Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

It occurred to me that some of these concerns over the temporary terminus could be covered by additional Planning Conditions [not that I really want to see additional conditions], restricting people joining the train there. I don't know whether there are any planning condition laid down for Killington Lane - but this seems to work as a temporary terminus.

 

I would suggest that, for that particular answer, then make it clear that you support the principle of relaxing the conditions to enable at least some work to start (eg Bridge 65), but have reservations about the extension (as opposed to specifically objecting to it). I'm sure that the ENPA will be able to work out a compromise that at least mollify, if not completely satisfy, both sides.

On the assumption that the basic process is the same as for the original applications, then I would imagine that the L&BR will be invited to submit a response to all the various issues/objections, which may help to 'smooth the way' when the matter goes before the Planning Committee.

 

How about:
"I absolutely support the proposed extension to a new temporary teminus at Parracombe, provided it can be done in such a way as to not inconvenience the local residents more than is absolutely necessary. It must be borne in mind that this is very definitely a temporary measure, and as soon as possible it is intended that the line will be further extended toward Wistlandpound."
I would have thought that might cover most sensibilities.

 

That's pretty good. Certainly more succinct than mine!

 

Why must it be assumed to be an inconvenience to the people of Parracombe though? Is it not potentially an economic benefit to them, bringing more custom to any businesses located there?

People may leave the train at Parracombe to look around, but I can’t really see anyone trying to park there to visit the LBR, when much better parking facilities are available a short drive away at Woody Bay. Indeed all you would need to do is to not sell tickets at Parracombe, to entirely avoid this potential problem.

Writing letters to support the application, but then highlighting ‘incovenience to the local residents’ doesn’t seem entirely helpful to me.

 

Isn't the better option to undertake, perhaps by planning condition, to have no parking at the station? Similar conditions were imposed, and still exist, at Kingscote on the Bluebell - so you can start a journey there if you arrive on foot or bike, but you can't drive there.

Not selling tickets largely obviates the need for a station at all, so not something I'd suggest you would want except for a very temporary situation. Ideally you want to avoid conditions that might be limiting in years to come. Project forward many years to a longer L&B, and maybe there would be a market for walkers doing walks one way and riding back: that would be limited if you couldn't sell tickets, but a restriction on parking would ultimately be much less limiting given facilities at other stations.

Tom

 

Might there not be a risk that people would simply try to park elsewhere in the vicinity? Members of the public are not always considerate in this regard.

 

Well, at least one of those writing to object has made specific reference to the potential for entire carriage loads of passengers disembarking and setting off en masse down the lanes to the village. You or I may think that unrealistic, but clearly there are those who do not want 'mass tourism' in the village, so the issue must be addressed.

 

I believe that same objector also specified the likelihood of children being caught short on an arriving train and defecating in the church yard as a specific concern. This doesn't seem to occur with any other station I know of without toilets, so I'm not quite sure where that idea has come from!

John

 

Would they even bother to go as far as the churchyard anyway? I'm sure we could provide a few old buckets behind the shelter.......

 

You can’t close a mine, only abandon it. Simple answer is you can’t reopen an abandoned mine. It’s impractical. Water, gas and collapse of roadways are just a few of the obstacles to overcome with a coal mine. You can’t get rid of the gas until you have a ventilation circuit and you can’t create that circuit until you have got rid of the water and gas and rebuilt the roadways and you can’t rebuild the roadways until you have got rid of the gas. You might be able to pump out the water but it would take years.

 

We’ve both said that you can’t reopen an abandoned mine but, just supposing you could, I believe any mine operational before 1947 would be outside any planning regulations as it has not closed, only abandoned so theoretically there would be no legal problem in doing so.

 

Would a new mine have to be a deep mine though? The coal produced at Fos -y-Fran is deemed by many railways to be eminently suitable and that is an opencast mine. The possibility of an opencast mine is surely more of a viable proposition for a collaborative effort if a suitable location exists.

 

Or a portable chemical toilet.

 

The latest "Trackbed Trails" has been emailed to Shareholders and supporters has been emailed by Exmoor Associates with details of the latest acquisition. Negotiations on a couple of other sites continue.

 

An opencast mine is technically possible but opencast mines generally close because the coal has been worked out. Opening a new mine, even opencast is an expensive affair. The coal isn’t simply lying at the surface waiting to be dug out. There will be a lot of overburden to remove and dispose of before you get to the black stuff. That costs a lot of money up front.

 

A little off-piste, but relates directly to the old L&B.
This short film sponsored by Ford motors, is a delightful snapshot of Britain in 1934:



The really interesting part is at 4:23. You get a brief glimpse of Lyn hauling a 3 carriage train on the rise up to Rowley Cross. That's Parracombe in the background- you can just make out the tower of St Petrock's. Plus, very much in the foreground, the A39, and the cause of the original line's demise.

 

Is this the same vantage point today?

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.181...2&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i16384!8i8192!5m1!1e4

 

That looks like the spot, alright.

 

I wondr if Ford would put one of their cars through similar today?