westtip wrote: » Yep that is one area we all agree with WOT on, which is why the greenway is a good idea, if you really want a railway along the west coast build one in a staight line, and don't accept the compromise of twisty turny C19th alignment.
Greaney wrote: » You obviously don't know the line. The second part of this video from Tuam to Athenry so you can have a look yourself (from 24:00)
ezstreet5 wrote: » I sadly just watched the whole inspection car video, and that's 48 minutes and 20 seconds of my life that I want back. I know it was filmed in winter and while raining, so you have to use your imagination. But I only see a few areas with half-decent scenery, and the rest is rather boring, straight, and flat. It's not going to attract a lot of tourists, and if you name it the "Quiet Man Greenway," those few tourists are going to feel deceived because it doesn't look the the film, and then they will give you only one or two dots on Tripadvisor.
westtip wrote: » If you think that scenery is dull and boring you want to see 6 km either side of Kiltimagh that already has had half a million spent on the velorail project, that is the project approved by West on Track by the way because it doesn't pull the tracks up - you know the tracks that could not be used for a railway anymore because they are fit for nothing, anyway that is another story.
ezstreet5 wrote: » My point was that the QMG idea does not enjoy fantastic scenery, and that scenery is key in attracting tourists. In that sense, a realised greenway may only rise to the level of a local amenity (which I, like others, would use).
Deleted User wrote: » Haha, I really do have to laugh. An almost verbatim Gerry Murray tactic in dismissing the greenway. I'm seeing a lot of that lately. Not that hard to connect the dots. Holding to that argument shows the utter lack of comprehension you and others have in relation to the usage of Greenways all over the world. One of the main reasons for usage is long stretches of peaceful travel fully separated from motor vehicles for walkers, cyclist's, young families and people with disabilities. It's simple really
ezstreet5 wrote: » Build the Athlone to Galway greenway, and you will have all of the same benefits (arguably to a greater degree), plus the ability to commute to Galway by bicycle from places like Athenry-if aligned correctly.
Greaney wrote: » 2) Greenways, as described in gov.ie, in the first paragraph are described as a Tourism Product. It does refer to it as a local amenity
Gov.ie wrote: The Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport recognises the benefits that can arise from the further development of Greenways in Ireland, as a tourism product with significant potential to attract overseas visitors, for local communities in terms of economic benefits, and for all users as an amenity for physical activity and a contributor to health and wellbeing.
Gov.ie wrote: It also aims to increase the number and geographical spread of Greenways of scale and quality around the country over a 10 year period with a consequent significant increase in the number of people using Greenways as a visitor experience and as a recreational amenity.
Greaney wrote: » 3) The government consultant for greenways, who was the speaker in Athenry at a previous presentation regarding greenways (former county engineer Martin Lavelle) recommended bringing a greenway along by the rivers (water) that would pass by historical sites. He stated the greenway by the railway line was not only a bad choice, but since it was earmarked for rail, and owned by Irish rail, it was also pointless to pursue. (It has me thinking the Quietman Greeway leadership is acting like the Grand Old Duke of York, marching the public up and down to no end).
Muckyboots wrote: » Lets get the facts right here- He supplied a map to one of the local TD's which was later qualified by the same TD as an "option" and not a plan as it involved CPO's from start to finish. A little research on the meaning of riparian rights will bring you up to speed on what it possible and what is fictional. At least he is trying to offer something constuctive, but he seems to be miles off the mark and has zero traction with this "option". On the other hand the Quiet Man Greenway is still the only game in town when it comes to alternative uses for the WRC and without trains running on that line - alternative uses will be "open for discussion" , in the words of a well known Mayo councillor. At least I think that's what he said. Eamon O'Cuiv certainly said it.
Sligo eye wrote: » I would say on balance the Athlone to Galway greenway is a far higher priority than destroying the railway. Two questions need to be asked;
Sligo eye wrote: » I would say on balance the Athlone to Galway greenway is a far higher priority than destroying the railway.
end of the road wrote: » so what is it then? an airport? a military base? it looks like a railway to me anyway as it has tracks that are similar to those that would be used for the undertaking of allowing for the movement of rail vehicles.
Muckyboots wrote: » Therein lies the heart of the anti-greenway stance. So, Galway airport looks like an airport - so it's an airport. Leave it be. Same with abandoned railways.
end of the road wrote: » well, galway airport is an airport to my knowledge. it's closed as far as i know, but still has it's infrastructure in place yes?
Greaney wrote: » As for the Quiet Man Greenway, what on earth do you mean by the only game in town?? Irish Rail own the line.!! No-one is doing anything on that line without their say so!
Muckyboots wrote: » CIE Property own the line and they have already agreed in principle and in writing on a lease to a local authority should they decide to use it for a greenway.
ezstreet5 wrote: » I'd love to see the lease that was agreed in writing with the local authority. Please share that.
Deleted User wrote: » Why not build both, it's not like the line beyond Athenry is going to see trains in our lifetimes, might as well use it for the benefit of the community
Muckyboots wrote: » :D I bet you would. Agreed in principle and in writing. I have a copy, but you do your own research. FOI might be a good start. Just one request now.
ezstreet5 wrote: » Let's not parse words. There is no lease.
Muckyboots wrote: » CIE Property own the line and they have already agreed in principle and in writing on a lease to a local authority should they decide to use it for a greenway. Sorry I have to repeat it verbatim for you, but you are the one that read "agreed" and saw "leased" . One day Galway County Council will decide to use it as a greenway and when they do a lease will be arranged by the property owners- CIE Property. It's not complicated, unless you want to make it so.
ezstreet5 wrote: » I asked that we not parse words, but that's exactly what you did. Don't infer that there is a lease agreed in writing.
Muckyboots wrote: » There is an agreement to lease it for a greenway, in writing, subject to requirements. I could go on all night rearranging these words for you. It won't make it go away.
ezstreet5 wrote: » Ah, I see. A conditional agreement to discuss a future agreement which would be in the form of a lease or license. It's akin to an agreement to "Let's talk later," and I wouldn't attribute a lot of weight to it. I suppose it's better than agreeing to disagree. Which is what we should do.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
