Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Muckyboots

hytrogen wrote: »

Wouldn't it make more sense both for safety and environmentally to get as many trucks off the road as possible for these expected touring cyclists??

The notion that rail freight will take trucks off the road in any noticeable numbers is just hogwash and you wont get away with that on an informed forum like this. Freight has to get to a destination - not a station, and that means trucks and vans at point of delivery. BTW, as a cyclist, truck drivers are generally the best trained and safest motorised companions you could have on a road.

eastwest

marno21 wrote: »

A tender has been issued for a feasibility study on a greenway between Collooney and Bellaghy, Co. Sligo on the disused Claremorris-Collooney railway line.

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase.asp?PID=115687

Anyone who thinks that they can continue to block this community-driven initiative is seriously deluded.
This initiative has the support of all the councillors in Sligo with the exception of three who have their own reasons for opposing the wishes of the public. In Waterford there were nine 'flat-earthers' but the deise greenway still got built. Three Luddites is nothing by comparison.

Markiemarkso

marno21 wrote: »

A tender has been issued for a feasibility study on a greenway between Collooney and Bellaghy, Co. Sligo on the disused Claremorris-Collooney railway line.

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase.asp?PID=115687

Is this not what was already done last year with public money?

westtip

Markiemarkso wrote: »

Is this not what was already done last year with public money?

No the Meehan-Tully report looked at the options open including re-opening the railway and concluded a greenway was the best option for the time being in order to protect the route, the report was funded by Sligo county council as they were being lobbied by both West on Track and the Greenway campaign. It was more of an economic broad brush study as to what could actually be achieved. The recommendation for a greenway from this independent report which Sligo Greenway Co-op had nothing to do with resulted in a greenway on the route been written into the county plan; whilst this all seemed long and laborious it was necessary to finally win the argument for cllrs against the anti-tourism lobby trying as hard as they could to stop the greenway from happening, which is really now down less than a handful of cranks in the council chamber, thankfully the vast majority of Sligo Cllrs now support the greenway and see the benefits it will bring to Sligo.

The commissioned feasibility study (which will as I understand it be co-funded by the council and the greenway co-op in a public/private partnership) will look at the nuts and bolts of achieving the greenway, how much will it cost to take up the closed railway that is no longer fit for purpose, how much will it cost to actually construct a greenway and hopefully will come up with a detailed costed plan on how it can be achieved, this properly costed blueprint will go to the department asking for funding. It will be the blueprint used for tenders to construct. It marks the beginning of the actual process of building the Sligo greenway, the northern section of the Western Rail Trail, the touch paper has now been lit, the project is now officially off the ground.

The greenway co-op is actually spending members money on this feasibilty study so it is not just about spending public money, businesses in Sligo have supported the co-op to get this moving, ordinary folk have bought shares in the co-op, even children have bought €1 shares in the co-op. This is real people saying what is left of the tiny anti-tourism lobby in the council chamber we want to see this happen. It is a fantastic day for job creation and tourism in the north west and everyone involved should be commended.

Del.Monte

How's the Velo Rail project going?

westtip

Del.Monte wrote: »

How's the Velo Rail project going?

It hasn't got planning permission yet, but that hasn't stopped the project from going forward with track clearing and some old tracks delivered to Kiltimagh to replace those stolen a few years ago. Mayo CC have been referred to the ombudsman about the fact they are allowing this project to go ahead without planning permission.

The Kiltimagh Greenway group are putting pressure on the council to have a parallel greenway run alongside the bit of closed railway being used for the velorail, in short things are hotting up in KM.

Del.Monte

Collooney or bust - I only need one trip in the Sligo direction.

westtip

Del.Monte wrote: »

Collooney or bust - I only need one trip in the Sligo direction.

DM sorry can't ever see your train trip on the burma road happening! Would you like to rent a bike?:D

end of the road

Muckyboots wrote: »

The notion that rail freight will take trucks off the road in any noticeable numbers is just hogwash

it's not hogwash at all. it can be done to a greater extent if there is a genuine push by government to do it. it can be done. there are flows in this country being brought by truck that could be transferred to rail if the government had a policy to encourage shift. would save a lot on the roads budget as well no doubt. of course it would mean the removal of power from the road lobby so forget it.

