Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Pete2k

eastwest wrote: »

Has anyone got a map of the project that shows the actual limits of it in each direction?

Don't av a map but 6km towards swinford would be roughly to the level crossing on the N5 id say.

eastwest

Pete2k wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

Has anyone got a map of the project that shows the actual limits of it in each direction?

Don't av a map but 6km towards swinford would be roughly to the level crossing on the N5 id say.

Sounds about right; they can't really have a series of these carts trundling across a main road.

eastwest

JCX BXC wrote: »

Ignoring of course it's economically unviability, how much would it cost to bring the Athentry-Tuam line back into service and what works would need to be completed?

It's about 28 km, and about €2 million/km should be a baseline. Plus the bridge at Ballyglunin and the grade adjustments either side of it. There are also major engineering challenges where it crosses the bog.
About 60 million plus rolling stock I'd reckon as an absolute minimum, if no problems were to be encountered. Plus a hefty subvention.

Muckyboots

eastwest wrote: »

It's about 28 km, and about €2 million/km should be a baseline. Plus the bridge at Ballyglunin and the grade adjustments either side of it. There are also major engineering challenges where it crosses the bog.
About 60 million plus rolling stock I'd reckon as an absolute minimum, if no problems were to be encountered. Plus a hefty subvention.

Plus- there would be a brand new station required at Tuam. Of course, it would be an autonomous style ghost station. It would have to be built from scratch and all the parking infrastructure included. Plenty of land there, but not enough potential users, I'm afraid.

Del.Monte

Muckyboots wrote: »

Plus- there would be a brand new station required at Tuam. Of course, it would be an autonomous style ghost station. It would have to be built from scratch and all the parking infrastructure included. Plenty of land there, but not enough potential users, I'm afraid.

Not forgetting that Irish Rail would have to install their beloved palisade fencing all the way from Athenry to Tuam.

monument

Pete2k wrote: »

There is really only 1 crossing that poses any risk and that's the one on the Kilkelly Rd R322 which you may well see traffic lights or a zebra crossing type setup. For now its only going 6km towards swinford. In that distance bar the 322 there's 4 crossings but they're thru roads that between them all if they see 20 cars a day id be surprised. Av a look on street view to see how minor they are. Of course if they also go towards claremorris they'll av to cross the Knock Rd the other side of the station which would be pretty busy.

On the Ballina line I think there was a collision between a van and a train on a crossing to one or two houses!

westtip

Have Kiltimagh IRD got planning permission for this project, one assumes they will need it for some stages of the project.

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

Have Kiltimagh IRD got planning permission for this project, one assumes they will need it for some stages of the project.

More to the point, will WOT be objecting to it? It must be giving them mixed feelings; a project designed to stop the greenway will also put an end to the railway if it's successful.
Decisions, decisions!

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

More to the point, will WOT be objecting to it? It must be giving them mixed feelings; a project designed to stop the greenway will also put an end to the railway if it's successful.
Decisions, decisions!

And the decision as to how to contend with the Japanese Knotweed in the area - I think there maybe some on the closed railway route....that is going to be a big problem.

However congratulations to Minister Ring for stopping the greenway for 6 km of the route, at least he has achieved his objective of stopping a greenway in East Mayo to compete as he sees it with the Great Western Greenway and has denied the people of Kiltimagh a simple leisure facility of a walking tracking - unless of course the plan is to put a safety cycling and walking access track along the route, I guess that will come out when the planning application comes through.

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

More to the point, will WOT be objecting to it? It must be giving them mixed feelings; a project designed to stop the greenway will also put an end to the railway if it's successful.
Decisions, decisions!

And the decision as to how to contend with the Japanese Knotweed in the area - I think there maybe some on the closed railway route....that is going to be a big problem.

However congratulations to Minister Ring for stopping the greenway for 6 km of the route, at least he has achieved his objective of stopping a greenway in East Mayo to compete as he sees it with the Great Western Greenway and has denied the people of Kiltimagh a simple leisure facility of a walking tracking - unless of course the plan is to put a safety cycling and walking access track along the route, I guess that will come out when the planning application comes through.

