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

what_traffic

end of the road wrote: »

so what?
they aren't doing it out of the goodness of their heart, they are doing it because obviously it's profitable for them. they are a commercial business, not a charity.

What..... so you are calling Burkes Bus - "Berks" because they are a commercial business and not a charity. Here was me thinking it was because you did not want it as a search term in the thread

ShaneC1600

If this rail review returns a verdict that there is no economical case for a railway on the western rail corridor is the greenway a given then? Because of the limited width due to the single line profile of the corridor will there be massive civil costs widening the embankments for the greenway or does it go in the 5ft?

Isambard

the 5 foot is what they want. There is nothing to say the cycleway has to go on the top of the embankment though. anywhere within the boundary fence would be feasible
.

ShaneC1600

Isambard wrote: »

the 5 foot is what they want. There is nothing to say the cycleway has to go on the top of the embankment though. anywhere within the boundary fence would be feasible
.

For cost reasons I see the benefit in the 5ft alright. I wonder is it done anywhere else in the 5ft? Was Midleton to Youghal line single track?

Isambard

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

For cost reasons I see the benefit in the 5ft alright. I wonder is it done anywhere else in the 5ft? Was Midleton to Youghal line single track?

on the track centre is usual as it is claimed that the ballast makes a good foundation. I believe what ballast there was has sunk into the mud long ago.

Midleton to Youghal was single track

dowlingm

Deleted User wrote: »

It would also need to take a more direct route, the days when the station needed to go through the middle of a town are long gone, one connecting bus to the town centre & a P+R system is whats needed these days.

If a bus is on offer, I'm sure some people with existing mainline stations remote from the town like Charleville might like the same thing

L1011

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

If this rail review returns a verdict that there is no economical case for a railway on the western rail corridor is the greenway a given then? Because of the limited width due to the single line profile of the corridor will there be massive civil costs widening the embankments for the greenway or does it go in the 5ft?

No - because we'll have ten years of people trying to argue reasons why they believe the review is wrong based on [insert nonsense here]. Just look at the previous threads here to see what will turn up.

ShaneC1600

L1011 wrote: »

No - because we'll have ten years of people trying to argue reasons why they believe the review is wrong based on [insert nonsense here]. Just look at the previous threads here to see what will turn up.

Thats true enough, sure after 10 years it would be time for another review anyways

The way the greenway supporters are talking they also will not accept the outcome if its ever released.

[Deleted User]

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Thats true enough, sure after 10 years it would be time for another review anyways The way the greenway supporters are talking they also will not accept the outcome if its ever released.

Given that there have been other reports that show phase 1 is an abysmal failure with it being nominated for closure and the section north of Athenry being abandoned, what you are incorrectly classifying as potential "non-acceptance" is more akin to a deep suspicion that this review will suffer from political interference due to the dirty tricks played by WOT/SF over the years.

The worst outcome for all sides is a report which fudges the issue and results in the line being idle for another generation.

ShaneC1600

Deleted User wrote: »

Given that there have been other reports that show phase 1 is an abysmal failure with it being nominated for closure and the section north of Athenry being abandoned, what you are incorrectly classifying as potential "non-acceptance" is more akin to a deep suspicion that this review will suffer from political interference due to the dirty tricks played by WOT/SF over the years.

The worst outcome for all sides is a report which fudges the issue and results in the line being idle for another generation.

The line was opened in the middle of an unprecedented recession dude where all modes of public transport suffered, so reports carried during those times were never going to be positive.
And no, what I am saying is that it appears, that no matter what the verdict is in the railway review, greenway supporters have attempted to discredit the conclusions just in case they are not to their liking, and also keep mentioning a "rumor" that the review is going against the railway.

What report recommended the track north of Athenry be abandoned? Who commissioned that one?

I am not against greenway btw, I just think the greenway campaign for the Western Rail Corridor is being headed by people from outside of Galway and have no clue about what is best for Galway. I bet they are not sitting in Galway traffic every day.

