If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Discussion in 'Narrow Gauge Railways' started by 50044 Exeter, Dec 25, 2009.

  1. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,494
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I've just found my copy of the appeal leaflet - it is silent on this point. That may be an own goal, depending on whether "future extension of the railway" is sufficiently similar to specifically returning to Parracombe.
     
    lynbarn, Old Kent Biker and H Cloutt like this.
  2. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    7,442
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    According to the Newsletter (now received here!) "Please note that no news items will be added to the old website. This will however be maintained as an archive."

    Now, do they mean 'no new items' or 'no news items' - there is a difference. If we assume that the old site will no longer be updated, then what - if anything - are the intentions for providing a members-only facility on the new site? Yet again it appears that nothing is being done to improve communications to the membership.
    I find it strange that, under the current circumstances, the Board does not seem to making the most of every available channel for getting their message across to the membership as widely and accurately as possible.
     
    lynbarn, Biermeister, ghost and 3 others like this.
  3. H Cloutt

    H Cloutt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2018
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Battle
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    That comment puzzelled me too. It seems to me that the Members pages on the old website was easy to find and use - the problem was that it wasn't updated. I would like it to remain on the old site and be updated.
    Communication does seem to be an issue - the newsletter is an important part of this and I would wish to continue to receive a hard copy. However when there is important news the members pages would be the best way to inform members - I don't really expect to read it on Social media.
     
  4. lynbarn

    lynbarn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    482
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Working in the NHS as a Maintenance Electrician
    Location:
    Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    Can I remind everyone that this is a unique project in that it really doesn't make any difference as to where you want to start this project, you can guarantee that there is not a another decent length of trackbed that copies Woody Bay, there are possibilities, but nothing quite like Woody.

    For what it is worth a new section needs to be looked at and found then considered as a new project. Sadly Woody Bay has to be considers as having to much baggage right now landowners to the north won't let it happen right now, and at present some people in Parracombe are doing the same.

    But what does need to happen now is that the Trust focus's on building up the reserves in the bank, since we will need the money to buy as much trackbed as and when we can as it come up for sale.

    Sadly I heard that the failure to secure the extension may have cost a couple of legacies of unknow size.
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2023
  5. Biermeister

    Biermeister Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2019
    Messages:
    333
    Likes Received:
    625
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Brewer
    Location:
    Daylesford, Victoria, Australia
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Dear Colin
    You seem to be a nice sort of a chap but I wonder if perhaps you wear your heart too readily on your sleeve ? What we all need to do right now is to settle down, take some deep breaths and muse quietly to ourselves for some time. There is no need for any of us to go off on wild flights of fancy about what we think 'needs' to happen. It will have to be 'easy, easy, catchee monkey'. Let's not get too disheartened: especially on this site. Things can change quickly and when they do the Trustees must be ready. This, and as you rightly say, filling the coffers are what is 'needed'.
     
  6. AD29935

    AD29935 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    91
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I understand and share the disappointment many people clearly feel regarding this recent setback. However, I'm less sure that I understand the suggestion that we should now look to extend the railway "elsewhere" rather than continue the focus on getting to Parracombe.

    In explaining the rationale for the s73 application, the Trust cited post-2018 changes to the financial climate and acquisition of additional land and funds as arguments that would allow "a staged construction and opening strategy to be robustly demonstrated".

    My understanding is that the withdrawal of the s73 application is the result of legal disagreements about whether the proposal was a material departure from the original application. This is not a rejection of the the staged reconstruction strategy itself - it seems to me that the Trust's arguments for a staged reconstruction and opening have not yet been considered by ENPA, let alone rejected! So I'm not sure we should be contemplating radical changes of course quite yet.

    I'm not equipped to comment on the validity of legal arguments around whether the changes sought were beyond the scope of a s73 application. However, I can certainly see why ENPA would exercise caution in this matter - the objectors to the scheme might well view a more lenient interpretation as allowing the Trust to "move the goalposts" in a way that I'm sure they would regard as unfair. So perhaps the message that ENPA is sending is: "If you want to rebuild the railway starting with a staged opening to Parracombe, put in a planning application that says that!"

    I appreciate the deep frustration that folks are feeling at the moment, but I'm also cautious about throwing out the baby with the bathwater! A staged reopening via Parracombe might well remain the right plan - it's just that through unfortunate circumstances the Trust ended up trying to achieve it in a way that ENPA wasn't comfortable with.
     
