Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

ezstreet5

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I fully agree with the first part of your post but then it descends into the standard rhetoric we see in this thread. It presents a wonderful scenario but only a train service can provide that. In reality, rail services to Tuam will not run this decade, it is not factored into public spending plans and even if it did somehow jump hundreds of place up the priority list, it would take the rest of the decade in design, planning and construction before a train would run - best case scenario.

Agree that I added some "rhetoric" there, probably in response to prior "rhetoric." But I equally reject blanket statements such as "We all know..." and "...not this decade.". Other than a few rail projects listed in the PFG, I also doubt whether there is a "priority list" of hundreds of projects that are sequentially advanced. I also don't believe that a fresh Railway Order is needed for reactivation. There may be a few local authority planning applications for agricultural overpasses, but CIE could rebuild the trackbed today if they wanted to as exempted development. I think that's the path that was taken for Phase 1.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If the goal is to provide sustainable commutes to jobs that can support a household, buses are the only answer and could be in place in months. A frequent bus service could be provided tomorrow connecting passengers to trains at Athenry, giving people their desired train link into Galway. Buses could be far more frequent than trains on the single track line to/from Tuam giving a better service.

Maybe conceptually, but in reality that would be a terrible service. The shuttle busses would either need to use the M17 and then backtrack 6 km to Athenry train station, or otherwise take R347, which is substandard. It would be slow, and cumbersome at both ends, and rail connections could not be guaranteed.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Ironically, the mindset here is not that different to the famine-era mindset described in the post above; "I'm entitled to a train service paid by the work of others." It has nothing to do with sustainability or community building or anything like that. If sustainability, community improvement, etc. were the goal, bus services would be implemented immediately, even as an interim measure.

I don't see how demanding rail service is relatable to the famine. I was referring to a landlord class believing they are entitled to rent. But again, there is a reason why nobody is seriously proposing a shuttle bus between Tuam and Athenry.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The railway crew here have no interest in buses though and actively oppose it because the success of such services at little cost would damage the case for spending €70m on rail and then subsidising it every year. We want sustainability but we will wait 10 or 20 years or more to get it.

No interest at all. The existing Burke's Bus service takes over an hour to make the journey during peak times and adds to Galway's traffic. Yet, 2,000 people use it every day, in addition to the single occupancy vehicles. So the travel demand is there. But busses are just not the answer, or at least not the sole answer.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Nobody is claiming that the greenway will be an economic miracle for Tuam. It can however be delivered relatively quickly for little cost, can improve quality of life for people in the area and yes they do attract people from further afield which benefits the local economy. It would do far more good than waiting for a train that never arrives. Hopefully the report gets published soon so we can see the real cost and impact of a train service, followed quickly by the greenway feasibility so everyone can stop clutching at the straws.

Yes, people are claiming that a "Quiet Man Greenway" will be an economic miracle. They really believe that! I tend to be in the camp that benefits would modest or minimal, and are outweighed by the benefits of rail service. That's just my honest opinion.

Muckyboots

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Maybe conceptually, but in reality that would be a terrible service. The shuttle busses would either need to use the M17 and then backtrack 6 km to Athenry train station, or otherwise take R347, which is substandard. It would be slow, and cumbersome at both ends, and rail connections could not be guaranteed.

I don't see how demanding rail service is relatable to the famine. I was referring to a landlord class believing they are entitled to rent. But again, there is a reason why nobody is seriously proposing a shuttle bus between Tuam and Athenry.
.

There are few ( other than a few diehard rail fanatics) seriously proposing a rail shuttle service from Tuam to Athenry for the connection issues you've correctly highlighted. Landlord classes should be charged full local authority rates on vacant premises- but that's a completely different issue.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

There may be a few local authority planning applications for agricultural overpasses, but CIE could rebuild the trackbed today if they wanted to as exempted development. I think that's the path that was taken for Phase 1.

Frequently closed due to flooding.

end of the road

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I fully agree with the first part of your post but then it descends into the standard rhetoric we see in this thread. It presents a wonderful scenario but only a train service can provide that. In reality, rail services to Tuam will not run this decade, it is not factored into public spending plans and even if it did somehow jump hundreds of place up the priority list, it would take the rest of the decade in design, planning and construction before a train would run - best case scenario.

If the goal is to provide sustainable commutes to jobs that can support a household, buses are the only answer and could be in place in months. A frequent bus service could be provided tomorrow connecting passengers to trains at Athenry, giving people their desired train link into Galway. Buses could be far more frequent than trains on the single track line to/from Tuam giving a better service.

Ironically, the mindset here is not that different to the famine-era mindset described in the post above; "I'm entitled to a train service paid by the work of others." It has nothing to do with sustainability or community building or anything like that. If sustainability, community improvement, etc. were the goal, bus services would be implemented immediately, even as an interim measure. The railway crew here have no interest in buses though and actively oppose it because the success of such services at little cost would damage the case for spending €70m on rail and then subsidising it every year. We want sustainability but we will wait 10 or 20 years or more to get it.

