Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Nobody seems to have photographed this bridge, although one of the historical cine films appears to have been taken from a train going under it. Attached a cruel blow up from the north in 1913 showing the parapet walls.

 

Thank you for that. Driving that way, I’ve always wondered why there’s been no evidence of the railway there, and that picture with previous posts helps clarify things nicely.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

Depending on the level of traffic, would a Welsh Highland 'Teletubbies' type bridge solution be suitable, allowing the road to cross the formation diagonally?

 

What's one of them? Like on the Britannia Bridge at Porthmadog? That was presumably allowed because of the railway's major contribution to the economy of the area. Would that rationale apply at location in question on the L&B?

 

The two corrugated iron type bridges seemed to have been called Teletubbies as the mounds they go through looked like the film set. This is an image of the type of structure.

 

I think the Armco Tunnel you mean on the WHR is by the Osprey view point.
Doesn't the Leighton Buzzard new alignment also have one?
And for an older one, The Middleton under the M621 in Leeds.

 

Having driven up the road past Snapper towards Chelfham, I think the combination of speeds and sightlines would guarantee that neither ORR nor the relevant highways authority would support any kind of level crossing there.

 

I don't think anyone is suggesting such an option, either.
Anyhow, it will probably be at least 2 decades hence before any kind of solution needs to be enacted here, and the world will undoubtedly be a rather different place to what it is today.

 

There was an early one on the, then, Yorkshire Dales Railway near Holywell Halt where the railway passes under the A59. IIRC it was installed to strengthen the road bridge rather than replace it. Ben Jackson who was a founder member of the LLPG and moved to the YDR had something to do with the design of it.
Cheers,
Ray.

 

Completely agree, but for the benefit of those who've not driven between Bratton Fleming and Barnstaple, it's worth sharing the challenges of even the more "major" minor roads.

 

Are the two separate? I thought that the TWAO would include the CPO application?

 

AIUI a TWAO includes the facility to ask for a CPO. Whether that request is granted or not is another matter, if (say) it was decided (by whatever official body determines on CPOs) that the land you wanted to buy was not directly essential to the purpose of building/running the railway (eg you wanted to buy Fairview in order to construct an engine-shed there ).

 

Many years ago I have a feeling that the late Colin Pealing looking in to this and the view at the time was that the railway would have to cross over the road above it, due a number of reasons but one which stood out was the creation of a weakness in the flood plan defences.

Also being a main North Devon road, that would mean a minimum of 18ft clearance I think it is.

 

Whether to grant or refuse a TWA Order application is a decision for the Secretary of State for Transport. If compulsory purchase powers are proposed in the Order (which is inevitable, unless there is prior agreement with every landowner) it’s highly likely the SoS will require a Public Inquiry. This is carried out by an independent Inspector who hears all the evidence, from the proposer; their supporters; objectors etc. and then reports to the SoS. As others have said the RVR inquiry finished more than a year ago and the decision is still awaited.

 

Trackbed Trails 35 and the accompanying Powerpoint on possible ways forward for the western part of the railway makes very interesting reading. If the breakout from the Woody Bay to Killington Lane stretch is thwarted it's good to know that thinking has started within EA and YVT of what could be achieved in their neck of the woods.

 

Any one of the 'Statutory Objectors' can call for a Public Inquiry - this includes the land owners.

 

"Call for", or have the right to force a public inquiry to be held?

 

From the Appropriate part of the Government website.
A ‘statutory objector’ is normally someone whose land, or rights in land, may be bought compulsorily under the TWA order, and who makes an objection in line with the rules. This could be an owner, a lessee, an occupier or a tenant of the land (or any building on it).

A statutory Objector can, if you wish, have your objection heard before a person appointed by the Secretary of State. We will ask you about this when we acknowledge your objection. However, you cannot be heard privately. If necessary the Secretary of State will arrange for either a public inquiry or a less formal (but still public) hearing

 

BTW - disappointing to learn from Trackbed Trails that EA and YVT had reached out to the LBRT in January about their vision for the future and had received no reply, at least by a week or so ago. A somewhat Trussian game plan?

 

Trussian- as in Liz Truss? I didn't know she had anything as sophisticated as a game plan, unless it's stick your fingers in your ears, and go "LA LA LAA!"