Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Pete_Cavan · 03-08-2014 11:49am

end of the road wrote: »

i would absolutely have no sympathy for them and would have no problem what so ever with them being dealt with

That is fine for those who simply decide to take the land but what of those who got planning permission? Do we know are there many people who were granted planning permission to encroach on the line because I'm sure that legally these people would be entitled to compensation given they have permission, although not the permission of the owner.

westtip · 03-08-2014 12:28pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

That is fine for those who simply decide to take the land but what of those who got planning permission? Do we know are there many people who were granted planning permission to encroach on the line because I'm sure that legally these people would be entitled to compensation given they have permission, although not the permission of the owner.

Not sure the planners are legally bound to check out land ownership issues as part of the planning process; That could be a legal nightmare for planners. I think the onus would have been on the owners to object to the permission being given on grounds that they own the land. Each planning application would need to be looked at to see where the red boundary lines on the plots are in the applications. There is one example near Collooney in which a new dormer bungalow built in the last 15 years has the railway lines running right through the front garden/driveway and the owners have fenced off the railway and another one in which coral fencing has been put around the line.

A photo of the bungalow is enclosed, you can see the one with the coral fencing on the sligo mayo greenway facebook page; if you look at the photo carefully you can see the railway lines covered by the light gravel in this driveway, it's quite astonishing permission was given for this house taking into account the county plan; it makes you wonder what the real agenda was all the time. Clearly there was no agenda to ever build a railway line again and the county plan has very little bearing on planning decisions the council used to take.

Little doubt there are going to be problems on the Collooney - Charlestown greenway section especially near collooney; What is so ironic is the councillors who so vociferously opposed the greenway said nothing about the planning permissions being granted for houses and house extensions so near the line. What's more it shows a level of incompetence on the part of the planning department to have granted these permissions when apparently restoring the railway line was a long term strategic aim of the council as set out in the county plan. They went against their own planning guidelines in this respect.

The good news is we now have the council (sligo coco at least) on our side in respect to wanting a greenway on the route, so lets hope a resolution will be achieved, but there is no escaping the fact any problems there are going to be will largely be of the councils own making from actions taken in the past.

corktina · 03-08-2014 12:45pm

Looking at your photo, I'd suspect that is a modernised crossing keepers cottage rather than a new build , for which planning permission wouldn't be needed

westtip · 03-08-2014 1:12pm

corktina wrote: »

Looking at your photo, I'd suspect that is a modernised crossing keepers cottage rather than a new build , for which planning permission wouldn't be needed

Corky yes I think that might actually be the case, the two pillars you can see in the foregound, I think were the supports for the gate crossing, nevertheless, the building is very close to the actual track route, and the panel fencing should not have been thrown across the track blocking it as a route and effectively fencing that stretch of track into an enclosed garden. There are undoubtedly going to be issues raised in the feasibility study for a greenway when and if that happens. (dependent on funding and support from department of transport tourism and sport).

corktina · 03-08-2014 2:15pm

this is one of the issues a Greenway will have to address. It could be the cottage is still owned by CIE and rented out or has been bought but the track would not be included in either case surely.
It may be that the Greenway would have to divert around the boundary, which wouldn't be too difficult. As you say the track is very close to the cottage and the occupiers may have grounds to object to the Greenway on that basis

Those posts are not robust enough to be for crossing gates imo

end of the road · 03-08-2014 2:40pm

Pete_Cavan wrote: »

That is fine for those who simply decide to take the land but what of those who got planning permission? Do we know are there many people who were granted planning permission to encroach on the line because I'm sure that legally these people would be entitled to compensation given they have permission, although not the permission of the owner.

i don't know, but its certainly an interesting question

westtip · 03-08-2014 2:53pm

corktina wrote: »

this is one of the issues a Greenway will have to address. It could be the cottage is still owned by CIE and rented out or has been bought but the track would not be included in either case surely.
It may be that the Greenway would have to divert around the boundary, which wouldn't be too difficult. As you say the track is very close to the cottage and the occupiers may have grounds to object to the Greenway on that basis

Those posts are not robust enough to be for crossing gates imo

Indeed all these issues in cases like this will have to be thrashed out. The point is Corky, the "we must have a railway brigade" have never raised these issues about actually protecting the route; one of the key issues of the greenway is to ensure the full route is retained in public ownership. None of us know what will happen in 30 years time and the route needs protecting, who knows a railway may become possible in half a centuries time. In the case of this photograph the land registry will show who owns the land, my guess is the strip of land the line sits on and either side of rail tracks for at least a couple of metres belongs to the state through irish rail, but again these will all be issues that will come out of the feasibility study.

