Isambard wrote: » Or you could improve Sligo to Dublin and Cork to Dublin to increase the line speeds to modern standards (particularly the Sligo line) and have a service which actually goes through places with a good sized population.
Deleted User wrote: » In a similar way that motorways are done
Lord Glentoran wrote: » Such methodology applied to motorways, for example, means that extending the M20 to Cork is redundant, as the M8 is linked to the M7.
Greaney wrote: » I had to look up what PWD meant!!!! I'm a carer for my family member with both mobility issues and acquired brain injury (which left them with severe epilepsy and unable to drive anymore). The train is a lifeline to her. She finds the bus difficult to use due to the fact their coaches with high steps etc. In fact rail meets the needs of the disabled more than most other transport forms. Crikey, to be reduced to a bloody Acronym!!! The terms you've used there speaks volumes about the contempt many in this country have towards the most vulnerable people who don't or cannot drive. :mad:
westtip wrote: » Anyway aside from all these accusations one way or another and btw that page is not me, yes I have seen it, whatever, it seems to be satirical but a below the belt stuff. However a Facebook page be it West on Track, SMG or indeed QMG is unlikely to be the reason for any government decision, a tiny amount of the general population actually see this stuff.
westtip wrote: » Like many of us even I am getting very bored with all this.
westtip wrote: » So let me ask all the WRC supporters a few perfectly civilized debating points: What exactly are the benefits of a railway between Claremorris and Athenry?
westtip wrote: » Why should this project be prioritized over other national projects - examples please with rational arguments?
westtip wrote: Why does it have to go on the route of the closed railway the road lobby always goes for new routes, what is different about this?
westtip wrote: How much will it cost to rebuild and how much subvention will it require and can you justify these costs in a national context?
westtip wrote: How would you feel if the Rail Report does not recommend it, would you be prepared to accept its findings?
westtip wrote: Any other thoughts. I just want to sit back and hear your rationale again to clear the air, because I haven't seen the spell binding argument yet.
westtip wrote: Give you a couple of weeks can we hear the arguments again please. I suggest Greenway supporters step back and let's hear what they have to say.
THE DIRECTORS of the Great Southern Trail Ltd (GST) have discussed the recent announcement by Limerick City and County Council of a €5 million upgrade for the Greenway and wish to draw public attention to the history of the “Coolybrown working farm” element of the “otherwise broadly welcome proposals”. In a statement, they said the story begins in 2003 with a successful planning application for a 180 square metre slatted unit to be constructed in a Coolybrown farm to the south of the railway. “The application was revised in 2006 to double the size of the unit and this was also approved. In the interim the adjacent old Limerick to Tralee railway corridor had its right of way protected by the Mid-West Regional Authority for recreational and environmental pursuits in 2004. “Therefore, in 2007, when another incarnation of the yet unbuilt slatted unit manifested itself in a planning application, Limerick County Council, referencing the Regional Authority guidelines, wrote to the applicant on July 20 that it was “not favourly disposed” to the application and advised that it should be relocated to the northern side of the railway where the bulk of the farmlands and buildings were located. The council requested further information. “Surprisingly, having received no new information or proposals (only a regurgitation of the previous 2003 and 2006 files received on July 30) the council approved the application on the following day,” said the statement. These events all pre-dated the 2010 development of the Rathkeale-Ardagh section; all of the works were undertaken by GST. “It was only then that it came to light that the plans approved three years earlier had not been complied with. The slatted unit was now several metres closer to the railway than the planning permission permitted. In fact the cattle were being fed on the CIÉ railway property. “The overall result of the CIÉ and council indulgence is that non local users of the Greenway when encountering a narrowing of the railway route and its less than attractive appearance, to their left and to their right, actually believe that they are in a farmyard. “To compound all of the above the council’s current plan to use public funds and