Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail

serfboard wrote: »

Because there is too much traffic caused by people driving into and around the city, due to insufficient provision of park n' rides, bus lanes, bus services and cycling infrastructure.

And, of course, no metro. Work on that should've started 50 years ago.

serfboard wrote: »

Because there is too much traffic caused by people driving into and around the city, due to insufficient provision of park n' rides, bus lanes, bus services and cycling infrastructure.

You are partially correct, but a huge amount of the traffic is actually Galway City traffic (esp Western suburbs). There is literally no way of crossing the town that will not meet or cause, traffic, including buses. There would need to a complete free run all the way from Barna to Parkmore unhindered, for that to change. The Park & Ride won't work without it: witness the one at Christmas - all goes well till the Bus Lane ends, and you're part of the problem, not the solution.
I don't believe cycling is going to be a major component of releasing that much traffic, some, maybe, but not the majority. Too far, too wet, too many hills, work facilities etc. Contrary to what people think, the majority of employees don't work in the big setups with the facilities to cope.

serfboard wrote: »

Thank you for making the points I have made many, many times.

I've said as much many times myself, including submissions to IR and Barry Kenny more than once, so no issue there at all.

serfboard wrote: »

Just as there is a late-night commuter service to Athlone, which leaves the station at 22:15 and serves Oranmore, Athenry, Attymon, Woodlawn and Ballinasloe, there may indeed be a need to have an early morning service going the other way.

There absolutely does. Even retail is starting staff from 06:00 now to work within allowed delivery times for access to the City Centre by trucks etc.

serfboard wrote: »

However there are plenty of bus services that arrive in the city centre before 8AM.

You're right, there are, and SO has changed from car to bus since beginning of December. Only 1 flaw: it gets stuck in the same traffic on the way home, so it's still 60+ minutes to get home.....at least she's can kind of relax on a bus...

galwaytt wrote: »

a huge amount of the traffic is actually Galway City traffic (esp Western suburbs).

Indeed there is a large amount of city traffic. However, I do not think that it is greater than the county traffic converging on the city from all the major approach roads - the R336/446, the N59/84/83/67 and the traffic jam that is the M6 which results in tailbacks back to the Oranmore junction some mornings. All of these roads dump a massive amount of cars into the business parks and the city every morning. And if these commuters did not live in one-off housing, and were therefore not car dependent, more bus (and train) services could be provided because the critical mass would exist in the county towns.

Since that's not going to change, city outskirts Bus Park n' Rides, feeding into Bus Lanes, will need to be built.

galwaytt wrote: »

There is literally no way of crossing the town that will not meet or cause, traffic, including buses. There would need to a complete free run all the way from Barna to Parkmore unhindered, for that to change.

Agreed. And so there should be. The Western Distributor Road is wide enough for bus lanes, and so a bus lane should be developed with the roundabouts on it replaced by traffic lights with the bus getting priority. A proper QBC, in other words. From there you already have a bus lane as far as the back of the hospital. Had one lane on the bridge been a dedicated bus lane when it was built you then could have extended that all the way to Ballybrit, but it wasn't and it can't be done now until (if) the bypass is built.

However, the roundabout at the back of the hospital is going to be replaced and when it is, a bus route that goes through the hospital and onto NUIG and the city centre should be provided. UCHG/NUIG are a huge magnet for cars which you can see if you look at their car parks.

galwaytt wrote: »

The Park & Ride won't work without it: witness the one at Christmas - all goes well till the Bus Lane ends, and you're part of the problem, not the solution.

Agreed, which is why the Bus Lane shouldn't end. Galway has to grasp the nettle of having bus-only streets in the city centre.

galwaytt wrote: »

SO has changed from car to bus since beginning of December. Only 1 flaw: it gets stuck in the same traffic on the way home

Again, bus-only roads and bus lanes would solve this problem.

As an example of what's missing, there is supposed to be a bus lane inward provided on the Tuam road from just after Claregalway all the way to Wellpark.

The Connacht Tribune wrote:

Phase One ... the stretch from Claregalway to the junction at Fleming’s Garage ... Could be done relatively quickly as compulsory purchase orders (CPOs) would not be needed as far as Castlegar church

But so far, there is nothing happening.

Of course, for city traffic itself, the council's answer is that there will be great solutions after the bypass is built. However, given that that is likely a decade away (if ever), progress should be made now.

Sligo eye wrote: »

But...but...if 3999 people send in a petition asking for the moon to be made of blue cheese and 30 people ask for it to stay the same does that make the 3999 people right?

If 3,999 people say that they are not going to use a train service, and 30 people say that they are, do you build a train line to accommodate those 30 people?

Muckyboots wrote: »

I agree on the spamming, but you are wrong about everything else, including the feasibility study, which was an attempt to position the Council on the issue and not a real attempt to draw down funds. It was scuppered with a cute-hoor contrived diluted proposal led by railway promotors with nothing but contempt for the greenway campaign. They got called out in local media. The newspaper reporters were in the chamber and saw what happened. Some of the orchestrators subsequently lost their council seats. Nothing to do with campaigning or spin. But...... The west will get neither greenway or railway while there is public squabbling going on between the two groups. A bit of bants here is fine, but the issue has become toxic and nasty (I think we agree on that too). This isn't Youghal or New Ross where the trail v rail arguments were easily won politically. Nothing will be achieved while the whiff of cordite still abounds- especially when it's in the county council chambers.