Re the property I would hope if Irish Rail have sold off the dwelling to private hands that the plot the house sits on does not include the railway/greenway route, if it is a rented property in the ownership of Irish Rail then there are no issues.

monument · 03-08-2014 6:51pm

A few points blocked along the route is not a notable issue for a greenway -- it can be rerouted with relative ease.

I say relative ease because even if the rerouting was a 2km detour, that's nothing in the scheme of things given the total distance of the route.

Most likely however is a few meters or, at most, a few 100 meters detour around houses or notable other obstruction be they man made or natural.

Carawaystick · 04-08-2014 1:35am

westtip wrote: »

Not sure the planners are legally bound to check out land ownership issues as part of the planning process; That could be a legal nightmare for planners. I think the onus would have been on the owners to object to the permission being given on grounds that they own the land. Each planning application would need to be looked at to see where the red boundary lines on the plots are in the applications.

From talking to my cousin, the planning applicant has to sign a doc stating they have the landowner's permission to develop the land.

But as, This Is Ireland,
there is no perjury conviction looming for any false declarations

westtip · 04-08-2014 9:50am

monument wrote: »

A few points blocked along the route is not a notable issue for a greenway -- it can be rerouted with relative ease.

I say relative ease because even if the rerouting was a 2km detour, that's nothing in the scheme of things given the total distance of the route.

Most likely however is a few meters or, at most, a few 100 meters detour around houses or notable other obstruction be they man made or natural.

I agree with you monument, but the whole point is if the route is blocked here and there what have WOT been doing all these years about keeping the route open and accessible. In the last few years their whole focus has been stop the greenway at all costs without seeing the bigger picture, without the integrity of the route being maintained in full there will be no railway - not ever. A greenway along the alignment keeps the possibility of a railway(with greenway then put in alongside the railway) in the future. We know from Irish Rail strategy the route won't be looked at for any possible rail development for at least 20 years. We know Europe has dropped the WRC off the agenda for funding with TEN-T policy. The minor diversions that may be necessary to achieve the greenway will in effect kill off the possibility of a railway for ever, as the route will be gone.

Alun · 04-08-2014 10:16am

monument wrote: »

A few points blocked along the route is not a notable issue for a greenway -- it can be rerouted with relative ease.

I say relative ease because even if the rerouting was a 2km detour, that's nothing in the scheme of things given the total distance of the route.

Most likely however is a few meters or, at most, a few 100 meters detour around houses or notable other obstruction be they man made or natural.

It's not so much the distance that's the problem with the detours but the route they have to take when doing so. There are a couple of such detours on the Mulranny - Newport section of the GWG, where the old railway line basically contours along the side of a hillside, and is reasonably flattish. The detours, though, force you steep uphill, along a bit and then steep downhill again, along some fairly narrow, newly built gravel paths which isn't ideal.

westtip · 04-08-2014 10:52am

Alun wrote: »

It's not so much the distance that's the problem with the detours but the route they have to take when doing so. There are a couple of such detours on the Mulranny - Newport section of the GWG, where the old railway line basically contours along the side of a hillside, and is reasonably flattish. The detours, though, force you steep uphill, along a bit and then steep downhill again, along some fairly narrow, newly built gravel paths which isn't ideal.

Those detours were because they couldn't get permissive access from the landowner who had taken over the old railway as Irish Rail had sold it off or allowed it to be squatted on since the 1930s. The ironic thing is one of the landowners who wouldn't give permissive access is a hotel owner from Newport which clearly has gained business from those coming to do the greenway. The permissive access model to build cycleways is very fragile, which is why I have always banged on about maintaining the integrity of the collooney claremorris section of the so called Western Rail corridor as a greenway to keep it in public ownership. There are going to be some issues with the likes of the bungalow photo posted a few posts back and one or two other places but now is the time for both irish rail and the council to simply say - sorry this is public land and we are going to change its use from redundant rail line for the time being to greenway to ensure the route is kept in public ownership. If you want compensation or want to object they can take the landowners to court, but the landowners (ie the public through irish rail) owe the squatters nothing. The attitude must be strong, if you want to stop us from using our land to create a greenway - you can take us to court and not attitude of asking for permission to use public land for the public good we need to stop any cowtowing to land thieves. The same attitude should be taken with farmers in Kerry trying to stop the extension of the Great Southern Greenway to Listowel. The railway route there belongs to Irish Rail, get on with it, there is no debate, at one time you had steam trains coming through your fields now you will have money spending tourists, grab the opportunity to make money by earning it and not waiting for entitlement grants/payouts.

