Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Muckyboots · 28-11-2016 8:21pm

NiallBoo wrote: »

I think it's funny that I pretty-much just tacked on the bit about precast concrete as an after-thought, but it's the bit that was taken to heart.

The idea re: waste to incinerators was the main drive of that but got ignored.

I also think it's funny that the arguments against here have all been completely black-or-white, ignoring that in any decision there's a tipping point where things start to pay off financially.

Anyway, best of luck.

You're right , we did miss that one. I think the town of Claremorris would be an ideal location for a national waste incinerator, served by rail from north, south & east. Anyone not blocked from the WOT FB page want to try running this idea over there?

end of the road · 28-11-2016 10:03pm

eastwest wrote: »

The big difference is that trucking companies don't need to have unlimited losses picked up by the taxpayer-- you and me again.

no but they do get a hidden subsidy. in fact they get a few. that's fine but lets not pretend it isn't the case.

BoatMad · 28-11-2016 10:12pm

eastwest wrote: »

Exactly. All infrastructure -- roads and railways-- is ultimately paid for by you and me and everyone else who pays taxes. However it is also true that roads carry a lot of paying customers via car and truck tax, as well as tolls. The big difference is that trucking companies don't need to have unlimited losses picked up by the taxpayer-- you and me again.

it depends on whether you see transport infrastructure as purely self financing or that certain aspects of it are , or none are.

its clear that had the anti -rail policies of the 60s carried on into the 80s and 90s, Dublin would have been left with virtually no railways, the reconstruction of several rail lines and reopening to passenger traffic of the phoenix tunnel are a clear demonstrator of that mis guided thinking,

Hence while closing a railway is unfortunate , removing and retaking the infrastructure such that it cannot easily be reopened is an entirely different issue and one that has shown to be demonstrably false.

For example ,its clear that in time Youghal etc will be reopened as a commuter traffic facility into cork, Yet at the time , many would have removed the rail infrastructure completely

This is the kernel of the issue , rail activity may ebb and wane , but the ability to re-use it must be retained

westtip · 29-11-2016 11:11am

BoatMad wrote: »

i

This is the kernel of the issue , rail activity may ebb and wane , but the ability to re-use it must be retained

I believe this is the view of Irish Rail as well, which supports the idea of retaining closed routes in public ownership as greenways. Irish Rail are on record of supporting this view, so why are people opposing the Western Rail Trail from Athenry to Sligo (Collooney) when they know full well no matter how much spin is put on it, the route north of Athenry is not going to be re-opened to facilitate one freight train a day.

serfboard · 29-11-2016 12:47pm

BoatMad wrote: »

Hence while closing a railway is unfortunate , removing and retaking the infrastructure such that it cannot easily be reopened is an entirely different issue and one that has shown to be demonstrably false.

For example ,its clear that in time Youghal etc will be reopened as a commuter traffic facility into cork, Yet at the time , many would have removed the rail infrastructure completely

This is the kernel of the issue , rail activity may ebb and wane , but the ability to re-use it must be retained

I'm curious to know what you mean when you refer to infrastructure. Are you referring simply to the routes themselves, or to things like tracks and sleepers? Because if it's tracks and sleepers, then if ever the line north of Athenry is to be re-opened, these will have to be replaced anyway, just as they were south of Athenry.

If you are referring to the routes and to structures like bridges, then a greenway is one certain method of ensuring that the infrastructure is maintained, and prevents encroaching by land-grabbers.

eastwest · 29-11-2016 1:18pm

BoatMad wrote: »

Dublin would have been left with virtually no railways, the reconstruction of several rail lines and reopening to passenger traffic of the phoenix tunnel are a clear demonstrator of that mis guided thinking,

Hence while closing a railway is unfortunate , removing and retaking the infrastructure such that it cannot easily be reopened is an entirely different issue and one that has shown to be demonstrably false.