Nobody is claiming that the greenway will be an economic miracle for Tuam. It can however be delivered relatively quickly for little cost, can improve quality of life for people in the area and yes they do attract people from further afield which benefits the local economy. It would do far more good than waiting for a train that never arrives. Hopefully the report gets published soon so we can see the real cost and impact of a train service, followed quickly by the greenway feasibility so everyone can stop clutching at the straws.

we have no interest in buses because we know they are only being used to try and get out of building rail, and as well as that they are likely only going to add to the traffic issues in galway rather then take away from them.
not to mention that hardly anyone is going to use a bus to connect to a train at athenry, where as they are likely to use a train from tuam which would go directly to galway.
essentially we know what the actual game is here and we aren't falling for it, even if your bus proposal was successful it does not negate rail.

Muckyboots wrote: »

There are few ( other than a few diehard rail fanatics) seriously proposing a rail shuttle service from Tuam to Athenry for the connection issues you've correctly highlighted. Landlord classes should be charged full local authority rates on vacant premises- but that's a completely different issue.


Frequently closed due to flooding.

flooding i believe has always been an issue, it's nothing to do with the process of how CIE rebuilt the line.
they have even raised it in the aim of trying to negate the flooding issues.
nobody to my knowledge in favour of reopening the line to tuam is suggesting an athenry tuam shuttle, quite the opposite, because we know it wouldn't be workable.
it's others claiming for a fact that this is what will be introduced if the line was to be reopened when they have nothing to go on because no service pattern has been released and we don't know if athenry galway redoubling would actually be done perhapse already, by the time the line would reopen.

donvito99

end of the road wrote: »

we have no interest in buses because we know they are only being used to try and get out of building rail, and as well as that they are likely only going to add to the traffic issues in galway rather then take away from them. not to mention that hardly anyone is going to use a bus to connect to a train at athenry, where as they are likely to use a train from tuam which would go directly to galway.

But wait, isn't your case that there is significant demand from Tuam to Athenry? I believe Greaney was always pointing to the school traffic between the two towns. So why wouldn't people avail of a bus?

There's a lot of conclusions being made here on the basis of we know and hardly anyone uses with little actual evidence.

essentially we know what the actual game is here and we aren't falling for it, even if your bus proposal was successful it does not negate rail.

His 'game' seems to be to actually deliver a decent public transport service instead of just talking about a hugely expensive investment which has taken decades to not happen but one which you like to talk about.

Actions speak louder than imaginary railways.

ShaneC1600

Muckyboots wrote: »

Frequently closed due to flooding.

Maybe I'm wrong but the Phase 1 section of the WRC does not flood frequently, twice in 10 years at kiltartan directly related to blocked 3rd party drains is hardly frequent. Ballycar is another issue entirely and that is currently at design stage between multiple agencies to rectify.

ShaneC1600

TCDStudent1 wrote: »

Fair enough. However, I am genuinely curious about what you think Tuam can do to improve itself as a town (based on your earlier post).

Tuam has exceptionally high unoccupied commercial premises in the town, as a start that could be addressed. The town itself is horrendous and looks terrible. Antisocial behaviour is rife, drugs are a problem and underage drinking is very visible. These issues are probably similar to other towns of similar size but this does not take from the fact that Tuam needs to be cleaned up drastically.
Tuam needs a unique selling point, the greenway will not address this, forget about everything else, if the disused railway was not passing through Tuam nobody would want the greenway to go through it, that needs to change. Other places are known for being full of activity or adventure sports, other towns are known for nice quite walks with cafes and super restaurants, others are heritage towns, others are known for street music, others for beautiful walks through the town, others simply for their scenery.
Tuam needs to address this and find its own purpose and not rely on the potential of a greenway because there could be many people disappointed with the result.
Tuam has massive potential no doubt but we need the council rehabilitation plan to be completed and get the people of Tuam to love the town again before we expect people to actually want to come in from any future greenway.

Pete_Cavan

end of the road wrote: »

we have no interest in buses because we know they are only being used to try and get out of building rail, and as well as that they are likely only going to add to the traffic issues in galway rather then take away from them.
not to mention that hardly anyone is going to use a bus to connect to a train at athenry, where as they are likely to use a train from tuam which would go directly to galway.
essentially we know what the actual game is here and we aren't falling for it, even if your bus proposal was successful it does not negate rail.

If the Tuam line opened in the morning, trains from Tuam which would not go directly to Galway. There isn't the capacity on the single track, unless you think trains from Tuam should take priority over Dublin - Galway or Galway - Limerick trains. Direct trains from Tuam wont happen until the mainline is double tracked, until then it is a shuttle.

A bus using M17 & M6 from Tuam to Athenry would be fast, some bus priority measures in Athenry town would really help though. It obviously wouldn't add to Galway traffic as it doesn't go near the city, the bus passengers still get into the city on a train.

