Launceston Steam Railway

What worries me is that there is in fact no right of appeal, as such, by objectors if planning permission is granted. The only way to challenge would be to show that the council's process was flawed, for example by having failed to take a relevant factor into account or giving weight to an irrelevant factor. However, the basic rule is that a council can make its own decision to grant permission and the courts will not substitute their own judgment on planning merits.

The process of appeal to the Secretary of State is for when permission is refused - then, a developer can appeal on planning merits in themselves.

A bit lop-sided, I know, but it is vital that members of the sub-committee should be made fully aware of public opposition to the plans of the council.

 

Well if it happens it will be great news, lets hope you will be able to report on such a happy event

Regards

Colin

 

Is this possible new locomotive coming on a permanent stay? Also, has Sybil been sold yet?

 

For fans of a certain green Hunslet, we've "rostered" Dorothea for the half term trains (Oct 28th - Nov 2nd) and she will be 'flying solo' for the first time as her air braking equipment should be in place by then. (Usual disclaimer of 'subject to availability', there may be another Hunslet in steam as back up).


For those following the Council trail saga, the following article has appeared in this week's edition of the local paper and may be of interest.

 

LSR statement regarding Cornwall Council's TRAC Project multi-use trail, issued 23/10/12:

The Launceston Steam Railway recently received from Mike Johns, RDPE Manager SW at DEFRA, a copy of a letter he had written to the TRAC Project Manager, Mr Hariades.

The letter laid down certain conditions that Cornwall Council was obliged to meet should it wish to continue to receive funding for the Project.

The funders were prepared to give Cornwall Council an extension of three months in which to show that they could actually make satisfactory progress. Several conditions were attached to this, one of which explicitly stated that they should return to the original agreement which was signed with the funders. This original agreement included the extension of the railway to Egloskerry. The letter confirmed that no deviation from this plan had been agreed.

The letter concluded by giving Cornwall Council a deadline of 15th October 2012 by which to submit written agreement to all of the conditions laid down, this to be countersigned by all parties. Failure to do this would ‘be taken to signify the Cornwall Council and its delivery partners do not want to take up RDPE funding for the TRAC project.’

The railway spoke to Mr Johns who confirmed that its signature was required, and they then wrote to Cornwall Council offering to meet. Cornwall Council did not reply, and did not seek the railway’s signature.

On Thursday 11th October members of Launceston Town Council met to discuss various planning applications in the locality, including the TRAC Project. They were informed that Cornwall Council had withdrawn the application for the Newmills – Egloskerry section due to ‘errors’ (to be re-submitted). The members discussed the Launceston – Newmills section and rejected it as most unsatisfactory. Two Cornwall Council officers attended the meeting, and members were given to understand that the railway’s signature was not required for the funding to continue, contrary to the stated position of DEFRA.

Subsequent to the deadline of 15th October, it was confirmed to the railway by Mr Johns that there had been no change in the requirements. It would appear that the funding has therefore been lost. Curiously, Cornwall Council’s press office has subsequently issued a statement to the effect that:

‘It is our strong desire to deliver a multi-use trail in Launceston which is supported by the local community. There have been a number of challenges in delivering this project. However, we are working with our partners to help find a solution that works for all’.

As Cornwall Council has not contacted the railway at all, nor met the conditions of its other partner, DEFRA (who now control the funding), this seems quite contradictory. The railway has made clear to DEFRA that its position has remained unchanged throughout. Any failure of the project is therefore entirely due to the actions or inactions of Cornwall Council officers.

The railway is grateful for the support given by local MP Dan Rogerson, local Cornwall Councillor Alex Folkes, the Mayor and Town Council, and the many people (over 1,000) who have objected to Cornwall Council’s plans.

We would encourage all those who have commented on the planning application to check both our website and that of Cornwall Council for news of any developments.

 

Hi Charlie

I don't suppose for a moment Nigel and co would consider applying for the money themselves and building the extension with a walk way beside the railway could they?

 

That sounds a good idea. I'd far sooner trust Nigel, Kay and LSR supporters to get it right than the council. At present, not just with the trail, the council seems to have some difficulty organising a decent party in a brewery.

 

News as follows...

Trail:

Cornwall Council withdrew their previous trail Planning Application PA12/07870 for 'technical' reasons. They have now submitted an almost identical application, PA12/10153 (some changes have been made to the surface materials to be used in places, but the plan still obstructs the extension of the railway). The new application can be viewed, and comments made, at PA12/10153 | Construction of new multi-use trail for cyclists, walkers and horse-riders along former railway corridor west of Newmills Hill and east of Egloskerry togther with extension of existing car park at Newmills and associated clearance, fenci.

By submitting a new application, a situation has been created where previous objections to PA12/07870 are no longer valid, and fresh objections will need to be made to the new application, and we would urge all those who have already objected to submit a fresh objection, or re-submit the previous one.