For example ,its clear that in time Youghal etc will be reopened as a commuter traffic facility into cork, Yet at the time , many would have removed the rail infrastructure completely

This is the kernel of the issue , rail activity may ebb and wane , but the ability to re-use it must be retained

Although you can't compare the greater Dublin and Cork areas to the route served by the WRC, given the population difference and the movement patterns of people, the point about retaining infrastructure is a valid one, and one that is at the kernel of the pro-tourism campaign.
The existing tracks, sleepers and ballast are irrelevant in the context of any new railway north of Athenry; they are of no value to Irish Rail except as scrap. IR is on record on this and have clearly said that a new railway would mean just that, building a new railway from the ground up.
I suspect that WOC know that too, they're not at all stupid despite the outward appearances, and the only reason they want to retain rotting tracks is for optics, to show that the various pro-tourism and pro-jobs campaigns along the route have been blocked. That's the same reason that politicians pay so much homage to this scrap metal, it looks like they're doing something to keep rail services alive when in fact it is nothing of the sort.
The only ways to ensure that the route stays in public ownership are to build a railway on it, or build a greenway at a tiny fraction of the cost. The latter has a proven business case and the funding is there, but the former is a proven loss-maker and there is no funding available either to build it or subsidise it. A greenway moreover would not impact on any future plans for a railway, and could be rebuilt as part of the railway project at a small extra cost -- the proverbial 'no-brainer.'
So, if I was a politician, what would I do? Simple, I'd do nothing, except a lot of can-kicking with report after report, and press conferences to launch reports that promise vague things 'when things get better.' I wouldn't worry too much about the loss of the asset, as long as I got the requisite few years out of it to build up the pension. Sound familiar?

eastwest · 29-11-2016 1:27pm

I see they've started lifting the rails at Tuam!
https://www.facebook.com/Offdarails/?hc_ref=SEARCH

Del.Monte · 29-11-2016 2:33pm

eastwest wrote: »

I see they've started lifting the rails at Tuam!
https://www.facebook.com/Offdarails/?hc_ref=SEARCH

Somebody with too much times on their hands and a schoolboy sense of humour (?) is behind that daft page.

eastwest · 29-11-2016 4:09pm

Del.Monte wrote: »

Somebody with too much times on their hands and a schoolboy sense of humour (?) is behind that daft page.

Waaay too much time, for sure; it's all fne until someone loses an i, as they say.
Still, they didn't start it; the 'original' is within a short head of being every bit as daft.

Muckyboots · 02-12-2016 6:31pm

For your delectation "Residents in one part of Galway have voiced their opposition to a stretch of the Galway-Dublin Greenway going through their area because it would assist criminals. The opposition centres on the proposed route from Roscam to Renmore, a short stretch of about 5km to the east of Galway City. And at a meeting of local residents in recent days a councillor from the area said he was opposed to “fat cat” consultants and managers forcing the project through. Local man John Grealish, who chaired the meeting, said there were real fears that the Greenway – a cycling route across the country – would bring crime into the area. Specifically he said the Greenway would expose the backs of properties to passers-by, adding burglars on motorbikes could escape down the cycle route after carrying out their crimes. “The area is a peninsula and one of the benefits of that is that there is only one way in and one way out,” he said in remarks reported by the Connacht Tribune. “This proposed route will expose the back of private property to people who could escape on motorbikes on the cycleway – and we are only two kilometres from the motorway so we are very open. “There is one man that the route is so close to the back of his house, he could hand tea through the window to people passing.” He insisted he was not opposed to the project, rather the project’s current proposed route. “There is already a proposal that they are going to run a pathway from the city out to Curragreen, but a footpath; why couldn’t a cycleway be included?
“Farmers have indicated that of a small amount of land had to be taken for this, they wouldn’t mind. The issue here is splitting land in two.” The Greenway, which would run to 277km, has already hit a variety of problems. The western section of the route was halted last year by then minister for transport Paschal Donohoe after complaints by farming organisations and a perceived lack of consultation with people living along the route. Galway City Councillor Mike Crowe said he would be requesting the council take the Roscam to Renmore proposed Greenway route out of the ‘city development plan’ amid complaints locals had not been consulted.
And once that was done local stakeholders should be given the opportunity to make their views known to the National Transport Authority. His view was supported by four other councillors at this week’s meeting. “This community.. will not stand idly by while fat cat consultants and senior officials try to drive a coach and four through our community with little or no regard for the effect on the residents and the environs,” said Cllr Crowe. He also believed the proposed route would take longer than of the Greenway ran along the Coast Road out of the city. “It’s grand on a July afternoon if you’re a tourist out for a cycle,” he said. “Other than that, it just doesn’t make sense.” “We… have an opportunity to remove this madness from it and send a message to these officials that we do not support this route.” Courtesy of http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/locals-oppose-277km-irish-cycle-route-because-burglars-might-use-it ( and for the benefit of the mods, similar soundings are being expressed by Western Rail Trail WRC objectors- a sure sign we are making real progress !).

