What's it(!) with Uber?
 

On 2014\06\17 11:31, Basil Jet wrote:

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

That didn't affect many residences, but the College Park area (Ponsard
Road / Waldo Road etc) was transferred from Brent to Hammersmith in the
2000s, transferring a significant number of houses for no good reason
that I can see.

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In article ,
(Basil Jet) wrote:

On 2014\06\17 09:23, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:10:31 on Tue, 17
Jun 2014, Nick Maclaren remarked:
Perhaps a better way of putting it would be that South Cambridgeshire
would grant an implicit licence to all Cambridge taxis for that
location alone, and Cambridge would grant a 'wayleave' for South
Cambridgeshire taxis doing the same (if needed).

I don't think the South Cambs hackneys need a wayleave, they are already
permitted to drive in the City if they have picked up a fare in South
Cambs. The situation at the new station is exceptional because that
small patch of South Cambs [in effect just the railway sidings
themselves] is entirely land-locked by the railway and the only road
access is via the City.

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.

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.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In article ,
(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.

They will continue to find much more business within the city as hire cars
than at the new station, I fear.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In message , at 05:37:20
on Tue, 17 Jun 2014, remarked:
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.

They only make regulations in accordance with powers granted to them by
Parliament. No powers, no regulations. What powers to deem somewhere not in
their area to be in their area for any purpose can you describe?

The hackney licences cover a specific area (for hailing). Any sensible
system should allow the council to specify that in more detail than just
"The City of Cambridge", to allow for anomalies such as this[1].

Although you mentioned earlier that the new station forecourt isn't
going to be a Highway. Is there any prohibition on hackneys plying for
hire on *private* land outside their area (in this case 'The City')?

[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.
--
Roland Perry

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

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.

ObRail/Hackney: Which means the railway station moved from Cambs to
Herts, and would affect which licensees were able to ply for hire there.
--
Roland Perry

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In message , at 11:22:34 on
Tue, 17 Jun 2014, Basil Jet remarked:
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.

I think you mean "incentivise". They are already "allowed" - assuming
they meet the criteria and I have no reason to think they wouldn't.

As it happens one of the major minicab firms "of" South Cambs which is
very much in evidence in the City is located not very far from the new
station.
--
Roland Perry

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

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?
--
Roland Perry

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

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.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

The hackney licences cover a specific area (for hailing). Any
sensible system should allow the council to specify that in more
detail than just "The City of Cambridge", to allow for anomalies such
as this[1].

Have you actually read the Town police Clauses Act 1847?

Although you mentioned earlier that the new station forecourt isn't
going to be a Highway. Is there any prohibition on hackneys plying
for hire on *private* land outside their area (in this case 'The
City')?

Apparently yes. That was the first question I asked when I foresaw this
problem some years ago now.

[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.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

What's it(!) with Uber?
 

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

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.

ObRail/Hackney: Which means the railway station moved from Cambs to
Herts, and would affect which licensees were able to ply for hire
there.

The relatively recent Royston boundary move was less drastic than you say.
It moved from the high street to the then northern edge of the town in the
nineteenth century.

--
Colin Rosenstiel