Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Banjoxed

monument wrote: »

That's not what I've seen from the line, and before you say otherwise my experience goes beyond Google Maps or Street View, but Google Street View (and satellite images) includes ample examples which shows your statement up to be highly questionable.

Not near Collooney (example 2)

Not near Tubbercurry (example 2)

Not near Charlestown (example 2)

Not near Swinford (example 2)

Not near Kiltimagh (example 2)

Not near Claremorris (example 2)

Not near Ballindine

Not near Tuam (example 2)

Unless where you say "in parts" you mean in very few parts OR where you said "relatively little" you're comparing it to a higher speed line which which would need greater clearance?

Perhaps the rest of the line should be similarly covered so we can form a judgement on this? Can you advise the swept path needed to run trains at 100 and 120 km/h? All these would be factors in making decisions.

errigalclimber

Interesting that in both photos that Monument has posted of the line near Tubbercurry there is evidence of adverse possession possibly in action, with tractor tyre marks along the line in one photo and a fenced off part of the line possibly being used as a watering place for livestock in the other. And these images date from 2009.

Copyerselveson

monument wrote: »

That's not what I've seen from the line, and before you say otherwise my experience goes beyond Google Maps or Street View, but Google Street View (and satellite images) includes ample examples which shows your statement up to be highly questionable.

(Long list of Google Maps images snipped)

Unless where you say "in parts" you mean in very few parts OR where you said "relatively little" you're comparing it to a higher speed line which which would need greater clearance?

Right, so I am in no doubt as to where monument stands on the WRC, so thanks for that.

And now you have set me a detailed exam question with the expectation of failure? To answer your question in the detail you demand would mean I would have to understand in detail the exact dimensions of CIE's land ownership with specific clearance limits for at what point the public railway gets separated from a road or in this case a proposed path.

Well known examples of this would be in Wexford town along the street where the railway runs alongside the road. That section is subject to severe speed restrictions as indeed the WRC would be if a path was sited right next to it without separation. A line with more major speed restrictions than the present Ennis Athenry Line would be really useless.

I would think if a path was quite close to the railway line there would have to be quite severe speed restrictions. Ever stood next to a train travelling past at 70 mph? As the train passes it generates turbulence that would be uncomfortable for people next to it. Whatever way you look at it you really need a fair clearance between a railway line and a path for the comfort of people using the path and to allow a train to travel at a reasonable speed.

So to answer monuments question I now need to go away and understand the exact dimensions of CIE's ownership of the line and where a path would need to diverge from the line in the case of under bridges, cuttings, embankments etc. I will need to look up Irish Rails standards on railway clearances and look at options on where and how temporary speed restrictions are placed.

If only I was a supporter of the Greenway proposals - all I would have to do would be to post things like "yeah, what he said" on the board and I would never get into trouble!

Give me a couple of weeks and I will try and answer monument's points.

Grandeeod

errigalclimber wrote: »

Interesting that in both photos that Monument has posted of the line near Tubbercurry there is evidence of adverse possession possibly in action, with tractor tyre marks along the line in one photo and a fenced off part of the line possibly being used as a watering place for livestock in the other. And these images date from 2009.

Adverse possession is well underway.

Car Dealership in Charlestown
wrc buried.jpg

Post closure housing with driveways across the line near Colooney.
WRC 2.jpg

Former level crossing house near Tubbercurry. Line now used as a driveway.
WRC3.jpg

I could post examples all day.

monument

Copyerselveson wrote: »

Right, so I am in no doubt as to where monument stands on the WRC, so thanks for that.

And now you have set me a detailed exam question with the expectation of failure? To answer your question in the detail you demand would mean I would have to understand in detail the exact dimensions of CIE's land ownership with specific clearance limits for at what point the public railway gets separated from a road or in this case a proposed path.

Well known examples of this would be in Wexford town along the street where the railway runs alongside the road. That section is subject to severe speed restrictions as indeed the WRC would be if a path was sited right next to it without separation. A line with more major speed restrictions than the present Ennis Athenry Line would be really useless.

I would think if a path was quite close to the railway line there would have to be quite severe speed restrictions. Ever stood next to a train travelling past at 70 mph? As the train passes it generates turbulence that would be uncomfortable for people next to it. Whatever way you look at it you really need a fair clearance between a railway line and a path for the comfort of people using the path and to allow a train to travel at a reasonable speed.

