Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

just to add to this for those that don't know, the figures announced at the AGM were in the 300's even after being counted twice, those results had the candidates in the same position i must add but as someone has already worked out there is an approximate 18% difference between them. It really is about time this organisation employed an independent company to carry out these elections and to utilise other ways to encourage members to vote, there are some 3000 members and although not all are eligible to vote there was only about 500 voting slips returned, maybe its because you have to buy your own stamp for the return envelope thats part of the reason

 

This was certainly assumed to be the case in another organisation to which I belong and they used to issue pre-paid envelopes with their AGM material.

 

One of the issues in relation to voting is the time taken for delivery of AGM details, digesting and then posting a reply in times allowed. Although I am probably a more extreme case living in rural Victoria Australia, I do want to have my say at the ballot box. I received the AGM notification materials on the Friday before the meeting. In this modern world that there will surely be a secure way for many of us to receive notifications in a more timely manner and submit a reply that can be validated and legitimately included in the count at the meeting.

 

'My' railway in Derbys has steadfastly refused to enter the digital age. Virtually all communications with shareholders and members are paper and ink based. I've pointed out several times (in writing!) the benefits of using different forms of communication, to engage more quickly and more often with a wider audience. I was given the rather ludicrous and ageist justification that 'our supporters are elderly and most of them do not use the internet'! A cynical view might be that it served the incumbent management team very well to keep pesky supporters at arms length...we do now have a new MD and hopefully he will be a little more enlightened. I'm not for one moment suggesting that the L&B has similar motives but it is very odd in 2022 that some railways seem reluctant to embrace comms technology.

 

I think that maybe a hybrid approach is necessary. I am a member of several Building societies and I have the option of receiving these necessary documents by post or email - voting is either by post or online. I like to receive the documents from the L and B by mail and am happy to use a first class stamp to send my vote back. But I do recognise that support for the railway is global and a means need to be found to give those who live in far flung places the chance to vote.

We have to recognise that there may be a large number who did not vote in the election for their own reasons - if they really wanted their voice heard then I am sure they would buy a stamp.

 

I can see that - as a member of 3 railways and a newbuild group the only one that I go out of my way to ensure I send ballots back for (as opposed to just if I get round to it) is the L&B. Because that's the one that I care about most.

 

I agree. The idea of 'one method only' is well out-of-date. By all means keep paper communications for those who want them, but equally offer electronic voting for those who want it.

A 'simple' solution that does not require the railway to set up any sophisticated system of voting software is to allow members to download a voting form, print it off, fill in and sign it, then scan it as a PDF (or else take a photo) and e-mail that back. I've done that before elsewhere when nominating a proxy. It's a bit cumbersome at the member's end perhaps, but better than nothing.

 

I must confess to have failed to vote this time because I got swamped with work and forgot until it was too late. My fault entirely! But if it could have been done electronically, then I would almost certainly have gotten it in.

 

Plus One......

 

Let's not forget that there has only been a trustees election at the last two AGMs. Counting votes for the other business at the AGM is a lot more simple. The trustees election was very close for the third post. To enable the result of the vote to be announced at the AGM there probable needs to be a cut off date for receipt of voting forms with none accepted at the meeting - I suspect this would need a change of rules which would delay its implementation.

 

Certainly my experience as to how things are done elsewhere.

 

Despite the misgivings expressed by some on here, I think that a "two centre" L & B, for a while, could work very well. It shows that the railway is expanding and is serious about its ambition. It gives the opportunity for more people to volunteer and gain experience. It builds up the infrastructure and rolling stock. It also provides more for visitors to do and see. Most will use their cars to travel between the sites. Steadily buying intervening land and being a good neighbour will generate more positives for the future of the L & B.
It will remove some of the expressed concerns of some of the locals.

 

It is also positive for the TWAO showing that the Trust is serious about extending.

 

But you would need the TWAO first in order to run the second stretch of railway.

>>>>>Most will use their cars to travel between the sites. .....It will remove some of the expressed concerns of some of the locals.

Sadly, I feel those comments are contradictory. The whole purpose of the WB-BR section (and later LN-BR) is take traffic OFF the roads - 'encouraging' them to drive by splitting the railway across two sites might be taken by some locals as justification for their concerns.

 

I find the need for a TWAO confusing. The Trust have stated that they do not need a TWAO to extend to Parracombe. Is this because they are extending an existing railway? If they don't need it for this - would they need it to run the second stretch of railway? I don't know the answers to these questions.

I suspect that it will take some time for all this to happen - unless there is a considerable injection of funding - so it maybe that the TWAO process runs in parallel.

 

But since then, others in the Trust have told me that one is needed.

AFAIK you certainly need one is you cross a public right-of-way, which is why AIUI there had to be one to go over Bridge 67 (once rebuilt) because of the footpath below it. Whether going under - rather than over - a public right-of-way also counts seems to be unclear, and I've not been able to find any sort of authoritative definitive answer. Is there not also a footpath under one of the bridges recently restored near the site for Whistlandpound station?

 

My (admittedly possibly flawed) understanding is that, with the demise of the Light Railways Act (1896), things now attract paperwork if a railway (a) has a gauge of 15" or more - or- (b) crosses any public right of way (I believe this extends to footpaths and bridleways) above, at or below grade.

Thus, were anyone sufficiently insane to undertake installation of a Lartique Monorail (or the Langen 'Wuppertal' / Gerry Anderson 'Thunderbirds' version) on UK soil, whilst under 15" gauge, they'd have you on point (b). Not too sure whether the ban on construction of public railways with a gauge greater than 4'-8½" was addressed at the same time .... but I digress.

 

I made that comment to accept the reality of likely most popular travel between the two sites....however the argument becomes that by joining the two sites, then road travel will be reduced. The more cars are in car parks by stations, the fewer are on the narrow roads.
It is a very complex situation as the majority in the larger area welcome the increased income that the larger L & B would attract, however quite a few who will be locally affected appreciate their solitude and isolation.

 

Was the Irish implementation of the Lartigue system broad gauge or standard gauge?

Tom (I’ll see myself out)

 

Believe it or no, it's an 'is' again ..... though just a short demo line and a steam outline diesel. For them's as are into such things, there's a very fine golf course nearby. Gratuitous plug (for monorail) below:

http://lartiguemonorail.com/