Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

Passengers push?

 

Just make a minor alteration to the carriage...

 

This is how ENPA Planning Officers carried out that exercise in 2025.
May-06-2025-Planning-Committee.pdf
Consultee representations are reported from pages 6 to 31. Public representations summarised (all 178 of them) on pages 32-38. Consideration of the Planning Policy Context of the development, and the Planning Considerations arising from it, is on pages 38 - 68.

The 'weighing up' exercise starts on page 68 (Section 14 - Planning Balance and Conclusion). The weighting does not reflect the number of supporters or number of objections at all. Just weighing up the things about the development which are in accordance with planning policies against those things which are not.

 

That would seem to imply two things:-

1. No weight is given to either (a) the proportion of support to object comments, nor (b) the (perceived) validity of any objections that are not about demonstrating something which is outwith planning policies
2. If there is nothing which is against any planning policies, then there is no valid reason to reject the application, so the view of objectors (and supporters also) are not taken into account and therefore are irrelevant.

I'm not sure if that is quite what is intended

 

@RailWest - read the report and draw your own conclusions. 25 pages are given to detailing the responses, usually by professionals, on behalf of statutory consultee organisations. Only 5 pages summarising the public comments.

That kind of weighting is what’s intended by the planning system. Local Plans are meant to help developers understand what kind of developments will be acceptable in an area and/or what kind of criteria they must satisfy. The present Gov wants to simplify this even more to further encourage development.

A consultation is not meant to be a referendum but committee Members can, as @35B says, give political weight to the ‘weight of public opinion’ if they wish. This can be very important in some cases however with the L&B the ENPA Members have tied their own hands to some degree by supporting, in principle, reinstatement of the railway in their own Local Plan - including criteria for a successful application.

If L&B’s application was compliant (I’ve no idea if it is) but Members rejected it in contravention of their own Local Plan this could be strong grounds for an appeal to the Secretary of State. The vast majority of planning appeals are decided (on behalf of the SoS) by professional Planning Inspectors, not politicians.

 

Reading all of this makes me wonder if let say, a behind-closed-doors meeting has not taken place at some time with the one question that needs to have been asked: what the hell have we got to do to get this passed?

The few construction and rebuilding projects that I have been involved with over my lifetime have always ended up with such a meeting between myself, the client, and the planning officer concerned. In the end, it comes down to reading the guidelines as to what is and is not allowed and understanding them.

One project almost never got off the ground due to the client's insistence on using a red/brown brick, yet the local brick colour was more of a yellow/stone colour, and the local planning officer would not let him build it with the red brick he wanted; in the end, they found a coloured brick that both sides could be happy with. Needless to say, the client didn't stay very long after completion and sold the house and moved on soon afterwards.

I have always found it useful to have the local planning authority on your side when you have these types of projects where things can and do go wrong, but let's not forget that this will only be the start of the long drawn-out process of rebuilding this part of the railway.