eastwest · 02-12-2016 7:09pm

Muckyboots wrote: »

For your delectation "Residents in one part of Galway have voiced their opposition to a stretch of the Galway-Dublin Greenway going through their area because it would assist criminals. The opposition centres on the proposed route from Roscam to Renmore, a short stretch of about 5km to the east of Galway City. And at a meeting of local residents in recent days a councillor from the area said he was opposed to “fat cat” consultants and managers forcing the project through. Local man John Grealish, who chaired the meeting, said there were real fears that the Greenway – a cycling route across the country – would bring crime into the area. Specifically he said the Greenway would expose the backs of properties to passers-by, adding burglars on motorbikes could escape down the cycle route after carrying out their crimes. “The area is a peninsula and one of the benefits of that is that there is only one way in and one way out,” he said in remarks reported by the Connacht Tribune. “This proposed route will expose the back of private property to people who could escape on motorbikes on the cycleway – and we are only two kilometres from the motorway so we are very open. “There is one man that the route is so close to the back of his house, he could hand tea through the window to people passing.” He insisted he was not opposed to the project, rather the project’s current proposed route. “There is already a proposal that they are going to run a pathway from the city out to Curragreen, but a footpath; why couldn’t a cycleway be included?
“Farmers have indicated that of a small amount of land had to be taken for this, they wouldn’t mind. The issue here is splitting land in two.” The Greenway, which would run to 277km, has already hit a variety of problems. The western section of the route was halted last year by then minister for transport Paschal Donohoe after complaints by farming organisations and a perceived lack of consultation with people living along the route. Galway City Councillor Mike Crowe said he would be requesting the council take the Roscam to Renmore proposed Greenway route out of the ‘city development plan’ amid complaints locals had not been consulted.
And once that was done local stakeholders should be given the opportunity to make their views known to the National Transport Authority. His view was supported by four other councillors at this week’s meeting. “This community.. will not stand idly by while fat cat consultants and senior officials try to drive a coach and four through our community with little or no regard for the effect on the residents and the environs,” said Cllr Crowe. He also believed the proposed route would take longer than of the Greenway ran along the Coast Road out of the city. “It’s grand on a July afternoon if you’re a tourist out for a cycle,” he said. “Other than that, it just doesn’t make sense.” “We… have an opportunity to remove this madness from it and send a message to these officials that we do not support this route.” Courtesy of http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/locals-oppose-277km-irish-cycle-route-because-burglars-might-use-it ( and for the benefit of the mods, similar soundings are being expressed by Western Rail Trail WRC objectors- a sure sign we are making real progress !).

You'd be amazed how many tons of scrap metal you can tie to a crossbar.
We'd want to watch for that in Tuam too. There won't be a bit of lead left on a roof between here and Dunmore once the western rail trail opens.

loyatemu · 04-12-2016 1:48pm

Muckyboots wrote: »

“fat cat” consultants and managers.

surely "jackeens" would quicker to say.

Muckyboots · 04-12-2016 1:56pm

loyatemu wrote: »

surely "jackeens" would quicker to say.

" burglars on motorbikes " - also Jackeens. Build a wall ?

eastwest · 04-12-2016 7:12pm

Muckyboots wrote: »

" burglars on motorbikes " - also Jackeens. Build a wall ?

Looks like they're on it in Tuam already...
https://www.facebook.com/Offdarails/photos/a.361846504163885.1073741828.361222657559603/370123620002840/?type=3&theater

westtip · 05-12-2016 2:51pm

eastwest wrote: »

You'd be amazed how many tons of scrap metal you can tie to a crossbar.
We'd want to watch for that in Tuam too. There won't be a bit of lead left on a roof between here and Dunmore once the western rail trail opens.

Not to mention 7 foot flatscreen TVs in the back wheel paniers. It just gets worse doesn't it.

05-12-2016 7:59pm

Reminds me of the story about a man who worked at a factory that used mercury in one of their processes.
He decided to fill the frame of his bike with it, but got caught when he tried to peddle out the factory gate up the hill home.

The bike was so heavy, he couldn't get up the hill!

hytrogen · 07-12-2016 1:40pm

Muckyboots wrote:

" burglars on motorbikes " - also Jackeens. Build a wall ?

