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

L1011

You'll have trouble finding any cycling campaigner at all that believes there is real potential for the WRC, though

Greaney

At the end of the day Iarnrod Eireann still 'own' the line. We keep talking about it as if the government just had to say, 'let's do it' and it'll be done. Our National rail company are seeing a huge growth in their 'product' and the demand for more rural public transport is growing also.

I've not yet met an 'everyday' cycling campaigner that would advocate rail to trail on a line that had real potential and had been in the program for government to re-open. Those of us working on 'cycling for all for everyday' transport, health & fitness are not fixated on building the 'Quietman Greenway'.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

You spoke to all the relevant senior civil servants and they all agree with you? Sure you should have said, it will be a greenway now for sure so.

I will not be drawn on who I spoke to, what I do know is this, the senior civil servant who wrote the report, put the named projects including Western Rail Trail in the strategy. The civil service presented what they saw as the best plan with the resources we have. The Minister took out all named projects, I believe against the advice of his department staff. End of discussion on this matter.

ShaneC1600

westtip wrote: »

I spoke to them.

You spoke to all the relevant senior civil servants and they all agree with you? Sure you should have said, it will be a greenway now for sure so.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

How do you know what the senior civil servants want? .

I spoke to them.

ShaneC1600

westtip wrote: »

The map in draft one of the national greenway strategy was a schematic, it did not follow the route exactly it was an indicator, however the fact the text of the original greenway strategy actually referred to the Western Rail Trail as a long distance greenway and if my memory serves me right it showed the route you refer to as a childs sketch in a particular colour with a coding under the map which said this colour = using a closed railway route, which seems to indicate a child could work out that the indicated route referred to the closed railway route, so mock as you may with your childs sketch comment, I am splitting my sides.:pac:

Really this all gets rather tiresome when it is pretty clear what the senior civil servants think about this project of railway/greenway options for this route. I would post the map up but just cannot find it at the moment.

As you said, draft 1, that's the thing about drafts, they are subject to change. How do you know what the senior civil servants want? The childs sketch comment was more to do with the way the coloured lines were inputted, its easy to see it was the 1st draft alright. How far did that draft actually go? Is there documents to show who changed their plans?
I wonder would the fact that €10 million + spent out west is better than €100 million + spent out west? Maybe thats the reason civil servants might be leaning one way? These same civil servants have spent more money on planning rail infrastructure that will never happen in dublin than reinstatement of the WRC would have cost if they just did it.

westtip

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Is map the greenway was shown on the one that looked like a childs sketch?

The map in draft one of the national greenway strategy was a schematic, it did not follow the route exactly it was an indicator, however the fact the text of the original greenway strategy actually referred to the Western Rail Trail as a long distance greenway and if my memory serves me right it showed the route you refer to as a childs sketch in a particular colour with a coding under the map which said this colour = using a closed railway route, which seems to indicate a child could work out that the indicated route referred to the closed railway route, so mock as you may with your childs sketch comment, I am splitting my sides.:pac:

Really this all gets rather tiresome when it is pretty clear what the senior civil servants think about this project of railway/greenway options for this route. I would post the map up but just cannot find it at the moment.

ShaneC1600

westtip wrote: »

You refer to best options for greenways, pray tell me is the old railway alignment the "best" option for the railway, in your words wouldn't it to have strategy focused on the best railway route rather than the cheapest and easiest one? Think about it. And by the way this logic applies to all railway projects, fighting for a railway on the inefficient alignment of the Western Rail Corridor is not striving for the best railway network....is it? In truth to have a high speed C21st railway system fully electrified and truly competing with faster express buses there needs to be a wholesale look at the network because just using the old alignments created in C19th is clearly

That argument might play out on the alignment north of Claremorris, less so between Tuam and Claremorris and not at all between athenry and Tuam. We dont have or are planning for "high speed" rail in the country, why would the WRC need to be?
Constantly putting the alignment down to make the great greenway sound the better option is getting old now. Can the greenway not stand up on it's own merit?
Is map the greenway was shown on the one that looked like a childs sketch?

westtip

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Someone on here finds it significant that the WRC greenway was included in a draft version of the Government's Greenways strategy, but was removed in the final version. This seems perfectly logical to me--that the strategy was adjusted to focus on the best greenways, rather than just the cheapest and easiest ones. You can blame certain individuals for this change, and disparage them, but I might applaud them for their discernment.
.

