nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

[Deleted User]

Carrying on with the discussion as the other thread is full

https://touch.boards.ie/thread/2055766866/1

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Isambard

Here's a current photo I lifted from the net (Copyright Micheal McHugh)

It clearly shows the state of the line and also the space available to run a Greenway and a rail track side by side.

serfboard

Isambard wrote: »

Here's a current photo I lifted from the net (Copyright Micheal McHugh)

It clearly shows the state of the line and also the space available to run a Greenway and a rail track side by side.

I'm not sure if that's true on all parts of the line, though.

Here's the line viewed from the Tuam bypass by Google Street View:

It looks like there is not a lot of room there.

westtip

Isambard wrote: »

Here's a current photo I lifted from the net (Copyright Micheal McHugh)

It clearly shows the state of the line and also the space available to run a Greenway and a rail track side by side.

This is what West on Track call infrastructure, sure, agree with you a greenway could go in alongside, there clearly is the space with accommodation at pinch points, but why go to that expense? A feasibility study on the Sligo section showed it would be a lot more expensive to go in alongside the old closed useless railway than merely lifting the rails and using the ballast under this old useless railway as perfectly adequate base for a greenway now; in future years if you had laid a greenway either on this old rail alignment or even alongside it at far greater expense, the whole thing would have to come up and be relaid anyway as the railway was built to light rail standards and entirely new ballast/foundation would have to go in, the alongside greenway would be ripped up at the same time due to the scale of the operation and the cost of putting in an alongside greenway with the new railway would be absorbed into the cost. West on Track welcomed the Velo-Rail project in Kiltimagh on the basis it saved the railway for future use, it is a totally non sensical argument, and has been used as a stop the greenway at all costs argument. Pure nonsense.

westtip

serfboard wrote: »

I'm not sure if that's true on all parts of the line, though.

Here's the line viewed from the Tuam bypass by Google Street View:

It looks like there is not a lot of room there.

that entire embankment would have to be pulled up and replaced to replace the railway due to the light railway standard this line was built to, see my other post above. Why bother? when a railway is highly unlikely in the next 20 years, build the greenway, protect the alignment and pull up those rusting railway which are neither use nor ornament to man or beast. Protect that strip of land and who knows what might come along for future generations.

Isambard

there is in all probability no ballast there to speak of. It was a cheaply built secondary line, they may have used beach shingle or ashes or gravel. Whatever , I reckon even for a cycle way, they are going to have to dig it all out and install a proper foundation

It worries me when I read of people wanting to build a cycleway right up the middle without making provision for a later rail line by moving it over a couple of feet. I wonder what their motive might be and I'm quite sure the Greenway would be much more likely to be built if those promoting were to say " we will leave a reserved strip for a later rail line and build our cycleway to one side"

Muckyboots

Isambard wrote: »

there is in all probability no ballast there to speak of. It was a cheaply built secondary line, they may have used beach shingle or ashes or gravel. Whatever , I reckon even for a cycle way, they are going to have to dig it all out and install a proper foundation

It worries me when I read of people wanting to build a cycleway right up the middle without making provision for a later rail line by moving it over a couple of feet. I wonder what their motive might be and I'm quite sure the Greenway would be much more likely to be built if those promoting were to say " we will leave a reserved strip for a later rail line and build our cycleway to one side"

A railway, on or beside the existing greenway, would come with 100s of millions behind it by necessity. Moving either to one side, fencing and sorting out pinch points would be back of the sofa stuff.

Isambard

yes but that's not my point. If provision were made now by definitely leaving room, that might go someway to appeasing the rail zealots up there. If the room for a rail line is there, how can they then object?

Grandeeod

Isambard wrote: »

yes but that's not my point. If provision were made now by definitely leaving room, that might go someway to appeasing the rail zealots up there. If the room for a rail line is there, how can they then object?