M50 ring fort does that nicely..

westtip · 08-12-2016 12:35am

http://www.heritagealliance.org/GreenwaysAndCrime.htm

says it all really.

loyatemu · 08-12-2016 11:49am

westtip wrote: »

http://www.heritagealliance.org/GreenwaysAndCrime.htm

says it all really.

these people have roads leading up their front doors right? - why not dig them up to protect them from jackeen raiders?

eastwest · 16-12-2016 12:24pm

Junior Minister Sean Canney came into government in a blaze of publicity around his stance on the western rail corridor, including a six month deadline for a study of the route. His website lists the matter as a priority, where he says that his priorities include his intent to "Campaign for the delivery of the remainder of the Western Rail Corridor including the provision of a freight service along this route."
Six months has come and gone, and there's not a sign of the promised report. Does that mean that Canney's 'red line' has been crossed and he will now walk away from government? Or is the report commissioned but not delivered? Or will he accept the recent Irish Rail report as sufficient evidence that completing the remainder of the WRC might be for another generation?
Or is his pre-ministerial bluster an embarrassment that he now wants to quietly ignore now that he has a plum job, and hope that nobody notices?
I think we should be told.

Logue no2 · 16-12-2016 1:36pm

eastwest wrote: »

Junior Minister Sean Canney came into government in a blaze of publicity around his stance on the western rail corridor, including a six month deadline for a study of the route. His website lists the matter as a priority, where he says that his priorities include his intent to "Campaign for the delivery of the remainder of the Western Rail Corridor including the provision of a freight service along this route."
Six months has come and gone, and there's not a sign of the promised report. Does that mean that Canney's 'red line' has been crossed and he will now walk away from government? Or is the report commissioned but not delivered? Or will he accept the recent Irish Rail report as sufficient evidence that completing the remainder of the WRC might be for another generation?
Or is his pre-ministerial bluster an embarrassment that he now wants to quietly ignore now that he has a plum job, and hope that nobody notices?
I think we should be told.

Deflection tactics! Why was the now closed West on Crack Facebook page created? Was there a view that the rail campaign was a bit too successful? I think we should be told.

Isambard · 16-12-2016 4:35pm

because it was a joke that had run it's course....away out of it with your conspiracy theories.

Logue no2 · 16-12-2016 4:49pm

Isambard wrote: »

because it was a joke that had run it's course....away out of it with your conspiracy theories.

Good to see you online again. How's Kanturk?

eastwest · 16-12-2016 10:03pm

Logue no2 wrote: »

eastwest wrote: »

Junior Minister Sean Canney came into government in a blaze of publicity around his stance on the western rail corridor, including a six month deadline for a study of the route. His website lists the matter as a priority, where he says that his priorities include his intent to "Campaign for the delivery of the remainder of the Western Rail Corridor including the provision of a freight service along this route."
Six months has come and gone, and there's not a sign of the promised report. Does that mean that Canney's 'red line' has been crossed and he will now walk away from government? Or is the report commissioned but not delivered? Or will he accept the recent Irish Rail report as sufficient evidence that completing the remainder of the WRC might be for another generation?
Or is his pre-ministerial bluster an embarrassment that he now wants to quietly ignore now that he has a plum job, and hope that nobody notices?
I think we should be told.

Deflection tactics! Why was the now closed West on Crack Facebook page created? Was there a view that the rail campaign was a bit too successful? I think we should be told.

No idea, and what has that got to do with the Canney debacle?
Or am I missing some in-house riddle?

BuffyBot · 16-12-2016 11:19pm

Can I remind folks (yet again) that civility isn't optional around here? Also trying to "out" folks either directly, or via snide remarks and sly comments is not something this forum is tolerent of, and frankly is the dictionary definition of "dick move".

eastwest · 17-12-2016 11:09am

eastwest wrote: »

Junior Minister Sean Canney came into government in a blaze of publicity around his stance on the western rail corridor, including a six month deadline for a study of the route. His website lists the matter as a priority, where he says that his priorities include his intent to "Campaign for the delivery of the remainder of the Western Rail Corridor including the provision of a freight service along this route."
Six months has come and gone, and there's not a sign of the promised report. Does that mean that Canney's 'red line' has been crossed and he will now walk away from government? Or is the report commissioned but not delivered? Or will he accept the recent Irish Rail report as sufficient evidence that completing the remainder of the WRC might be for another generation?
Or is his pre-ministerial bluster an embarrassment that he now wants to quietly ignore now that he has a plum job, and hope that nobody notices?
I think we should be told.

