London Banter - View Single Post

[email protected] · June 16th 14, 11:35 PM posted to cam.transport,uk.transport.london

In article ,
(JNugent) wrote:

On 16/06/2014 17:18, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:55:25
on Mon, 16 Jun 2014, remarked:
Plying for hire requires a licence from the local authority in the
area to be plied in. This is going to be a huge problem with the
new Science Park station whose forecourt will be in South Cambs
that has next to no licensed hackneys. My plan, for a joint
licensing authority covering both councils was making no progress
when other events intervened.

Is there any possibility of a byelaw declaring the station to be in
'joint' territory? It might help swing that if, as I suspect, it's
landlocked by the City (via Milton Rd).

It shouldn't matter who owns it, just a waiver on the District
Boundary condition for that site.

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?

Of course not, except by getting a local Act. Outside London they are rarely
achievable and expensive.

Can one spot be in two districts
simultaneously? Would occupants be liable to pay council tax to both
district councils? And maybe a double-dose to the county?

Not that either.

--
Colin Rosenstiel