Pete_Cavan

Is there even any paths available on the track into Galway for a service from Tuam? If not (which I suspect is the case), then the best you would get is a shuttle with a change. Surely a bus would be infinitely better for the shuttle as it could be higher frequency meaning missing your train doesn't mean having to wait for it to get to the far terminus and back to get the next train. People seem to think that there would be a Tuam - Galway service which may not be possible.

[Deleted User]

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

The line was opened in the middle of an unprecedented recession dude where all modes of public transport suffered, so reports carried during those times were never going to be positive.
And no, what I am saying is that it appears, that no matter what the verdict is in the railway review, greenway supporters have attempted to discredit the conclusions just in case they are not to their liking, and also keep mentioning a "rumor" that the review is going against the railway.

What report recommended the track north of Athenry be abandoned? Who commissioned that one?

I am not against greenway btw, I just think the greenway campaign for the Western Rail Corridor is being headed by people from outside of Galway and have no clue about what is best for Galway. I bet they are not sitting in Galway traffic every day.

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/ireland/iarnrod-eireann-seeks-to-permanently-axe-10-closed-lines-430881.html

serfboard

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

I just think the greenway campaign for the Western Rail Corridor is being headed by people from outside of Galway and have no clue about what is best for Galway. I bet they are not sitting in Galway traffic every day.

You could not be more wrong about this.

ShaneC1600

[Deleted User] wrote: »

https://amp.irishexaminer.com/ireland/iarnrod-eireann-seeks-to-permanently-axe-10-closed-lines-430881.html

Did a report conclude it should be a abandoned or just the paper? From memory that was the beginning of a request for steady state funding too.

ShaneC1600

serfboard wrote: »

You could not be more wrong about this.

You really believe that? ðŸ˜႒
Which part?

serfboard

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

You really believe that? ðŸ˜႒
Which part?

All of it.

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

I just think the greenway campaign for the Western Rail Corridor is being headed by people from outside of Galway

Wrong. In fact if you had said that West On Track is being headed by people from outside of Galway then you would be right.

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

and have no clue about what is best for Galway.

"what is best for Galway" on an opinion forum is always going to be subjective, but I think you're wrong that a railway to/through Tuam is "best for Galway".

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

I bet they are not sitting in Galway traffic every day.

Wrong.

MayoForSam

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

I am not against greenway btw, I just think the greenway campaign for the Western Rail Corridor is being headed by people from outside of Galway and have no clue about what is best for Galway. I bet they are not sitting in Galway traffic every day.

Ahem..... https://galwaydaily.com/news/rally-in-support-of-quiet-man-greenway-draws-thousands-to-tuam/

user1842

Does any one know how much the green way will cost and when completed how much money it will bring to the area?

ShaneC1600

serfboard wrote: »

All of it.

Fair enough if you say so

serfboard wrote: »

Wrong. In fact if you had said that West On Track is being headed by people from outside of Galway then you would be right.

Your right about WOT, but the dog on the street can see the influence of the greenway campaign from outside telling their followers to obey and send messages to xyz because they tell them to, its funny really.

So you are saying the campaign to bring a greenway along the WRC is championed by local groups only? The main heads in that group are from outside the county even the local politician would not be sitting in the same traffic that could be improved by improved transport in Galway.

serfboard wrote: »

"what is best for Galway" on an opinion forum is always going to be subjective, but I think you're wrong that a railway to/through Tuam is "best for Galway".

Where did I say a railway was "best for Galway"???

serfboard wrote: »

Wrong.

I made was such a sweeping statement that it has to be in some tiny bit right and you say I'm "wrong". You believe "they" are all sitting in traffic through Claregalway or the Headford Rd or where ever every day? Class

ShaneC1600

MayoForSam wrote: »

Ahem..... https://galwaydaily.com/news/rally-in-support-of-quiet-man-greenway-draws-thousands-to-tuam/

It was a great day in fairness.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Thats true enough, sure after 10 years it would be time for another review anyways The way the greenway supporters are talking they also will not accept the outcome if its ever released.

