Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

rainbowdash

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Another letter to the times today

On your bike? Not any time soon
http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/letters/on-your-bike-not-any-time-soon-1.1454219

You gotta love these rant letters all the same. He was doing ok until he claimed the key strip of infrastructure was between Claremorris and Collooney. If a greenway is built it won't be connecting to any other existing greenways or tourist heartland, how is it particularily "key"

I would say the railway between Limerick and Fenit is far more "key", its much longer, starts in a major city, near a major airport and goes all the way to a tourist heartland with a further option of going along a scenic coastal route to Foynes, tarbert, across the Shannon on a ferry and into west clare and the old west clare railway etc.

Its also partially built already.

Another "key" strip in my opinion is the canal towpaths out of Dublin.

rainbowdash

Grandeeod wrote: »

A remarkable letter that is more alarming than one could realise. To digress for a moment - In a time where Ireland needs to generate money in any way possible, I am always drawn back to the precarious nature of it's Tourism industry. I live abroad in a place that is extremely dependent on Tourism to keep the local economy alive. While Ireland isn't as dependent, the comparisons are educational. Ireland has consistently trotted out the same tourist product for generations. It's old, it's tired and seems afraid of real change. The American green trouser brigade have gone. The days of Americans flying in on Aer Lingus 747s and camping out in posh hotels all over Ireland are over. The market is very different yet the marketing of the product is the same. We see ads based on the "craic in the pub", "the trad session" and of course the "scenery". It's never changed. None of it. Yet there awaits us, a massive tourism market if we think differently, use our resources and tap into it.

I've been back in Ireland on business for the last few weeks and I feel like a tourist so I can benchmark it against where I live in terms of a tourism product along with my other travels. It's bizarre! Where I live they will move heaven and water to facilitate a tourism product because the kickback is financial reward for the economy both local and national. While I have expressed a don't give a damn attitude to whether the WRC is developed into a greenway or not (its not my fight) I know it shouldn't reopen as a railway. However I do see the merits of doing something with it as I alluded to a few posts back. The general Greenway concept is literally just one concept that can begin a change in the Irish tourism product. And for the record it doesn't have to just be about walkers and cyclists. While Greenways generally suggest to people that its about the fit and healthy getting involved, I think thats a limiting factor to a facility that can have so many other appealing factors. For example the Segway concept is growing and I can't for the life of me understand why this concept has not been rolled out on the few Greenways we have. Greenways provide a perfect environment for Segways. This is just one example of how the Greenway concept can be developed as a tourism product. There are many more and I'm not bothered getting into it now because I am shocked by the attitude from those against the Greenway idea for the WRC. This alignment has wonderful potential to deliver a really clever tourism product to the region compared to a multi million euro railway that we don't need. That said, one only has to visit the West of Ireland to see that they are still trotting out the same old and tired tourist product. It's getting embarrassing and that's from the mouths of tourists I've talked with. In the minds of those against the WRC Greenway, that's okay as they can't see the problem. Its always been that way so why change it. The railway represents something different to them. Its about the pound of flesh and entitlement that they think they deserve. That is a very inward way of thinking and highlights the same west of Ireland begging bowl mentality that prohibits them from actually forging their own future. They don't see what they have. They only see what they think they should have.

Not sure what your point is really. Take the cliffs of moher for example, almost 1 million visitors a year, or the aran islands, more and more ferrys added every year to cope with demand. Killarney and surrounds is always wall to wall with tourists.

Ireland has some truely great tourist products, things that a greenway between Collooney and Claremorris will never compete with.

Take a look at the greenway in west limerick, its not exactly a tourist mecca, and would have a similar profile to what you might see in east Mayo.

Yes it would be a nice local amenity but thousands of tired and hungry tourists it will not produce.

Grandeeod

rainbowdash wrote: »

Not sure what your point is really. Take the cliffs of moher for example, almost 1 million visitors a year, or the aran islands, more and more ferrys added every year to cope with demand. Killarney and surrounds is always wall to wall with tourists.

Ireland has some truely great tourist products, things that a greenway between Collooney and Claremorris will never compete with.

Take a look at the greenway in west limerick, its not exactly a tourist mecca, and would have a similar profile to what you might see in east Mayo.

Yes it would be a nice local amenity but thousands of tired and hungry tourists it will not produce.