So to answer monuments question I now need to go away and understand the exact dimensions of CIE's ownership of the line and where a path would need to diverge from the line in the case of under bridges, cuttings, embankments etc. I will need to look up Irish Rails standards on railway clearances and look at options on where and how temporary speed restrictions are placed.

If only I was a supporter of the Greenway proposals - all I would have to do would be to post things like "yeah, what he said" on the board and I would never get into trouble!

Give me a couple of weeks and I will try and answer monument's points.

Rewind for a second, and put aside your pearsonlising, and snide commends a side for a few seconds...

You said: "The WRC is for the most part a single track railway with relatively little clearance in parts." Without weeks of work, please just back up that comment... Compared to what other railway in Ireland does the disused WRC sections have "relatively little clearance"? Or exactly which section of the line is so problamitic in this regard?

Also: I don't think anybody has suggested that a railway and greenway be put in without separation, so it's unclear why you're suggesting such conditions.

And talking about bridges, cuttings, embankments as if these are a major problem is trying to find problems where there are none -- there's few bridges (source: my crossing survey map previously posted) and, if you cycle the Great Westren Greenway, you'll get an idea of how easy it is to divert a greenway away from the original railway line where needed.

And for the record:

[1] I've stood on station platforms which are designed to take high-speed trains at speed through a station, while this design was in use.

[2] Where I personally stand on the route is really little to do with my last post, because I don't confine myself to looking at my own personal position -- my position on many things has changed over the years and can change again if presented with new information or chanes given time.

[3] If read with point two, I'm happy to put my stance on the record: going mainly [a] the lack of population along the route, [b.] the vast amount of at grade crossings, [c] the recent and planned road improvements, and [d] the lack of demand along the open sections if the WRC, then there's little or no case for reopening the rest of the WRC anytime soon and, if you include the lack of planning / likelihood to bulk up the population along the route, then there's no case at all in the foreseeable future.

On the other side I'm not sure the case for a greenway has been fully made, but it will become stronger if the Dublin-Galway route and more Mayo and Sligo greenways ahead. The joy of greenways is that junctions are less of a problem, it can be built over many years, diverted a bit easly if there's ownership etc issues and the running costs are low -- all things which are problems for a railway.

corktina

I've stood on a train platform behind the yellow line a metre or so from a high-speed train doing up to 125 mph and I didn't die and nor did any of the other dozens of people there.

No doubt a separating fence would be provided for Greenway but isn't strictly necessary, check out some of the videos on Youtube of USA railway which have passenger and massive freight trains running in city streets and through ungated crossings.

There clearly is room for two modes of use on the WRC.

westtip

Copyerselveson wrote: »

Right, so I am in no doubt as to where monument stands on the WRC, so thanks for that.




I would think if a path was quite close to the railway line there would have to be quite severe speed restrictions. Ever stood next to a train travelling past at 70 mph?

How many more times do we have to post up photos like this one? Do these people look distressed?

Tuam Greenway Project

Elon Musk was on Newsnight last night talking about his dismay at the high speed rail line planned in Los Angelus. His point is that by the time its complete it would still leave the Americans over 50 years behind the technology being used in Korea and Japan.
Here is a suggestion for WRC rail advoates, including WOT . Promote a futuristic, imaginative, affordable, real sustainable transport option that utilises the public access. Do not include diesil sucking choo choo trains and 1950's technology. I for one will put away my helmet & hiviz jacket and walk an extra mile towards that idea, but remember that cycling is a legitimate form of sustainable transport and not just a leisure activity exclusive to people from Dublin 4.

dowlingm

The principal issue in the US is that if you want rail access to the city centre you're going to have to share with massive freight trains for at least some of the way. This means Shinkansen, TGV, ICE off the shelf designs won't, for the most part, do.

Similarly, I think there is an issue around road/rail interfaces which prevent reasonable uses of rail. We don't require crossing roads to have bells and gates - a simple stop light suffices. If the RSC was willing to find a way to approve a simpler protection mechanism without physical barriers for low speed crossings on lightly used lines then the notion of Castlebar freight and the Ballina 2800 being routed via/to Limerick at say 25mph between Claremorris and Athenry becomes attractive while doing so at a speed which wouldn't create an unreasonable safety concern for a parallel greenway.

end of the road

Grandeeod wrote: »

Adverse possession is well underway.

