Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Thanks - exactly our long-term plan in the Blyth Valley. Many question the point in putting down track where it cannot be used for some years - but the rails at Halesworth now not only look as if they were never taken up, but feature in the tourist info the council puts out! And, as you say again, our idea is to celebrate the 2029 centenary of closure by running something - even if only our collapsible PW wagon - on each bit of track we have. Nothing to stop the L&B from doing that kind of thing too on owned sections (although planning permission is obviously a problem, the local authority MAY accept effectively unusable short lengths of track as a historic remembrance of the line)
James

 

There are some good ideas here; maybe you should all join the L&BR Trust before the AGM to make them happen

Seriously, for a moment, haven't I been banging on about a hub and a museum at Blackmoor? It doesn't need to be a running/working railway, but it would allow for the collection, assembly and display of the equipment required to build the railway when the time comes.

 

Maybe Parracombe is akin to Passchendaele. Possibly the Woody Bay section is like Market Garden- great idea if it had worked, but the SS Panzers...
Woody Bay- Killington Lane is boxed in, apparently checkmated by slick planning lawyers. Breakout has been attempted, and thwarted. They won't let you go south, and you can't go north. Right now, the opposition claim that it is a small number of middle-aged trainspotters playing about and who will never actually restore the railway is appearing all too true.
Projects succeed by making progress. Maybe slow progress sometimes, but consistent, persistent progress makes a thing seem unstoppable, which is how things appeared in 2013. Those days are long past.
A new 'front' in the south, gradually extending northward to eventually connect up at Killington Lane is, I believe, the only way of ever delivering the stated intent to restore a decent stretch of the L&B. Go where there is less opposition, work hard and make progress.
The trust keep on re-enforcing the position at Woody Bay, -canteen, carriage shed- but that money is not spent moving forward.
The reckless purchase of the pub has not, it seems, brought rails any closer to Blackmoor-quite the opposite, as the Trust now seems to be in a precarious financial position without the resources to carry out any sort of campaign to breakout from the current confined site. The spectre of 'costs awarded' makes any legal challenge of the status quo a terrifying prospect.
I'm not saying 'give up', I'm saying give up on this front for now. Go and make a decent showing somewhere else. Take the best toys there. Make some progress. Regain trust and support, and maybe, just maybe, there will be another chance at waking up the L&B.

 

Would the prospect of the L&B moving elsewhere on the line get any response from the local authority or National Park?

 

I am an L&B Trust member, but my personal opinion is that we need a base on the outskirts of Barnstaple (with good road connectivity, car parking and storage space) before trying to build a railway in the south. If we can get that, then I'm all for it (even if it means mothballing Woody Bay once it is open).
However, that will take a lot of time and money, so I'm all for trying to get to Parracombe and also doing something at Blackmore (even if it's not initially authentic L&B rolling stock).

 

Would I be a cynic to suggest that the NDC would say 'welcome!', the ENPA would shrug their shoulders, and there would be the ringing of bells in celebration in Churchtown?

 

Just to clarify, "The Trust" you are referring to is the Lynton & Barnstaple Railway Trust (L&BRT), whereas there is now also the Barnstaple & Yeo Valley Railway Trust (B&YVRT) which is currently evolving from the merging of EA and YVT. The B&YVRT - like the L&BRT - is in the business of restoring as much as possible of the former 19-mile route, but concentrating on the section South of Wistlandpound, whereas the L&BRT is focussed on the Northern half, an arrangement (with some historical exceptions) that was made between the two groups several years ago. Whilst many of the individuals involved are associated with both charities, they are entirely separate organisations, working towards a common goal.

 

My twopennorth-worth is that thoughts/suggestions of establishing a museum are not helpful, there needs to be a real focus on extending the railway, whether it is in the form of an extension or, less favourably, a second line that can be linked to at a later stage. A general-theme of "locomotives from narrow gauge railways from around the world" will be expensive and increasing difficult to stock, and will be of limited interest. Spend the money on a railway and recreate it's USP.

 

I would agree with your 2nd and 3rd sentences.

