Western Rail Corridor

murphaph · 28-04-2005 12:27pm

I'm on record here as being totally against the WRC north of Tuam until such time as Galway, mayo and Sligo county councils stop allowing one off housing and start concentrating development. Until then-nothing should be wasted on the route.

Students travel by bus in the main. It's cheaper and that's the decisive factor. Forget about factoring in students even if they do exist along the route.

I'm getting the usual crock of **** social justice about connecting these poor underserved towns to the rail network. Fact is all the big towns in these counties are already connected to the network (except Tuam, pop. 3,000-big deal), they just want more and are being greedy while poor folks in Dublin, Cork, Limerick etc. sit in endless traffic jams just to go 7 miles or whatever! Where's the justice for us? :mad:

PandaMania · 28-04-2005 1:21pm

Apart from the fact that the Bev Flynn argument is a pile of complete and utter hyperbole, nearly every student I know here in south Sligo (I live next to the WRC) has their own car. They have to as there is no public transport for them to have the lives of normal teenagers as they are trgically marronned in one-off housing land (this social isolation is also why there are problems with depression and huge suicide rates and road deaths among rural teenagers). The WRC will do nothing to change this unless the FAI and WoT team up and start demanding spurs built to all the one-off houses.

This is the great tragedy of the Western Rail Corridor in that the people and groups who want it the most in the West of Ireland, are the ones who have destroyed its potential to realistically justify its exsistence.

MG · 28-04-2005 3:19pm

ishmael whale wrote:

I think its clear from the extract I posted from my post on the Westlink bridge that my querying of the €20 estimate is not evidence of a Dublin bias, which is what you originally alleged. You seem to be concentrating on this point simply because I acknowledge we don't have the data to make a definitive conclusion. However, you seem less inclined to deal with the substantive point of whether the WRC will actually add much to the mix. A flat assertion that you are 'convinced' doesn't address, for example, WOT's contention that outpatients will use the service to take them to hospitals that aren't on the route.

Definitively, I obviously cannot say the WRC will work, no-one can. It is a risk but my analysis of the situation is that if it is set up correctly, it is a small risk with a positive NPV for the country. (The exact same sentence can be used for rail in Dublin). Based on such issues as population, congestion, future planning, economic growth, international comparison etc, my analysis is that a properly set up rail service providing interregional services between Galway, Limerick, Cork & Waterford, with integrated commuter services is viable, desirable and will encourage best practice in planning. I don’t intend writing a book on the subject for your benefit.-

ishmael whale wrote:

Does this mean that recognising the reality that Dublin Airport is operating beyond its capacity and Shannon isn't constitutes Dublin bias? I'm still not clear on your mindset.

The real question is why flights insist on going to Dublin when they could go to other airports. As part of a logical, long-term solution to this problem, I propose better public transport facilities.

ishmael whale wrote:

I've already said that the €8 charge can't be proved one way or the other. You might note I used a figure of €7.5 when doing my own calculations - so I think you can appreciate that I think I'm being generous to them. In any case, you seem fixated by the €8 charge.

I have shown the €8 you use to be unreasonable, so I can’t see how you are being generous to them – unless you are biased against the project.

ishmael whale wrote:

Is the fact that the WRC will only potentially be of use to a fraction of Galway traffic and excessive claim ?

All public transport is potentially of use to a fraction of traffic users, I don’t see your point here.

ishmael whale wrote:

Is the fact that the figure of 55,000 students headlined by WOT is totally irrelevant to the WRC an excessive claim?

It is both relevant and irrelevant. It is relevant in so far as the 3rd level student population is one of the most mobile sections of society and are likely to use such a service. The figure mentioned of 55,000 is certainly strange when a far smaller proportion of students in Athlone and Letterkenny are likely users and also because it excludes potential users attending others 3rd level institutions such as Mary I, UCC, CIT and WIT.

ishmael whale wrote:

Is pointing out that WOT seriously suggest that the WRC is of use to people whose destination is not on the route an excessive claim?

There will of course be people who take the train whose destination is not on the route, though naturally at a diminishing rate as distance from the line continues. This is the nature of transport systems! I know someone who travels 17 miles in the opposite direction to his destination in order to get a bus. Welcome to rural Ireland!

murphaph wrote:

I'm getting the usual crock of **** social justice about connecting these poor underserved towns to the rail network.

I haven't mentioned social justice.

murphaph wrote:

Fact is all the big towns in these counties are already connected to the network (except Tuam, pop. 3,000-big deal), they just want more and are being greedy while poor folks in Dublin, Cork, Limerick etc. sit in endless traffic jams just to go 7 miles or whatever! Where's the justice for us? :mad:

Firstly, just because they are connected to the rail network does not mean they are connected to where they want to go. Secondly, the WRC would have small positive effect on traffic in Dublin & Cork and potentially a good impact on Limerick. I'm not from the West, I sit in those traffic jams like you but I recognise that the solutions to these problems are not mutually exclusive.

murphaph wrote:

Students travel by bus in the main. It's cheaper and that's the decisive factor. Forget about factoring in students even if they do exist along the route.