Car Dealership in Charlestown
wrc buried.jpg

Post closure housing with driveways across the line near Colooney.
WRC 2.jpg

Former level crossing house near Tubbercurry. Line now used as a driveway.
WRC3.jpg

I could post examples all day.

a 201 with special bogies that allow rubber tyres, drive it down and demolish as you go, that will sort out the land grabbers, send it to the north kerry line as well along with where ever else

Grandeeod

end of the road wrote: »

a 201 with special bogies that allow rubber tyres, drive it down and demolish as you go, that will sort out the land grabbers, send it to the north kerry line as well along with where ever else

I appreciate that you are posting in jest. However I have always been amazed by how WOT have never commented on this issue. Its now a case of politicians being totally ignorant and only now worrying about adverse possession. Im not a greenway campaigner, but realistically only a greenway on the claremorris - colooney route can actually save the alignment. In these lean times the route will continue to surrender to nature and man. 10 or 20 years from now the route will be beyond any reasonably priced restoration. Its struggling as it is currently. How or why WOT and the councils cant see this is the saddest installment to date.

Grandeeod

If the issue has reached the stage whereby WOT and the local councils are rejecting a greenway because they believe it is a conspiracy against the WRC, then they are shooting themselves in the head. Claremorris - colooney is virtually obliterated. As I alluded to in my previous post a greenway can preserve it once a planning clause is included to provide for a railway reopening in the future.

eastwest

Tuam Greenway Project wrote: »

Not that I was counting:)- but 8 out of the last 10 posts on the West on Track FB page relate to Greenways. Practically ALL media reports on the WRC in the last 6 months relate to Greenways, bar references to Oranmore Station ( which isn't really on the WRC) . So I'd say unless the Greenway campaigners are planning to go away anytime soon ( and we are not ) the Greenway v nothing debate will endure. Unless of course there is a major rail announcement eminent from Mayo Co Co.

It's a lot more than eight out of ten -- they delete everything that in any way shows up the emptiness of their position.
Just as WOT lives in the past with their dreams of railways serving tiny populations, they don't understand the potential of social media for debate. Debate is firmly off the table on the WOT website -- only 'yes-men' (and the yes-woman) need apply.
It's the same with radio, they apparently flatly refused to debate this issue with SMG campaigners on Ocean FM and on Midwest radio in recent times, and are only prepared to come on those stations after the SMG people are off the air.
Well, I suppose it works in third world dictatorships......

eastwest

Grandeeod wrote: »

I appreciate that you are posting in jest. However I have always been amazed by how WOT have never commented on this issue. Its now a case of politicians being totally ignorant and only now worrying about adverse possession. Im not a greenway campaigner, but realistically only a greenway on the claremorris - colooney route can actually save the alignment. In these lean times the route will continue to surrender to nature and man. 10 or 20 years from now the route will be beyond any reasonably priced restoration. Its struggling as it is currently. How or why WOT and the councils cant see this is the saddest installment to date.

They don't comment on the issue of land grabs because it would alienate a slice of their support base, the farmers who seek to profit from the return of the rail line. If the WRC is ever built on this alignment, they figure out that there will be plenty of 'Dublin money' not only for the construction of the railway but also for compensation for people who have been allowed to acquire rights on CIE property.
County councillors and TDs would see it the same way; they can sit back, offend nobody and then be seen to deliver money to individuals who effectively stole public property, if the railway ever happens.
Not in our lifetimes though. Rail on this route is a couple of generations off, at best. Still not a reason to abandon the asset though; the greenway is by far the most sensible solution -- a 'win-win' if ever there was one.

errigalclimber

I became aware only today of the editorial in the Western People of 13 August 2013. I emailed the editor, James Laffey, asking him in friendly terms whether he would be prepared to publish the riposte below as a letter to the editor (I provided all of my details, home address, telephone number). He has responded to me this evening, refusing to do so. He says he does not intend "to re-open the debate at this point". Greenway campaigners, please feel free to cut and paste into your Facebook pages, making it clear the Western People will not publish.


