Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Unless I am very much mistaken, isn’t there something of a conflict between certain posters on here and what I regard as a very successful set up at Woody Bay and a marvellous new loco and fantastic carriages.

That some posters on here might want the railway to relocate away from Woody Bay presumably abandoning Woody Bay in favour of what they personally have been concentrating on as separate projects?

I think myself that everything that has been achieved at Woody Bay is fantastic. In so many respects.

The planning application stuff was always going to be very challenging to achieve; I don’t think that the best Board of any preserved railway could have done any better. It took The Bluebell years and years to acquire their track bed north of Horsted Keynes.

The Isle of Wight Steam Railway was content to run from Havenstreet to Wootton for 20 years - just 1.5 miles despite the track bed being owned by the IWCC between Newport and Smallbrooke since disposed of by BR.

Is it length of the line or a quality product, or some posters thinking that their own bits are more important than Woody Bay?

 

Ultimately the L&BR TRUST oversee what happens at the railway, previous trustees and what was the railway company developed and brought Woody Bay and the L&BR back to life, the current trustees have enhanced the visitor experience over the last 14 or so years, planning permission to extend was granted some 5 years ago but as you know has now expired, it is the Trust who have now sent out a consultation document proposing 4 alternative options to take the railway forward, 3 of those options have been deemed too expensive or high risk with the only recommendation to extend a little way from Woody Bay and also to develop some sort of line from the old station house inn (which the trust now has a controlling stake in) down to Wistlandpound reservoir and also back under the main road to Rowley farm, this option has been suggested by the Trust itself and nobody else, comments have been made by a few of us on here as to how viable the other 3 options could be if thought through a little more but that is as far as it goes, Woody Bay is a showcase for the L&BR and in my opinion should not be mothballed under any circumstance as has been occasionally suggested when the options and running issues of 2 lines has been discussed on here, but that was just a general discussion of people's thoughts, the railway has been running over it's 0.9 of a mile for some 17 years now so forgive people for getting a little bit restless

 

Well, the above poster hasn’t addressed my comment of a conflict of those that have been pursuing their own agenda.

If you want a L&BR through Snapper Halt and over the viaduct instead of at the fabulous set up at Woody Bay, then have the decency not to hide behind a nondescript avatar/name and state who you are and what company positions you have so we can do a Company House search.

I haven’t got a solution to the Parracombe impasse. But in my opinion the current Board did the very best they could in extreme/difficult circumstances to progress matters, and on file we have an approved planning application now lapsed for Exmoor that will in due course be significant, as once granted sets a precedent.

Cheers,
Julian Atkins

 

If you are referring to me then I haven't stated that I want to go through snapper and over the Viaduct, I have however stated that I have thought of a way that might overcome the issues that others have raised when discussing 'option A' of the trusts consultation document, two entirely different things altogether, I've never suggested replacing Woody Bay for anything else and my avitar explains exactly who I am

 

You haven’t, and you haven’t said who you are or what positions you have in the L&BR family to make any assessment. What is your full name and do you hold any elected positions within any part of the L&BR family, and any positions on any Company Board of this family? Please! Transparency!

Cheers,
Julian Atkins

 

Where is the conflict of those who are pursuing their own agenda?please explain. And may I just add this railway is so much more than just Woody Bay to a lot of people.
Andy

 

Hi Andy ….. ?

The Trust and the Board are Woody Bay. Why do you continue saying something else and not disclose who you are please?

Simple questions I’ve posed of you repeatedly this evening without any proper reply.

Cheers,
Julian Atkins

 

Hi Julian I got in to the same trouble for asking the same sort of questions of others about their membership issues on here. Meatman is one of the good guys and you need to trust me on that one.

Those of us who do care about this railway are doing what we can to take it forward, just because we don't or can't tell you everything doesn't make it any easier for us either. At least we are trying to give you answers, you may not like them, but they are answers all the same which is more that you are getting from the L&BR Trust right now.

Again no one I know is seriously suggesting rebuild the railway from Snapper to Chelfham at this moment in time. It just simply wouldn't fly. As far as I know no one has taken a serious look at how the railway get's back into Barnstaple anyway just yet. So until you can solve that one issues forget it.

 

@lynbarn another superficial ‘clever’ reply without addressing any of the points I raised!

Same as @Meatman

Are both of you suggesting that the Board should not have achieved the planning permission through Exmoor Park? Not even have attempted it? What else? Nothing? They succeeded, and set a precedent.

I remain strongly of the view that those who are critical of the Board should be utterly transparent as to their identity and their other interests.

