Cork, Limerick, Galway Motorway

Bass Reeves

With all the issue regarding Dublin regarding size it has nearly 1/3 of the country's population. This has created a magnet where by it gets bigger and bigger population wise and we are struggling to service it with housing. This is exasperated by literally all motorways leading to Dublin. It is nearly as fast to get to Dublin from Limerick that to either Cork or Galway. This was again exasperated by the stupidity of the western rail corridor where by it is still as faster to get from Cork to Galway by road rather than by train.

Intercity trains are a dead duck regarding transport in Ireland. However a Motorway from Cork to Limerick and onto Galway (50% complete) would provide a population counter on the westeren side of the counter to counter the magnetic draw of Dublin for population, business and jobs. It would also be serviced by a central Airport Shannon that could provide fights to the US and Europe and would be within an hour of Cork and Galway if a motorway was present.

The Cork, Limerick and Galway axis would also be easy to support population wise with major towns like Fermoy, Mallow, Ennis, Nenagh Charlesville and Gort all with access via motor way if the new motorway was build. As well other area's would benefit. At present Middleton and Youghal are serviced by either dual carrigeway or good single carrigeway to Cork The road from Tralee to Limerick most of which is nearly a high class singe carrigeway with pland for the Limeric Foynes road via Rathekeal this would make Kerry very acessible to Limerick. Then you have again a good single carrigeway from virtually Charlestown to Galway.

If the Government want to create a counterbalance to Dublin is this motorway the main infrastructure priority in the next few years.

savagethegoat

we know

theskeptic

If / when such a motorway is built, would Limerick not be the natural centre? In particular would this see the demise of Cork Airport in favour of Shannon Airport? One problem with defining a region as "not Dublin" is that its constituent elements may not be happy bedfellows; with each wanting to be the centre of that new linked up region.

Del.Monte

Bass Reeves wrote: »

With all the issue regarding Dublin regarding size it has nearly 1/3 of the country's population. This has created a magnet where by it gets bigger and bigger population wise and we are struggling to service it with housing. This is exasperated by literally all motorways leading to Dublin. It is nearly as fast to get to Dublin from Limerick that to either Cork or Galway. This was again exasperated by the stupidity of the western rail corridor where by it is still as faster to get from Cork to Galway by road rather than by train.

Intercity trains are a dead duck regarding transport in Ireland. However a Motorway from Cork to Limerick and onto Galway (50% complete) would provide a population counter on the westeren side of the counter to counter the magnetic draw of Dublin for population, business and jobs. It would also be serviced by a central Airport Shannon that could provide fights to the US and Europe and would be within an hour of Cork and Galway if a motorway was present.

The Cork, Limerick and Galway axis would also be easy to support population wise with major towns like Fermoy, Mallow, Ennis, Nenagh Charlesville and Gort all with access via motor way if the new motorway was build. As well other area's would benefit. At present Middleton and Youghal are serviced by either dual carrigeway or good single carrigeway to Cork The road from Tralee to Limerick most of which is nearly a high class singe carrigeway with pland for the Limeric Foynes road via Rathekeal this would make Kerry very acessible to Limerick. Then you have again a good single carrigeway from virtually Charlestown to Galway.

If the Government want to create a counterbalance to Dublin is this motorway the main infrastructure priority in the next few years.

Why is Inter-City rail travel a dead duck? According to IE's 2014 Annual Report http://www.irishrail.ie/media/iarnrod-eireann-annual-report-2014_1.pdf there has been an increase in traffic and I believe last year also saw an increase.

How do you think Ireland is going to meet its carbon emissions targets if we continue our obsession with 1950s (US Style) road based transport solutions? http://www.epa.ie/climate/communicatingclimatescience/whatisclimatechange/whatareirelandsgreenhousegasemissionslike/

markpb

Bass Reeves wrote:

we are struggling to service it with housing.

Struggling would suggest that we have tried. The truth of the matter is that we have not tried.

elastico

Del.Monte wrote: »

Why is Inter-City rail travel a dead duck? According to IE's 2014 Annual Report http://www.irishrail.ie/media/iarnrod-eireann-annual-report-2014_1.pdf there has been an increase in traffic and I believe last year also saw an increase.

How do you think Ireland is going to meet its carbon emissions targets if we continue our obsession with 1950s (US Style) road based transport solutions? http://www.epa.ie/climate/communicatingclimatescience/whatisclimatechange/whatareirelandsgreenhousegasemissionslike/

Take out oap's, students and cheap Internet fares then what's left in terms of paying passengers?

The railway survives on subsidies, intercity rail in Ireland is largely an out of date concept.

Markcheese

Unless you plan on ripping up the current motorway system and ditch dublin airport then forget trying to rebalance the country...
Our largest city/province, happens to be the centre of our transport network,have out largest airport, largest port... centre of government ect ect.
Basically you need a meteor or global warming/sea level rise to rebalance the country..

savagethegoat

Markcheese wrote: »

Unless you plan on ripping up the current motorway system and ditch dublin airport then forget trying to rebalance the country...
Our largest city/province, happens to be the centre of our transport network,have out largest airport, largest port... centre of government ect ect.
Basically you need a meteor or global warming/sea level rise to rebalance the country..

and it's that way because that's how it works best. All you could achieve by "rebalancing the Country" would be to weaken it.

Pablo Escobar

theskeptic wrote: »

If / when such a motorway is built, would Limerick not be the natural centre? In particular would this see the demise of Cork Airport in favour of Shannon Airport? One problem with defining a region as "not Dublin" is that its constituent elements may not be happy bedfellows; with each wanting to be the centre of that new linked up region.

Limerick would be the geographical centre, but Cork has 3 times the GDP of Limerick and a metro population of over 400,000. That'd be quite a leap. Also, on the point about airports, Cork, despite bodies doing their best to derail it, it still handles more passengers than Shannon.

marno21

You're preaching to the converted here buddy.

A motorway upgrade to the existing N20 is badly needed with about 10 years, and the lack of such is severely hindering the economic development of the south west and the existing road is a downright dangerous deathtrap.

Before anyone suggests rail, the population along the corridor of the N20 & N18 is too dispersed to allow rail. May as well build a massive white elephant than build a rail line.