Well, sooner or later I suppose these students must have realised that there weren’t any trains. Students will take the mode of transport which is most suited to them based on factors such as time, cost, comfort etc ………….or perhaps they don’t actually take the bus but buy cars instead………seems to be a difference of opinion in the ranks of P11.

PandaMania wrote:

nearly every student I know here in south Sligo (I live next to the WRC) has their own car. They have to as there is no public transport for them to have the lives of normal teenagers

"there is no public transport." Nail on head.

ishmael whale · 28-04-2005 3:48pm

MG wrote:

.. my analysis is that a properly set up rail service providing interregional services between Galway, Limerick, Cork & Waterford, with integrated commuter services is viable, desirable and will encourage best practice in planning. I don’t intend writing a book on the subject for your benefit.

I don’t see any ‘analysis’. You’re simply asserting that you believe this to be the case, and your ‘book’ comment is simply a smokescreen to avoid any justification. Do I take it implicitly that your concentration on linking Galway, Limerick, Cork and Waterford mean you accept my analysis that WOT’s case, which mostly relates to linking Galway to Sligo, is a crock?

MG wrote:

The real question is why flights insist on going to Dublin when they could go to other airports. As part of a logical, long-term solution to this problem, I propose better public transport facilities.

I take this to mean that you do feel that stating the reality that Dublin’s airport is overused and Shannon’s isn’t constitutes a Dublin bias. Can I suggest that I am simply stating the actual position, but that you have an anti-Dublin bias?

http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn2.0?stage=1&word=bias
1. bias, prejudice, preconception -- (a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation)

MG wrote:

I have shown the €8 you use to be unreasonable, so I can’t see how you are being generous to them – unless you are biased against the project. .

Back to the €8. If only you’d pay the same attention to explaining your ‘analysis’ of interregional services.

If I use a higher cost for the WRC than for the Westlink, where I’m actually trying to make a case that the congestion costs need to be addressed, how can you not see that I am giving them a treatment that I would not give myself? (See anti-Dublin bias above).

MG wrote:

All public transport is potentially of use to a fraction of traffic users, I don’t see your point here.

Fine. Start at the top of this post and we’ll get there.

MG · 28-04-2005 4:46pm

ishmael whale wrote:

I don’t see any ‘analysis’. You’re simply asserting that you believe this to be the case, and your ‘book’ comment is simply a smokescreen to avoid any justification. Do I take it implicitly that your concentration on linking Galway, Limerick, Cork and Waterford mean you accept my analysis that WOT’s case, which mostly relates to linking Galway to Sligo, is a crock?

My position has always been that the WRC should be built from the south up. If it gets to Sligo great but I doubt it will in the medium term. My reading of the situation is based on all available publications and opinions. So far the statistics you have posted here have been dubious and have not served to undermine the case for the WRC at all.

ishmael whale wrote:

I take this to mean that you do feel that stating the reality that Dublin’s airport is overused and Shannon’s isn’t constitutes a Dublin bias. Can I suggest that I am simply stating the actual position, but that you have an anti-Dublin bias?

http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn2.0?stage=1&word=bias
1. bias, prejudice, preconception -- (a partiality that prevents objective consideration of an issue or situation)

That definition of bias would fit well with your posting patterns. If I had an anti Dublin bias would I get advocating spending €3-5 bn on rail transport in Dublin? Can I be anti-Dublin without being against it?
http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn2.0?stage=1&word=anti
1. anti (vs. pro) -- (not in favor of (an action or proposal etc.))

ishmael whale wrote:

Back to the €8. If only you’d pay the same attention to explaining your ‘analysis’ of interregional services.

If I use a higher cost for the WRC than for the Westlink, where I’m actually trying to make a case that the congestion costs need to be addressed, how can you not see that I am giving them a treatment that I would not give myself? (See anti-Dublin bias above).

As I have shown, the €8 is a poor quality estimate (a crock, perhaps), my rationale for the €20 is properly analysed. If your analysis of the WRC is of similar poor quality, then my analysis of the WRC should be far more reasonable.

ishmael whale wrote:

Fine. Start at the top of this post and we’ll get there.

PLease explain. Do you expect public transport to cater for all traffic users?

ishmael whale · 28-04-2005 5:11pm

MG wrote:

My position has always been that the WRC should be built from the south up.

Which I take it means that you do feel the Galway – Sligo route is justified, but you’re just a little shy in telling us why.

MG wrote:

So far the statistics you have posted here have been dubious and have not served to undermine the case for the WRC at all.

Apart from the famous €8, what are you referring to?

MG wrote:

Can I be anti-Dublin without being against it?

Do I take it, then, that you now don't have a problem with the statement that Dublin Airport is overcapacity and Shannon isn't?

MG wrote:

As I have shown, the €8 is a poor quality estimate (a crock, perhaps), my rationale for the €20 is properly analysed.