Muckyboots wrote: »

and you wont get away with that on an informed forum like this.

he has made a good point, unfortunately however some don't like the idea of anything that doesn't mean an over dependance on road and any suggestion to move traffic to rail is met by some with all sorts. yes you will never move all road traffic to rail and nobody is suggesting it but there is lots of room for a greater shift currently.

Muckyboots wrote: »

Freight has to get to a destination - not a station, and that means trucks and vans at point of delivery.

some of it yes. not every single bit. lots of it is brought to distribution centres first which with government policy could have been built beside rail.
the fact is relying on trucks for all freight is not cost effective to the tax payer and not sustainible. even with electric vehicles the electricity costs could potentially add up once they become the main stay.

eastwest

Muckyboots wrote: »

hytrogen wrote: »

Wouldn't it make more sense both for safety and environmentally to get as many trucks off the road as possible for these expected touring cyclists??

The notion that rail freight will take trucks off the road in any noticeable numbers is just hogwash and you wont get away with that on an informed forum like this. Freight has to get to a destination - not a station, and that means trucks and vans at point of delivery. BTW, as a cyclist, truck drivers are generally the best trained and safest motorised companions you could have on a road.

Ah no, the west of Ireland is different from any other thinly populated area, anywhere. It's a special case that bucks all trends.
The western rail corridor will be great for the kind of freight that is common around that part of the world. Collecting milk from farms, delivering blocks, concrete and stone to one-off housing sites, bringing fuel to filling stations -- these are all jobs that are eminently suited to the western rail corridor. And don't forget bringing loads of straw and hay from meath and Dublin to mayo and sligo; sure the thrain is yer only man.
It's not all about bringing the contents of animal stomachs to Claremorris for composting, you know, despite the benefits of leaving these waggons in Tuam overnight to help dissipate the smell.

westtip

By all accounts the department of transport received hundreds of submissions on the greenway strategy, submissions closed on Friday July 14th. No guarentee we will be listened too, and I have no doubt the WOTTIES will have made submissions saying a greenway would be the deathknell to the Western Rail Corridor although I think that bell has well and truly tolled already, but they have an unCanney (sic) way of wielding their influence. We are getting there and we will cross the line so thanks to everyone who made a submission,but we still need to be aware of the likes of anti greenway TDs like Sean Canney who is opposed to the greenway tourism jobs that would be created by the Western Rail Trail.

Still someway to go!

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

By all accounts the department of transport received hundreds of submissions on the greenway strategy, submissions closed on Friday July 14th. No guarentee we will be listened too, and I have no doubt the WOTTIES will have made submissions saying a greenway would be the deathknell to the Western Rail Corridor although I think that bell has well and truly tolled already, but they have an unCanney (sic) way of wielding their influence. We are getting there and we will cross the line so thanks to everyone who made a submission,but we still need to be aware of the likes of anti greenway TDs like Sean Canney who is opposed to the greenway tourism jobs that would be created by the Western Rail Trail.

Still someway to go!

To be fair to Canney, I think he understands that the railway dream is over, but he is commendably loyal to his friends in the little railway lobby.
Going by the slant of a story in the local papers a week or so back, he seems to be anxious to support his constituents too, but clearly his is somewhat compromised by his association with wot. He'll come around though, if he doesn't want to sink without trace on the next election; Tuam has suddenly become key for him given the boundary changes, and nobody who opposes the greenway in Tuam has a chance of getting votes in the town.
At the end of the day he's a politician, and he probably knows he'll have to throw his train mates over the side, or go back to civvy Street.

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

To be fair to Canney, I think he understands that the railway dream is over, but he is commendably loyal to his friends in the little railway lobby.
Going by the slant of a story in the local papers a week or so back, he seems to be anxious to support his constituents too, but clearly his is somewhat compromised by his association with wot. He'll come around though, if he doesn't want to sink without trace on the next election; Tuam has suddenly become key for him given the boundary changes, and nobody who opposes the greenway in Tuam has a chance of getting votes in the town.
At the end of the day he's a politician, and he probably knows he'll have to throw his train mates over the side, or go back to civvy Street.