As the element to which the vast majority of objections related has not been addressed (the railway's offers of meetings with Cornwall Council have gone unanswered) natural justice would suggest that these original objections should be carried forward. If you feel that this should be the case, we would suggest that you contact Cornwall Council Planning Department, 3-5 Barn Lane, Bodmin, PL31 1LZ Tel: 0300 1234 151 planning.east@cornwall.gov.uk direct, or your Member of Parliament.

As and when we have any further news, it will appear on our website.

Dorothea:
On a happier note D performed very well over the half term week and made the local TV news (see BBC News - Restored locomotive pulls passengers in Cornwall). Kay is understandably very happy with how D went over the week. We even had a mini-Dorothea turn up on the Sunday too! :

 

One wonders just what Cornwall Council are really up to, objection submitted again.

 

My objection has been resubmitted. The council has behaved in a high handed way and needs to be scrutinised by higher authority.

I hope that everyone will resubmit their objections. The danger is always that once the 'fuss' has died down, the council will sneakily get its own way.

 

Railcar bodywork mock up.....

 

Good to see progress on the railcar project.

Meanwhile Cornwall Council considered on 28 November at Eastern sub-committee of Planning the first 'leg' - from Launceston to New Mills that doesn't directly affect the extension to Egloskerry but is part of the overall cyclepath project. The decision whether to approve or refuse planning permission was deferred because there was a discrepancy in the route put forward, and more information was needed from Highways about public safety issues arising from mixed use of the road in question.

It was interesting to note that a councillor stated a need to decide expeditiously because of time and funding constraints. Any decision to approve just to get the permission in time to meet funding deadlines would be possibly a matter for judicial review as this suggests a hasty decision that was based on expediency rather than pure planning merits. By the way, Launceston Town Council were against it. I think that it's a question of watching this space; presumably this application will come back to East area sub-committee in a month or two, so it will be worth keeping an eye on the agenda for forthcoming meetings.

I'm too much of a dinosaur to be able to provide a link here, but if you google Cornwall Council and then look for meetings of Planning Committee, you should find the minutes, and the minutes relating to this application are on pages 9-11 - PA12/07691 application by Mr C Hariades on land north of Underlane, Launceston.

 

The draft meeting minutes as mentioned by John can be read here. I believe at present it is anticipated the matter will be discussed again on the 21st January.

Additionally as it has been reported in the local press, I can confirm that Cornwall Council are now willing to meet to discuss the issue, and we have a meeting this month with Cornwall Councillor Bert Biscoe, who has overall responsibility in the Council for transport and the environment.

 

This looks more hopeful; let's hope that a sensible outcome can be achieved.

 

This is what happens if you leave your locomotive in one of the dodgy parts of Launceston....


In truth Covertcoat's wheels are due a visit to our lathe so are out for that purpose.

Railcar now has steel framework at each end - pics on the website and Facebook.


Meeting with Cornwall Council was fairly positive. We plan to issue a statement 'dreckly' but the Cornwall Council statement here and reaction from local councillors/MP here will tell you most of what you need to know!

 

From reading the attachments, it seems that the TRAC project has been effectively abandoned; no path at all on the track of the old line to Egloskerry so no railway extension but nothing to block one if LSR can obtain funds and land owners' agreement. Please correct me if I've got it wrong.

The Cornwall Council statement is worthy of the best efforts of Blair's spin doctors - tells us nothing but presents it as some sort of success for the council, which in fact has totally messed up.

 

I agree a typical council cock up, why cant they just come out and say they never had the money in the first place. The least they can do now is to let Nigel, Kay and the rest of you guys build the extension with no council interference.

Sometimes politicians are there own worst enemy.

 

Abridged copy of our statement re: TRAC Project - the full statement can be seen on our website:

Shortly before Christmas, the railway met with Bert Biscoe, Cornwall Council Portfolio Holder for Transport, for an update on the TRAC project. At the meeting, the railway was informed of the probability that the project would not go ahead, and this was confirmed officially in a press release a few days later.

In a Radio Cornwall interview on 21st December with Bert Biscoe and local Cornwall Councillor Alex Folkes, it was made clear that the money spent to date at Launceston and Bude has been clawed back by DEFRA, effectively ending the project. At Launceston however, Cornwall Council intend to construct a short length of off-road trail of about one third of a mile, ending at the long-established scrapyard in Underlane.

The railway has now received a formal letter from Cornwall Council's legal advisors in Leeds stating that no further action will be taken with regard to the project.

Cornwall Council still retains the ambition to link the Camel and Tarka trails (subject to the availability of funding), without compromising the railway's future, and the railway has expressed its willingness to meet with senior officers to discuss ways in which this might be achieved.

The railway is most grateful to all those who have expressed their support to prevent Cornwall Council from blocking off any future extension to Launceston's major and nationally known tourist attraction.

 

Good to see that confirmed.

As a Cornwall Council taxpayer, I'd have thought that they had quite enough lawyers on their payroll not to need to go to Leeds for their legal advice.