|
Post by kris on Jul 7, 2021 22:03:03 GMT
You learn something everyday, most of it useless. Especially when it’s from Andrew under some psychedelic influence. It’s the filtered river water, that’s doing it.
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jul 8, 2021 7:30:46 GMT
Especially when it’s from Andrew under some psychedelic influence. It’s the filtered river water, that’s doing it. Just takes a rave upstream...
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Jul 8, 2021 8:42:33 GMT
Residents had branded B&NES Council “negligent” for allowing mooring in Mead Lane and said it was “imperative” they were taken away.
They accused boaters of criminal activity, staying longer than they were allowed, running their engines for extended periods, damaging the riverbank and littering.
However, Atkins, consultants brought in by the council, found “no indication that mooring is adversely affecting bank stability”.
I wonder how many of the residents loved there before it was a mooring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2021 8:46:47 GMT
I wonder how many of the residents loved there before it was a mooring. It used to be a well-known dogging spot
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Jul 8, 2021 8:48:49 GMT
Perhaps it will return. That will chear the miserable residents up.
|
|
|
Post by kris on Jul 8, 2021 9:03:19 GMT
I wonder how many of the residents loved there before it was a mooring. It used to be a well-known dogging spot How would you know that?
|
|
|
Post by Jim on Jul 8, 2021 9:34:28 GMT
It used to be a well-known dogging spot How would you know that? A decent pair of bins, with anti shake image stabilization.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2021 10:10:27 GMT
It used to be a well-known dogging spot How would you know that? wuff wuff
|
|
|
Post by TonyDunkley on Jul 10, 2021 8:05:55 GMT
I had seen it was going to court. The village nimbys lost! Technically, nobody lost, . . and the only winners were the lawyers who pocketed their fees. The article reporting the proceedings on the K&A website states that the application before the Court was for Judicial Review, and the JR was 'stayed' - in other words temporarily halted whilst the local (BaNES) Council reconsiders its position. The powers available to the local Council to control the mooring of boats exercising the common law PRN applicable to the river Avon within the area administered by the Council is limited to action for trespass and/or adverse possession of the land it owns or controls adjoining the river - ie. the river bank - and, arguably, of the parts of the river bed above which any boat is moored at any given time. Given that the threat by the Council to "close the moorings" was a meaningless one in practical terms, . . nothing permanent or tangible has been achieved or guaranteed through the Judicial Review process. The report on the K&A website also states that in reviewing its position regarding the Mead Lane, Saltford moorings, the BaNES Council will be consulting the C&RT, . . so, no prizes for predicting how that will go !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2021 8:53:57 GMT
I had seen it was going to court. The village nimbys lost! Technically, nobody lost, . . and the only winners were the lawyers who pocketed their fees. The article reporting the proceedings on the K&A website states that the application before the Court was for Judicial Review, and the JR was 'stayed' - in other words temporarily halted whilst the local (BaNES) Council reconsiders its position. The powers available to the local Council to control the mooring of boats exercising the common law PRN applicable to the river Avon within the area administered by the Council is limited to action for trespass and/or adverse possession of the land it owns or controls adjoining the river - ie. the river bank - and, arguably, of the parts of the river bed above which any boat is moored at any given time. Given that the threat by the Council to "close the moorings" was a meaningless one in practical terms, . . nothing permanent or tangible has been achieved or guaranteed through the Judicial Review process. The report on the K&A website also states that in reviewing its position regarding the Mead Lane, Saltford moorings, the BaNES Council will be consulting the C&RT, . . so, no prizes for predicting how that will go ! It is posts you make like the above which explains why you lost your boat, (and integrity). Your obsession with believing you are the only person who understands the law, and can therefore be the most righteous person on these issues is borderline ridiculous. What this case did was successfully bring the matter into the public domain, and not surprisingly garnered quite a lot of support. Although nobody got locked up or hung (which seems to be your preference), the issue became “live”, and will without doubt make anyone now getting involved tread very carefully. The whole process is a very good example of how to approach and deal with such issues, and although it comes a little late to help you, it may well help others who will show a little more common sense when taking such a thing on. All in all, it was a successful campaign, and nobody, but nobody, gives a shit on what you think 🙂
|
|
|
Post by thebfg on Jul 10, 2021 9:06:45 GMT
Fair point. Now when the council make the decision they cannot ignore the recommendations from the report they sanctioned.
Unlike crt the council will have to do it by the book.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2021 9:11:24 GMT
Fair point. Now when the council make the decision they cannot ignore the recommendations from the report they sanctioned. Unlike crt the council will have to do it by the book. CRT will also tread very carefully if they decide to get involved. They recognise the fact that there will be a court case on this if needed, and could deliver a result that would have adverse effects on their own policies.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2021 9:31:34 GMT
Fair point. Now when the council make the decision they cannot ignore the recommendations from the report they sanctioned. Unlike crt the council will have to do it by the book. Councils have powers to request byelaws. This route already has at least two precedents in terms of banning mooring on council owned land beside rivers. Hounslow and Richmond. The other approach is PSPO which I think Oxford tried but did not succeed as far I as I know. I'm sure the council will try something. Whether they would s
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2021 9:36:00 GMT
Fair point. Now when the council make the decision they cannot ignore the recommendations from the report they sanctioned. Unlike crt the council will have to do it by the book. Councils have powers to request byelaws. This route already has at least two precedents in terms of banning mooring on council owned land beside rivers. Hounslow and Richmond. Totally different scenario, and will have no bearing whatsoever on this case.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2021 9:37:22 GMT
So we are not talking about boats moored to council land with local objections then. I must have got wrong end of stick. Again.
|
|