A Chara,

My attention was brought this week to the travesty that is your editorial of 13 August 2013 regarding the Western Rail Corridor (“WRC”), in which your publication implied that supporters of a greenway along the disused section of the Western Rail Corridor are, among other things, econoomic vandals and short sighted. Let’s get a few things straight:

1. Proponents of a greenway along the disused section of the WRC (of which I am one) are not anti-rail. Most of us are keen cyclicts and as such have an in-built bias towards sustainable transport and generally we favour trains over cars any day.

2. Greenway proponents are not seeking exclusivity of use. We would like to see a greenway on the WRC either: (a) until such time as the reinstatement of a rail service becomes economically viable; or (b) alongside a working railway. One of the great untruths pedalled by West on Track among others is that greenways and railways are mutually exclusive – they simply are not.

3. You accuse the greenway proponents of being “unaware or indifferent to public safety”. It is a disgraceful accusation and it is utter nonsense. There is hardly a body of people more conscious of public safety, and particularly road safety, than cyclists. Having road crossings on a greenway is not unusual – indeed the greenway from Annecy to Albertville in France has numerous road crossings, all properly signed and all perfectly safe if used properly. Crossing a road involves a risk to public safety but goodness me just because I use a footpath it does not mean I am unaware of or indifferent to public safety, it just means that I have to take reasonable care like everyone else.

4. Just who are the proponents of the “economic vandalism” to which your editorial referred? Are they really the proponents of a sustainable, environmentally friendly greenway along a disused railway line, or are they those lobbyists who lobbied strong and hard for a reported investment of public funds of more than €100m and an annual susbsidy of more than €3m to re-open a line between Limerick and Galway so that ghost trains can take two hours travelling between two the cities carrying next to nobody? Was that really, and does it continue to be, a good use of public money in a time of austerity? Or is it an obscene and profligate waste of public money that could be put to good use on more deserving projects?

5. Far from being economic vandals, Greenway proponents are arguing for a greenway to bring economic benefits to Counties Sligo, Mayo and Galway in the here and now, not at some indeterminate point in the future. Those who oppose the greenway do so in the face of the clear evidence of the economic and health benefits it can bring to the communities bordering the greenway, something which is currently the subject of research by NUI Galway – please, don’t take my word for it.

6. Advocates of a greenway on the WRC actually wish to preserve the alignment. As West on Track and others surely know, there are numerous examples of land grabs and adverse possessions all along the disused section of the WRC, as is evident even from a cursory glance at Google Street View. West on Track seem remarkably relaxed about this - not one word have I read from West on Track condemning such actions, which erode the viability of the alignment as a contiguous way, for trains, bicyles or anything or anyone else for that matter. You say that a greenway along the WRC would be a “disastrous move for the future development of the region’s transport network”. Why? A greenway would actually preserve the alignment pending future rail use – what actually is disastrous for the disused alignment is that it is now vulnerable to adverse possession claims whereby a valuable public resource will over time completely disappear into private hands.

7. Your leader states that “anyone with a whit of sense would know that the Western Rail Corridor is not the best option for a greenway between Mayo and Sligo”. I will ignore the personal insult as I am sure most other greenway advocates will, but it does not reflect well on the Western People that you are reduced to throwing insults at greenway advocates when, every bit as much as West on Track, they have the best interests of the local communities and their economic well being at heart. Do you know how many jobs and how much economic benefit a greenway would bring to the region? I can honestly say I do not know, but I know this – it is a damn sight more than a decaying, disused railway line with rotting infrastructure will ever bring. It is not economic vandalism to call for use of the disused alignment as a greenway now, it is to take an economically and socially responsible stance.

I do not know who might ever argue that Ireland should return to a pre-rail 19th Century incarnation as your leader puts it, but I do know this – the disused railway stands disused and decaying and it is slowly disappearing to the post 19th century hunger for land for car forecourts, driveways, decking and the like. While it might not enjoy the tourism ‘rock star’ status of Achill or Galway, the countryside through which the WRC passes is, to my mind, among the most peaceful and beautiful in Europe. The future economic development of the region will benefit from the alignment being preserved and a greenway will achieve that, while bringing economic and health benefits now. So let’s have some balance to this debate and please let us move away from throwing insults at those greenway advocates who also have the best interests of the region at heart.