BrianD3 · 04-08-2014 11:59am

westtip wrote: »

The permissive access model to build cycleways is very fragile

Very fragile indeed. Landowner owns a strip of poor land part of an old railway, not worth much. Greenway proposed, landowner gives permissive access for the greenway. Waits for it to become popular and of economic benefit then withdraws access and looks for money.

I actually think we will see a greenway on the WRC in a few years as CIE owns the trackbed and the issues with squatting, objections and WOT lobbyists are surmountable.

However for other proposed greenways on closed lines where some/most/all of the land has been sold off, embankments removed, cuttings filled in, bridge decks removed and relying on permissive access from landowners - I can't see them working.

I have a thread in the trains subforum here about abandonment orders and some stuff on the West Clare railway which may be of relevance.

Grandeeod · 05-08-2014 9:18pm

westtip wrote: »

Not sure the planners are legally bound to check out land ownership issues as part of the planning process; That could be a legal nightmare for planners. I think the onus would have been on the owners to object to the permission being given on grounds that they own the land. Each planning application would need to be looked at to see where the red boundary lines on the plots are in the applications. There is one example near Collooney in which a new dormer bungalow built in the last 15 years has the railway lines running right through the front garden/driveway and the owners have fenced off the railway and another one in which coral fencing has been put around the line.

A photo of the bungalow is enclosed, you can see the one with the coral fencing on the sligo mayo greenway facebook page; if you look at the photo carefully you can see the railway lines covered by the light gravel in this driveway, it's quite astonishing permission was given for this house taking into account the county plan; it makes you wonder what the real agenda was all the time. Clearly there was no agenda to ever build a railway line again and the county plan has very little bearing on planning decisions the council used to take.

Little doubt there are going to be problems on the Collooney - Charlestown greenway section especially near collooney; What is so ironic is the councillors who so vociferously opposed the greenway said nothing about the planning permissions being granted for houses and house extensions so near the line. What's more it shows a level of incompetence on the part of the planning department to have granted these permissions when apparently restoring the railway line was a long term strategic aim of the council as set out in the county plan. They went against their own planning guidelines in this respect.

The good news is we now have the council (sligo coco at least) on our side in respect to wanting a greenway on the route, so lets hope a resolution will be achieved, but there is no escaping the fact any problems there are going to be will largely be of the councils own making from actions taken in the past.

Your photo does not appear to be a former crossing keeper house location. The nearest to Collooney is still a derelict site, unless your definition of near Collooney is further out. There are driveways across the line nearer Collooney, but they weren't there when the line was operational and were added long after closure to access land and new builds. Regardless of a Greenway, these obstacles would seriously inhibit the reopening of the line and these issues have been consistantly ignored by WOT and Government reps. Claremorris to Collooney has been subsumed into so much illegal land grabbing, with a blind eye thrown in from CIE, that its laughable a guy stealing rails was convicted.

westtip · 11-08-2014 4:49pm

Grandeeod wrote: »

Your photo does not appear to be a former crossing keeper house location. The nearest to Collooney is still a derelict site, unless your definition of near Collooney is further out. There are driveways across the line nearer Collooney, but they weren't there when the line was operational and were added long after closure to access land and new builds. Regardless of a Greenway, these obstacles would seriously inhibit the reopening of the line and these issues have been consistantly ignored by WOT and Government reps. Claremorris to Collooney has been subsumed into so much illegal land grabbing, with a blind eye thrown in from CIE, that its laughable a guy stealing rails was convicted.

