Boundaries And Retail.

[Mark76]

According to the Office of National Statistics Leicester Unitary Authority has a larger population (289K) than both Nottingham (286K) and Newcastle Upon Tyne (270K). This is the population within the official boundaries of each city and does not include areas that are contiguous with the city but controlled by a different council.

In all three cases the relevant authority for each urban area (as defined by the ONS) is responsible for collecting revenues and providing services. They are not permitted to collect revenue from outside their area of influence; though service provision tends to be a little more fluid these days. Thus: Leicester city council can not demand that residents of Blaby pay their council tax to New Walk, nor can NCC insist that the people of Rushcliffe pay into the coffers at, erm, wherever (Clifton?). To the same end, Leicester, Nottingham and Newcastle city councils may attempt to influence the surrounding borough councils, and even to form partnerships with them for reasons of mutual interest, but they cannot, ultimately, have any real say on the policies of those councils; which are often (though not always) of an entirely different political stripe. Likewise, money spent in Clifton goes to Clifton Borough Council via the business rates and not to Nottingham. Ditto for Oadby and Leicester. By the same token people who work in the cities may not necessarily live in them. Nor is it a given that they will choose to spend their money there (as Fosse Park proves).

Therefore, it is, in my view, a waste of time to talk about Metropolitan Areas or Greater Urban Areas as if they have any real existence beyond the minds of city councillors dreaming of expansion and retail analysists studying shopping trends and catchment areas. Whilst it's true that Nottingham's location in the south of its county does make it an attractive destination for shoppers from South East Deryshire and North Leicestershire it also has to compete with Sheffield and Meadowhall for the retail £s of people in North Notts. Just as Leicester city centre competes with Nottingham city centre to attract people from North Leics and SE Derbys.

The completion of the Highcross in 2008 will make it even harder for Nottingham to attract people from Leicestershire to spend in their city, thus lowering revenues for NCC from that quarter and boosting them for LCC. Even the more modest new Eagle Centre (AKA Westfields, Derby) will have an effect on Nottingham's retail income in the long term. Even if you allow for the expansion of the Broadmarsh that's still quite a few years away. Years in which both Leicester and Derby can, and will, continue expanding their retail offers.

What NUT has to do with this, I have No idea

[outsider1]

I can see this is going to go down well!
The forum seems a bit dead at the moment so perhaps we need something to argue about.

[Mark76]

I updated the population figures. Seems Nottm's catching up again.

Oh look! There's Danz. Quelle Surprise

[danz013]

Originally Posted by Mark76

According to the Office of National Statistics Leicester Unitary Authority has a larger population (289K) than both Nottingham (286K) and Newcastle Upon Tyne (270K). This is the population within the official boundaries of each city and does not include areas that are contiguous with the city but controlled by a different council.

In all three cases the relevant authority for each urban area (as defined by the ONS) is responsible for collecting revenues and providing services. They are not permitted to collect revenue from outside their area of influence; though service provision tends to be a little more fluid these days. Thus: Leicester city council can not demand that residents of Blaby pay their council tax to New Walk, nor can NCC insist that the people of Rushcliffe pay into the coffers at, erm, wherever (Clifton?). To the same end, Leicester, Nottingham and Newcastle city councils may attempt to influence the surrounding borough councils, and even to form partnerships with them for reasons of mutual interest, but they cannot, ultimately, have any real say on the policies of those councils; which are often (though not always) of an entirely different political stripe. Likewise, money spent in Clifton goes to Clifton Borough Council via the business rates and not to Nottingham. Ditto for Oadby and Leicester. By the same token people who work in the cities may not necessarily live in them. Nor is it a given that they will choose to spend their money there (as Fosse Park proves).

Therefore, it is, in my view, a waste of time to talk about Metropolitan Areas or Greater Urban Areas as if they have any real existence beyond the minds of city councillors dreaming of expansion and retail analysists studying shopping trends and catchment areas. Whilst it's true that Nottingham's location in the south of its county does make it an attractive destination for shoppers from South East Deryshire and North Leicestershire it also has to compete with Sheffield and Meadowhall for the retail £s of people in North Notts. Just as Leicester city centre competes with Nottingham city centre to attract people from North Leics and SE Derbys.