The point is simple. A Greenway anywhere is not for competing with any existing tourist product. Its about adding to existing tourist products and increasing tourism figures. As for not delivering thousands of "tired and hungry" tourists, how do you know it won't?

eastwest

rainbowdash wrote: »

You gotta love these rant letters all the same. He was doing ok until he claimed the key strip of infrastructure was between Claremorris and Collooney. If a greenway is built it won't be connecting to any other existing greenways or tourist heartland, how is it particularily "key"

I would say the railway between Limerick and Fenit is far more "key", its much longer, starts in a major city, near a major airport and goes all the way to a tourist heartland with a further option of going along a scenic coastal route to Foynes, tarbert, across the Shannon on a ferry and into west clare and the old west clare railway etc.

Its also partially built already.

Another "key" strip in my opinion is the canal towpaths out of Dublin.

Thanks to galwaycyclist for posting the link; I hadn't seen the Times.
I'm afraid I have to disagree with this post and agree with the sentiments in the letter, and indeed I fail to see how it could be described as a 'rant.'
What is most shocking about the letter ( I read it a few times looking for the 'rant) is the statement that Roscommon County Council voted against discussing other uses for this abandoned railway. That's almost unbelievable, but if true it shows that the problems of the west lie very much in the west. I'm going to root around and find out more about this, and I'll post here when I get to the bottom of it.
As for the Claremorris Collooney stretch being 'key', anyone with a map of Ireland would have to agree. It would nicely join up the proposed Collooney to Enniskillen greenway (that just got seed funding a few weeks back) with the existing short greenway in Mayo to form a decent length trail. 'Key' enough for me, anyway, but maybe not everybody has a map. ;-)
The other thing I notice from my map, by the way, was that the proposed greenway (or railway, for the dreamers) goes nowhere near Roscommon, so am I missing something?

rainbowdash

eastwest wrote: »

As for the Claremorris Collooney stretch being 'key', anyone with a map of Ireland would have to agree. It would nicely join up the proposed Collooney to Enniskillen greenway (that just got seed funding a few weeks back) with the existing short greenway in Mayo to form a decent length trail. 'Key' enough for me, anyway, but maybe not everybody has a map. ;-)

If a greenway ever went ahead across the privately owned route between Collooney and Enniskillen then it might have something to join up with.

Whats the existing greenway that starts in Claremorris at the moment for it to join with, and where does it go?

How is the Collooney - Claremorris section key in a national context, when its proposed to join up with other non existent greenways.:rolleyes:

Why is Collooney - Enniskillen less "key" in a national context.

What makes the letter a "rant" is wrongly making out Collooney - Claremorris is key in a national context.

TINA1984

rainbowdash wrote: »

You gotta love these rant letters all the same. He was doing ok until he claimed the key strip of infrastructure was between Claremorris and Collooney. If a greenway is built it won't be connecting to any other existing greenways or tourist heartland, how is it particularily "key"

I would say the railway between Limerick and Fenit is far more "key", its much longer, starts in a major city, near a major airport and goes all the way to a tourist heartland with a further option of going along a scenic coastal route to Foynes, tarbert, across the Shannon on a ferry and into west clare and the old west clare railway etc.

Its also partially built already.

Another "key" strip in my opinion is the canal towpaths out of Dublin.

I am curious as to your motivations for downplaying the case for converting Tuam - Claremorris - Collooney into a greenway. Whilst it on its own merits may not be as popular as other Greenways, it would certainly be more worthwhile a project then leaving it as a 'preserved' alignment in the faint hope that one day trains will run on it again. Wouldn't you agree?;)

rainbowdash

Grandeeod wrote: »

The point is simple. A Greenway anywhere is not for competing with any existing tourist product. Its about adding to existing tourist products and increasing tourism figures. As for not delivering thousands of "tired and hungry" tourists, how do you know it won't?

According to yourself the existing tourist product is an embarrassment, how is 1 million visitors to the cliffs of moher an embarrassment.

Surely we should be abandoning these tired old tourist products in favour of greenways, if as you say, its embarrassing.

Bottom line is a greenway through knock will be a drop in the tourist ocean compared to something like the cliffs of moher or aran islands.

I don't know how tourists will use a greenway from Collooney to Claremorris, and neither do you.

