Compulsory Purchase

pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

Nearholmer wrote: 2 Feb 2023, 6:32pm It probably was back in C18th …. The A272 isn’t exactly a ruler-straight superhighway.

But, one would like to think that we’ve moved on beyond C18th, although I fear that we are hurtling back towards it.
In the 18th century, when roads were being turnpiked, a landowner could have the road route altered to go round rather than across his land, providing he paid for the increased costs of doing so.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

Pete Owens wrote: 2 Feb 2023, 4:15pm Surely this is a case for compulsory purchase of a strip of land:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... sex-estate
Land owned by a wealthy and very influential man, in one of the most Tory parts of Tory Britain. The children of Conservative supporters don't walk or cycle to school. They either board there or are driven in large SUVs.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Steady rider
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by Steady rider »

Can anyone provide details of how other countries have legislated to provide for cycle tracks/cycleways?
I expect the merits of any proposal should be judged against land owners concerns.
cycle tramp
Posts: 3532
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by cycle tramp »

Steady rider wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 11:16am Can anyone provide details of how other countries have legislated to provide for cycle tracks/cycleways?
I expect the merits of any proposal should be judged against land owners concerns.
To be fair, the land owner hasn't said 'no' to the route across his land. He just doesn't wish it to cross a particular visa (and gives economic reasons for doing so). However the council have rejected the other two routes, one because it might flood, and the other follows a railway line, which means that the council has to stump up some cash to stop kids from getting on that line. The council is also free to put in a pavement or cycle way along the twisty road.
What we have here doesn't appear so much as the land owner saying no, but rather the council not saying yes to increasing the funding to bring about a solution.

And whilst the council may claim to be cash strapped- sedgemoor council have just won a bid from central governments 'levelling up' programming and are constructing an off road pathway from my own village to the centre of Bridgwater- meaning when constructed I can avoid some particularly unpleasant roads.
- which kinda shows that occasionally there are funds available :-)
Motorhead: god was never on your sidehttps://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=m ... +your+side
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 3:11pm
To be fair, the land owner hasn't said 'no' to the route across his land. He just doesn't wish it to cross a particular visa (and gives economic reasons for doing so). However the council have rejected the other two routes, one because it might flood, and the other follows a railway line, which means that the council has to stump up some cash to stop kids from getting on that line. The council is also free to put in a pavement or cycle way along the twisty road.
What we have here doesn't appear so much as the land owner saying no, but rather the council not saying yes to increasing the funding to bring about a solution.

And whilst the council may claim to be cash strapped- sedgemoor council have just won a bid from central governments 'levelling up' programming and are constructing an off road pathway from my own village to the centre of Bridgwater- meaning when constructed I can avoid some particularly unpleasant roads.
- which kinda shows that occasionally there are funds available :-)
Occasionally being the operative word.

Kleinwort is an extremely wealthy man. Economic reasons - the route will hardly have an effect on his finances. He just doesn't want oiks crossing his land but, being no fool, doesn't say no but offers alternatives unlikely to be acceptable to the council.

I guess there are many, in Tory Britain, who think it right to spend a lot of public money to avoid slightly inconveniencing a very wealthy individual.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pwa »

pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 4:41pm
cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 3:11pm
To be fair, the land owner hasn't said 'no' to the route across his land. He just doesn't wish it to cross a particular visa (and gives economic reasons for doing so). However the council have rejected the other two routes, one because it might flood, and the other follows a railway line, which means that the council has to stump up some cash to stop kids from getting on that line. The council is also free to put in a pavement or cycle way along the twisty road.
What we have here doesn't appear so much as the land owner saying no, but rather the council not saying yes to increasing the funding to bring about a solution.

And whilst the council may claim to be cash strapped- sedgemoor council have just won a bid from central governments 'levelling up' programming and are constructing an off road pathway from my own village to the centre of Bridgwater- meaning when constructed I can avoid some particularly unpleasant roads.
- which kinda shows that occasionally there are funds available :-)
Occasionally being the operative word.

