M3 will sever Kells rail alignment

Navan Junction · 13-09-2006 10:08pm #1

http://blog.meathontrack.com/2006/09/13/m3-will-irreparably-sever-kells-rail-alignment.aspx

Ok, so it isn't of use now.

But as there is an alignment there it should be protected.

westtip · 14-09-2006 9:28am

NJ, quite ubelievable - clearly the long term intention is to kill the rail line off now. I have sent a copy of your link to every TD (I keep all their emails in one list)

Navan Junction · 14-09-2006 12:20pm

Fair play to you, westtip..!

It's a pity to see an alignment like that compromised, especially when there is even an outside chance of a possibilty it could be of future use..

Transport21 Fan · 14-09-2006 2:36pm

That alingment is more wonky than the rollercoaster at Alton Towers and would be useless for anything other than light rail. Look at how it plunges into the valley and then straight up again. Looks like a bit of Burma Road job to me.

Navan Junction · 14-09-2006 3:00pm

Nope. It's built on a plain - it isn't rough or boggy terrain.. It did however have 4 level crossings.

The rough territory is north of Kells, but even that wasn't built under light railway legislation - it had double track bridges along the whole route between Kells and Oldcastle..

There is no harm in preserving the alignment to Kells, though at this stage it seems unlikely as the M3 has already passed through the planning process.

You don't need to worry about this one.

spacetweek · 14-09-2006 4:50pm

Transport21 Fan wrote:

I thought work still hadn't started on the M3 - by the looks of that picture it has though??

murphaph · 14-09-2006 5:23pm

spacetweek wrote:

I thought work still hadn't started on the M3 - by the looks of that picture it has though??

Nah, that's what archeological investigations look like.

Navan Junction · 15-09-2006 10:07am

The scar-like works are arhaeological test trenches. They were carried out along the entire M3 route about 3 years ago.

Basically where there wasn't a sign from geo readings that there was anything of archaeological interest, they just used an excavator to dig along the route, and out to either side every 50 feet or so..

BrianD · 16-09-2006 5:28pm

While I agree with the sentiment of preserving the line, this are is north of Navan where there are no plans to build a railway in the longterm. In any case, the 'permanent way' could be reinstated by a bridge as the blogger mentions (This will have to be built anyway in some shape or form either as part of the M3 spanning the alignment or as part of the railway spanning the road).

westtip · 18-09-2006 9:45am

BrianD wrote:

While I agree with the sentiment of preserving the line, this are is north of Navan where there are no plans to build a railway in the longterm. In any case, the 'permanent way' could be reinstated by a bridge as the blogger mentions (This will have to be built anyway in some shape or form either as part of the M3 spanning the alignment or as part of the railway spanning the road).

why reinstate the route in say ten years time - which will mean closing the motorway (or at lease causing severe disruption) and lots of extra cost to build a bridge later - it is much more cost effective to build the bridge now when the motorway is being built over the alignment so the option remains open; I thought we might have learnt our lesson about patching up bits of roads and infrastructure after the event in this country (M50 the prime example). All NJ is suggesting, I think, is learn from the past and look to the future. There is no excuse on this one - it is clear from the aerial photograph what is planned by the PPP building the M3 - that is to bulldoze through the alignment and have the motorway running through it, its not acceptable, and the Government has to have the vision - or their eyes opened as to the potential problems this could cause for future Transport planners. NJ might of course be completely wrong on this one - and there may be plans to span the alignment with a bridge now, I haven't see the detailed drawings for this section of the M3 (however I will email NRA today for an answer on this one) - if they are planning a bridge, then fine, but I agree with NJ - it is just as well to bring it to the publics attention now just to make sure the relevant authorities hear the alarm bells now - when something can be done about it.