The refusal to even consider a bus connection to Athenry really exposes the rail campaign, this has nothing to do with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household or any of that. If that were the case, you'd be calling for the fastest implementable service, particularly as bus does not negate rail, as you said yourself. A bus service has nothing to do with getting out of building rail, no building rail is happening with or without the bus service.

intellectual dosser

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If the Tuam line opened in the morning, trains from Tuam which would not go directly to Galway. There isn't the capacity on the single track, unless you think trains from Tuam should take priority over Dublin - Galway or Galway - Limerick trains. Direct trains from Tuam wont happen until the mainline is double tracked, until then it is a shuttle.

A bus using M17 & M6 from Tuam to Athenry would be fast, some bus priority measures in Athenry town would really help though. It obviously wouldn't add to Galway traffic as it doesn't go near the city, the bus passengers still get into the city on a train.

The refusal to even consider a bus connection to Athenry really exposes the rail campaign, this has nothing to do with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household or any of that. If that were the case, you'd be calling for the fastest implementable service, particularly as bus does not negate rail, as you said yourself. A bus service has nothing to do with getting out of building rail, no building rail is happening with or without the bus service.

It has been said many times that double tracking Galway to Athenry is necessary with or without WRC Phases 2+.

Like so many posters on this forum you take a railway from Athenry to Tuam/Claremorrie/Colooney in isolation, yet of course you've felt free to make changes in Athenry to accommodate your bus solution...the mind boggles.

Pete_Cavan

intellectual dosser wrote: »

It has been said many times that double tracking Galway to Athenry is necessary with or without WRC Phases 2+.

Like so many posters on this forum you take a railway from Athenry to Tuam/Claremorrie/Colooney in isolation, yet of course you've felt free to make changes in Athenry to accommodate your bus solution...the mind boggles.

But the claim that people "are likely to use a train from Tuam which would go directly to Galway" is irrelevant until the double tracking is in place. Its putting the cart before the horse. Until then, wouldn't it be good to put in place an easily implementable, low cost service which could allow for more public transport commuting? Or does sustainability, reducing car commuting, etc. not matter at all and the argument here is actually "spend €100m building and subsidising a train service for us because we are worth it"?

Losty Dublin

westtip wrote: »

So the line was open in the boom years and there was no market then for passenger services?

It wasn't that long ago when the lines beyond Athlone to Galway and Westport/Ballina were perilously close to Abandonment. Today, all three lines are near capacity, with plans afoot to add freight and passenger capacity in the region. This growth in rail traffic to the region is both substantial and consistent has come in spite of considerable road investment and liberalisation in both road haulage and private bus routes.

Muckyboots

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Tuam has exceptionally high unoccupied commercial premises in the town, as a start that could be addressed. The town itself is horrendous and looks terrible. Antisocial behaviour is rife, drugs are a problem and underage drinking is very visible. These issues are probably similar to other towns of similar size but this does not take from the fact that Tuam needs to be cleaned up drastically.
Tuam needs a unique selling point, the greenway will not address this, forget about everything else, if the disused railway was not passing through Tuam nobody would want the greenway to go through it, that needs to change. Other places are known for being full of activity or adventure sports, other towns are known for nice quite walks with cafes and super restaurants, others are heritage towns, others are known for street music, others for beautiful walks through the town, others simply for their scenery.
Tuam needs to address this and find its own purpose and not rely on the potential of a greenway because there could be many people disappointed with the result.
Tuam has massive potential no doubt but we need the council rehabilitation plan to be completed and get the people of Tuam to love the town again before we expect people to actually want to come in from any future greenway.

It reads, your town is a pile of ****e. Learn to love it. Don't try and change it. Trains are great.

end of the road

donvito99 wrote: »

But wait, isn't your case that there is significant demand from Tuam to Athenry? I believe Greaney was always pointing to the school traffic between the two towns. So why wouldn't people avail of a bus?

it's not my case.
there may be school children traveling between the 2 mentioned places but they will only be a part of the traffic, most would likely be going to the city itself, for which a bus simply dropping them at athenry to connect to a train that cannot be guaranteed to wait just isn't going to work.

donvito99 wrote: »

There's a lot of conclusions being made here on the basis of we know and hardly anyone uses with little actual evidence.

yes, i agree, i have been saying this all along.

donvito99 wrote: »

His 'game' seems to be to actually deliver a decent public transport service instead of just talking about a hugely expensive investment which has taken decades to not happen but one which you like to talk about.

Actions speak louder than imaginary railways.

no his game is to deliver a subpar option based on his belief that the train is only going to deliver tuam athenry and nothing else.

ShaneC1600

Muckyboots wrote: »

It reads, your town is a pile of ****e. Learn to love it. Don't try and change it. Trains are great.

Simple things can be lost on simple minds.

