Council Parkland- Private or Public?

oldwestern

Hi,
A council in SE England recently introduced carparking fees at one of its 'country park' sites. The notice board by the ticket machine says that the land is 'private land' owned by the council (not sure if that's the 'district' or 'county' council).

On the other hand the was land 'gifted' to the council for public enjoyment! So is it 'public' or 'private' land?

Importantly, where does Jo Public stand? Is one dealing with:-
1) a public 'local authority' who is also a 'private owner' of 'private land, or
2) Does being a 'local authority' somehow change the 'enforcable' characteristics of what is 'public' and what is 'private'?
:think:
Hal.

Owain_Moneysaver

'private' land indicates that the land is not commons, part of a public highway, etc.

The conditions of the 'gift for public enjoyment' may be very wide-ranging. It suggests that access to the public should be substantially without charge, but that would't necessarily stop the council from fencing it off and occasionally renting it as a site for festivals which charge admission. You can probably get a copy of the gift conditions under Freedom of Information Act requests.

Acess for public enjoyment doesn't include driving/parking on the land, so the council can choose to implement parking controls and parking charges. This would be in accordance with their rights as landowner, not their rights as a council which they can use to control parking on public highways.

Orford

Whether the land is council owned or private is irrelevant. The crucial point is whether there is an Off-street Parking Places Order for that land (available to view at council offices). If there is, then any PCN's issued by the council are enforceable.

AlexisV

It depends whether they issue Penalty Charge Notices, or invoices related to an alleged contractual arrangement. A third party or the council themselves might issue the latter. Whether the invoices were enforceable or correct is another matter.

oldwestern

Owain_Moneysaver wrote: »

'private' land indicates that the land is not commons, part of a public highway, etc.

The conditions of the 'gift for public enjoyment' may be very wide-ranging. It suggests that access to the public should be substantially without charge, but that would't necessarily stop the council from fencing it off and occasionally renting it as a site for festivals which charge admission. You can probably get a copy of the gift conditions under Freedom of Information Act requests.

Acess for public enjoyment doesn't include driving/parking on the land, so the council can choose to implement parking controls and parking charges. This would be in accordance with their rights as landowner, not their rights as a council which they can use to control parking on public highways.

Hmm...so what defines 'public enjoyment'? I can imagine certain limitations on how the public might be 'prohibited' from certain acts of 'enjoyment' through Public Order acts. However, if the 'Gift' didn't specify HOW the land was to be 'enjoyed' - who is the council to limit the 'enjoyment'?

I think your reply also throws up another questions - if the gift of land (Real Estate) was for the Beneficial Enjoyment of the people of Xplace, then there seems to be a conundrum between those who own title to the 'real estate' and those in whom the Beneficial interest was intended to be invested?

Put another way, how could one make a class of people, rather than an individual (person, group or organisation) the 'common' owners of land? I have in mind that the original probably intended the council to 'manage' the land rather than 'own' it.

Hal.

Owain_Moneysaver

oldwestern wrote: »

Put another way, how could one make a class of people, rather than an individual (person, group or organisation) the 'common' owners of land? I have in mind that the original probably intended the council to 'manage' the land rather than 'own' it.

You can't, sensibly. Therefore the council owns the land.

Coblcris

How was it 'gifted' ? Is there a Trust involved ?

oldwestern

Owain_Moneysaver wrote: »

You can't, sensibly. Therefore the council owns the land.

I know the following question strays a little from the original subject but I think it might be interesting to understand it in context, so...who owns 'common land'?

Hal.

Owain_Moneysaver

oldwestern wrote: »

I know the following question strays a little from the original subject but I think it might be interesting to understand it in context, so...who owns 'common land'?

Hal.

A landowner or landowners, but commoners had certain rights to use the land.

The legal position concerning common land is confused. Most commons are based on ancient rights which pre-date the established law and even the monarchy. The exact rights which apply to individual commons may be documented but more often are based on long-held traditions. ... Prior to the Erection of Cottages Act 1588, an Englishman could build his house on common land, if he could raise the roof over his head and have a fire in the hearth between sunrise and sunset, and claim the dwelling as his home. (wikipedia)