GCR fails in bid for lottery money

It is to be reopened as part of the electrification of the London Bristol line. This will also see the removal of the 1970s power box.

 

The oldest part is currently vacant but I believe is destined to be offices, the middle section is an events space, and the most modern bit is car parking but may yet become train platforms once more.

 

And, as such, the blinkered determination to be heard by the likes of this gentleman can only ever be counter-productive to those who do have the skills, experience and real-world vision of the pros and cons of such schemes like the NRM/GCR outstation to make them happen.

This is precisely why those to whom railway preservation is all about shouting their impractical fantasies from Facebook and in endless letters and emails to council bean counters are such a bloody menace to those who are capable of delivering the goods in an economically viable and sustainable fashion.

The empty vessel, as always, makes the loudest noise. And they just don't see the potential damage they are doing to those who do have their heads screwed on tight.

 

I think that's a bit harsh. I doubt if anyone takes him seriously, and certainly not a lottery committee considering a £10M bid. Rather, if I were on that committee I think I'd be asking myself if another outstation only 80 miles from the NRM at York is really the best place for it, given that its purpose is surely to make it accessible to as many people as possible. Personally I'd have said it would be better if it was located further away from York, perhaps somewhere midway between Birmingham and London, give or take a bit. Didcot would be a good choice if they had the room and inclination and could perhaps rotate out some of their out of ticket stock in exchange - to me that's more of a true partnership than the GCR's "give us the contents for a visitor centre" bid.

 

To compete with Didcot and Swindon just a stones throw away ?

I think the GW could do with an attraction, Southall would make sense to me, for the "London" factor, also Crewe, Manchester & Liverpool are a bit starved of a quality railway attraction.

 

Rather more than 80 miles, the aa thinks you are out by 31 miles or approx 40%

 

I hate to say it, but if I were on the committee I would be asking how much cash heritage railways have had over the last few years and if this would be better spent on 10 £1million projects that are nothing to do with rails. We have done very well from the HLF over the years!

 

One of there reasons HLF likes railway projects, I'm told, is that on the whole they have a very good track record for delivering what they set out to achieve. That must be attractive to any grant awarding body, and bearing mind that there have been very few (if any - Im can't think of one off the top of my head) blockbluster grants (say £3M +) from heritage groups - lots of smaller projects but no really big ones till now.

 

Crewe diesel depot would have been a good location for an outstation on this side of the country.

Bob.

 

Quite agree, from Bodmin To Bo'ness heritage lines have become the living national railway museum, the building at York is a storage facility. Good luck to the GC, although I do like the idea of Temple Meads.

 

I have read through the entirity of this thread and would like to add my thoughts.

Going back to the beginning where it was being discussed about the GCR looking after their locos and getting some criticism, I would say that as the railway is almost pancake flat the locos are not being worked hard, so the fact that people are mentioning loco problems that suggests that maybe they are not being looked after as well as they could be. Recent runaways and derailments do not fill me with confidence either.

To back up the argument of the GCR being worthy, there is also much talk of "when the line is reconnected........." I still see the total for just the bridge replacement is a long way off target and thats before the additional cost of the actual connection and associated moving of MPD etc. I just don't see where the money is coming from to complete this. Also the comment about connecting Leicester with Nottingham is a little silly as both GCR stations are some way from the town centres. The travel costs of running full line may make this prohibitive to some too, in the way that WHR and Ffestiniog have become very expensive for full line travel, and no one is going to doubt the difference in scenery and gradients either.

Having said that, I am dissapointed that a grant of this type has failed and that more heritage rail vehicles cannot be stored under cover. As an alternative to where something like this could be built, there are going to be lots of suggestions and people will favour there own railway of course, so from and unbiased point of view I think it would be a good idea to locate this at Barry and also tell the tale of Woodhams too.

 

Are the new operators of the Barry Tourist Railway planning something along those lines with the unrestored 9F?

 

No more out stations York has been degraded enough.

 

And still I have unrestored vehicles and others stored outside...

 

My feeling is wouldn't £10 million be better spent at York in providing the storage space you need.

I also question the amount of money & when you for example compare the GCR scheme with that just completed on the Isle of W which was aprox 1/10th of that figure, I would have thought the HLF would have spotted the big difference.

The preservation movement has done very well from the lottery, however I do feel that more benefit would be provided by the the provision of more simple storage sheds on more railways than another NRM out station, or yet another loco restoration.

 

Exactly my feelings, perhaps my original comment was a bit abrupt.

 

The provision of those sheds requires someone to write a funding bid. And as for extending buildings at York, there isn't the space. I firmly believe that the National Collection should be just that, and the GC project is one of the more exciting projects that I've worked on in the last decade, telling appropriate stories using the right vehicles - I cannot believe the negativity towards it.

 

Anthony

Whilst you cannot understand the negativity to the scheme, the HLF certainly did and thus rejected it.

So what are you going to do with all the stuff that still needs a home - such grandiose schemes are not value for money IMHO and time for a re-think is in order, don't you think?

 

Not necessarily so.

Just because a project is rejected by the HLF, it doesn't mean it lacks value. There just isn't enough money in the pot to fund every application!

Keith

 

The last big NRM bid to the HLF (for redevelopment at York) failed as well iirc, so perhaps what is being sought is not finding favour with HLF, and the price of the development in relation to what it might potentially hold always seemed high. I think a little more creative thinking on how to develop these outstations may be called for - for instance how about an industrial and early railways themed one in partnership with the Bowes Railway, right in the heart of where railways began? The Bowes is in more need of a boost than the GCR and could be a great base for a freight-oriented collection.