Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

marno21

voz es wrote: »

I assure you I am very pro Greenway, and if you had read my previous posts you would see I am only against this particular one.

Just to note you will have no issue at all getting seats in the local pubs of my local towns many of them have nosedived along with many other businesses as a result of the lack of infrastructure and job opportunities resulting in the upcoming generations leaving to find work and settling.

A major issue with lots of towns around the country is the lack of people living the town and living in one off houses or ribbon developments outside of towns. Thousands of people living down boreens or on local/regional roads around north Galway all driving by themselves to Galway for work in the morning. Since the drink driving laws came in and off licences became more popular, going to the pub for a few pints has become more difficult and people do it less now due to the hassle of not being able to drive.

The quietness of towns is due to people not living there and people not wanting to drive there to shop because it's handier to shop in car centric retail developments on the outskirts of towns/cities rather than the hassle of driving into town.

(I realise this is slightly off topic but its another valid point in relation to people not living near railway stations and if they are going to have to drive to the railway station most of them will just drive the extra distance to Galway).

Del.Monte

Wagon360 wrote: »

I've used velo rail in France, it's a lot of fun. I certainly think the Kiltimagh scheme is to be applauded, not attacked.

And extended to Letterkenny.

Muckyboots

voz es wrote: »

I assure you I am very pro Greenway, and if you had read my previous posts you would see I am only against this particular one.

I'm very pro-railways myself. It's just the few hopeless cases that have been allowed to blight the landscapes and towns that they infest/intersect that I'm against. This particular one especially.

eastwest

Del.Monte wrote: »

And extended to Letterkenny.

Or the moon, even, while we're at it! ;-)

voz es

marno21 wrote: »

Without quoting posts, I have a few points.

1. The M17 doesn't solve Galway's traffic problems. But half the talk here is of either a freight hub in Claremorris or of reopening the Western Rail Corridor for freight, especially routing to Waterford and Rosslare. The M17 is a high quality link for freight as very little freight going up the west coast originates in Galway, and the M17 connects Galway to Foynes and Rosslare, and also Dublin.

2. Climate change fines. When someone can explain how the emissions from the construction work on Phase 1 of the Western Rail Corridor and the money spent on the half empty trains is environmentally friendly then I would love to hear the answer. Having diesel trains carry a car load of people is not environmentally friendly.

3. Galway's congestion. The Tuam line will do little for Galway's congestion. How many N17 commuters work or have business anywhere near the train station? If there's money available for investing in rail to solve Galway's congestion issues then it would be much more beneficial building a station in Renmore and double tracking Athenry-Galway and providing a decent service in it. Build a decent P&R at Athenry and Oranmore and use that to get people into the city centre if that's where they need to go.

1. Its not all about Galway city, the growth in industry in other urban and rural hubs out side of the planning nightmare that is Galway city has to be a positive for the region.

2. Climate change fines... its well worth having a look back at the posts, and im sure others are sharing links that show many E.U. and other European countries are expanding their rail network.

3. Galway needs another option than road, the bypass that is planned will put be a short term fix. In a decade the issues will be back if Galways population growth keeps in line with world trends. From the Ballymooneen/Cappagh part of the road its reduced to single lane out to Furbo... Would it not have made sense to leave room for a light rail option to run along side the proposed ring road, that it could be implemented in the future.


Galway is a city sandwiched between local housing need requirements, that really is not going in its favour.

When you say ' half the talk here is of either a freight hub in Claremorris or of reopening the Western Rail Corridor for freight', you realise that the same rail lines are used for passenger and freight, right? I assume your saying the other half of the talk is with regard to passenger traffic?

Finally dont you think there will be an electric train eventually? It took close on 20 years for diesel to overtake Steam when there fuel mode evolved.

voz es

Muckyboots wrote: »

I'm very pro-railways myself. It's just the few hopeless cases that have been allowed to blight the landscapes and towns that they infest/intersect that I'm against. This particular one especially.

That is interesting to know something new about about you, in your total 280 odd posts you have only commented once outside of anti Sean Canny and pro-greenway posts.

voz es

Wagon360 wrote: »

Over the next 40 years the population of Ireland is expected to expand to nearly double the present size. At the same time we are facing massive climate change fines due to our current over reliance on road transport.

We have a choice as a nation; do we continue in business usual mode and expand road transport and stay Dublin-centric and at the same time pay those climate change fines (and they will be in the billions) or do we take the opportunity to re-imagine the country and plan properly for population expansion while eliminating the notion of a western hinterland fit only for tourism?

