Western Rail Corridor (all disused sections)

Muckyboots

BoatMad wrote: »

I agree, I have tried to argue that rail infrastructure is there for railways now or in the future

greenways should be self justifying , not simply as a method of "comsuming" rail infrastructure. A greenway argument should justify its own pathway

Greenways are self justifying ( deliverable and cost effective) and because of this they are the perfect method for consuming disused rail infrastructure, while protecting it at the same time.

serfboard

BoatMad wrote: »

greenways should be self justifying , not simply as a method of "comsuming" rail infrastructure

From my perspective, Greenways don't "consume" infrastructure they protect it from squatting and encroachment until a decision is made (if ever) to use it again.

The alternative is to let the line be squatted on and encroached until, when a decision is finally made in 50 years time to use the line as a Greenway, the state has to ask pretty please for its land back - or even worse, to compensate the land grabbers family.

As a matter of interest, what do you think should be done with unused lines ? Just keep leaving them unused?

monument

This applies to all...

BoatMad wrote: »

monument wrote: »

Moderator warning for both sides on here:

Drop the anti-rail, anti-greenway etc talk -- deal with points made by posters and do not label posts or posters, but if there's no actual arguments to be had that has not been said before, just don't post.

If you really have to say X post is against Y you have to detail why you think such.

Generally both can and must tone it down a bit!

-- moderator

I agree, I have tried to argue that rail infrastructure is there for railways now or in the future

greenways should be self justifying , not simply as a method of "comsuming" rail infrastructure. A greenway argument should justify its own pathway

Even if you're agreeing with the message, do not reply to moderation in-thread.

-- moderator

westtip

loyatemu wrote: »

because it loses a huge amount of money. This is why we do cost/benefit analyses. They all lose money, but at least in the case of (e.g.) Dublin-Galway, a lot of people use the service and it's better than the bus; you can't say that about the WRC.

Dublin commuter services lose money (except maybe the Dart) but if you cancelled them the city would grind to a halt - there's a clear benefit to subsidising them.

+1 Loyatemu its called common sense reasoning. Public transport is about enabling wealth to be created but it has to be realistic in terms of what is on offer, trains running through the west of ireland just so "we can have the same as Dublin" is not a rational argument. It is the common sense reasoning bit that has been lost on too many people.

savagethegoat

It's a bit rich to be expecting "Dublin" to pay for both it's own rail system and the wrc isn't it!

Muckyboots

So West on Track are backing (for all that might be worth) a Valorail proposal for Kiltimagh as a means of protecting the track. One would have to assume for safety reasons there would probably be a track alongside it for people to walk or cycle ( a kind of Greenway ). What am I missing, lads? http://www.advertiser.ie/mayo/article/75789/velorail-could-bring-major-tourism-boost-to-kiltimagh

mayo.mick

Muckyboots wrote: »

So West on Track are backing (for all that might be worth) a Valorail proposal for Kiltimagh as a means of protecting the track. One would have to assume for safety reasons there would probably be a track alongside it for people to walk or cycle ( a kind of Greenway ). What am I missing, lads? http://www.advertiser.ie/mayo/article/75789/velorail-could-bring-major-tourism-boost-to-kiltimagh

Article is dated February 20th 2015

Muckyboots

mayo.mick wrote: »

Article is dated February 20th 2015

It's just been posted on West on Track FB page. An olive branch or a red herring ? ( Do you get moderated for over use of idioms?)

Grandeeod

The WRC debate has to be the most rediculous debate ever!

The Velorail idea is based on the 30+ years (and counting) concept of not taking the rotting to **** rails out of the ground. Why oh why this holy grail aspect of protecting these actual rails is still an issue, is beyond the intelligence of any reasonable person. Its overgrown, torn up or buried in a lot of parts. The entire Claremorris - Collooney aspect has gone beyond a joke at this stage. Even a Greenway will face a level of objection.

These life expired rails are literally the only pieces of metal still in the ground after the 1960s closure process. Lines closed in the 70s have long since gone the route of Greenways or simply caved into farmland.

Can someone in the west please shout stop?

Muckyboots

Big breakthrough in Tuam where Tuam Municipal Council have voted to seek central funding for Greenway on WRC.

westtip

Muckyboots wrote: »

Big breakthrough in Tuam where Tuam Municipal Council have voted to seek central funding for Greenway on WRC.