Realistically, there isn't room. Athenry-Tuam was built to accomodate double track, but only in terms of bridges over the line. Embankments/cuttings were built for single track. North of Tuam and all the way to Collooney is single track infrastructure. To accomodate a greenway and leave the existing track there, will require additional expense such as land acquisition. That wasn't an issue on the Mullingar-Athlone line because it did operate as a double track rail line in the early 20th century.

In my opinion it all boils down to ripping up the track and building a greenway or leaving the existing rusty rails to sink into obscurity. None of it is worth anything as a railway these days. Trying to placate the rail zealots with promises of putting the greenway alongside the rails does nothing for either side in terms of advancement. Probably suits the zealots.

Here's a video from an inspection car run in the noughties. C'Morris to Athenry. Look at it very carefully if you fancy a greenway while not removing the existing track.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEfx5T3G4NQ

Isambard

i didn't say anything about not removing the existing track

Sam Russell

Looking at that video, going from Claremorris to Athenry, there is mainly just single track, with no room for dual track.

Also there are no places from which it might fnd a few passengers. There are not even very many one-off houses. How could such a train service even pay for the fuel, let alone the wages?

westtip

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at that video, going from Claremorris to Athenry, there is mainly just single track, with no room for dual track.

Also there are no places from which it might fnd a few passengers. There are not even very many one-off houses. How could such a train service even pay for the fuel, let alone the wages?

that's it in a nutshell, and now we the taxpayer are spending half a million euro to come up with an independent report on this subject,everyone has been saying it for years there is simply no economic, demographic, business case, or sound transport planning case for this railway probably never will be so let's just get on with the alternative use that people are clamouring for.

marno21

At present, the Western Rail Corridor has not been re-instated on the Trans-European Transport Network. During negotiations on the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Connecting Europe Facility and Repealing Regulations (EU) No 1316/2013 and (EU) No 283/2014, the European Parliament proposed an amendment to the Annex. The Parliament's proposed amendment was to include the alignment of Derry - Sligo - Galway on the North Sea - Mediterranean Core Network Corridor. This amendment was deemed unacceptable by the European Commission on the grounds that alignments of the core network corridors can only include elements of the core TEN-T network, which as presently defined does not include any of Derry, Sligo or Galway. A number of similar proposed amendments by the Parliament concerning other Member States were also rejected on the same grounds.

In late February 2019, my Department received correspondence from European Commissioner for Transport, Violeta Bulc, which stated that the European Commission is considering advancing the review of the comprehensive TEN-T Network, which is due to take place no later than the end of 2023, as stipulated in the TEN-T Regulation. The Commission's review process will include: an evaluation study, to be launched this month and to conclude in spring 2020; a public stakeholder consultation process, opening this month and concluding in June 2019; and targeted consultation with Member States and a wide range of stakeholders, commencing in the second half of 2019. My Department intends to be fully engaged in all stages of this review process.

In addition to our participation in this process, my Department will be making a formal submission to the European Commission shortly, calling for an early review of the TEN-T Network as outlined in the Programme for Government, taking into account our National Development Plan, our National Planning Framework and the implications of Brexit.

The Western Rail Corridor was originally included under the Transport 21 Initiative and was to be developed in Three Phases. Phase 1 involved the reopening of the 36 mile stretch of railway line between Ennis and Athenry and this is part of the TEN-T comprehensive network. This line was opened to the public in March 2010. Exchequer funding of €106.5 million was approved for Phase 1.

The plan for Phase 2 involved the development of the line from Athenry to Tuam. However, this development together with a number of other transport projects was postponed in 2011 due to the economic and fiscal crisis. Phase 3 involved the development of the line from Tuam to Claremorris.

As the Deputy is aware, both the 'Programme for a Partnership Government' and the recently-published 'National Development Plan' commit to an independent review of the costings for a proposal to extend the existing Western Rail Corridor. A process for an independent financial and economic evaluation of WRC phase 2 has commenced and this will include broad consultation. Having conducted a procurement process for contracts of this nature, Irish Rail anticipate the appointed consultants will commence work at the end of the month. The study will take 5 to 6 months to complete and will include a comprehensive public consultation exercise.