It would be such a pity to see him go:D But yes I reckon he has underestimated the depth of feeling now in Tuam, and the greenway may turn out to be his Achilles heel, I think he has been labelled as the anti greenway TD in that neck of the woods and his known anti greenway on the railway route stance might be a weakness his political opponents will exploit....As if politicians would focus on an opponents weakness.

marno21

It would be very useful for him if he could get the opening of the (now completed) Tuam bypass and shortly M17 open.

Think of the ribbon cutting and photo ops!

eastwest

marno21 wrote: »

It would be very useful for him if he could get the opening of the (now completed) Tuam bypass and shortly M17 open.

Think of the ribbon cutting and photo ops!

The irony of course being that the motorway is the final nail in the railway coffin!

eastwest

marno21 wrote: »

It would be very useful for him if he could get the opening of the (now completed) Tuam bypass and shortly M17 open.

Think of the ribbon cutting and photo ops!

The irony of course being that the motorway is the final nail in the railway coffin!

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

The irony of course being that the motorway is the final nail in the railway coffin!

Yes it would make a great speech for Canney, to open the motorway and on the same day make a pronouncement that he is now backing the tuam greenway group, just in time for the election!

westtip

Does anyone recall the Rail consultation process, the National Transport Authority asked for submissions from the public on the role of rail in Ireland. The closing date for submissions was January 17th, almost six months to the day ago. As yet there is no sign of this report coming out, which btw will probably be another woolly document wrapped up in vague promises and ideas; the point is this, the public are asked to engage, they make submissions and then seemingly absolutely nothing happens....What on earth are they doing in the NTA?

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

The irony of course being that the motorway is the final nail in the railway coffin!

Yes it would make a great speech for Canney, to open the motorway and on the same day make a pronouncement that he is now backing the tuam greenway group, just in time for the election!

Ciaran cannon will get top billing that day, along with varadkar and Ross.

GM228

westtip wrote: »

Does anyone recall the Rail consultation process, the National Transport Authority asked for submissions from the public on the role of rail in Ireland. The closing date for submissions was January 17th, almost six months to the day ago. As yet there is no sign of this report coming out, which btw will probably be another woolly document wrapped up in vague promises and ideas; the point is this, the public are asked to engage, they make submissions and then seemingly absolutely nothing happens....What on earth are they doing in the NTA?

The NTA had 4 different 2016 consultations, none of these reports have yet been published.

They can take several months/years to publish, in fact I'm still awaiting the report on the 2015 consultation for the Draft Transport Strategy 2016-2035 for the Greater Dublin Area, if you think that's bad they have yet to publish their very first public consultation report from 2010 on bus licensing or in fact most of their consultations to date- no rush eh.

Complete a FOI application for the most recent draft

GM228

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Complete a FOI application for the most recent draft

It's possible that they don't even have a draft, in any case they may refuse to release it as consultations are exempted from FOI.

Muckyboots

Greenways on minor roads - "the solution". https://www.facebook.com/galwaycyclingsolutions.ie/photos/a.1923046154620017.1073741829.1839489779642322/1924814277776538/?type=3&theater

Del.Monte

Muckyboots wrote: »

Greenways on minor roads - "the solution". https://www.facebook.com/galwaycyclingsolutions.ie/photos/a.1923046154620017.1073741829.1839489779642322/1924814277776538/?type=3&theater

I like it, the West is inundated with boreens that could be closed to normal road traffic and reduced to Greenway status.

Muckyboots

Del.Monte wrote: »

Muckyboots wrote: »

Greenways on minor roads - "the solution". https://www.facebook.com/galwaycyclingsolutions.ie/photos/a.1923046154620017.1073741829.1839489779642322/1924814277776538/?type=3&theater

I like it, the West is inundated with boreens that could be closed to normal road traffic and reduced to Greenway status.

All you need to do now is find some "disused sections" of Irish roads and you have a campaign on your hands. The runway at Galway Airport will give you a start.

Given that group represents East Galway Landowners and other anti greenway folks, it's a little difficult to swallow what they are serving.

Sorry, but no way will families go for cycles on minor roads where traffic is. If that was a realistic solution, you would see it being done right now.