Is mise le meas.

westtip

I wouldn't worry too much about the WP they got so many letters complaining about that editorial they gave up the ghost on the "debate", they have failed to report that nearly 300 submissions went into Mayo coco re the county plan asking for a greenway, they have never reported on the Swinford vision for the future in which 1200 people surveyed gave overwhelming support to the greenway idea, they have pinned their colours to the WOT mast and they won't change their editorial stance. They are archaic in their attitudes and actually have far less influence in the west than they claim they do. That meaningless editorial merely showed a lack of intellectual ability at the newspaper.

eastwest

errigalclimber wrote: »

I became aware only today of the editorial in the Western People of 13 August 2013. I emailed the editor, James Laffey, asking him in friendly terms whether he would be prepared to publish the riposte below as a letter to the editor (I provided all of my details, home address, telephone number). He has responded to me this evening, refusing to do so. He says he does not intend "to re-open the debate at this point". Greenway campaigners, please feel free to cut and paste into your Facebook pages, making it clear the Western People will not publish.


A Chara,

My attention was brought this week to the travesty that is your editorial of 13 August 2013 regarding the Western Rail Corridor (“WRC”), in which your publication implied that supporters of a greenway along the disused section of the Western Rail Corridor are, among other things, econoomic vandals and short sighted. Let’s get a few things straight:

1. Proponents of a greenway along the disused section of the WRC (of which I am one) are not anti-rail. Most of us are keen cyclicts and as such have an in-built bias towards sustainable transport and generally we favour trains over cars any day.

2. Greenway proponents are not seeking exclusivity of use. We would like to see a greenway on the WRC either: (a) until such time as the reinstatement of a rail service becomes economically viable; or (b) alongside a working railway. One of the great untruths pedalled by West on Track among others is that greenways and railways are mutually exclusive – they simply are not.

3. You accuse the greenway proponents of being “unaware or indifferent to public safety”. It is a disgraceful accusation and it is utter nonsense. There is hardly a body of people more conscious of public safety, and particularly road safety, than cyclists. Having road crossings on a greenway is not unusual – indeed the greenway from Annecy to Albertville in France has numerous road crossings, all properly signed and all perfectly safe if used properly. Crossing a road involves a risk to public safety but goodness me just because I use a footpath it does not mean I am unaware of or indifferent to public safety, it just means that I have to take reasonable care like everyone else.

4. Just who are the proponents of the “economic vandalism” to which your editorial referred? Are they really the proponents of a sustainable, environmentally friendly greenway along a disused railway line, or are they those lobbyists who lobbied strong and hard for a reported investment of public funds of more than €100m and an annual susbsidy of more than €3m to re-open a line between Limerick and Galway so that ghost trains can take two hours travelling between two the cities carrying next to nobody? Was that really, and does it continue to be, a good use of public money in a time of austerity? Or is it an obscene and profligate waste of public money that could be put to good use on more deserving projects?

5. Far from being economic vandals, Greenway proponents are arguing for a greenway to bring economic benefits to Counties Sligo, Mayo and Galway in the here and now, not at some indeterminate point in the future. Those who oppose the greenway do so in the face of the clear evidence of the economic and health benefits it can bring to the communities bordering the greenway, something which is currently the subject of research by NUI Galway – please, don’t take my word for it.

6. Advocates of a greenway on the WRC actually wish to preserve the alignment. As West on Track and others surely know, there are numerous examples of land grabs and adverse possessions all along the disused section of the WRC, as is evident even from a cursory glance at Google Street View. West on Track seem remarkably relaxed about this - not one word have I read from West on Track condemning such actions, which erode the viability of the alignment as a contiguous way, for trains, bicyles or anything or anyone else for that matter. You say that a greenway along the WRC would be a “disastrous move for the future development of the region’s transport network”. Why? A greenway would actually preserve the alignment pending future rail use – what actually is disastrous for the disused alignment is that it is now vulnerable to adverse possession claims whereby a valuable public resource will over time completely disappear into private hands.