Absolutely laughable, in 30 years time the sons of WOT will be thanking the greenway campaigners of yesteryear for having the vision to keep the route intact with a greenway.

eastwest · 04-09-2014 10:45am

What is very clear from all the previous discussion is that the pro-rail lobby, including WOT, did absolutely nothing to protect the route. Ditto the political wing of WOT -- the inter-county railway committee. In fact, given their opposition to the greenway proposal and their success in delaying it be several years, and the role that a greenway will have in protecting the route, it could be said that their entire effect on the rail route and the future possibility of a rail link was negative.
So, was the entire rationale for the pro-rail lobby just a massive expenses-gathering scam, or what were they thinking?
On the subject of WOT, have they now faded away or are they regrouping to try to stop the proposed tourism development? I haven't seen a single whimper from them anywhere since Sligo county council voted to make a start on the greenway project.

serfboard · 04-09-2014 12:49pm

eastwest wrote: »

On the subject of WOT, have they now faded away or are they regrouping to try to stop the proposed tourism development? I haven't seen a single whimper from them anywhere since Sligo county council voted to make a start on the greenway project.

Colman was on Sean O'Rourke recently - but not talking (very much) about the WRC. He was debating with the owner of DublinCoach about buses versus railways in this country.

He actually came across quite reasonable (:eek:), saying things like we need a mix of transport alternatives and that he was in favour of scrapping the universal travel pass for the elderly (to be replaced with discounted travel instead for those who can afford it).

corktina · 04-09-2014 1:22pm

I don't see that bus vs Rail is an argument that needs discussion. Rail in terms of speed and comfort is better, bus in terms of cost is better. The real competitor to rail is the car and in most cases it has already won that battle.

westtip · 04-09-2014 3:22pm

serfboard wrote: »

Colman was on Sean O'Rourke recently -.......that he was in favour of scrapping the universal travel pass for the elderly (to be replaced with discounted travel instead for those who can afford it).

Won't win friends and influence people advocating what has almost become enshrined in the constitution - the free travel pass.

corktina · 09-09-2014 7:18pm

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-28955045

COastal path makes £16 million pa in Wales

westtip · 09-09-2014 8:52pm

corktina wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-28955045

COastal path makes £16 million pa in Wales

Yes it's amazing and yet we still have some politicians against the greenway on the western rail corridor. it never ceases to astonish me and others they cling to this idea of the railway coming back when a cash cow stares them in the face.

eastwest · 09-09-2014 11:21pm

corktina wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-28955045

COastal path makes £16 million pa in Wales

Ah but wouldn't a train be better?
Just imagine, the 'welsh western arc rail corridor coastal railway not path' (wwarccrnp for short).

Markcheese · 10-09-2014 8:50am

westtip wrote: »

Yes it's amazing and yet we still have some politicians against the greenway on the western rail corridor. it never ceases to astonish me and others they cling to this idea of the railway coming back when a cash cow stares them in the face.

Ah here now, careful now, down with that sort of thing ... Let's form an expert group to commission a report ..

Irish Steve · 11-09-2014 2:28pm

Just as long as the "expert group" looks very carefully at the success that is the Welsh Highland Railway, which was relaid not that long ago, from nothing, and is now bringing in serious tourism revenue to that part of the world.

OK, that's narrow gauge, rather than standard, but it works, it's reliable, and it provides a service to people that need it. Perhaps if we had some more forward thinking people around, rather than the luddites that seem to to incapable of sensible thought and actions, things might be better.

If nothing else, I suspect that there's a significant quantity of ex Bord Na Mona tracks that could be relaid in more useful places at relatively low cost, which could provide some useful tourism income in the right places. It would be very easy to put narrow gauge tracks on to an "old" standard gauge route, with passing loops without any problems, and properly promoted, there would be benefits to tourism and local economies.

westtip · 11-09-2014 3:04pm

Irish Steve wrote: »

Just as long as the "expert group" looks very carefully at the success that is the Welsh Highland Railway, which was relaid not that long ago, from nothing, and is now bringing in serious tourism revenue to that part of the world. .

Indeed a good idea now lets ask West on Track to commit to what WHR have done http://www.whrsoc.org.uk/ A total voluntary organisation that has restored a 40 miles of narrow gauge railway and several steam locos; it truly is an admirable and gallant effort by steam enthusiasts. It is not part of the national rail network and does not receive national rail subventions. There are no indications that the will to do a similar project on the WRC exists, or at least no one has suggested it. I doubt the will exists in Government to fund a steam railway theme park along 40 miles of the WRC but I guess someone might ask.

Markcheese · 11-09-2014 3:57pm

Irish Steve wrote: »

Just as long as the "expert group" looks very carefully at the success that is the Welsh Highland Railway, which was relaid not that long ago, from nothing, and is now bringing in serious tourism revenue to that part of the world.