The completion of the Highcross in 2008 will make it even harder for Nottingham to attract people from Leicestershire to spend in their city, thus lowering revenues for NCC from that quarter and boosting them for LCC. Even the more modest new Eagle Centre (AKA Westfields, Derby) will have an effect on Nottingham's retail income in the long term. Even if you allow for the expansion of the Broadmarsh that's still quite a few years away. Years in which both Leicester and Derby can, and will, continue expanding their retail offers.

What NUT has to do with this, I have No idea

What the **** are you talking about lol?? I disagree with the last paragraph to an extent but Whats your point? What ultimately are you saying?

Mark76. I think you should contact Wjfoxx and rename this thread Nottingham Vs Leicester. Depending on what you say next.. I predict this thread will be the fastest growing thread in the EM Forum lol.

[danz013]

Originally Posted by Mark76

I updated the population figures. Seems Nottm's catching up again.

Oh look! There's Danz. Quelle Surprise

[danz013]

Mark!!! Why have you done this?? I can't do this today lol.

[danz013]

Originally Posted by Mark76

Likewise, money spent in Clifton goes to Clifton Borough Council via the business rates and not to Nottingham.

Money spent in Clifton goes to the businesses in clifton? Taxes taken in Clifton go to Nottingham City Council? Your facts are totally wrong?

Originally Posted by Mark76

Therefore, it is, in my view, a waste of time to talk about Metropolitan Areas or Greater Urban Areas as if they have any real existence beyond the minds of city councillors dreaming of expansion and retail analysists studying shopping trends and catchment areas.

Whilst it's true that Nottingham's location in the south of its county does make it an attractive destination for shoppers from South East Deryshire and North Leicestershire it also has to compete with Sheffield and Meadowhall for the retail £s of people in North Notts. Just as Leicester city centre competes with Nottingham city centre to attract people from North Leics and SE Derbys.

I've split your paragraph into two parts above. The two parts bear no relation to each other?

Originally Posted by Mark76

The completion of the Highcross in 2008 will make it even harder for Nottingham to attract people from Leicestershire to spend in their city, thus lowering revenues for NCC from that quarter and boosting them for LCC. Even the more modest new Eagle Centre (AKA Westfields, Derby) will have an effect on Nottingham's retail income in the long term. Even if you allow for the expansion of the Broadmarsh that's still quite a few years away. Years in which both Leicester and Derby can, and will, continue expanding their retail offers.

I disagree to a great extent though I agree with some principles.

[Mark76]

I'm saying let's stop pretending there actually is a Greater Nottingham or a Greater Leicester as political entitities. It's only in the sphere of economic activity (and especially retail) that the notion makes any sense. Greater Nottingham may well have a population of over 600K, but less than half of that contributes directly (in the form of council tax) to the city coffers. For the rest you have to rely on retail spend and for that you're going to find yourselves increasingly having to compete with other destinations. I mean, do you honestly think that once the Highcross is finished we'll just politely sit back and wait for you to build the Broadmarsh - Westfields Centre? The HCL will attract people into our city centre who might previously have chosen to go to yours. That'll attract more and better shops to open. You see, it's a dynamics thing. We were stagnant for so long, and that affected us badly.

[Mark76]

Money spent in Clifton goes to the businesses in clifton? Taxes taken in Clifton go to Nottingham City Council? Your facts are totally wrong?

Where did I say taxes taken in Clifton go to NCC? I'm pretty sure I didn't.

[danz013]

I don't understand what your saying? You seem to have two point.. one about Boundaries.. and one about retail? I understand the points your making about the two but I disagree with both of them. But before I explain why... what I am trying to understand is how the two come together?

[danz013]

Originally Posted by Mark76

Where did I say taxes taken in Clifton go to NCC? I'm pretty sure I didn't.

You didn't... You said.. Taxes taken in clifton go to Clifton Borough Council. They don't they go to Nottingham City Council.

[Mark76]

Yeah, I kind of tacked on the retail thing to show that that's the only way either of our city councils can make money from the GUA notion.

[Mark76]

Clifton is actually in Nottingham?

Okay.