7. Your leader states that “anyone with a whit of sense would know that the Western Rail Corridor is not the best option for a greenway between Mayo and Sligo”. I will ignore the personal insult as I am sure most other greenway advocates will, but it does not reflect well on the Western People that you are reduced to throwing insults at greenway advocates when, every bit as much as West on Track, they have the best interests of the local communities and their economic well being at heart. Do you know how many jobs and how much economic benefit a greenway would bring to the region? I can honestly say I do not know, but I know this – it is a damn sight more than a decaying, disused railway line with rotting infrastructure will ever bring. It is not economic vandalism to call for use of the disused alignment as a greenway now, it is to take an economically and socially responsible stance.

I do not know who might ever argue that Ireland should return to a pre-rail 19th Century incarnation as your leader puts it, but I do know this – the disused railway stands disused and decaying and it is slowly disappearing to the post 19th century hunger for land for car forecourts, driveways, decking and the like. While it might not enjoy the tourism ‘rock star’ status of Achill or Galway, the countryside through which the WRC passes is, to my mind, among the most peaceful and beautiful in Europe. The future economic development of the region will benefit from the alignment being preserved and a greenway will achieve that, while bringing economic and health benefits now. So let’s have some balance to this debate and please let us move away from throwing insults at those greenway advocates who also have the best interests of the region at heart.

Is mise le meas.

That is full of logic, common sense and pragmatism, all the things that are missing from the WOT 'railway or railway' mantra.
You're wasting your time with that particular newspaper I'm afraid; they are like many politicians that believe that they must follow the votes, believing that voters/advertisers need to hear the pro-rail view all the time.
Although it is tempting to consider that Mayo people get the politicians (and newspapers) they deserve, in fact it is the luddite mentality in other parts of the county that is preventing sustainable development along the abandoned rail corridor. The politicians who support the greenway are local, with a few significant and inexplicable exceptions of course (a United Ireland will be best achieved by keeping tourists out of Sligo and Mayo, apparently!).

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

The politicians who support the greenway are local, with a few significant and inexplicable exceptions of course (a United Ireland will be best achieved by keeping tourists out of Sligo and Mayo, apparently!).

For those of you unaware of who EASTWEST is referring to its the kind of comment we heard recently from SinnFein/WestonTrack anti tourism Mayo county councillor Gerry Murray who was quoted in the Connacht Tribune as saying this classic:

"

We don't want to be creating another wildlife park for the Dublin 4 brigade. In any case, you can't have a railway line in tandem with a greenway. We need to cut this off at the pass now." - SinnFein/Westontrack Anti tourism councillor from Mayo County Councillor Gerry Murray

Clearly Sinnfein/West on Track anti tourism councillors still believe the West is being suppressed by a conspiracy of the elite in Dublin 4. SinnFein/West on Track are clearly oblivious of all the examples of parallel greenways that have been posted up on this thread, in fact we had to send SinnFein/West on Track councillor Gerry Murray copies of the photos. So far Sinnfein/Westontrack have not responded.

corktina

I think your coupling of SF/WoT is hilarious, insinuating they are one and the same thing, reminiscent of days of old!

I'm sure that's not true btw, just the way I read it.

galwaycyclist

corktina wrote: »

I think your coupling of SF/WoT is hilarious, insinuating they are one and the same thing, reminiscent of days of old!

I'm sure that's not true btw, just the way I read it.

Probably in poor taste but to ask the obvious questions..

Is that the "Provisional" WoT?

or the "Continuity" WoT?

monument

westtip wrote: »

For those of you unaware of who EASTWEST is referring to its the kind of comment we heard recently from SinnFein/WestonTrack anti tourism Mayo county councillor Gerry Murray who was quoted in the Connacht Tribune as saying this classic:

"

Clearly Sinnfein/West on Track anti tourism councillors still believe the West is being suppressed by a conspiracy of the elite in Dublin 4. SinnFein/West on Track are clearly oblivious of all the examples of parallel greenways that have been posted up on this thread, in fact we had to send SinnFein/West on Track councillor Gerry Murray copies of the photos. So far Sinnfein/Westontrack have not responded.

You're going way over board there -- stop the baiting / trolling.

relaxed

This thread is always good for a wacky conspiracy theory.

eastwest

galwaycyclist wrote: »

Probably in poor taste but to ask the obvious questions..

Is that the "Provisional" WoT?

or the "Continuity" WoT?

