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

ShaneC1600

Deleted User wrote: »

Some links for you, not sure if it's what you are looking for

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07kR1YDn9lM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfv0EGFjxK0

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

No that's not it. I was referring to the quote the minister used regarding an actual published report where the opening of the railway was for 8 to 100 against. I have heard it multiple times from him.
That stuff you posted there is old hat from FG and RTE, you know during the recession where even established rail lines and even FG built roads had fewer numbers never mind a newly opened train line with poor timetabling and carriages. I believe usage has improved significantly since then and the ghost train ceased operations about 2013 when students, workers and tourists are using the line.
As for Enda, he might need a measuring tape regarding the location of the greenway!
Lucky for all of us the country has/had pre COVID come on leaps and bounds.
Thanks for your attempt at finding the report for me though.

ShaneC1600

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Did Cannon quote that statistic again today?

No not today, it was from two weeks ago, I would like to see the report is all.

CrowdedHouse

https://twitter.com/sticky_bottle/status/1273914307244437504?s=20

ezstreet5

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Does anybody have the source of the report Minister Cannon used in his recent GBFM interview? The one where he mentions an 8 to 100 against rail on the WRC. I have requested it from multiple sources but I cant find it anywhere. Cheers.

Did Cannon quote that statistic again today?

[Deleted User]

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Does anybody have the source of the report Minister Cannon used in his recent GBFM interview? The one where he mentions an 8 to 100 against rail on the WRC. I have requested it from multiple sources but I cant find it anywhere. Cheers.

Some links for you, not sure if it's what you are looking for

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=07kR1YDn9lM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfv0EGFjxK0

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

Sligo eye

westtip wrote: »

The M20 will unfortunately be one of the projects that will be a sacrificial lamb to the greens, FF have in their manifesto a commitment on any new motorways for railway alignments alongside (think I am right on that one), but I think the M20 project will be lost to fiscal pressure, in fact a lot of big road projects will go that way, it won't be the GP fault but let's blame them anyway I cannot see the greens problems with Dual carriageways, they make life safer, ok so they mean more long distance commuting so use the new roads for an exceptional bus service, bring in congestion charges and literally take private cars out of city centres. There seems to be an antagonism towards private motorists in the GP, you can have a car and be green, just use it less and use public transport for going into cities. Post 2030 the GP have got the ban on registering any new petrol/diesel cars haven't they? so long term, say in 20 years time they will almost be a thing of the past thanks to the legacy of the GP in government, who knows what will happen by then in 20 years time we will be on WRC/WRT thread on boards, #V25.0 What do you reckon SligoEye can we drag the debate out that long......:D

Well we could be debating that long alright Westtip! :-D

ShaneC1600

Does anybody have the source of the report Minister Cannon used in his recent GBFM interview? The one where he mentions an 8 to 100 against rail on the WRC. I have requested it from multiple sources but I cant find it anywhere. Cheers.

westtip

Del.Monte wrote: »

The new Cork/Limerick motorway in all likelyhood. It will surely be the first time in history that a motorway has been built between two towns to replace a dangerous stretch of road?

The M20 will unfortunately be one of the projects that will be a sacrificial lamb to the greens, FF have in their manifesto a commitment on any new motorways for railway alignments alongside (think I am right on that one), but I think the M20 project will be lost to fiscal pressure, in fact a lot of big road projects will go that way, it won't be the GP fault but let's blame them anyway

I cannot see the greens problems with Dual carriageways, they make life safer, ok so they mean more long distance commuting so use the new roads for an exceptional bus service, bring in congestion charges and literally take private cars out of city centres. There seems to be an antagonism towards private motorists in the GP, you can have a car and be green, just use it less and use public transport for going into cities. Post 2030 the GP have got the ban on registering any new petrol/diesel cars haven't they? so long term, say in 20 years time they will almost be a thing of the past thanks to the legacy of the GP in government, who knows what will happen by then in 20 years time we will be on WRC/WRT thread on boards, #V25.0 What do you reckon SligoEye can we drag the debate out that long......:D

Del.Monte

serfboard wrote: »

If you look at that line on Google Satellite, you can barely make it out, and large parts of it have been completely removed and green fields are in its place. I don't think that there is too much of it available for either a railway or a Greenway.