The reason why the Galway-Dublin greenway cannot be completed yet is due to massive arguments over CPOs for the proposed "best" route. We all know the model of closed railway to Greenway works, yes because the land belongs to the state already and yes because the gradient of a closed railway works perfectly; are they they cheapest and easiest option - yes - so that is a good reason to build them, and not sit around navel gazing for another 20 years; let me ask you a question......You refer to best options for greenways, pray tell me is the old railway alignment the "best" option for the railway, in your words wouldn't it

be perfectly logical

to have strategy focused on the best railway route rather than the cheapest and easiest one? Think about it. And by the way this logic applies to all railway projects, fighting for a railway on the inefficient alignment of the Western Rail Corridor is not striving for the best railway network....is it? In truth to have a high speed C21st railway system fully electrified and truly competing with faster express buses there needs to be a wholesale look at the network because just using the old alignments created in C19th is clearly not the best option.

Anway.....There is little doubt what the Department senior civil servants want to see a greenway on the closed railway route, they wrote the Western Rail Trail into the original policy, they are the experts who write the policy and recommend it their minister. Was it truly discernment on the part of Lord Ross to put a red pen through the fabulous greenway network the civil servants recommended in draft one of the greenway strategy making sure the WRT did not happen, or was it instruction on part of his IA colleague. Mmmmm...we all have our views on that one. Go fight for a proper railway!

TCDStudent1

ezstreet5 wrote: »

I wholeheartedly agree. The 'gimmick' is the idea that a greenway on the WRC will be a tourist bonanza. A local, (rather giddy) politician was even convinced that such a project would transform Athenry into "a Westport." And then, when the substantial issues of tourism, and (perfectly lovely but) average scenery, and average "see-and-do" potential are interjected into the argument, the greenway suddenly deflates into a local amenity.

In this sense, I must agree with the Government's strategy to develop high-quality greenways with tourist potential. Someone on here finds it significant that the WRC greenway was included in a draft version of the Government's Greenways strategy, but was removed in the final version. This seems perfectly logical to me--that the strategy was adjusted to focus on the best greenways, rather than just the cheapest and easiest ones. You can blame certain individuals for this change, and disparage them, but I might applaud them for their discernment.

And finally, I must comment on the issue of travel demand from Tuam and Claremorris. If you think it it insignificant or zero, I would question your judgement. 20+ busses each way from Tuam to Galway and back does not represent insignificant travel demand. And I am too far from Claremorris to guage that added demand.

What is wrong with that? It's an area crying out for such an amenity. And the disused railway is the ideal spot to create that amenity. Greenways are about much more than tourism. I would argue that their more important function is that they encourage exercise and provide health benefits to the local population.

ezstreet5

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

In the grand scheme of public infrastructure spending the 100 million euro that was spent on the opened section is nothing, more should have been spent and the line continued to Tuam back then.
Only reason there is talk of a greenway is because of the railway line is there, regardless of location we are told the greenway will be this magical solution to tourism and local amenities. Sure most of the people telling us how great a greenway will be do not live near the line, will use it once for a photo for sure with the result that the line will never see a train again. Hopefully the second line into Galway will help form part of the extension to Tuam.

I wholeheartedly agree. The 'gimmick' is the idea that a greenway on the WRC will be a tourist bonanza. A local, (rather giddy) politician was even convinced that such a project would transform Athenry into "a Westport." And then, when the substantial issues of tourism, and (perfectly lovely but) average scenery, and average "see-and-do" potential are interjected into the argument, the greenway suddenly deflates into a local amenity.

