Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Not saying it cannot be done (to have 2 lines) but apart from us enthusiasts to whom is that immediately attractive? As a visitor do I want to park - ride - park - ride? Or do I expect a vintage bus link between the two so it is one experience? However, you approach it the situation has issues and would be status quo for many years. It might be the best way forward, but I am not sure we have the information to judge that right now.

 

Maybe visitors would visit both sections but on different days of their holidays?

 

As far as the engineering and fund raising goes, hasn't the Ffestiniog done it twice? Although most of the track to Blaenau remained, much was unfit for use and one stretch was flooded, requiring a much larger Deviation than the L&B will need, though that might not have been achieved without the compensation from the CEGB. No track remained on what is now the WHR.

The Ffestiniog didn't (AFAIK) have to deal with "over my dead body" objectors other than the then-rival outfit, so for that aspect I agree that the outcome of the RVR case should be informative.

 

This is why it's time for unity/a One Railway approach - because it'll all get very political very quickly...

 

IMHO the answer is quite simple - the ENPA did not want the situation where there was a shiny, big new Depot and sidings etc at BR, doing b**** all 'cos the railway had run out of money and/or not been able to build the railway northwards to connect up at KL.

That is why my view on Option C is that the Trust should wait until construction work on BR-WD is well underway before they submit any formal application for planning permission for the new Depot at BR (but by all means have preliminary discussions to save time), so that by that time they will be able to give the ENPA more confidence in their ability to complete the Depot and put it to practical use.

 

Aside from the deviation, the point is that in both the FR and WHR restoration projects, they started with the land, and just (just is doing a lot of work here) had to do the track. Many preserved lines have started with land and no track.

No one, least of all the Ffestiniog/WHR has been faced with *nothing but* 19 miles of former route, in the hands of over 100 landowners, divided into a few yards here, a hundred yards there etc. Might be over 200 landowners, but can't remember offhand.

 

Apologies Tom @Jamessquared I didn't realise the Bluebell was at that level. Likewise, apologies to @Flying Phil although perhaps the GCR has only hit the £1m mark with the gap project.
I think the l&b still has some way to go in terms of reputation, length, targeted appeals etc before it reaches those levels of fundraising.
I do think a yearly bridge/section of trackbed appeal could work quite well as a manageable amount with a very visible result

 

True enough, but some of those odd bits of land should not cost much to buy back. In total that will be a significant cost, but should be manageable. The objectors, and particularly the landowners who refuse to sell, seem the more significant obstacle, but one that afflicted many railways when they were first built.

 

I don't think it's so much the cost, but the time and the legal complexity. On your second bit, absolutely, but because of that it makes the L&B more like HS2 than another preserved railway. There's a route, there are some surviving structures, but there has been no coherent whole - in terms of the land - since the mid 1930s. Generations have never known a railway there - some generations have been born since closure and already left us again. It really is something different. To be honest, that's part of the appeal, and I hope no one ever thought it would be easy. It's one of the great railway adventures of Britain.

 

To be honest I though that this had been put to bed years ago, the Garratt concept was only suggested before the WHR got rebuilt since then and I have said this may times before you don't need a second Garrett based line.

The L&BR has its own USP, but the old adage of having something different each year to pull the punters in is something we need to be constantly looking at.

When we have more of a railway to run, it might be possible, that at one of the galas you could see either a single or double Fairlie in North Devon, the USA WW1 tank Mountaineer, Russell, Gowrie or any other WHR loco for that matter, plus of course the Darjeeling B class which is a personal favourite.

I haven't even talked about anything from either the Statfold or the Vale of Rheidol Collection's, of any other Heritage railway from the UK for that matter.

The purchase of Blackmoor brings with it a whole new raft of ideas to get your head around. It has been suggested that in time we shall need more locos and rolling stock. Fine so why not set up a new collection policy and a Museum to supply what we need then?

I think we can all agree on one thing we don't want to end up with a mini Barry with a load of locos that don't have a cat in hells chance of being restored. Also you don't want to be the repository of locos having been owned by individuals who are no longer with us (unless they happen to be a really useful engine).