If a rail link between Charleville and Patrickswell is re-established, let them build a new alignment alongside the new M20.

The non-infinite railway infrastructure budget will have to make decisions - hmmm which to do, finish a line between Limerick and Cork, or (re)build one to allow Tuam commuters to get to Galway?

No guesses as to which would win.

The new Cork/Limerick motorway in all likelyhood. It will surely be the first time in history that a motorway has been built between two towns to replace a dangerous stretch of road?

westtip

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed, they are talking about a rail line between Limerick and Cork

https://dateway.net/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork/

The Greens did not mention the WRC in their election manifesto despite naming several projects they would like to see happen, they have a massive focus in this programme for Government on cycling infrastructure and they have a goal of leaving a legacy from this government of a National Cycle Network, completed and delivered. It will be one of their landmark objectives.

westtip

Sligo eye wrote: »

Yes and no doubt WOT also got a friendly reception as well. It’s usually referred to as “professionalism”.

Indeed you are right, professionalism would have prevailed at both meetings; it is what is not minuted at these type of meetings that is more important, the off the cuff comments, the body language and the sheer sense of hilarity when the railway was discussed. Only those in attendance are privy to these indicative moments of human interaction, which are consigned to the subjective moments of the record of history, not written in minutes but written by eye witness accounts and participants.

serfboard

Del.Monte wrote: »

It's reinstating a railway line from Charleville to Limerick via Patrickswell that was foolishly dismantled in 1967 but it's probably wanted for a greenway.

If you look at that line on Google Satellite, you can barely make it out, and large parts of it have been completely removed and green fields are in its place. I don't think that there is too much of it available for either a railway or a Greenway.

If a rail link between Charleville and Patrickswell is re-established, let them build a new alignment alongside the new M20.

The non-infinite railway infrastructure budget will have to make decisions - hmmm which to do, finish a line between Limerick and Cork, or (re)build one to allow Tuam commuters to get to Galway?

No guesses as to which would win.

Sligo eye

westtip wrote: »

The Regional planners met with the Greenway campaign in February 2019 and got a very friendly reception from the NWRA planners, no doubt WOT would have met with them as well.

Yes and no doubt WOT also got a friendly reception as well. It’s usually referred to as “professionalism”.

Del.Monte

Deleted User wrote: »

Indeed, they are talking about a rail line between Limerick and Cork

https://dateway.net/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork/

It's reinstating a railway line from Charleville to Limerick via Patrickswell that was foolishly dismantled in 1967 but it's probably wanted for a greenway.

[Deleted User]

Indeed, they are talking about a rail line between Limerick and Cork

https://dateway.net/greens-considering-railway-line-between-limerick-and-cork/

westtip

galwaytt wrote: »

I suspect the GP have either seen it or a summary of it, and made it a plank in their support for the programme for Govt.

I think you will be quite surprised what the greens think about the WRC, and will not please West on Track.

westtip

OK here is a bit of background for you folks on the NWRA and RSES. The RSES is a strategy planning policy document which sets out Regional Planning Objectives; The RSES are reset every ten years, the RPOs have to be incorporated in County plans. Ten years ago West on Track virtually owned this document, which is why over the course of a decade the only show in town in official policy was the railway with he enforcement of RPOs into the county plans.

WOT effectively strangled any debate in local councils about this issue as the constant reference was made to the RPOs created by WOT.

Slowly but surely the greenway campaign has sort to break the stranglehold of official thinking and local political thinking. This has happened with great success. A great deal of lobbying and getting ordinary folk involved in a programme of mass submissions on every policy being considered has been part of this grinding down of the WOT view as the only accepted view.

Mark my words, the greenway campaign has been listened to and this new RSES reflects just how much and it could have been more.

The Regional planners met with the Greenway campaign in February 2019 and got a very friendly reception from the NWRA planners, no doubt WOT would have met with them as well.

None of the senior planners at the NWRA had any faith in the idea the railway line would re-open, believe me I was in the meetings with the planners who all fully accepted the view the railway was dead in the water. They supported the idea of the greenway idea going into the RSES and said it would be written into the plan.