BrianD · 18-09-2006 5:08pm

westtip wrote:

why reinstate the route in say ten years time - which will mean closing the motorway (or at lease causing severe disruption) and lots of extra cost to build a bridge later - it is much more cost effective to build the bridge now when the motorway is being built over the alignment so the option remains open; I thought we might have learnt our lesson about patching up bits of roads and infrastructure after the event in this country (M50 the prime example). All NJ is suggesting, I think, is learn from the past and look to the future. There is no excuse on this one - it is clear from the aerial photograph what is planned by the PPP building the M3 - that is to bulldoze through the alignment and have the motorway running through it, its not acceptable, and the Government has to have the vision - or their eyes opened as to the potential problems this could cause for future Transport planners. NJ might of course be completely wrong on this one - and there may be plans to span the alignment with a bridge now, I haven't see the detailed drawings for this section of the M3 (however I will email NRA today for an answer on this one) - if they are planning a bridge, then fine, but I agree with NJ - it is just as well to bring it to the publics attention now just to make sure the relevant authorities hear the alarm bells now - when something can be done about it.

Yes but there no longterm plans to extend the railway to Kells at all so there is no justification for a bridge. As stated, a bridge will have to be built one way or the other whether it be over the railway now or over the m-way at some unknown time in the future. At present there is little practical value in the old route other than defining a route - from an engineering point of view almost everything will have to be rebuilt ...bridges etc. to acomodate a new line. It is not a hurdle for transport planners as who is to say that it will not be cheaper to build a bridge at a future time. What is a more pressing issue ia accomodation of the rail line south of Navan and how any of the proposed routes will be affected by the M3.

Navan Junction · 18-09-2006 5:19pm

BrianD wrote:

there is no justification for a bridge.

It would at least leave the option open, and it isn't unusual to do this.

there is little practical value in the old route other than defining a route

Buy-back clauses from when the land was sold off make the old allignment worth preserving..

It is not a hurdle for transport planners as who is to say that it will not be cheaper to build a bridge at a future time.

Not likely - it takes a long distance and a large embankment to elevate a line to a height high enough to cross a motorway if it is built at grade..

What is a more pressing issue is a accomodation of the rail line south of Navan and how any of the proposed routes will be affected by the M3.

In relation to the former route it is already taken care of and that is the most likely route by far..

Anyway, the arguement at this point is most likely merely academic. But it doesn't do any harm to highlight it, and it should have been bridged in the plans, if only as being possibly of use in the future..

westtip · 18-09-2006 10:37pm

BrianD wrote:

Yes but there no longterm plans to extend the railway to Kells at all so there is no justification for a bridge.

I think you might find there were similar arguments when they closed the Harcourt Street Line. This is not a campaign to re-open the Kells-Navan line - just a hope we can see mistakes of the past and address these kind of issues now. Revisiting a motorway to do a patch up job after it is built is always more expensive than getting it right in the first place. So just plan for the future and leave the option if needed to open the old rail line if deemed necessary in future.

In any event why not build a bridge to allow the alignment to be used as a cycle track or leisure route ie walking route in future). The way the motor car has taken over our society it is pretty impossible to find a lane to walk on these days without the risk of being knocked over by a 4x4 trundling along to some mansion dropped in the middle of the country, why not use the old railway lines for something useful if they are not going to be reinstated.

admiralofthefleet · 18-09-2006 11:33pm

whats the blue thing in the middle of the alignment in the picture. is it a train!?

westtip · 19-09-2006 1:15pm

ghost train maybe

BrianD · 19-09-2006 11:33pm

westtip wrote:

I think you might find there were similar arguments when they closed the Harcourt Street Line. This is not a campaign to re-open the Kells-Navan line - just a hope we can see mistakes of the past and address these kind of issues now. Revisiting a motorway to do a patch up job after it is built is always more expensive than getting it right in the first place. So just plan for the future and leave the option if needed to open the old rail line if deemed necessary in future.

In any event why not build a bridge to allow the alignment to be used as a cycle track or leisure route ie walking route in future). The way the motor car has taken over our society it is pretty impossible to find a lane to walk on these days without the risk of being knocked over by a 4x4 trundling along to some mansion dropped in the middle of the country, why not use the old railway lines for something useful if they are not going to be reinstated.