It might be the 'Real SF/WOT'

Glad to see at least that one half of the coalition has moved on from the days when they were putting a lot of 'bang for your buck' into closing railways! ;-)

Tuam Greenway Project

I'll happily delete this if it's moderated "off topic"..... but I see Galway County Council, not content with blocking alternative use of a disused railway, spending €9 million on a never used runway ( http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/02/unkempt-landing-strip-latest/ ) have just spent €1.2 million on a disused Airport. I hope someone somewhere has a plan.

eastwest

Tuam Greenway Project wrote: »

I'll happily delete this if it's moderated "off topic"..... but I see Galway County Council, not content with blocking alternative use of a disused railway, spending €9 million on a never used runway ( http://www.broadsheet.ie/2013/05/02/unkempt-landing-strip-latest/ ) have just spent €1.2 million on a disused Airport. I hope someone somewhere has a plan.

Yes, a plan to get elected/re-elected.

Transportuser09

Let us be honest. Tuam northwards is never going to reopen. Athenry to Tuam might have a chance years away so it should be kept from be greenwayed but work away with the other bits I think.

eastwest

Transportuser09 wrote: »

Let us be honest. Tuam northwards is never going to reopen. Athenry to Tuam might have a chance years away so it should be kept from be greenwayed but work away with the other bits I think.

Therein lies the solution and the problem, I think.
I'm sure that the people in WOT aren't all stupid; some of their members are successful and intelligent people and must be able to see that the Claremorris-Collooney section in particular will never reopen. However it would seem that the reason that they oppose tourism development in that area may be that they are afraid that a successful greenway between those points might create an unassailable demand for the same kind of infrastructure south of Claremorris.
That is the only explanation I can think of to explain their almost virulent opposition to the development of the northern section, a section that has never been part of any plan for a railway, with good reason. It was a lame duck when it was a light railway, and that was before cars or good roads were the norm; it would be an even worse prospect than the Ennis-Athenry debacle and there's no way in the world that any government could put a penny of taxpayer funds into it.
As long as you have too many politicians chasing too few seats though, all the west will ever get is stalemate. John O'Mahony's recent adding of his tuppenceworth to the debate in support of WOT is nothing more than an attempt to capture a certain vote ahead of the European elections, as he tests the waters to see whether he has a chance of sliding into Brussels on somebody else's coat tails. He knows that he's going to be out of a job come the next general election, so this was the action of a desperate man. It's pathetic stuff, to be honest.

westtip

Indeed its amazing how SF/WOT councillors will lobby to stop tourism in places like Charlestown and how John Omahony is now allied with SF on this issue. My guess is our minister for tourism in Mayo sees no benefit for Westport in the SMG so no votes in it for him.

relaxed

westtip wrote: »

Indeed its amazing how SF/WOT councillors will lobby to stop tourism in places like Charlestown and how John Omahony is now allied with SF on this issue. My guess is our minister for tourism in Mayo sees no benefit for Westport in the SMG so no votes in it for him.

I think theres a conspiracy theory thread for this SF / WOT type of alliance argument

Surprised you don't get shell to sea on your team to balance the fight.

SF / WOT V Sligo Mayo Greenway / Shell to Sea

eastwest

westtip wrote: »

Indeed its amazing how SF/WOT councillors will lobby to stop tourism in places like Charlestown and how John Omahony is now allied with SF on this issue. My guess is our minister for tourism in Mayo sees no benefit for Westport in the SMG so no votes in it for him.

Politics makes for strange bedfellows, and none more strange than this unholy trinity. I'm surprised that O'Mahony hasn't had his knuckles rapped for supporting the SF/WOT alliance on an issue that is clearly contrary to government policy. Maybe Enda knows that O'Mahony is a goner next time anyway, and is letting him scrabble anywhere he can for a few votes. After all, they'll transfer mostly to FG when O'Mahony is eliminated. Likewise if he runs for Europe, Jim Higgins will get the couple of thousand transfers.
Enda may well be happy enough to let local politicians squabble over this strip of land; it keeps their minds off other things. In a way, it's an easy solution for him; the SF/WOT opposition is an excuse not to spend money in East Mayo and Sligo, and his home base is unaffected. Michael Ring must be rubbing his hands as he sits safely on the fence as well.