Kent & East Sussex Railway

Because it would have to be reinstated to modern standards, as a 5 coach platform. The structure, built by the preservation society in the 70's (?) was decidedly more.... ramshackle than that.....

 

Plus there would be no access to any rebuilt halt/station. The original Dixter Halt was constructed to serve Great Dixter House gardens some distance away. Access was along a permissive track and not via a public-right-of-way. So if Dixter Halt was theoretically rebuilt there would be no access to the site unless permissive access was sought and obtained.

 

It was actually part of the agreement for access with Dixter Farm in connection with the reinstatement of the Northiam to Bodiam sections in the late 1990s that Dixter Halt was removed and not reinstated. I was part of the demolition party. On my first visit there by car with the then PW manager it wasn't apparent that there was railway under the undergrowth there let alone a platform such is the progress of renaturing in this part of the country.
The railway still does joint visits for coach parties under the Gardens and Guards theme with the charitable trust that now operates Great Dixter House.

 

Great Dixter House and Gardens are worth
a visit if you are in the area.
Here is a slideshow of my visit a few years ago:

 

It sounds like the Landowners who objected to the reconnection project are still very angry that it’s gone through; is there much hope of reconciliation? Does the railway basically slice their land in half?

 

The railway will be rebuilt on the same alignment it was on until dismantled in 1972. Accommodation crossings will be provided to enable the farms to function, and the Compulsory Purchase process allows the landowners to claim compensation amounts for severance and other disruptions in addition to the land value. The CP process also allows, if necessary, the valuation & compensation amounts to be settled via a prescribed process after the land is taken, so that land negotiations can no longer be used to delay the scheme.

 

Some of the landowners fields are split but the majoroty of their land is north of the railway. In the case of Moat Farm - the trackbed has been left to 'go wild' and the landowner has established a number of access 'paths' - these can be seen on google maps. Parsonage Farm has removed the embankment - establising larger fields. Since the landowners would not enter into discussions about occupation crossings the documents submitted with the TWAO included provisons for crossings but acknowledged that these would be changed once negotiations took place - there was some discussion at the Public Inquiry, but obviously there needs to be further negotiations.

 

Though I guess that ideally you’d want a negotiated agreement, to remove the later risk of an unexpectedly adverse award from the prescribed process.

 

Yes, a negotiated settlement is always to be preferred. But, if it ends up at a Tribunal, lawyers for both sides’ll have a better idea of the likely upper limits than’d be the case in unfettered negotiations because it's a legal process with legal precedents; requiring evidence.

The process is meant to ensure both that the landowner can’t hold the promoter to ransom; and that they receive reasonable compensation (evidence of the loss is required) in addition to the land value.

Most importantly, an ongoing Tribunal process will not prevent the promoter taking possession of the land on the date they require it.

 

I don’t suppose anybody knows what’s running tomorrow? Can’t find anything on the website… Thanks in advance!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I wonder whether, with the passage of 25 years or so since the removal of Dixter Halt, there might be some renewed appetite for attempting a rebuild and whether the owners of Dixter Farm might be more amenable to considering access from the halt to the Gardens now, perhaps given the success of the K&ESR? Just a thought.

 

There isn't, and they aren't.

 

Very definite, but how do you know? Are you on the K&ESR Board and perhaps a friend of the Dixter farm owners? Sorry if I am treading on toes here but you do seem so sure.

 

I'm not sure the KESR needs yet another excuse to stop on the current operational section. Theres enough stopping and starting as it is with the train-crew worked crossings. I travelled last week, and Rolvenden seemed to me to be very slow. Stopped for the guard to get down to work the crossing, then stopped again in the station, then pulled forward and stopped again in the loop for another train to pass. I guess you might say this is characteristic of a rural light railway, but I just wanted to get going!
Ian

 

I wonder if this is a problem with volunteers or lack of them. There are quite a few level crossings which need volunteers to operate. I wonder whether there is a case of some automation similar to that propsed for the crossing on the RVR extension.

 

Very unlikely. The ORR are concerned with short length platforms and slam door stock and the idea of a halt would be unlikely. They also mandate that new platforms must full train length. It would have to be a very big halt.

 

Dixter is an interesting place and so close to the railway. It's comparable to Bodiam Castle. On our trip last week we visited Bodiam Castle between trains. When buying our entry tickets, I was pleased that the castle offers a discount if you arrive by train. I was quite excited until the discount was revealed to be 10p off the £10 entrance fee! I still wonder if that was a mistake....
Ian

 

Salehurst Halt might need to be long then, for the hordes alighting to visit 'The Salehurst Halt' (pub)?

 

Whilst no final decisions have been taken, the potential need to automate one or more crossings on the existing railway to facilitate a Tenterden - Robertsbridge service is firmly on the ‘radar’ of the K&ESR Board.

 

I wonder whether a platform could be provided which would accomodate Railcar 20 on a shuttle service.