What you’ve shown is that we don’t have the information to make a definitive statement – that’s not the same as €20 being ‘properly analysed’. Your breakdown of traffic type is based on supposition, and a supposition I don’t accept. All that’s happened, essentially, is you’ve said ‘it must be €20’ and I’ve said ‘whatever, now moving on to what impact the WRC will make to Galway’s congestion problem.’

MG wrote:

If your analysis of the WRC is of similar poor quality, then my analysis of the WRC should be far more reasonable.

You really are trying to build an awful lot onto the fact that we don’t have any information on the breakdown of journey types in Galway. What you are effectively saying here is that, because we cannot definitively state what proportion of journeys on the Galway Tuam road are accounted for by business travel, outpatients will use the WRC to get to Portunicula. We’re back to Alice in Wonderland.

MG wrote:

PLease explain. Do you expect public transport to cater for all traffic users?

No, but as I’ve posted above all four categories that WOT identify as potential WRC users are questionable. As I’ve also stated above, if we started from the perspective of what would actually improve public transport options, it is unlikely that we’d end by specifying the WRC.

SeanW · 28-04-2005 5:13pm

seems to be a difference of opinion in the ranks of P11.

And you're probably having a wet dream at the thought. But I'm sorry to burst your bubble.

From my understanding, the view is that the bus system in the West needs to be radically improved, but that the WRC above Athenry/Tuam is not economically defensible. Part of this has already come to pass: I understand that Aircoach/Eircoach or some bus operator are planning to run an hourly service from Sligo to Cork via Shannon and Limerick. This is not only economically feasable, it will serve the people in the West infinitely better than 3 worthless trains per day over a rural Victorian tramway.

murphaph · 28-04-2005 6:26pm

MG wrote:

The real question is why flights insist on going to Dublin when they could go to other airports.

Eh, maybe it's because Dublin is where PEOPLE WANT TO GO! They don't want to be forced into other airports. It is the capital afterall. Heathrow is operating beyond capacity.....BAA don't suggest they fly to glasgow, they build new terminals and runway extensions.

MG wrote:

All public transport is potentially of use to a fraction of traffic users, I don’t see your point here.

All public transport doesn't cost a billion quid (there's no way in hell the WoT estimate is anywhere near a realistic price for complete reopening). Buses are a damn sight cheaper and given the sparse population would serve Mayo & Sligo better.

MG wrote:

I know someone who travels 17 miles in the opposite direction to his destination in order to get a bus. Welcome to rural Ireland!

Exactly-it's the countryside. It's supposed to be full of trees and things-not pink bungalows dotted here there and everywhere. if your mate wants to live in the countryside then he can damn well accept no public transport. People have congregated in towns and cities for millenia because it brings economies of scale to everything-especially public transport.

MG wrote:

I haven't mentioned social justice.

You're one of the few supporters of the WRC who don't. I didn't mention you specifically. It's the usual crock of **** that WoT come out with.

MG wrote:

Firstly, just because they are connected to the rail network does not mean they are connected to where they want to go.

I'd imagine in a quick show of hands if the people of Sligo were offered these options:

a)Line to Dublin via Longford & Mullingar

or

b)Line to Waterford via Claremorris, Athenry and Limerick

that they'd chose a) by a massive majority, luckily for them they already have a)

Victor · 28-04-2005 8:20pm

MG wrote:

"there is no public transport." Nail on head.

There is nowhere to provide public transport to. Name the famous towns of south Sligo?*

*Ballymote and Tobercurry and the well known metropolises of Castelbaldwin and Ballinafad :rolleyes:

ishmael whale · 29-04-2005 10:35am

It's hard to know who's leaking what this weather, but at least this article doesn't see to be just dictated by WOT and their supporters.

