Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Yup, but sometimes the more you put into an argument the more scope you leave for holes to be picked in it.

 

To coin a phrase; "I disagree with what they say, but I do defend their right to say it" ~ after Evelyn Beatrice Hall

 

Absolutely - let's hope that is the view of the majority (which it does look to be, having read through a sample of the responses).

 

I had not realised the true significance of the L&B Railway as the only pre-Roman steam railway. Did Mr Trevithick plagiarise from Archimedes? I think we should be told....

Robin

 

That was not the case. The Inspector holding the public inquiry recommended in favour of the 1964 company but the SofS disagreed. It was the SofS' inquiry, the inspector reports to him and it is not all that uncommon for the SofS to disagree with his inspector. Of course when that does happen, there is the obvious temptation for the aggrieved party to go to the High Court.

 

I was impressed with the road that was built without inclines or crosswinds!

 

I've just finished reading through the 2015 Local Plan consultation responses (121 respondents, 267 pages!). Whilst this is merely a quantitive analysis, and although the plan covers much, much more than the L&B, of the 121 respondents, 74 commented in support of the L&B reinstatement provisions, 2 offered mixed comments or observations, and 4 were against. Of the four against, three share a common surname, made the same points, and used much the same wording! Of the 74, many were on behalf of official bodies, several were L&B members, but many others were local residents and businesses, so the majority would seem to be on the side of the L&B. I certainly hope a similar level of support will see the current expansion plans successfully through the planning process.

 

We had a slight advantage here in West Somerset as our line was never lifted.

However, a few years ago we made a controversial planning application for the land adjacent to Bishops Lydeard station for a 140M long museum / carriage shed building in a deeply rural area.

We faced a very vocal minority of objectors, who shouted in public using every means they could find. It would have been easy to think they reflected a significant part of public opinion. We just carefully and politely got the message out there as to why we needed to develop that site. And then the 'antis' were utterly shocked when we achieved overwhelming support from both the Parish and District Councils.

And so it will be in Devon.....

Robin

 

The objection set out above is no doubt a passionately held opinion, but it is a statement of belief and belief has little value in evidence unless the believer can show the facts upon which it is based.

Tim

 

Just so but in exactly the same way as those in favour of the scheme have a "passionately held opinion". My own view is that the objections do not stand up but the L&B is in danger of falling into the old trap of providing too long a run. This is a leisure time joyride and not a public transport service so the cost and duration of a journey need to be kept in bounds.

Paul H.

 

Yawn.

This is not proving a problem for the Ffffffestinioggggg, the WHR etc etc

And until you can find a way to move Lynton nearer to Barnstaple, and Minehead nearer Taunton, then there is no value banging this drum again.

What we need to do is to find ways of making use of the opportunities the longer run, and the places along the way, provide. This can mean that the Railway can provide more than one trip.

The WSR Commercial Department have accepted a suggestion from me in this regard. I understand it is due to be launched in about a fortnight (and the initials FOTL may become important), but it is not for me to steal their thunder.

Watch this space....

Robin

 

Let's have a competition of cliches!

The W.S.R. has "made its own bed" in terms of lengthy route mileage so it has "to lie in it."

The "jury is still out" regarding the W.H.R. and we will probably have been sprinkled over the herbaceous border before they reach a verdict. (this ought to appeal to you)

It cannot be "banged on" about enough that accumulating capital reserves to meet the major renewal expenses (sometimes occurring at short notice) that every line will incur over the next few years needs to be a priority over the Ultima Thule extension.

There is absolutely no need to extend the whole distance of a former railway "just because it is there". I am well acquainted with a tourist railway that has three main stations, two of which connect with public transport. By far the most business comes via the station with no public transport link whatsoever.

Every railway enthusiast has an "inner romantic" which needs to be kept well under control.

Good fortune with your new job.

PH

 

Thank you.

I'd rather have a rational discussion.

The 'Lynton' and 'Barnstaple' areas are the significant areas of population (and holidaymakers) close to the line. Which would you abandon?

And it is also a matter of that undefinable 'something' about a heritage railway project (all utterly unviable without the volunteers) that has folk giving up their time and money (in various ways) to support it.

I am sure that with the L&B it is the recreation of the L&B as was that is that 'something'.

As it happens, narrow gauge does not 'do it for me' although I love to visit, ride and see the progress and I know the good the L&B will do in time for North Devon and Exmoor. (I'd hate to think what West Somerset would be like now without the WSR.)

Robin

 

Let's do a deal then. Both of us avoid cliches.

I would avoid both of the old termini and run from Blackmoor to Wood(y)(a) Bay. There is a main line service of sorts to Barnstaple and (three years ago at any rate) a surprisingly good bus service to Lynton which passes alongside much of the L&B. This will cope with the extreme minority who don't come either by coach excursion or private car. (Railway enthusiasts are notoriously prone to think if the means of access used in 1910 no longer exist, then a place is inaccessible!)

The Fox and Goose at Parracombe is a good placd to stop.

PH

 

But that rejects the possibility of extending into the centres of population and would leave the philosophy unfulfilled.

Doesn't tick either the commercial or enthusiast boxes?

Robin

 

Sorry to say this again but this is the 1916 rather than the 2016 approach. There are plenty of tourist attractions in the middle of no-where (Chatsworth is just one I can think of) that flourish in the motor age, which makes everywhere accessible. Tourist railways are in the tourism rather than the transportation business. Thus cleanliness, welcome and value are more important than total "authenticity" This is just as well as, IMHO, rather a lot of tourist railways are not particularly authentic.

Enthusiasts need to keep the "inner gricer" well under control.

PH

 

Agreed. The "something" is bringing this railway back to life.

 

Well, that's not happening to me!!

I'm to be buried under the Rhubarb

 

If the enthusiast pays (some of) the capital cost, it is the general public who provides the revenue income. Beware of replicating the terminal problem of the original railway namely too long a journey time. Reminds me of the line in the poem "All men kill the thing they love".

PH

 

It seems to me that we are a very long way from a situation in which connecting the two original terminals looks likely to happen - with all due respect of course to those involved in its reinstatement.

I occasionally wind up the S&DRHT by wandering into Midsomer Norton Station & asking for a ticket to Lynmouth, ditto at Woody Bay by asking when we get to Waterloo