Projects such as the M20 Cork-Limerick motorway, M28 Cork-Ringaskiddy motorway have been proven by cost benefit analysis reports to be worth twice (and many times in the case of the M28) their initial outlay to the Irish economy.

Do you think the useless out of touch government take any notice? No. Let's build a motorway in Wexford to get votes.

See: Metro North, DART Underground, M20, N21/N69 threads for more of this discussion in the Infrastructure forum/Roads subforum

Carawaystick

Del.Monte wrote: »

Why is Inter-City rail travel a dead duck? According to IE's 2014 Annual Report http://www.irishrail.ie/media/iarnrod-eireann-annual-report-2014_1.pdf there has been an increase in traffic and I believe last year also saw an increase.

How do you think Ireland is going to meet its carbon emissions targets if we continue our obsession with 1950s (US Style) road based transport solutions? ]

Look at the time it takes a train from Limerick to Galway.
Look at the time it takes a coach.

Look at the time it takes a train from Limerick to Cork.
Look at the time it takes a coach.

Road improvements will not reduce the train times.

Look at the time it takes to get to Galway from Dublin city centre.
Look at the time it takes by coach.

cgcsb

Bass Reeves wrote: »

With all the issue regarding Dublin regarding size it has nearly 1/3 of the country's population. This has created a magnet where by it gets bigger and bigger population wise and we are struggling to service it with housing. This is exasperated by literally all motorways leading to Dublin. It is nearly as fast to get to Dublin from Limerick that to either Cork or Galway. This was again exasperated by the stupidity of the western rail corridor where by it is still as faster to get from Cork to Galway by road rather than by train.

Intercity trains are a dead duck regarding transport in Ireland. However a Motorway from Cork to Limerick and onto Galway (50% complete) would provide a population counter on the westeren side of the counter to counter the magnetic draw of Dublin for population, business and jobs. It would also be serviced by a central Airport Shannon that could provide fights to the US and Europe and would be within an hour of Cork and Galway if a motorway was present.

The Cork, Limerick and Galway axis would also be easy to support population wise with major towns like Fermoy, Mallow, Ennis, Nenagh Charlesville and Gort all with access via motor way if the new motorway was build. As well other area's would benefit. At present Middleton and Youghal are serviced by either dual carrigeway or good single carrigeway to Cork The road from Tralee to Limerick most of which is nearly a high class singe carrigeway with pland for the Limeric Foynes road via Rathekeal this would make Kerry very acessible to Limerick. Then you have again a good single carrigeway from virtually Charlestown to Galway.

If the Government want to create a counterbalance to Dublin is this motorway the main infrastructure priority in the next few years.

The only issues I would have with the above is:

a)Intercity rail has shown to be very popular in Ireland, with most routes offering a very fast and efficient service. Dublin-Cork for example has retained about half of the market share and the speeds offered here beat the car. You may be referring to the Ennis-Athenry debacle which was a poorly designed political stunt.

b)Dublin is not overcrowded, it is not Tokyo, we haven't actually tried to provide significant housing in the capital. In fact the government prevents homes from being built. For example, if I'm a developer and I have a small plot of land in the City Centre, first of all I can't build higher than 4 floors because of 'heritage'. I have to put in an underground car park for all the carless households that will live here and then 40% of my construction costs will go on taxation, therefore I will not build, the government has stopped me from doing so. Dublin has plenty more scope for densifying it's core, in fact the entire population of the Island of Ireland could comfortably reside within the M50 if we had a mind to do so.

cgcsb

elastico wrote: »

Take out oap's, students and cheap Internet fares then what's left in terms of paying passengers?

The railway survives on subsidies, intercity rail in Ireland is largely an out of date concept.

Incorrect, Irish Rail's deficit is next to nothing, it more-less breaks even. The motorway network on the other hand costs billions in maintenance and toll subsidies, never mind the enormous cost of motorway construction. There hasn't been a new railway built in this state....ever, but we've built 1100km of Motorway.

savagethegoat

Irish Rail receive a massive subsidy in effect because of the free rail travel doled out to pensioners. Take that away and it isn't sustainable, they wouldn't be travelling but for the free travel scheme.

cgcsb

savagethegoat wrote: »

Irish Rail receive a massive subsidy in effect because of the free rail travel doled out to pensioners. Take that away and it isn't sustainable, they wouldn't be travelling but for the free travel scheme.

?? they would be travelling on the bus surely if there were no trains? It is of course sustainable don't be silly. Half of Dublin-Cork journeys are made by rail. Irish Rail was only down a mere €14m per anum in 2012.

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

Look at the time it takes a train from
Look at the time it takes a train from Limerick to Cork.
Look at the time it takes a coach.

Train varies between 1hour35 and 2 hours, coaches all take betwenn 1hour45 and 2 hours.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Look at the time it takes to get to Galway from Dublin city centre.
Look at the time it takes by coach.

Approximately the same time, 2.5 hours.

I notice you've picked the slowest intercity routes on Irish Rail's network to make your case, but really the case your making is for a modest improvement to rail infrastructure on those lines.

Markcheese

savagethegoat wrote:

and it's that way because that's how it works best. All you could achieve by "rebalancing the Country" would be to weaken it.

Personally i'd disagree with you (centering everything on dublin,skews everything in dublins not irelands favour),but it's too late to change whats been done.
Rebalancing the country would involve hubbing the motorway system off somewhere like athlone and relocating dublin airport to athlone area also... aint going to happen..

markpb

Markcheese wrote: »

Rebalancing the country would involve hubbing the motorway system off somewhere like athlone and relocating dublin airport to athlone area also... aint going to happen..

Building motorways and airports away from where people live and instead putting them where you'd like people to live can be done in two ways: penalise Dublin by depriving it of infrastructure or doubling up on infrastructure by building it twice.

Markcheese wrote: »

centering everything on dublin,skews everything in dublins not irelands favour

Skewing everything in Dublins favour definitely benefits Dublin but also benefits Ireland. The more competitive Dublin is internationally, the more money it brings in which can (and is) spent on the rest of the country.