Kleinwort is an extremely wealthy man. Economic reasons - the route will hardly have an effect on his finances. He just doesn't want oiks crossing his land but, being no fool, doesn't say no but offers alternatives unlikely to be acceptable to the council.

I guess there are many, in Tory Britain, who think it right to spend a lot of public money to avoid slightly inconveniencing a very wealthy individual.
It is possible that he has a business there that employs people, and that he wants to protect the business for that reason. I'm not saying that I know that to be the case, but it is possible.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

pwa wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 5:48pm
pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 4:41pm
cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 3:11pm
To be fair, the land owner hasn't said 'no' to the route across his land. He just doesn't wish it to cross a particular visa (and gives economic reasons for doing so). However the council have rejected the other two routes, one because it might flood, and the other follows a railway line, which means that the council has to stump up some cash to stop kids from getting on that line. The council is also free to put in a pavement or cycle way along the twisty road.
What we have here doesn't appear so much as the land owner saying no, but rather the council not saying yes to increasing the funding to bring about a solution.

And whilst the council may claim to be cash strapped- sedgemoor council have just won a bid from central governments 'levelling up' programming and are constructing an off road pathway from my own village to the centre of Bridgwater- meaning when constructed I can avoid some particularly unpleasant roads.
- which kinda shows that occasionally there are funds available :-)
Occasionally being the operative word.

Kleinwort is an extremely wealthy man. Economic reasons - the route will hardly have an effect on his finances. He just doesn't want oiks crossing his land but, being no fool, doesn't say no but offers alternatives unlikely to be acceptable to the council.

I guess there are many, in Tory Britain, who think it right to spend a lot of public money to avoid slightly inconveniencing a very wealthy individual.
It is possible that he has a business there that employs people, and that he wants to protect the business for that reason. I'm not saying that I know that to be the case, but it is possible.
Hmm and people will try and dig up the flimsiest of excuses to justify spending money so as not to inconvenience the wealthy. What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
pwa
Posts: 17371
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pwa »

pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:29pm ...What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
Location shooting for TV and Film production. Presumably funding the estate and the folk who maintain it. The owner could be just a selfish so-and-so, but it is also possible that he is trying to run a business for the benefit of its employees. That does happen.
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

pwa wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:34pm
pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:29pm ...What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
Location shooting for TV and Film production. Presumably funding the estate and the folk who maintain it. The owner could be just a selfish so-and-so, but it is also possible that he is trying to run a business for the benefit of its employees. That does happen.
"Sir Richard Kleinwort has blocked permission for the viable routes proposed by the council, arguing it would take productive farmland from the estate to have a path running through, and that it may affect his agricultural activities."

Hmmm just think - will that cause any unemployment amongst the couple of men per thousand acres of arable he may employ?
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
cycle tramp
Posts: 3532
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by cycle tramp »

pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:29pm
Hmm and people will try and dig up the flimsiest of excuses to justify spending money so as not to inconvenience the wealthy. What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
Er... its going to be a heavily used bridleway used to by school children on their way to and from school....
so the bridleway is going to generate a fair amount of litter (because I also spent some time on the council telephone lines taking g complaints about litter and the heavily places for litter was school routes)
Then he's going to have to update his farm insurance... whilst it's one thing for little Tommy & Amanda to drown in your slurry pit if they weren't invited onto your farm land and shouldn't be on the farm site, it's a whole different ball game if there's a bridleway..
If the bridleway goes through your woodland you've got to provide reasonable evidence that you have kept it safe.
Then there's going to be possible crop damage including the threat of loosing a whole field of growing cereal to a carelessly thrown cigarette.

Again, I get the feeling we're focusing on the wrong point which is why doesn't the council add a cycle lane and footpath to the existing road, and perhaps put in some street lamps so cycle way between the town locations can be used safety after dark.