Yes! That was exactly the bizarre commentary that resulted from that Council meeting. The greenway campaign, junior minister, and some of the local media seemed quite pleased to propagate the same. In reality, there were two adopted motions:

1. That Galway Co. Co. give an expression of interest before 31st October 2018 that they wish to apply for funding from the €53 million government fund to carry out a feasibility study on the establishment of greenway as a complimentary use of the disused rail line between Athenry and Milltown, and

2. That Galway Co. Co. seek funding from the Dept of Transport of carry out a feasibility study of all options for a greenway network in the County to link to the the National Greenway Network.

We see from the full language of the first motion ('If we miss this deadline the opportunity is gone for the foreseeable future.') that councilors honestly believed they were applying for some substantive level of funding for a specific greenway. Also, we saw the councilors that voted in favour of the second being lambasted and targeted as somehow being "anti-greenway" because they supported a county-wide feasibility study of other greenways. I think this was the beginning of the toxicity, and the junior minister gleefully fanned those flames to rile up one-issue voters.

Subsequently, both requests were submitted to DTTAS, and both refused because they did not meet the guidelines. So all of that nasty, political rhetoric was pointless in the end. There was never a coordinated, civil, reasoned strategy to build political consensus on the issue (which may be impossible now), and I would suggest that a €75k 'feasibility study' would not have done that either.

Muckyboots wrote: »

There was only one adopted motion. The second one. The one which was contrived to dilute mention of rail alignment out of the proposal. Under public and media pressure the acting CEO subsequently submitted both proposals but probably did so knowing they would be both turned down. Some councillors obviously felt that creating a **** storm that delivered nothing was better than giving even a pyrric victory, or confidence boost, to the greenway campaign. There are some dispicables on the pro rail side. It's not angels v demons.

After a second look at the minutes, I agree. There was only one motion that was twice amended. Only the second amendment stood. I may not agree on the cynical intent of that second amendment, but I suppose it doesn't really matter now. In hindsight, there was probably no motion that could have been adopted at that meeting that would have resulted in the council getting one cent of the €53 million.

Sligo eye wrote: »

But...but...if 3999 people send in a petition asking for the moon to be made of blue cheese and 30 people ask for it to stay the same does that make the 3999 people right?

that's fine. whatever. however it is pretty clear there is huge support for the greenway evidence based on the sheer volume of people participating in thr process. also it's clear the minority asking for the overgrown closed railway to stay the same....a complete waste of this resource appear at the moment to be winning. fair play to them for that ....and it appears that Mr canney is doing all he can to stop the report from being published.

Where is DaCor when we need him?

westtip wrote: »

I think he got lost in the crowd of 3,000 people marching for a greenway in Tuam.

Here, we've had our share of "thousands" marching to a gig rig packed with our finest megaphone-wielding politicians promising more tater tots from the school canteen. We've also had our share of haughty march-leaders quibbling over credit for yesteryear's march whilst they counted their involuntary-added FB members and "fair plays."

I agree 100% with Sligo eye:

Sligo eye wrote: »

And yet you fight for the status quo, vehemently.

The trouble is that the Greenway campaign is, as my fellow public transport campaigner Steve Bradley put it in a tweet the other day,

“These guys have made the campaign for a greenway there into an anti-rail crusade. A huge shame.”

It is quite possible that the greenway campaign needs a railway to be built from Athenry to Tuam. Every overpass was oddly built for double tracking, and a widening of the right of way during re-tracking would likely be inexpensive. And while I believe a greenway would be a very good thing, and I would use it, I can't go near that campaign until they expunge their spite goblins.

ohographite wrote: »

I really think it is too harsh to suggest closure of railways just because the average number of passengers on their trains can fit on a bus.
I wouldn't keep open railways with trains that carry, say, 10 people each on average, but 39 people on average is already a different story.

Wow, just wow! Down with economics and sums!

ohographite wrote: »

This is an exaggeration of the opinion I've expressed.

Alas you're going to get that on this forum from those that want the greenway. They're mostly (but not all) anti-rail. They over estimate the 'power' of having a March and a facebook page. In contrast if one compares it to the Connemara greenway campaign; that had

1) None of the vitrol so it could...
2) ...develop partnerships
Members:
Moycullen Community Development Association, An Meitheal Rothair, Galway Chamber of Commerce, Connemara Chamber of Commerce (Clifden), HSE Healthy Cities, Chroi, Galway’s West End, Galway’s Latin Quarter, local businesses, hoteliers, community groups and landowners living along the route.
3) Has a proper maintained web page
4) Has a twitter account (a huge number of cycling advocates keep in touch with each other to support each others campaigns through twitter).
5) Has advocates who are part of other cycling campaigns that are not about tourism; and they cycle!!!
6) Has developed lots of goodwill with the land owners
7) Took a long time to get this far, and have been doing ground work for years, as you can see by the above list.

The truth is, I'm learning a lot of how not to conduct a cycling campaign from the greenway campaign between Athenry & Tuam.

Just so you know, the Irish rail staff have enthusiastically told me numbers on the WRC are growing all the time. They are astonished there's a greenway campaign trying to stop it going further.

jay0109 wrote: »

Alice in Wonderland stuff :rolleyes:

not at all, he's correct believe it or not.
the numbers are healthy now, the line is doing well.
it's hard to imagine things would have turned out as they did when we look back at the early years but here we are.