Absolutely Fabulous news and I see todays Tuam Herald hasn't held back on its coverage!

Carawaystick

Grandeeod wrote: »

The WRC debate has to be the most rediculous debate ever!

The Velorail idea is based on the 30+ years (and counting) concept of not taking the rotting to **** rails out of the ground. Why oh why this holy grail

I think its a holy McGreil actally

tabbey

Muckyboots wrote: »

Big breakthrough in Tuam where Tuam Municipal Council have voted to seek central funding for Greenway on WRC.

Tuam does not have a municipal council. Like all other town councils, Tuam UDC or town council was abolished by Hogan, with effect from last year.
Local area committees may like to claim to be municipal councils, but they are just talking shops.

For better or for worse, for all practical purposes, Hogan abolished all semblance of local democracy.

Muckyboots

tabbey wrote: »

Tuam does not have a municipal council. Like all other town councils, Tuam UDC or town council was abolished by Hogan, with effect from last year.
Local area committees may like to claim to be municipal councils, but they are just talking shops.

For better or for worse, for all practical purposes, Hogan abolished all semblance of local democracy.

You are incorrect. They have decision making and budgetary powers, a Chairperson and a democratic structure and take decisions that take effect within clearly defined Tuam Area boundaries. Regardless of this it is a clear signal back to the Minister of Transport and Irish Rail that the Council has removed its' opposition to a Greenway. Ultimately it's the Minster and property owners, CIE, who will decide and they were seeking a green light from Councillors - which they now have received.

westtip

tabbey wrote: »

Tuam does not have a municipal council. Like all other town councils, Tuam UDC or town council was abolished by Hogan, with effect from last year.
Local area committees may like to claim to be municipal councils, but they are just talking shops.

For better or for worse, for all practical purposes, Hogan abolished all semblance of local democracy.

http://www.galway.ie/en/services/yourcouncil/councillors/#d.en.22973 I think you will find that under the re-org of local goverment the local electoral areas meet on a regular basis to discuss and vote on local issues, the issue in Tuam has been trying to get progress on the tourism initiative through the Tuam Electoral Area meetings, until this major breakthrough the Anti-tourism West on Track cllrs had been blocking this idea been taken to Galway coco. Rather than Tuam District council I think Muckyboots was referring to the Tuam Electoral area council meeting; I understand that the general rule of thumb is that if contentious issues such as the need to invest in tourism infrastructure like the Tuam Greenway project gets carried by the local electoral area meetings they will get through at general county council level as the council will generally support initiatives supported by local electoral area meetings. Now that the Tuam Electoral area has voted in favour of the tourism infrastructure to create jobs in the Tuam area, it has to be hoped that Galway coco will support the vote of the Tuam Electoral area and push for this tourism infrastructure to go ahead. My guess is we will have to wait and see how strong the anti-tourism lobby is on the whole Galway coco, but I feel this vote at Electoral Area level is a major breakthrough for the pro-tourism lobby in Galway, we hope the anti-tourism lobby are not allowed to scupper it. They will try of that we can be sure.

serfboard

westtip wrote: »

Absolutely Fabulous news and I see todays Tuam Herald hasn't held back on its coverage!

westtip wrote: »

http://www.galway.ie/en/services/yourcouncil/councillors/#d.en.22973 I think you will find that under the re-org of local goverment the local electoral areas meet on a regular basis to discuss and vote on local issues, the issue in Tuam has been trying to get progress on the tourism initiative through the Tuam Electoral Area meetings, until this major breakthrough the Anti-tourism West on Track cllrs had been blocking this idea been taken to Galway coco. Rather than Tuam District council I think Muckyboots was referring to the Tuam Electoral area council meeting; I understand that the general rule of thumb is that if contentious issues such as the need to invest in tourism infrastructure like the Tuam Greenway project gets carried by the local electoral area meetings they will get through at general county council level as the council will generally support initiatives supported by local electoral area meetings. Now that the Tuam Electoral area has voted in favour of the tourism infrastructure to create jobs in the Tuam area, it has to be hoped that Galway coco will support the vote of the Tuam Electoral area and push for this tourism infrastructure to go ahead. My guess is we will have to wait and see how strong the anti-tourism lobby is on the whole Galway coco, but I feel this vote at Electoral Area level is a major breakthrough for the pro-tourism lobby in Galway, we hope the anti-tourism lobby are not allowed to scupper it. They will try of that we can be sure.