If they don't put a cycling and walking trail alongside the rails as part of the project, they not only omit emergency access in case of accidents but also exclude the majority of people in Kiltimagh from access to a publicly owned asset, in favour of a lesser number of customers of a private business.
However it is difficult to see how they could design a safe railcar operation without an access path, so I'd imagine it will have to be included.
As for the knotweed, no project goes ahead nowadays without a knotweed survey, so best practice would suggest that it would have to be done before a digger goes in and potentially scatters the problem to the detriment of neighbouring landowners.

Pete2k

eastwest wrote: »

If they don't put a cycling and walking trail alongside the rails as part of the project, they not only omit emergency access in case of accidents but also exclude the majority of people in Kiltimagh from access to a publicly owned asset, in favour of a lesser number of customers of a private business.
However it is difficult to see how they could design a safe railcar operation without an access path, so I'd imagine it will have to be included.
As for the knotweed, no project goes ahead nowadays without a knotweed survey, so best practice would suggest that it would have to be done before a digger goes in and potentially scatters the problem to the detriment of neighbouring landowners.

Going by the photos of the digger already making its way up the track either a survey has been done or they don't care and are clearing the line regardless.

eastwest

Pete2k wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

If they don't put a cycling and walking trail alongside the rails as part of the project, they not only omit emergency access in case of accidents but also exclude the majority of people in Kiltimagh from access to a publicly owned asset, in favour of a lesser number of customers of a private business.
However it is difficult to see how they could design a safe railcar operation without an access path, so I'd imagine it will have to be included.
As for the knotweed, no project goes ahead nowadays without a knotweed survey, so best practice would suggest that it would have to be done before a digger goes in and potentially scatters the problem to the detriment of neighbouring landowners.

Going by the photos of the digger already making its way up the track either a survey has been done or they don't care and are clearing the line regardless.

Seems irresponsible, if that's the case, but it's unlikely to be the reality if this project is being run any way professionally.
Unless the digger was just put in there as a bit of grandstanding to back up the announcement of funding, which would be a bad way to start off.
If this project is being done in an amateur way it bodes badly for its future, but I honestly doubt that it's been done ahead of a survey.

Logue no2

Fantastic news coming from Cllr Shaun Cunniffe in Tuam that an alternative route for a Tuam Athenry Greenway is emerging that uses a dffierent route from the railway line. I am somewhat surprised that the Greenway campaigners on this thread are silent about it so far, however this is now a cast iron opportunity for the Tuam and Sligo Mayo Greenway campaigns to step up to the plate and prove for once and for all that they are not all about stopping or delaying the railway.

eastwest

Logue no2 wrote: »

Fantastic news coming from Cllr Shaun Cunniffe in Tuam that an alternative route for a Tuam Athenry Greenway is emerging that uses a dffierent route from the railway line. I am somewhat surprised that the Greenway campaigners on this thread are silent about it so far, however this is now a cast iron opportunity for the Tuam and Sligo Mayo Greenway campaigns to step up to the plate and prove for once and for all that they are not all about stopping or delaying the railway.

As far as I am aware, and I'm open to correction, this news didn't come from Shaun Cunniffe but from another Councillor. It seems a bit vague at the moment but if it is genuine it is of course great news and would create a start for a greenway from Athenry to Collooney.
However there is also some talk that this is little more than a line on a map drawn by somebody and just following roads. Until there is clarity about this proposal, separating the truth from the rumours, it would be premature to comment on it. For instance there was an initial rumour that this was wayleaved along river banks and approved by the IFA, but that now seems to have been a false rumour.
So, if it's true, it's great, but I'd like to see the actual proposal.

loyatemu

why go from Tuam to Athenry if your not using the railway alignment - why not find a route direct from Tuam to Galway?

eastwest

loyatemu wrote: »

why go from Tuam to Athenry if your not using the railway alignment - why not find a route direct from Tuam to Galway?

It's about blocking the greenway on the disused railway alignment.

Logue no2

eastwest wrote: »

It's about blocking the greenway on the disused railway alignment.

So about an hour before you stated it was premature to comment on the scheme and now you are commenting? That was fast.

eastwest

loyatemu wrote: »

why go from Tuam to Athenry if your not using the railway alignment - why not find a route direct from Tuam to Galway?