http://www.unison.ie/tuam_herald/stories.php3?ca=34&si=1385495&issue_id=12394
Tuam-Galway rail link is on the cards
By Claire Gallagher
THE long awaited McCann Report on the Western Rail Corridor (WRC) is to recommend the reopening of the 185-kilometre line, according to early leaks.
The report which is expected to be presented to the Minister for Transport within the next week is set to recommend the re-opening of the corridor at a cost of €365 million.The opening of the line from Ennis to Claremorris is estimated in the report to cost €170 million.
WRC activists and politicians are already welcoming the news. Galway East Deputy Paul Connaughton said “Compared to the €800 million that went into LUAS and God alone knows what the final cost of the Port Tunnel will be, there is absolute justification for the Government now to embark immediately on a programme to make the Western Rail Corridor become a reality.
“For many daily job commuters in the region it would bring a massive lifestyle change. It would bring more prosperity to the towns along the rail route. It would re-ignite a tourist industry that badly needs a shot in the arm and it would more than any other single regional development proposal provide the counter balance to the overwhelming overcrowding of Dublin and the east coast.”
Despite the recommendation the project is likely to meet some opposition.
Last month Iarnrod Eireann claimed that the Western Rail Corridor is likely to be used by just 200,000 people per annum, over half a million less than the figures produced by lobby group West on Track and the Strategic Rail Review.
Irish Rail against link?
Supporters of the WRC have claimed time and again that Irish Rail is not in favour of the reinstatement of the railway service connecting Collooney to Ennis. “Many economists, several Dublin-based commentators and I suspect Iarnrod Eireann itself will play negative games with these costings but if ever there was a regional development programme that would satisfy several disparate but legitimate purposes the Western Rail Corridor is such,” said Deputy Connaughton.
The Fine Gael deputy even went so far as to say that his party could support the government if they made the project a top priority. Last month An Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dáil he was in favour of reopening the rail corridor.
Just over six weeks ago Iarnrod Eireann produced a report compiled by consultants Faber Maunsell to the WRC committee which makes up part of their report. The Faber Maunsell study into the track connecting Ennis to Collooney indicated that the northern half of the proposed WRC is likely to be substantially more expensive to repair than the southern half as it was originally designed for light rail.
The 17-mile Tuam to Claremorris line is likely to cost €58.9 million (€30 million more than predicted by West on Track), while the 15.5 mile section connecting Tuam to Athenry was costed at €34.7 million by the consultants. The final section between Ennis and Athenry is estimated at €74.7 million (the cost of the Claremorris by-pass).

ishmael whale · 29-04-2005 11:58am

Just reflecting on Deputy Connaughton’s comparison the Luas as a justification for the WRC.

In February Luas carried 1.4 million passengers. If they keep that level of custom, they’ll carry 16.8 million in a full year. WRC seems to take 43% of the cost. To be justified in terms of Luas they’d need to carry over 7 million passengers. Even WOT’s own estimates don’t come close to that – they estimate less than 800,000 passengers a year.

I’ve already been through a lengthy thread on whether Luas is an appropriate benchmark for regional commuter rail services. People can probably guess my opinion on that, but if you are really interested I can probably locate the thread. (Stop yawning there at the back.) So I want to make it plain – what I’m commenting on is Connaughton’s position which is the €800m spent on Luas justifies the expenditure on WRC. If it’s not a valid comparison, he shouldn’t make it. If it is a valid comparison, it simply underlines how unrealistic the WRC proposal is.

http://www.mayoireland.com/wot/Introduction.doc
Fares are based on a template of approximately 2,150 daily passenger journeys of varying distances, of which approximately 50% would be in respect of Commuter/Park & Ride journeys within the Galway-South Mayo region.

http://www.greenparty.ie/en/in_the_dail/departments/transport/24_mar_05_dart_and_luas_passenger_numbers

Thursday 31 March 2005
120. Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Transport the number of passengers who were carried on the red and green Luas lines in February 2005; and the number which were carried on all DART suburban rail services for the same period. [9863/05]
Minister for Transport (Mr. Cullen): I understand from the Railway Procurement Agency that approximately 642,000 passengers were carried on the red line and 753,000 on the green line in February 2005. The total number of passengers carried on the DART in the same period was some 1.9 million. However, it should be noted that DART upgrade works are being undertaken with consequent shutdowns at weekends. DART passenger numbers would be higher in a normal month or period.

Victor · 30-04-2005 6:03pm

ishmael whale, if you are quoting, can you keep it tidy / legible?

ishmael whale wrote:

In February Luas carried 1.4 million passengers. If they keep that level of custom, they’ll carry 16.8 million in a full year. WRC seems to take 43% of the cost. To be justified in terms of Luas they’d need to carry over 7 million passengers. Even WOT’s own estimates don’t come close to that – they estimate less than 800,000 passengers a year.

But the average fare would be higher than the average Luas fare, seeing as the journey is longer.

ishmael whale · 30-04-2005 8:50pm

Victor wrote:

ishmael whale, if you are quoting, can you keep it tidy / legible?.

Apologies – I take you mean the lengthy post # 55, being the article from the Tuam Herald. I had a look to see if I could cut it down, but I thought the whole article would be of interest to people. I don’t plan on making a habit of posting lengthy articles.

Victor wrote:

But the average fare would be higher than the average Luas fare, seeing as the journey is longer.

As I understand it fares on the Luas cover its running costs – the operation being contracted out. Whether WRC will cover its running costs is 'not proven'.

I don’t think, but I’m open to contradication, that either fares actually charged for Luas or proposed to be charged on the WRC make a contribution to capital cost. So the immediate relevance of the higher fares that might be charged on the WRC isn’t obvious.

I stress again, my particular point here is that either the comparison between the two is valid, in which case €300 odd million would get us as many Luas bums on seats in a month as the WRC (even on WOT’s optimistic estimate) would see in a year, or its not valid in which case WOT supporters can’t really claim €800 million spent on Luas justifies the WRC. Unless someone can think of a rationale for saying x Luas passengers = y WRC passengers. (Incidently if you accept WOT's estimates then one WRC passenger is worth more than 8 Luas passengers. If you have more sympathy with IE's estimates, you're looking at one WRC passenger being equal to 35 Luas passengers).

