If you register, you can do a lot more. And become an active part of our growing community. You'll have access to hidden forums, and enjoy the ability of replying and starting conversations.

Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Discussion in 'Narrow Gauge Railways' started by 50044 Exeter, Dec 25, 2009.

  1. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2011
    Messages:
    26,062
    Likes Received:
    24,792
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    My copy of the Trackmaps diagrams for the Western area suggests the following distances (all measured from Barnstaple Town):
    Killington Lane end of Line: 15m 09c
    Killington Lane platform: 15m 10c
    Woody Bay: 16m00c
    Woody Bay end of line: 16m 08c

    That equates to a running line of 70 chains (0.875 miles).
     
  2. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,885
    Likes Received:
    7,659
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    By coincidence, I was involved in a similar discussion elsewhere not long ago where a claim had been made that an extension at a heritage site would increase the 'ride' by X%. Given that the length of new track was not much different from the total length of existing track at the station, the only way to have achieved the claimed increase would have been by a passenger in the cab of a light engine starting from right up next to the buffer stop at the terminus and proceeding all the way to the buffer stop at the extended end - hardly a 'typical' ride IMHO. To give a L&BR example, if you were in the first compartment immediately behind the engine at the Barnstaple end of a train in the Down platform, would you consider your 'ride' up the line to include the track behind you all the way to the buffer-stop in the cutting beyond the shed?
     
  3. Isambard!

    Isambard! New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2023
    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    367
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Wilds of Hatley
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Depends if it's a Branch Line Society Event!

    Sent from my SM-T575 using Tapatalk
     
    Hampshire Unit and Small Prairie like this.
  4. Old Kent Biker

    Old Kent Biker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    ex IT Consultant
    Location:
    Kent UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    In what may be a welcome sign of changing attitudes at the L&BRT, the following has appeared on the L&BRT website, at https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/trust-notices :

    Seeking Artists and Graphic Designers
    Can you bring your creative skills to help the railway?

    The Trust is preparing a briefing pack on the proposed extension to Cricket Field Lane, for the benefit of members and the local community – please see our announcement on 16 May.

    The extension team have produced planning and layout drawings. We would like to supplement these with accurate artistic renderings of the proposals, and to produce visually appealing briefing materials for display, print, and web purposes. We hope to be able to finalise this material in the next 3-4 weeks, so time is of the essence.

    We would love to hear from any members who may be able to help with this. In particular we interested in “artists impressions”, 3d renders, and illustrations of the plans. Offers of graphic design / layout skills would also be appreciated.

    If you think you may be able to help, please email enquiries@lynton-rail.co.uk

    Whilst the article refers to (L&BRT) members, it may also be that others with appropriate skills in this area would also be able to assist, so please do consider getting in touch with the Trust.
     
    Small Prairie likes this.
  5. MellishR

    MellishR Resident of Nat Pres Friend

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    8,286
    Likes Received:
    5,341
    It appears that they are still resolved to proceed with the short extension to Cricket Field Lane, despite the arguments that have been advanced on here as to why that is a bad idea.
     
    Meatman and Biermeister like this.
  6. Old Kent Biker

    Old Kent Biker Member

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2007
    Messages:
    909
    Likes Received:
    1,438
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    ex IT Consultant
    Location:
    Kent UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I agree, and as things stand, I feel that the chances of getting suitable, unfettered, planning permission will be slim, but who knows, it could happen, and at least they are engaging with their stakeholders, so the plans may yet develop in the right direction.
     
    Isambard! likes this.
  7. Small Prairie

    Small Prairie Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    208
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Coach Driver
    Location:
    North Devon
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    The request is for everyone but I belive its just half expected that someone who puts thier help forward us likely to be a member

    It is however , all very positive.
     
    Old Kent Biker likes this.
  8. mdewell

    mdewell Well-Known Member Friend

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,711
    Likes Received:
    2,631
    Occupation:
    UK & Ireland Heritage Railways Webmaster
    Location:
    Ruabon, Wrexham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Perhaps they don't read NP :Jawdrop:
     
  9. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    6,643
    They do. Quite closely I think.

