Rother Valley Railway

Any photos? (can't see anything on my mobile)

 

There's no photos showing on my desktop either, just blank spaces where photos should be.

 

Ditto no photos for me too..............

 

Sorry the pictures seem to have been deleted from the Rail Engineer website. Above will give you an idea.

 

I would assume that the RVR would want to install the level crossing at Junction Rd first, and join up the section already laid, and get metals down as far as Austins Bridge before starting on the other two sites, with North bridge Street being done, and finally the A21, because by then, they should have ironed out any snags in installing this type of level crossing plus it enables the head of track to be extended from Roberts bridge towards the A21 before the earthworks are done as these will need to stabilise and bridges rebuilt where needed.

 

Hi Robin

Looking back at this as we step into yet another Spring, it seems the post from Ms. Ainslie was absolutely correct as to the timings of the clearance work from Junction Road to Austen's Bridge and Mike Hart's information to you that is was done some time ago is incorrect? Maybe Mike can explain why site clearance in May is "unavoidable" in this case as I find it extremely hard to believe not a single bird was nesting anywhere along that section in May?

From the RVR's own CEMP document...

Breeding Birds
2.35 The removal of habitats with potential to support breeding birds (those within BPZ 5) is to be undertaken during May 2019 (subject to a dormouse mitigation licence being granted by Natural England). As site clearance during the breeding season is unavoidable then potential nesting habitat will be inspected up to 48 hours prior to clearance work commencing to identify active birds’ nests. If any nests are found, they are to be protected until such time as the ecologist confirms that the young have fledged (left the nest). This would involve setting up an exclusion zone/cordon of an appropriate size for the species concerned. Works may then proceed up to, but not within, this exclusion zone. If any nesting birds are found at any time during clearance works when the ecologist is not present, work must stop immediately and an ecologist consulted immediately for advice on how to proceed.

2.36 Otherwise, habitats with potential to support breeding birds will be removed during September to February inclusive, to avoid any potential offences relating to breeding birds during their main bird breeding season.

For clarification from RVR, this shows the line had not been cleared in February 2019...
https://railwayheritageroutes.blogs...ting-out-photo.html?showComment=1555448963227

 

There has evidently been some letters in the Hastings and Rye Observer about the A21 Level Crossing. A letter published on their website this week seems to be supportive of the scheme. Here is a link
https://www.hastingsobserver.co.uk/...pm30LF6722NsMJvdq-Kz9CCJFfu3XXxgcFlRe7OuzLxwo

The link has been posted this morning on the 'Robertsbridge Family Info' facebook page. This has, not unsurprisingly, generate a lot of comment from the 'usual suspects' who feel that the letter is biased. Well 'Mandy Rice Davies Applies'. I have been unable to find the other letters on the subject on the Newspaper's website, but I suspect that they would be viewed as biased by supporters of the railway.

 

Unfortunately the anti's are never going to accept that some of the propaganda they are taking as fact is wrong, I wonder how they would feel, if the Estate of the Late Owner of one farm, decided that there was more money to be made from selling the land for development, and not in farming? would they say, its ok, its right, or protest about farmland becoming a trading estate, or Houses?

 

Never tell your opponent their sword is broken before the battle, lest they come to the fight with a different one that isnt...

 

Of course this family have a connection with the proposed controversial development in Little Common [Bexhill on Sea] - this was discussed at Rother District Council's Planning Committee yesterday and despite a recommendation by Officers to approve was refused by the committee after a five hour debate.

 

Good point.

 

Which is irrelevant, surely, to this thread since that development involves neither a railway or compulsory purchase.

 

Not really when the niece of the deceased is one of the major protagonists spreading a lot of negativity on facebook

 

Martin,
Just let it all come out at the enquiry- there are 16 days set aside for the genuine truth to come out, and that is plenty of time. And I for one am certainly looking forward to hearing the real story behind the years of claim and counterclaim.

 

None of which is at all relevant to the inquiry. If anyone brings untruths or paper thin arguments to an inquiry they will quickly be exposed by the other side or by the inspector.

I’d be surprised if the RVR side even mentioned the other development since in principle there is nothing wrong with a landowner supporting a development on one part of their land whilst opposing it on another. If there was anything to criticise about the other development the RVR inquiry inspector would not be interested in the slightest - that’ll be somebody else’s job.

 

I am certain they won't mention it either. However, a lot of local people think that it shows double standards since this particular landowner feels that RVR is going to destroy the natural habitat for wildlife which they have created on the old trackbed - but they are quite happy to do this same with their proposed development.

We await the Public Inquiry with interest - the notes of the recent Pre-Inquiry Meeting which are available on the Inquiry website make interesting reading.

 

I would imagine the decision will come down to whats in the best public interest , vs the landowners own wishes, for instance, what impact the loss of a section of land , will have on the viability if the land is arable, and if laid aside , as a wildlife habitat, how much will the railway impact on it, or what the railway can do to minimise and relocate that wild life, I suspect the Hoads land will be the harder one to solve, as it can be argued the re instatement of the railway, the wildlife tends to use the track as a corridor and whilst some species may migrate away, others will take their place, wild life tends to do well on our railways, the loss though, of arable land with a perceived value in yield , may be harder to solve and compromise may be needed ,but so far none has been forthcoming.

 

I received an email at 9pm last night to inform me that the Public Inquiry into the RVR's TWAO has been postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

 

yes with no future date set at the moment and I saw Sally Anne hart saying we need to protect our tourism in the south east, and help them during the closedown period, I hope her words don't come back to haunt her at a later date, if she comes out as being anti the extension.

 

So no replies to this from Mike Hart or Robin MW who I am sure would be able to clarify the above? Disappointing to say the least.