To be honest, I think the essential truth poking out of all this is that rail is mostly useful for moving large amounts of people between or within large urban centres. That's when the efficiency gains come into play. Otherwise, its just wasteful.

Victor · 30-04-2005 9:07pm

This version (if correct) is a lot easier on the eye. I've no problem with teh overall length.

THE long awaited McCann Report on the Western Rail Corridor (WRC) is to recommend the reopening of the 185-kilometre line, according to early leaks.

The report which is expected to be presented to the Minister for Transport within the next week is set to recommend the re-opening of the corridor at a cost of €365 million.The opening of the line from Ennis to Claremorris is estimated in the report to cost €170 million.

WRC activists and politicians are already welcoming the news. Galway East Deputy Paul Connaughton said “Compared to the €800 million that went into LUAS and God alone knows what the final cost of the Port Tunnel will be, there is absolute justification for the Government now to embark immediately on a programme to make the Western Rail Corridor become a reality.

“For many daily job commuters in the region it would bring a massive lifestyle change. It would bring more prosperity to the towns along the rail route. It would re-ignite a tourist industry that badly needs a shot in the arm and it would more than any other single regional development proposal provide the counter balance to the overwhelming overcrowding of Dublin and the east coast.”

Despite the recommendation the project is likely to meet some opposition. Last month Iarnrod Eireann claimed that the Western Rail Corridor is likely to be used by just 200,000 people per annum, over half a million less than the figures produced by lobby group West on Track and the Strategic Rail Review.

Irish Rail against link?

Supporters of the WRC have claimed time and again that Irish Rail is not in favour of the reinstatement of the railway service connecting Collooney to Ennis. “Many economists, several Dublin-based commentators and I suspect Iarnrod Eireann itself will play negative games with these costings but if ever there was a regional development programme that would satisfy several disparate but legitimate purposes the Western Rail Corridor is such,” said Deputy Connaughton.

The Fine Gael deputy even went so far as to say that his party could support the government if they made the project a top priority. Last month An Taoiseach Bertie Ahern told the Dáil he was in favour of reopening the rail corridor.

Just over six weeks ago Iarnrod Eireann produced a report compiled by consultants Faber Maunsell to the WRC committee which makes up part of their report. The Faber Maunsell study into the track connecting Ennis to Collooney indicated that the northern half of the proposed WRC is likely to be substantially more expensive to repair than the southern half as it was originally designed for light rail.

The 17-mile Tuam to Claremorris line is likely to cost €58.9 million (€30 million more than predicted by West on Track), while the 15.5 mile section connecting Tuam to Athenry was costed at €34.7 million by the consultants. The final section between Ennis and Athenry is estimated at €74.7 million (the cost of the Claremorris by-pass).

ishmael whale · 13-05-2005 5:11pm

It could have been worse. At least it shoots down the prospect of throwing money at the Claremorris to Collooney portion, and doesn't seem too warm about going beyond Tuam.

http://www.breakingnews.ie/2005/05/13/story202403.html

Report calls for reopening of Western Rail Corridor
13/05/2005 - 14:52:34

The Western Rail Corridor which runs from Ennis to Sligo should be re-opened on a phased basis, a report recommended today. The Working Group on the Western Rail Corridor said the most viable section of the 114-mile railway was the 51-mile railway section from Ennis in Co Clare to Athenry and Tuam in Co Galway. It would cost around €110m to re-open, as opposed to €365m for the project as a whole.

“It would create a rail link between the four largest cities outside Dublin; Galway, Limerick, Waterford and Cork and thus implement a major objective of the National Spatial Strategy,” it said. At the launch in Castlebar, County Mayo, Transport Minister Martin Cullen said he was committed to re-opening the railway.

…… While examining other sections of the Western Rail Corridor, it found the 17-mile line from Tuam to Claremorris in Co Mayo would cost almost €59m, rising to around €197m for the 46-mile line from Claremorris to Collooney in Sligo.

The report said the high cost of restoring the Claremorris to Collooney line was because it had been constructed as a light railway in 1891 and would need to be upgraded to a national heavy rail standard. There would also be a need to alter more than 200 level crossings, including two which would cost €24m alone.

“Expenditure of this order would be very difficult to justify and the case for its restoration, as things stand, is weak except on the grounds of balanced regional development,” the report said.

Flukey · 13-05-2005 5:50pm

Good, now get on with it and bring it in on time and at or under budget. I'd say we have two hopes!

hawkmoon269 · 14-05-2005 12:57pm

Yes, it could be worse and nothing has been signed off on yet.

As someone said on the Platform11 board it has all the makings of a fudge.

ishmael whale · 15-05-2005 11:33am

The published report is here: http://www.transport.ie/upload/general/6645-0.pdf . I’ve read it, and a few points come to mind.