Such was their lack of faith in any idea that the railway will be re-opened the original final draft RSES presented to the NWRA last July by the planners at the NWRA in the Railway section actually had an RPO which read as follows, I can post up the full pdf of that plan but take it from me this is what it said:

NEW RPO The Assembly supports the alternative appropriate uses for disused rail corridors including use as Greenways where it does not prevent future use for railway transport.

This RPO was removed due to massive lobbying and to give him his due, successful lobbying by Gerry "not up for discussion" Murray the SF/WOT member of the NWRA from Mayo. Gerry could clearly see what this RPO was aimed at and knew it needed removing at all costs.

Gerry "not up for discussion" Murray also I believe tried to have all the references to a greenway on the route removed from the Greenway section of the RSES but failed in this sabotage on the greenway even being mentioned in this policy document. It clearly is, and it is clearly marked on a map which follows the exact route of the closed railway.

It is true that the references to the WRC have all been maintained in the railway section of the report, in some ways it makes the RSES all things to all men. However the number one RPO in the railway section of the report is about the need for the Western Rail Corridor independent report to be published, effectively it means if the report is negative about the rail being re-opened it means the WRC is dead in the water and it means an alternative plan is clearly in place in the RSES for he closed railway as a greenway.

All this change in thinking in regional planning circles has been due to the greenway campaign no longer accepting that the only thinking in town in terms of regional planning was the West on Track View. There is an alternative view and in truth public planners have broadly embraced it (outside of Mayo)

It also clearly shows why this bloody railway report is so pivotal, no doubt this will be the fudge of all fudges and we will all take our own level of interpretation from it.

This rather long winded post gives you all a bit of background....And means the rail report needs to be decisive one way or the other, if it favours the railway build it. If it doesn, build the greenway but Lord have mercy on us all if it is a waffling bit of fudging.

galwaytt

Sligo eye wrote: »

Read the report rather than interpret it. It gives far more prominence to rail and includes specific objectives for rail expansion from Sligo up to Derry/Letterkenny and for the WRC right down to Galway and Limerick from Westport/Ballina and Sligo.

The report it refers to, to support their case for the WRC North has already been done as we know, and EY or somebody is sitting on it.

I suspect the GP have either seen it or a summary of it, and made it a plank in their support for the programme for Govt.

[Deleted User]

Sligo eye wrote: »

Read the report rather than interpret it. It gives far more prominence to rail and includes specific objectives for rail expansion from Sligo up to Derry/Letterkenny and for the WRC right down to Galway and Limerick from Westport/Ballina and Sligo.

Sure but you are ignoring the glaring caveats being IF the rail report says its a good idea and IF the government approve it, it should be built but otherwise greenway all the way

The Sligo section of the greenway is due to be opened first. I'm looking forward to going for a spin on it.

Sligo eye

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Document can be found at https://www.nwra.ie/pdfs/NWRA-RSES-2020-2032.pdf

It shows the Western Rail Trail as a key greenway project

Where it states the following

It also states

With regards to the rail corridor itself, it states

There's also a smattering of "should the WRC be realised" statements. e.g.

So in summary, they would like to see the rail line opened, and IF the rail report says its a good idea and IF the government approve it, it should be built but otherwise greenway all the way

Read the report rather than interpret it. It gives far more prominence to rail and includes specific objectives for rail expansion from Sligo up to Derry/Letterkenny and for the WRC right down to Galway and Limerick from Westport/Ballina and Sligo.

[Deleted User]

intellectual dosser wrote: »

Admittedly I'd never heard of that group before, but that's neither here nor there.

you'd have to wonder what sort of weight the NWRA have?

From their about page

The Northern & Western Regional Assembly (NWRA) was established on 1st January 2015. The Border, Midland and Western Regional Assembly was established in 1999, one of two Regional Assemblies established to give effect to the division of the country into two regions for EU Structural Funds purposes.

