Is Greater London actually several cities?

Dylan Leblanc · #1 Posted: **Sep 22, 2003, 9:51 PM**

If so then it should be split up.

Jared · #2 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 1:29 AM**

the "City of London" is actually a tiny piece right in the center of london. its basically the area where the Swiss Re Cluster is. its about 1 square mile. Greater London is everything but that, and is run by the Greater London Authority

John Hinds · #3 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 8:32 AM**

The population of the City of London is under 5000 people.

And Jared is right it is only the area around Swiss Re, Tower 42 and the Lloyds Building.

They used to all be separate cities until about 200 years ago when they all grew together and the GLA (Greater London Authority) decided they should just be called bourghs of one large city.

See the tiny City area in the middle

You could split it up but it would result in 20+ extra places being made and people would wonder why they can't find the Canary Wharf buildings, Houses of Parliament, London Eye, BT Tower, London Bridge Tower, Tower of London, Tower Bridge etc. (most of the famous buildings) when they search for the London diagram.

This is what a City of London diagram would look like.
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?3492965

Tony · #4 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 12:02 PM**

Maybe instead of splitting it up, we should just rename "London" to "Greater London"

Of course this sets a VERY crappy precidence for other cities such as the GTA etc... etc...

John Hinds · #5 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 4:12 PM**

I renamed it as Greater London nearly 2 months ago Tony.

caw123 · #6 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 5:04 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonny 5

The population of the City of London is under 5000 people.

And Jared is right it is only the area around Swiss Re, Tower 42 and the Lloyds Building.

They used to all be separate cities until about 200 years ago when they all grew together and the GLA (Greater London Authority) decided they should just be called bourghs of one large city.

See the tiny City area in the middle

You could split it up but it would result in 20+ extra places being made and people would wonder why they can't find the Canary Wharf buildings, Houses of Parliament, London Eye, BT Tower, London Bridge Tower, Tower of London, Tower Bridge etc. (most of the famous buildings) when they search for the London diagram.

This is what a City of London diagram would look like.
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?3492965

It is strange how different rules apply to different cities in the UK. For example: Greater Manchester

The small slither named Manchester is the official 'City of Manchester' area, which is what defines population counts - which is why Manchesters at around 400,000 seems so low for the UKs 2nd city.
The whole area is reffered to as just 'Manchester'.
It is also why Manchester seems to have such a low amount of highrises-just 94 completed.

In London all the boroughs count towards the city counts.
Under this system, London and Manchester can never be fairly compared, which is stupid.

Buck · #7 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 6:02 PM**

It should just remain Greater London, but if not already- maybe the buildings should have which "city" they are in under the address.

John Hinds · #8 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 9:33 PM**

Some of them have the already have the city name in the address line.

I'll add the city names to all the buildings as soon as possible.

toggie · #9 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 9:52 PM**

but aren't some of those area more "suburbs" than City. If so Dallas/Fort Worth and Minneapolis/st. paul should be combined and suburban buildings should be allowed in their corrisponding cities.

maybe you could narrow it down to the more central area.

Buck · #10 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 10:15 PM**

no, those are actually all the city- just different boroughs (like Bronx, Queens, Manhattan, Brooklyn and Staten Island in NYC). Suburbs are completely separate cities.

toggie · #11 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 11:15 PM**

wow that's alot of boroughs.

Jared · #12 Posted: **Sep 23, 2003, 11:43 PM**

maybe just put a note on the main city page, explaining that it is a combination of the City of London and the Greater London Authority

John Hinds · #13 Posted: **Sep 24, 2003, 1:42 PM**

I'm going to put a list of links to diagrams of each borough on the main city page once i'm done.

I've only got about 450 more addresses to change :nuts:

Should the same thing be done to New York?

Buck · #14 Posted: **Sep 24, 2003, 7:56 PM**

Yes. I started doing that in Atlanta a while ago (before the new database) even though they aren't "official boroughs." I have Buckhead, Upper Midtown, Lower Midtown, Downtown, West Downtown, and I think some area for the Coca-Cola/GA Tech Center. I need to go back through Atlanta sometime.

winglun · #15 Posted: **Sep 26, 2003, 5:14 AM**

How about turning Greater London into a state ?

Jared · #16 Posted: **Sep 26, 2003, 4:53 PM**

because its not a state. besides, we already have england as a state. its really 2 seperate cities, but we need to find some way to have them both come up as one, so as not to confuse people

John Hinds · #17 Posted: **Oct 14, 2003, 10:35 AM**

Finsihed adding all the boroughs to the address lines of every single building.

Buck · #18 Posted: **Oct 14, 2003, 11:49 AM**

Good job!! That was a big feat!

John Hinds · #19 Posted: **Oct 14, 2003, 12:12 PM**

Who said I had big feet? :sly