to detour away from the railway for a length of 800 metres is the final capitulation. It is also a recipe for similar demands on sections yet to be developed. “During the GST twenty-five years of campaigning, developing and managing the Greenway we never entertained requests to deviate from the railway corridor. We viewed it as land held in trust by CIÉ for the people of Ireland. Our hope now is that wiser counsel will prevail with this ill-advised current proposal being further investigated and resolved in the public interest. “The GST Greenway has the capacity to be a world class facility and of major benefit to locals and visitors alike. The integrity of the entire way without any proposed private diversion is a key element of the facility now and for future generations,” concludes the statement. In reply, the council said they took ownership of the Greenway route from Rathkeale to the Kerry border in 2015. “Since then a large amount of work has been completed to bring the route up to the standard of similar Greenways nationally and internationally, with more than €3 million. These works included the Barnagh Tunnel, improved crossing points, fencing, track surfacing, bridges and signage, along with loops around the three market towns of Rathkeale, Newcastle West and Abbeyfeale. “Just three weeks ago Limerick City and County Council announced a further investment of €5 million for a total upgrade of the surface of the Greenway,” said a spokesperson. In addition to the €5 million, the council pointed to purchasing the old Ardagh and Barnagh Station Houses. “With the agreement of CIE and landowners, the council will in the interests of health and safety construct an 800m diversion of the Greenway around a working farmyard at Coolybrown, Ardagh. No further route diversions are planned along the Greenway. The council has commenced design work on the small number of cattle underpasses necessary to facilitate other farm crossings on the route. “A new re-imagined and enticing Greenway can act as a catalyst for the development of tourism and spin off activities in West Limerick and it is incumbent on everyone now to support the Greenway and support the potential job creation and other economic benefits for the region, especially now in this post-Covid environment which should make the Greenway even more popular,” said the spokesperson.
Deleted User wrote: » When unprotected routes become farmyardshttps://www.limerickleader.ie/news/home/551337/attention-needed-for-limerick-s-working-farm-at-coolybrown.html
ShaneC1600 wrote: » OMG the QMG has got the green light. They are just making it up as they go now!https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=2033632063434863&id=435870759877676&sfnsn=mo
MayoForSam wrote: » Correct, this is fake news (who would rely on Facebook as a reliable news source anyhow?). I doubt if 'This Is Galway' is affiliated to the QMG campaign however.
ezstreet5 wrote: » For the same reason that the greenway supporters want to take it - cost! As quoted in the prior report, the cost of construction of a new single track (120 kph) railway over agricultural land is €3.5m/km. Whereas, the cost of upgrading an existing single track line to the same speed or better is €1.5m/km. The difference in cost is due to land acquisition and cut and fill (embankment build). So using the existing line saves €2m/km. If you want to electrify it, add €400k/km. The costs would be: Upgrade the line to 160 km/hr for 25 km @ €1.5m/km = €37.5m Add electrification (for future-proofing) at €0.4m/km = €10.5m Station Enhancement at €5m each (lets include Ballyglunin and Tuam) = €10m Rolling Stock (6 cars, 3 DMUs) = €20m Total Capital Expenditure €78m Operating Costs: €5/km for EMUs
ShaneC1600 wrote: » Anybody know if that bike hire place is open?
Losty Dublin wrote: » https://galwaybayfm.ie/galway-bay-fm-news-desk/programme-for-government-brings-hope-for-east-galway-greenway-says-cannon/
whisky_galore wrote: » Puff piece of nonsense. I'm surprised they didn't use the "light at end of tunnel" or "full steam ahead" journo clichés.
Geuze wrote: » I dip in and out of this discussion, so apologies for the questions: I see a reference to 120 kph and also to 160 kph above. Can I clarify is 1.5m per km for upgrade to 160kph correct? It seems low to me? Costs to build halts always seem high to me, 5m? I'd be hoping you'd get two platforms and an overbridge/subway for 5m? So 58m for the physical infrastructure, ok. More questions: (2) This would allow trains to pass/cross at three points in Athenry, Ballyglunin/N63 and in Tuam? (3) Could peak departures/arrivals to/from Tuam every 30 mins be managed? (4) What might journey time be from Tuam-GY, with three stops? I'd be hoping for 30 mins?