As for closing roads for use as greenways, have you seen our countryside? There's a house down every road which means you would be blocking access.

These lads just don't want a greenway that might cut through their land. Motorway, no problem, realignment of roads, no problem, greenway, no way.

end of the road

Deleted User wrote: »

Sorry, but no way will families go for cycles on minor roads where traffic is.

i'm sorry, but if that turns out to be the only solution availible, then so be it, they will have to go for it or leave it.

Deleted User wrote: »

These lads just don't want a greenway that might cut through their land. Motorway, no problem, realignment of roads, no problem, greenway, no way.

well that is fair enough. they have their reasons and those reasons need to be taken on board.

westtip

end of the road wrote: »

i'm sorry, but if that turns out to be the only solution availible, then so be it, they will have to go for it or leave it.



well that is fair enough. they have their reasons and those reasons need to be taken on board.

It will all come down to compensation levels. There is a solution for west of Athlone on the Dublin-Galway greenway, already suggested to DTTAS, that is parallel with the railway, might need some CPO at pinch points but the argument it "cuts through my land/farm" is meaningless - what does the railway do? This would be a traffic free route that brings the greenway into the heart of towns along the route. Parallel greenways happen all over the world but of course I am forgetting this is Ireland and as per usual we are different. A passing train every now and again is not going to put cyclists off.

westtip

Irish Times today on the strategising and consultation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/the-obligatory-public-consultation-process-1.3159218

Muckyboots

westtip wrote: »

Irish Times today on the strategising and consultation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/the-obligatory-public-consultation-process-1.3159218

Public; " Minister, any chance of some joined up thinking around railways, greenways. tourism and regional development ?"
Minister; " Sure. Just run over there and kick that can as hard as you can for me."
Public; "Great. We all have a great sense of importance and national progress".
Minister; "Eh, sorry. I have completely forgotten who you are or what you are talking about. Must rush, off to a summer school in Donegal to do some back slapping and mingle with the great and good. Now, which socks will I wear? Where's my bloody advisor?

JCX BXC

westtip wrote: »

It will all come down to compensation levels. There is a solution for west of Athlone on the Dublin-Galway greenway, already suggested to DTTAS, that is parallel with the railway, might need some CPO at pinch points but the argument it "cuts through my land/farm" is meaningless - what does the railway do? This would be a traffic free route that brings the greenway into the heart of towns along the route. Parallel greenways happen all over the world but of course I am forgetting this is Ireland and as per usual we are different. A passing train every now and again is not going to put cyclists off.

I think it would be a pity not to turn Galway to Athenry into a double lane track, and instead a Greenway.

Before building anymore railways, really there should be talk of double tracking Galway to Athenry, Athlone to Portarlington and Limerick to Limerick Junction.

westtip

JCX BXC wrote: »

I think it would be a pity not to turn Galway to Athenry into a double lane track, and instead a Greenway.

Before building anymore railways, really there should be talk of double tracking Galway to Athenry, Athlone to Portarlington and Limerick to Limerick Junction.

Actually I don't disagree with you and have long since argued this is what the rail lobby for the west should have campaigned for, mentioned in several posts already. Double tracking (or at least significant number of passing loops) plus a greenway would be feasible, but as the liklihood of double tracking investment is highly unlikely why not put a greenway alongside the existing rail corridor, in fact widen the corridor to have a greenway now and double tracking in the future, this would require CPOs but as mentioned the argument about cutting farms in half would be irrelevant. Have a read of this discussion document I sent to the department back in 2011, the arguments hold true (IMO) today six years later.

Corca Baiscinn

westtip wrote: »

Irish Times today on the strategising and consultation.

https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/letters/the-obligatory-public-consultation-process-1.3159218

Yes, read that too but now I see that action number 63 in the Climate Plan is "Publish the Greenway Strategy" and the date given is 2017! So, either there's a brand new dawn or they have their strategy ready to go and the consultation was a fig-leaf! Time will tell!