Under the Local Government Reform Act 2014 a number of changes were made to the regional structures in Ireland. The eight regional authorities were dissolved on 1st June 2014 and their functions and staff were transferred to the Regional Assemblies. Subsequently three Regional Assemblies were established on 1st January 2015 – the NWRA, the Eastern & Midlands Regional Assembly and the Southern Regional Assembly. Together the Regional Assemblies form a strong regional structure that strengthens the development of Ireland’s regions in a co-ordinated, strategic manner.

ezstreet5

galwaytt wrote: »

Can we assume now that the WRC north leg is now dead, thanks, and move on ? https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/historic-moment-for-east-galway-as-quiet-man-greenway-gets-thumbs-up/?fbclid=IwAR0oHX4LLzbpAbPnM7JTXkNwtB82iVISKMqmPxveAKN9cKkWqDwXD15JmlY

Ciarán Cannon strikes again!!! (as if on cue). The NWRA's Regional Spatial and Economic Strategy 2020-2032 strongly supports reactivation of the rail line from Athenry to Claremorris.

p. 123

KEY FUTURE PRIORITIES
Enhanced rail services (thereby supporting the transition to a low carbon region) to Dublin and commuter services between Ballina, Castlebar, Westport and Claremorris with connectivity to Galway and Limerick Metropolitan Cities and major international ports such as Shannon/Foynes, should the Western Rail Corridor be realised

p. 140

The development of the EU TEN-T designation is desirable for international connectivity and integrated performance of road, rail and air. The reopening of the Western Rail Corridor would present an opportunity to provide integrated rail linkage to IWA Knock SDZ, thus providing rail linkage with other centres of population and to provide alternative sustainable travel opportunities to that of road based options.

p.222

Many gaps exist within the region’s rail network and the National Development Plan 2018-2027 confirms that the Western Rail Corridor Phase 2 from Athenry to Tuam and phase 3 to Claremorris could increase passenger, tourist and commercial use.

The Western Rail Corridor is of strategic importance as it represents a piece of key enabling and sustainable transport infrastructure for the region that presents an opportunity to effect ‘transformational change’ in the realisation of the Atlantic Economic Corridor.

REGIONAL POLICY OBJECTIVES
RPO 6.11
To seek commencement and completion of the review of the Western Rail Corridor project as a priority for passenger and freight transport.

[Deleted User]

Document can be found at https://www.nwra.ie/pdfs/NWRA-RSES-2020-2032.pdf

It shows the Western Rail Trail as a key greenway project

Where it states the following

It also states

GREEN LINK SOUTH TO POTENTIAL FUTURE GREENWAYS
There is potential for a walkway/cycleway connection from Collooney to Sligo which can also serve as a Smarter Travel commuter route. There would be a potential for this piece of infrastructure to link into similar regional scale greenways on closed or abandoned railways in the vicinity such as along the abandoned railway line to Enniskillen (SLNCR).

With regards to the rail corridor itself, it states

In line with the National Development Plan, an independent review will be undertaken immediately and if the review concludes that the corridor should
be reopened, and if that is approved by Government, the project should be prioritised during this plan period.

There's also a smattering of "should the WRC be realised" statements. e.g.

Enhanced rail services (thereby supporting the transition to a low carbon region) to Dublin and commuter services between Ballina, Castlebar, Westport and Claremorris with connectivity to Galway and Limerick Metropolitan Cities and major international ports such as Shannon/Foynes, should the Western Rail Corridor be realised;

So in summary, they would like to see the rail line opened, and IF the rail report says its a good idea and IF the government approve it, it should be built but otherwise greenway all the way

intellectual dosser

galwaytt wrote: »

Can we assume now that the WRC north leg is now dead, thanks, and move on ? https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/historic-moment-for-east-galway-as-quiet-man-greenway-gets-thumbs-up/?fbclid=IwAR0oHX4LLzbpAbPnM7JTXkNwtB82iVISKMqmPxveAKN9cKkWqDwXD15JmlY

Thanks for sharing galwaytt

For anyone who doesnt have time to click on the link its an article saying the QMG is included in strategy by the Northern and Western Regional Assembly (NWRA) 's Spatial and Economic Strategy 2020-2032.

Admittedly I'd never heard of that group before, but that's neither here nor there.

So I had a look and found the report in question, this is it.

I went to the rail section, my time is limited right now so forgive me.

Page 223:

A. It shall be an objective to deliver the Athenry - Tuam - Claremorris - Sligo Rail to an appropriate level of service and to a standard capable of facilitating passenger and freight transport
B. It shall be an objective to progress through pre-appraisal and early planning the extension of the railway from Athenry - Tuam - Claremorris - Sligo.

