Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

The options should be:
1. Accept that Woody Bay is as good as it gets and cease any aspirations for extensions.
2. Accept the planning decision and take, say a year, to proactively consult with every member, authority and interested party. Then to produce new plans and have a fair members vote on them.

Why do I feel that this will not happen…

 

Well said Toby.

My opposition, when I was a Trustee, to the flawed options document that promoted the return to Cricket field Lane, was because it was a knee jerk reaction, produced with little thought on, or recognition of, the reasons why the Trust was having difficulties with moving forward with the development of the line.

The new posting on the Trusts website on the outcome of the CFL planning, appears to show that the Trustees still have not comprehended the basic reasons for their problems. The proposal to consult the membership is a start, but then stating that options will be presented at the forthcoming AGM in 10 days time, is not only unrealistic, but also shows a a failure to acknowledge the position that the railway has been put in and the task ahead to overcome that.

The basic problem is that the the L&B project as a whole, now lacks credibility, not only with the public, but more importantly with the various authorities that the Railway has to deal with. Most people of North Devon have no idea that the L&B project exists and what it is trying to do, (that is, apart from the inhabitants of Paracombe who understand what the L&B railway is trying to do for all the wrong reasons). Dealing with the local and statutory bodies is an uphill task and will take a lot of time and patience to get them back on board.

This project will only move forward as a whole, under one umbrella of the "Lynton & Barnstaple Railway", with all the family groups involved and as Toby suggests under a neutral Chair. It will only move forward if it (and by that I mean the membership as a whole, not just the Trust or EA, YVT etc.) recognise that until it has that credibility, with a proper business, development and funding plan that shows that the reconstruction of this railway is in the public interest and a public benefit and not just a bunch of elderly railway nuts who just want to play trains and expect everybody else to allow them to rebuild the railway so that they can do that.

Until this is realised in all quarters, there can be no progress and those that are not prepared to realise this reality, should reflect on their positions and stand aside now to allow progress to be made.

 

I agree. The consultation 2 years ago was very limited and designed to support reuse of work already done.

I abstained in that consultation, and did not support Cricket Field Lane, but acknowledge that people I respect judged differently. While I'm not very surprised by the outcome of the planning application, and think it's probably about right, there will be some who've invested a lot of work in trying to bring it forward and will feel very bruised by that outcome.

There now needs to be a pause for reflection to seriously consider what options may exist, and how the wider L&B family might be placed to pursue them. Those need to be worked up properly into options, so that members can make an informed decision about what the right approach to follow might be.

What would be wrong would be a repeat of the May 2023 AGM, where the trustees used their power to drive a particular conclusion, without really understanding what that conclusion really was (and, to note, nothing like the Cricket Field Lane extension as pursued was part of that consultation), and generally riding a (self-created) wave of "we want to build a railway".

To those who may say "but the Trustees have to lead not be slaves of the members", I will just observe that they have led, and this is the outcome. Consultation to establish consensus on the right option(s) to pursue will provide a much more secure railhead from which to make future decisions about whether*, where, and how to pursue reopening of the L&B.

* - there is another thread running about "best small railway" where, strangely, the L&B hasn't been mentioned. One option that has to be considered, however repugnant it may be to many (including myself), is stopping at the current 1 mile based on Woody Bay, and developing that.

 

IMHO people are making some very serious and important points here in a non partisan way. For me, the clear message is that the LBR now faces an uphill task and the sensible thing should be to take time to work out the best way to proceed and plan and organise accordingly. There must be no more “knee jerks”. I accept that others may disagree - if so that emphasises to me the need for more time and space (not less) for proper debate and consideration.

 

"Most people of North Devon have no idea that the L&B project exists and what it is trying to do"

As a matter of interest, what exactly is the L & B project trying to do? And, more to the point, why?

 

From personal experience, I think people in north Devon know more than is given credit for. How much they know, beyond "it's a narrow gauge railway", is another question

 

Well, I can answer why it was set up and what it was supposed to do. There was a certain rock star who wanted to set up his private 12.5-inch gauge railway along the trackbed back in the 1970/80s that failed due to the setting up of the former L&BR Association, and so he moved his project up to the Fairbourne Railway in Wales.

At the time, the plan was very simple: it was to open up a section of the railway as a tourist attraction. It only started to think about the recreation of the railway, as it was much later.

Sadly, many of those who were responsible for the early success, if you like, have either moved on, retired or just left. Now, while it is great to see Woody Bay as a Heritage site. I feel it has lost that commercial edge it used to have, and if you like, all it is doing is fulfilling some people's private dreams.

As for why? Well it has always been the dream to rebuild the railway between Lynton and Barnstaple even if we have to make a few deviations on the trackbed.

What I feel needs to happen now is for the membership to take a long, hard look at the whole project and see if it is still viable to rebuild more of the line. I think it is (but then I would say that).