Muckyboots

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/takes/seanad2017072000002#N13
Minster Ross speaking in the Seanad yesterday
"I thank Senator Craughwell for bringing this matter to the House and giving me an opportunity to address same. I know that he is, as I am, a great believer in both the railways and greenways. He has been a champion of both but this problem sometimes leaves people in a quandary. If there is a conflict between railways and greenways, one feels it is a great pity because greenways have been a great success. He has been a great supporter of them but they do not always have to be done at the cost of a railway or otherwise. Obviously one can be in favour of both of them. They are very important parts of my Department and what I do. I fully support greenways and also railways, where they are appropriate.
The future of western rail corridor, including the Athenry-Claremorris line, has been the subject of much debate over the years. There are many differing views on it, including among people who live in the localities that the line runs through. Certainly there seems to be strong support among some people for reopening all or part of the line. There are also many who support the redevelopment of sections of the line as a greenway. My Department has received robust submissions from both groups. While I have no objection to the proposal by some groups to create a greenway along the disused railway line, it is ultimately a matter for the relevant local authority to progress and submit, if funding is required, a proposal for consideration to my Department.
I will briefly give a little background on what has happened to date in terms of the redevelopment of the western rail corridor. In 2006, there was a lot of capital funding available for infrastructure projects. The Government at the time approved funding of €106 million for phase 1 of the western rail corridor under the Transport 21 programme. This investment allowed for the reopening of the 36 mile stretch of railway line between Ennis and Athenry. The line was opened to the public in March 2010.
Originally it was envisaged that phase 2 of the project, the development of the line from Athenry to Tuam, would be completed in 2011. However, following the economic crisis, the proposal was shelved indefinitely in common with many other infrastructure projects at the time. Senators will be aware that the programme for Government includes a commitment to provide for an independent costing and review of a proposal to extend the western rail corridor by linking Athenry and Claremorris. It also commits that no measures will be taken to prevent the future reactivation of this corridor for rail use.
One of the actions contained in my Department's 2015 strategic investment framework for land transport was the development of a new rail policy to address the future role of rail in Ireland. The National Transport Authority subsequently launched a public consultation last November with the publication of the rail review report that examined the funding required to support the heavy rail network now and into the future, together with a consultation document. The analysis carried out in the rail review report predates the finalisation of the national planning framework that is being developed under the leadership of my colleague, the Minister for Housing, Planning, Community and Local Government. Once agreed by Government, the approach that the framework adopts towards land use planning and settlement patterns for the country will have a significant impact on the role of rail and other important contexts for consideration of issues raised by the rail review report and any recommendations that I will bring to Government in this regard. No decisions on future changes to the rail network, including decisions on the western rail corridor, will be made until this process is completed.
Again, I thank Senator Craughwell for raising this matter. I know it is very important to many people who live in the area and public representatives who represent the area. I hope my comments have clarified things."

westtip

Muckyboots wrote: »

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas.ie/Debates%20Authoring/DebatesWebPack.nsf/takes/seanad2017072000002#N13
Minster Ross speaking in the Seanad yesterday
". I hope my comments have clarified things."

Yep. That nothing will happen; so no one will get the blame. but hey I thought the western rail corridor wasn't up for discussion

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L7G_Zd47HRc

The most concerning thing about the Ross cop out is his reference to county councils:

While I have no objection to the proposal by some groups to create a greenway along the disused railway line, it is ultimately a matter for the relevant local authority to progress and submit, if funding is required, a proposal for consideration to my Department.

Alan Kelly, then a junior minister responsible for sustainable transport working under Leo Varadkar, advised me and another campaigner in his office back in 2012 you have to get the councils on board, which is why so much effort was made to bring Sligo coco on board, the efforts in Galway are sterling valiant and praiseworthy and hopefully Galway CC will also come on board, leaving Mayo to dig it's heels in for the 30 or so miles of the Western Rail Trail that run through that county. But this should never have been the case, the national cycle network/greenway network needs to be planned centrally, the landbank available for greenways needs to be managed centrally and viewed as a national resource/asset not a local issue, of course to work with councils but, leaving the structure and shape of the greenway network upto the whims of councils is slowing this whole process down to build a connected network; having said all that, at this stage I am increasingly confident, the Western Rail Trail will happen, the fact it is being actively debated in a national government chamber is a huge issue, when you consider the comment by Gerry "not up for discussion" Murray of Sinn Fein/West on Track a few years ago, the matter clearly is "up for discussion" it is clearly on the agenda, the greenway movement has made monumental leaps forward, but as yet no-one is enjoying this wasted asset as it should be, and it seems the influence and pressure being put on Shane Ross as Transport Minister is continuing to make sure the can will continue to be kicked down the road. All Ross can do now is slow it down. For the time being the greenway movement has to play the game and bring the councils on board, it has succeeded in Sligo and is moving forward in Galway, In Mayo WOT are so entrenched in the council management, where unelected officials are acting to stop the greenway, will only come on board, dragging and kicking their heels. What a pity this great opportunity has yet to be fully embraced, what a wasted opportunity for the past ten years, but it will happen, of that I am now confident.