So to answer your question, no I don't agree its dead. Maybe this NWRA holds the same view as a lot of us, lets have both!

Will flick through the rest of that report later, its interesting, but you'd have to wonder what sort of weight the NWRA have?

Avns1s

galwaytt wrote: »

Can we assume now that the WRC north leg is now dead, thanks, and move on ? https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/historic-moment-for-east-galway-as-quiet-man-greenway-gets-thumbs-up/?fbclid=IwAR0oHX4LLzbpAbPnM7JTXkNwtB82iVISKMqmPxveAKN9cKkWqDwXD15JmlY

Anyone got a link to this in the NWRA’s spatial and economic strategy as opposed to a politicians musings?

blackwhite

galwaytt wrote: »

Can we assume now that the WRC north leg is now dead, thanks, and move on ? https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/historic-moment-for-east-galway-as-quiet-man-greenway-gets-thumbs-up/?fbclid=IwAR0oHX4LLzbpAbPnM7JTXkNwtB82iVISKMqmPxveAKN9cKkWqDwXD15JmlY

IMO it's the right decision - but strange that they've taken such a definitive step before the EY report is published.

galwaytt

Can we assume now that the WRC north leg is now dead, thanks, and move on ? https://www.galwaydaily.com/news/historic-moment-for-east-galway-as-quiet-man-greenway-gets-thumbs-up/?fbclid=IwAR0oHX4LLzbpAbPnM7JTXkNwtB82iVISKMqmPxveAKN9cKkWqDwXD15JmlY

Muckyboots

Sligo eye wrote: »

Ah, the poor farmers. Cannon’s backing of the landowners was a major strategic error on his part so what else could he do but align with the angry brigade and try and stop the march of progress with the railway, so he could claim to be on the side of cyclists and all that. After all, it’s got to be easy to get votes if you’re clearly demonstrating that you’re against the tide.

I think Canute had a similar problem on the beaches of Eastern England a long time back.

Landowners, farmers specifically, always take an "all for one and one for all" approach when it comes to compulsory acquisitions. It's in our DNA for obvious historical reasons. The DTTAS took a ham-fisted approach to the Athlone -Galway route that left at least one landowner with his farm literally split in half. What followed was inevitable.

westtip

Sligo eye wrote: »

Ah, the poor farmers. Cannon’s backing of the landowners was a major strategic error on his part so what else could he do but align with the angry brigade and try and stop the march of progress with the railway, so he could claim to be on the side of cyclists and all that. After all, it’s got to be easy to get votes if you’re clearly demonstrating that you’re against the tide.

I think Canute had a similar problem on the beaches of Eastern England a long time back.

And tell me did Sligo county council side with the "angry brigade" when they changed their minds and decided to support the Greenway, did Marian Harkin do the same, did Marc Macsharry do the same? Has Frank Feighan who sided with the greenway from day one sided with the "angry brigade", Did Anne Rabbitte side with the "angry bridgade" when she too chose to support the greenway? Did the various Galway cllrs side with the angry brigade when one by one they sided with the one independent cllr in the Galway chamber advocating a greenway come on board to support the idea; I am just wondering who the angry brigade are? Are they the ones angry with the continued waste of this resource? Are they the ones fed up listening to those who tell them a railway closed 50 years ago is going to be re-opened; Are they the 3,000 angry people Mums, Dads, small children, teenagers, business people who marched on the streets of Tuam asking for the greenway to happen, are these folks the angry brigade? Which way is the tide actually flowing? Is it with the greenway or railway? Mmmm interesting question why don't you go ask the 25,000 people who signed the petition, the 3,000 marchers - go ask the angry brigade....

Take a reality check, there was no march of progress for the railway, it has been dead in the water for years, it is those that have been challenged about it being re-opened methinks are now the angry brigade.

Sligo eye

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It was dead in the water long before anyone spoke about CPO's, see attached.

Ah, the poor farmers. Cannon’s backing of the landowners was a major strategic error on his part so what else could he do but align with the angry brigade and try and stop the march of progress with the railway, so he could claim to be on the side of cyclists and all that. After all, it’s got to be easy to get votes if you’re clearly demonstrating that you’re against the tide.

I think Canute had a similar problem on the beaches of Eastern England a long time back.