Firstly, there’s no real assessment of benefits that are expected to result from the proposed investment. They note that the “The only indication that we have in relation to likely travel demand on the WRC are the numbers travelling on the newly refurbished Ennis to Limerick line since the service offering on it was greatly enhanced in December 2003. These exceeded all expectations, with some 130,000 people travelling in the first twelve months of operation, of whom some 80,000 continued on to Dublin on the Limerick-Dublin service.”

Cutting away the spin, these figures confirm that Ennis-Limerick commuting isn’t what draws passengers to this service, so much as the ability to travel Ennis-Dublin. These figures are consistent with the view that there’s more to be gained from investing in mainline services between Dublin and regional locations than in services between regional locations. Hence the statement in the McCann report “The travel demand figure for the WRC will only be absolutely established once the route is operational.” is clearly fudge. McCann’s business is hotels. I dare say that the demand for a hotel in a particular location can only be absolutely established once its built, but at the same time if you offered him a choice between building a hotel in Cork city and building a hotel in Templemore at the same price he’d have an opinion as to where to put his money.

Secondly, the only new information presented in the report relates to the capital cost of rebuilding the line. This information essentially confirms what WRC critics have said – West on Track’s estimates of costs are unrealistic.

Finally, all the report really amounts to is a statement that the line could be reinstated as far as Tuam for about €100 million, but that extending it beyond there would bring far more cost and far less chance of attracting business. But, in fairness, it does at least attempt to link rail development to local authority plans – i.e. if a rail service is provided to Athenry, future development should be concentrated to make use of the investment.

The Western Development Commission’s response to the report “PR on WRC” (their choice for a URL, not mine) is good for some light relief. http://www.wdc.ie/press_releases/WDCPRonWRC.htm A few extracts:

“The Report maps the way forward for rail development in the West”

It really only addresses the WRC.

Lisa McAllister said: “The investment required to reinstate services on the Western Rail Corridor represents value for money which far outweighs that from any other comparable investment in new transport infrastructure.

This statement is pure fluff. What’s actually missing from the equation is any assessment of what €100 million might achieve if spent on, say, traffic management measures in Galway city instead of on a rail link out to Tuam, let alone any comparison to what it might buy in the Eastern region.

“Projects promoting balanced regional development will only be achieved if a ‘weighting' is applied when deciding national priorities”.

This is the WDC’s much loved idea that if you carry out a cost benefit analysis of a project and the figures don’t add up, it should be proceeded with anyway if its in the West. Note how they don’t define what this ‘weighting' should be, i.e. should we be willing to spend double the amount we normally would to achieve some particular result? Triple? More than you can shake a stick at?

Victor · 15-05-2005 8:21pm

http://www.rte.ie/business/2005/0513/rail.html

Government 'committed' to Western Corridor
May 13, 2005 12:38

Transport Minister Martin Cullen had said the Government is entirely committed to re-opening the closed down Sligo to Ennis rail line. But he was not in a position to say exactly when this will happen.

The Minister made his comments in Castlebar, Co Mayo today.

The 114 mile long disused rail line, known as the Western Corridor, would cost an estimated €350m to re open.

The Transport Minister said he had just received a new report into the viability of re-opening the line and that this had to go to Cabinet for consideration. He said he could not make any formal announcement in advance of this happening, but he believed the project had serious merit and that the line would be re-opened.

The West on Track lobby group, which has been campaigning for the restoration of the rail link, welcomed his announcement.

ishmael whale · 16-05-2005 4:51pm

A blunt, but valid, assessment of the McCann report.

http://www.unison.ie/irish_independent/stories.php3?ca=35&si=1396945&issue_id=12479

'Ladybird' WRC report a one-track journey into madness
IF the Government decides to go ahead with re-opening the Western Rail Corridor (WRC), it will be a financial disaster. The arguments in favour of opening the rail service between Ennis and Collooney have been made by various interest group from the area.

We have yet to see anything that resembles a comprehensive and logical case for proceeding with this huge folly. And I include the report from the chairman of the Expert Working Group on the Western Rail Corridor in that. The group was established by former Transport Minister Seamus Brennan last June and its report was given to Martin Cullen last week. The fact that it took a 26-member committee, led by Jurys Doyle Hotel Group chief Pat McCann, nearly a year to produce these 13 pages is a joke.

The report says there is a case for re-opening the line. It says the capital cost would be €365m. Yet the report does not include the cost of buying the carriages (estimated at a further €200m), changing the signalling (the report does say that two of the 290 level crossings would cost €24m) or the cost of maintenance. The other unbelievable aspect of this "ladybird book" report is that it doesn't produce any real assessment of where the demand for the service is going to come from.

Pat McCann's report says "the only indication we have in relation to likely travel demand" is the Ennis to Limerick route which was enhanced in 2003 and carried 130,000 passengers in its first twelve months. What kind of an argument is that? It's a bit like saying that just because the train line we opened from Dublin to Dundalk is doing well, we should spend hundreds of millions opening a Dundalk to Monaghan one.