    The extension is popular with the volunteers at Woody Bay. It is also believed that the CIC cannot operate more than one site as it lacks sufficient volunteers. I hear that visitor feedback is that the ride is lovely but a bit short. Any extension that went beyond CFL would be prohibitively expensive because of land ownership and the need to rebuild Parracombe bank. If you build at another site then you must replicate the WB facilities there to some extent.

    The above facts have driven the board to conclude that the extension to CFL is the only viable strategy. Other strategies are available, but most certainly require more vision and more convincing of WB volunteers .

    I think there is a gap between this expressed viewpoint of the volunteers and I think (based on voting patterns) upto half of the membership who want to see a longer railway soon and aren’t sure that CFL is the best approach. The board may need to pay attention to this gap and narrow it or they risk one or other group walking away.

    It will be interesting to see if the planning authority will allow the CFL plan.
     
  10. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,885
    Likes Received:
    7,659
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    Indeed. Reports from the Board in recent Newsletters imply that the initial responses from ENPA have been favourable, but of course many of us remember that an analysis of the situation with the Sec 72 applications (or is it Sec 73? - can't recall now!) varied between what the Board claimed and what the ENPA actually wrote.

    I am still minded to ask two questions:-
    1. What is the essential difference - if any exists - between going to CFL and going to PE which makes it likely that the former will be viewed more favourably (if at all) by the local objectors than the latter?
    2. If the outcome has little or no difference, then why not just try PE again anyway?
     
    Isambard!, pmh_74 and Old Kent Biker like this.
  11. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    6,643
    Those are good questions
     
    Isambard! and RailWest like this.
  12. Meatman

    Meatman Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2018
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    1,604
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Burrington,devon
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    I was one of 3 i think who voted against the extension to CFL when J.B asked his backwards set of questions at the AGM, quite simply because before any decision is made feasibility studies should be made as to the pro's and con's of extending to CFL and also of a line from OSI to Wistlandpound. I can see that extending to CFL will not really need any extra volunteers but there is a very expensive bridge to build and a lot of fill and work required to create a Halt at CFL which would, if the railway ever extended beyond there require removal and of course planning approval, also and ultimately would operations at Woody Bay actually benefit financially from such an extension after an initial 12-18 months. The other thought is, given the apparent investment by the Trust (and its relevant exposure) in OSI, should a study be done here too, as to whether a line to Wistlandpound and back would be of more benefit as a whole both to the railway and OSI as it would have a 'destination' at either end, both with its own set of visitors, planning is secured, 2 new bridges have been built but lay redundant and the line would probably be simpler to reinstate. It has already been discussed on here about the type of locomotive power being a simple push/pull railcar affair so operation could be simpler too and minimal staff required. the thing is neither options have been properly studied or thoroughly discussed by the Trust to its members, what we have had is J.B saying at last years AGM that any option chosen apart from CFL he wont be part of and again at this years AGM he stated before asking his 'questions' that he needed to know if he should be putting more time to this, yet he didn't actually ask if people were in favour of going to CFL, yes he may have spent a lot of time working on this but a lot of it was for the S73 and at the end of the day it should be what is best for the railway
     
  13. H Cloutt

    H Cloutt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2018
    Messages:
    944
    Likes Received:
    1,396
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Battle
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    It was a Section 73 application which sought to phase the development. There was a difference between the legal opinions obtained by the Trestees and one of the objectors. ENPA were in the position of having different legal opinions and would have had to decide which one to accept.

    I understand that the Trustees have discussed the proposed application with the planning authority and it seems that the extension to to CFL will be looked on favourably. The majority of the objections to the Section 73 application were related to terminating in Parricombe. Don't forget that the Local Plan [on which planning decisions are based] includes the reinstatement of the line.
     
    Old Kent Biker and Snail368 like this.
  14. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,885
    Likes Received:
    7,659
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    "...the thing is neither options have been properly studied or thoroughly discussed by the Trust to its members..."

    IMHO therein lies the crux of the current problem in a nutshell.
     