In this sense, I must agree with the Government's strategy to develop high-quality greenways with tourist potential. Someone on here finds it significant that the WRC greenway was included in a draft version of the Government's Greenways strategy, but was removed in the final version. This seems perfectly logical to me--that the strategy was adjusted to focus on the best greenways, rather than just the cheapest and easiest ones. You can blame certain individuals for this change, and disparage them, but I might applaud them for their discernment.

And finally, I must comment on the issue of travel demand from Tuam and Claremorris. If you think it it insignificant or zero, I would question your judgement. 20+ busses each way from Tuam to Galway and back does not represent insignificant travel demand. And I am too far from Claremorris to guage that added demand.

ShaneC1600

donvito99 wrote: »

These points are ultimately contingent on the usefulness of the service.

Would a railway be more 'useful' to people living along the line than a leisure/recreational or tourist trail which also allows lots of children to cycle to school? And if the railway is more useful, is the enormous cost of reinstating it warranted, in the context of extraordinarily limited resources made available for rail?

The WRC between Ennis and Athenry would suggest that it is not warranted considering what could be done with that €100m, the rolling stock and the drivers.

In the grand scheme of public infrastructure spending the 100 million euro that was spent on the opened section is nothing, more should have been spent and the line continued to Tuam back then.
Only reason there is talk of a greenway is because of the railway line is there, regardless of location we are told the greenway will be this magical solution to tourism and local amenities. Sure most of the people telling us how great a greenway will be do not live near the line, will use it once for a photo for sure with the result that the line will never see a train again. Hopefully the second line into Galway will help form part of the extension to Tuam.

Greaney

donvito99 wrote: »

These points are ultimately contingent on the usefulness of the service.

Would a railway be more 'useful' to people living along the line than a leisure/recreational or tourist trail which also allows lots of children to cycle to school? And if the railway is more useful, is the enormous cost of reinstating it warranted, in the context of extraordinarily limited resources made available for rail?

The WRC between Ennis and Athenry would suggest that it is not warranted considering what could be done with that €100m, the rolling stock and the drivers.

You're asking good questions but I think you're drawing conclusions that mightn't be true. I know folk thought the Westport greenway would facilitate lots of children to cycle to school, but they didn't. I'm sure there are lots of reasons but they just didn't use it. At the end of the day, most folk who advocate for every day cycling like that would rather cyclable towns, and frankly, bike parking!!

As for the Ennis line, I've seen huge growth of use on it personally so I'm honestly stumped at claims to the contrary. I know that it's made Craughwell & Ardrahan real options for families who know they're linked to towns with secondary schools and the need to ferry one's kids is a lot less. I know folk who've bought recently in Gort because of the line and goodness, but there's been a developer trying to get planning for Ardrahan. It could really take off if the Planning Authority allowed estates at the town (the station is walking distance). Often development like housing follows the trainline so it can take a 'generation' for travel paterns to adjust.

donvito99

Greaney wrote: »

I don't think so.
The distance a person will cycle as a commute verses a rail commute is huge!
A lot of bike users mix rail with their cycle.
Trains are more disability friendly.

These points are ultimately contingent on the usefulness of the service.

Would a railway be more 'useful' to people living along the line than a leisure/recreational or tourist trail which also allows lots of children to cycle to school? And if the railway is more useful, is the enormous cost of reinstating it warranted, in the context of extraordinarily limited resources made available for rail?

The WRC between Ennis and Athenry would suggest that it is not warranted considering what could be done with that €100m, the rolling stock and the drivers.

Greaney

eastwest wrote: »

There are a few areas where cycling commuting will be enhanced by the WRT.
All the schools in tuam lie close to it, and st attractas college in tubbercurry has a cycle path linking it to the old railway. I remember hearing a figure of up to 500 students who could commute to school by bike in that location alone.
But you're right, the biggest pluses around this project will be leisure and tourism.

I know children are commuting to school by bike in Athenry, that was since the new school had proper sheltered bike parking, and moved out of town. I work with some teens in the area and my experience is the young people in question never have to take rail because they're within about 3 miles of the school to cycle (roaming radius of young people is not that huge), and they could do with our towns themselves having cycling infrastructure.