But as a benchmark to another inland greenway the west limerick trail is a reasonable comparison and its not exactly a tourist trap.

corktina

Not exatly a tourist trap YET. Early days yet, i feel these things spread by word of mouth almost, Herr Schmidt from Hamburg comes this year, loves the peace and quiet and the cafés full of a tired hungry cyclist...and tells his mates, he puts it on facebook, he posts on his cycling club website, and next year two or three more Hamburgers come look see.....it is a cheap bit of infrastructure and can only add to our tourist base, sure, the coachloads of grannies visting the Cliffs of Moher and the Hen Parties in Killarney (etc) won't use them but that's the point, it's NEW tourists we need, there's a huge market out there in Europe, the DUtch for instance love our bogs, mainly because they drained all theirs, and I can see them in particular cycling to the Midland Bogs.

eastwest

rainbowdash wrote: »

If a greenway ever went ahead across the privately owned route between Collooney and Enniskillen then it might have something to join up with.

Whats the existing greenway that starts in Claremorris at the moment for it to join with, and where does it go?

How is the Collooney - Claremorris section key in a national context, when its proposed to join up with other non existent greenways.:rolleyes:

Why is Collooney - Enniskillen less "key" in a national context.

What makes the letter a "rant" is wrongly making out Collooney - Claremorris is key in a national context.

The route of the old Leitrim and northern counties railway from Collooney to enniskillen ( or the part that is in the republic) has been given €150k in seed funding to start the process of building a greenway, on land that had largely reverted to private ownership, same as the land on which the Westport Achill greenway is built. That land was also lost to public ownership and required a lot of money to be input to get the greenway through.
Clearly, not everybody can see the irony here. We are going to allow the Collooney Claremorris stretch to also be lost to private landowners before we spen a shed load of money to buy it back to take its key place as the bit that joins the two greenways. An Irish solution to looking after the squatters (aka voters).

Grandeeod

rainbowdash wrote: »

According to yourself the existing tourist product is an embarrassment, how is 1 million visitors to the cliffs of moher an embarrassment.

Surely we should be abandoning these tired old tourist products in favour of greenways, if as you say, its embarrassing.

Bottom line is a greenway through knock will be a drop in the tourist ocean compared to something like the cliffs of moher or aran islands.

I don't know how tourists will use a greenway from Collooney to Claremorris, and neither do you.

But as a benchmark to another inland greenway the west limerick trail is a reasonable comparison and its not exactly a tourist trap.

Oh dear oh dear, please don't try and twist what I've said. I did not say we should abandon anything in favour of anything else or because its embarrassing. Tourism incorporates more than just attractions like the Cliffs of Moher. Its the overall experience and availability of varied attractions that suit different tastes. Now before you go off twisting what I have said to suit your own agenda, lets get something straight.

1. I am not involved in any way whatsoever in this Greenway campaign.
2. I can see the merits of it against a background of pushing our tourism product onwards. That means expanding the product. You may not accept this but there are tourists who couldn't care less about the Cliffs of Moher. They want a different experience.
3. The attitutde towards the WRC from West of Ireland officialdom, is disgraceful, especially when some don't even want a Greenway/alternative use put up for discussion. That is backwards.

Keep reading the above points when replying to me.

eastwest

Grandeeod wrote: »

Oh dear oh dear, please don't try and twist what I've said. I did not say we should abandon anything in favour of anything else or because its embarrassing. Tourism incorporates more than just attractions like the Cliffs of Moher. Its the overall experience and availability of varied attractions that suit different tastes. Now before you go off twisting what I have said to suit your own agenda, lets get something straight.

1. I am not involved in any way whatsoever in this Greenway campaign.
2. I can see the merits of it against a background of pushing our tourism product onwards. That means expanding the product. You may not accept this but there are tourists who couldn't care less about the Cliffs of Moher. They want a different experience.
3. The attitutde towards the WRC from West of Ireland officialdom, is disgraceful, especially when some don't even want a Greenway/alternative use put up for discussion. That is backwards.

Keep reading the above points when replying to me.