    Snail368, brmp201, Breva and 7 others like this.
  7. Michael B

    Michael B Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2020
    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    1,045
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Bristol
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    I thought that some of the objection at Parracombe was the possibility that trains would terminate there (rather than go on to Blackmoor) with the car parking and other issues that might cause.
     
    lynbarn, H Cloutt and WhoKnows like this.
  8. AD29935

    AD29935 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2017
    Messages:
    55
    Likes Received:
    91
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    London
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Yes, I'm sure that's right. However, this concern would also need to have been addressed as part of the s73 process, so presumably the Trust believed the mitigations it was offering would be sufficient to overcome this objection.

    My thought is that those same mitigations might be used as part of a new application.

    Off the top of my head, I believe the proposal was that Parracombe would be operated on a similar basis to the current Killington Lane setup - so no parking and no ticket-purchasing. I'm sure others will correct me if I'm mistaken!
     
  9. SpudUk

    SpudUk Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Messages:
    1,732
    Likes Received:
    593
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Project Manager
    Location:
    Wales
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    If they application is resubmitted, is an extension as far as Heddon Hall viable? I know it's what, less then half a mile, but it's progress, it shows momentum, and it gives time for a positive PR campaign in Parracombe to assuage concerns and mitigate anxieties
     
  10. Meatman

    Meatman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2018
    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    1,405
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Burrington,devon
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    This was the very plan back in 2009, the then owners of heddon hall were very supportive but the trust at the time, some of who are still in power poo poo'd the idea back then in favour of going to blackmoor, and with the Parracombe plan this railway has come full circle at a cost of 15 years wasted, their PR skills have upset the goodwill of a community who's future support the railway is reliant on for any further movement in that area, bit of a dogs dinner all round I'd say, heddon hall has been on the market for some time recently and now rumoured to be under offer so an extremely friendly approach would be needed by the trust towards any new owner ( maybe they could hire a PR expert this time) before the objectors get a foot in the door
     
    Biermeister and SpudUk like this.
  11. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    7,442
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    Amidst all the noise and fury from objectors about the L&BR in general and the Sec 73 in particular, as I see it there were two key objections from Parracombe residents:-

    1. They did NOT want PE to be a terminus, even temporarily - just a 'quick stop' on the way to/from Blackmoor
    2. Concerns about the knock-on traffic effects on the road leading to the station.

    In many ways the latter fuelled the former, insofar as there were fears about (a) safety of people walking to/from the station and (b) safety of local residents (including school users) from what was feared to be extra traffic created by (1) potential passengers driving to the station to catch a train and/or (2) railway enthusiasts driving there to watch/photograph etc.

    Having used that road myself, it does seem clear that it would be unsuitable for any substantial increase in vehicle or foot traffic. Whether the problem would actually materialise to the extent that the residents fear is hard to judge, other than to say of course once the railway is there it would be hard to 'undo'.

    There simply is NO public parking available at the station site or along the access road, but however much the railway publicise that fact there will still be people who will try to drive there 'just in case'. Human nature being what it is, realistically it is hard to see how the railway could guarantee a 'fix'. The railway could (and IIRC did) promise not to sell tickets to people trying to board at PE, but that risks alienating potential passengers such as (say) tourists staying at the Fox and Goose who decided to walk up there to 'catch the train for a ride'. The railway currently promotes the idea of getting off at KL and walking to PE for lunch etc and then back - it would be ridiculous therefore (especially as KL has to close once the line is extended southwards) to expect the same customer base to travel to PE and back without getting off there for lunch etc.

    I am not suggesting that the idea of expanding to PE as the first step in a revised staged approach to getting to Blackmoor should be abandoned, but I do feel that it will have to be approached in a very cautious manner and - hopefully - in meaningful consultation with all concerned to see what scope, if any, exists for a solution that might prove acceptable to the majority ( I don't expect the railway will ever be able to please everyone). Only time will tell...
     
    Last edited: Mar 8, 2023
  12. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,803
    Likes Received:
    7,442
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    I note on the 'new' website that the Appeal is still active....
     
  13. lynbarn

    lynbarn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    482
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Working in the NHS as a Maintenance Electrician
    Location:
    Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    We can all grumble about all sorts of things, however it will need all sides of this discussion, to come together to sort out the many issues that have come to light so far, if they are not to happen again, no one is whiter that white from what I can see.

    There have been some serious system failures within the Trust, some of which can only be removed via a partial rewrite of the M&A's. At the same time it needs to include some suggestions which make a lot of sense from the membership based CIO Constitution template.

    It has been suggested to me that we convert the Trust to a CIO. I would normally agree with that. However at this moment in time, I don't think that will help matters and it would only become a distraction to the issues which have recently been highlighted. These items need to be addressed before we can all move on.
     
