Jump to content

Marinas without residential planning permission

carlt

By carlt
in Living Afloat

 Share

Featured Posts

Dekazer Rising Star

Dekazer

Posted
Posted

100 households paying council tax at band A would be just over £97K per year. Huntingdon District Council must be quite well off.

 

I can't for the life of me understand why they would refuse retrospective planning permission for residential use. Is there a petition or anything to sign I wonder? I think I might write a letter to the Council there, citing the wonderful example Ealing Council have provided. (Not to mention their generous decision to refund £50 per household this year owing to 'underspend' :lol:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Typical NBW reporting. The 'threat of eviction" came well over a year and a half ago actually. The council now in fact appear to be taking a much softer stance.

 

Click

Yes it's very rare (though not unheard of) for evictions to take place before a decision on a retrospective application is heard)

 

It doesn't mean Residential planning permission will be granted, of course...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sociable_hermit Experienced

sociable_hermit

Posted
Posted

It's about time some common sense was applied to the whole situation. Planning Officers seem to object to residential moorings on principle - maybe they don't understand what living aboard is all about, or they still subscribe to the whole "thieving water-gypsy b@stards" stereotype, or they simply don't have the same powers to control liveaboard boaters with petty rules as they do home-owners, so the only way of having their moment of power and spoiling the fun is not to let anyone live aboard in the first place. I dunno. What I do know is that this almost blanket anti-liveaboard stance has simply encouraged rule-breaking. And boats provide useful budget accomodation, and space for people who can't cope with conventional 'rat race' living, and I guess that at least some of these people would otherwise be reliant on Council services, so why can't canal living be recognised as a good thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
  • Author
Posted
It's about time some common sense was applied to the whole situation. Planning Officers seem to object to residential moorings on principle - maybe they don't understand what living aboard is all about, or they still subscribe to the whole "thieving water-gypsy b@stards" stereotype, or they simply don't have the same powers to control liveaboard boaters with petty rules as they do home-owners, so the only way of having their moment of power and spoiling the fun is not to let anyone live aboard in the first place. I dunno. What I do know is that this almost blanket anti-liveaboard stance has simply encouraged rule-breaking. And boats provide useful budget accomodation, and space for people who can't cope with conventional 'rat race' living, and I guess that at least some of these people would otherwise be reliant on Council services, so why can't canal living be recognised as a good thing?

To be fair planning officers, in the main, are not remotely interested in boat dwellers, until a "concerned member of the public" brings it to their attention, by making a complaint.

 

They are obliged to investigate and act, if such a complaint is made.

 

I was told by a planning officer that they just wouldn't cope if every liveaboard, in South Northants, was suddenly required to get Residential Planning Permission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
magpie patrick Veteran II

magpie patrickDonate to Canal World

Posted
Posted
It's about time some common sense was applied to the whole situation. Planning Officers seem to object to residential moorings on principle - maybe they don't understand what living aboard is all about, or they still subscribe to the whole "thieving water-gypsy b@stards" stereotype, or they simply don't have the same powers to control liveaboard boaters with petty rules as they do home-owners, so the only way of having their moment of power and spoiling the fun is not to let anyone live aboard in the first place. I dunno. What I do know is that this almost blanket anti-liveaboard stance has simply encouraged rule-breaking. And boats provide useful budget accomodation, and space for people who can't cope with conventional 'rat race' living, and I guess that at least some of these people would otherwise be reliant on Council services, so why can't canal living be recognised as a good thing?

 

The problem is, at least in part, with the Use Class Order. There is only one class of ordinary dwelling, C3. Thus in policy terms a residential mooring is pretty much the same as a three bedroom house. I know this sounds daft to the non-planner, and indeed it is daft. Various conditions can be imposed on C3 (agricultural occupancy condition, local employment condition) and there are conditions which relate to holiday homes, (usually non-continuous occupation).