For some reason I can't see the photo you posted, but there is part of the article online here.

I presume you are right in that I presume "Tuam Municipal District" refers to the councillors from the Tuam Electoral Area of Galway County Council.

There are nine councillors in the Tuam Electoral Area. The report says that after "heated exchanges ... the result was split four in favour and four against the proposal" and that "Cathaoirleach Cllr Donagh Killilea had the casting vote" which he used to vote in favour.

I'd be interested to know how that vote broken down. Shaun Cunniffee proposed the motion, Donagh Kililea supported it, and I imagine Karey McHugh did as well as she is on the record of being in favour of it, IIRC.

I'm not sure that this will necessarily translate to Council-wide support. One would imagine that the councillors from Ballinasloe, Loughrea and Connemara would be indifferent, since it won't affect them. Likewise, the Athenry councillors probably won't be too bothered either since they already have 16 services a day to Galway so they're all right Jack.

Which leaves the Tuam councillors, who could at best be described as "divided" as to whether they want this or not.

However, it's progress, even if it is small steps ...

Muckyboots

serfboard wrote: »

For some reason I can't see the photo you posted, but there is part of the article online here.

I presume you are right in that I presume "Tuam Municipal District" refers to the councillors from the Tuam Electoral Area of Galway County Council.

There are nine councillors in the Tuam Electoral Area. The report says that after "heated exchanges ... the result was split four in favour and four against the proposal" and that "Cathaoirleach Cllr Donagh Killilea had the casting vote" which he used to vote in favour.

I'd be interested to know how that vote broken down. Shaun Cunniffee proposed the motion, Donagh Kililea supported it, and I imagine Karey McHugh did as well as she is on the record of being in favour of it, IIRC.

I'm not sure that this will necessarily translate to Council-wide support. One would imagine that the councillors from Ballinasloe, Loughrea and Connemara would be indifferent, since it won't affect them. Likewise, the Athenry councillors probably won't be too bothered either since they already have 16 services a day to Galway so they're all right Jack.

Which leaves the Tuam councillors, who could at best be described as "divided" as to whether they want this or not.

However, it's progress, even if it is small steps ...

Cllr Peter Roche, a former member of the Western Rail Committee who now says that rail is just a pipe dream, was the fourth. One Cllr was absent.

The minutes will show it as a proposal passed in favour of a Greenway - regardless of the numbers.
The main Council Chamber tend to respect the views of local area committees but I wouldn't take it for granted in this case. Correct, a small but very significant Greenway victory.

westtip

serfboard wrote: »

For some reason I can't see the photo you posted, but there is part of the article online here.


.

Yep don't know what the problem is there will try again here, it seems to be working now

what_traffic

Muckyboots wrote: »

Cllr Peter Roche, a former member of the Western Rail Committee who now says that rail is just a pipe dream, was the fourth. One Cllr was absent.

The main Council Chamber tend to respect the views of local area committees but I wouldn't take it for granted in this case. Correct, a small but very significant Greenway victory.

That's a big U-Turn for Cllr Peter Roche. A pragmatist?

Potential for Greenways to exist in all Wards in Galway County and City so am sure Cllr's are more attuned to it than 5 years ago? Galway City to Ballinasloe(Dublin) which is Eurovelo2, Galway City to Clifden, Athenry to Tuam/Ballindine

Muckyboots

"We must now ensure that the railway is protected from any form of interference and fast-track the development of our rail network in line with the urgent requirements of reducing carbon emissions and accelerating economic recovery in the regions"

The railway sleepers in WOT have been awoken again and regurgitated the old "freight is great" press release in retaliation to the Tuam Greenway vote. I hope that, if by some miracle and the reignition of the Mayo Industrial Revolution, freight trains come tumbling down the track at a top speed of 25KM per hour to Athenry Junction via Tuam, that the Greenway campaign will get its' due acknowledgment for keeping the old rail campaign fueled. I know anger is an energy- but can you call "spite" a fuel? .

what_traffic

Might be of interest to folks here. http://www.galwayindependent.com/news/topics/articles/2015/12/16/4111323-galway-greenway-protest/

Council want to use the Old Clifden Railway line.

westtip

Muckyboots wrote: »

The railway sleepers in WOT have been awoken again and regurgitated the old "freight is great" press release in retaliation to the Tuam Greenway vote. I hope that, if by some miracle and the reignition of the Mayo Industrial Revolution, freight trains come tumbling down the track at a top speed of 25KM per hour to Athenry Junction via Tuam, that the Greenway campaign will get its' due acknowledgment for keeping the old rail campaign fueled. I know anger is an energy- but can you call "spite" a fuel? .