Tourism is vital and very welcome but we can’t sit around cap in hand waiting for those visitors to arrive. We need to eliminate forced emigration and redistribute the population to allow opportunities to develop all over Ireland.

Many of you judge what rail infrastructure we have in terms of current usage. We should plan for the future and think in terms of future usage. Of course we should think ahead and plan better alignments and make a commitment to develop those alignments along with a plan for road transport. The two modes - rail and road - must complement each other.

We need to look at our tourism strengths. We have a world class offering in the Wild Atlantic Way. We must develop a parallel off road offering for the Wild Atlantic Way. The beginnings of that offering are there in the shape of the Achill Greenway and the forthcoming Valentia Greenway. We need to join the dots. I’ve cycled extensively along the Donegal, Mayo and Galway coasts. We have World class scenery there. Get those off road routes linked up and there will be a real cycling bonanza.

We need to link up the West Coast cities directly both by road and rail. Eastwest says they are already linked to Dublin but that misses my point completely. These cities need to be linked to each other directly and not just to Dublin. It’s this simple idea that we should be pursuing and to show we are serious about western development for both business and tourism.

My vision is very simple; link what we have by road and rail. Build the off road routes for cyclists and walkers in the right places. Encourage non road travel to and from our airports. If we do get more direct western rail alignments in place then and only then release them for Greenways. Otherwise rail will never come back.

This is a brilliant post, fantastic points.

voz es

marno21 wrote: »

A major issue with lots of towns around the country is the lack of people living the town and living in one off houses or ribbon developments outside of towns. Thousands of people living down boreens or on local/regional roads around north Galway all driving by themselves to Galway for work in the morning. Since the drink driving laws came in and off licences became more popular, going to the pub for a few pints has become more difficult and people do it less now due to the hassle of not being able to drive.

The quietness of towns is due to people not living there and people not wanting to drive there to shop because it's handier to shop in car centric retail developments on the outskirts of towns/cities rather than the hassle of driving into town.

(I realise this is slightly off topic but its another valid point in relation to people not living near railway stations and if they are going to have to drive to the railway station most of them will just drive the extra distance to Galway).

Minister Ross is intending on bringing in legislation with regard to the very issue of difficulty in getting to social centers including public houses leading to isolation.

marno21

marno21 wrote: »

A major issue with lots of towns around the country is the lack of people living the town and living in one off houses or ribbon developments outside of towns. Thousands of people living down boreens or on local/regional roads around north Galway all driving by themselves to Galway for work in the morning. Since the drink driving laws came in and off licences became more popular, going to the pub for a few pints has become more difficult and people do it less now due to the hassle of not being able to drive.

The quietness of towns is due to people not living there and people not wanting to drive there to shop because it's handier to shop in car centric retail developments on the outskirts of towns/cities rather than the hassle of driving into town.

(I realise this is slightly off topic but its another valid point in relation to people not living near railway stations and if they are going to have to drive to the railway station most of them will just drive the extra distance to Galway).

I wonder how well it would go down if West on track or some other interested party started objecting to any one off houses or developments in north Galway or East Mayo that weren't within walking or cycling distance of Athenry, Ballyglunin, Tuam, Milltown, Ballindine, Claremorris, Kiltimagh etc train stations.

Encouraging a critical mass along a possible public transport corridor would be a long term thing that could make a railway viable. I doubt it would be a popular policy though.

Muckyboots

voz es wrote: »

That is interesting to know something new about about you, in your total 280 odd posts you have only commented once outside of anti Sean Canny and pro-greenway posts.

Did I post somewhere else once? Don't remember taking an interest in anything other than this greenway. Thanks for that alert, Voz.

voz es

Del.Monte wrote: »

And extended to Letterkenny.

Belfast to Cork along the Western Corridor, lets be having ye :-D

voz es

westtip wrote: »

I just wondered what the original state of the Barrow towpath was, I am guessing it was a cinder hard path at the time it was actually used as a towpath and has only become a grassy path since the tow path in the true sense of the words, went out of existence. Not a lot to do with the closed western rail corridor though and it seems entrenched views are leading to stalemate on this one.

Indeed nothing at all to do with the western rail corridor!

eastwest

Deleted User wrote: »

Encouraging a critical mass along a possible public transport corridor would be a long term thing that could make a railway viable. I doubt it would be a popular policy though.