OK, that's narrow gauge, rather than standard, but it works, it's reliable, and it provides a service to people that need it.
Perhaps if we had some more forward
thinking people around, rather than the
luddites that seem to to incapable of
sensible thought and actions, things
might be better.

If nothing else, I suspect that there's a significant quantity of ex Bord Na Mona tracks that could be relaid in more useful places at relatively low cost, which could provide some useful tourism income in the right places. It would be very easy to put narrow gauge tracks on to an "old" standard gauge route, with passing loops without any problems, and properly promoted, there would be
benefits to tourism and local economies.

Isn't part of the problem that it was always light rail, with a rather convtorted alignment, and anyway that alignment has been encroached on in so many
places as to make it extraordinarily expensive to put a even a slow traveling tourist train service on , and there's very little money washing around so ...
One of the arguments I've heard against a greenway is that the area isn't scenic or touristy enough for one ... Now if the area isnt scenic enough to warant the investment in a footpathI why would you spend big on a tourist/heritage rail line...

corktina · 11-09-2014 3:58pm

Irish Steve wrote: »

Just as long as the "expert group" looks very carefully at the success that is the Welsh Highland Railway, which was relaid not that long ago, from nothing, and is now bringing in serious tourism revenue to that part of the world.

OK, that's narrow gauge, rather than standard, but it works, it's reliable, and it provides a service to people that need it. Perhaps if we had some more forward thinking people around, rather than the luddites that seem to to incapable of sensible thought and actions, things might be better.

If nothing else, I suspect that there's a significant quantity of ex Bord Na Mona tracks that could be relaid in more useful places at relatively low cost, which could provide some useful tourism income in the right places. It would be very easy to put narrow gauge tracks on to an "old" standard gauge route, with passing loops without any problems, and properly promoted, there would be benefits to tourism and local economies.

In fairness there was already mega tourism in the area, it's a National Park and there are loads of little railways who all promote each other. There also is a massive enthusiast base in the UK which is not the case here

westtip · 11-09-2014 4:15pm

corktina wrote: »

In fairness there was already mega tourism in the area, it's a National Park and there are loads of little railways who all promote each other. There also is a massive enthusiast base in the UK which is not the case here

Not to mention a domestic tourist market of 60 million people.

corktina · 11-09-2014 8:36pm

I wonder what percentage of Republic Residents have visited Downpatrick or Cultra , very very low I'd guess.(or NI residents for that matter (school tours not included)

end of the road · 11-09-2014 9:16pm

corktina wrote: »

I wonder what percentage of Republic Residents have visited Downpatrick or Cultra , very very low I'd guess.(or NI residents for that matter (school tours not included)

don't know. they are on the list of places i must visit list though. to see all those "lovely girls" sorry railway vehicles

corktina · 12-09-2014 7:28am

well worth it and they all have lovely bottoms, sorry buffers

Markcheese · 12-09-2014 8:27am

corktina wrote: »

well worth it and they all have lovely bottoms, sorry buffers

Ah here... Careful now,

Markcheese · 12-09-2014 8:39am

Seriously though, if anybody/anygroup could get it together enough to open 40/ 50 kms of track and run a viable steam/heritage service on it , they'd get some degree of government support ... But where you'd find all the active volunteers to set up/build/and run such a service... Let alone the paying customers to fund it .
Also I'm sure there are disused IE lines or trackbeds else where in the country that'd be more suited to such a project (condition/location/population) but to be fair it's often about key people and their determination....

westtip · 12-09-2014 10:59am

Markcheese wrote: »

Seriously though, if anybody/anygroup could get it together enough to open 40/ 50 kms of track and run a viable steam/heritage service on it , they'd get some degree of government support ... But where you'd find all the active volunteers to set up/build/and run such a service... Let alone the paying customers to fund it .
Also I'm sure there are disused IE lines or trackbeds else where in the country that'd be more suited to such a project (condition/location/population) but to be fair it's often about key people and their determination....