I don't think anybody doubts that closing a rail line in the middle of an already built up area was a 'whopper' but it is not comparable to what this is thread is highlighting. It is a non-issue whether the M3 has a bridge over the old line especially when there is no plans for the railway line to extend to Kells. If the line is to reopen beuilding a bridge over is as cheap as under.

westtip · 20-09-2006 10:15am

BrianD wrote:

It is a non-issue whether the M3 has a bridge over the old line especially when there is no plans for the railway line to extend to Kells. If the line is to reopen beuilding a bridge over is as cheap as under.

Who says it is as cheap to build a bridge in later years - past experience has shown to prepare for the possibilities of the future pays dividends - in the future.

BrianD wrote:

there is no plans for the railway line to extend to Kells. If the line is to reopen beuilding a bridge over is as cheap as under.

There are no plans currently, but are you a futurologist saying this will never happen? Your view of the future is not necessarily the truth, but building a bridge in later years - either an underpass or bridge over, will disrupt traffic on the M3, and IMO it will be more expensive to do then (whenever that when is) than it would to prepare for the eventuality now. If you want to see the disruption of building an underpass under a motorway at a later date I refer you to M4/A34 interchange at Reading/Newbury in the south of England - a classic case of a job not being done properly in the first place.

You didn't answer the other point I raised wich Navan did not raise in the opening post, but there is a huge opportunity to use these old railway alignments as leisure facilities - as a walking/cycling route. I don't know if you have kids, but it is getting increasingly difficult to find a safe place to take kids for a bike ride or walk, a buggy push walk or take someone in a wheelchair on a safe walk in this country. The proliferation of one off houses in the country and reliance of those living in remoter locations on cars, has made every boreen in the country a potential death trap when taking kids out, or elderly parents in wheelchairs. Walking or cyling with your kids is a simple enough pleasure in life - if the Kells Navan section of this line is not going to be opened in the near future as a railway - why not make it footpath/cyclepath with the M3 bridging it - this way you retain the alignment, it is of public benefit (family life, health, general well being of the public), and if needed in the future - the line is available for a railway.

Is this such a huge ask of our planners and authorities?

Navan Junction · 20-09-2006 11:32am

westtip wrote:

If the Kells Navan section of this line is not going to be opened in the near future as a railway - why not make it footpath/cyclepath

That's a good way to preserve an alignment but unfortunately the Kells allignment is no long in state or local authority ownership..

westtip · 20-09-2006 12:30pm

NJ - Who does own it then?

Navan Junction · 20-09-2006 12:36pm

westtip wrote:

NJ - Who does own it then?

It was sold off to farmers along the route when it closed. However, a right of way of sorts and buy-clauses were inserted in the terms of sale so it isn't just 'ordinary' land, so to speak..

Ideally for the linear park idea it would still need to be in state ownership..

westtip · 20-09-2006 1:01pm

At least it seems from what you say there is an opportunity to take it back into state ownership. The trails in the peak district of Derbyshire have been a huge success over the past thirty years in boosting tourism in those areas. I know your vision is to see trains going down the line again - I share this view but if not - then I see another use which would be of huge public benefit. Who knows maybe those in charge will share some of these visions.

Navan Junction · 20-09-2006 1:21pm

westtip wrote:

At least it seems from what you say there is an opportunity to take it back into state ownership. The trails in the peak district of Derbyshire have been a huge success over the past thirty years in boosting tourism in those areas. I know your vision is to see trains going down the line again - I share this view but if not - then I see another use which would be of huge public benefit. Who knows maybe those in charge will share some of these visions.

Oh, I fully agree with you there. Sure Navan doesn't even have a public park. If it wasn't for the goodwill of the Columban Missionaries in Dalgan there would be nothing apart from a 4 mile tow-path (Ramparts) along the Boyne in Slane direction. Even that isn't finished as 2 of the 6 miles are overgrown..

If it was in state ownership it would be great for a trail - maybe Kingscourt will end up as one, or possibly Navan Drogheda if IÉ have their way..

westtip · 20-09-2006 1:56pm

I just cannot understand this government - when it seems they prioritise the WRC (which is near me and the northern section at least is simply not justifiable) over the Navan line and the Athlone/Mullingar line. It just baffles me they can be so moronic on these issues.