It would be politically unpopular, and it would do nothing to address the houses already built.

eastwest

voz es wrote: »

Minister Ross is intending on bringing in legislation with regard to the very issue of difficulty in getting to social centers including public houses leading to isolation.

'Minister Ross is intending' just about sums up his focus in his current role.

Del.Monte

Muckyboots wrote: »

Did I post somewhere else once? Don't remember taking an interest in anything other than this greenway. Thanks for that alert, Voz.

In fairness, you did seem to have something of a one track greenway mind.

Irish Steve

Wagon360 wrote: »

Tourism is vital and very welcome but we can’t sit around cap in hand waiting for those visitors to arrive. We need to eliminate forced emigration and redistribute the population to allow opportunities to develop all over Ireland.

And when companies like Apple try to do that, the result is NOTHING, as NIMBYs who want to retain their nice unspoiled rural country living make it impossible to bring the employment that redistributing the population requires. Forcing people to move out of the existing high density population areas without having local alternative employment opportunities is the worst of all worlds, as they will either have to commute long distances (by road) from their rural locations, or join the state employed system otherwise known as Social Welfare. The State tried it a few years ago, they called it decentralisation, and it was an unmitgated disaster.

The only other alternative is to make areas like Galway, Limerick, Cork, and other large towns even larger, and we've seen what happens with that plan in the towns around the Greater Dublin area, the result is not a pretty sight, and the harsh reality is that there's no funding available to build the essential infrastructure needed BEFORE construction starts to make additional housing and the like viable, the mess of the M50 and the Greater Dublin area is the result of building the housing, and then trying to add the essential infrastructure like communications, broadband, schools, hospitals and the like after the housing has taken all the cheapest and easiest land to build on.

Even if the urban areas are more densely urbanised, are we then going to go down every boreen in the country and force the people living there to move into the urban areas? If we don't, then the problems of excessive car use, high support costs for low density rural housing and all the other problems being rehearsed here are not going to go away.

Where are people going to wake up and recognise that Ireland Inc doesn't do forward planning, even things like county development plans are only aspirations that are all too often changed in the light of expediency and financial contributions (all too often to the wrong causes), and the result is the shambles that condemns way too many people to a lifestyle that's often unsustainable.

Billions of Euro in CO2 Emission fines may be unpalatable as it's wasted money, but those billions will probably be a lower cost than the cost of the infrastructure that would be needed to make some of these flights of fancy schemes being proposed come even close to fruition.

Quackster

Irish Steve wrote: »

And when companies like Apple try to do that, the result is NOTHING, as NIMBYs who want to retain their nice unspoiled rural country living make it impossible to bring the employment that redistributing the population requires. Forcing people to move out of the existing high density population areas without having local alternative employment opportunities is the worst of all worlds, as they will either have to commute long distances (by road) from their rural locations, or join the state employed system otherwise known as Social Welfare. The State tried it a few years ago, they called it decentralisation, and it was an unmitgated disaster.

We live in a democracy and people have a right to object. The issue here is which a system that takes a ridiculously long time to make a final decision. If it had been designated strategic infrastructure to begin with, it might be built right now.

And the recent decentralisation, while not exactly the success that McCreevy intended, certainly wasn't a complete disaster.

eastwest

eastwest wrote: »

It would be politically unpopular, and it would do nothing to address the houses already built.

I was thinking in the context of the expected substantial population growth someone was talking about above.

westtip

https://www.rte.ie/player/ie/show/eco-eye-1112/10825040/

More positive Greenway coverage on Eco-Eye last night, focusing on the structure of urban greenways being built in Westport, you have to hand it to the Minister for Westport how he has got infrastructure for his home patch and how Mayo county council have focussed on the West of the county whilst ignoring and actively trying to stop anything like this happening in East Mayo.

eastwest

Deleted User wrote: »

I was thinking in the context of the expected substantial population growth someone was talking about above.

In the unlikely event that we get population growth in the west outside of the cities, some of it will be in existing scattered housing stock, some of it will be in new scattered housing stock, and a bit of it will be encouraged into towns.
That's the trend everywhere, and the west of Ireland won't buck it.

Wagon360

eastwest wrote: »

In the unlikely event that we get population growth in the west outside of the cities, some of it will be in existing scattered housing stock, some of it will be in new scattered housing stock, and a bit of it will be encouraged into towns.
That's the trend everywhere, and the west of Ireland won't buck it.