Yep they have posted a glorious note on Facebook about the Rail Freight report in the West of Ireland, here is a slightly different take on their optimism

Press release From: Western Rail Trail Campaign
Date: December 18th 2015: FOR IMMEDIATE USE
• Western Development Commission Report on Rail Freight acknowledges potential use of Western Rail Corridor as Greenway
• Report states “proposals exist to establish a greenway for pedestrians and cyclists” on line closed since 1975
• Campaigners welcome recognition of greenway potential of Western Rail Corridor in WDC report
• Report forecasts two levels of freight increase, one based on realism and one on speculation.
• Speculative forecasts unrealistic

Western Rail Trail Campaigners have warmly welcomed the recognition for the potential of a greenway on the closed railway from Athenry to Collooney as stated in a report published by the Western Development Commission this week.

The WDC commissioned the report into Rail Freight and the Western Region in March of this year at a cost of €17,000. The report was produced by a UK based rail consultant Intermodality which has been involved in several rail freight projects in the UK. The report was released on the WDC.ie website on 17th December http://www.wdc.ie/publications/reports-and-papers/

Brendan Quinn of the Western Rail Trail campaign said. The most encouraging comments in the report as far as the Western Rail Trail Campaign is concerned is the acknowledgement that “proposals exist to establish a greenway for pedestrians and cyclists” on the closed railway line from Collooney to Athenry which has been closed since 1975. (page 42 item 4.2.5).

Quinn added “Intermodality the consulting company which wrote the report, is very well respected in this field and the findings of the report are very interesting. Clearly the potential for rail investment in the existing rail routes to help freight is paramount. However, there is nothing in the report that suggests that rail freight from the West of Ireland will demand more railway lines. The report certainly highlighted the need for longer freight trains to make freight more competitive which would require infrastructural investment. For example, better and longer passing loops on our existing railway lines would help the case for more freight in and out of the West of Ireland. The Western Rail Trail campaign would fully support the upgrading of our existing network to make freight more efficient to service from the West of Ireland, and the report does make some excellent recommendations in this respect”

Two levels of Forecast on future freight volumes: Realistic and Speculative

The report highlights the number of freight trains per day going in and out of the West of Ireland at about 4 per day (4.3.17 page 46, 2 inbound trains 2 outbound), which is hardly enough to justify new railway lines. It is what the report says about the future that is more interesting says Quinn.

Extensive “bottom up” analysis involved trade research with industry in the region showed that there is potential for about another 2 freight trains per day in and out of the region. The report also covers what is called “speculative freight increase” to a level of 10-14 freight trains a day by 2050. Quinn said, this kind of speculation has to be taken for what it is, pure speculation, there is no realistic reason to accept that rail freight to and from the West of Ireland is going to increase fourfold anytime in the near to medium future. There is a concern though that this speculation may lead to optimism from those who still believe in the Western Rail Corridor concept; however, as was clearly shown this week, Galway councillors in Tuam voted in favour of a Greenway on the closed railway as they see a greenway as having far greater opportunity for the regional economy in the immediate future.

Quinn stated “Even with the realistic potential increase in volume it would be hard to justify new railway lines and we feel sure it will not lead to any further investment in new freight routes. However, if the potential does exist in the future, the importance of protecting the route of the closed railway from Collooney to Athenry, ideally with a greenway is now paramount.” “We think this report will really confirm Government policy not to re-open the Western Rail Corridor, as the realisitic forecasts for Rail Freight are still quite low and the speculative forecasts really have no foundation apart from pure speculation.”

Quinn added “ The greenway campaign would also support upgrading existing railway routes with better and longer passing loops allowing longer freight trains to and from the Western Region, and rail freight hubs to ensure the existing routes are fully utilised for freight and intermodal transport. This kind of rail investment is probably realistic and will help increase rail freight to and from the West”

ENDS
Words: body content 436 words
Contacts: see the press release on Facebook of sligo mayo greenway page.

eastwest

Grandeeod wrote: »

The WRC debate has to be the most rediculous debate ever!