eastwest

Interesting to see Michael Martin coming out in support of the greenway option on the wrc. Has he had a peek at the pending rail review?

http://www.tuamherald.ie/news/roundup/articles/2017/07/26/4143516-greenway-boost-as-ff-leader-doesnt-foresee-return-of-railway/

Grandeeod

eastwest wrote: »

Interesting to see Michael Martin coming out in support of the greenway option on the wrc. Has he had a peek at the pending rail review?
http://www.tuamherald.ie/news/roundup/articles/2017/07/26/4143516-greenway-boost-as-ff-leader-doesnt-foresee-return-of-railway/

Maybe he has. However if he gets into Government as Taoiseach, his tune will change fairly lively if staying in power depends on it.

I'm shocked at the level of naievity towards politicians. I refuse to believe anything until there's tarmac and bikes running along that tarmac.

Del.Monte

Grandeeod wrote: »

Maybe he has. However if he gets into Government as Taoiseach, his tune will change fairly lively if staying in power depends on it.

I'm shocked at the level of naievity towards politicians. I refuse to believe anything until there's tarmac and bikes running along that tarmac.

Collooney or bust - velorail the only way to go.

Del.Monte

Aaabbbccc wrote: »

Please don't do these things:
1. Posts linking to illegal or inappropriate material (warez, porn etc.)
2. Commercial or site spamming, shilling etc.
3. Abusive posts, flaming, baiting etc.
4. Blatently dragging threads off-topic
5. Attention-seeking, particularly when you're not funny
6. Please don't chain-post garbage in the middle of a thread. If you want to have a conversation with someone, PM them or go on IRC.
7. Feel free to let others know about your fun thing/event in response to a request for something, but starting a thread to pimp your event is not allowed. This goes for ANY type of event. This is a discussion board, not a poster wall. For music events, read the Gigs\Events forum charter and see if you should post there instead.
8. Do not post anything potentially defamatory or libellous about businesses or people. 'Free Speech' is vetoed by the welfare of Boards.ie.
For instance do not post anti-recommendations, if you don't like a place then do not post here to let people know.
Service/food experiences are too subjective to be reliable and frankly, we don't know you well enough to know your reasons to put a place down.
If you have a problem with a business and need advice, please use Consumer Issues forum. If someone asks for recommendations, don't use the opportunity to mention places that have "wronged" you. Take it up with the manager instead of the internet.
9. Do not bring back old threads from years ago. It will confuse people that may not look at dates and make them think 3 year old posts were posted recently.
10. Txt spk, don't use it here, it's harder to read and you have a full keyboard in front of you.
11. If you are new, wait a while before naming companies. We like to get to know you a bit more before we take your advice at face value.
12. No backseat modding. If you feel a post violates this Charter, click the report button in the lower left hand corner of their post, and state your reasons in the report window provided when it opens.
13. No in-thread discussion of moderation. If you need clarification of this Charter, or wish to discuss actions taken that pertain to moderation, PM the moderator.
14. Please don't post addresses, emails or phone numbers as this forum is public (not even official numbers or mails) - instead link to an outside website or use the PM function.

The penalty for doing any of the above ranges from warnings, editing posts, deletion of posts/threads, PMs, banishment from the forum and ultimately being banned from Boards.ie itself and you possibly being slung over Wolfetone Bridge by your socks.

Saved before the site ban.