Despite the change of subject earlier that seems to have been aimed at avoiding the issue, this question is important. Where is the report, or is there going to be one at all? Was it all just a stalling tactic to slow down the greenway campaign, or what exactly is the story?
Or was it just a way of getting a nice job in government?

westtip · 21-12-2016 11:27pm

Logue no2 wrote: »

Good to see you online again. How's Kanturk?

and how is south london are the trains not running on time enough for you to concentrate on!

BuffyBot · 22-12-2016 12:59pm

BuffyBot wrote: »

Can I remind folks (yet again) that civility isn't optional around here? Also trying to "out" folks either directly, or via snide remarks and sly comments is not something this forum is tolerent of, and frankly is the dictionary definition of "dick move".

This. Again. Take it to private message if you must, but anyone ignoring it shouldn't expect much sympathy.

eastwest · 22-12-2016 1:17pm

I'd love to know where the Canney Report is though. It was such an important issue during the talks for the formation of government, and the six months deadline was a red line issue for the bould Sean. That deadline is now passed and there's no sign of the report.
So, does anyone know, (1) is the report even commissioned yet?, (2) If it is, who is writing it?, (3) Is Junior Minister Canney going to accept the recent Irish Rail report as definitive, or will he spend our taxes duplicating it?, or (4) If he doesn't get a report, will he withdraw from government as promised?
Or is it 'none of the above', where ignoring it means that at least an adverse report won't appear?

25-12-2016 8:17pm

eastwest wrote: »

I'd love to know where the Canney Report is though. It was such an important issue during the talks for the formation of government, and the six months deadline was a red line issue for the bould Sean. That deadline is now passed and there's no sign of the report.
So, does anyone know, (1) is the report even commissioned yet?, (2) If it is, who is writing it?, (3) Is Junior Minister Canney going to accept the recent Irish Rail report as definitive, or will he spend our taxes duplicating it?, or (4) If he doesn't get a report, will he withdraw from government as promised?
Or is it 'none of the above', where ignoring it means that at least an adverse report won't appear?

If you are that interested, why not just drop his office an email.

eastwest · 25-12-2016 9:00pm

That would just get me a political response. You know, 'the minister is engaged in a consultative process going forward with a view to bringing finality to the ongoing discussions around the process of delivering essential infrastructure to the Galway area. As soon as clarity has emerged from the discussions, the minister will update you.'
I just want to know if the whole thing about the 'red line' issue in the programme for government was just a bit of spoofing, something to keep the few anti tourism councillors happy while grabbing a tasty salary with a nifty expenses regime. I don't think I'll get that from the junior minister, but maybe some of the railway buffs have the information. Did their boy deliver, or was it all smoke and daggers?

eastwest · 25-12-2016 9:00pm

That would just get me a political response. You know, 'the minister is engaged in a consultative process going forward with a view to bringing finality to the ongoing discussions around the process of delivering essential infrastructure to the Galway area. As soon as clarity has emerged from the discussions, the minister will update you.'
I just want to know if the whole thing about the 'red line' issue in the programme for government was just a bit of spoofing, something to keep the few anti tourism councillors happy while grabbing a tasty salary with a nifty expenses regime. I don't think I'll get that from the junior minister, but maybe some of the railway buffs have the information. Did their boy deliver, or was it all smoke and daggers?

westtip · 26-12-2016 6:03pm

Deleted User wrote: »

If you are that interested, why not just drop his office an email.

Pointless I have written via email to him and the minister for Westport so many times on this issue, they never reply.

Del.Monte · 01-01-2017 1:45am

Look what I found tonight. Happy New Year westtip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaMK8d61dMY

eastwest · 01-01-2017 11:33am

I'd love to see them try that today! Might have to do a bit of portage!
Still, it's great to see that the wdc still believes in the tooth fairy.

01-01-2017 12:57pm

eastwest wrote: »

I'd love to see them try that today! Might have to do a bit of portage!
Still, it's great to see that the wdc still believes in the tooth fairy.

