Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Hope your newsletter turns up soon! Re: Grampian conditions however, I don't think that the ENP would ever have agreed to their removal in those circumstances.

 

No problem with that, but...what about the majority of members who are unlikely to be able to attend the AGM, when will they hear about 'the options'? After all, we're still waiting for a feedback from the 'volunteers' forum' of last November :-(

The situation clearly is complex. I do not believe that it will be sufficient simply to turn up at the AGM and listen to the Trustees saying (hopefully) (a) this is what happened and why, (b) these are the options that we see as possible ways ahead and (c) what are your views on them? The talking could go on for h-o-u-r-s .

IMHO there needs to be a detailed brief sent out by the Trustees well in advance of the AGM (possibly with the AGM paperwork etc to save on postage costs) [#], so that members can 'gen up' on the subject before hand and then can come ready with useful questions and contributions towards a more meaningful debate.

[#] and, dare I say it, put on the members-only web-page as well for quick and easy access !

 

Those of us who were in Lynton Town Hall and sat in the 'Public Gallery' in March 2018 to witness the whole of that meeting would most certainly agree with you Brian. In my opinion it was the purchase of The Halt which made it feasible to apply for the S73s - that meant we then did own all the trackbed from Killington Lane tp Parracombe.
Mike

 

Well said. Accountability is essential but management have to be allowed to manage without being undermined by sniping and second guessing.

 

I don't see that owing the Halt made any difference to applying for the S73 apart from wasting 3 valuable years of approved planning because at the end of the day the S73 should have taken into consideration the feelings of the locals and requested that conditions be changed to work on the trackbed but not lay track or run trains, we have been told for years it would not be practical to go back to Parracombe alone even though it could have been possible to get as far as heddon hall when there was less resistance to the railway in the area, what has now happened is that the application that was submitted not only stirred the objectors right up but has ended in failure, the world is changing and how much longer will there be a chance to rebuild a heritage line, we could be looking at a good 5 years now before something else actually gets approved and starts to be built, that will take some of us to 22 years of waiting to see the line extend and a lot of you on here wonder why some of us are critical of this recent news

 

My only question about that would be about where in the process the AGM sits. My hunch is that it should be early in a process of regrouping and replanning, not the conclusion.

 

My recollection of the objections from 2018 was that they included not just operation of a live railway, but the disruption that reinstatement would cause.

 

Good news indeed, that business operations are progressing well, but does 2460 subscriptions, 3050 members represent a significant increase over recent years? When I was involved in managing the membership, many years ago, I'm sure there were over 2500 subscriptions even then.

The important point though, is that we are where we are, and we can't change the past, but we can perhaps learn from it, look to the future, and to getting this railway built by whatever means possible.,,

 

So there might be opposition in both directions, but going north from Woody Bay to Caffyns (initially) could provide a way forward, building on the operation at Woody Bay, rather than the prospect of two separate ones - if the engine shed could be relocated and it has been built with this in mind. Although it might have to be at Caffyns. Woody Bay would then remain the centre of things - wouldn't that be the best of both worlds ? - with round trips in both directions rather like Broadway and Cheltenham Racecourse around the HQ at Toddington on the Glouc & Warwicks. The expensive problem of course is the replacement of the bridge north of Woody Bay and the removal of what might be (by my amateur estimate) 30,000 cubic yards of fill for about 560 yards in the cutting at this point. Photograph looking south in that cutting in 1966 attached before it was filled beyond the Bridge carrying the road to Woolhanger (shown here) . And maybe land could be bought (or rented as a temporary facility) near Dean Steep for a car park. And provide a jumping-off point to the ultimate goal of Lynton in the future. If the site of Dean Steep embankment could be acquired, and if the content of that cutting is non-toxic, it could be used to reinstate the bank in anticipation of an extension.