Muckyboots

eastwest wrote: »

Interesting to see Michael Martin coming out in support of the greenway option on the wrc. Has he had a peek at the pending rail review?
http://www.tuamherald.ie/news/roundup/articles/2017/07/26/4143516-greenway-boost-as-ff-leader-doesnt-foresee-return-of-railway/

There is now zero party political support for WOT.

Grandeeod

Muckyboots wrote: »

There is now zero party political support for WOT.

While I despise the WRC, do not get sucked into the current political situation. We have been here before and it can change.

eastwest

Grandeeod wrote: »

Muckyboots wrote: »

There is now zero party political support for WOT.

While I despise the WRC, do not get sucked into the current political situation. We have been here before and it can change.

As far as I can see, there are three national politicians supporting WOT. One senator and one TD are embedded in the organisation and unlikely/unable to change, and one minister who is expert at riding two horses and telling people what they want to hear.

Coillte_Bhoy

westtip wrote: »

It hasn't got planning permission yet, but that hasn't stopped the project from going forward with track clearing and some old tracks delivered to Kiltimagh to replace those stolen a few years ago. Mayo CC have been referred to the ombudsman about the fact they are allowing this project to go ahead without planning permission.

The Kiltimagh Greenway group are putting pressure on the council to have a parallel greenway run alongside the bit of closed railway being used for the velorail, in short things are hotting up in KM.

Why would they need planning permission to replace track?And things arent hotting up, there is no active Greenway group to speak of afaik, there is a facebook group yes but there has been been no public meetings etc

eastwest

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

westtip wrote: »

It hasn't got planning permission yet, but that hasn't stopped the project from going forward with track clearing and some old tracks delivered to Kiltimagh to replace those stolen a few years ago. Mayo CC have been referred to the ombudsman about the fact they are allowing this project to go ahead without planning permission.

The Kiltimagh Greenway group are putting pressure on the council to have a parallel greenway run alongside the bit of closed railway being used for the velorail, in short things are hotting up in KM.

Why would they need planning permission to replace track?And things arent hotting up, there is no active Greenway group to speak of afaik, there is a facebook group yes but there has been been no public meetings etc

Youre right, they don't need permission to replace track, but they probabky need permission for the velorail.

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

Youre right, they don't need permission to replace track, but they probabky need permission for the velorail.

No probably about it, change of use means they must apply for planning permission, but we can let the ombudsman decide that....who has of course been asked.

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

No probably about it, change of use means they must apply for planning permission, but we can let the ombudsman decide that....who has of course been asked.

A bit silly of them to try to skirt around the planning rules. A case of don't do as I do, do as I say?
Even if it was a case of not being sure, surely the interests of good governance would dictate a planning application?
In fairness, I think this wouldn't happen in most other counties.

westtip

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Why would they need planning permission to replace track?And things arent hotting up, there is no active Greenway group to speak of afaik, there is a facebook group yes but there has been been no public meetings etc

Quietly slowly gently the silent majority are moving forward......;)

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

Coillte_Bhoy wrote: »

Why would they need planning permission to replace track?And things arent hotting up, there is no active Greenway group to speak of afaik, there is a facebook group yes but there has been been no public meetings etc

Quietly slowly gently the silent majority are moving forward......;)

I see that the Sligo county plan has just been amended to facilitate the development of a greenway on the track bed.
The decision was made by councillors a couple of months ago, apparently, but it has physically been amended in the last couple of days.
(Speaking of moving forward.....)

serfboard

eastwest wrote: »

I see that the Sligo county plan has just been amended to facilitate the development of a greenway on the track bed.
The decision was made by councillors a couple of months ago, apparently, but it has physically been amended in the last couple of days.
(Speaking of moving forward.....)

Ye can find it here.

Sligo County Council wrote:

Seek the development of a footway and cycleway (greenway) on or alongside the closed railway line from Collooney to Bellaghy (Sligo/Mayo county boundary) insofar as such route does not compromise the reopening of the Western Rail Corridor, if reopening the railway line is deemed feasible.

Still covering their tracks (geddit? ), but movement at least and at last.

eastwest

It's great, the barriers are falling, one at a time.