However, I would not dismiss the idea of a Museum altogether if it were about any of the following (in a sort of rough order) :-

• the L&BR
• the railways of North Devon around Barnstaple
• the railways of the South West

I do not see the need to expand into 'NG railways in general' - there were enough less-than-standard gauge railways in the South West that deserve to be covered IMHO.

There are some of us who remember the days when the Trust did have a mini-Museum in the old ex-L&SWR signal-box at Barnstaple Town (which still stands) and there are often comments from members about the ongoing lack of a suitable replacement, whether back in Barum or at WB or BR as necessary. I've found from experience at other heritage railway sites that mnay visitors come with little or no background knowledge about their railway that they are visiting and welcome anything that helps to 'fill in the gaps'. One reason why I spend time scribbling a few words on the web on a wet weekend

 

Over time, the L&BR Trust (& the Association as it was) has tried various locations, and we did come close to reopening the line from hole ground (Pilton Yard); however, there were planning issues even back then.

In all this time, the one thing the whole project has never had is the financial backing of someone very wealthy, and we did reject one person who wanted to remove the membership from the ownership of this railway. Call it "biting the hand that feeds you"; it might sum up the situation rather well.

But at the end of the day, what happens to the railway will always be down to the membership. Now I don't mean this to sound bad, but an assessment by the HRA has said that we have too many people involved who only want to discuss what colour to paint its locos and lack the skills to push this project forward in a constructive business-like manner.

We are not short of keen volunteers to come and do the work. But it needs to be organised in such a way that they feel welcomed when they make the effort. The other point to be raised here is that running a Charitable Trust has changed a lot since I was last involved with one.

Trustees are now held to a much higher standard than it was back in the day. One of the current problems is that the L&BR is seen as becoming stagnant, and with no or little progress having been made, it is very hard to get enthusiastic about the whole thing.

While it may not be the thing members want to hear, I do honestly believe that the L&B Trust needs to concentrate on fundraising to buy more trackbed. If the L&BRT and the Barnstaple and Yeo Valley Trust can come together and work towards acquiring all the trackbed between Bratton Fleming and the Howell Castle site (south of Parracombe), we would have about six miles or so of railway to rebuild (including Blackmoor).

I don't say that it would be easy, but it works out to be around 1/3 of the old railway that could be made to operate again within a reasonable time frame.

As a standalone project with its own management team taken from both of the groups above, it could be the way forward. As for Blackmoor itself, I don't think you can just look at it as a single entity, but it needs to be part of the larger vision.

 

I don't think that's an accurate assessment at all. Based on recent and less recent planning applications:
- you can go south, if you own all the land.
- you can't go south, if you want to build some monstrous* station infrastructure which was never there or like that originally.

(*Some would not describe it thus; but that's semantics.)

I haven't seen any evidence from the planning process to suggest that a carefully thought out application which meets all of the terms of the local plan would fail.

The problem with that is you run into more opposition as you need to get past the landowner who doesn't want to sell. This is not a fight worth having, and certainly not in the immediate future, if you want to win friends.

I honestly believe that the only way to overcome the Parracombe objections is to get there, from the north, in as low-impact a way as possible, and demonstrate over some years that the railway is a professionally run organisation, a good neighbour, part of the community and demonstrably not bringing hoardes of tourists into the village (other than a handful who may stay in B&Bs there and thus benefit local businesses), and then just wait, while the credibility of the majority of the objections melts away.

(I accept though that as a non-member who lives >200 miles away, my opinion doesn't hold much sway.)

 

I would go further and say, let's stay away from Parracombe for a period to let people cool down and in the meantime, work on bringing life back to Blackmoor, not so much as a working railway just yet, but more in the way of the new central engineering hub that we all want to see and need for the long term.

The one most expensive item at Blackmoor for now will be the new road bridge for the A39 linking the Station to the Farm in the National Park. It might not be sexy, but it is a case of it needs doing first.

Subject to having the money, the land and planning permission, it might also be an idea to think about having a second and third bridge built under the A39 North Woody Bay and the new bridge at Killington Lane, while we have a bridge-building contractor in North Devon. It might be cheaper for them to drag all their kit to North Devon to do three bridges rather than just the one.