I totally agree that other another city should be encouraged but a balance has to be found between hampering Dublin and growing elsewhere. So far, the only suggestions seem to be hampering Dublin because of some misguided notion that Athlones geographical supremacy makes it the obvious choice for it to be the second city or the notion that everywhere can grow and compete with Dublin so we can all be equally successful. We saw how that idea worked for the communists.

savagethegoat

cgcsb wrote: »

?? they would be travelling on the bus surely if there were no trains? It is of course sustainable don't be silly. Half of Dublin-Cork journeys are made by rail. Irish Rail was only down a mere €14m per anum in 2012.

Me silly? If the free travel was taken off the trains, it would also be taken off the buses.
How many of those journeys would not be made if the passengers had to pay cash for them?

If you took away the free travel, the most of those passengers wouldn't travel (by train or bus), and the service would not be viable without the dosh the Government give to cover the free travel scheme.

cgcsb

Dublin is Ireland's City, our gateway to the world, and our only significant market in many respects. Infrastructure spending should be focused there to attract more major global companies. Provincial Irish Cities should not be competing with Dublin for inward investment. Dublin is in competition with Amsterdam, Copenhagen and now London to secure more business, those other cities are bringing fantastic local and international transport connections to the table.

We're too busy bypassing the New-Ross Mega City to Connect the Waterford Megalopolis with south Wexford with one of the world's most elaborate cable stay bridges.

Jamie2k9

cgcsb wrote: »

Incorrect, Irish Rail's deficit is next to nothing, it more-less breaks even. The motorway network on the other hand costs billions in maintenance and toll subsidies, never mind the enormous cost of motorway construction. There hasn't been a new railway built in this state....ever, but we've built 1100km of Motorway.

Just the 150 million or so they owe, you can dress figures up but their financial station is still pretty poor.

This is exasperated by literally all motorways leading to Dublin.

They also lead in the opposite direction so you can't blame the motorway's for the prob;ems.

Intercity trains are a dead duck regarding transport in Ireland. However a Motorway from Cork to Limerick and onto Galway (50% complete) would provide a population counter on the westeren side of the counter to counter the magnetic draw of Dublin for population, business and jobs. It would also be serviced by a central Airport Shannon that could provide fights to the US and Europe and would be within an hour of Cork and Galway if a motorway was present.

Only dead because the Government prefer to spend billions after billions on new roads and rail may get a couple of million here and there.

The Cork, Limerick and Galway axis would also be easy to support population wise with major towns like Fermoy, Mallow, Ennis, Nenagh Charlesville and Gort all with access via motor way if the new motorway was build.

Most of these towns are major commuting towns to Cork/Limerick as it is and don't need a motorway to work. Towns like Mallow/Ennis have excellent public transport in terms of bus and rail to Cork/Limerick.

If / when such a motorway is built, would Limerick not be the natural centre? In particular would this see the demise of Cork Airport in favour of Shannon Airport? One problem with defining a region as "not Dublin" is that its constituent elements may not be happy bedfellows; with each wanting to be the centre of that new linked up region.

No both airports will always have a place but both will always struggle against Dublin and nothing will change that. We don't and never will have the population density to support air services to them like DUB.

Take out oap's, students and cheap Internet fares then what's left in terms of paying passengers?

The railway survives on subsidies, intercity rail in Ireland is largely an out of date concept.

So does every single motorway, motor tax will never cover the costs of our roads. Railways worldwide are subsidized.

Unless you plan on ripping up the current motorway system and ditch dublin airport then forget trying to rebalance the country...
Our largest city/province, happens to be the centre of our transport network,have out largest airport, largest port... centre of government ect ect.
Basically you need a meteor or global warming/sea level rise to rebalance the country..

Nobody expect a balanced economy but there are steps that can reduce the dependency. The capital region will ways be above the rest.

If / when such a motorway is built, would Limerick not be the natural centre? In particular would this see the demise of Cork Airport in favour of Shannon Airport? One problem with defining a region as "not Dublin" is that its constituent elements may not be happy bedfellows; with each wanting to be the centre of that new linked up region.

Are you just basing that on map location between Cork/Galway. If anything Cork/Galway will be more important than Limerick.

The M6 route is the prefect example of the benefits of a motorway corridor where it's used to it's true potential. You have lots of trafic commuting between Athlone-Galway and Athlone-Dublin.

Bray Head

Such a project should only be countenanced if it goes all the way to Letterkenny;)

end of the road

marno21 wrote: »

Before anyone suggests rail, the population along the corridor of the N20 & N18 is too dispersed to allow rail.

i'm sure 1 serving simply cork, limerick, and galway would get very reasonable patronage if built on a good alinement and to a decent speed and was attractive to users. your correct in that places inbetween may have to be left out.

marno21 wrote: »

May as well build a massive white elephant than build a rail line.

and it's that mentality that will have the powers that be see "more roads begorra" as an answer to everything.

marno21 wrote: »

Do you think the useless out of touch government take any notice? No. Let's build a motorway in Wexford to get votes.

well they won't be getting votes as nobody seems to want it.

end of the road

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Intercity trains are a dead duck regarding transport in Ireland.

absolute rubbish. intercity trains have a huge part to play in ireland, however it will take government policy changing from "more roads begorra" along with changing attitudes toards such transport where existing. this will include targeted investment in the current network insuring it goes on the infrastructure, and possibly opening a couple of lines around dublin and maybe cork with incentives to usage and disincentives to use the competing road such as toals. of course this would mean having to see rail as an asset rather then a burdin. and an asset it is

elastico wrote: »

Take out oap's, students and cheap Internet fares then what's left in terms of paying passengers?

The railway survives on subsidies, intercity rail in Ireland is largely an out of date concept.

most railways survive mostly because of subsidy. some of us don't have an issue with that, because we recognise it as an asset rather then a burdin. it's only ireland now who seems to have the 1960s mentality toards rail still, and it's absolutely laughable. intercity rail is as far from an out of date concept as it can get, it's not just OAPS students and free travel users using it. more roads begorra is expensive and not a long term solution to all of our transport needs. it's part of it but not all of it.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Look at the time it takes a train from Limerick to Galway.
Look at the time it takes a coach.

Look at the time it takes a train from Limerick to Cork.
Look at the time it takes a coach.

Road improvements will not reduce the train times.