There is a very inward-looking mentality in parts of the west, an inability to see how things work elsewhere and apply it to solving problems locally. That is made worse by a bad dose of negative self image, such as that which suggests that tourists wouldn't be interested in cycling or walking a trail through mayo.
A few months ago I was listening to Midwest radio on line, having been told that this matter was being discussed. A spokesman for wot made an almost unbelievable comment to the effect that the mayo grernway had something that Claremorris didn't have, i.e. scenery!
These guys just miss the point completely. They need to go to France, Istria, germany or anywhere that this business is booming and rent a bike for a few days and head off along a decent-sized greenway. Then maybe they'd get it.
I am beginning to get a picture here though, particularly with regards to the inter county rail committee. This isn't about a railway; they know that's not coming. It's about keeping a few farmers on side and milking the expenses system.

rainbowdash

eastwest wrote: »

The route of the old Leitrim and northern counties railway from Collooney to enniskillen ( or the part that is in the republic) has been given €150k in seed funding to start the process of building a greenway, on land that had largely reverted to private ownership, same as the land on which the Westport Achill greenway is built. That land was also lost to public ownership and required a lot of money to be input to get the greenway through.
Clearly, not everybody can see the irony here. We are going to allow the Collooney Claremorris stretch to also be lost to private landowners before we spen a shed load of money to buy it back to take its key place as the bit that joins the two greenways. An Irish solution to looking after the squatters (aka voters).

Its funding for a feasibility study. It might never happen. As things stand a greenway from Collooney to Claremorris is not the key part of a national greenway network.

Just because some clown got his letter published in the Irish Examiner does not mean you have to take what he says as being even remotely true.

A paper never refuses ink and all that.

eastwest

rainbowdash wrote: »

Its funding for a feasibility study. It might never happen. As things stand a greenway from Collooney to Claremorris is not the key part of a national greenway network.

Just because some clown got his letter published in the Irish Examiner does not mean you have to take what he says as being even remotely true.

A paper never refuses ink and all that.

Clowns?
Rants?
When I see this kind of language, I'm afraid that I see somebody who has lost the argument and is relying on the language of the playground. We're all entitled to an opinion, regardless of which side we agree with.

If you really want to see clowns though, try the circus that is Roscommon County Council (as promised, I've been doing a bit of digging).
At the May meeting of the Council, Cllr John Murphy (ind) tabled a motion proposing that the council write to the other councils involved in the western inter county railway committee with a proposal to set up an inter county greenway committee that would be able to discuss alternative options for the disused Claremorris to Collooney line. The motion was defeated, with only three councillors voting for it, Rachel Doherty (FF), Tony Ward (ind), and John Murphy.
The council effectively voted to block all discussion of alternative uses of the asset, which is all the more surprising when you consider that no part of the line is located in county Roscommon. Why are they even involved?
An even more chilling part of this episode ( if you're a democrat) is that the motion was defeated following an intervention on behalf of the pro-rail lobby by an unelected council official who was present in the chamber. The official, according to my source, intervened several times to support the WOT argument that the route should only ever be used for rail, and his arguments helped persuade the waverers to defeat the motion.
Dodgy behaviour, to say the least; he's not supposed to do that. If you're a supporter of democratic principles, you will probably agree with me on that one, even if we disagree about almost everything else.

monument

rainbowdash wrote: »

Its funding for a feasibility study. It might never happen. As things stand a greenway from Collooney to Claremorris is not the key part of a national greenway network.

Just because some clown got his letter published in the Irish Examiner does not mean you have to take what he says as being even remotely true.

A paper never refuses ink and all that.

Calling people clowns or other names won't be tolerated here -- this applies to both sides of the debate.

rainbowdash

monument wrote: »

Calling people clowns or other names won't be tolerated here -- this applies to both sides of the debate.

I didn't call anybody on here a clown.

galwaycyclist

rainbowdash wrote: »

I didn't call anybody on here a clown.

How do you know?

rainbowdash

galwaycyclist wrote: »

How do you know?

Because I was referring to a letter in the Irish times, written by a named individual, I don't see the persons name on any of the contributions here nor do I see anybody claiming to be that person.

monument

Please read the charter - do not reply to moderation on the thread.

Nobody is obliged to ID them self here, but we do ask that you do not call people names and that the level of debate is kept a little higher than name calling.

Grandeeod

eastwest wrote: »

Clowns?
Rants?
When I see this kind of language, I'm afraid that I see somebody who has lost the argument and is relying on the language of the playground. We're all entitled to an opinion, regardless of which side we agree with.