They'd need to use one of these to get along the "modified" sections.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZKYu34s7Eo

westtip · 01-01-2017 3:53pm

Del.Monte wrote: »

Look what I found tonight. Happy New Year westtip.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vaMK8d61dMY

Was that the holy father on board at the beginning of the clip? With His holiness possibly coming back to Ireland would't this wee yellow cart make a great Pope mobile. 1981. My second year at Uni. Margaret Thatcher at the height of her realm, Italia 90 only 9 years to go. The Millenium bug festering in our mainframes. Truly a lifetime away.......and still those that live in hope. Good luck for 2017.

what_traffic · 11-01-2017 6:29pm

"Contract to be awarded shortly for long-awaited upgrade of N63 near Abbeyknockmoy"

http://connachttribune.ie/contract-to-be-awarded-shortly-for-long-awaited-upgrade-of-n63-near-abbeyknockmoy/
"
The works include, fencing, site clearance, traffic management, earthworks, drainage, pavement, signage, landscaping, kerbing and footway/cycleway construction.
"
Does this mean the end of the WRC?
Is footway/cycleway mentioned here in relation to the Railway Bridge over the N63? Is it to be converted into a footway/cycleway bridge?

NiallBoo · 11-01-2017 6:38pm

^^^wouldn't standard foot-paths/cycle lanes along the road be the more obvious answer?

Del.Monte · 11-01-2017 6:44pm

NiallBoo wrote: »

^^^wouldn't standard foot-paths/cycle lanes along the road be the more obvious answer?

No, every closed line in the country needs to be turned into a greenway and then we can move onto to greenways on planned rail links that weren't built.

what_traffic · 11-01-2017 7:02pm

NiallBoo wrote: »

^^^wouldn't standard foot-paths/cycle lanes along the road be the more obvious answer?

Your correct - but in this scenario I believe this N63 scheme was held up in relation to who was going to pay for the Railway Bridge works? The road is been widened and the Bridge has to be widened as a result. I understand a big difference in the cost of reinstating as a Railway Bridge v's Cycleway Bridge was discussed at the time but I have not heard anything on what the final decision was?

Edit for clarification:
as per photo in the following link
http://connachttribune.ie/contract-to-be-awarded-shortly-for-long-awaited-upgrade-of-n63-near-abbeyknockmoy-290/
the Railway Bridge is called the: Ballyglunin bridge

Grandeeod · 11-01-2017 8:47pm

what_traffic wrote: »

Your correct - but in this scenario I believe this N63 scheme was held up in relation to who was going to pay for the Railway Bridge works? The road is been widened and the Bridge has to be widened as a result. I understand a big difference in the cost of reinstating as a Railway Bridge v's Cycleway Bridge was discussed at the time but I have not heard anything on what the final decision was?

Edit for clarification:
as per photo in the following link
http://connachttribune.ie/contract-to-be-awarded-shortly-for-long-awaited-upgrade-of-n63-near-abbeyknockmoy-290/
the Railway Bridge is called the: Ballyglunin bridge

Well if they dont replace the railway bridge as part of this road project, it doesn't matter. WOT and their supporters wont care because they will simply "demand" its replacement as part of their "demand" for the reopening. Who cares?

Lots more damage was inflicted in areas of decent enough population and nobody batted an eyelid. Think the M3 and the state backed reopening of the Navan rail line. Biggest scam ever in rail terms. A poxy bridge in the backwater of Ballyglunin hasn't a patch on it.:rolleyes:

westtip · 12-01-2017 11:56am

NiallBoo wrote: »

^^^wouldn't standard foot-paths/cycle lanes along the road be the more obvious answer?

Not for a long distance greenway to attract tourists, inevitably sometimes alongside a road is used for short sections of greenway, of course in countries like Netherlands cycle lanes are built as a standard part of many roads, that is not going to happen here. There are many different solutions for building greenway infrastructure visit the www.sustrans.co.uk site to see what can be achieved, the use of closed railways though is just an obvious and cheap way of utilizing public land for this purpose, not going to go over old ground here, but the obvious answer and most cost effective solution is actually to use the closed railway.....which ain't going to re-open!

westtip · 12-01-2017 11:59am

what_traffic wrote: »

http://connachttribune.ie/contract-to-be-awarded-shortly-for-long-awaited-upgrade-of-n63-near-abbeyknockmoy-290/
the Railway Bridge is called the: Ballyglunin bridge

Ballyglunin Bridge gone is the end of the railway. End of. Period. Full Stop. Adios amigos.