Look at the time it takes to get to Galway from Dublin city centre.
Look at the time it takes by coach.

not really relevant. limerick galway, built on an old alinement that isn't fit for purpose. cork to limerick requires a reversal at limerick junction. the journey from galway city centre will depend on where you wish to go. finishing the krp and doubling athlone portarlington and even re-doubling the line to galway in full could see the coach being left for dust. so i'm afraid the coach doesn't mean intercity rail is a dead duck, it means that proper targeted investment needed and needs to be put toards the infrastructure. rail improvements will reduce train times if targeted and done right.

Carawaystick

cgcsb wrote: »

Train varies between 1hour35 and 2 hours, coaches all take betwenn 1hour45 and 2 hours.

Limerick to Cork coach times on an awful road, that should be motorway, reducing the coach time when it's built.

cgcsb wrote: »

Approximately the same time, 2.5 hours.

Are you counting the extra time to get to Dublin city centre from Heuston, where the Coaches serve?

cgcsb wrote: »

I notice you've picked the slowest intercity routes on Irish Rail's network to make your case, but really the case your making is for a modest improvement to rail infrastructure on those lines.

I notice you've no rebuttal for the Limerick/Galway intercity train farce. Modest improvements will never fix that black hole.

end of the road

Carawaystick wrote: »

Limerick to Cork coach times on an awful road, that should be motorway, reducing the coach time when it's built.

not by much. and even then most will be taking the car over the coach.

Carawaystick wrote: »

Are you counting the extra time to get to Dublin city centre from Heuston, where the Coaches serve?

i shouldn't think so, his timings sound about right.

Carawaystick wrote: »

I notice you've no rebuttal for the Limerick/Galway intercity train farce. Modest improvements will never fix that black hole.

the wrc is no rebuttal for anything to do with the rest of the rail network dispite how some use it to target the rail network as a whole.

Grandeeod

Its a small country at the back door of Europe. Sometimes I think a lot of you forget how important and influential that is. There's a reason the east coast is ahead.

cgcsb

Carawaystick wrote: »

Are you counting the extra time to get to Dublin city centre from Heuston, where the Coaches serve?

Yes

Carawaystick wrote: »

I notice you've no rebuttal for the Limerick/Galway intercity train farce. Modest improvements will never fix that black hole.

That's indefensible, the route should never have been built on that alignment. If the state was determined to introduce better inter-regional rail services a slightly more expensive, direct route should have been chosen, the current route was the cheapest capital spend option with the most useless result.

cgcsb

Grandeeod wrote: »

Its a small country at the back door of Europe. Sometimes I think a lot of you forget how important and influential that is. There's a reason the east coast is ahead.

Exactly, you don't see Danes trying to 'counter balance' Copenhagen, acknowledging that Copenhagen is their only significant City, gateway to the world and market of significant size. It's their national cash cow, so they'll invest in keeping the services there world class. What is the point in trying to build a 'counter balance' in a country where no town is more than 3 hours travel from the centre of the capital.

ongarboy

markpb wrote: »

So far, the only suggestions seem to be hampering Dublin because of some misguided notion that Athlones geographical supremacy makes it the obvious choice for it to be the second city or the notion that everywhere can grow and compete with Dublin so we can all be equally successful. We saw how that idea worked for the communists.

Never mind the Communists. The pathetic Spatial Strategy from about 10 years ago tried to endorse that madness where our country of under 4 million people at the time was somehow deemed worthy of 50 or so spatial critical mass hubs (ie every small town that had a mouthy TD got hub status). Of course it failed massively and cost the taxpayers millions....

Bass Reeves

First on rail in Ireland we lack the population density outside of Dublin to support train as a method of transport. The truth is if you were going to Dublin tomorrow morning the train is only an option if you are going to the city center. If you wish to travel elsewhere in Dublin it is generally Bus or car. This is proven by the multiple Bus operators that provide 24 hour bust service to Dublin Airport from Cork, Limerick and Galway and the many people who travel to different parts of Dublin ever day by car.

Neither is this about moving infrastructure from Dublin it is about providing a piece of infrastructure to allow the development of a large part of the country. It amazing to consider that at present you have better roads between major towns compared to the roads servicing our major cities. The stupidity of the spatial strategy of the noughties where it tried to serve political interests of giving something to everyone is totally different to building a piece of infrastructure that will enhance existing population centers and existing infrastructure.

You have a crazy situtation at present where the roads from west Cork to Cork City, from Kerry to Limerick and from Mayo to Galway are better roads ( considering the traffic they carry) than the roads between these cities.

marno21

Bass Reeves wrote: »

First on rail in Ireland we lack the population density outside of Dublin to support train as a method of transport. The truth is if you were going to Dublin tomorrow morning the train is only an option if you are going to the city center. If you wish to travel elsewhere in Dublin it is generally Bus or car. This is proven by the multiple Bus operators that provide 24 hour bust service to Dublin Airport from Cork, Limerick and Galway and the many people who travel to different parts of Dublin ever day by car.

Neither is this about moving infrastructure from Dublin it is about providing a piece of infrastructure to allow the development of a large part of the country. It amazing to consider that at present you have better roads between major towns compared to the roads servicing our major cities. The stupidity of the spatial strategy of the noughties where it tried to serve political interests of giving something to everyone is totally different to building a piece of infrastructure that will enhance existing population centers and existing infrastructure.

You have a crazy situtation at present where the roads from west Cork to Cork City, from Kerry to Limerick and from Mayo to Galway are better roads ( considering the traffic they carry) than the roads between these cities.

Can you expand on this please?

Bar a 4km stretch near Ballinhassig, the N71 is very poor for the level of traffic it carries. The N21 Kerry-Limerick is also not good enough for the level of traffic it carries, and runs through 3 congested towns/villages. The N17 Mayo/Galway isn't half bad but there is still a bad stretch between Tuam and Ballindine and the N60 carrying traffic from the N17 to Castlebar is also poor.

magicbastarder

elastico wrote: »

The railway survives on subsidies, intercity rail in Ireland is largely an out of date concept.

you could also argue that building motorways is 'subsidising' the car as a transport option.

end of the road

Bass Reeves wrote: »

First on rail in Ireland we lack the population density outside of Dublin to support train as a method of transport. The truth is

absolute rubbish that has no basis in reality. the rail lines from dublin are doing mostly fine and i believe passenger numbers are increasing slowly. ireland absolutely has the population density to support rail on the existing corridors from dublin.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

if you were going to Dublin tomorrow morning the train is only an option if you are going to the city center.

or to somewhere where you are going to have to change in the city centre anyway. however, the city is where most will want to go.