In the absence of a detailed economic analysis on demand, it becomes impossible to know how many people are actually going to use the line. The Cork to Midleton route is expected to lose €2m per year. In other words, it will require an annual State subsidy of that amount. Based on that figure, this particular journey into madness (the WRC) could lose €30m per year, according to sources.

Thankfully, Mr McCann didn't waste public money hiring external consultants. He says at the beginning of the report that the committee decided not to bring in external advisers and the report would "afford the proponents of the WRC the opportunity to make the case for the restoration of the line."
If this is the only case they can come up with, then all the more reason not to get on this particularly expensive train. It is ironic that Mr McCann's business empire, which is the biggest hotel chain in the country, only has one hotel on this proposed stretch of 115-miles of rail corridor. And that hotel happens to be in the centre of Galway city. Surely, with all of the burgeoning millions waiting to hop on trains in Kiltimagh, Athenry and Collooney, Jurys should be in there already, serving these huge population areas with hotels.

The "expansive" report also refers to the potential for rail freight that could be generated on the line: "A very strong case has been made by some members of the group regarding the potential for rail freight in the West. It has been put to me that this unmet rail freight demand could be substantial, that there is a positive disposition towards the use of rail by manufacturers and distributors in the West." Mr McCann, who is currently very busy fielding a takeover approach for the hotel chain he runs, doesn't tell us what that very strong case is. Rail freight is required by heavy manufacturing industry, yet the report fails to name a single heavy industry manufacturer who might avail of it.

It gets even worse: "Anecdotal evidence would suggest that infrastructure such as the restoration of the WRC could have a major impact on the future development of the West and would support both the Government's Spatial Strategy and Decentralisation Programme." Funny how it should refer to Decentralisation, which is yet another ridiculously expensive journey into madness.

The bottom line is this rail corridor would probably cost €500m to €600m to build. We don't know how many people would or even might use it and it could cost the Exchequer a further €30m per year in trading losses. Not everything has to make money. But if something is going to be a constant burden on the Exchequer, then we should have a clear assessment of the social and community benefit it will bring, so we can weigh it up against the financial cost.

This report, written by a prominent leader of Irish business, contributes virtually nothing to that process.

Victor · 16-05-2005 11:32pm

Ministers speech.

http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6648&lang=ENG&loc=1081

ishmael whale · 17-05-2005 10:40am

I don’t want to read too much into this speech, as electoral necessity can lead to the approval of any crazy proposal, but the section on integrated transport planning reads like a kick in the nuts to the WRC campaign. It seems to be saying ‘there’s no point in heading off on a parade with five marching bands and a signed petition saying how much you want to see a rail line restored if your local authorities are merrily granting planning permission for one off housing all over the shop.” It also makes the clear point that transportation is about getting people to where they want to go, and not an end in itself.

The acknowledgement that high capital and ongoing costs are involved is also hopeful. It now looks like the WRC would cost around €600 million, including rolling stock, so the ‘we’re only looking for peanuts compared to the Luas’ argument is gone. With an estimate floated of €30 million of an annual subsidy being needed to keep the WRC service going (which is enough to cover the entire Bus Eireann network subsidy) there’s some comfort in seeing a little recognition of the realities.

http://www.transport.ie/viewitem.asp?id=6648&lang=ENG&loc=1081

“….Specifically what I want to say is that it will not be possible to provide funding for major public transport proposal unless those proposals constitute a central part of an integrated development plan. It must be demonstrated that the public transport proposals are critical to that development and that, in turn, the development will be a key driver of public transport demand.
We have to remember that the need for a transport service arises as a means of meeting other needs facilitating access to jobs, schools, hospitals and other services.

Transport is not an end in itself; it simply gets us to where we want to go to do other things. It is simply a means to an end; it is not an end in itself.

The economic case for proceeding with rail transport proposals is critical because of the high capital investment and ongoing operational costs associated with it. ……..

There is a very good precedent available to guide us along the road both of delivering on integrating transport with land use and settlement planning and the process of close co-operation with local authorities. I am referring to the process, which led to the approval by Government last year, to proceed with the new commuter rail proposals in Cork. ….. the success to date of that proposal was due primarily to the foresight of both Councils in adopting a comprehensively integrated joint development plan, the Cork Area Strategic Plan in 2001…..”

murphaph · 17-05-2005 11:46am

Whilst I'm glad to hear Cullen talking like this it really p*sses me off that it's coming from a FF minister, who's colleague Dick Roche recently annonced a virtual free-for-all on ridiculous one-off housing. Talk about disintegrated 'policy'.

SeanW · 17-05-2005 2:54pm

murphaph wrote:

Whilst I'm glad to hear Cullen talking like this it really p*sses me off that it's coming from a FF minister, who's colleague Dick Roche recently annonced a virtual free-for-all on ridiculous one-off housing. Talk about disintegrated 'policy'.