 

Cant remember all the points as it was a very long day,
Planning and S73. its serious, very serious, objections gone through and 3 main points, the biggest is the use of a TT, TT dropped from the application, weekly meeting with ENPA not happened, unsure why (since the MF it was found that the planning officer assigned had left ENPA ,whether this had anything to do with meetings i don't know)
General Manager gave a decent talk about what he had been up to, eco coal, h+s, HRA courses/meetings ect
Chairman made announcement that OSHI was close, possibly even before Christmas, if it happened, any volunteers willing to help paint it and the bungalow at the halt as that was to have new tenants, Trust to make 'small' loan to Blackmoor PLC with help to purchase.
Lunch
Afternoon spent listening to the finer details of the HOPS system and all that it entails
Might have missed a couple little snippets but that was about the sum of it

 

One benefit/feature of such a scheme is that it would put WB back as a passing-loop somewhere between two termini, thereby enabling us to recreate the sight and process of two L&BR trains passing each other.

 

This should have been the way forward in the first place, work shed deposited down at Killington lane, carpark already at WB for park and ride, the cost of the bridge is immaterial, its cost will only go up, there is of course a large area beside dean lane bridge although that might have to be filled back in seeing they took the embankment to extend Chivenor runway, (somewhere to put the fill from the cutting anyway) and a good reason was that Mrs.G doesn't live in that direction and was already a known opponent of the railway at the time

 

I've been visiting the L&B on & off since 2008.

Undoubtedly with the arrival of Lyn & the restored carriages it has improved, although it has always been small but perfectly formed.

But its not expanded in all that time.

It was exciting when the planning application was approved but what then, I agree that there was Covid, but I never really got the feeling that work was going to start, where was the fund raising, the sort of activity that happened to get teh WHR built.

Yes, its different but surely not that different.

 

Sadly I've thought very much the same over the last few years that some just wanted it to go through the process and end up just as it was , big enough to survive but not too big to lose control, and believe me others have said the same

 

Any one care to give a summary of the situation for those who have tried to read the last few pages but have had difficulty separating facts from commentary.

Thank s in advance

 

Having received my Newsletter and Magazine, I sat down to start to read the newsletter, Ok there is a reasonable explanation as to what has gone on, But and there is always a but who are these people who have been given the Trustees all this wrong information there is mention of a legal challenge and legal advise given, now surprise surprise I am not a great lover of the Uk legal set up but we have to have something, now I don't know about you but the law in the UK is divided up into a number of sub parts and I am wondering if the legal advice that was given was done so by a chambers that specialised in land/corporate law if that was the case then it was terrible advice. If however the advice was given by Arup then what is going on? People make mistakes, we all do, but if it was known that the Grampian conditions had been withdrawn early on wouldn't it have been better to have withdrawn that planning application and then submit a fresh application knowing that the Grampian conditions could not have been added as an after though.

Sure you can't make an omelette without breaking a few eggs. But looking at all of this I am sure none of any of this would have happen had we even had an update say last year and I wouldn't have become so ratty.

 

I think a lot of the misunderstanding might not have happen if the Trust had organised more members meeting while this was all going on, they may have even pick up some good free advice.

As for the AGM this will only show what has been happening in the past year business wise.

 

Don't worry wait until you have reached 44 years of all of this then you can take over from me

 

What is happening with OSHI? That news would certainly offer a bit of a lift!

 

I have some experience of seeking and using legal advice. That experience tells me a number of things. First is that any lawyer who tells me that something is certain to happen is a liar - the best they can do is indicate a degree of confidence. Second is that not all advice comes from barristers (who are based in chambers). Third is that lawyers give professional advice on the law - and other professionals give advice on their specialist areas. Like, for example, Arup who are a specialist engineering and planning consultancy, not a law firm. Fourth is that there are restrictions on who can see legal advice due to the workings of privilege. It's a complex area and I'm no expert on it, but it does restrict the ability to share advice given under privilege in public.

Sorting this situation out calls for care, calm heads, expertise and a fair bit of cunning. Not chicken licken impressions.

They might. They might also have been distracted when dealing with a complex situation, and potentially struggling with what they could or couldn't share without upsetting things further.

As for the AGM, time will tell. I for one would be disappointed if it was allowed to be so limited.