NEWCASTLE . . The City Boundary - Should it be changed?

[Geordie Ahmed]

There certainly is an argument for the boundary to be changed BUT i can imagine the 'uproar' this was to be proposed

Since this is a hpothetical thread - where exactly would you want the boundary be changed to? How far out? If possible, throw it on google earth and share

[geordiejon]

We talk about the largest city in the UK within its own boundary- we forget Leeds down the road- which does not have the problem other conurbations such as Manchester, Liverpool or Birmingham. I agree that the later all do not suffer as much as Newcastle does because all of the 3 above are still the largest cities in the UK without having all those bits that were cut off them in 1974. I do agree that newcastle city centre maybe overlooked by many businesses particularly retail or leisure because it has a population of 288,000- hence why many real smaller cities compared to us have better shops.


The boundaries between Newcastle and North Tyneside are the most peculiar I have seen anywhere. Four Lane Ends and Wallsend area particularly, one house in Newcastle and your joined on neighbour is in North Tyneside. I think the boundary commission had a bit of a problem with North Tyneside really. Originally, if I am right wasnt the likes of Blyth, Cram, Bedlington and Ashington supposed to be in the 'Tyneside' metropolitan county (which included sunderland and seaham- obviously the mackem MP's demanded in parliament that the name of the county be changed- hence Tyne and Wear was adopted). If SE Northumberland had been included in the county then the coastal areas such as Whitley, Tynemouth and North Shields could have been joined up with them and the eastern parts of Newcastle- Wallsend, Killingworth, Longbenton, Wideopen could have been part of municpal Newcastle- and the boundaries would, IMO look a lot better. As it is SE Northumberland wasnt included so they had to take of parts of newcastle to make North Tyneside enough population to make it viable.

The other boundaries make failry sense- there is a clear gapish between Gateshead and S.tyneside and between those and Sunderland. Washington is perculiar- what with it being closer to Gateshead than Sunderland- again Washington in Gateshead would have made a lot of sense, as would, IMO eiother having Birtley out of Gateshead and in with Chester le Street or have had Chester le street in with Gateshead.

I agree with a comment before, that even though we all class newcastle city centre as our city centre but live in Whitley or Gateshead and therefore have no say in how it is run. The council must also struggle to support the city, the caters for almost 900,000 i the built up Newcaslte conurbation but only gets the money from 280,000.

I reckon that some day we might see the joining more and more of Necastle and Gateshead- maybe we could get a new name- seeing as the castle isnt very new these days- and as it has many names (pons aelius and monkchester) then maybe Gatecastle is an idea? Then it wouldnt look like Newcastle was swallowing up Gateshead. Just an idea!

Also agree that the vast majority a would not be bothered if all tyneside was being one council- again assuming that there taxes were not going up- so the area with the lowest council tax would have to be used. The thought of taxes going up was one of the main reason why people voted no for the NE assembly. But there would be some small groups fight it- probably sunderland football supporters in S.Tyneside and the like - and the way that things usually go in this country the voices of these minorities will win and the majority who are either in favour or not arsed either way will loose.

[WilfBurnsFan]

Originally Posted by gregstone

On the KLINT point, Longbenton was originally within the Newcastle boundary, but was carved up into the artificially created North Tyneside in a rather peculiar fashion in 1974 (the boundary in the Four Lane Ends area makes very little sense, particularly on the Fairways Estate).

I'm afraid that's incorrect, Greg. Longbenton was an independent Urban District Council until 1974, when it became part of North Tyneside. Newcastle had acquired a great deal of land there and started building the Longbenton estate in the 1950s, but it was never part of Newcastle. What the Post Office call it is irrelevant, and I quite agree that it should be Newcastle (or even better, part of a unified City of Tyneside), but it never has been yet.

[johnnypd]

Originally Posted by gregstone

but then, would you include places like Dalkeith or Queensferry? They're only 5 miles or so out from Edinburgh but they are separate towns in different local authorities. Historically they were distinct towns, today they are part of the "greater" city area... if you applied the same logic to Newcastle, would you include Wallsend and North Shields or not?

those places are physically separate though i believe queensferry is in the city of edinburgh. wallsend is clearly joined on to newcastle, it's not even suburbia it is practically an inner city heavy industrial (or ex industrial) community. i'd compare it with say somewhere like Leith which was its own town and joined up with edinburgh due to georgian development schemes in new town, down leith walk etc.

[gregstone]

Originally Posted by WilfBurnsFan

I'm afraid that's incorrect, Greg. Longbenton was an independent Urban District Council until 1974, when it became part of North Tyneside. Newcastle had acquired a great deal of land there and started building the Longbenton estate in the 1950s, but it was never part of Newcastle. What the Post Office call it is irrelevant, and I quite agree that it should be Newcastle (or even better, part of a unified City of Tyneside), but it never has been yet.

I stand corrected on Longbenton although I think some of the land around Four Lane Ends / Fairways was Newcastle and went into NT.

[gregstone]

I also note one of the articles mentions that there were previously historical anomalies which meant that small parts of land south of the river near Lemington / Stella were officially Newcastle not Gateshead...

[johnnypd]

Originally Posted by gregstone

I also note one of the articles mentions that there were previously historical anomalies which meant that small parts of land south of the river near Lemington / Stella were officially Newcastle not Gateshead...

wild guess - might that be something to do with the power station that used to be on that site straddling the river?

[WilfBurnsFan]

There was also a chunk of Newburn Haugh, north of the river, that was part of Blaydon/Gateshead up to the 1990s. That's because the boundary followed the old course of the river, while the river itself was 'straightened' when the Tyne Improvement Commission constructed 'Cowen's Cut' in the late c19th.

[Irish Blood English Heart]

I work in the public sector in Gateshead and always find it amusing when people from Swallwell and Whickham get really tetchy when you ask them if they live in Gateshead, "no Newcastle thankyou".

[johnnypd]

Originally Posted by Irish Blood English Heart

I work in the public sector in Gateshead and always find it amusing when people from Swallwell and Whickham get really tetchy when you ask them if they live in Gateshead, "no Newcastle thankyou".

it's funny to see planning applications submitted to gateshead council wit hthe address listed as newcastle upon tyne. im sure there's plenty of tales of people from whickham submitted planning applications to newcastle council too.

[gregstone]

beyond the Derwent, it's not really Gateshead any more... it would have been County Durham though pre 74.

On the Leeds point mentioned above, the Leeds city boundary includes outlying towns like Pudsey, Wetherby, Garforth, and Morley. They are not quite joined up with the main city.