The latest from Shane Ross.

Muckyboots

marno21 wrote: »

The latest from Shane Ross.

It reads like a cheap circular train set.

trellheim

A process for an independent financial and economic evaluation of WRC phase 2

Was this not done before ?

Grandeeod

trellheim wrote: »

Was this not done before ?

Many times.

westtip

trellheim wrote: »

Was this not done before ?

Yep as GD said many times, the most recent was the national rail review three years ago, but there is something about the mindset of West on Track that has a stranglehold over government. So we are wasting half a million euro on yet another independent survey...its enough to make your blood boil.....:mad:

Del.Monte

Sam Russell wrote: »

Looking at that video, going from Claremorris to Athenry, there is mainly just single track, with no room for dual track.

Also there are no places from which it might fnd a few passengers. There are not even very many one-off houses. How could such a train service even pay for the fuel, let alone the wages?

Athenry/Claremorris is part of a through route - not a branch from Athenry to Claremorris and no sensible person is suggesting that Ballyglunin, Tuam etc. are going to be major sources of traffic but it all contributes. A proper North/South rail spine down the West side of the island makes sense but it's difficult to argue this point with people such as yourself who appear to know nothing about the route save what they have read on Boards. No personal criticism intended.

serfboard

Del.Monte wrote: »

Athenry/Claremorris is part of a through route

A through route from where to where?

Grandeeod

Del.Monte wrote: »

Athenry/Claremorris is part of a through route - not a branch from Athenry to Claremorris and no sensible person is suggesting that Ballyglunin, Tuam etc. are going to be major sources of traffic but it all contributes. A proper North/South rail spine down the West side of the island makes sense but it's difficult to argue this point with people such as yourself who appear to know nothing about the route save what they have read on Boards. No personal criticism intended.

Ah Del.Monte.:D I know all about the route and no matter how much money we have the existing alignment won't cut it. You got Limerick - Galway via Athenry and after my experience last week, it's not too great.

Del.Monte

serfboard wrote: »

A through route from where to where?

Take your pick - Limerick/Westport; Limerick/Ballina; Galway/Limerick; Wesport/Galway; Waterford (should be Rosslare)/Gallway/Westport/Ballina etc. or Cork to any of the above. It's not about 'all' those commuters in Athenry who want to get to Ballyglunin/Tuam or Claremorris.

Sam Russell

Del.Monte wrote: »

Athenry/Claremorris is part of a through route - not a branch from Athenry to Claremorris and no sensible person is suggesting that Ballyglunin, Tuam etc. are going to be major sources of traffic but it all contributes. A proper North/South rail spine down the West side of the island makes sense but it's difficult to argue this point with people such as yourself who appear to know nothing about the route save what they have read on Boards. No personal criticism intended.

I am very familiar with Tuam and Galway. If the population of Tuam travelled from Tuam to Athenry, how would they get to Galway? There is no capacity on the Athenry to Galway to carry them - it is a single track railway.

Why would they go by train when a bus can do the journey quicker down the new motorway?

There is no sense whatsoever to open the line. There are no population centres on the route, and no passengers prepared to wait on a wet and windy platform at Athenry for a connection to Galway.

What would the running time for a train from Tuam to Athenry be?
How many staff would be required to support the service?
What would the subvention be per annum for the service?
How much would the reinstatement of the line cost?

If there is money for trains, there are better candidates than this line. Navan to M3 Parkway - about 30 km, with plenty of would be passengers en route. Or if you like, Navan to Drogheda might be better as the line is there now and in current use for freight (or was until recently).

westtip

Del.Monte wrote: »

Athenry/Claremorris is part of a through route - not a branch from Athenry to Claremorris and no sensible person is suggesting that Ballyglunin, Tuam etc. are going to be major sources of traffic but it all contributes. A proper North/South rail spine down the West side of the island makes sense but it's difficult to argue this point with people such as yourself who appear to know nothing about the route save what they have read on Boards. No personal criticism intended.