 

What is needed is either a sub-set of C3, which would recognise residential moorings, and allow for the fact that either facilities are provided in a marina or the occupier simply doesn't want these facilities, and any other variants between boat dwellings and house dwellings, or some clever planner to come up with a condition that eases the situation and makes permission easier to grant. It would actually be easier for boaters to fulfil a non-continuous occupancy condition because the condition relates to the mooring not the boat, and they could just leave the marina for a month!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chris Pink Veteran II

Chris Pink

Posted
Posted
The problem is, at least in part, with the Use Class Order. There is only one class of ordinary dwelling, C3. Thus in policy terms a residential mooring is pretty much the same as a three bedroom house. I know this sounds daft to the non-planner, and indeed it is daft. Various conditions can be imposed on C3 (agricultural occupancy condition, local employment condition) and there are conditions which relate to holiday homes, (usually non-continuous occupation).

 

So is the Use Class Order not in breach of the Human Rights Act article 8 ?

 

"Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence."

 

when your being shot at its not wise to stick yer head out of the trench

 

That's what my grandmother taught me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sociable_hermit Experienced

sociable_hermit

Posted
Posted
What is needed is either a sub-set of C3, which would recognise residential moorings, and allow for the fact that either facilities are provided in a marina or the occupier simply doesn't want these facilities, and any other variants between boat dwellings and house dwellings...

Yep, good thinking.

 

The current "all or nothing" approach is just daft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sociable_hermit Experienced

sociable_hermit

Posted
Posted
To be fair planning officers, in the main, are not remotely interested in boat dwellers, until a "concerned member of the public" brings it to their attention, by making a complaint.

 

They are obliged to investigate and act, if such a complaint is made.

 

I was told by a planning officer that they just wouldn't cope if every liveaboard, in South Northants, was suddenly required to get Residential Planning Permission.

I was thinking more in terms of planning permission for liveaboards in new Marinas. The very idea seems to cause wailing and gnashing of teeth even though other elements of Government are keen to promote sympathetic rural (re)development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
carlt Veteran II

carlt

Posted
  • Author
Posted
the simple answer is for every liveaboard to apply for a council house and then kick up because there aren't any available.

the council would shut the f... up pretty damn quick me thinks! :lol:

This (as well as school places) was one of the reasons my planning colleague feared a call to arms against the liveaboards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smelly Veteran

Smelly

Posted
Posted

Assuming Huntingon is on the Thames... Does the EA maintain the same right to move a boat with no warning if necessary?

 

i ask because there would be a beautiful punchline if, as on BW water they weren't even liable for Council tax...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tim Lewis Veteran

Tim Lewis

Posted
Posted
Assuming Huntingon is on the Thames... Does the EA maintain the same right to move a boat with no warning if necessary?

 

i ask because there would be a beautiful punchline if, as on BW water they weren't even liable for Council tax...

 

Huntingdon was on the Great Ouse last time I looked :lol:

 

Tim

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smelly Veteran

Smelly

Posted
Posted
Huntingdon was on the Great Ouse last time I looked :lol:

 

Tim

 

As it's darn sarf it's much of a muchness to this humble, if displaced northerner.

 

'tis immaterial to my question which was whether the EA maintain the same authority to move a boat with no notice where necessary...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sueb Veteran II

sueb

Posted
Posted
As it's darn sarf it's much of a muchness to this humble, if displaced northerner.

 

'tis immaterial to my question which was whether the EA maintain the same authority to move a boat with no notice where necessary...

EA don't have the same problem because they own very little land. What they have got they can regulate, otherwise you are moored on someone elses land and I presume the laws on trespass apply.

Sue

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Orca Community Regular

Orca

Posted
Posted (edited)

Personally, I couldn't give a flying fig! At worst it will mean council tax at Band A and a possibility of being told to clear off for one month of the year (as happens on the Nene at Gt. Billing). I can't see ANY council evicting people (with an associated duty to rehouse one presumes!) The whole issue needs better clarification anyway IMO and at best an acknowledgment from the powers-that-be that it is lifestyle choice, as opposed to victim of circumstance...

Edited by Orca
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.