  15. RailWest

    RailWest Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2011
    Messages:
    3,885
    Likes Received:
    7,659
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Country
    >>>Don't forget that the Local Plan [on which planning decisions are based] includes the reinstatement of the line...

    Indeed it does, but that did not seem to do us much favours with the Sec 73 applications. Given that the Local Plan ought to be the key driver, I would prefer to see a situation where - if the railway proposes an extension that complies with the Local Plan - then there should be a presumption in favour unless there are exceptional circumstances not to grant permission.

    >>>The majority of the objections to the Section 73 application were related to terminating in Parracombe...

    Also true, but.... exactly how is a terminus CFL (apparently) so fundamentally different from one at PE??? I've yet to see any substantive answers to that question.
    After all, given that the latter would enable an original heritage station to be re-opened (albeit nothing original remains other than the shelter), whereas CFL would be (like KL) an all-new station at a new location, ought not PE to be viewed more favourably than CFL from the 'heritage' perspective'? IIRC one of the objections to the original Phase 2A application was that a station at PE would not be 'heritage' as there had never been one there previously - clearly an historically ill-informed/mis-guided objection , but one that certainly would be more accurate for CFL.
     
    Last edited: May 27, 2024
  16. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    6,643
    I was one of the two or three that indicated they weren’t sure.

    I think the way the question was posed by Mr Barton did not invite honest answer. That’s always a difficult thing to do (get honest responses).

    I remain unconvinced by the CFL plan. It seems to me that there is an excess of tactical thought over strategic
     
  17. 21B

    21B Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2009
    Messages:
    3,055
    Likes Received:
    6,643
    In fairness the issue with the s73 was that the changes required were deemed sufficiently significant as to change the fundamental nature of the original application and that was unlawful.
     
    Isambard! likes this.
  18. Small Prairie

    Small Prairie Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2006
    Messages:
    2,549
    Likes Received:
    208
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Coach Driver
    Location:
    North Devon
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Simply put , CFL falls outside of paracombe village and therefore alot of the arguements / issues and concerns are null and void

    Go any closer to paracombe without the ability to go stright through it and all the arguments, issues and concerns become valid again.
     
  19. Biermeister

    Biermeister Member

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2019
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    669
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Brewer
    Location:
    Daylesford, Victoria, Australia
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    Please remind me, what exactly are the 'arguments, issues and concerns'? I imagine that they relate to (some) Parracombians being worried about hordes of railway buffs and others descending upon their unspoilt village... Though I would have thought that The Fox and Goose would actually benefit from an extension to Parracombe Halt. It could be a good idea in that it might show the nay-saying Parracombians that they actually have nothing to fear (so many people have such stilted imaginations that they have real difficulty in imagining how significant or otherwise a change in their local environment might be). It would also bring more pressure to bear upon the Grobs to re-consider their opposition to the extension continuing across their land.

    I seem to remember too that there were concerns about a run-round loop at Parracombe. If this is so, then why not top-and-tail locomotives until such time as the further extension to Blackmoor can proceed. Alternatively, what about exploring a push-pull operation? (I've no idea how plausible (or costly) this might be, but has it ever been explored?)

    OK, I know that opposition from some Parracombians must be considered and respectfully responded to. This presents a good opportunity for the new L&BR Trust Board to show its negotiating acumen: something it must undertake eventually in any case. Furthermore, a deal of new funding must be sought: again an opportunity. Please let us see a broader approach than a difficult to understand proposed extension to Cricket Field Lane. It may take some time but would be better than this diversionary tactic of Cricket Field Lane.
     
  20. ilvaporista

    ilvaporista Part of the furniture

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    4,289
    Likes Received:
    5,341
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    C.Eng
    Location:
    On the 45th!
    If you go to the site of Parracombe station it will be obvious the main problem and why people objected to a station there. The road is narrow and twisty, it's difficult to pass when there are two small cars. Imagine two Range Rover sized cars trying to pass. They would be stuck, imagine that happening outside your house on a 30 minute basis. You can say lots of things but human nature will make people want to drive as close as possible to the station
     
    lynbarn and brmp201 like this.

Share This Page