Lynton and Barnstaple - Operations and Development

I wonder why these local authorities won't accept electronic copies. They all have eco policies but insist on the L&B chopping trees down to make paper which all costs 3K and then expect to see tree planting in the app to compensate lol..

 

I didn't know that, but I wouldn't have thought they would trawl the whole country - the time and cost of that would likely eat into any possible savings they may have made. 25,000 pages is quite a substantial print run!

 

L&B on BBC News



And a new video from Exmoor Associates

 

There is a suggestion in some of the comments on the applications that the application should be decided through the TWA (O?) process rather than a planning application. Is there any reason for choosing one method over another?

 

I believe both are required. Planning usually required first, for the development. TWA for certain construction powers (including compulsory purchase if required) and railway operating/undertaking powers which cannot be granted by a planning authority.

 

Are comments generally positive at the moment?

 

Mixed ....

 

As I understand it a TWAO can be obtained with deemed planning permission. I'm sure there is a good reason the L&B have decided to do it separately.

Near unanimous positive comments from outside North Devon. Comments from inside North Devon, and specifically the area the L&B intend to run in, are mixed - there may even be a slight majority to objections. A number of the affected landowners have objected; some of these objections could be overcome with minor adjustments to the current plans, others will be difficult. One Louise Grob has commissioned a significant report which comprehensively demolishes parts of the business plan and supporting documents. It is difficult to see how ENPA and NDC will determine the applications without them being called in and/or subject to significant legal challenges.

It is going to be an interesting one to watch - if the L&B can get planning and a TWAO I suspect it will embolden a few more railway expansion plans.

One thought that has struck me with regards to the extension is land acquisition. It is obvious that some of the landowners are of the 'over my dead body' persuasion. In theory a TWAO can include compulsory purchase powers. However, has any preserved railway (except the Welsh Highland, where the trackbed was all nominally in one ownership) ever been awarded compulsory purchase powers as part of a TWAO?

 

It will be interesting to see how this plays out. The report commissioned by the Grob's does contain a number of inaccuracies and it does feel like they may have rounded up a number of the Parracombe community to object with them. Perhaps to ensure they get the best price for their land, when it comes to sell?

Let's not forget that the reinstatement of the railway is in the Exmoor Council long term plan, and there is much support from local businesses and MPs. My understanding (from my mother, who is a district council planning officer in a completely different part of the country) is that economic regeneration (in an area that is in decline) will count far more than the objections of a few locals.

Here's hoping for the right outcome. I believe the decision is due at the beginning of May.

 

Can you post a link to the Grob report?

I couldn't spot it easily on the planning site.

Robin

 

Ah, I have found it now.

There is a lot wrong with the report.

On a quick scan I noticed the following:

"It is not understood what safety standards the embankment will adhere to. The side slopes are particularly steep and the top of the embankment very narrow and high and hence it would be presumed that containment barriers would be necessary. A derailment event in this location could otherwise result in severe, and potentially fatal, consequences."

So the consultants would, presumably, suggest that all railway embankments in the country are provided with vehicle-resistant arnco barriers along their full lengths.

With that quality of argument from the opposition, the L&B should prevail.

kind regards

Robin

 

As I understand it the embankment is to be rebuild with a bridge since that is least environmentally damaging route to take.

But as Robin has said, her report has many flaws in it, it is all very well reporting on this and that and using legal test cases to make a point, but she must realise that test cases can and do get overturned, what might be OK for the goose in that case may not be OK for the gander here.

Now while I don't live in that part of the world, and she has every right to object, she of all people, will be more aware of what is going on in her location, also from what I have read she has been asked to attend meetings with the Trust, but has failed to turn up to any of them.

I hope she has deep pockets for any legal challenge she wants to make and I hope she can afford to lose as well, the Trust has nothing to lose but everything to gain as I see it.

 

I am, of course, wholly supportive of the L&B's rebuilding plans (in principle, recognising that we can all 'get it wrong' occasionally, or not see the best solution to a problem). No doubt this thread is read by those in the chair at the L&B, and if a lawyer with a modicum of railway knowledge, who happens to delight in living alongside a heritage railway not too far from Woody Bay can make a (voluntary) contribution to the processes in prospect, they should not hesitate to ask.......plenty of others do

Robin

BSc ARCS CMILT LLB MIRO

 

I am sure the Trust have the feelers out already just in case, the bit that get me more, is that if it ends up with having to go though the legal process, then no one will benefit for it except the legal profession.

I am not a vindictive person on the whole, but I sure would want my costs paid for all the trouble we have had to go though, yet it could all be agreed in a few face to face meetings in private and it would not cost anyone that amount of money, which could be used to fund and put right any of the objections that have been raised.

Some people just want their day in Court I guess.

 

yep it just me venting my spline on this

 

You have to understand the fact that some folks, and Ms Grob probably comes into this category, have come to a remote and peaceful place and just don't want to see any change. Some of them will also have the resources and will to make life difficult for projects like the L&B that we would not regard as intrusive. It is, of course, likely that, in time, when the railway extends beyond the proposed stretch, places such as Parracombe will see very little footfall. While they are part of the (short) operating L&B, it will be much higher.

Robin

 

Venting your what???

I think you meant spleen...


Keith

 

You are right Keith

 

You are correct Robin the L&BR has been here before many times in the twenty odd years before we opened at Woody Bay and I guess it will be no different along the rest of the line either, Mr Prideaux said at out opening that out of all the railways he has been associated with, ours was going to be the most challenging of them all, how right he is.