I reckon the line from Ennis to Athenry should be given to the steamies, it would make a great tourist attraction and get the WRC monkey off Irish Rails/Governments back. There will be no backing to re-open any part of the WRC as a heritage line, or as any kind of railway come to think of it, although there is a mad cap scheme in Kiltimagh to re-open part of the line as a Velo-rail facility - all pie in the sky and a smokescreen to stop the greenway.

corktina · 12-09-2014 12:57pm

Not the WRC but Nenagh or Carrick or even Rosslare might make sense. They'd need a lot of support both from volunteers and in cash plus they would almost certainly need the support of the RPSI and ITG (and both of them are UK organisations of course)

I'd love to see it but I'm not holding my breath for the reasons Markcheese gives.

eastwest · 14-09-2014 2:31pm

westtip wrote: »

I reckon the line from Ennis to Athenry should be given to the steamies, it would make a great tourist attraction and get the WRC monkey off Irish Rails/Governments back. There will be no backing to re-open any part of the WRC as a heritage line, or as any kind of railway come to think of it, although there is a mad cap scheme in Kiltimagh to re-open part of the line as a Velo-rail facility - all pie in the sky and a smokescreen to stop the greenway.

The steamies could probably dovetail into the existing schedule, or take it over at weekends when the thousands of commuters are on a couple of days off.

foggy_lad · 14-09-2014 2:43pm

eastwest wrote: »

The steamies could probably dovetail into the existing schedule, or take it over at weekends when the thousands of commuters are on a couple of days off.

not reliable enough to be operating scheduled services?

eastwest · 14-09-2014 3:02pm

foggy_lad wrote: »

not reliable enough to be operating scheduled services?

Not a bad idea, when you think about it. They could double passenger numbers, say from six to twelve.

westtip · 15-09-2014 8:53am

eastwest wrote: »

Not a bad idea, when you think about it. They could double passenger numbers, say from six to twelve.

sure once we get a few winter deluges, (it does rain a lot in the west of Ireland in the winter) and the line floods as per usual and closes for a month or two just after Christmas, the double handful of commuters using the line will be back on the door to door mini-bus service.

westtip · 18-11-2014 11:49pm

well hello boardies its been a while and things are hotting up in the west. The winter rain is coming so expect closures on the WRC anytime soon, in the meantime the old greenway/railway debate goes on and it seems like the greenies are winning the hearts and minds of our western councillors, With Sligo coco passing a motion in favour of a greenway in July and now the BMW Assembly members having the audacity to question a report published on outdoor recreation in the west that flatly refused to accept the idea of a greenway on the route to protect it in public ownership. just have a look at the scoop the Roscommon Herald got by having a journalist at the BMW Assembly meeting last Friday! One councillor even described the WRC as not fit for Thomas the Tank Engine! Take a look at the attached. Hilarious stuff!
Or even better go read what is being said on the SMG FB page

https://www.facebook.com/sligomayogreenway

mayo.mick · 19-11-2014 12:04am

There is an interesting article in last Sunday's Business Post about Irish Rail needing €100M more from the government for them to survive. Lost €78M last year. Saying that the rail infrastructure is going to decrease. The article is behind a paywall on their website so I cant post in full, (haven't time to type out I'm afraid)

end of the road · 19-11-2014 12:30am

yeah, and its a case of here we go again. should it decrease any more they will still need the same amount to survive as they just refuse to grow their business. decreasing the rail network seems to be the answer for every problem to do with CIE but when its done nothing happens in return apart from people looking for more. when will enough be enough? when the last bit of track is ripped up? sorry, back to the WRC now

mayo.mick · 19-11-2014 1:42pm

BoatMad · 25-11-2014 2:25am

i wouldn't give IR another penny, it has destroyed the rail network, its plays trains not running a railway. privatise it , take the track into a public company, anything has to be better then this mess

end of the road · 25-11-2014 3:43pm

BoatMad wrote: »

i wouldn't give IR another penny, it has destroyed the rail network, its plays trains not running a railway. privatise it , take the track into a public company, anything has to be better then this mess

yeah. privatise it. that solves everything in the world. i'd be the first to agree IR is a joke but lets be realistic. what private company is going to come in and run a mostly loss making network? and who is going to pay for it? the government? they only pay enough to keep the lights running and they do it begrudgingly. fund it properly and bring in management who actually want to improve the rail network and then we will have a chance of improving things. it won't be done by privatizing it for the sake of privatizing it, a strategy that should be left in the past

westtip · 25-11-2014 3:58pm

Re what remains of the WRC north of Athenry, this kind of article just keeps spelling it out. There is no money from central government ever coming in for the WRC, nor from Europe and as IR is totally reliant on subvention and government/EU funding for any capital project, you have to accept facts, the WRC is not going to be re-opened..... so lets get on with the alternative use.