I think you need to familiarise yourself with the Ireland 2040 proposals. They are all about how the State deals with significant population expansion. What you are describing is not what is being planned. One off housing has had its day and we need to plan ahead.

Question; are you effectively campaigning for the continuation of our current laizzez faire approach loosely knitted together with an expanded road network?

Wagon360

Irish Steve wrote: »

And when companies like Apple try to do that, the result is NOTHING, as NIMBYs who want to retain their nice unspoiled rural country living make it impossible to bring the employment that redistributing the population requires. Forcing people to move out of the existing high density population areas without having local alternative employment opportunities is the worst of all worlds, as they will either have to commute long distances (by road) from their rural locations, or join the state employed system otherwise known as Social Welfare. The State tried it a few years ago, they called it decentralisation, and it was an unmitgated disaster.

The only other alternative is to make areas like Galway, Limerick, Cork, and other large towns even larger, and we've seen what happens with that plan in the towns around the Greater Dublin area, the result is not a pretty sight, and the harsh reality is that there's no funding available to build the essential infrastructure needed BEFORE construction starts to make additional housing and the like viable, the mess of the M50 and the Greater Dublin area is the result of building the housing, and then trying to add the essential infrastructure like communications, broadband, schools, hospitals and the like after the housing has taken all the cheapest and easiest land to build on.

I'm right with you up to this point;

Even if the urban areas are more densely urbanised, are we then going to go down every boreen in the country and force the people living there to move into the urban areas? If we don't, then the problems of excessive car use, high support costs for low density rural housing and all the other problems being rehearsed here are not going to go away.

That's not going to happen - we aren't the Soviet Union in the 1930s.

Where are people going to wake up and recognise that Ireland Inc doesn't do forward planning, even things like county development plans are only aspirations that are all too often changed in the light of expediency and financial contributions (all too often to the wrong causes), and the result is the shambles that condemns way too many people to a lifestyle that's often unsustainable.

Fully agree - the status quo is not sustainable.

Billions of Euro in CO2 Emission fines may be unpalatable as it's wasted money, but those billions will probably be a lower cost than the cost of the infrastructure that would be needed to make some of these flights of fancy schemes being proposed come even close to fruition.

Never in a million years should we ever contemplate paying fines when we would allievate those fines by spending far less by building infrastructure and planning ahead. If we go down the route you advocate then this country will have truly lost its collective marbles.

We need to tackle head on the vested interests who want us to continue the current planning shambles and transport shambles we have. Otherwise we might as well hand over the entire country to the road builders, gombeen men and hidden hands who have encouraged this country to be the infrastructure desert it is.

westtip

Wagon360 wrote: »

I think you need to familiarise yourself with the Ireland 2040 proposals.

You most definitely need to do this, as there is not a mention of the Western Rail Corridor in Ireland 2040 and all the transport infrastructure along the so called Atlantic Economic Corridor discussed in Ireland 2040 is about the Letterkenny to Cork road upgrading Here is the quote from page 135 of the Ireland 2040 document you refer to :

Progressive development of the Atlantic Economic Corridor from
Galway northwards by completion of the M17/M18, upgrading
sections of the N17 northwards, where required and upgrading
the N15/N13 link.

So yes most people advocating the Western Rail Trail Greenway from Athenry to Collooney have in fact familiarised themselves with Ireland 2040 and see it as huge opportunity to advance the use of the closed railway for tourism development as a greenway and potentially other uses as well, Gas and industrial strength fibre optic cabling.

Wagon360

westtip wrote: »

You most definitely need to do this, as there is not a mention of the Western Rail Corridor in Ireland 2040 and all the transport infrastructure along the so called Atlantic Economic Corridor discussed in Ireland 2040 is about the Letterkenny to Cork road upgrading Here is the quote from page 135 of the Ireland 2040 document you refer to :



So yes most people advocating the Western Rail Trail Greenway from Athenry to Collooney have in fact familiarised themselves with Ireland 2040 and see it as huge opportunity to advance the use of the closed railway for tourism development as a greenway and potentially other uses as well, Gas and industrial strength fibre optic cabling.

Yes. Not only have I read the draft document but I have also made a detailed submission on it.

eastwest

Wagon360 wrote: »

I think you need to familiarise yourself with the Ireland 2040 proposals. They are all about how the State deals with significant population expansion. What you are describing is not what is being planned. One off housing has had its day and we need to plan ahead.

Question; are you effectively campaigning for the continuation of our current laizzez faire approach loosely knitted together with an expanded road network?

