Eight new cities to mark Platinum Jubilee

[bearhugger]

As per the title, 8 new cities have been announced including Stanley in The Falklands & Douglas in the Isle of Man.
Other towns listed in the BBC article are:

• Milton Keynes
• Dunfermline
• Bangor
• Wrexham
• Colchester
• Doncaster

(and living in a town that had bid for City Status in this latest round, I'm not bitter! )

 

[Bletchleyite]

With MK it's about time (I would say that, but it really is).

Some of the others seem a bit strange. Wrexham is a small and very scruffy town. I suppose it's about regeneration to some extent? Colchester and Donny are probably justified, though it's odd that there's no interest in returning the incorrectly taken city status from Rochester (lost due to an administrative error).

Yet the ones I think that would be obvious candidates, such as Shrewsbury, Bournemouth and Reading, don't feature.

It's worth noting by the way that Bangor is the one in Northern Ireland - Bangor in North Wales was already one.

 

[bearhugger]

MK is one of those places that I've always kind of assumed was already a city.

 

[jfollows]

I don't believe that being called a city confers anything additional on the place than it already had, it's simply some kind of "prestige" thing, maybe akin to the honours system for people for those who believe in it. But I'd be very interested to be contradicted with anything tangible that changes as a result of a town becoming a city.

 

[Bletchleyite]

MK is one of those places that I've always kind of assumed was already a city.

It was a New City, which was a term used by the Commission for the New Towns to mean "a big new town" and didn't convey city status, so it's already on most signage.

Curiously, people talk of going to the centre as going "up the city", whereas in traditional cities that is "going to town". In my case "going to town" would mean going to Bletchley town centre, though it's grim so it's not a phrase I'd use often! By comparison in the area around Liverpool if going to your local town centre you'd tend to specify which one, e.g. "going into* Ormskirk" or "going to* Southport", with "going to town" being reserved for Liverpool city centre. i think Manchester terminology is largely similar though I don't doubt some people would call the larger components like Stockport or Bolton "town".

* No idea why one gets "into" and one "to", but that is what my parents say!

I don't believe that being called a city confers anything additional on the place than it already had, it's simply some kind of "prestige" thing, maybe akin to the honours system for people for those who believe in it. But I'd be very interested to be contradicted with anything tangible that changes as a result of a town becoming a city.

It's purely ceremonial, but does change peoples' attitudes to a place.

 

[jfollows]

I'm glad, though, that 86211's name is retrospectively correct now (I looked for, and saw, its nameplate when I passed Colwich last month). (Not my picture from last month: https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4032/4633093714_727b2fbd63_b.jpg)

 

[DarloRich]

With MK it's about time (I would say that, but it really is).

Agree. Although I have to stop being a pedant by saying you cant go up the city. It is just a town

MK is one of those places that I've always kind of assumed was already a city.

It was badged and treated a such by the council. it certainly feels different to many other places i have lived. On the same subject I always thought Colchester was a city!

I don't believe that being called a city confers anything additional on the place than it already had, it's simply some kind of "prestige" thing, maybe akin to the honours system for people for those who believe in it. But I'd be very interested to be contradicted with anything tangible that changes as a result of a town becoming a city.

it is good PR, nothing else.

 

[hexagon789]

I think it's a fairly good selection, though Stanley is perhaps a little small!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think it's a fairly good selection, though Stanley is perhaps a little small!

To be fair a big thing has been made of at least one in each part of the UK, which includes the Falklands. That's probably what resulted in Wrexham - while I think it's pushing it in terms of justification, I'm also struggling to think of anywhere else in Wales that did justify it and isn't already a city, unless they did another one that was obviously a bit silly like St Asaph. Maybe Aberystwyth at a massive push. Most of the other places I'd feel would justify it e.g. Bournemouth, Reading and Shrewsbury, are in England.

 

[hexagon789]

To be fair a big thing has been made of at least one in each part of the UK, which includes the Falklands. That's probably what resulted in Wrexham - while I think it's pushing it in terms of justification, I'm also struggling to think of anywhere else in Wales that did justify it and isn't already a city, unless they did another one that was obviously a bit silly like St Asaph. Maybe Aberystwyth at a massive push. Most of the other places I'd feel would justify it e.g. Bournemouth, Reading and Shrewsbury, are in England.

St Asaph presumably because of the cathedral.

I do appreciate the reasoning behind Stanley, don't get me wrong. I wonder if it's now the worlds smallest city?