I do understand that more land for a new car park (behind the station) and access from the A39 will be required once the bridge is built.

I am not sure if lottery heritage funding would be available to help, or if grant aid could be looked at, but something like this needs to be treated as a capital campaign project.

As I see it, Blackmoor by itself could develop into a 2-mile line without needing to acquire more trackbed and in my opinion, it would be a better long-term bet rather than waiting to get past Parracombe in the meantime.

I would suggest that once Blackmoor is ready to run trains, we move most of the assets from Woody Bay to Blackmoor and relocate the core operation to the new site. Meanwhile, Woody Bay could then be rebuilt to what the ENPA expect or will allow us to have (Woody Bay 1935 style, anyone?) there, for the long term.

 

The L&B must be the only heritage railway that isn’t short of volunteers.
Or could the truth be that the L&B is just as short of volunteers as every other heritage railway, and you’re making things up again?

Sure why not rebuild Lancey Brook viaduct as well, while you have the builders there?

Just to summarise, currently you would like to:
Build a ng museum - cost unknown but probably no less than £1m
Rebuild 3 bridges which probably couldn’t be used for a very long time - cost unknown but guesstimate around £1m - £1.5m
Build a railway at Blackmoor - cost, at least £10m (going on your own cost per mile)
Build a railway in the Yeo valley, cost, tens of millions (going on your own cost per mile)
Buy more L&B tracked. Cost, hundreds of thousands - millions depending on location and length.
Rebuild Axe to original condition. Cost, tens of thousands.
Build a L&M replica. Cost, £0.5m - £1m?

I hope you have seriously deep pockets to pay for all of this?

Do you ever actually read your posts back before pressing the send button?
Do you realise how ridiculous you come across?
Do you not realise that you’re probably doing more harm than good to the L&B?

 

I am labouring under the impression that those who oppose the railway would only countenance Parracombe being a little-used halt on plain line. There doesn't seem to be the scope or space for a run-round. However, the opponents own the trackbed south of Parracombe. By insisting that Parracombe must not operate as a terminus, they have prevented the railway from advancing that far.
You can't go to Parracombe because you can't go through Parracombe.
But you can't go through Parracombe because you can't go to Parracombe. So, surely the only possible way forward is to build the bit south of Parracombe, so that the Killington Lane to Parracombe bank bit is one missing section, and if we build that then trains will barely pause at Parracombe... certainly not bringing hordes of unwashed tourists to disturb the peace.
The other point about decamping to an alternative location for some time is the current hostile situation will quieten down, and you give the "Over my dead body" people the opportunity to fulfil their side of the bargain.

 

I think the idea that the objectors are only opposed to a terminus is questionable - at least some of the objectors are opposed to the railway in any form. One such (at least) is a landowner who would have to be persuaded or compelled to sell to enable extension south of Parracombe Halt.

There are various approaches to how this could be dealt with, and I'm sympathetic to the arguments implied in last year's planning meeting that imply a Parracombe option would be more successful than Cricket Field Lane. However, to set against the arguments for a short extension that would then lead to a further extension, I have two concerns:
1. Going back to the 2018 application, Exmoor have been concerned about piecemeal extensions and the possibility of work being left incomplete. This concern gave us the "Grampian Conditions" and sensitivity (at least) will be required around those concerns.
2. At least one of the major objectors owns essential land, and would have to be persuaded or compelled to sell land to enable reinstatement. He also has significant resources at his disposal.

For these reasons, I'm reluctantly persuaded that the focus should shift away from Parracombe.

That leads to the idea of an alternative section being opened. With the increasingly long sections of continuous run being established "down south", the idea of a run in the Yeo Valley section feels an increasingly plausible possibility, if the right scheme could be generated. Get such a scheme running all the way to Blackmoor Gate, and suddenly a rejoining to get to Woody Bay takes on a different complexion - quite apart from time having had the opportunity to work on a few minds and spirits.

 

With respect, IMHO there is some muddled thinking here.