Oh so wrong, lets see the review accept what it says and get on with it. One thing is for sure if the review was massively pro WRC it would have been leaked by now. If the review says the WRC is the best idea since sliced bread then lets draw a line in the sand and get on with the railway, the general consensus is that it won't and the latest "peer review" in the department is to fudge the whole thing so the debate goes on endlessly.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Fair enough if you say so

Your right about WOT, but the dog on the street can see the influence of the greenway campaign from outside telling their followers to obey and send messages to xyz because they tell them to, its funny really.

Where do you get this line of thought from, People are merely being told how they can empower themselves. I issued the call for people to make their own FOIs my guess is most folk wouldn't know where to start or think "its not for them". I called on people to enter a campaign of bombarding the department with FOIs to create mayhem. From all accounts the department has received hundreds of FOIs in just a few days, these all have to be responded to registered on the department website and it all becomes very transparent, it will also embarrass Lord Ross at the cabinet table if he has a department the public are screaming at. But no one is telling people to obey orders, we can leave that to SF/WOT.

Sligo eye

westtip wrote: »

Where do you get this line of thought from, People are merely being told how they can empower themselves. I issued the call for people to make their own FOIs my guess is most folk wouldn't know where to start or think "its not for them". I called on people to enter a campaign of bombarding the department with FOIs to create mayhem. From all accounts the department has received hundreds of FOIs in just a few days, these all have to be responded to registered on the department website and it all becomes very transparent, it will also embarrass Lord Ross at the cabinet table if he has a department the public are screaming at. But no one is telling people to obey orders, we can leave that to SF/WOT.

There is no such organisation as SF/WOT.

Sligo eye

Sligo eye wrote: »

There is no such organisation as SF/WOT.

I mean if we started calling the Greenway campaign FG/BORE* that might just have some traction given that Mairead McGuinness’s agent is involved in the campaign.

*Fine Gael/Bikes on Railways Exclusively

Muckyboots

Sligo eye wrote: »

There is no such organisation as SF/WOT.

Best read in the voice of Gerry Adams (or a similar voiceover artist) .

[Deleted User]

Sligo eye wrote: »

There is no such organisation as SF/WOT.

Sorry, you misunderstand, SF stands for Sinn Fein and WOT stands for West On Track. When they are called SF/WOT it is to indicate that they are working together.

Image attached is from the recent WRC meeting in Athenry where a SF MEP, Councillor and other reps were joined by Gerry Murray from WOT.

I hope that clears it up for you and anyone else confused

ShaneC1600

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Sorry, you misunderstand, SF stands for Sinn Fein and WOT stands for West On Track. When they are called SF/WOT it is to indicate that they are working together.

Image attached is from the recent WRC meeting in Athenry where a SF MEP, Councillor and other reps were joined by Gerry Murray from WOT.

I hope that clears it up for you and anyone else confused

At least SF have nailed their colours to a mast unlike the FG and FF. FG have a greenway TD supporter and FF have a Greenway TD supporter but seem to have less power as WOT. They don’t seem be putting their seats on the line for cause for what 6 years?

Sligo eye

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

At least SF have nailed their colours to a mast unlike the FG and FF. FG have a greenway TD supporter and FF have a Greenway TD supporter but seem to have less power as WOT. They don’t seem be putting their seats on the line for cause for what 6 years?

And Gerry Murray is a SF councillor. Looks like a SF meeting to me, if it was WOT the meeting would be branded as such. By hey, don’t let me wreck your buzz, as they say.

Sligo eye

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

At least SF have nailed their colours to a mast unlike the FG and FF. FG have a greenway TD supporter and FF have a Greenway TD supporter but seem to have less power as WOT. They don’t seem be putting their seats on the line for cause for what 6 years?

Well said.

[Deleted User]

Sligo eye wrote: »

And Gerry Murray is a SF councillor. Looks like a SF meeting to me, if it was WOT the meeting would be branded as such. By hey, don’t let me wreck your buzz, as they say.

Gerry outlined his involvement in WOT for over 15 years at the meeting