There's probably a more valid argument for finding a rail route direct from Galway to Tuam, if they ever want Tuam commuters to use it. The Tuam-Athenry-Galway proposal for a commuter rail route has two major flaws; it takes a slow, roundabout route via athenry and it doesn't deliver commuters to where the majority of jobs are located.
A light rail project that followed the old N17 and took in the industrial estates, ucg and uchg might have a chance of hitting a critical mass of customers, but in reality it wouldn't be any more efficient than a good bus service on dedicated bus lanes.
The motorway will kill off the railway proposal completely, but there is little hope for the greenway proposal either; Galway isn't waterford, and pennies take a lot longer to drop in parts of the west.

eastwest

Logue no2 wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

It's about blocking the greenway on the disused railway alignment.

So about an hour before you stated it was premature to comment on the scheme and now you are commenting? That was fast.

He asked a different question altogether, about a greenway directly from Galway to Tuam.
If the proposal to effectively abandon the railway completely and find a viable route for the greenway has merit and isn't just an arbitrary line on a map, of course I'll support it. In the absence of a proposal though, as distinct from a rumour, I couldn't possibly comment

Logue no2

eastwest wrote: »

He asked a different question altogether, about a greenway directly from Galway to Tuam.
If the proposal to effectively abandon the railway completely and find a viable route for the greenway has merit and isn't just an arbitrary line on a map, of course I'll support it. In the absence of a proposal though, as distinct from a rumour, I couldn't possibly comment

So on the back of that comment, am I right in thinking your prime objective is to stop the railway by using the Greenway as a mechanism to stop it from ever being used as a railway line? Forgive me if I'm wrong.

eastwest

Logue no2 wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

He asked a different question altogether, about a greenway directly from Galway to Tuam.
If the proposal to effectively abandon the railway completely and find a viable route for the greenway has merit and isn't just an arbitrary line on a map, of course I'll support it. In the absence of a proposal though, as distinct from a rumour, I couldn't possibly comment

So on the back of that comment, am I right in thinking your prime objective is to stop the railway by using the Greenway as a mechanism to stop it from ever being used as a railway line? Forgive me if I'm wrong.

You're forgiven; you're completely wrong.
I have no interest in stopping the railway, or in stopping the European space agency from relocating to claregalway, even though the latter is probably a more likely scenario.
I have no interest in the railway one way or another. It's just a myth, like draining the Shannon, that suits politicians when thinking of what they can promise voters. It's a lot like santa clause in terms of being in touch with reality.
So, am I interested in stopping the railway? You might as well ask me if I'm interested in stopping santa clause.

Pete2k

eastwest wrote: »

As far as I am aware, and I'm open to correction, this news didn't come from Shaun Cunniffe but from another Councillor. It seems a bit vague at the moment but if it is genuine it is of course great news and would create a start for a greenway from Athenry to Collooney.
However there is also some talk that this is little more than a line on a map drawn by somebody and just following roads. Until there is clarity about this proposal, separating the truth from the rumours, it would be premature to comment on it. For instance there was an initial rumour that this was wayleaved along river banks and approved by the IFA, but that now seems to have been a false rumour.
So, if it's true, it's great, but I'd like to see the actual proposal.

According to tuam herald it was Cllr Billy Connelly who has said he's seen the alternative route proposed. And that he was shown it by Sean Canney.

Muckyboots

Pete2k wrote: »

According to tuam herald it was Cllr Billy Connelly who has said he's seen the alternative route proposed.

The "alternative" cycle route, pulled out of hat by Cllr Billy Connelly when it looked like Cllr Shaun Cunniffe was about to have a motion passed in favour of a Greenway Feasibility Study, has turned out to be bits and pieces of minor roads, boreens and riverbanks strung together with signposts. In other words " not a greenway". Greenway campaigners won't be fobbed off with that kind piecemeal, undeliverable, political shenanigans.

Logue no2

Muckyboots wrote: »

The "alternative" cycle route, pulled out of hat by Cllr Billy Connelly when it looked like Cllr Shaun Cunniffe was about to have a motion passed in favour of a Greenway Feasibility Study, has turned out to be bits and pieces of minor roads, boreens and riverbanks strung together with signposts. In other words " not a greenway". Greenway campaigners won't be fobbed off with that kind piecemeal, undeliverable, political shenanigans.

It seems to me at least that Greenway Campaigners seem to be more "we're agin' them trains" than "let's see how this could work before we dismiss opportunities". Hey ho.

Muckyboots

40 years! We'll give this a month or two. But let's be straight. It's not a Greenway.

westtip

Logue no2 wrote: »

So on the back of that comment, am I right in thinking your prime objective is to stop the railway by using the Greenway as a mechanism to stop it from ever being used as a railway line? Forgive me if I'm wrong.