It was just an example. I'm not that hot on the political geography of Notts

[outsider1]

Surely the most important population figure, is that of those who contribute directly to the city coffers as this is what pays for council funded regeneration projects e.g streets and spaces. Thats why a year or so both Nottingham and Leicester City Councils wanted to eat up some of their surrounding areas. Which at the time also meant more government funding. However if both cities did this then Leicester unfortunately would probably loose. The Urban area in a way is irrelevant as if what is offered in the city centres is good enough people will travel accross the East Midlands to get to it. Its pointless arguing whether Leicester or Nottingham is bigger as the difference is negliable. Even if you did take into account the Urban areas, Nottingham may be bigger, but its still not enough to move them to a different league to Leicester.

Lets just face it both Leicester and Nottingham are two medium sized regional cities.

[outsider1]

However, i can see this arguement going on and on. with people manipulating figures to suggest their city is bigger/ better etc.

[Mark76]

Correctamundo!

And no amount of GUA jiggerypokery can ever change that as long as the current boundaries remain.

[Mark76]

Incidentally, up until about 20 years ago Nottingham city's population actually was bigger than Leicester's. Then we overtook them.

Anyone know why?

[outsider1]

To be honest i'm not sure, but with more and more apartments being built in our cities, I can only see them (both Leicester and Nottingham) getting bigger, which can only be a good thing for investment in our cities.

[danz013]

Originally Posted by Mark76

Yeah, I kind of tacked on the retail thing to show that that's the only way either of our city councils can make money from the GUA notion.

I know... so whatis your point? Why does that mean we should never talk about Urban Areas?

- Nottingham attracts masses of retail because we have a large urban area. Look at the retail spend charts.. they're all *roughly* proportional to city sizes

- Nottingham has a tram system which extends out into greater Nottingham. We have this tram system because of the huge size of our conurbation.

- Nottingham is home to many of the regions largest businesses. We're home to most of the regions regional businesses. One of the main reasons for this is the huge population in our conurbation

Originally Posted by outsider1

Surely the most important population figure, is that of those who contribute directly to the city coffers as this is what pays for council funded regeneration projects e.g streets and spaces. Thats why a year or so both Nottingham and Leicester City Councils wanted to eat up some of their surrounding areas. Which at the time also meant more government funding.

Nottingham has said many times we do not want to extend our boundaries. We have One Nottingham, Greater Nottingham Partnership, Greater Nottingham Business Partnership to ensure all out local authorities are working towards the same targets.

We have a great influence over the other authorities. We work together put put in places thing like the trams, the councils have an agreement that no large retail centre should be built outside of the city centres etc. I'm sure binge and furry can give you many more examples.

Originally Posted by outsider1

The Urban area in a way is irrelevant as if what is offered in the city centres is good enough people will travel accross the East Midlands to get to it. Its pointless arguing whether Leicester or Nottingham is bigger as the difference is negliable. Even if you did take into account the Urban areas, Nottingham may be bigger, but its still not enough to move them to a different league to Leicester.

I can assure you that it is only you guys from Leicester than believe Urban areas sizes are irrelevant. I have had boundary issue debates many times with people from all over the country and you guys are the only people who that I have ever spoken too are suggesting that the size of an official boundary is the true representation of a city?

Nottingham is a core city based on the size of its urban area whilst Leicester is not. Leicester misses out on many things simply due to the size of the city.

As someone has said many times... the size of London is officially 1 sqaure mile with a population of 2,000 people or so. Greater London is however 609 sq miles with a population of 12-14 million?

Originally Posted by outsider1

Lets just face it both Leicester and Nottingham are two medium sized regional cities.

If you think 150,000/200,000 is not a big difference then your entitled to your own opinion.

Oursider, you sound just like Lears. Please don't end up like him.

[danz013]

Originally Posted by outsider1

To be honest i'm not sure, but with more and more apartments being built in our cities, I can only see them (both Leicester and Nottingham) getting bigger, which can only be a good thing for investment in our cities.

Nottingham is the fastest growing core city. I personally believe that if the figures Mark76 quoted are correct. Than Nottingham will more than likely overtake Leicester's LA Population by the next census in 2011.