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

Тема в разделе 'Narrow Gauge Railways', создана пользователем 50044 Exeter, 25 дек 2009.

  1. Old Kent Biker

    Old Kent Biker Member

    Дата регистрации:
    10 янв 2007
    Сообщения:
    960
    Симпатии:
    1.532
    Пол:
    Мужской
    Род занятий:
    IT Consultant (retired)
    Адрес:
    Kent UK
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    Yes I am an active volunteer
    Chelfham Viaduct open days are now on the L&B website: https://www.lynton-rail.co.uk/news/view/chelfham-viaduct-open-weekend-17-18th-may
     
    Tobbes нравится это.
  2. lynbarn

    lynbarn Well-Known Member

    Дата регистрации:
    22 авг 2006
    Сообщения:
    1.589
    Симпатии:
    554
    Пол:
    Мужской
    Род занятий:
    Retired
    Адрес:
    Kent
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    As it is almost Eurovision, L&B Trust nu points
     
  3. Tobbes

    Tobbes Member

    Дата регистрации:
    14 авг 2010
    Сообщения:
    961
    Симпатии:
    2.740
    Bu**er, I thought it was going all the way to Torrington on a mixed gauge bridge for the reinstated Ilfracombe line. My bad.
     
    21B нравится это.
  4. 35B

    35B Nat Pres stalwart

    Дата регистрации:
    18 июн 2011
    Сообщения:
    28.827
    Симпатии:
    28.828
    Пол:
    Мужской
    Адрес:
    Grantham
    Heritage Railway Volunteer:
    No I do not currently volunteer
    It should. It also gives a great deal to think about in terms of how ENPA consider applications, and what they may or may not give support to.

    I also found the comments of opponents interesting. What struck me was the depth of knowledge and experience they brought to discussions, and hence the quality of evidence required to successfully rebut their concerns - and where the application clearly failed to hit the mark.

    Unlike some, I don’t conclude that Parracombe is unachievable. There were clear steers as to what might successfully thread the eye of the needle. But that requires absolute rigour in the submissions, and in the supporting information. It also requires credibility, and opponents will challenge that credibility - as we saw. That means dealing with economic analysis properly, dealing with drainage questions properly, and seriously engaging with the precise meaning of the National Park’s policy on reinstatement.

    A period of reflection is absolutely required, to allow proper consideration of what might be possible, and what not. A rapid turnaround based on one more heave will not work.

    As an aside, I root my views in the law as it is, and planning policies as they are. Not as I might wish them to be. I actually share the views of @RailWest on some of the specifics - but they are the rules as laid out.
     
    lynbarn нравится это.

Поделиться этой страницей