BoatMad · 25-11-2014 8:54pm

end of the road wrote: »

yeah. privatise it. that solves everything in the world. i'd be the first to agree IR is a joke but lets be realistic. what private company is going to come in and run a mostly loss making network? and who is going to pay for it? the government? they only pay enough to keep the lights running and they do it begrudgingly. fund it properly and bring in management who actually want to improve the rail network and then we will have a chance of improving things. it won't be done by privatizing it for the sake of privatizing it, a strategy that should be left in the past

Personally, and Im a rail fan, the network, the operator and the mentality has deteriorated to a point where the whole Intercity rail network might as well be shut down. It will continue to increase its rate of losses, as its always done, but now the network is on its knees and lobbing more bits off it will just kill it, probably better to shut it all down and we can sing railway songs in the pub.

The passengers levels outside commuter rail in Dub, could be transferred to the motorway network, without causing a single blip.

end of the road · 25-11-2014 9:22pm

BoatMad wrote: »

Personally, and Im a rail fan, the network, the operator and the mentality has deteriorated to a point where the whole Intercity rail network might as well be shut down.

shutting it is the easy option and would play into the hands of the road lobbiests, and other anti rail types who seek its destruction. so that is not an option.

BoatMad wrote: »

It will continue to increase its rate of losses, as its always done, but now the network is on its knees and lobbing more bits off it will just kill it, probably better to shut it all down and we can sing railway songs in the pub.

or, bring in people who actually give a dam, fund it properly, and bother to save it. find ways of encouraging people to use it, toles along roads near it if needs be i don't care how. they're is a place for both and we have a good network which can survive with those who give a dam in charge, and not those waiting out until their retirement. we can still sing songs about it down the pub though

BoatMad wrote: »

The passengers levels outside commuter rail in Dub, could be transferred to the motorway network, without causing a single blip.

the vast majority of the network gets good usership dispite irish rail. so the usership couldn't be transferred to the motor way with only a blip. it would be a blob.

westtip · 20-12-2014 12:56pm

Press release From: Sligo Mayo Greenway campaign
Date: December 20th 2014: FOR IMMEDIATE USE
• Minister gives clear statement on future of Western Rail Corridor.

• Department favours greenway option to protect the route.

Transport Minister Paschal Donohoe has made it clear the Western Rail Corridor will not be extended.

In recent correspondence with Brendan Quinn of the Sligo-Mayo Greenway Campaign, Minister Donohoe said there are no plans to extend the railway along the disused alignment. The first phase of the route, from Ennis to Athenry, was completed in 2010, but has proved unsuccessful, attracting insufficient passenger numbers and suffers heavy losses, requiring significant annual subvention to cover operating costs. Pro-rail campaigners had hoped that the next section from Athenry to Tuam might be reopened in the near future, although most observers accept that the planned motorway link between Gort and Tuam has made this highly unlikely.

Minister Donohoe has now come down firmly on the side of the pro-tourism lobby, stating “that it is the Department's view that the construction of a greenway along the route of the disused rail line will protect the integrity of the line in the event of any possible future reopening as an operational line.”

Commenting on the Minister's email received on December 17th Brendan Quinn said today that “this statement brings clarity to the situation concerning the future of the route. Two successive Ministers of Transport have told us there are no plans to re-open this railway north of Athenry and the route must be protected”

He went on to say "We now call on all councillors in Mayo, and Galway to follow the lead of Sligo County Council and develop plans for a greenway on the disused railway route. This project will create immediate jobs and opportunities in the region, and will protect the route for future generations. It is clear from the Minister's comments that a greenway project would find favour with the Department, and that councils would be pushing an open door with regards to funding. There are two viable options here; protect the asset with a greenway, or dream of a train that isn't coming.'

ENDS
Copy of Paschal Donohue email received on December 17th below.
Words: body content 320
Contacts: Find us on Facebook: sligomayogreenwaycampaig

From: Minister@dttas.ie Sent: Wed 17/12/2014 16:25
To brenquinn@eircom.net
Dear Brendan
I would like to re-confirm my Department's position that there are currently no plans to extend the Western Railway Corridor.
Furthermore, I would like to reiterate that it is the Department's view that the construction of a greenway along the route of the disused rail line will protect the integrity of the line in the event of any possible future reopening of as an operational line.
With best wishes,

Paschal Donohoe T.D.
Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport

corktina · 20-12-2014 2:02pm

xmas present for Brendan

Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Comments