Pete_Cavan

end of the road wrote: »

no his game is to deliver a subpar option based on his belief that the train is only going to deliver tuam athenry and nothing else.

In the absence of double tracking between Athenry and Galway, that is all that can be delivered on the Tuam line. Both double tracking and reopening to Tuam have to go through years of planning, design and construction, not to mention not being in government spending plans until the latter part of this decade at least before any of that can start. If people are concerned with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household, supporting regional development, etc., wouldn't a bus service which allows people get the train into Galway be a good interim solution in the meantime?

donvito99

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

wouldn't a bus service which allows people get the train into Galway be a good interim solution in the meantime?

No because apparently a bus service will completely prohibit a railway being developed and people should have to live without decent public transport until such time as hundreds of millions can be allocated to their particular cause ahead of those which are more deserving.

end of the road

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If the Tuam line opened in the morning, trains from Tuam which would not go directly to Galway. There isn't the capacity on the single track, unless you think trains from Tuam should take priority over Dublin - Galway or Galway - Limerick trains. Direct trains from Tuam wont happen until the mainline is double tracked, until then it is a shuttle.

A bus using M17 & M6 from Tuam to Athenry would be fast, some bus priority measures in Athenry town would really help though. It obviously wouldn't add to Galway traffic as it doesn't go near the city, the bus passengers still get into the city on a train.

The refusal to even consider a bus connection to Athenry really exposes the rail campaign, this has nothing to do with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household or any of that. If that were the case, you'd be calling for the fastest implementable service, particularly as bus does not negate rail, as you said yourself. A bus service has nothing to do with getting out of building rail, no building rail is happening with or without the bus service.

which is why we are saying redoubling which is needed anyway must be done to allow greater direct services from tuam.
some direct services could absolutely be supported currently, galway dublin and the opposite + limerick to galway and opposite aren't hugely frequent anyway, or at east in the case of the limerick services.
the bus passengers have to change off their bus at athenry and hope for the best that there is a connecting train, and if they miss it wait around for the next train which wouldn't be for a good while, so there is no real incentive to use it.
the refusal to consider a sub par bus connection to athenry exposes the rail campaign as being a campaign which wants a service that is workable and high quality, and who will not simply accept sub par offerings that are unuser friendly.

ezstreet5

donvito99 wrote: »

No because apparently a bus service will completely prohibit a railway being developed and people should have to live without decent public transport until such time as hundreds of millions can be allocated to their particular cause ahead of those which are more deserving.

A shuttle bus from Tuam to Athenry would be a really poor service unless your were heading east. It's a 23-minute journey on the motorway. The bus would probably need to arrive 5-10 minutes early to avoid a closed level crossing, and to give time for people to buy a train ticket and perhaps to get to the opposite platform. Then, up to 22 minutes on the train (in the case of the 07:48 service to Galway). So you're looking at perhaps a 55 minute journey time IF the trains pass perfectly at Athenry, which, well, sometimes happens. I think I'd rather sit in traffic on Burke's Bus for a few extra minutes than to undergo the hassle and risk of that connection.

ezstreet5

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

In the absence of double tracking between Athenry and Galway, that is all that can be delivered on the Tuam line. Both double tracking and reopening to Tuam have to go through years of planning, design and construction, not to mention not being in government spending plans until the latter part of this decade at least before any of that can start. If people are concerned with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household, supporting regional development, etc., wouldn't a bus service which allows people get the train into Galway be a good interim solution in the meantime?

If the current application for funding to DHLGH for an Oranmore passing loop (as an interim measure) and double tracking between Athenry and Galway (as a permanent measure) is successful, I think you could see that project commence rather quickly.

Pete_Cavan

Ah well, hopefully the economic assessment will be published soon so we can see just how much of a blank hole for taxpayers money this would be, only then can a sensible conversation be had.

end of the road

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Ah well, hopefully the economic assessment will be published soon so we can see just how much of a blank hole for taxpayers money this would be, only then can a sensible conversation be had.

we are having a perfectly sensible conversation, it's just that the idea you propose is sub par hence barely any support for it, that's just life i am afraid.

Pete_Cavan

end of the road wrote: »

we are having a perfectly sensible conversation, it's just that the idea you propose is sub par hence barely any support for it, that's just life i am afraid.

The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc. Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent? The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream. If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time. The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service. Like I said, hopefully the report will be published soon to tell us exactly how much this would cost the taxpayer (both capital and operational costs).

River Suir

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc. Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent? The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream. If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time. The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service. Like I said, hopefully the report will be published soon to tell us exactly how much this would cost the taxpayer (both capital and operational costs).