It's the kids in Abbeyknockmoy, Ballygluning etc. that live too far to cycle, that would be interested in rail (there's no secondary schools between Tuam & Athenry you see). I've spoken with folk out there & many of them said they'd rather rail. They don't get a voice in a lot of forums so I think many are underestimating their numbers. It made rural living easier to have independent travel for folk with no car like teens, and commuting students, so that households wouldn't need so many cars.

There's a lot to unpack. I'm in favour of exploring other plans for a greeway between Athenry & Tuam personally. We'll be more likely to get a greenway if we have a plan 'b' and 'c'. We're awfully stuck on the former trainline which was to be opened in 2011 and was shelved due to the economic rescession that started in 2007/8.

I have an interest in both cycling & tourism, and the truth is, rural Irelands transport infrastructure is really only for 'cars'. As a parent and someone who has over 20 years working with kids, we're burnt out driving from pillar to post to get them to sports etc. If the distances were walkable or cycleable that'd be great. If not, public transport would be wonderful.

Greaney

donvito99 wrote: »

This is an excellent argument against the re-instatement of the railway also.

I don't think so.
The distance a person will cycle as a commute verses a rail commute is huge!
A lot of bike users mix rail with their cycle.
Trains are more disability friendly.

donvito99

Greaney wrote: »

I wouldn't over idealise that idea....

1) The Government policy regarding greenways can be found on gov.ie
They are discribed at tourism product, not local cycle infrastrucuture. They really are all about tourism. Just read the link there.
2) Between Abbeyknockmoy and the turn for Ballyglunin, the gov have already funded and built cycle infrastructure
3) I've been attending a fair few cross group cycling strategy meetings regarding cycling infrastructure in the west. I mentioned the Quietman greenway, and some folk involved in Galway Cycle Bus remarked that when they were invited to Westport to develop a cyclebus they discovered local school kids didn't use it for their cycle commute to school. They said the gap between greenways & towns is pretty bad.
From my experience, and I've been in cycling advocacy for about four years now, most 'everyday cycling' advocates would not support you in your view at all! We'd like if it did, but I don't think the old railway line links as much as you're imagining.

Irishcycle.com have a few articles here & here on the matter.

This is an excellent argument against the re-instatement of the railway also.

eastwest

Greaney wrote: »

I wouldn't over idealise that idea....

1) The Government policy regarding greenways can be found on gov.ie
They are discribed at tourism product, not local cycle infrastrucuture. They really are all about tourism. Just read the link there.
2) Between Abbeyknockmoy and the turn for Ballyglunin, the gov have already funded and built cycle infrastructure
3) I've been attending a fair few cross group cycling strategy meetings regarding cycling infrastructure in the west. I mentioned the Quietman greenway, and some folk involved in Galway Cycle Bus remarked that when they were invited to Westport to develop a cyclebus they discovered local school kids didn't use it for their cycle commute to school. They said the gap between greenways & towns is pretty bad.
From my experience, and I've been in cycling advocacy for about four years now, most 'everyday cycling' advocates would not support you in your view at all! We'd like if it did, but I don't think the old railway line links as much as you're imagining.

Irishcycle.com have a few articles here & here on the matter.

There are a few areas where cycling commuting will be enhanced by the WRT.
All the schools in tuam lie close to it, and st attractas college in tubbercurry has a cycle path linking it to the old railway. I remember hearing a figure of up to 500 students who could commute to school by bike in that location alone.
But you're right, the biggest pluses around this project will be leisure and tourism.

Greaney

westtip wrote: »

What the Greenway might do is help those in one off housing less dependent on the car for short journies into local communities, too see friends and family and serve to connect one off housing in a non car based mode of transport. For example if you live say 2 miles outside of a town near this greenway what is stop your teenage children cycling to school, the GAA pitch or just to see their mates, that is what we did on safe roads when we were kids? or nipping into town yourself on your newly purchased electric bike, or just using it for your daily stroll, or taking out children in buggies or wheelchair users on its low gradient path, it is these micro actions that I genuinely believe could benefit the West of Ireland, its not just about tourism economic benefits on the Atlantic Economic Corridor, it is about local benefits and the way people live as well.

