Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

"The road is designed to accommodate articulated vehicles" so eventually could be used to transport locos and carriages to and from Woody Bay for maintenance and storage?.

 

Does the railway need a destination? I can think of several successful (standard gauge) lines in the 1 - 5 miles category that seem to function perfectly well going from nowhere to nowhere. The ride, and facilities on the line, are sufficient attraction. I’d have thought that if the line provides an attractive ride, preferably in historically appropriate rolling stock, coupled with an imaginative Museum experience exploring the history of the original L&B, then what is at the other end is less important - at least in the interim.

Let’s face it, if I wanted to visit Parracombe (which Wikipedia helpfully reminds me is home to a church with some 13th century features and some Bronze Age barrows) I wouldn’t drive a hundred miles just to get out and do the last two miles by train …

Tom

 

I would - but then I like medieval churches, barrows, and the Lynton and Barnstaple! However, I totally get your point...

 

It looks like there are several versions of the map in different resolutions - presumably which one you get depends on your device. Chrome on my phone is fine, chrome on my PC is not. This should be a direct link to the higher res version - its not great, but all the labels are at least readable! https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/uploads/news/picture1-image(992x616-crop-autorotate).jpg

 

For an organisation which is suffering from a credibility deficit in the aftermath of the planning failure, it seems like an own goal to publish something that is good news with an image that includes the thing that you've just lost the planning permission to build - I've been following the planning pretty closely and I was confused about whether this meant that the PP for the works was still in play. How anyone less familiar with the project would understand what was going on here is beyond me.

Could we just be straight with each other and the public, please?

 

Thinking about the East Somerset Railway & the Isle of Wight Steam Railway, neither of them are located in any sort of 'destination' town, neither do they run anywhere in particular - yes OK you can get off to join the Island Line at Smallbrook Junction but not many do.

 

I agree, which is why I suggest Caffyns despite the problems, and all the options have problems. It's the medium and long term that matters. Going north builds on the existing facility at Woody Bay Station; and will give a round trip as with Glouc & Warwicks which has Toddington as a centre-piece - more attractive than a one mile plus and back which seems to give some visitors the feeling of being short-changed (see trip advisor) It would also give the prospect of reaching Lynton in the distant future when park and ride might become even more desirable than now. It looks like EA are planning a much-needed Museum at Bratton Fleming, but there seems to be little enthusiasm for one at WB even assuming there is a suitable space nearer the bridge (as was). Which is shame. The ever-present danger of any option is landowners unwilling to even discuss a sale or a lease, but that is an unavoidable risk that might be overcome as it was on the Brecon Mountain.

 

How was it overcome on the Brecon Mountain?

 

I thought Rowley Farm was outwith the National Park and covered by the NDC PP?

 

My understanding is that the road provides the boundary at this point, and that north of the A39 and A399 is in the Park and south is not - which seems to be the NP's own website suggests:

 

My recollection is that the owner of the southern terminus would not agree to sell and the Railway was diverted off the trackbed of the rest of the railway it had acquired onto a neighbour's land at considerable expense and work.

 

I don't wish to seem like one of the 'know-alls' who regularly post on here, but are you familiar with the thrust of the planning applications and the staged attempt to recreate the L&BR, as far as possible in its entireity? The L&BR Trustees clearly do not want a railway that goes from nowhere to nowhere and now that you have made me think about it, neither do I! Extensions are proposed that will actually go somewhere. If you are happy to go from nowhere to nowhere then you can buy a day trip on the L&BR and tootle back-and-forth between Woody Bay and Killington Lane all day long. The ride provides attractive scenery in good weather. If you wanted to visit Parracombe you could walk down there from Killington Lane, visit St. Petroc church, have a swift couple of pints over lunch at the Fox & Goose and retrace your steps to Killington Lane.

The current ride meets holiday trippers requirements and provides much needed revenue. It is perhaps only the heritage railway fraternity who are desperate for a quick extension, yes to nowhere, if it can be done quickly... Those of us who wish to see a more complete recreation of the L&BR recognise that it will be a slow process. It will happen but it will take time and it will require deft negotiators (and lorry loads of money). Let's hope that such people can be encouraged onto the Board.

 

I think the Planning application is within ENP and is 62.50.19.13 which was determined on 20 June 2022.

 

I'm well aware of the overall desire to recreate the whole line - an aspiration that I whole-heartedly support - and that such reinstatement must necessarily proceed in stages.

However, my comment was about the here and now. A one mile line is very different from a 20 mile line. The OP that I was responding to was trying to fit the next small extension in terms of having its own "destination", and it is that point that I think is unnecessarily constraining. All the time the line is very short, it needs to be a self-contained attraction in its own right if it is to attract significant numbers of visitors; it is only as the line (and journey length) expands that the character might change to being more about a "journey to somewhere".

So all I am really saying is for the foreseeable future, each incremental step should not be constrained by the thought that every incremental step inevitably has to have "somewhere" at its end. It is quite possible to be viable going from nowhere to nowhere, especially when the length is still comparatively short.

Tom

 

Nevertheless, in the here-and-now, Exmoor Associates are beavering away extending the length of owned track bed which will ultimately provide a longer line. It isn't necessary to run trains along it in the near future because, as you rightly say, the current short line is 'an attraction in its own right' which does attract 'significant numbers of visitors'.

The L&BR Trustees could certainly better advertise its extension plans by leafleting passengers which might further encourage new members and help to build momentum for an extension which can carry trains. It seems to me that there is much marketing and promotion work required before we entertain a further extension to somewhere, nowhere or wherever.

 

Isn't this the catch 22?
On the one hand, you can't advertise that you want to extend to (let's say) Parracombe, as there's no planning permission and then certain people get very annoyed that there's no progress X years after the plan was announced. It also runs the risk of upsetting the locals if the railway is advertising that they want to extend over land they don't yet own and there's no PP in place.
On the other hand, if you don't plan to extend then the railway will stay as a short line with some lovely views.
There's no easy answer!

 

Looking at the maps, there are two very short sections at Paracombe that are shown as "not owned". Possibly ransom strips? Are these genuine gaps in ownership or a maps quirk?
Ian

 

You can certainly advertise that you want to extend to Parracombe and beyond without planning permission. This is aspirational. In fact the whole project is aspirational but it starts to enter the real world as the jig-saw pieces of land are slowly put together. There will always be people that get annoyed with any proposal, especially those that fall into the NIMBY category. The trick is to placate their anger and win them over, slowly (or outlive them). Locals should come to realise that the project is aspirational and that the L&BR Trustees want them on-board, that they too are part of the project. But I agree, there is no easy answer.

 

A quirk of the mapping I think.
My understanding is that the two "gaps" indicate the boundaries between sections of track that were formerly in separate ownership as part of different properties - Ivy Cottage, the Halt, and Fairview (from South to North).
I believe I'm right in saying that the Trust owns 100% of the trackbed from Killington Lane through to Ivy Cottage (so just south of Parracombe Halt).