But they're just "guidelines" right?

Correct me if I'm wrong but if a local authority didn't like these guidelines they could just tell Roche where to put them?

murphaph · 17-05-2005 3:21pm

SeanW wrote:

But they're just "guidelines" right?

Correct me if I'm wrong but if a local authority didn't like these guidelines they could just tell Roche where to put them?

Of course, as already happens in Meath, Cork and Fingal. However this does not happen in the likes of Clare where vote-greedy councillors are only too happy to ensure one-off housing flourishes and publc services suffer as a result. These guidelines should not exist or they should recommend against one-off housing except in very extreme circumstances (note: being a farmer's son who now works off the land in a nearby town does not count as extreme need).

ishmael whale · 17-05-2005 3:30pm

According to this,

http://www.irishspatialstrategy.ie/Final%20Rural%20Housing%20Guidelines%20Version%205.doc

These guidelines constitute Ministerial guidelines under Section 28 of the Planning and Development Act 2000. Section 28 provides that planning authorities and An Bord Pleanala shall have regard to Ministerial guidelines in the performance of their functions. .

I’m not a lawyer, but I presume ‘have regard’ means a local authority can’t ignore the guidelines completely, or if they do An Bord Pleanala will simply overrule them in individual cases.

This does raise a difficult prospect for local authorities that want to act responsibly. Take the excerpt below from Galway County Council’s draft development plan, which succinctly describes the problems of one-off housing and identifies it as a strategic threat to the area. Will the new guidelines not undermine any attempt they might make to address that threat?

http://www.galway.ie/planning/developmentplan/settlement/word/Executive%20Summary.htm

5.0 The strategic threats
1. A continuation of the current trend in which most of the housing growth in the county is in the form of single houses in the countryside is not sustainable. In the short term the costs may not be noticeable but in the long term some of the costs could be catastrophic. These potential costs include damage to major aquifers and a decline in the status of Connemara as a tourist destination. Also there is a danger that, if an increasing proportion of the county’s new housing stock takes the form of isolated housing, it will result in a growing proportion of the county’s households becoming relatively isolated from essential services such as health provision and educational and financial services.

2. The efficiency of the delivery of services and facilities by both the public and private sectors is affected by the character of the settlement structure. To an increasing degree corporate investment is being concentrated on fewer locations. If there is not a more structured pattern of residential development in the county, involving a greater concentration of growth in towns in villages, an irreconcilable gulf will develop between, on the one hand, the desire to provide services and facilities, and, on the other hand, the ability to make provision because of the high costs of servicing an increasingly dispersed population.

invincibleirish · 17-05-2005 5:43pm

forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but would it now be more sensible, to re-open/develop line exclusively between Cork-Limerick-Galway, surely this should be given priority over the proposed wrc, linking the states 2nd,3rd and 4th largest cities/national gateways together, the numbers on that line would surely be far greater then, you know sligo claremorris and the like. along the line would be Mallow,Ennis,Charleville and so forth

murphaph · 17-05-2005 6:00pm

invincibleirish wrote:

forgive me for sounding like a broken record, but would it now be more sensible, to re-open/develop line exclusively between Cork-Limerick-Galway, surely this should be given priority over the proposed wrc, linking the states 2nd,3rd and 4th largest cities/national gateways together, the numbers on that line would surely be far greater then, you know sligo claremorris and the like. along the line would be Mallow,Ennis,Charleville and so forth

You are of course correct. The alignment further north should be preserved in case those county councils ever get their planning together and actually foster an environmen conducive to rail travel (density).

enterprise · 17-05-2005 6:05pm

Thats what was recommended in the report. (Limerick) - Ennis - Galway should be reopened within two years, then onto Tuam. North of Tuam the case for reopening gets weaker while north of Claremorris its a no-no, for the next 20 years anyway.

When the section to Galway opens it should have a service every two hours to / from Cork, connecting at Atherny into / out of Dublin services offering connections from Athlone, Ballinsloe etc.

Other benefits are; opens up the western side of the country to decent rail transport.

You can also replace one of the Ennis - Limerick - Limerick Jct shuttles every two hours as the Galway - Cork train would use its path and it can following the Cork Dublin Express into Cork calling at Charleville and Mallow alone the way. Anybody wanting a slightly earlier arrival time into Cork can change at Limerick Jct onto the Cork express.

SeanW · 17-05-2005 6:18pm

I've always believed that a Galway-Limerick-Cork direct Intercity train would rock tail.

With the 120 new Intercity railcars coming in 2007/2008, it would be very easy to use a 3-car set as a "route prover" when passenger numbers climb in a few years you could put on an extra carraige, snack/restaurant car facilities etc.

The government made a good move relaying the line from Limerick to Ennis, 130000 passengers used it in a single year breaking all expectations despite the fact that it does nothing except provide a few trains running non-stop Ennis-Limerick.

Now its time to finish the job and rebuild the line to Athenry.

Western Rail Corridor

Comments