I wouldn't over idealise that idea....

1) The Government policy regarding greenways can be found on gov.ie
They are discribed at tourism product, not local cycle infrastrucuture. They really are all about tourism. Just read the link there.
2) Between Abbeyknockmoy and the turn for Ballyglunin, the gov have already funded and built cycle infrastructure
3) I've been attending a fair few cross group cycling strategy meetings regarding cycling infrastructure in the west. I mentioned the Quietman greenway, and some folk involved in Galway Cycle Bus remarked that when they were invited to Westport to develop a cyclebus they discovered local school kids didn't use it for their cycle commute to school. They said the gap between greenways & towns is pretty bad.
From my experience, and I've been in cycling advocacy for about four years now, most 'everyday cycling' advocates would not support you in your view at all! We'd like if it did, but I don't think the old railway line links as much as you're imagining.

Irishcycle.com have a few articles here & here on the matter.

Sam Russell

marno21 wrote: »

The Atlantic Economic Corridor concept is a good one. Linking all the economic assets on the western seaboard and providing good infrastructure to them. Cork-Limerick-Shannon-Ennis-Galway-Sligo-Letterkenny and nearby Tralee, Killarney, Tuam, Mayo towns etc. Also Foynes Port, Shannon Airport, Cork Airport, Ringaskiddy Port, Knock Airport.

Such a concept requires good quality road connectivity. It doesn't have the population, population density, business cluster sizes nor the distance for rail connecitivity. "Climate action" isn't going to change this.

One of the problems in the west of Ireland is that train filled dreams are distracting people in power from the actual solutions to make the place more prosperous. I heard a Sinn Fein person on the radio last year saying that the number one infrastructure requirement in the west of Ireland was a fully electrified rail line from Sligo to Rosslare via Limerick.

Absolutely bonkers stuff.

Thankfully there are some others in the required agencies thinking differently - http://www.sligococo.ie/N17KCAEC

There is a railway connection from Sligo to Rosslare. It is not electrified, but it is there. No direct service because there is no demand.

Any idea why they want it to go via Limerick? It would be a longer way round.

westtip

end of the road wrote: »

yes, in areas that seem to actually have something to offer.
i see nothing between athenry and mayo that would be worth someone's time when they could go to waterford or around kerry, places of actual beauty.

the old no scenery argument! haven't heard it for a while, West on Track used that about the idea of a greenway on the Mayo section, then they fully backed the idea of a velorail through the bog on the closed railway at Kiltimagh, then low and behold claimed the WRC would help tourism, sure why would tourists buy tickets for a train journey when there is nothing to see out the windows!

What about the idea that some people just want a long distance network of greenways so they can enjoy the simple pleasure of cycling through the countryside unhindered by spectacular scenery and only having the birds and bees to keep you company.

westtip

galwaytt wrote: »

A simple path shouldn't be an obstacle - it's a light Works and reversible. Should the messiah appear and shower us with trains, it could technically be undone and revert to Permanent Way. There is literally no downside

Actually, that's an issue that doesn't get enough coverage: the entire Galway-Dublin line should be a double line.

You are dead right there about double tracking Galway Dublin or at least having a lot more passing loops, certainly double tracking Athlone Galway would allow for Commuter stopping service Athlone - Galway and an express train that bypassed intermediary stops. If the rail lobbyists had been campaigning for that many of us would have given our full support over the years.

Re the simple path not being an obstacle to future trains we have said this all along.....

marno21

westtip wrote: »

Do you want hear another gimmick and ersatz phrase that has crept into the save the west voice:

Atlantic Economic Corridor it just fits in perfectly with the crayon drawing on maps that some folks get upto. It was created out of thin air and has no become part of the body politic mumbo jumbo talk. Sure I think a job was created for Michael Ring on this one he was head of the AEC something or other group in the last Dail and Lord Ross's mate Sean Canney was on that committee, guess what they saw the WRC as a the panacea for the west!

