Rother Valley Railway

That's what happens when you have the JH empire paying for things! You only have to look at what he has achieved at Crewe diesel depot, saphos trains, etc etc etc to see he is happy to spend money if the end result is a good job and done correctly.

 

I was asked if I would like to speak at the enquiry. Originally I thought it wouldn't be necessary, but now I think it might be as well if I did. Theres an awful lot of crap which seems to be piling up.

 

Ah, I didn't realize that Mr. Hosking was involved with the RVR. Yes, it certainly looks like the RVR materials are "a good job and done correctly".

Noel

 

And, despite what the antis would have you believe, he IS local to the project

 

He actually lives closer to the area than a lot of the protesters do, and what he does with his money, and influence, is no bodies business, but his.

 

My understanding is that there are several backers, some of whom may not wish their identities to be openly bandied about. However, giving all the credit to one of them may be doing the others a disservice.

 

I am not local but I will vote for this to happen as it will be silly to not connect up the railways.

 

Are you likely to be asked to vote?

 

I think that what he means is that he supports the proposals that the railway has made .

From the wording of your reply Do you?

 

Just scanning through some of the correspondence on the Gateley Hamer website, particularly from the objectors, and even though most of it is over 2 years old now, I'm struck by the similarities in the pejoratives used, to the soundbites from the Lynton hearing:
"Toy trains" "hobby railway", "playing choo-choo trains" "rich mans train set".
One actually went as far as to say "we don't need or want tourists here", which at the very least is honest about a distaste for the great unwashed, ie. the tens of thousands who will happily travel in these trains.
But I am surprised at the linguistic paucity, and the generic similarities to those in Devonshire. Perhaps not quite Violet Elizabeth Bott, but very, very close.

 

The DfT guidance for TWA Orders says “applications are decided entirely on the merits of the arguments and not by comparing the numbers of objection and support letters received”

The Inspector makes similar comments in his notes following the previous pre-inquiry meeting, saying that a good point supported by evidence needs to be said only once in order to carry weight. He urges parties with similar interests to get together if they can to present their case through a single spokesperson at the inquiry; and warns that he may intervene to prevent unnecessary repetition.

 

Quite. My invitation was from the point of view of a road safety professional, and frequent user of the A21. If there's a gap to be filled with a valid observation, then I'll happily do it.

 

From my observations of the A21, I honestly don't think the level crossing will have that much of an impact, heading north( London M25 ) bound, your going to be slowing down for the roundabout any way, South bound towards Hastings, your just coming off the roundabout, so speed shouldn't be an issue, Unless your a self important BMW driver, who just has to get to the posh shop in Tunbridge Wells, of Course, and nothing should be allowed to be in your way, because your more important than anyone else the majority of the hold ups i have encountered are at the Frimwell lights ,

 

More or less what I stated in my letter of support. In both directions, drivers are going to be in hazard negotiation mode because of the roundabout.
The classic pinch points on that road are, like you say, Flimwell lights, Scotney- Flimwell, and Lamberhurst- Kippings cross. The L/C will be very small beer by comparison, and fortunately in that area there are no possible rat-runs which otherwise might have been problematic.

 

I have just received notification that both the Pre-Inquiry meeting and the Public Inquiry into the TWAO will be held virtually using Microsoft Teams.

 

The inquiry website now includes the inspector's note of the pre-inquiry meeting.
The documents section also includes the RVR's updated statement of case dated 10/05/21 which outlines the current positive progress with ORR and Highways England over level crossing issues etc. and RVR's responses, in some detail, to the objections received from other parties.
https://gateleyhamer-pi.com/en-gb/rother-valley-railway/

 

Some of the objections are of the usual ranting nature but many are also substantial and well evidenced, and as such should not be dismissed out of hand. Whilst the KESR/RVR have attempted to promote this project as foregone conclusion, they are very far from home and dry. In fact I would suggest that 70:30 in favour of the objectors though I hope my analysis is more pessimism than reality. I am supporter of the concept of linking the RVR to the KESR but I very much doubt it will happen in my life time.

The ORR submission makes interesting reading especially with regard to the RVR's estimations on the A21 level crossing. In civil service speak, they effectively suggest the proposals as flawed. As an aside, I witnessed a suited individual counting traffic at the proposed level crossing site over the weekend.

As to be expected, flooding and the A21 are the most contentious points. These matters were addressed when Rother District Council approved the planning application but we cannot assume that the inquiry will simply rubber stamp that decision. EA are still expressing concern on the matter of flooding. The parish council also appear to reversed their earlier views on the proposal.

On a positive side, Natural England have not raised objections with The Ramblers and Open Spaces Society being positively in favour. East Sussex and Rother councils merely repeat the findings from the planning decision of a few years ago.

One clear omission is evidence from Highways England - possibly the most important agency in the whole process - who have not yet submitted but will almost certainly give evidence at the actual hearing.

 

The A21, is certainly the major sticking point, but should not be looked at in isolation, you have to also take into consideration the other pinch points along the road, such as the Fimwell lights and their impact on traffic flow, The flooding, will certainly be offput by the inclusion of flood relief measures , done when the line is being rebuilt, At the moment the disused track bed, with blocked or bulldozed drainage channels increases the flood risk, its not in any operational railways interest to have its track under flood water, and drainage is one of the very first things to be done before any ballast goes down,
As regards the farming community, It's a rapidly changing world, and who knows, if the land does not make the yield, and prices go down, Farmers are businessmen, and Women, if a bit of land is worth more from its saleable value, and you have a willing purchaser, and it fits in with their new business plan, any objections will soon die, If the Hoads business model has to change because its no longer viable to be in arable and Dairy farming, then clearly they will do whats in their best interests, That will then leave the other land owner, who I.m not sure is actually into farming, offer certain safeguards and promises to re-wild some of their land the line goes through, and suitable cash, and only an hardened eco warrior would not be tempted.

 

Of interest, prompted by comments above, did the line suffer much flooding historically, or did drainage arrangements work adequately?

 

Not that i have heard, because much of it was on embankments, the section from Northbridge St to Robertsbridge Junction, though did have additional anti flood improvements made when that section of the line was rebuilt, much of it to reduce run off into the adjacent fields, including the Robertsbridge cricket ground, So if anything, the reinstatement of that section of line, should have decreased the likelihood of flooding , yet they are objecting to the extension because of flooding risk, yet, the line that runs parallel to their ground, has been re opened, and has had additional channels dug to increase the run off from the Rother, if it does flood.