BrianD · 20-09-2006 7:28pm

westtip wrote:

Who says it is as cheap to build a bridge in later years - past experience has shown to prepare for the possibilities of the future pays dividends - in the future.

There are no plans currently, but are you a futurologist saying this will never happen? Your view of the future is not necessarily the truth, but building a bridge in later years - either an underpass or bridge over, will disrupt traffic on the M3, and IMO it will be more expensive to do then (whenever that when is) than it would to prepare for the eventuality now. If you want to see the disruption of building an underpass under a motorway at a later date I refer you to M4/A34 interchange at Reading/Newbury in the south of England - a classic case of a job not being done properly in the first place.

You didn't answer the other point I raised wich Navan did not raise in the opening post, but there is a huge opportunity to use these old railway alignments as leisure facilities - as a walking/cycling route. I don't know if you have kids, but it is getting increasingly difficult to find a safe place to take kids for a bike ride or walk, a buggy push walk or take someone in a wheelchair on a safe walk in this country. The proliferation of one off houses in the country and reliance of those living in remoter locations on cars, has made every boreen in the country a potential death trap when taking kids out, or elderly parents in wheelchairs. Walking or cyling with your kids is a simple enough pleasure in life - if the Kells Navan section of this line is not going to be opened in the near future as a railway - why not make it footpath/cyclepath with the M3 bridging it - this way you retain the alignment, it is of public benefit (family life, health, general well being of the public), and if needed in the future - the line is available for a railway.

Is this such a huge ask of our planners and authorities?

The question that was posed is should it be bridged or not while building the M3. There are currently no grounds to beidge based on the fact that there are no plans to build a railway line there in any long term plan that is available. Even if we do suddenly decide to do it the cost of putting a bridge in the context of the overall build of the line on a greenfield site (this is what is left of the orignal railway actually is) is neglible. We have seen bridges inserted over the N7 (outer ring) and the M1 (Exit 2) with no real intereference with traffic flows underneath. Furthermore, nobody has stated the actual cost of the bridge as part of the motorway and as a railway bridge so we can compare. Therefore, it is not short sighted thinking by the county council. Junctions on the M50 were always short sighted from the start.

As regards, the linear park/walking trail ... great idea but is it worth it? somebody might build a damn railway on it in the future!

westtip · 20-09-2006 8:26pm

BrianD wrote:

As regards, the linear park/walking trail ... great idea but is it worth it? somebody might build a damn railway on it in the future!

We will agree to differ on the bridge argument for the future - reference a trailway - I understand there isn't even a public park in Navan (see NJs post a couple of posts back) - so this would be an added leisure facility. Is it worth it? Well it depends what you think we need in a post industrial urbanised society, in which lack of exercise has being identified as one of key causes of ill health. so yes i think it is worth it to invest in such a facility.

I have referenced in another thread a trail called the Tissington Trail in Derbyshire - that follows the line of an old railway (just google Tissington trail if you want some interesting links) I have recently done some research on this facility - 12,000 bicycle hire transactions a year take place on this trail for visitors to use the trail, a further estimated 24,000 users bring their bikes to the trail every year mainly as day trippers, plus walkers and families using buggies on the trail the tourist board of the peak district in Derbyshire estimate over 100,000 users a year, all spending money in the peak district national park. One third of bicycle hires are hired by users who also rent a bed in the area and spend money in restaurants etc on a slightly longer stay, good high value tourists. This all comes from a very simple easy to use facility - a small track about five feet wide following the line of an old railway. So, would it be worth it to offer such a leisure facility to the people of Meath? - With the day tripper market from Dublin and as far north as Belfast (90 minutes max away with the new motorway) there is the critical mass to attract a lot of visitors to this facility. Meath/Louth has plenty to offer tourists in the wonderful sites they have - wouldn't this trail - at relatively low cost offer something of real added value, not to mention giving the people of Kells and Navan a superb faciity to get off their backsides and do some exercise.

And by the way - if it turns out a railway is needed on the track in later years then at least the alignment will have been preserved.

M3 will sever Kells rail alignment

Comments