It’s not just about Tuam. Perhaps it suits your argument to frame it that way.

end of the road

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc.

yes, exactly, and the train would actually deliver that unlike your proposed service which just chucks people off at athenry in the hope they might be able to connect to a train, that's if the bus doesn't arrive late given the statements in relation to the routings and road quality depending on the route taken.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent?

the goals aren't met, that is the issue.
you know this, why you keep persisting when you have been outsmarted is beyond me.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream.

that's not the case in reality, you only want to believe this because you know the game is up and people know what you are up to.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time.

there is already a campaign trying to get the issue addressed, we cannot make the government address it quickly, + we also understand that especially with the fall out over covid pt is not going to be a priority bar what is already committed to.

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service.

there is no self entitlement, or bus is not good enough attitude.
the reality is in this country bus is used as a way to get out of building rail and increasing public transport in areas where there is going to be a demand for increased public transport, and it is that 1950s/60s nonsense which some of us are doing our best to move the country away from.
yes, bigger communities have to rely on buses, some of them had railways which were removed, that is not our fault and many of us disagree with those decisions and call for those to be reinstated where it is possible to do it.

Pete_Cavan

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc. Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent? The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream. If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time. The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service. Like I said, hopefully the report will be published soon to tell us exactly how much this would cost the taxpayer (both capital and operational costs).

There's just one problem with your proposal which is why it will never be accepted....its not a choo-choo

You can throw all the logic you want, but if its not on rails....

River Suir

River Suir wrote: »

It’s not just about Tuam. Perhaps it suits your argument to frame it that way.

Where else is it about?
Heavy rail is about moving lots of people efficiently along a corridor.
There are no significant commuters into Galway north of Tuam.
http://census.cso.ie/p6map42/

Claremorris would be what an hour and 20/30 minutes from Galway by train?
Promoting commuting that distance would not be a sustainable solution.

Why are people so negative about Tuam? It has its problems like any rural town but it it is grand.
It has modern industry that many towns around Europe would want to attract.
It is older than any of our cities having been founded as a monastery by Jarlath nearly 1,500 years ago.

There is a nice redevelopment plan someone referenced earlier in this thread.

If rail is found to be sustainable, it should be full steam ahead. (pardon the pun)
If not let's use the line as a relatively cheap and popular local amenity.
It might bring a few tourists along but more likely it would be used by people like me who want to bring the kids for a walk or cycle away from traffic and have some lunch after.
Coole Park got our business last weekend, Salthill probably this weekend.

Muckyboots

Deleted User wrote: »

Where else is it about?
Heavy rail is about moving lots of people efficiently along a corridor.
There are no significant commuters into Galway north of Tuam.
http://census.cso.ie/p6map42/

Claremorris would be what an hour and 20/30 minutes from Galway by train?
Promoting commuting that distance would not be a sustainable solution.

Why are people so negative about Tuam? It has its problems like any rural town but it it is grand.
It has modern industry that many towns around Europe would want to attract.
It is older than any of our cities having been founded as a monastery by Jarlath nearly 1,500 years ago.

There is a nice redevelopment plan someone referenced earlier in this thread.

If rail is found to be sustainable, it should be full steam ahead. (pardon the pun)
If not let's use the line as a relatively cheap and popular local amenity.
It might bring a few tourists along but more likely it would be used by people like me who want to bring the kids for a walk or cycle away from traffic and have some lunch after.
Coole Park got our business last weekend, Salthill probably this weekend.

The biases and prejudices against Tuam surface more and more frequently as a decision becomes more likely. One "local" TD thought it was a good idea to produce an alternative greenway plan that basically followed the same route of the QMG but completely bypassed the town! When this (and the fact that it necessitated CPO's from start to finish) was exposed he correctly locked in his filling cabinet and hasn't referred to it since. People who dish Tuam as a "greenway town" should look at scenic Moate and scenic Mullingar and also take a look at Tuam's unique heritage, easily comparable if not superior to Athenry, which includes what's left of the railway infrastructure.

The Western Development Commission have some reports drawing on census details.

westtip

Deleted User wrote: »

Where else is it about?
Heavy rail is about moving lots of people efficiently along a corridor.
There are no significant commuters into Galway north of Tuam.
http://census.cso.ie/p6map42/

The census figures were laid out before EY consulting in a presentation I made to them in Galway in July 2019 along with a well known politician who supports the greenway. The comment from the EY consultant at the meeting when we showed a slide with the figures below was yes we are looking at those numbers and are fully aware of the facts of the matter.

Claremorris 4,487
Ballindine 349
Milltown 207
Tuam 8767
Total living in towns along the propose route: 13,810.
+10,000 people for the wider rural areas
Building a commuter rail route to accommodate such a low level of population. Does not stack up economically

It is why we need to see that report, because if they come up with a recommendation to build this route they will lose their professional credibility.

ShaneC1600

westtip wrote: »

The census figures were laid out before EY consulting in a presentation I made to them in Galway in July 2019 along with a well known politician who supports the greenway. The comment from the EY consultant at the meeting when we showed a slide with the figures below was yes we are looking at those numbers and are fully aware of the facts of the matter.