One of the major issues we have and that is the whole project has been run by a very small number of people, which is not healthy. I do know that there are people out there willing to help if asked.

I think most of us on here are aware of the issues at the Teifi Valley Railway and I for one don't want the L&BR to turn into a copy of that railway.

 

absolutely no argument about visiting engines for galas - tbh including Garratts. But there are, out there on social media, *still* people whose solution is 'the Welsh Highland, but in Devon.'

 

The Bluebell's northern extension involved many of the same issues: land purchase, planning permission, reconstruction. For the land purchase, it was additionally complicated because when sold off, the trackbed had been split longitudinally down its centre line, so in most cases, any given section of track required two separate land purchases. There is still one section of a couple of hundred yards where the land was only purchased on the west side, and the new line has to squeeze past with limited clearance to the east; fortunately the original line was double track at that point.

That was only over 6 miles but still took nearly four decades. I'm not sure how many separate parcels of land were involved; the number of about 40 sticks in my mind, including a couple that were bought from the then BR Residuary Board.

What was obvious was that the vision was clear all the time (reopen the line to East Grinstead); and strategically the reopening happened in a sequence of manageable chunks:

• About a mile north from Horsted Keynes to Horsted House Farm, operated in "push-pull" mode with no ability to alight (1990)
• From Horsted House Farm to West Hoathly. Trains could run through and locos could run round at a temporary loop, but again no ability to alight (1992)
• West Hoathly to Kingscote. A full line service, but planning restrictions at Kingscote meant that the ability to start journey there was very curtailed (to this day there is still no parking for cars) (1994)
• Kingscote to Imberhorne Lane. Primarily used for engineering services, with occasional shuttles to maintain wider visibility of the project (2005)
• East Grinstead station - disconnected, used primarily for engineering reasons, with very occasional shuttles run (2010)
• Full line reopening and operation - 2013.

Tom

 

So you recognise that the line has its own usp but then you want to change that by collecting locos and rolling stock from elsewhere? That makes no sense.
It also requires money, land, storage building(s), restoration - can (or should) the L&B really afford to be trying to be the Statfold of Devon?
If you know of people willing to help and are just waiting to be asked, then I would question their commitment. Why haven't they already volunteered? Railways all have a constant appeal for volunteers, why would these people need to be personally invited???

 

>>> Fine so why not set up a new collection policy and a Museum to supply what we need then?

By ironic coincidence, I'm trying at the moment to locate one of the many 'relics' already in Trust possessions for research purposes. Currently the Trust does not have a Museum (although happily EA are talking about a possible small one at BF in due course) and - as far as I can gather - no acquisitions/collections policy either. Even more disconcerting however is the fact that the stuff which the Trust has already appears to be 'scattered', nor does there appear to be anyone in official overall charge of it all - ie no duly-appointed Archivist and/or Curator.

PS I think Michael B would do well for the former, but he might have other ideas/commitments

 

Asked being the polite term for told, as for my agenda, well it was partly to get members asking questions of the trustees instead of just believing every word they were told but that's by the by now the planning has failed, I'll just go on with my main agenda which is to keep trying to get my 14 hours a weekend in volunteering at various sites in the Yeo Valley, I'd like to do more but a full time job restricts my spare time

 

Simply would you ask a Doctor to build you a house? of course not. The problem as I see it is the Trust just didn't ask if anyone is out there that can do the job in the first place.

They simply don't know how to recruit the skills they need

As regarding a Museum there is nothing wrong in having a building to store your replica heritage rolling stock while you are building the railway.

 

An affliction that was addressed through the evolution of railway legislation, including CP powers...

The issue with the current strategy is not to do with the bite sized pieces (lets remember, there's also a significant embankment to restore) but the lack of any coherent answer to what happens if the irreconcilable landowners refuse to sell.

 

Don't know, or haven't succeeded? There's a difference.

 

Nope.
Two different words entirely.
Look them up.

 

Without comment on what actually happened, I know that there are times when I "ask" someone to do something in a particular way and the reality is that it is an instruction.