such a reasonable council tax......their Reading neighbours must be very envious!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
user23
post Aug 9 2016, 08:41 AM
Post #31


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,025
Joined: 14-May 09
Member No.: 50



QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 9 2016, 01:09 AM) *
I could almost excuse the discarding of 2000 years of history if it was done rationally;
Somewhat ironic, given some in the the thread have argued for abandoning a historic market.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Aug 9 2016, 09:59 AM
Post #32


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,847
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 9 2016, 09:41 AM) *
Somewhat ironic, given some in the the thread have argued for abandoning a historic market.


Well, in reality the market has abandoned itself! Or you you think it's the Council's duty to keep all old practices alive? Why did the livestock market close, apparently there was still some demand still when it shut up shop? Surely an even bigger case for retention!


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Aug 9 2016, 01:26 PM
Post #33


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 9 2016, 09:41 AM) *
Somewhat ironic, given some in the the thread have argued for abandoning a historic market.

The operative word in blacdog's argument is "rational". Abandoning an anachronistic public market because it no longer provides any public service and is costing the tax-payer to provide it is a perfectly rational decision.

More generally though, if there is an argument with a historical precedent it is for the rent-free oppirtunity for traders to tout their wares free from the exploitation and interferance of an avaricious state. Newbury exists because of its geography, sitting on a bridging point over the Kennet, and bronze-age traders would have been trading here many thousands of years before the state began ponsing off that trade by sanctioning markets with a royal charters. Markets are now an anachronism with high street shops taking their trade, and then supermarkets taking the trade from high streets, and I don't doubt that on-line shopping will in turn take the trade off the supermarkets, so there is no historical precedent for the charter market, though plenty of precedent for a self-serving state taxing trade.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Aug 9 2016, 05:39 PM
Post #34


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 9 2016, 09:26 AM) *
At least you and I can still use our nearest recycling centre, unlike the people of Tilehurst, Calcot etc. And the small detour is probably just as well, considering the speed traffic travels up that hill.

A right turn junction could easily have been built either controlled by a roundabout or lights.
This has been done at many other places locally where a right turn was required against heavy traffic.
When you consider the amount of fuel burned by each vehicle travelling down to the Swan Roundabout and back up the hill again the environmental impact will be significant.
In addition to this it would calm the traffic that you say speeds up the hill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HJD
post Aug 10 2016, 07:50 AM
Post #35


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 420
Joined: 5-September 09
Member No.: 322



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 9 2016, 05:39 PM) *
When you consider the amount of fuel burned by each vehicle travelling down to the Swan Roundabout and back up the hill again the environmental impact will be significant.


Before long those that live just the other side of the Swan roundabout will have to burn a darn site more fuel by having to travel to Basingstoke or Andover !!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Aug 10 2016, 10:37 AM
Post #36


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 9 2016, 06:39 PM) *
When you consider the amount of fuel burned by each vehicle travelling down to the Swan Roundabout and back up the hill again the environmental impact will be significant.

Car/lorries waiting at and accelerating away from an extra set of traffic lights or roundabout would probably burn more fuel. And that's without considering the environmental cost of building a junction in the first place. It's not exactly a problem doing the short detour round the Swan roundabout.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
greenmeanie61
post Aug 10 2016, 11:22 AM
Post #37


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 28-April 12
From: Newbury
Member No.: 8,710



ah ha!! I recently had a heated on-street discussion with a "40 years" resident of Newbury, who assured me that there never used to be double yellow lines in the Market Place prior to pedestrianisation. I, apparently, was wrong, wrong, wrong!

Stand corrected, Sir (whoever you are)!!!!! tongue.gif


--------------------
GM61
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Aug 10 2016, 11:55 AM
Post #38


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,902
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (greenmeanie61 @ Aug 10 2016, 12:22 PM) *
ah ha!! I recently had a heated on-street discussion with a "40 years" resident of Newbury, who assured me that there never used to be double yellow lines in the Market Place prior to pedestrianisation. I, apparently, was wrong, wrong, wrong!

Stand corrected, Sir (whoever you are)!!!!! tongue.gif

The double yellows are relatively new; perhaps when the pavement widening was introduced. I remember being able to park at the kerb in the market place, which would be the 1980s I suspect.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Aug 10 2016, 02:21 PM
Post #39


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 10 2016, 11:37 AM) *
Car/lorries waiting at and accelerating away from an extra set of traffic lights or roundabout would probably burn more fuel. And that's without considering the environmental cost of building a junction in the first place.

I disagree.
A significant amount of fuel is burnt by every vehicle visiting the site have to ride up the hill from Newtown for EVERY visit.
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 10 2016, 11:37 AM) *
It's not exactly a problem doing the short detour round the Swan roundabout.

You could say the same about many other places locally where a right turn has been put in so they don't have to.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
blackdog
post Aug 10 2016, 03:43 PM
Post #40


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,945
Joined: 5-June 09
Member No.: 130



QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 10 2016, 03:21 PM) *
I disagree.
A significant amount of fuel is burnt by every vehicle visiting the site have to ride up the hill from Newtown for EVERY visit.

A hundred or two vehicles will do the loop each day, thousands would slow, perhaps wait at a new juntion and use up extra fuel accelerating away. Inconveniencing every user of the road to the benefit of a small minority - doesn't seem worth it to me.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V  < 1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 28th March 2024 - 04:10 PM