If you really want to see clowns though, try the circus that is Roscommon County Council (as promised, I've been doing a bit of digging).
At the May meeting of the Council, Cllr John Murphy (ind) tabled a motion proposing that the council write to the other councils involved in the western inter county railway committee with a proposal to set up an inter county greenway committee that would be able to discuss alternative options for the disused Claremorris to Collooney line. The motion was defeated, with only three councillors voting for it, Rachel Doherty (FF), Tony Ward (ind), and John Murphy.
The council effectively voted to block all discussion of alternative uses of the asset, which is all the more surprising when you consider that no part of the line is located in county Roscommon. Why are they even involved?
An even more chilling part of this episode ( if you're a democrat) is that the motion was defeated following an intervention on behalf of the pro-rail lobby by an unelected council official who was present in the chamber. The official, according to my source, intervened several times to support the WOT argument that the route should only ever be used for rail, and his arguments helped persuade the waverers to defeat the motion.
Dodgy behaviour, to say the least; he's not supposed to do that. If you're a supporter of democratic principles, you will probably agree with me on that one, even if we disagree about almost everything else.

It is absolutely sickening to see what's going on. Roscommon CC have nothing to do with this. They have been infiltrated. There is very clear evidence developing that WOT are morally bankrupt and that they are far too politically connected to represent a transparent view of the WRC. It's democracy their way.

eastwest

Grandeeod wrote: »

It is absolutely sickening to see what's going on. Roscommon CC have nothing to do with this. They have been infiltrated. There is very clear evidence developing that WOT are morally bankrupt and that they are far too politically connected to represent a transparent view of the WRC. It's democracy their way.

I wouldn't have a problem with the political nature of their campaign, but suppressing debate in a council chamber while giving a voice in the same chamber to somebody who is not elected to the council? What on earth is going on down there? It's bizarre, in my view.

Grandeeod

eastwest wrote: »

I wouldn't have a problem with the political nature of their campaign, but suppressing debate in a council chamber while giving a voice in the same chamber to somebody who is not elected to the council? What on earth is going on down there? It's bizarre, in my view.

The political nature of their campaign has enabled them to suppress debate via any means possible. They are permitted to orchestrate whatever they please. This is nothing new. Political affiliation means nothing in the West of Ireland, it's just politics, full stop. Look at these videos. But first realise that "Bizarre" is an understatement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKQyv_N-HvQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5CcbiWSo-Kg

From one extreme to another.

Grandeeod

I'll leave this tonight with a bit of light hearted humour. Obviously the pro WRC side are free to do an alternate version.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWPxQSxDS6U

rainbowdash

Grandeeod wrote: »

It is absolutely sickening to see what's going on. Roscommon CC have nothing to do with this. They have been infiltrated. There is very clear evidence developing that WOT are morally bankrupt and that they are far too politically connected to represent a transparent view of the WRC. It's democracy their way.

Maybe you should ring Joe Duffy, infiltration of county councils by morally bankrupt organisations ruined this country before and can't be allowed happen again. If you have very clear evidence of this then perhaps its time to go national?

bambergbike

For a greenway to work with a typical "greenway" clientele (families with young children, for example, or pensioners) it would need excellent public transport links. Regular bike buses, for example. So locals along the route wouldn't just benefit from a new cycling link, but also from other improvements that would be hard to justify without a greenway project. Maybe those benefits have not been highlighted as well as they could be.

However, I think the benefits of the WRC greenway to cyclists tend to be hugely overstated. It may well be worth building as a local amenity, but blacktop is not a tourist attraction in itself, only a means of connecting tourist attractions. Cycle routes need selling points and narratives and this one isn't selling itself very well. John Mulligan states in his letter to the Irish Times that 5 million Germans go on cycling holidays every year. He doesn't say that 85% of these holidays are in Germany, and that the most popular tourist routes in Germany are along rivers and not along old railway embankments: the Danube, the Elbe, the Main etc. If we want to capture a chunk of that particular market, we need to think big and build a Shannon source-to-sea greenway.

