Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I understand your thoughts, but there isn’t really a parallel to the Bluebell in anyway. It’s adding about 500m to the line I think. There is only one reason for the scheme. The members are desperate to have a longer running line. This is a longer running line (just). The previous scheme having collapsed there was/is an impatience to do something. This is something so that’s what they are doing. It adds almost nothing to the current operation, might not be capable of being built, obstructs any further expansion, destroys the existing historical trackbed and will cost almost £2M in the process.

I would like to see a longer railway too, but very much doubt this is the right scheme.

 

So, from your comments the planners would be doing the railway a favour by refusing the application i.e. saving them from their own folly. Or is this a "set up to fail" strategy by the company to allow them to draw a line under any expansion of the Woody Bay site and thus direct efforts elsewhere?

 

That sounds like a very expensive way to achieve an end that, if the Trustees desired it, could have been more easily obtained simply by not putting in an application at all!

Tom

 

I'm sure that this is right, @Jamessquared

 

What gets me is that for an alleged membership of 3000 members, I am surprised that not many of them have taken an interest in having an extension to the Woody Bay operation. I guess that all the time the trust is seen to be trying for an extension, everyone must be happy.

But I guess that once the plans come back with a rejection, the standard answer will be, well, we tried, but they won't let us extend. And that will be that. I do wonder if the trust is boxing itself into a corner that it simply can't get out of.

 

But it's what we voted for...

 

How would 'showing an interest' be calculated, and how do you know that 'not may' have taken an interest?
As Martyn says, the membership voted for the CFL extension plan, so how would the membership be seen to be supporting the plan (excepting their donations of course?).
The board has not appealed for any help with the extension, so how would the membership know that help was needed?

 

Not all of us Martyn But the options were heavily weighted to guide members to option 'C' and without too much information given at that point, there was of course NO option to take time out and take stock of things.
If i recall correctly J.B clearly stated that any reports and documentation already done could still be used in an application to go to CFL, all set up to guide the armchair members into what the trustees wanted to do in their opinion and not what was actually in the best interests of the Trust.
At the AGM before last J.B stated that he had a pile of paperwork 'this high' and that if the members changed their mind and wanted to go in a different direction then he would walk away.
At the last AGM J.B again gave a little pep talk but the approach was to ask firstly who was against going to CFL (3), who was unsure (only a handful) so his conclusion was that the rest of the room was in support without even asking for a show of hands. It was interesting afterwards that many said not only did they not like being put on the spot but also that they felt uncomfortable to express their feelings so publicly therefore didn't raise their hand.
The trustees have most definitely cattle prodded the members in the direction that they thought best.

 

Ever since a triangle of land was bought at CFL to build a temporary terminus on the Trustees (or certain of them) have pressed this plan forward. Maybe because of lack of progress on acquiring the missing trackbed to BM G, w

 

They did, and if the committee go with the recommendations of the officers, the trustees will collectively own the consequences of that pushing.

If they then try to turn that round and say “you supported it” to the members at large, they (or at least some of them) may find themselves at the reaction they get.

Likewise, if the permission is granted, it will bring the ability of the trust to deliver into sharp focus. As @lynbarn points out, this puts an emphasis on fundraising; it will also require practical support. That’s relatively easy for the right project; it can be harder when the project isn’t so well supported.