Claremorris 4,487
Ballindine 349
Milltown 207
Tuam 8767
Total living in towns along the propose route: 13,810.
+10,000 people for the wider rural areas
Building a commuter rail route to accommodate such a low level of population. Does not stack up economically

It is why we need to see that report, because if they come up with a recommendation to build this route they will lose their professional credibility.

You better get onto Irish Rail and tell them not to bother with the Woodbrook station so because they are planning that for a potential population of 5000.

Pete_Cavan

River Suir wrote: »

It’s not just about Tuam. Perhaps it suits your argument to frame it that way.

I frame it about Tuam because it suits your argument! Spending €70m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam could be classified as preposterous, spending €150m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam plus a tiny number of other people would be bat**** crazy.

Pete_Cavan

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

You better get onto Irish Rail and tell them not to bother with the Woodbrook station so because they are planning that for a potential population of 5000.

It will cost a couple of million to open Woodbrook station, development contributions will contribute towards the cost, it will be an extra stop on an already operational service so there is little additional operating cost, etc. None of that applies to WRC which will cost many multiples as much to rebuild and will be a new service with associated operating costs. It is possible, even likely, that more people will use Woodbrook station per day than would use Tuam despite the respective populations.

ShaneC1600

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

It will cost a couple of million to open Woodbrook station, development contributions will contribute towards the cost, it will be an extra stop on an already operational service so there is little additional operating cost, etc. None of that applies to WRC which will cost many multiples as much to rebuild and will be a new service with associated operating costs. It is possible, even likely, that more people will use Woodbrook station per day than would use Tuam despite the respective populations.

I understand the costs, I understand the reasons, I am referring to the population equivalent between the locations. It is possible, even likely that more people will use a greenway in Dublin than in Galway so does that mean we shouldn't build greenways in Galway? No it doesn't, same for transport.

Losty Dublin

River Suir wrote: »

It’s not just about Tuam. Perhaps it suits your argument to frame it that way.

Indeed so. The traffic approaching Galway city on the N84 is dreadful at the best of times. This rather poor road is the direct link between Galway and much of Mayo. Already rail linked Westport, Castlebar and Ballina rely on this road to connect them to Galway. The likes of Ballinrobe, Cong (The Real Quiet Man town ) and parts of the Gaeltacht of Mayo and Connemara also rely. Car trips of 2 hours+ are not uncommon on this route.

Granted not all people in these regions may need or may use a railway but many will. The quantitive ease that the WRC will offer the broader region will go way beyond those solely dwelling in Tuam.

Pete_Cavan

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

I understand the costs, I understand the reasons, I am referring to the population equivalent between the locations. It is possible, even likely that more people will use a greenway in Dublin than in Galway so does that mean we shouldn't build greenways in Galway? No it doesn't, same for transport.

You've well and truly scraped through the bottom of the barrel at this stage if thats your retort.

ShaneC1600

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

You've well and truly scraped through the bottom of the barrel at this stage if thats your retort.

My point was simple enough, I thought you would understand it rather than a response like that but I guess it was lost on ya.

Pete_Cavan

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

My point was simple enough, I thought you would understand it rather than a response like that but I guess it was lost on ya.

Your point was based on comparing one single factor in isolation which is pointless.

ShaneC1600

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Your point was based on comparing one single factor in isolation which is pointless.

My point was based on replying to another poster and you decided to dip in so in reality your response is kinda pointless! I did not know there was a minimum quantity of factors to base a response on.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

You better get onto Irish Rail and tell them not to bother with the Woodbrook station so because they are planning that for a potential population of 5000.

As others have come in on this, and answered perfectly well, adding another station between Bray and Shankill on the Dart line and comparing it with the service required on the northern branch line of the Western Rail corridor is somewhat bizarre, but if it is a comparison you wish to make so be it. There is inadequate parking at Bray Station, it is difficult to get into the station and traffic clogs the area up. I am less familiar with Shankill station, my guess is Woodbrook will ease pressure on access to both of these stations, and for that particular commuter service it makes perfect sense for Irish Rail to propose such a station. Compared to the distance between Stations from Dalkey into Tara Street the new station at Woodbrook is a great idea, but comparing this investment with the line to Claremorris is just stretching it beyond the realms of reality, but you are entitled to your view and no I won't be writing a strongly worded letter to Irish Rail, the Minister or asking 25,000 people to sign a petition against the idea.

ShaneC1600

westtip wrote: »

As others have come in on this, and answered perfectly well, adding another station between Bray and Shankill on the Dart line and comparing it with the service required on the northern branch line of the Western Rail corridor is somewhat bizarre, but if it is a comparison you wish to make so be it. There is inadequate parking at Bray Station, it is difficult to get into the station and traffic clogs the area up. I am less familiar with Shankill station, my guess is Woodbrook will ease pressure on access to both of these stations, and for that particular commuter service it makes perfect sense for Irish Rail to propose such a station. Compared to the distance between Stations from Dalkey into Tara Street the new station at Woodbrook is a great idea, but comparing this investment with the line to Claremorris is just stretching it beyond the realms of reality, but you are entitled to your view and no I won't be writing a strongly worded letter to Irish Rail, the Minister or asking 25,000 people to sign a petition against the idea.