You are forgiven, because yes I believe you are wrong. The prime objective, if you are at all interested, of the greenway campaign is to make use of the public asset that is the closed railway. As you know, in the south London suburbs with which you are very familiar I am sure, trains work very well because in large urban areas where frequent trains fill up to capacity at rush hour, this is not the case in the West of Ireland. I am sure you know all that. For the last time, on behalf of anyone who writes in favour of the greenway can I tell you that the Greenway campaign is not against the railway, we just know it is not going to happen, for all the reasons long since covered in this thread, however protecting the route in public ownership and creating tourism related jobs is a benefit worth fighting for.

Anyway, how was the 18.37 from Victoria tonight, packed to the gunnels?

westtip

Logue no2 wrote: »

It seems to me at least that Greenway Campaigners seem to be more "we're agin' them trains" than "let's see how this could work before we dismiss opportunities". Hey ho.

The fact they have come up with this alternative greenway (does this sound like "alternative facts"!) route shows the likes of Canney are getting it in the ear on this subject. It looks like this greenway thing could become an election issue in Tuam, I just wonder if another independent candidate stood in the general election and focused on this single local issue could he/she make a critical dent in the Canney vote.....There is some way to go to the next GE. But who knows this one might have a head of steam, as they used to say on the Brighton Bell.

eastwest

Pete2k wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

As far as I am aware, and I'm open to correction, this news didn't come from Shaun Cunniffe but from another Councillor. It seems a bit vague at the moment but if it is genuine it is of course great news and would create a start for a greenway from Athenry to Collooney.
However there is also some talk that this is little more than a line on a map drawn by somebody and just following roads. Until there is clarity about this proposal, separating the truth from the rumours, it would be premature to comment on it. For instance there was an initial rumour that this was wayleaved along river banks and approved by the IFA, but that now seems to have been a false rumour.
So, if it's true, it's great, but I'd like to see the actual proposal.

According to tuam herald it was Cllr Billy Connelly who has said he's seen the alternative route proposed. And that he was shown it by Sean Canney.

That would make sense.
Not the proposal; the source of the proposal.
I didn't know that inheriting a seat meant you couldn't do your own thinking!

eastwest

Logue no2 wrote: »

Muckyboots wrote: »

The "alternative" cycle route, pulled out of hat by Cllr Billy Connelly when it looked like Cllr Shaun Cunniffe was about to have a motion passed in favour of a Greenway Feasibility Study, has turned out to be bits and pieces of minor roads, boreens and riverbanks strung together with signposts. In other words " not a greenway". Greenway campaigners won't be fobbed off with that kind piecemeal, undeliverable, political shenanigans.

It seems to me at least that Greenway Campaigners seem to be more "we're agin' them trains" than "let's see how this could work before we dismiss opportunities". Hey ho.

Did I miss the bit about opportunities? What was that about?
The only opportunity on the cards would seem to be the greenway. The train isn't a runner, as is obvious to anyone who looks at the facts.
Let's get one thing straight; the train only exists in the minds of a tiny group of railway enthusiasts harking after the way things used to be, and in the manifestos of a few cute politicians, some of whom have been heard to rubbish it in private.

westtip

Logue no2 wrote: »

It seems to me at least that Greenway Campaigners seem to be more "we're agin' them trains" than "let's see how this could work before we dismiss opportunities". Hey ho.

We are not "agin them trains" but others are: (trains from Athenry to Claremorris that is)

European TEN T Transport Policy...approved by our government and by they way 27 other nation state members of the EU
Successive Transport Ministers, including the last one who now happens to be in charge of the purse strings
Can't comment on the current one, he seems to have a colleague holding a gun to his head.
The greater need of other project stakeholders.....too numerous to mention.
The evidence given by the Western Development Commission in a report on freight from the West which showed with an optimistic forecast of 4 freight trains a day (2 in and 2 out) of the west which the current infrastructure is well able to handle.

You see, the Railway campaign is using the greenway campaign as a scapegoat, saying we are against the railway and trying to stop the railway from re-opening We are not, but there is a queue of bodies that is. So please put away your persecution complex. The Greenway campaigners are not against the trains or railway, they just know they are not going to happen. That is the fact of the matter. Get used to it, and stop crying into your beer.