  14. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,494
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    You may want to reflect on the comparison between what you propose is and is not changed. I’ve no idea on the details, but it seems odd to me that you would benefit from investing time and effort in one set of constitutional documents but not another.

    More generally, the important thing is to focus and obtain consensus on what changes are needed and then think about how they’re enacted - jumping straight to the solution generally risks missing why you’re doing it in the first place.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
     
  15. The Dainton Banker

    The Dainton Banker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2014
    Messages:
    1,720
    Likes Received:
    3,186
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Over the hills and far away
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Please indicate what you think should be included in a re-write of the M&As and what items "need to be addressed before we can all move on". It is very difficult to follow your thinking when you don't give specific examples.
     
    Axe +1, ghost, H Cloutt and 2 others like this.
  16. lynbarn

    lynbarn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    482
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Working in the NHS as a Maintenance Electrician
    Location:
    Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer

    This is not a solution but the start of the process that needs to be done, it was suggested before Covid that a review be undertaken. It has been known for sometime that the Trust M&A's require an updated but they didn't get done as other things have got in the way, but there is a lot to look at and to make suggestions which we hope will improve the Trust.

    The current thinking in the charity world is that every group constitution should be reviewed every five years to make sure it complies and nothing has gone out of date. Until a group has been formed to look into this there really is not much to say about it, I am just give you guys the heads up for one thing that hopefully will happen.
     
  17. H Cloutt

    H Cloutt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2018
    Messages:
    885
    Likes Received:
    1,329
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Battle
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Exactly - and what would a re-write achieve? Do we seriously thing that the M&As are necessary before the trust can "move on"? We are all disappointed by what has happened with the extension plans - but we cannot assume that the Trust and it's professional advisers had not considered the possibility that the S73 application would not be successful and made contingency plans. We will just have to wait and see.
     
  18. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    25,494
    Likes Received:
    23,734
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    And the relative importance of this is?

    The M&As are a means to an end; right now, it’s sorting out the end that matters and then the means can follow.

    The L&B has suffered a significant knock. There is a view that leadership approach is one of the factors, but that is not common ground. Accepting for a moment that this view is right, the question that must first be asked is how much of that could be effectively dealt with “constitutionally”, rather than by focusing on ways of working. In this case, that must include consideration of those outside the railway, their influence on its prospects, and how the railway can better engage.

    One of the reactions I see from those disappointed in this outcome is a sense of disappointed entitlement. It comes across as “How dare those opponents not support us” and then appears to blame the leadership for not succeeding. That’s not a good way to ensure that future attempts at extending will succeed - or have the right people to make things happen.

    Where I’m a trustee, the constitution was changed a few years ago (before my time), and is kept under review. But the starting point is always about how we work effectively, then whether constitutional change is necessary to underpin that.

    Right now, all you are doing is reiterating a combination of boilerplate best practice and asserting “something must be done” without actually dealing with what or why. It doesn’t convince, any more than “projects” like the South Bedfordshire Railway, with perfect paperwork but nothing else did.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  19. lynbarn

    lynbarn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Messages:
    1,482
    Likes Received:
    482
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Working in the NHS as a Maintenance Electrician
    Location:
    Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Anyone who is close to the project can tell you what needs to be addressed and have made suggestion on how to move on and improve matters in the group.

    One suggestion that has been raised is how do you engage the membership to be more involved by not remaining either a keyboard warriors or just having a proxy vote interest in the project.

    Also how do you use social media for better communications with-in the L&BR group, not everyone uses Facebook or other social media outlets but it is just as important to make sure that all the members receive up to date news.

    It has become a central point in that most people agree that communications needs to improve not just inside the Trust with the membership but also externally to those we need to work with. Just how that happens will be up to the members to decide.

    Part of the problem we have is you cannot blame everyone else for this, unless you are prepared to take some of the blame of the groups strengths and weakness's yourself.

    It has become clear that for some people rebuilding the railway has become more important than being good neighbours in North Devon. without that Trust this railway is never going to expand.

    Right now there are more questions that answer
     
  20. Jamessquared

    Jamessquared Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Messages:
    26,105
    Likes Received:
    57,435
    Location:
    LBSC 215
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    That basically boils down to “better stakeholder relations”, stakeholders including both members and the local community.

    I’m sure that is important, but why does doing that require rewriting the memorandum and articles?

    You still seem to be no further forward than an unfocused “something must be done” and lashing out with suggestions that are basically irrelevant to the perceived problem.

    Tom
     

Share This Page