We also need to develop a proper cycling culture of our own if we want to attract cycle tourists from abroad. People go on cycling holidays to the Netherlands because they know that the Dutch cycle themselves and "get" cycling. In Germany, tourists account for 23,7% of the total number of km cycled, so 23,7% of the cycle route budget can be justified as an investment in tourism. In Ireland, it might be realistic to aim for a much higher "tourist" quota, but we need to remember our own "10% of all trips by bike" aim as well. The chances of terrifying encounters on country roads with SUV drivers who don't "get" cycling are distressingly high in Ireland. People seem to fantastize that the way we drive wouldn't matter if we built greenways for cyclists, but it doesn't work like that. Even if we built four or five long-distance greenways as big "flagship" projects tomorrow, we would still need to incorporate lots of quiet country roads and suburban roads into any national cycling route network worthy of the name. That won't work if we have very high speed limits on narrow and twisty roads, if we allow rat-running on them, if we don't do anything about dangerous overtaking ...

John Mulligan also says that Germany has 75 000 km of dedicated cycleways. I did a little bit of digging to work out where that particular statistic came from - it struck me as a bit strange.
There are 2 million km of bike paths in Germany - many of them shared with pedestrians - and lots of other facilities used by cyclists: "ordinary" roads, agricultural roads, forestry roads, residents-only roads ... and nobody had a clue how much of this network should count as a tourist cycle route network. So what they did to calculate the length of the tourist network was to add up the length of all the cycle routes SIGNPOSTED for tourists - long-distance routes and various local circuits - and then to subtract the "extra" kilometers that resulted from overlap between routes. So yes, the Germans have built greenways - quite a few of them, in fact - but a huge proportion of their cycle route network has been created simply by putting up green and white signposts to direct cyclists from A to B and to let drivers know when to expect them. We need to do this, too, as a matter of urgency. We could create 50 decent cycle routes that use existing country routes in a year. These wouldn't attract families with very young children, but they would attract more adventurous cyclists, the type of cyclist who isn't going to be put off by the odd shower and is maybe more of a candidate for a "wild" Irish holiday.

As things stand, it is possible to cycle most of the way from Sligo to Galway on fairly quiet country roads - it just takes a lot of map reading and involves the odd encounter with a lunatic on wheels. WRC or no, we need to take out the map reading and guesswork and make the roads a more civilized environment by warning drivers when they are on cycle routes ("green roads"). Old railway lines are low-hanging fruit, and there's no need to ignore the rest of the orchard. At the moment we seem to be leaving half the harvest on the trees for lack of a ladder.

Naomh Eanna

Some great and clear thinking in that last post. From reading the other posts here it seems to me that the motivation for the Sligo Mayo greenway campaigners is to stop the Western Rail Corridor at all costs, and that the Greenway idea is a useful stick to beat West on Track and local councillors with.

Brendan Quinns opposition to the WRC goes back to at least 2006 when he wrote to The Irish Times to complain about the cost of the WRC. Back then he was advocating spending the money on motorways. Along the way we have seen cancer care in the west, gas pipelines, fibre optic links and now a greenway for the old railway track. Originally the greenway was to be on the Collooney-Claremorris section but now he wants the whole section right down to Athenry to be a greenway. One can only speculate that his motivation is partly driven by hatred of West on Track as can be seen by the promotion of the Adolf Hitler downfall parody and the constant sniping at West on Track and local councillors here.

Safe cycle routes using a sensible mixture of roads and former railway and canal routes is to my mind the right and cost effective thing to do. I do not think for one minute that there are hoards of "tired hungry tourists" aching for a greenway in North Mayo, but a safe network of cycle friendly roads would be a great start for ourselves here.

If the WRC is to succeed we need to follow the example of Midleton where targeted development encouraged a critical mass where a railway became feasible. If Mayo is serious about developing the WRC then they need to have a strategy where development is targeted around the towns lying on the WRC so a critical mass is in place to justify rail services.

corktina

the idea of Greenways is to have a safe traffic-free route. "Fairly quiet country roads" do not acheive this.

Also, 85% of Germany's routes may be along rivers, and the same applies no doubt in the UK. Thats because the tow paths were already there from the days of horse drawn river traffic. It is madness to suggest a path be built alongside the Shannon where for most of it's length no such path exists. Now, the Grand and Royal Canals now, that's different matter.

