| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Objection to Benches | |
| Posted by: | Alex Greenbank | |
| Date/Time: | 05/04/18 16:58:00 |
| I don't think the benches breach any of those sections of the Act, but that's my untrained eye. 34. The benches are for all to use. As I said elsewhere, there are other benches on the common placed by WPCC so it's not specific about benches. These benches are placed and not 'built' on the common, so it remains unbuilt. The benches do not 'inclose' an area, it's not fenced off or otherwise off limits, they're free for anyone to use whether they are buying drinks/food from the pub or not. It seems to be no different from the WPCC themselves deciding to place the benches there. 35. "sell, lease, grant or in any manner dispose" implies exclusivity to me, which is not what is happening. 36. When the benches are removed the grass area quickly returns to a state as if the benches had not been there. If you read this section too literally then you'd ban everyone from walking on any part of the commons. If the pub had exclusive rights to use the benches (and kicked off people bringing their own food/drink) then I'd agree it would contravene the act. I would probably have objected about them on this basis too. If the grass did not recover when the benches were removed (or they were kept all year round) then I'd agree it would contravene the act. I would probably have objected about them on this basis too. If the area was concreted over to give a solid footing for the benches then I'd agree it would contravene the act. I would probably have objected about them on this basis too. |