The Atlantic Economic Corridor concept is a good one. Linking all the economic assets on the western seaboard and providing good infrastructure to them. Cork-Limerick-Shannon-Ennis-Galway-Sligo-Letterkenny and nearby Tralee, Killarney, Tuam, Mayo towns etc. Also Foynes Port, Shannon Airport, Cork Airport, Ringaskiddy Port, Knock Airport.

Such a concept requires good quality road connectivity. It doesn't have the population, population density, business cluster sizes nor the distance for rail connecitivity. "Climate action" isn't going to change this.

One of the problems in the west of Ireland is that train filled dreams are distracting people in power from the actual solutions to make the place more prosperous. I heard a Sinn Fein person on the radio last year saying that the number one infrastructure requirement in the west of Ireland was a fully electrified rail line from Sligo to Rosslare via Limerick.

Absolutely bonkers stuff.

Thankfully there are some others in the required agencies thinking differently - http://www.sligococo.ie/N17KCAEC

end of the road

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This "gimmick" is working very well in several other parts of the country, using an otherwise abandoned state asset for the benefit of local people, small business, and tourism

yes, in areas that seem to actually have something to offer.
i see nothing between athenry and mayo that would be worth someone's time when they could go to waterford or around kerry, places of actual beauty.

galwaytt

westtip wrote: »

All we are asking for is what you call a simple path along the closed railway route.

..do yo think this duplicated service could be used on the single track into Galway from Athenry.

A simple path shouldn't be an obstacle - it's a light Works and reversible. Should the messiah appear and shower us with trains, it could technically be undone and revert to Permanent Way. There is literally no downside
Actually, that's an issue that doesn't get enough coverage: the entire Galway-Dublin line should be a double line.

westtip

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

This "gimmick" is working very well in several other parts of the country, using an otherwise abandoned state asset for the benefit of local people, small business, and tourism

The real gimmick of course was creating the grandiose title of "Western Rail Corridor" in the first place, and then some eejit created a Wikipedia page for it with a cross-sectional diagram of a double-track TGV line (!) as an illustration of what they expected would be built :rolleyes:

Do you want hear another gimmick and ersatz phrase that has crept into the save the west voice:

Atlantic Economic Corridor it just fits in perfectly with the crayon drawing on maps that some folks get upto. It was created out of thin air and has no become part of the body politic mumbo jumbo talk. Sure I think a job was created for Michael Ring on this one he was head of the AEC something or other group in the last Dail and Lord Ross's mate Sean Canney was on that committee, guess what they saw the WRC as a the panacea for the west!

Hotblack Desiato

ezstreet5 wrote: »

greenway = gimmick. Don't become ensnared by it, at the risk of losing years of your life.

This "gimmick" is working very well in several other parts of the country, using an otherwise abandoned state asset for the benefit of local people, small business, and tourism

The real gimmick of course was creating the grandiose title of "Western Rail Corridor" in the first place, and then some eejit created a Wikipedia page for it with a cross-sectional diagram of a double-track TGV line (!) as an illustration of what they expected would be built :rolleyes:

westtip

Sligo eye wrote: »

With all due respect WT how do you work out what the timetable of any service would be? These decisions would be made by the NTA in conjunction with IE. It strikes me that what you are trying to do here is to make a wild assumption about any service levels to try and undermine the whole concept of a railway service which in my opinion is the entire basis of your campaign.

I think is a fair assumption that the service levels on a single track rural railway line will be little more than six trains a day max, actually probably over-generous an estimate. it will certainly be no more than Ennis-Athenry.

Sligo eye wrote: »

You then throw in some sweet rosy little scenarios that are sweet and positive, but a simple path would achieve what you are looking for here.

Your tone is slightly patronising however the scenario I presented is actually how people live their lives. Your reference to a simple path is all well and good, what kind of simple paths have you seen on country roads in Ireland, we don't do footpaths in rural Ireland, born out in latest stats on road fatalities an astonishing amount is of pedestrians on our roads. All we are asking for is what you call a simple path along the closed railway route.

Sligo eye wrote: »

I know well that railway supporters get a lot of demands here to make their claims stand up but on any level of scrutiny your many claims about what a rail service would look like and how the land could be used simply don’t stand up.

