"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 16:01:20 on Tue, 17 Jun
2014, tim..... remarked:
[1] Another anomaly I'm aware of is East Midlands Airport, which

*******

despite being sometimes described as "Nottingham East Midlands" and
with Derby as the closest conurbation, is actually in Leicestershire.

Oh I see.

Roland's always going on about the station so I assumed that what he was
talking about here

I think I'm capable of telling the difference between airports and
stations.

i wasn't suggesting otherwise.

just my mistaken assumption


--
Roland Perry

On 17/06/2014 08:26, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 00:04:18 on Tue, 17 Jun
2014, JNugent remarked:
Because I'm not talking about the status of the land, it could be owned
by Father Xmas for all I care. What matters is whether it's "inside
South Cambs" or "inside the City" for hackney-hailing purposes.

All that's needed is a derogation which says that for taxi-hailing
purposes it's deemed to be in both.

Is that legally possible? Can one spot

It only needs to be a small spot. Just the taxi rank would do.

be in two districts simultaneously?

It doesn't have to *be* in two districts at once. Just DEEMED to be FOR
THE PURPOSES OF HACKNEY HAILING ONLY.

Would occupants be liable to pay council tax to both district
councils? And maybe a double-dose to the county?

Of course not, it's only in South Cambs.

It all sounds intriguing.

Are there any precedents?

On 17/06/2014 12:57, wrote:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
06:06:02 on Tue, 17 Jun 2014, remarked:
Borough boundaries can be moved. The boundary of Enfield was moved to
match the M25 in the 1990s.

It seems to be easier in London. Cambridge has been stuck since 1934. A
lot of building across the boundary has taken place since then.

Including of course SJIC, which is literally built "across" the
border. The reception is in the City and the canteen is in South
Cambs. How do they apportion the business rates?

Not a problem. It's been done for years. Only a small part of SJIC is
outside the city, by the way. Unless they have extended it rather since we
were there.

Do business rates vary by council anyway?

I know they used to, but this was abolished by the introduction of the
uniform business rate back in the late 80s.

On 17/06/2014 15:03, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2014\06\17 14:55, tim..... wrote:


"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 11:31:48 on
Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Basil Jet remarked:
An alternative would be to locate a section of taxi rank a couple of
hundred yards away from the station buildings, which is inside the
City.

Borough boundaries can be moved. The boundary of Enfield was moved to
match the M25 in the 1990s.

Not just boroughs, but whole counties. Back in the day the boundary
between Hertfordshire and Cambridgshire went down the main street in
Royston. It was later moved to co-incide with the northern bypass.

and wholes boroughs between counties.

e.g. Bournemouth

Bournemouth is a unitary authority so is not covered by Dorset County
Council anyway, unlike Christchurch which also switched from Hants.

Within easy living memory, Bournemouth was a shire district in
Hampshire. Then it was swapped to the same status within Dorset, then to
unitary status.

On 17/06/2014 11:22, Basil Jet wrote:

Surely if there was no demand for hackney carriages in South Cambs
previously, and this new science park creates such a demand, one thing
to do would be to allow a small number of South Cambs private hires to
become South Cambs hackney carriages.

There is no recognised system for that.

It would be just as easy - and probably more expedient - to simply allow
some or all of the hackney-carriage owners to apply for an extra vehicle
licence (or licences).

On 17/06/2014 09:06, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:45:56 on Tue, 17
Jun 2014, Rupert Moss-Eccardt remarked:
It doesn't have to *be* in two districts at once. Just DEEMED to be FOR
THE PURPOSES OF HACKNEY HAILING ONLY.

Would occupants be liable to pay council tax to both district
councils? And maybe a double-dose to the county?

Of course not, it's only in South Cambs.

Roland,

Are you really proposing that local authorities should have the power
to change the law as they see fit?

They do it all the time. Every speed limit change or new yellow line for
example. Ely recently changed the law applying to the Broad Street car
park (such that it's now half and half long/short stay). They also
changed the law to allow cycling along quay/riverside footpath, which I
don't agree with but they did it anyway.

Any law? What criteria would you apply for choosing which ones are
changeable?

They clearly have the power to change traffic laws, and have lots of
discretion for taxi licensing (who they allow to become drivers, what
the tests are for vehicle and drivers, who they'll permit to be
"authorised" to use the rising bollards etc). This would simply be a
small change in the conditions for a City hackney licence that would say
"only hailable in the City *but also at the taxi rank at Science Park
Station*")

Refusal or revocation of a taxi-driver's or taxi-proprietor's licence on
the "fit and proper person" grounds (which must be what you mean when
you say that councils have power over "who they allow to become
drivers", etc) is appealable to the magistrates' court.

The implication is that the council must act reasonably (in the
Wednesbury sense) and must not act capriciously or in furtherance of an
unspoken agenda which disadvantages licence-holders or applicants.

On 17/06/2014 09:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:03:42 on Tue, 17 Jun
2014, Someone Somewhere remarked:
Whilst I appreciate threads have a habit of drifting, how is this
seriously now related to uk.transport.london ?

The same principle may apply to several railway stations on the edge of
London.

For example I happen to know the Herts boundary is very close to
Chorleywood station. So there's a wider issue here about hailability of
hackneys in the vicinity of railway stations very close to licencing
boundaries.

London cabs' operational area is not limited by the outer boundary of
"Greater London".

At least, not unless the boundaries of "Greater London" have become
reconciled with those of the Metropolitan Police District.

"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2014 09:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:03:42 on Tue, 17 Jun
2014, Someone Somewhere remarked:
Whilst I appreciate threads have a habit of drifting, how is this
seriously now related to uk.transport.london ?

The same principle may apply to several railway stations on the edge of
London.

For example I happen to know the Herts boundary is very close to
Chorleywood station. So there's a wider issue here about hailability of
hackneys in the vicinity of railway stations very close to licencing
boundaries.

London cabs' operational area is not limited by the outer boundary of
"Greater London".

At least, not unless the boundaries of "Greater London" have become
reconciled with those of the Metropolitan Police District.

happened in 2000

tim

On 17/06/2014 19:49, tim..... wrote:


"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 17/06/2014 09:30, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:03:42 on Tue, 17 Jun
2014, Someone Somewhere remarked:
Whilst I appreciate threads have a habit of drifting, how is this
seriously now related to uk.transport.london ?

The same principle may apply to several railway stations on the edge of
London.

For example I happen to know the Herts boundary is very close to
Chorleywood station. So there's a wider issue here about hailability of
hackneys in the vicinity of railway stations very close to licencing
boundaries.

London cabs' operational area is not limited by the outer boundary of
"Greater London".

At least, not unless the boundaries of "Greater London" have become
reconciled with those of the Metropolitan Police District.

happened in 2000

That's the thing to remember: London cabs are not controlled by local
authorities.

"tim....." wrote

hackneys in the vicinity of railway stations very close to licencing
boundaries.

London cabs' operational area is not limited by the outer boundary of
"Greater London".

At least, not unless the boundaries of "Greater London" have become
reconciled with those of the Metropolitan Police District.

happened in 2000

Thus confusing all those reading Dick Francis novels in which the jockey
hero takes a London cab to Sandown Park (was in the MPD, now in Surrey for
everything to include taxis and police).

--
Mike D