As previously discussed the bridleway is intended to be used by children as young as 11 would you really want them walking through farmland and woodland, is it even safe or appropriate? Especially during the winter months when it's not actually light out.
Motorhead: god was never on your sidehttps://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=m ... +your+side
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 9:00pm
pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:29pm
Hmm and people will try and dig up the flimsiest of excuses to justify spending money so as not to inconvenience the wealthy. What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
Er... its going to be a heavily used bridleway used to by school children on their way to and from school....
so the bridleway is going to generate a fair amount of litter (because I also spent some time on the council telephone lines taking g complaints about litter and the heavily places for litter was school routes)
Then he's going to have to update his farm insurance... whilst it's one thing for little Tommy & Amanda to drown in your slurry pit if they weren't invited onto your farm land and shouldn't be on the farm site, it's a whole different ball game if there's a bridleway..
If the bridleway goes through your woodland you've got to provide reasonable evidence that you have kept it safe.
Then there's going to be possible crop damage including the threat of loosing a whole field of growing cereal to a carelessly thrown cigarette.

Again, I get the feeling we're focusing on the wrong point which is why doesn't the council add a cycle lane and footpath to the existing road, and perhaps put in some street lamps so cycle way between the town locations can be used safety after dark.

As previously discussed the bridleway is intended to be used by children as young as 11 would you really want them walking through farmland and woodland, is it even safe or appropriate? Especially during the winter months when it's not actually light out.
You mean he hasn't already got similar things like public footpaths and bridleways on that estate, for which he's already covered by his public liability insurance and which are subject to the same "risks" you describe. I doubt there's a farm in the country which isn't crossed by public footpaths and/or bridleways.

Kids as young as 11 using a public bridleway? Big deal - it happens all the time in the countryside and with children a lot younger too. It appears it's not just left leaning folks who can be described as snowflakes.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
cycle tramp
Posts: 3532
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by cycle tramp »

pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 9:09pm
cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 9:00pm
pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 6:29pm
Hmm and people will try and dig up the flimsiest of excuses to justify spending money so as not to inconvenience the wealthy. What an earth sort of land use business, farming and the like would be so drastically effected by what is effectively a bridleway as to cease or reduce the number of employees?
Again, I get the feeling we're focusing on the wrong point which is why doesn't the council add a cycle lane and footpath to the existing road, and perhaps put in some street lamps so cycle way between the town locations can be used safety after dark.

As previously discussed the bridleway is intended to be used by children as young as 11 would you really want them walking through farmland and woodland, is it even safe or appropriate? Especially during the winter months when it's not actually light out.
It appears it's not just left leaning folks who can be described as snowflakes.
Is that code for 'I've completely run out of a reasoned argument at this point of the discussion' ?
Motorhead: god was never on your sidehttps://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=m ... +your+side
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by pete75 »

cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 11:03pm
pete75 wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 9:09pm
cycle tramp wrote: 4 Feb 2023, 9:00pm

Again, I get the feeling we're focusing on the wrong point which is why doesn't the council add a cycle lane and footpath to the existing road, and perhaps put in some street lamps so cycle way between the town locations can be used safety after dark.

As previously discussed the bridleway is intended to be used by children as young as 11 would you really want them walking through farmland and woodland, is it even safe or appropriate? Especially during the winter months when it's not actually light out.
Kids as young as 11 using a public bridleway? Big deal - it happens all the time in the countryside and with children a lot younger too. It appears it's not just left leaning folks who can be described as snowflakes.

.
Is that code for 'I've completely run out of a reasoned argument at this point of the discussion' ?
There you are - I've corrected it for you, with a little bit of context.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
cycle tramp
Posts: 3532
Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by cycle tramp »

I'll take the inclusion of the word snowflake as an indication that you have run out of moral arguments and are now reduced to veiled insults.
Motorhead: god was never on your sidehttps://www.google.com/search?ie=UTF-8&client=m ... +your+side
User avatar
PedallingSquares
Posts: 548
Joined: 13 Mar 2022, 11:01am

Re: Compulsory Purchase

Post by PedallingSquares »

So the Council have rejected two other viable options, which he has no objections to, on his land yet he is in the wrong?
So easy to point the finger at someone just because they are wealthy and own a lot of land :roll:
This is a bit of a non-story IMO.The Council has spat the dummy out because it can't get it's own way.
Tough.
Post Reply