Bass Reeves wrote: »

If you wish to travel elsewhere in Dublin it is generally Bus or car. This is proven by the multiple Bus operators that provide 24 hour bust service to Dublin Airport from Cork, Limerick and Galway and the many people who travel to different parts of Dublin ever day by car.

and? the amount traveling to other places in dublin is likely a lot smaller then those who travel to the airport or the city centre. building a heavy rail link to the airport could attract good custom both away from the bus or to the service in the first place, if done right.

so again, your statements in relation to rail in ireland have no basis in reality.

Prototype1

The Cork-Limerick-Galway motorway should have been built ages ago. It's been obvious to everyone living in the region for years now and I have yet to hear one logical argument against it.

The argument for improving intercity rail infrastructure over creating a motorway network has been entirely debunked. The point made about the multitudes of 24hr bus services between cities proves that busses are the preferred form of transportation between cities by the Irish public. Regardless, this whole trains vs busses argument has completely omitted the fact that railways serve only trains, whereas motorways serve far more than just busses. Given the fact that almost every household has at least one car and the fact that the vast majority of our goods and products are transported by trucks. Investing in improving the motorways over the railways is a far more intelligent strategy in all regards.

This motorway proposal would be a massive improvement to country overall. It would greatly reduce the time and cost of most business conducted around the region and would be a huge economic improvement to the country as a whole. The argument that any improvement made outside of Dublin would hurt the capital and in turn the rest of the country has absolutely no basis in reality. You need only look at countries like Germany with its capital in the east but it's economic centres in the west, or England where a lot of work was put into improving the road networks outside of London eg. Birmingham and Greater Manchester area. If you tried making this argument to anyone in these countries you'd be laughed at all the home. The notion that improvements outside of the capital hurt the country is an archaic and dangerous one, by the very same logic you could argue that absolutely everywhere outside of Dublin should be decimated in order to make it more attractive to investment and this would benefit the country overall.

This motorway proposal, if done right, has the potential to turn Ireland into a real economic contender in Europe. The fact that it has yet to even be started is actually quite worrying for this countries development and future.

end of the road

Prototype1 wrote: »

The Cork-Limerick-Galway motorway should have been built ages ago. It's been obvious to everyone living in the region for years now and I have yet to hear one logical argument against it.


The argument for improving intercity rail infrastructure over creating a motorway network has been entirely debunked. The point made about the multitudes of 24hr bus services between cities proves that busses are the preferred form of transportation between cities by the Irish public. Regardless, this whole trains vs busses argument has completely omitted the fact that railways serve only trains, whereas motorways serve far more than just busses. Given the fact that almost every household has at least one car and the fact that the vast majority of our goods and products are transported by trucks. Investing in improving the motorways over the railways is a far more intelligent strategy in all regards.

This motorway proposal would be a massive improvement to country overall. It would greatly reduce the time and cost of most business conducted around the region and would be a huge economic improvement to the country as a whole. The argument that any improvement made outside of Dublin would hurt the capital and in turn the rest of the country has absolutely no basis in reality. You need only look at countries like Germany with its capital in the east but it's economic centres in the west, or England where a lot of work was put into improving the road networks outside of London eg. Birmingham and Greater Manchester area. If you tried making this argument to anyone in these countries you'd be laughed at all the home. The notion that improvements outside of the capital hurt the country is an archaic and dangerous one as by the same logic you could argue that absolutely everywhere outside of Dublin should be decimated in order to make it more attractive to investment.


This motorway proposal, if done right, has the potential to turn Ireland into a real economic contender in Europe.

The argument for improving intercity rail infrastructure over creating a motorway network has not been debunked apart from in the minds of the more roads begorra types, who would have us spending the vast majority of the countries income on roads, all over specked to motor way standards, and to every dwelling in the country.
the fact that they're are 24 hour bus routes between cities only proves they're are 24 hour bus routes between cities. bus actually isn't the prefered method of transport between cities by the irish public, it's car, as bus offers nothing of worth.
railways only serve trains, but those trains being used to their full potential along with the infrastructure, will reduce costs hugely long term in both road spending, and other environmental costs and more.
Investing in improving the motorways over the railways is not an intelligent strategy at all, investing in both is the only strategy that a grown up country would be considering. this motor way proposal won't be of benefit to the country, it will be of benefit to a small few. i've no issue with it being done, but lets not over speck the benefits which will actually be brought by it.
this motor way proposal, done right or not, won't be changing ireland into some economic contender in europe.

marno21

Rail investment should be in the east of the country, where large volumes of people need to be moved in and out of Dublin daily. The M50 and arterial routes are not suitable for mass commuting.

Road investment should be in the west where the population is sparse. The failure of the WRC & the cramming of trains in Dublin and the traffic shows that rail is needed in Dublin and an M20 is needed in the west.

Del.Monte

marno21 wrote: »

Rail investment should be in the east of the country, where large volumes of people need to be moved in and out of Dublin daily. The M50 and arterial routes are not suitable for mass commuting.

Road investment should be in the west where the population is sparse. The failure of the WRC & the cramming of trains in Dublin and the traffic shows that rail is needed in Dublin and an M20 is needed in the west.

No, just no. The country is already completely lop sided and the continued growth of Dublin to the detriment of the regions is as unsustainable as it is undesirable. Proper regional development based on some of the largest centres such as Cork, Limerick, Galway, Sligo, Clonmel, Athlone etc. would serve the country best. The WRC has not failed or succeeded as it has been a shambles from the start and is not an example of a properly planned regional rail link.

marno21

The jobs in Dublin won't be moved out of Dublin, and commuters in Dublin have to deal with a 19th century rail network. The PPT was opened recently but it's still 19th century setup. Traffic needs to be moved off Dublin's roads and onto trains so that people can get into work without sitting in a massive traffic jam for 4 hours a day.