1. Let us not forget that the 2018 application to go to PE was approved by ENPA. It failed primarily - if not solely - bacause the Trust could not comply with the Grampian conditions.
2. The application to go to CFL failed because it did not comply with ENPA's planning policies. Any local opposition did not come into the matter as that was never 'tested'.
3. Having had some minor involvement in the operational design process of some of the plans, it is not correct to say that there is no space for a run-round loop. The problem is finding space for one that one will accommodate 4-coach trains (5 coaches are out of the question).
4. What is the point of building the bit from PE bank to BR? This will surely fall foul of ENPA's apparent dislike of piecemeal construction.

The one bit of 'piecemeal building' within the ENPA that will become crucial IMHO is the Pilton Mk2 depot at Rowley Farm and the bridge under the main road to connect to BR station and the rest of the NDC section. Otherwise where will any BR-WD operation base its stock and maintenance, other than by trying to shoe-horn it in on the BR station site, only to remove it in later years when - hopefully - PIlton Mk 2 will be operational.

 

I'm delighted to see Exmoor Associates and YVT (soon to amalgamate as the Barnstaple & Yeo Valley Railway Trust – B&YVRT) have been thinking along similar lines. I suppose I should join!
The following quotes are extracted from Trackbed Trails no. 47SE (dated 15/01/26) which can be read in full (the one at the top of the list) at: Trackbed Trails – Exmoor Associates
I've separated my selected quotes using dots. ..... I now notice serendipitous to the final sentence.

“Since the early part of 2025 a thorough review of the options for re-instating a railway on the southern part of the Lynton and Barnstaple railway has been undertaken by a mixture of Directors, Trustees and others from across the heritage railway industry. …..… The full summary of the strategy will not be released until after further consultation with key stakeholders including local authorities, who have shown a considerable amount of positive interest in the plans ………

“The core mission of the B&YVRT is: To reinstate the Southern section of the Lynton & Barnstaple railway. ……….…. The B&YVRT will seek opportunities to work with the L&BR Trust; we look forward to developing appropriate working arrangements to share resources for mutual benefit. …..

“When we reviewed what is needed to create a viable plan in today’s economic environment it became clear that the B&YVRT will need to build in a very different manner to pretty much every preceding heritage railway. …………..

“Traditionally, heritage railways started with the longest bit of track they could and gradually extended in successive additional lengths to achieve their maximum length. The B&YVRT intends to take a different tack. We will borrow from the canal restoration world to build where we can, gradually linking together sections of the line. Naturally this means that the conventional way of operating will not be possible until the section connecting with the new operational base is ready. However, we will be able to start delivering the training, work experience and volunteering opportunities and the footpaths and community green spaces we have planned. ………..

“As various parts of the line are ready there will be opportunities to open these for members and we have lots of tantalising ideas for future events. The aim is to build what we can, where we can, as rapidly as we can, linking the various parts as land, finances, and engineering hurdles are overcome. …..

The short-term objective is rails down at an iconic location in early 2027 with a member’s event, possibly including a steam engine, to celebrate that achievement. After that, what follows will be as quick and exciting as funding allows.

2026 looks like it could be the year that a few dots are joined.” ……………………………

 

The best way forward IMO, it shows progress and a clear intent. This should help if there is the argument from people that don't want the railway, that the groups are all talk and no action.

 

The reason should be obvious to anyone why I did not mention any other bridges or tunnels since they are not covered in the proposal between Bratton Fleming and South of Parracombe. The two bridges on the current Woody Bay make sense in that these would be part of an operational railway and are the main reasons why extensions haven't yet been built. Once built, they can open up more options to the current operating railway.

As for the Yeo Valley, I have nothing to do with?

If you happen to know Blackmoor, then you will know that there are still parts of the site that the railway does not yet own, and they are not going to be cheap to buy.

You appear to be opposed to the L&BR Trust's buying more trackbed. Well, what is this railway supposed to run on then, thin air? In my personal opinion, buying trackbeds needs to become the primary function of the Trust.

Rebuilding AXE was tongue-in-cheek, and no, even if it were done, it would not cost anywhere near the figure you gave.

As for a L&MR loco, you certainly haven't done any research into the links between the L&BR and the L&M, then, have you?

As for a Museum at Blackmoor, what else can you suggest that is put there to attract people to the site besides the pub and food?