West Somerset Railway General Discussion

West Somerset Railway - Then and Now # 61

Watchet 1961 / 2017

A very similar shot to yesterday. But this time the train is a little further away and the loco is bunker first. This reveals the distant for Kentsford box (I look forward to that reappearing.) and the pointwork / ground frame for the access to the harbour lines.

The 'half harp' lamp is, in my view, very elegant, and reminds me of one which used to fascinate me at Castle Cary years ago.

A feature which has reappeared at Watchet only in the past year or so are the equally elegant 'scroll' style GWR benches, collected together for Watchet by the generosity of other WSR stations who have agreed to swap around styles of benches so that Watchet can have a complete set of one type. Two more such 'transfers' are in the pipeline.

Copyright Chris Gammell / Robin White

1961


2017

 

" .................... a pity they couldn't have made additions more in keeping with the original building."
"..................... Agreed. a blot on the landscape... a carbuncle even."

I'm a bit surprised this collection of black shipping containers made it past the planning authorities.
I'd start with "visually intrusive", continue with "in-appropriate materials" & add "stupid location" if I were on the planning board & reject it out of hand.
Quite frankly I'd stick the same soubriquets on the MD cafe.
Which makes the wrong-pitch-of-the-roof CH Goods Office look rather petty by comparison, however disappointing.

 

I'm told the modern 'received wisdom' about making additions to historic buildings is not to attempt pastiches of additions that might have been made, but rather to build something that is obviously different, to keep the old and new separate, without affecting the integrity of the old structure.

It does take a bit of getting used to, and I am not sure the effect on the station at Watchet was fully taken into account, but I can understand the reasoning.

Robin

 

Nicely put! 60103 is a race horse, when it gets up to speed on the mainline, that's its natural habitat, on a line like the WSR something like a 28xx, a 43xx or a 78xx is ideal, lots of wheels with plenty of grip.

 

A "monstrous carbuncle on the face of an old friend" seems apposite.

 

Unless the adjoining building is "listed" (which this one might be for all I know) it is actually rather difficult for a planning authority to make a refusal on architectural grounds "stick".

PH

 

Something else to take into account is that all WSR buildings were built from locally quarried stone. (Within a mile of the station.) Most drew local red sandstone which is great building stone and is as hard and crisp 150 plus years later.

Unfortunately Watchet drew horrible grey shaley stuff which crumbles for a pastime.

The work to refurbish and enhance the boat museum included considerable stone stabilisation works and without this, the future of the building was in doubt. It was giving the overall building a renewed and enhanced purpose which made all that possible and required the new extension.

Robin

 

If 20 year old memories of my now wife's student fieldwork on the beach between Watchet & Blue Anchor are to be relied upon, it is called mudstone. The name seems apposite.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I struggle with the logic of an 0-4-4 wheel configuration because of this. Driving wheels up front with seemingly not much weight over them for adhesion on starting - although classes with this configuration don't seem to be designed with any great train weight in mind.

Sorry for the further drift!

 

The few remaining examples don't seem to have a particular problem. However 4-6-2s do. Presumably this is why Chapelon opted to convert the later of his rebuilds to 4-8-0s as the power developed got ever higher.
PH

 

Thank you to all those who commented and provide answers to my question.

Dave

 

Which is how we've ended up with, among others, that hideous conservatory thing on the side of Wymondham Abbey, and the God awful plate glass windows in the Whitby banqueting house.

 

Exactly the mistake of following that current planning fad was initially made with the Bridgnorth redevelopment. Result - lack lustre response to the initial share appeal to fund it.

A rethink followed where the railway made clear what it is actually about, expert GW architecture input was obtained and the solution currently being implemented is being carried out as if the GWR (NOT the 2017 version!) had to cope with 250,000 passengers per year. The subsequent share issue has been rather more successful.

The "received wisdom" may hopefully be another passing phase.

 

For received wisdom read something that rhymes with parts of a rowing boat! Sadly the planners got the whole flawed concept wrong at Watchet. The shape might have been acceptable but the colour makes it look awful. Just about the worst example of this "concept" I have seen. The same department that screwed up the CH goods shed!

 

I did make the comment to one of the architects on the original plans that "received wisdom"was "intelectual bull****". The answer seems to be looking at the site as a whole not just the extension

 

I am well aware of the events over Bridgnorth.

Had sense not prevailed, I had been consulted about an injunction....

Robin

 

On the other hand being too much of an "aged flatulence" is not good! Pastiche can often be appalling whilst Kings Cross is an example of something adventurous which works well. In the end there is good design or bad.

PH

 

Indeed but Kings Cross does not set out to remain a time warp from a previous era whereas our heritage railways hopefully do. The GWR and others were not renowned for their use of stainless steel, fluorescent lighting, large areas of plate glass and the like.

 

Well I am by no means convinced how successful tourist railways are at being a time warp. Some pastiche is good but some not.

PH

 

Maybe, but the containers at Williston look bloody awful! Even if they built something in brick it would be better, if not in local stone. This 'received wisdom' of architects is just lazyness.