One question that needs to be asked is it still viable as a commercial project? Again, I come back to the point that transport needs in North Devon have changed over time, we have been going. One of the key reasons for the rebuilding of the line in Exmoor was to help reduce the number of cars in the National Park.

I think it has finally caught up with the trust that we need a business plan, and that we also need to show that we know what we are doing and how to go about it. As to what is the point? It is because we want to make it happen.

 

Echoing others thoughts, I think there is little to be gained by advancing any scheme right now. It wouldn’t be credible if it built upon what has been proposed to date, because those schemes did not succeed, and as much as anything the approach, tone and strategy communicated all has to change now.

The Trust have at times appeared highly insular. This is not how things are achieved in the modern world. There has to be a change of approach.

I think a successful longer line is possible and achievable, but the approach will have to be very different to anything seen from any heritage railway to date. Developing that approach is going to need every part of the “family”.

 

Insular, arrogant & patronising.....

Sent from my SM-T575 using Tapatalk

 

And to that I might add including the inhabitants of the area, as far as is possible, within that umbrella of "family".

 

Given that Woody Bay is now landlocked for the foreseeable future, to achieve a longer operational length requires some out-of-the-box thinking. One might elect to look further South where EA have assembled a considerable amount of trackbed outside the National Park. Wouldn't it be delightful for instance to see an operational railway at Chelfham? That would of course require cooperation between different groups.....

Sent from my SM-T575 using Tapatalk

 

A lot of wise words.

It seems to me that it has to start with building the capacity of the L&B family management so that it can firstly decide what exactly the next move is to be - and that has to be realistic and done in cooperation with the National Park etc AND develop the capacity to manage that project.

 

er, point of order, post 3 (at least) ix *only* about nominating the L&B…

 

The unity of purpose and thoughts on this thread is striking: I hope the Trust is listening (we know that they read these pages) and that as @21B notes, don't attempt to push a new approach in Lynton in 10 days' time. We need to take the time to come up with a range of feasible options: this excludes options north of Woody Bay where the L&B family owns almost none of the trackbed, meaning that we're focussed on options south of Blackmoor Gate/OSHI. This means that the L&BRT will need to work with Exmoor Associates/Yeo Valley Trust, as they've been very successful in piecing the trackbed back together under Mike Buse and David Cameron, which in turn means that there should be a neutral chair to facilitate options development.

Once we have some costed, implementable options - a process that will probably take 6-12 months - then the L&BRT members and the EA/YVT members (many of course are members of both bodies) will need to agree on a combined approach.

In the meantime, the Trust should probably fence the section of land south of OSHI to avoid it being returned to its former owner this year at no cost.

 

In the meantime, the Trust should probably fence the section of land south of OSHI to avoid it being returned to its former owner this year at no cost.[/QUOTE]

Could this be suggested at the AGM?

 

Correction noted - and faults in my memory likewise

 

Could this be suggested at the AGM?[/QUOTE]
I will raise that, unless someone else beats me to it.

 

I will raise that, unless someone else beats me to it.[/QUOTE]
Why should this need to be raised at the AGM anyway? Surely the Board can not be ignorant of the time-limit on that land - after all, it has been mentioned often enough on here - so surely they ought to have a plan already in place to do just that? If no, then frankly one has to ask exactly WHAT they are doing to take the railway forward, if anything.

 

It has been said that at least some of the objections to the CFL application came from local residents who have moved into the area since the current L&BR has been in operation. Whether that is true or not, I don't have the relevant local knowledge, but let us assume for a moment that at least some did.

In that case, surely such objectors - when buying their houses - should have been informed by their solicitors, having done the relevant searches and due diligence etc, that their new houses were adjacent or close to a former railway line that was now the subject of an active preservation attempt, one supported in principle by the ENPA Local Plan? Equally, were not the vendors under obligation to have brought such 'material facts' to their buyers attention? [I am reminded of those people who move d into the new blocks of flats built next to the WSR at Minehead and then complained about the smoke and noise etc!] I fail therefore to see why ENPA should take cognisance of such objections.

It has been suggested previously that many of the long-standing objections from the PE area have been grossly pessimistic and unfounded, and to some extent I would agree with that. One only has to look further south to Chelfham to see how both railway and neighbouring properties (GrowFoward) can co-exist and co-operate to each others advantage. Perhaps more effort could be usefully expended by the Trust in a practical attempt to encourage similar at PE, rather than appearing to be always 'fighting them off'.

 

Why should this need to be raised at the AGM anyway? Surely the Board can not be ignorant of the time-limit on that land - after all, it has been mentioned often enough on here - so surely they ought to have a plan already in place to do just that? If no, then frankly one has to ask exactly WHAT they are doing to take the railway forward, if anything.[/QUOTE]
The Board have other priorities.