Cork and Limerick being linked by rail is a white elephant. There are already several bus routes on the N20 corridor and a rail link via Limerick junction that takes roughly the same time as driving.

The Western Rail Corridor will never work, it takes roughly an hour by road and slightly longer by bus. The fact that there is one railway station in Limerick, and that it's far away from where 90% of people want to go doesn't help either.

end of the road

marno21 wrote: »

Cork and Limerick being linked by rail is a white elephant.

no it's not. it would be a huge boost if a properly built rail link was installed.

marno21 wrote: »

There are already several bus routes on the N20 corridor and a rail link via Limerick junction that takes roughly the same time as driving.

busses aren't a reason not to invest in rail as both have different markets. this has been proven decades ago.

Prototype1

Replying to end of the road here. Second ever time posting here so I'm not sure how to quote your reply but I'll address you points anyway.

The fact that there are 24hr bus services between cities demonstrates that there is a demand for such services while there is no such demand for a 24hr train service. The fact that these bus companies are all private companies, except for bus eireann, and are continuing to grow, whereas Irish rail services are heavily subsidised and still struggle to stay viable shows that there is much greater demand for bus services over train services and that they are more economically viable.

You accept that railways only serve trains but say that we need only improve our organisation of the railways to reduce spending on roads, the environment and more. Even if we maximised the potential of our railways so we have 2 way tracks along all routes with very tightly packed lines of passenger and freight trains getting the absolute maximum out of our railways. It can never match the potential of dual-lane motorways. The motorway will simply always have a higher capacity for traffic. That's not even mentioning the fact that not all motorways are restricted to just 2 lanes and the fact that individual motorist can make use of of motorways to get to places where busses don't go, something that can never be done with railways.

I'm not saying that we should completely neglect our railways. Trains were a great invention of the 19th century and opened up the world to a lot of people. However times have changed, we are living in the age of the car now. Because of this and the reason stated throughout, the development of motorways should absolutely be prioritised over the development of railways.

Just to address your environment concerns, trains are not the way forward here, no more than busses are. Trains are still completely reliant on the burning of fossil fuels whereas many motor companies are making major strides in moving away from fossil fuels eg Tesla cars.

Finally, you say that this motorway will be a benefit to a small few. This statement is simply false. Given that the combined population of the counties Cork, Limerick, Clare and Galway, the people who this motorway would serve, is over 1 million people, your definition of a small few seems slightly skewed. Improved connectivity and infrastructure for over 20% of the country should not be underestimated.

I said this motorway has great potential, you said it won't be changing Ireland into some economic contender in Europe. I wouldn't be so pessimistic.

Del.Monte

The age of the car is over but nobody has told the motor industry.

end of the road

Prototype1 wrote: »

Replying to end of the road here. Second ever time posting here so I'm not sure how to quote your reply but I'll address you points anyway.

The fact that there are 24hr bus services between cities demonstrates that there is a demand for such services while there is no such demand for a 24hr train service. The fact that these bus companies are all private companies, except for bus eireann, and are continuing to grow, whereas Irish rail services are heavily subsidised and still struggle to stay viable shows that there is much greater demand for bus services over train services and that they are more economically viable.

You accept that railways only serve trains but say that we need only improve our organisation of the railways to reduce spending on roads, the environment and more. Even if we maximised the potential of our railways so we have 2 way tracks along all routes with very tightly packed lines of passenger and freight trains getting the absolute maximum out of our railways. It can never match the potential of dual-lane motorways. The motorway will simply always have a higher capacity for traffic. That's not even mentioning the fact that not all motorways are restricted to just 2 lanes and the fact that individual motorist can make use of of motorways to get to places where busses don't go, something that can never be done with railways.

I'm not saying that we should completely neglect our railways. Trains were a great invention of the 19th century and opened up the world to a lot of people. However times have changed, we are living in the age of the car now. Because of this and the reason stated throughout, the development of motorways should absolutely be prioritised over the development of railways.

Just to address your environment concerns, trains are not the way forward here, no more than busses are. Trains are still completely reliant on the burning of fossil fuels whereas many motor companies are making major strides in moving away from fossil fuels eg Tesla cars.

Finally, you say that this motorway will be a benefit to a small few. This statement is simply false. Given that the combined population of the counties Cork, Limerick, Clare and Galway, the people who this motorway would serve, is over 1 million people, your definition of a small few seems slightly skewed. Improved connectivity and infrastructure for over 20% of the country should not be underestimated.

I said this motorway has great potential, you said it won't be changing Ireland into some economic contender in Europe. I wouldn't be so pessimistic.

that's not correct. irish rail services don't struggle to be viable, they are viable. the problem for the railway is successive governments being interested in using it as a political tool, rather then getting to grips with the issues and bringing it up to standard. couple that with irish rail's sort of politics (or whatever it is, i'm not quite sure) and it is where it is . from the best of my knowledge they're are only a few 24 hour bus routes, and even some of those services late at night are empty, but it's better to run them taking passengers rather then run empty back to their terminus to run their next scheduled service which could be full. the devolopement of motorways should not be prioritised over rail, both should be equal priority, as part of a properly functioning, integrated transport system. the age of the car just isn't sustainible and to the tax payer is hugely expensive, hence where existing, and on a couple of other corridors, bringing up the railway to full standard and encouraging use of it will be of huge benefit to all, both in terms of costs and even road capacity. trains are absolutely the way forward in terms of the environment, they're are electric trains availible. the cork galway and limerick motor way will only be of a benefit to a small few, 1000000 people won't be traveling between those cities for now at least. like i stated earlier, i have no issue with it happening, but they're are more pressing issues needing to be done first. it really won't be turning us into a contender in europe. lowering our corporate tax rate on the other hand (not a popular view but we might have to try and consider it with brexit) would be 1 way that might help that to be achieved.