Where did I compare the Western Rail Corridor to the Dart line? I referred to the 5000 potential population in the Woodbrook area which was the basis for the planning application to the population breakdown you love to tell everybody you presented to EY-DKM. So nothing really bizarre about it at all!

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Where did I compare the Western Rail Corridor to the Dart line? I referred to the 5000 potential population in the Woodbrook area which was the basis for the planning application to the population breakdown you love to tell everybody you presented to EY-DKM. So nothing really bizarre about it at all!

whatever. And love is a rather strongly emotive word, I would not associate it with a presentation made to a management consulting company. The planning for Woodbrook may well have used the local demographic to justify the new station on the extant route. The fact the line is in existence and is probably the busiest suburban line in the country has slightly more bearing on the consideration, and certainly means you are comparing apples and pears with the demographics of East Galway, but as I always say your view is your own and to which you are perfectly entitled. Anyway hey ho on we go.

serfboard

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Spending €70m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam could be classified as preposterous, spending €150m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam plus a tiny number of other people would be bat**** crazy.

Don't forget the metropolis of Ballyglunin! On a good day, it might get a third of the passengers that get onboard at Ardrahan!

Carawaystick

Woodbrook is a SDZ housing area with planning for another 5k people.

ezstreet5

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

I frame it about Tuam because it suits your argument! Spending €70m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam could be classified as preposterous, spending €150m to restore train services to the small population of Tuam plus a tiny number of other people would be bat**** crazy.

Can we please get some perspective on costs here in place of the perpetual freak-out?

If it were announced that the Covid Pandemic Unemployment Payment in place today was to be extended by just one week, would you classify that as "preposterous?" Would extending two weeks be "bat**** crazy?" Because that's about the cost of extending the the line to Tuam (€70m) and then Claremorris (€150m) per your own estimates - just two weeks of Covid payments.

The last time I checked, the de facto practice in a representative democracy was to aggressively lobby (dare I say, fight) for investment and spending for your own constituency. And yes, sometimes that can result in so-called "pork-barrel" projects and "bridges to nowhere." But given the low costs of the WRC, that's not really going to become an issue. Especially with Tuam growing at a rate of over 100 people per year. But politicians and local "advocates" eschewing rail investment in their region because it costs too much? Can one shoot themselves in the foot while at the same time sitting on the branch they are cutting off?

Switching gears, Minister Eamon Ryan on Ketith Finnegan this morning seemed quite keen on double-tracking between Galway and Athenry as a transport project that should be fast-tracked (mentioning it three times). So again, I suspect that the applications for funding submitted for this (I don't know the details) will succeed. He also seemed positive on a light rail system for Galway (which would have a mind-exploding €1b price-tag). He mentioned "local bicycle infrastructure" and "greenways" once each, as well as "high quality bus service" and other "public transit" projects. He seemed quite cool on the Outer City Bypass, deflecting to the fact that is was "in the planning stage."

Have a listen beginning at 1:21:11: https://galwaybayfm.ie/podcasts/galway-talks-with-keith-finnegan-thursday-3rd-september-2020-2-2/

ezstreet5

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Can we please get some perspective on costs here in place of the perpetual freak-out?

If it were announced that the Covid Pandemic Unemployment Payment in place today was to be extended by just one week, would you classify that as "preposterous?" Would extending two weeks be "bat**** crazy?" Because that's about the cost of extending the the line to Tuam (€70m) and then Claremorris (€150m) per your own estimates - just two weeks of Covid payments.

The last time I checked, the de facto practice in a representative democracy was to aggressively lobby (dare I say, fight) for investment and spending for your own constituency. And yes, sometimes that can result in so-called "pork-barrel" projects and "bridges to nowhere." But given the low costs of the WRC, that's not really going to become an issue. Especially with Tuam growing at a rate of over 100 people per year. But politicians and local "advocates" eschewing rail investment in their region because it costs too much? Can one shoot themselves in the foot while at the same time sitting on the branch they are cutting off?

Switching gears, Minister Eamon Ryan on Ketith Finnegan this morning seemed quite keen on double-tracking between Galway and Athenry as a transport project that should be fast-tracked (mentioning it three times). So again, I suspect that the applications for funding submitted for this (I don't know the details) will succeed. He also seemed positive on a light rail system for Galway (which would have a mind-exploding €1b price-tag). He mentioned "local bicycle infrastructure" and "greenways" once each, as well as "high quality bus service" and other "public transit" projects. He seemed quite cool on the Outer City Bypass, deflecting to the fact that is was "in the planning stage."