Could be a unique tourist selling point!

 

[Bletchleyite]

St Asaph presumably because of the cathedral.

I do appreciate the reasoning behind Stanley, don't get me wrong. I wonder if it's now the worlds smallest city?

Could be a unique tourist selling point!

St Davids is a bit smaller at a population of 1600 vs about 2500 in Stanley.

I doubt there'd be a world competition, because most of the world doesn't have city status - e.g. in German the word for city is just Grossstadt - "big town". Something St Davids definitely isn't!

 

[hexagon789]

St Davids is a bit smaller at a population of 1600 vs about 2500 in Stanley.

I doubt there'd be a world competition, because most of the world doesn't have city status - e.g. in German the word for city is just Grossstadt - "big town". Something St Davids definitely isn't!

Oh, I thought St Asaph was the smallest - my mistake.

Good point, it's more an English-speaking country thing I suppose.

 

[dk1]

Wonder if Colchester Town (formerly St.Botolphs) station will be renamed Colchester City?

 

[duncombec]

though it's odd that there's no interest in returning the incorrectly taken city status from Rochester (lost due to an administrative error).

Apparently (according to one of those much loved "someone told someone who told someone who told someone who told the local paper"-type sources say) it was strongly hinted to the local authority after the last time (2012, or maybe the time before that, 2002) that if they applied for Rochester in its own right it would be hard to refuse. However, because there is an insistence in applying for the entire unitary authority, made up of five very distinct towns and vast swathes of 1960s suburbia, they don't have a hope. Essentially, this would be a return to the pre-1997 situation, where the "City of Rochester upon Medway" covered a chunk of the same area, even though only Rochester was the city.

The same has been true of all the other locations: stoke is a city, but not the rest of the wider area. Brighton is a city, but Hove is not, even though they are managed by the same unitary authority. I believe it's also why some of the vaguer areas (wasn't there some sort of "South West Scotland" approach?) haven't got an outcome.

 

[Bletchleyite]

An interesting question with MK is what exactly will become a city - the "Borough and New City of Milton Keynes"* (now a unitary but including places like Olney) or just the urban area, and if so exactly what boundaries? Or even excluding Bletchley and other old bits? This doesn't seem dissimilar in concept to Rochester.

* That, which appears on most of the signage, can be read in two ways - that it's one thing that is both a borough and "New City"**, or that it's a combination of two things, a borough *and* a "New City". I think it's meant to be the former, FWIW.
** Big new town conveying no particular status

 

[kristiang85]

I'd prefer it if we just went on when a settlement hits a certain population, but I guess that's a boring opinion!

City of Bangor? Really? Yet Reading, with a population 22x the size (and even bigger than MK), is still a 'town'.

A load of old nonsense really. If a town wants a bit of prestige, give them the 'Capital of Culture' status for a year and leave it at that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I find the fact that Reading and Bournemouth don't have city status quite bizarre. Bournemouth has twice the population of even MK, and Reading is about 100K bigger. Shrewsbury is about 70K but for some reason it just feels like a city.

 

[AlterEgo]

To be fair a big thing has been made of at least one in each part of the UK, which includes the Falklands.

The Falklands isn’t in the UK and neither is the Isle of Man, being an Overseas Territory and a Crown Dependency respectively. However the Queen retains the gift of letters patent for city status over the settlements there.

St Asaph presumably because of the cathedral.

I do appreciate the reasoning behind Stanley, don't get me wrong. I wonder if it's now the worlds smallest city?

Could be a unique tourist selling point!

City status in places like the US is quite different, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some “cities” had only a few dozen residents.

 

[duncombec]

An interesting question with MK is what exactly will become a city - the "Borough and New City of Milton Keynes"* (now a unitary but including places like Olney) or just the urban area, and if so exactly what boundaries? Or even excluding Bletchley and other old bits? This doesn't seem dissimilar in concept to Rochester.

* That, which appears on most of the signage, can be read in two ways - that it's one thing that is both a borough and "New City"**, or that it's a combination of two things, a borough *and* a "New City". I think it's meant to be the former, FWIW.
** Big new town conveying no particular status

You'll probably find just the urban area (the bit called "Milton Keynes" will become the city in terms of the letters patent, but the entire Unitary authority area will be called "the City of Milton Keynes Unitary Authority" or something like that... much the same way as Bletchley is "Milton Keynes" for local government now, but not actually Milton Keynes.