Prototype1

end of the road wrote: »

that's not correct. irish rail services don't struggle to be viable, they are viable. the problem for the railway is successive governments being interested in using it as a political tool, rather then getting to grips with the issues and bringing it up to standard. couple that with irish rail's sort of politics (or whatever it is, i'm not quite sure) and it is where it is . from the best of my knowledge they're are only a few 24 hour bus routes, and even some of those services late at night are empty, but it's better to run them taking passengers rather then run empty back to their terminus to run their next scheduled service which could be full. the devolopement of motorways should not be prioritised over rail, both should be equal priority, as part of a properly functioning, integrated transport system. the age of the car just isn't sustainible and to the tax payer is hugely expensive, hence where existing, and on a couple of other corridors, bringing up the railway to full standard and encouraging use of it will be of huge benefit to all, both in terms of costs and even road capacity. trains are absolutely the way forward in terms of the environment, they're are electric trains availible. the cork galway and limerick motor way will only be of a benefit to a small few, 1000000 people won't be traveling between those cities for now at least. like i stated earlier, i have no issue with it happening, but they're are more pressing issues needing to be done first. it really won't be turning us into a contender in europe. lowering our corporate tax rate on the other hand (not a popular view but we might have to try and consider it with brexit) would be 1 way that might help that to be achieved.

Your username is starting to make a lot more sense now. I actually feel like I'm talking to a brick wall here. You haven't countered a single one of my points. Points that completely dismantle your argument. Instead you've just decided to repeat your already debunked views on the matter.

Let me try to clear this up for you. Irish Rail is heavily subsidised. That means that all Irish taxpayers, regardless of whether or not they even use trains, are paying to support this company. Even with the support of our money Irish Rail still operated at a loss of €21 million back in 2012. If this company was no longer the burden of the Irish people and forced to be a self sufficient enterprise like the bus companies we've mentioned, it would immediately collapse. In other words it would not be viable. You try to argue that roads and cars are too much of a burden on tax payers but, for the most part, people pay a proportionate amount of tax to the use they get out of the roads. On the other hand if someone never once uses a train in their life, they are still forced to pay for the upkeep of Irish Rail through their taxes.

Most of the rest of your reply is you just repeating you already thoroughly disproved view points. The one new point you make is the fact that electric trains are available as a more environmentally friendly option. I'm sure you aware of the monumental cost involved in transforming our railways into electric railways. Which would be one of the most foolish wastes of money imaginable given the fact that switching to electric motor vehicles does not require a complete overhaul of the road network as it does with trains and given the fact that the public has shown an overwhelmingly greater interest in bus transport over train transport.

You finish up by going way off topic and suggesting that we lower our corporate income tax even further. Given that we already have the joint lowest rate in Europe and Britain have shown no real interest in adjusting their corporate income tax rate to compete with our's, this would be a completely unnecessary move and quite frankly has little to no relevance to the discussion here.

end of the road

Prototype1 wrote: »

Your username is starting to make a lot more sense now. I actually feel like I'm talking to a brick wall here. You haven't countered a single one of my points. Points that completely dismantle your argument. Instead you've just decided to repeat your already debunked views on the matter.

Let me try to clear this up for you. Irish Rail is heavily subsidised. That means that all Irish taxpayers, regardless of whether or not they even use trains, are paying to support this company. Even with the support of our money Irish Rail still operated at a loss of €21 million back in 2012. If this company was no longer the burden of the Irish people and forced to be a self sufficient enterprise like the bus companies we've mentioned, it would immediately collapse. In other words it would not be viable. You try to argue that roads and cars are too much of a burden on tax payers but, for the most part, people pay a proportionate amount of tax to the use they get out of the roads. On the other hand if someone never once uses a train in their life, they are still forced to pay for the upkeep of Irish Rail through their taxes.

Most of the rest of your reply is you just repeating you already thoroughly disproved view points. The one new point you make is the fact that electric trains are available as a more environmentally friendly option. I'm sure you aware of the monumental cost involved in transforming our railways into electric railways. Which would be one of the most foolish wastes of money imaginable given the fact that switching to electric motor vehicles does not require a complete overhaul of the road network as it does with trains and given the fact that the public has shown an overwhelmingly greater interest in bus transport over train transport.

You finish up by going way off topic and suggesting that we lower our corporate income tax even further. Given that we already have the joint lowest rate in Europe and Britain have shown no real interest in adjusting their corporate income tax rate to compete with our's, this would be a completely unnecessary move and quite frankly has little to no relevance to the discussion here.

oh i have countered your points. you may not like what was said but that's for you to deal with. your points haven't dismantled my argument. my views haven't been debunked, but been accepted by most of the developed world. Let me try to clear this up for you. all transport receives some sort of subsidy. whether it be a direct subsidy as in the case of the CIE companies, or a hidden subsidy in terms of the privates via road infrastructure. i don't have an issue with either, however we must be honest of the realities. the vast majority of railways around the world either operate at a loss in full, or in part. however most countries (grown up ones anyway) accept this as the railway offers a service to people who otherwise would not use public transport, meaning in turn less road congestion and more. my whole reply is repeating the accepted viewpoint of the vast majority of the developed world. while electrifying the network would be expensive upfront, it would be of huge benefit going forward into the future, and be one of many ways to make our railways future proof and fit for generations to come. doing it would be money well spent. the public has not shown an overwhelmingly greater interest in bus transport over rail, but car transport. bus transport is still a rather small form of transport in the great scheme of things, and the reason it has a bit more usership then rail is down to the fact our rail network is underfunded and invested in, and the company running it is badly managed. in saying that, the rail network is very well used, and they're is room for growth. no doubt it will come in time.

Bass Reeves

Of all the developed EU countries Ireland has the lowest density.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries

Because of this railways lack flexibility. When you have a situation that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th city's are not connected by motorway it would seem that we have an infrastructural deficit. I do not think that any other country in Europe is such a situation.

If you want to spread economic development then you have to have infrastructure. You have to prioitize you spend. The reality is that in a low population density country motorways between city's are more important than railway

Prototype1

end of the road wrote: »

oh i have countered your points. you may not like what was said but that's for you to deal with. your points haven't dismantled my argument. my views haven't been debunked, but been accepted by most of the developed world. Let me try to clear this up for you. all transport receives some sort of subsidy. whether it be a direct subsidy as in the case of the CIE companies, or a hidden subsidy in terms of the privates via road infrastructure. i don't have an issue with either, however we must be honest of the realities. the vast majority of railways around the world either operate at a loss in full, or in part. however most countries (grown up ones anyway) accept this as the railway offers a service to people who otherwise would not use public transport, meaning in turn less road congestion and more. my whole reply is repeating the accepted viewpoint of the vast majority of the developed world. while electrifying the network would be expensive upfront, it would be of huge benefit going forward into the future, and be one of many ways to make our railways future proof and fit for generations to come. doing it would be money well spent. the public has not shown an overwhelmingly greater interest in bus transport over rail, but car transport. bus transport is still a rather small form of transport in the great scheme of things, and the reason it has a bit more usership then rail is down to the fact our rail network is underfunded and invested in, and the company running it is badly managed. in saying that, the rail network is very well used, and they're is room for growth. no doubt it will come in time.