Cheers,
Julian Atkins

 

Julian,
could you please explain why you think that some posters want the railway to 'relocate away from WB, abandoning WB in favour of what they personally have been concentrating on as separate projects' and that 'some posters seem to think their own bits more important than WB'.
What and where are these 'other projects or more important bits' as to me you are not making yourself very clear.
With all due respect you give the impression that WB is the be all and end all of this railway, yes it is the public face of the railway and a revenue earner but now so is The Old Station House Inn so there will be two main centres of attention

The L&BR Trust also own Chelfham Station which has undergone restoration over the past few years and is still continuing.
Exmoor Associates owns Bratton Fleming Station which although will not get any restoration to the Station building itself there are plans afoot to rebuild the goods shed and hopefully recreate some of the outside. EA also owns Snapper Halt and a significant amount of trackbed which all needs to be managed. If you are referring to the above as the issues you raise then im afraid i have to say that all of these 'smaller' projects are part of the story of the recreation of the railway and are important to the promotion of the L&BR, in fact many locals to Barnstaple have their first contact with the railway when they see the 'station' is open at Chelfham and then go on to find WB. All of these places also give the enthusiast other parts of the railway to explore. There are a small group of us who prefer to volunteer within the Yeo Valley over the weekends and Wednesdays, this is a 19 mile railway that is slowly being pieced together, it is not just about Woody Bay, that may be the sole operating centre but it is not the only part of the railway that is coming back to life
Andy
As @Meiriongwril has mentioned, EA director
As i have mentioned, Yeo Valley volunteer and a Snapper navvie
Also my avatar is relevant to who i am, that is the p-way hut at Snapper that i rebuilt a few years ago, one of the biggest clue to who i was or so i thought seeing it has been in a trust magazine with my name beside it
I guess i should add that the views i have expressed over the years are my views only and not of any other EA director, i do want to see the whole project succeed, i want to know that my time and energy working as a volunteer in the Yeo Valley is not being wasted or dragged down by those who have had no opposition to the positions they hold within the trust and have over many years become complacent to that fact and think that they can do as they wish

 

Sounds OK in principle but is there not a real danger that EA might get tarred with the L&BR 'negotiating' brush in the eyes of the locals?

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing, as i understand it the Grampian conditions were added at the last minute, others have suggested that the planning should have been withdrawn and a rethink taken place as it was clear from the outset that the conditions could not be met, nevertheless the trust had 5 whole years to find a way around the issues but by their own admittance they only took legal advice in May 2021 then proceeded to act on a section 73 in May 2022, what happened between March 2018 and May 2021, no-one has given an answer to this yet and lets not forget covid only came along in March 2020 , so yes they succeeded in getting the planning, did they set a precedent! but ultimately it all failed and look at the fallout that has followed, you may not agree but there is a lot to be done to restore some faith into this project as it stands

 

EA directors contact details are listed at the bottom of Trackbed Trails - Trackbed Trails – Exmoor Associates (exmoor-associates.co.uk)

I also recommend a read of the EA FAQs - Frequently Asked Questions – Exmoor Associates (exmoor-associates.co.uk)

 

Possibly, but if that's an issue, it's a reason to sort out relationships in the round rather than get into demarcation discussions.

 

Indeed, but must that not be 'sorted out' before any closer relationship can possibly eventuate. Trust seems a rare commodity here.

 

And those who are supportive of the Board?

This forum has norms which I've not noticed either of the users you've named breach, and where neither is especially secretive about their identities. I have no less confidence in their authenticity and visibility than I do in yours - or for that matter, any of you can have in mine.

My issue at this time is with all the main protagonists in the major L&B bodies. There is an awful lot of referring to history, but much less about the future, and how the L&B can get from where it is now to where we want it to be. That won't be achieved with boardroom games and politicking.

 

I'd go the other way - that trust needs building, and from that position it will be possible to sort out demarcations, which would hopefully also include consolidation of the various organisations so that there are fewer gaps for people to fall down.

 

i would also suggest reading the back issues of 'trackbed trails' from the beginning,all but the most recent of which are free to access on the EA website

 

Not so

It is owned - perhaps somewhat incongruously - by the CIC, as stated on the recent NRHA plaque now fitted there, which means unfortunately that there is no mention of either the Trust or its band of hard-working volunteers.

 

Any member, myself included has a right to be critical of the board of trustee's if we are unhappy or feel things are not right, the reason we are in such a position as we are now is because that board has not been held to account