Isambard wrote: » 160km/h is delusional. They can barely manage that on Cork to Dublin.No other track is afaik cleared for that speed. With an intermediate stop at Ballyglunin (perhaps) and slowing to take the Junction at Athenry (or stopping if the section is not clear) a high average is highly unlikely.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » €78m capital cost at 2011 prices for an hourly service between Tuam and Athenry is not financially viable.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Even that is likely light as the "Upgrade single track (120kph or less) to single 160kph" probably assumes an existing operational line given the reference to 120kph, the "or less" is unlikely to be as low as JCB speed.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » As has been said before, a better (faster and more frequent) bus service could be provided at a small fraction of that cost.
ezstreet5 wrote: » Yeah it is. We just spent €1.149 billion building the Gort/Tuam Motorway. And we are hoping to spend an additional €612 million for the N6 Galway City Ring Road. And you are worrying about €78m to reinstate rail service to Tuam? Even if it €100m, it is still worth it.I don't believe that a one-hour journey time from Tuam to Galway in the morning makes Tuam an attractive place to live for a person working in Galway. Yet, 2000 passengers per day use the congested service. It's not good enough.
Deleted User wrote: » You might want to double check some of your figures
ezstreet5 wrote: » Yeah it is. We just spent €1.149 billion building the Gort/Tuam Motorway. And we are hoping to spend an additional €612 million for the N6 Galway City Ring Road. And you are worrying about €78m to reinstate rail service to Tuam?
Even if it €100m, it is still worth it.
I don't believe that a one-hour journey time from Tuam to Galway in the morning makes Tuam an attractive place to live for a person working in Galway. Yet, 2000 passengers per day use the congested service. It's not good enough.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » €78m capital cost at 2011 prices for an hourly service between Tuam and Athenry is not financially viable. Even that is likely light as the "Upgrade single track (120kph or less) to single 160kph" probably assumes an existing operational line given the reference to 120kph, the "or less" is unlikely to be as low as JCB speed.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » I don't know where you got that figure for the Gort/Tuam Motorway but any reported cost I saw was half that. I would rather the Galway Bypass wasn't built as I don't think it represents good value for money. Neither does spending that much for a low frequency shuttle train service. Just because something else cost more, doesn't make this lesser amount good value. Based on what? A report was complied but has been hidden away for some strange reason. Hopefully the next Transport Minister will publish it, warts and all. Rather than spending tens of millions on a railway to provide a shuttle service to Athenry for connection to onward services to Galway, a bus could be provided at little cost (both capital and operational) and would likely be a superior service in terms of frequency and possibly in terms of speed also. You have to consider the times of potential connections in Athenry, if the first train leaves Tuam to connect with a particular train in Athenry, then takes on hour to go back to Tuam and return to Athenry, when is the next train from Athenry? It is possible that there would only be one train leaving Tuam which would suit commuters, getting them into Galway at a reasonable time. It is unlikely to be an attractive service for commuters. At least buses could hit every connection and you wouldn't be left waiting for an hour if you missed one (plus possible wait when you finally get to Athenry). Reinstating the rail line doesn't automatically create a good service, there are many limitations, particularly on a single track line, particularly when you have a single track connecting to an already congested single track.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » I don't know where you got that figure for the Gort/Tuam Motorway but any reported cost I saw was half that. I would rather the Galway Bypass wasn't built as I don't think it represents good value for money. Neither does spending that much for a low frequency shuttle train service. Just because something else cost more, doesn't make this lesser amount good value.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Based on what? A report was complied but has been hidden away for some strange reason. Hopefully the next Transport Minister will publish it, warts and all.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Rather than spending tens of millions on a railway to provide a shuttle service to Athenry for connection to onward services to Galway, a bus could be provided at little cost (both capital and operational) and would likely be a superior service in terms of frequency and possibly in terms of speed also. You have to consider the times of potential connections in Athenry, if the first train leaves Tuam to connect with a particular train in Athenry, then takes on hour to go back to Tuam and return to Athenry, when is the next train from Athenry? It is possible that there would only be one train leaving Tuam which would suit commuters, getting them into Galway at a reasonable time. It is unlikely to be an attractive service for commuters. At least buses could hit every connection and you wouldn't be left waiting for an hour if you missed one (plus possible wait when you finally get to Athenry). Reinstating the rail line doesn't automatically create a good service, there are many limitations, particularly on a single track line, particularly when you have a single track connecting to an already congested single track.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