No, but I'm a realist.
Do you really think that any Minister will be allowed to stop people building houses in the countryside? A compromise might involve rural clusters, as is happening in County Dublin quite a lot now, but rural dwellers would scream the house down if they were forced to live in towns. It's a fine ideal, but totally unworkable in practice.
This is the very same political mind-set that has stopped the wrc being turned into a greenway until such time as an alternative transport use emerges for it. It is far easier politically to make vague promises about trains than to grasp the nettle and tell it like it is, that the trains aren't coming anytime soon. It would be political suicide for some TDs to be seen to 'block the railway' which is how their opponents would spin a bit of progressive action. It would be similarly a bad idea for a TD to support an end to rural housing.
So what we get is stalemate, and no investment, which is probably what we deserve.

Wagon360

eastwest wrote: »

No, but I'm a realist.
Do you really think that any Minister will be allowed to stop people building houses in the countryside? A compromise might involve rural clusters, as is happening in County Dublin quite a lot now, but rural dwellers would scream the house down if they were forced to live in towns. It's a fine ideal, but totally unworkable in practice.
This is the very same political mind-set that has stopped the wrc being turned into a greenway until such time as an alternative transport use emerges for it. It is far easier politically to make vague promises about trains than to grasp the nettle and tell it like it is, that the trains aren't coming anytime soon. It would be political suicide for some TDs to be seen to 'block the railway' which is how their opponents would spin a bit of progressive action. It would be similarly a bad idea for a TD to support an end to rural housing.
So what we get is stalemate, and no investment, which is probably what we deserve.

The fundamental issue is actually a lack of trust; trust that the greenway advocates would actually vacate said Greenway if there was a decision to reactivate the railway. Experience shows in Belfast that they won’t, and on the basis of statements about railways in general made in this thread that they won’t either. So stalemate it is for now.

eastwest

Wagon360 wrote: »

Never in a million years should we ever contemplate paying fines when we would allievate those fines by spending far less by building infrastructure and planning ahead. If we go down the route you advocate then this country will have truly lost its collective marbles.

The carbon argument for the wrc doesn't stack up against other alternatives, mostly because of low numbers. Hauling empty trains around the countryside isn't carbon friendly. Electric or methane-fuelled buses would be well ahead of it, as would bikes obviously.

Wagon360

eastwest wrote: »

The carbon argument for the wrc doesn't stack up against other alternatives, mostly because of low numbers. Hauling empty trains around the countryside isn't carbon friendly. Electric or methane-fuelled buses would be well ahead of it, as would bikes obviously.

Again, as if by cue, you are on again about empty trains. I rest my case.

eastwest

Wagon360 wrote: »

The fundamental issue is actually a lack of trust; trust that the greenway advocates would actually vacate said Greenway if there was a decision to reactivate the railway. Experience shows in Belfast that they won’t, and on the basis of statements about railways in general made in this thread that they won’t either. So stalemate it is for now.

The Belfast red herring is a compete myth. 'Greenway advocates' would have no say in the building of a railway in the west of Ireland, they won't own the asset and never will. Irish rail don't propose licensing the alignment to anyone but local authorities for greenway development, and their official position is that the route is 'required for future rail use'. If rail use becomes viable, they can and will build a railway. In the meantime, we should use the asset, and keep it in public ownership.
The situation with the Comber Greenway was jumped on by the anti-cycling element of the wrc campaign as an example of how a rail route can be lost, but it is a completely false and irrelevant comparison; it's up there with 'the moon landings didn't happen'.
There is simply no relationship between what was done in another jurisdiction and the licensing arrangements used by Irish rail.

Wagon360

eastwest wrote: »

The Belfast red herring is a compete myth. 'Greenway advocates' would have no say in the building of a railway in the west of Ireland, they won't own the asset and never will. Irish rail don't propose licensing the alignment to anyone but local authorities for greenway development, and their official position is that the route is 'required for future rail use'. If rail use becomes viable, they can and will build a railway. In the meantime, we should use the asset, and keep it in public ownership.
The situation with the Comber Greenway was jumped on by the anti-cycling element of the wrc campaign as an example of how a rail route can be lost, but it is a completely false and irrelevant comparison; it's up there with 'the moon landings didn't happen'.
There is simply no relationship between what was done in another jurisdiction and the licensing arrangements used by Irish rail.

I must find out how I can contact the anti-cycling element of West on Track. You make them sound like a dark, evil octopus with many tentacles!