 

[AlterEgo]

MK is one of those places that I've always kind of assumed was already a city.

MK is the most overdue of all those on the list, for sure!

 

[Bletchleyite]

City status in places like the US is quite different, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some “cities” had only a few dozen residents.

In the US it's an administrative status, isn't it? A bit more like a particular type of Council?

In the UK it's purely ceremonial.

You'll probably find just the urban area (the bit called "Milton Keynes" will become the city in terms of the letters patent, but the entire Unitary authority area will be called "the City of Milton Keynes Unitary Authority" or something like that... much the same way as Bletchley is "Milton Keynes" for local government now, but not actually Milton Keynes.

FWIW it's currently called "Milton Keynes Council" so I'd expect either "The City of Milton Keynes Council" or "Milton Keynes City Council" as a title.

There are traditional comparisons. Lancaster City Council covers Morecambe, a town, for example.

 

[duncombec]

FWIW it's currently called "Milton Keynes Council" so I'd expect either "The City of Milton Keynes Council" or "Milton Keynes City Council" as a title.

There are traditional comparisons. Lancaster City Council covers Morecambe, a town, for example.

It will work in exactly the same way - similarly, Canterbury City Council covers Whitstable and Herne Bay, but nobody is under any doubt that only Canterbury is the city in the truest sense of the word.

The issue with Rochester is that the authority want the city status to cover the entire area: we'd all agree the City of Cornwall would be ludicrous, so why should an entire urban unitary get the same treatment? A good chunk of the populace aren't too keen on the modern idea either, but would happily see a return to the pre-1997 status.

 

[Railsigns]

Wonder if Colchester Town (formerly St.Botolphs) station will be renamed Colchester City?

Dunfermline Town station as well?

 

[PTR 444]

I find the fact that Reading and Bournemouth don't have city status quite bizarre. Bournemouth has twice the population of even MK, and Reading is about 100K bigger. Shrewsbury is about 70K but for some reason it just feels like a city.

According to 2017 population estimates, the largest settlement in the UK which isn’t a city is in fact Northampton

100 Largest Cities and Towns in the UK by Population | The Geographist

The 100 largest cities and towns in the United Kingdom ranked by population. London is the most populous city in the UK, followed by Birmingham and Glasgow.

www.thegeographist.com

In terms of largest settlements (as opposed to largest towns) Reading comes 25th on the list and Bournemouth in 30th. Other notable entries which aren’t cities include Luton (26th place), Bolton (28th place), Swindon (32nd place) and Middlesbrough (36th place).

Shrewsbury however does not make the top 100. Amazingly it is even smaller than towns like Sutton Coldfield and Raleigh (Essex).

 

[duncanp]

It's worth noting by the way that Bangor is the one in Northern Ireland - Bangor in North Wales was already one.

Naga Munchetty on BBC Breakfast this morning was unsure which Bangor had been awarded city status this morning.

"..and now we are going over to our reporter in Bangor in, er,er ...to our reporter in Bangor.."

 

[dk1]

Dunfermline Town station as well?

Oh yes, so it is

 

[nw1]

St Asaph presumably because of the cathedral.

I realise that it wasn't officially a city then (though it appears to have been historically) - but in 1978 I distinctly remember the sign "Welcome to the city of St Asaph" sighted from the A55. As the place didn't look very big I found that quite amusing as a child!

In the US it's an administrative status, isn't it? A bit more like a particular type of Council?

I believe so yes. I have visited the City of Signal Hill, California (just north of Long Beach and within the Greater LA urban area) and that is certainly very small - yet it has its own council and hence is a city.

 

[hexagon789]

In the US it's an administrative status, isn't it? A bit more like a particular type of Council?

Wasn't Disneyland in Florida legally a city until recently?

I realise that it wasn't officially a city then (though it appears to have been historically) - but in 1978 I distinctly remember the sign "Welcome to the city of St Asaph" sighted from the A55. As the place didn't look very big I found that quite amusing as a child!

I wonder what St Davids is like?

A High Street and a few houses?

 

[nw1]

I wonder what St Davids is like?

A High Street and a few houses?

I've been there too, in the late 80s. Like a small town, if I remember right - but with a big cathedral and surrounding green area.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I wonder what St Davids is like?

A High Street and a few houses?

A small and very quaint country village with a bit of a "surfer" vibe. Lovely place though rather out of the way to visit!

You can always Google Streetview it!