Have a listen beginning at 1:21:11: https://galwaybayfm.ie/podcasts/galway-talks-with-keith-finnegan-thursday-3rd-september-2020-2-2/

Perspective?
Covid payments are received by 220,000 this week.
The reopened stations of the WRC were used by about 60 people on the sample day.

I'm with Eamonn Ryan on lots of matters.
I don't see the value of the Galway bypass.
Too much store is being put on it to solve problems, what if it never comes?
Quality bus corridors and say park and ride, maybe a new station at Roscam, double tracking and associated improvements, and maybe even light rail would transform the city, and make the WRC more viable by allowing it to plug into a comprehensive, integrated, reliable public transport network.

ezstreet5

Deleted User wrote: »

Perspective?
Covid payments are received by 220,000 this week.
The reopened stations of the WRC were used by about 60 people on the sample day.

You mean, "the three new cherrypicked stations of my choosing were used by 60 people on the sample day." Actual boardings for the five new actual stations differ:

Oranmore: 278
Craughwell: 26
Ardraghan: 12
Gort: 27
Sixmilebridge: 54

Why are you disregarding Oranmore and Sixmilebridge boardings, as well as Galway, Athenry, and Limerick boardings? It seems to me that we are getting quite granular to support a preconceived view that "nobody uses the WRC."

And how can you compare a benefit that lasts one week to one that lasts generations?

L1011

Oranmore and Sixmilebridge are not on the reopened section of track.

The usage figures that matter are those actually on the train between Athenry and Ennis which it is not possible to ascertain from the boardings

Greaney

Deleted User wrote: »

Perspective?
Covid payments are received by 220,000 this week.
The reopened stations of the WRC were used by about 60 people on the sample day.

I'm with Eamonn Ryan on lots of matters.
I don't see the value of the Galway bypass.
Too much store is being put on it to solve problems, what if it never comes?
Quality bus corridors and say park and ride, maybe a new station at Roscam, double tracking and associated improvements, and maybe even light rail would transform the city, and make the WRC more viable by allowing it to plug into a comprehensive, integrated, reliable public transport network.

I was very disappointed the Oranmore station was in the middle of nowhere (I'm originally from Oranmore and the location of the original platform made loads of sense. It could bring folk to work in the industrial estate there and was near the 'not yet built' IDA park. Heck, it'd be a quicker trip to the cinema!! Anyways, I had inquired into this with our local politician and.... Oranmore station was to service the new 'Ardaun' suburb between Roscam & Oranmore.... so I'm afraid, I think that Oranmore is Roscams railway.... neither in one place or the other. I've lived in both and find the current location quiet difficult to use, especially, it seems to be designed around the car. There's plenty with no car, and we need to make our communities livable for everyone. Everyday travel should come before tourism infrastructure. The tourists will come if the areas are served well by public transport. (Donegal always say that they'd have way more tourists if only they had rail).

L1011 wrote: »

Oranmore and Sixmilebridge are not on the reopened section of track.

The usage figures that matter are those actually on the train between Athenry and Ennis which it is not possible to ascertain from the boardings

Oramore is a new station, of course its numbers count!! No one got on in Oranmore to commute to Galway before the new station!! That's obtuse thinking!!

I cycle almost every day, bikes are the second vehicle in our house, however, I'm sorry to say, I've discovered the local boys school are back down to having one child cycling to school everyday. Shouldn't cycling in the local areas we live in, be our priority.

ezstreet5

L1011 wrote: »

Oranmore and Sixmilebridge are not on the reopened section of track.

So they were free and not part of the €106m price-tag, which was just for new track?

L1011 wrote: »

The usage figures that matter are those actually on the train between Athenry and Ennis which it is not possible to ascertain from the boardings

Which is my point. Don't characterize the benefits of Phase 1 based on boardings from rural, intermediate stations.

Pete_Cavan

ezstreet5 wrote: »

So they were free and not part of the €106m price-tag, which was just for new track?

Oranmore station was built separately and in no way reliant on WRC Phase 1 so its entirely fair to not include it when talking about the WRC Phase 1. Sixmilebridge could have been built and train services provided there without spending €100m between Athenry and Ennis.

ezstreet5

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

Oranmore station was built separately and in no way reliant on WRC Phase 1 so its entirely fair to not include it when talking about the WRC Phase 1. Sixmilebridge could have been built and train services provided there without spending €100m between Athenry and Ennis.

Very well then. But please subtract the capital costs of those stations, as well as the cost of the rolling stock from your analysis. And please subtract the operating costs of maintaining those stations and all operating costs that do not occur on the 58km segment between Athenry and Ennis. And then please disregard the benefits accruing to Galway, Oranmore, Athenry, Ennis, Sixmilebridge, and Limerick originating passengers using the new WRC services as well, since those could have been delivered by other theoretical projects, which I guess are theoretically free. Then you arrive at the analysis you prefer.