The Velorail idea is based on the 30+ years (and counting) concept of not taking the rotting to **** rails out of the ground. Why oh why this holy grail aspect of protecting these actual rails is still an issue, is beyond the intelligence of any reasonable person. Its overgrown, torn up or buried in a lot of parts. The entire Claremorris - Collooney aspect has gone beyond a joke at this stage. Even a Greenway will face a level of objection.

These life expired rails are literally the only pieces of metal still in the ground after the 1960s closure process. Lines closed in the 70s have long since gone the route of Greenways or simply caved into farmland.

Can someone in the west please shout stop?

Ye can't go agin the priest, so ye can't. Even if it's feckin mad.

Muckyboots

[HTML] A proposal to construct a new rail freight interchange at Claremorris (Co. Mayo), with rail access achieved by reinstating around 1.6km of disused railway. The site is relatively remote (25km from the nearest cluster at Castlebar), and has relatively small development proposals on site (around 20,000 sq ft / 1,900 sq m). Securing a major anchor occupier / end user generating trainload volumes of traffic will be critical to achieving a viable business case;
[/HTML]
The WRC barely gets a mention in the WDC report, other than to recommend it's alignment protection - and we all agree with that. The "clusters" where freight activity is predicted are Galway, Sligo, Ballina, Castlebar, Westport and Killala. No mention of Tuam at all and just a complementary nod to Claremorris quoted above ( with a fairly dubious tone about their ambitions as a freight hub ). A "show me the money" demand to Claremorris? Lets hope the next Minster for Transport will be quick off the mark to ask the same question before deciding what to do to protect the WRC alignment.

eastwest

wot spin.JPG

I don't know what report WOT was reading when they came to this conclusion, but it certainly wasn't the WDC report on rail freight.
They have somehow tried to spin this as a prediction in the report for a four-fold increase in rail freight, which it certainly doesn't say.
WOT were banking on their report giving backing to their madcap proposal to develop a freight hub in Claremorris, coincidently a town where most of them live, but it backfired on them on this occasion. The days of getting governments to make bad investment decisions based on waffle and overblown figures are long over, thankfully.

westtip

eastwest wrote: »

wot spin.JPG

I don't know what report WOT was reading when they came to this conclusion, but it certainly wasn't the WDC report on rail freight.
They have somehow tried to spin this as a prediction in the report for a four-fold increase in rail freight, which it certainly doesn't say.
WOT were banking on their report giving backing to their madcap proposal to develop a freight hub in Claremorris, coincidently a town where most of them live, but it backfired on them on this occasion. The days of getting governments to make bad investment decisions based on waffle and overblown figures are long over, thankfully.

West on Track are the same group remember that speculated that 750,000 would be using the Western Rail Corridor! They really aren't too strong on numbers!

westtip

westtip wrote: »

West on Track are the same group remember that speculated that 750,000 would be using the Western Rail Corridor! They really aren't too strong on numbers!

But I hear they now believe they have a wet sail behind their campaign following the report on freight......

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/here-are-the-train-services-that-have-been-affected-by-the-floods-710444.html

westtip

The Athenry to Gort section of the Limerick to Galway line is still closed this due to flooding, and is expected to remain closed until just after Easter. The company is operating bus transfers between Ennis and Galway.

Iarnród Éireann apologises to customers for the inconvenience caused as a result of flooding. Service updates are available at www.irishrail.ie and on @irishrail.

However the company has been delighted to hear from all seven regular Train passengers who have discovered the X51 only takes 1 hour 20 minutes to do the intercity journey compared to the regular 1 hour 55 the train takes.

"Rest on Track" ROT have cried foul and asked bus eirean to slow down their buses so those on a free travel pass who normally use the train service so they have plenty of time to eat their cheese sandwiches and flask of coffee during the journey.

"The speed of service on the bus is far too frightening for many of those who travel regularly from Limerick to Galway for afternoon tea at the Great Western Hotel, it is critical that these superfast buses are slowed down to match the pace of life of many of our patrons are used to; if these buses keep to these ridiculously fast timetables the half dozen or so people who rely on this intercity service will simply abandon the route and start taking the bus." It's bad enough that this critical piece of infrastructure has been closed for flooding every year since it was re-opened to great aclaim in 2010. These buses must be halted before that dam motorway from Gort to Tuam makes bus journies just far too fast for our train users.

eastwest

I think the moniker WOT applies more to 'Waiting on Thomas-the-tank' nowadays than anything else.

savagethegoat

he is not a Tank....