That's it you have to be a troll. You have yet to effectively counter anyone of my points but are somehow satisfied that I have been corrected here. All that's happening here is you're consistently missing my point and then go off on some kind of tangent.

You claim that all transport companies are subsidised (not true) and you back this up by saying the fact that roads are built, counts as a subsidy for bus companies. Subsidies are what is given to a company in order to keep it afloat. Irish Rail could not exist without these subsidies, bus companies are fine without them. The point is bus companies are economically viable, train companies are not.

Your next point is that Governments accept this loss because trains provide a public service. The truth is that trains do not provide any essential service that is not offered by busses. Meaning the losses are just that, wasted money.

I don't disagree with making our railways electric but not until the more economically viable, farther reaching and more accessible motorway system has been properly developed.

You do accept that bus transport is generally preferred by the public over train transport but then go on to state that the reason for this is because the rail network is underfunded. This makes me question whether or not you're actually reading my replies to you at all. I've already clearly explained how Irish Rail is directly funded by the Irish tax payers. Even with this public funding they still cannot compete with the bus companies, who do not get public funding, and your suggestion to make them competitive is to increase their funding even more, making Irish Rail even more of a burden on the Irish people than it already is. Just out of curiosity, how will you be increasing this funding? Will it be at the expense of public services elsewhere or by increasing taxes on the people?

marno21

There is a backlog of about 7bn euro of rail needs needed in Dublin. ALL rail funding needs to be diverted towards bridging this gap before any western rail corridors or lines to provincial towns or subventing existing lines.

end of the road

Prototype1 wrote: »

That's it you have to be a troll. You have yet to effectively counter anyone of my points but are somehow satisfied that I have been corrected here. All that's happening here is you're consistently missing my point and then go off on some kind of tangent.

You claim that all transport companies are subsidised (not true) and you back this up by saying the fact that roads are built, counts as a subsidy for bus companies. Subsidies are what is given to a company in order to keep it afloat. Irish Rail could not exist without these subsidies, bus companies are fine without them. The point is bus companies are economically viable, train companies are not.

Your next point is that Governments accept this loss because trains provide a public service. The truth is that trains do not provide any essential service that is not offered by busses. Meaning the losses are just that, wasted money.

I don't disagree with making our railways electric but not until the more economically viable, farther reaching and more accessible motorway system has been properly developed.

You do accept that bus transport is generally preferred by the public over train transport but then go on to state that the reason for this is because the rail network is underfunded. This makes me question whether or not you're actually reading my replies to you at all. I've already clearly explained how Irish Rail is directly funded by the Irish tax payers. Even with this public funding they still cannot compete with the bus companies, who do not get public funding, and your suggestion to make them competitive is to increase their funding even more, making Irish Rail even more of a burden on the Irish people than it already is. Just out of curiosity, how will you be increasing this funding? Will it be at the expense of public services elsewhere or by increasing taxes on the people?

i have countered them, you simply don't like the information been given. that's fine, but you will quickly learn that calling people a troll because you don't agree with them does not work on here. i'm not missing your point, it's simply that your point is a mix of being not quite as correct as you think, and been debunked decades ago. if transport companies are availing of infrastructure which is implemented at my expence and your expence, that is a form of a hidden subsidy. as i have said, i don't have an issue with that but to try and deny it is burying your head in the sand. subsidies are many things and come in many forms. in fact, we are all subsidised to some extent, whether it be direct or hidden depending on our circumstances. trains do provide an essential service, those of us who use them would not be using public transport if they didn't exist. so the money in having them existing is money well spent. busses offer nothing of value to me and those of us using rail, and the vast majority of people who use car. they do offer something of value for others and that is why i have no issue with them existing to provide those who wish to use them said service. the debatibly more economically viable motor way system which cost billions to develop and dispite bringing in a good amount of money, doesn't seem to cover their full costs (which i don't have an issue with) will be "properly developed" (as in developed further) when the traffic to justify doing so exists. bus transport is only slightly "preferred" by the public over train transport (as in used out of necessity rather then being preferred)

a proper rail network brought up to it's full speed would levave the busses for dust. the alinements for the most part would be able to be brought up to higher speeds then currently. the railway is not a burdin on the tax payer, it's a public service, a form of infrastructure, which is vital to a properly functioning country, which claims to want to be a european power.

end of the road

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Of all the developed EU countries Ireland has the lowest density.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_and_population_of_European_countries

Because of this railways lack flexibility. When you have a situation that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th city's are not connected by motorway it would seem that we have an infrastructural deficit. I do not think that any other country in Europe is such a situation.

If you want to spread economic development then you have to have infrastructure. You have to prioitize you spend. The reality is that in a low population density country motorways between city's are more important than railway

railways will be inflexible to some degree regardless of the density. that's just their nature. if you want to build infrastructure, then between the cities both road and rail are the only acceptible offering.

marno21 wrote: »

There is a backlog of about 7bn euro of rail needs needed in Dublin. ALL rail funding needs to be diverted towards bridging this gap before any western rail corridors or lines to provincial towns or subventing existing lines.

the western rail corridor is irrelevant as it won't be reopening. subventing the network must continue, it should not be lost just so dublin will still not get any improvements to it's rail network. other people should not be losing their services for dublin or any other part of the country. that's not how a grown up country works.

Isambard

why are we talking about railways?
the M20 motorway would make a huge difference to the people who use that corridor to get to Limerick or Cork. That's what it is about really, end to end traffic is not the main purpose, although that will be important also.

Add to that the lives that will not be lost and it's a no brainer.

I heard last week that the planning process has restarted and one million has been allocated to this. It's a start, I doubt I'll get to use it though :-(