Rother Valley Railway

Please be in no doubt that I want the extension to Robertsbridge completed and to succeed. To that end I have already helped with tracklaying west of Bodiam and am involved with the restoration of 4253. However, no one I have spoken to has seen any predictions of likely income from the Robertsbridge end of the line.

 

Trust me it does exist, done by a member of the board who does it professionally for one of the mainline TOCs. A detailed strategy for Robertsbridge is in the course of being drawn up.
Some clues were to be had at the last volunteers meeting in the baptist Church.

 

Don't worry about Martin. He lost his glass ages ago....

 

And those were... ?

Noel

 

They didn't hold a whip round to pay for the next day's coal....

 

If there is any railway that may offer a parallel to the KESR/RVR situation, it is the Severn Valley, which extended an existing line to make a main line connection and now has a prime tourist attraction (i.e., Bewdley) some 3 miles from the main line link at Kidderminster with a further 12 miles until a sizeable and attractive town is reached. I wonder what effect the Kidderminster link made to traffic levels on the rest of the line at the time.

 

An update was posted on the RVR blog earlier today.
http://14rvrnews.blogspot.co.uk/2014/05/early-may-status-update.html

 

What do you mean by that? i didnt lose it, i put it down , then when i wanted a refill someone had taken it
i understand that Mr Baldwin and the Kesr have parted company , thats one massive hurdle removed, whilst the now former GM would be luke warm about extending, for what ever reason, it sent out mixed answers to the public at large , i now hope that the Kesr re discover what their real selling point is to the public anf go from strength to strength , oh and please start to lose that horrible dark green, for something that looks more in keeping, chocolate and cream, for the A set, and blood and custard for the B set southern Green for the Maunsels

 

When I was at KESR stock was of original owning company colours. This was seen as too much like all other heritage sites and not following the Colonel's ideosyncronies. Stock was then painted an uninspiring mud green, more authentic but dull as ditchwater

 

and the shade of green used right now is still dull, the KESR did i believe use chocolate and cream at some stage, i just think it would look better and would match the current loco fleet better . and for the record the Colonel never purchased any Mk 1 coaches, so why paint them in a totally un original livery to start with.

 

The KESR threw chocolate & cream over all its coaching stock until at least the mid-1980s (when I stepped away) and, IMHO, it looked awful. Not so bad on MK1s, where there was some historical precedent (although the lack of BR coach roundels mae them look incomplete, to my eyes), but on Maunsell carriages it just screamed.

If I had my way, all the locos and stock would be in liveries which they had carried at some point in their pre-preservation lives - although I can see the KESR's point in wanting its own house colours, because it is a natural continuation of the 'Stephens tradition'.

Nor did he buy any Austerities or Yankee tanks, but they also bore non-original 'KESR' livery for many years!

 

I see the planning application for rebuilding the missing link has now been made, details including documentation on the RVR website

Chris

 

I have had a quick flick through the online documentation and, from what I can see, the RVR is applying for planning permission to build on land - or at least some of it - that it doesn't own. Can you actually do this - it would seem to be putting the cart rather before the horse!

One of the correspondents is apparently a landowner who seem to acknowledge that they own some of the land... and have no intention of selling it to the RVR. So this wouldn't seem the most subtle of charm offensives by the RVR'! If anything, surely it's just going to make opponents more implacably opposed?

Just thinking of an analogy... if somebody wanted to build on my garden, I had already told them it wasn't for sale but they applied for planning permission anyway... frankly I'd be incandescent at their bloody cheek!

Can anyone explain the legalities, etc, of all this?

 

Do they have to put in an application with the council as part of the required application to get a CPO on the track bed. after all if the council approove it, then they can then in turn apply for the CPO where as if by some chance the council turn it down, it would make obtaining the CPO very difficault,
as regards the Landowner, there is just one that seems to not want to sell, all the others are prepared to sell, and would like this particular farmer to change his mind i would assume this farmer is the one who has complained, his family i understand are very much in favour of the line being rebuilt of course the appication for planning will ee just how strong his desire is to not sell, after all, if the RVR get the planning ,and then get the CPO,the farmer will only get what is decided as a fair price, the RVR,may even be offering a better price.

 

Does anyone here know WHY this particular farmer is so opposed to the railway?

There must be a history to tell.

 

I believe it may be sheer bloody mindedness,
There is a story, i believe, there were 4 landowners who bought the track bed when Barbera Castle decided that the section had to close to allow for the bypass , one had the land from just pass Bodiam to Junction Rd, the other three holding sections of former railway land to northbridge st, the one who owned the land to Junction rd, was really Anti the railway, and so there were 2 who said, over my dead body and two who owned the land to salehurst who had no real problem, but it looked very unlikily that the railway would ever be rebuilt, anyway the landowner of the bodiam section sold the land and it was purchased by a supporter of the RVR, and that enabled the section to Junction road to be rebuilt , the RVR held on to the track bed and sold the house and rest of the land on, the person who owns the house and land now is supportive of the railway, as long as their privacy is respected , the land owners who own the land to salehurst as i said are not oppossed to the railway, as long as they can still get to their fields , but are friends of the last farmer, who states he will not sell, so are in a bad situation, but will sell , he is the only one holding out, unfortuatly he owns the land from Northbridge street to the A21 , hence the need to get planning persision, then in turn a works order and CPO for the land if he does not come to agreement.

 

I'm happy to be corrected about this, but the Transport & Works Act Order they require would presumably grant them the necessary compulsory purchase powers.

Chris

 

That's most unfortunate. Even if the railway does get a CPO, he will no doubt be ticked off, and then the railway will have an unhappy neighbour.... Sigh.

Noel

 

I'm not sure you should accuse the guy of bloody-mindedness....many people don't like the idea of trains passing their properties and have genuine concerns. A lot of people view us as silly boys playing trains and their hearts and minds need to be won with diplomacy, not name-calling.

 

in this case my description is quite honest, the RVR have made many approaches to him, and his family , his family say that they have no problem with allowing the trackbed to be taken back into railway ownership, as its mostly waste ground, not been used , and subject to occupation crossings etc would have no problem, with a re opened rail line i beieve he has been offered a very fair price to sell, more than he would get from any CPO