Muckyboots · 12-01-2017 12:24pm

what_traffic wrote: »

"Contract to be awarded shortly for long-awaited upgrade of N63 near Abbeyknockmoy"

http://connachttribune.ie/contract-to-be-awarded-shortly-for-long-awaited-upgrade-of-n63-near-abbeyknockmoy/

Does this mean the end of the WRC?
Is footway/cycleway mentioned here in relation to the Railway Bridge over the N63? Is it to be converted into a footway/cycleway bridge?

http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/10/12/4128223-atlantic-rail-corridor-set-to-become-a-reality/

Seán Canny TD (Minister of State OPW) said that he was working closely with Minister Ring and other colleagues to ensure that the Atlantic Corridor becomes a reality.
“The restoration of the Mayo-Galway rail link is a key part of that as far as I am concerned.” He added that he was pleased to confirm that the TII was writing to Galway County Council to confirm that a new railway bridge is to be built at Ballyglunin as part of the works on the new M17 motorway.

eastwest · 12-01-2017 1:23pm

Muckyboots wrote: »

http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/10/12/4128223-atlantic-rail-corridor-set-to-become-a-reality/

Seán Canny TD (Minister of State OPW) said that he was working closely with Minister Ring and other colleagues to ensure that the Atlantic Corridor becomes a reality.
“The restoration of the Mayo-Galway rail link is a key part of that as far as I am concerned.” He added that he was pleased to confirm that the TII was writing to Galway County Council to confirm that a new railway bridge is to be built at Ballyglunin as part of the works on the new M17 motorway.

Apart from the statement by Canney, I wonder is there any basis in fact for a belief that a bridge will be built at Ballyglunin as part of the M17 job? If so, what height above the current track will it be built at, and what impact will that have on the other bridges nearby? There is another bridge close enough to Ballyglunin that is already very humped and that is also close to somebody's front garden; will that have to be raised as well to accommodate the raised track bed and won't it create a serious visual intrusion and traffic hazard close to a handful of homes on that road? There is another bridge as well in the zone that will also have to be raised, and I think that both may be listed structures.
I wonder has anybody thought this through? Maybe Junior Minister Canney could elaborate?

westtip · 12-01-2017 1:24pm

Muckyboots wrote: »

http://www.con-telegraph.ie/news/roundup/articles/2016/10/12/4128223-atlantic-rail-corridor-set-to-become-a-reality/

Seán Canny TD (Minister of State OPW) said that he was working closely with Minister Ring and other colleagues to ensure that the Atlantic Corridor becomes a reality.
“The restoration of the Mayo-Galway rail link is a key part of that as far as I am concerned.” He added that he was pleased to confirm that the TII was writing to Galway County Council to confirm that a new railway bridge is to be built at Ballyglunin as part of the works on the new M17 motorway.

It will be a promisary note for it to happen sometime in the future, maybe Sean Canney should ask for it to be included in the Western Rail Corridor report he has asked for, apparently going to happen within 6 months of government being formed, shouldn't worry too much about the railway bridge being rebuilt, it will be offered to happen sometime in the future. They will wave the promisary note in the air, "Peace in our time", I believe is the historical reference.

eastwest · 12-01-2017 1:44pm

Ballyglunin Bridge currently has a clearance off the roadway of 4.14m. Is it not true that part of the access road works includes raising the road level, reducing that clearance?
Either way, TII's own standards for road bridges allow for clearance over vehicles with a maximum height of 4.65m, raised since the year 2000 when it was 4.25m. So, they will have to build any replacement bridge to the new standard, raising the track bed by more than half a meter plus whatever additional height is being added to the roadway. That also has implications in both directions for nearby bridges.
You can't build an access link to a motorway without also building in sufficient clearance for motorway traffic.

NiallBoo · 12-01-2017 3:00pm

westtip wrote: »

Not for a long distance greenway...

Whether there's a greenway built or not, this article doesn't say anything about it. As you say it would be a completely separate project and thus out if the scope of what's being reported.

What_traffic asks an interesting question about how/if the bridge might be rebuilt, but the article doesn't say anything about it so it's all just guess-work.

serfboard · 12-01-2017 3:00pm

eastwest wrote: »

is there any basis in fact for a belief that a bridge will be built at Ballyglunin as part of the M17 job?

No.

Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Comments