The whole point in this endless debate though is if anyone wants a North/south Rail route from say Derry to Cork then go campaign for a route that can provide a proper train service, reinventing this ramshackle rambling route that twists and turns its way through the countryside is not about creating modern 21st century infrastructure. The road lobby would never have accepted the idea of upgrading the national road system by widening a few national roads and putting a few bypasses akin to lets say for example the Enfield bypass. If the rail lobby had from day one fought for a proper new alignment they would probably have a much better Limerick Galway link now, ie a line that actually goes from point to point. Re-opening the closed railway will deliver a second rate product, is that what West on Track are aiming to deliver? It is a second rate campaign to deliver second rate piece of infrastructure, so why not let go of the old route, let it become a greenway and look for something that will deliver what they yearn?

Isambard

westtip wrote: »

The whole point in this endless debate though is if anyone wants a North/south Rail route from say Derry to Cork then go campaign for a route that can provide a proper train service, reinventing this ramshackle rambling route that twists and turns its way through the countryside is not about creating modern 21st century infrastructure. The road lobby would never have accepted the idea of upgrading the national road system by widening a few national roads and putting a few bypasses akin to lets say for example the Enfield bypass. If the rail lobby had from day one fought for a proper new alignment they would probably have a much better Limerick Galway link now, ie a line that actually goes from point to point. Re-opening the closed railway will deliver a second rate product, is that what West on Track are aiming to deliver? It is a second rate campaign to deliver second rate piece of infrastructure, so why not let go of the old route, let it become a greenway and look for something that will deliver what they yearn?

there already is a Cork to Derry rail route.

London Correspondent

Isambard wrote: »

there already is a Cork to Derry rail route.

Similar to the Cork to Limerick motorway that already exists...

what_traffic

Sam Russell wrote: »

I am very familiar with Tuam and Galway. If the population of Tuam travelled from Tuam to Athenry, how would they get to Galway? There is no capacity on the Athenry to Galway to carry them - it is a single track railway.

Why would they go by train when a bus can do the journey quicker down the new motorway?

5 NEW bus services added to this route since 01-04-2019 (No APRIL Fools)
Not using the Motorway (servicing Claregalway and Carnmore instead)(possibly using section of the N6 that is Dual Carraigeway)

https://www.gobus.ie/Ballina

Timetables

https://www.gobus.ie/dp.php?c=ballina&t=galway-to-ballina-timetable&id=51
https://www.gobus.ie/dp.php?c=ballina&t=ballina-to-galway-city-timetable-commencing-april-1st-2019&id=49

Isambard

London Correspondent wrote: »

Similar to the Cork to Limerick motorway that already exists...

amusing but not comparable.

Muckyboots

what_traffic wrote: »

5 NEW bus services added to this route since 01-04-2019 (No APRIL Fools)
Not using the Motorway (servicing Claregalway and Carnmore instead)(possibly using section of the N6 that is Dual Carraigeway)

https://www.gobus.ie/Ballina

Timetables

https://www.gobus.ie/dp.php?c=ballina&t=galway-to-ballina-timetable&id=51
https://www.gobus.ie/dp.php?c=ballina&t=ballina-to-galway-city-timetable-commencing-april-1st-2019&id=49

Ah ya, but it's not a train.

London Correspondent

God forbid it would be a train. They’re evil things you know.

serfboard

what_traffic wrote: »

5 NEW bus services added to this route since 01-04-2019

Add those to the 2 services provided by Feda O’Donnell, the 13 services provided by Bus Eireann and the 19 (weekday) services provided by Burkes giving a total of 39 weekday buses from Tuam to Galway.

But no - the people of Tuam want a train service instead that’s going to be less frequent, slower and more expensive, which is why they marched in their thousands around the town demanding it.

Except they didn’t.

what_traffic

Muckyboots wrote: »

Ah ya, but it's not a train.

True - they are very comfortable Volvo 9700 coaches, with free WiFi and power sockets. On board toilet facilities.