In th UK also there is a huge network of footpaths and bridleways that can be readily adapted for cycles, there is no such equivalent here.

Tuam Greenway Project

Grandeeod wrote: »

The political nature of their campaign has enabled them to suppress debate via any means possible. They are permitted to orchestrate whatever they please. This is nothing new. Political affiliation means nothing in the West of Ireland, it's just politics, full stop. Look at these videos. But first realise that "Bizarre" is an understatement.

Probably irrelevant but I believe Eamon Ryan, Green Party leader now has a new deliverable and sustainable vision for the WRC - Greenway. I may stand corrected, but that's the beauty of Boards.

eastwest

corktina wrote: »

the idea of Greenways is to have a safe traffic-free route. "Fairly quiet country roads" do not acheive this.

Also, 85% of Germany's routes may be along rivers, and the same applies no doubt in the UK. Thats because the tow paths were already there from the days of horse drawn river traffic. It is madness to suggest a path be built alongside the Shannon where for most of it's length no such path exists. Now, the Grand and Royal Canals now, that's different matter.

In th UK also there is a huge network of footpaths and bridleways that can be readily adapted for cycles, there is no such equivalent here.

Germany, France, the UK etc have a lot of cycle trails on disused railways, and these are popular because they are not on roads. We need to decide whether links like Claremorris Collooney are best kept for future rail use or converted for cycling (and walking, and segeways), or both.
What is clear is that there is no money for railways and that there won't be any for a long time; the country is spending more than it is taking in at a frightening level. We no more have our finances under control than the 'spend, spend, spend' lady. If money ever becomes plentiful, projects like metro north will be at the top of the queue -- Dublin has the population numbers to justify rail. Mayo will be well down the list, despite what the WOT brigade would like to believe.
Anyone who heard Alan Kelly on rte on Monday would have got the picture. He spoke of the need to have accurate performance measurement for all public transport before making decisions about spending. That points to the closure of Ennis Athenry, although it can't be closed until Kelly is moved and the Nenagh line is closed first. Varadker won't force Kelly to close Nenagh while he's in the hot seat, but if he's moved in the next reshuffle, all bets are off with regards to Nenagh. Closure of that linr will leave phase 1 of the WRC very exposed.
Anyone who still thinks that the rest if the WRC will be opened should tell us (a) where the money will come from, and (b) where the passenger numbers to sustain it will come from.

TINA1984

Naomh Eanna wrote: »

Some great and clear thinking in that last post. From reading the other posts here it seems to me that the motivation for the Sligo Mayo greenway campaigners is to stop the Western Rail Corridor at all costs, and that the Greenway idea is a useful stick to beat West on Track and local councillors with.

I'd say it's more a case of people being sick and tired of councillors with an agenda ignoring the wish to see an asset developed and utilized in the short to medium term rather then rotting to nothing whilst waiting for a day some time far, far away from now for when funding is secured to re-open the rest of the WRC (A day which will almost certainly never come bar, perhaps, Tuam - Athenry re-opening).

Naomh Eanna wrote: »

If the WRC is to succeed we need to follow the example of Midleton where targeted development encouraged a critical mass where a railway became feasible. If Mayo is serious about developing the WRC then they need to have a strategy where development is targeted around the towns lying on the WRC so a critical mass is in place to justify rail services.

The Midleton renewal & the northern section of the WRC are not comparable. One is a short commuter line stub to a small metropolitan area, the other a long, meandering rural line going to nowhere from nowhere. Like I said, perhaps Tuam - Athenry is feasible if an apppropriate an LUTS is put in place - not likely given how the Galway/Mayo Local Authorities tend to handle themselves - any reopening of railway line north of Tuam is in the realms of fantasy.

corktina

TINA1984 wrote: »

The Midleton renewal & the northern section of the WRC are not comparable. One is a short commuter line stub to a small metropolitan area, the other a long, meandering rural line going to nowhere from nowhere. Like I said, perhaps Tuam - Athenry is feasible if an apppropriate an LUTS is put in place - not likely given how the Galway/Mayo Local Authorities tend to handle themselves - any reopening of railway line north of Tuam is in the realms of fantasy.

can I add to that: NO towns lie along the WRC, that's exactly the problem, Tuam being the exception and that's really a large village. Midleton on the other hand is virtualy a suburb of Cork City.