You are not wrong there about Railway supporters needing to make their claims stand up. Here is a simple level of scrutiny, do you think the frequency and level of service on Claremorris/Athenry would be any better than say Ennis/Athenry a single track line through rural Ireland on any level of scrutiny would be highly unlikely to have more than six up and down trains a day. Would the service become a claremorris to Limerick service with all change at Athenry for Galway/Dublin. Do think IE could roster for two separate service one from the North of the line to Galway one from the south of the line to Galway, do yo think this duplicated service could be used on the single track into Galway from Athenry. Do you call six trains a day up and down the line commuter service? I don't. When it comes to scrutiny the failings in the arguments to extend north of Athenry are as wide open as a barn door. As for How the land could be used? Well if it was used for a greenway Take a look at Waterford Greenway as a case study on how it could stand up.

We tend to disagree on this, but obviously I find my own arguments a lot more compelling,which is why I persist in making them. I also accept I may be deemed to be completely wrong and the management consulting brains at EY consulting may not have listened to the presentation I made to them, I really don't mind if I lose that argument and see if they have recommended this railway should be built to save the west. I would be surprised but I am prepared to look at what they said if we would only be allowed to do so.

Sligo eye

westtip wrote: »

LG can I ask you a serious question do you really think a commuter service that can at best deliver 4 to 5 up trains a day and the same number of down trains between Claremorris to Athenry will be transformative in patterns of going to to work in the west of Ireland? Really do you think it will make any difference to the society we live in?

Oh and BTW I completely agree with you about scattered one off housing, totally and utter disaster but re-opening this railway will make no difference to what has gone before us. What the Greenway might do is help those in one off housing less dependent on the car for short journies into local communities, too see friends and family and serve to connect one off housing in a non car based mode of transport. For example if you live say 2 miles outside of a town near this greenway what is stop your teenage children cycling to school, the GAA pitch or just to see their mates, that is what we did on safe roads when we were kids? or nipping into town yourself on your newly purchased electric bike, or just using it for your daily stroll, or taking out children in buggies or wheelchair users on its low gradient path, it is these micro actions that I genuinely believe could benefit the West of Ireland, its not just about tourism economic benefits on the Atlantic Economic Corridor, it is about local benefits and the way people live as well.

With all due respect WT how do you work out what the timetable of any service would be? These decisions would be made by the NTA in conjunction with IE. It strikes me that what you are trying to do here is to make a wild assumption about any service levels to try and undermine the whole concept of a railway service which in my opinion is the entire basis of your campaign.

You then throw in some sweet rosy little scenarios that are sweet and positive, but a simple path would achieve what you are looking for here.

I know well that railway supporters get a lot of demands here to make their claims stand up but on any level of scrutiny your many claims about what a rail service would look like and how the land could be used simply don’t stand up.

westtip

Lord Glentoran wrote: »

It may be a gimmick but it has a purpose. The status quo of car commuting and scattered one off housing monetising otherwise unproductive land must be preserved at all costs.

LG can I ask you a serious question do you really think a commuter service that can at best deliver 4 to 5 up trains a day and the same number of down trains between Claremorris to Athenry will be transformative in patterns of going to to work in the west of Ireland? Really do you think it will make any difference to the society we live in?

Oh and BTW I completely agree with you about scattered one off housing, totally and utter disaster but re-opening this railway will make no difference to what has gone before us. What the Greenway might do is help those in one off housing less dependent on the car for short journies into local communities, too see friends and family and serve to connect one off housing in a non car based mode of transport. For example if you live say 2 miles outside of a town near this greenway what is stop your teenage children cycling to school, the GAA pitch or just to see their mates, that is what we did on safe roads when we were kids? or nipping into town yourself on your newly purchased electric bike, or just using it for your daily stroll, or taking out children in buggies or wheelchair users on its low gradient path, it is these micro actions that I genuinely believe could benefit the West of Ireland, its not just about tourism economic benefits on the Atlantic Economic Corridor, it is about local benefits and the way people live as well.