ShaneC1600 wrote: » A great article gone to print by a greenway supporter today. Calling railway supporters desperate, criminal even for believing reintroduction of a rail service along the WRC could be beneficial to the area. The derogatory rear guard action comment is not unusual or surprising for this greenway supporter but one that furthers the division between the two sides. He fails to mention that the opening of the section between Athenry and Ennis happened during the economic crisis and has improved year on year but again not surprising. He fails to mention that all railway lines went through a period of declining usership in that period. He leads the reader to believe that the greenway will keep educated people in the area. He states that funding has been provided to begin the greenway between Athenry and Ennis, i guess the railway supporters could equally say the railway is underway if money into a report is considered the beginning. Great article tho ðŸ‘
River Suir wrote: » You have to remember though that the many derogatory and divisive comments in print and online written by that man and his campaign partner led many people - including myself - to become pro rail activists. It's thanks to those two that over the last few years has seen a strong and very effective pro better transport lobby emerge, one that meets regularly with TDs and ministers to push the rail message. These guys in their attempt to be the Burke and Hare of Irish railways have paradoxically radicalised many former armchair commentators into being full blown activists. All-Ireland railway expansion is now firmly on the agenda.
Muckyboots wrote: » This?https://www.advertiser.ie/galway/article/116166/quiet-man-greenway-receives-funding-for-feasibility-study?fbclid=IwAR258SjAwpc8pvKpBO6PaQNL9pvlGsglcuOKLpogBU7ok1lS03-BcXVftE8
Fine Gael councillor Jimmy McClearn said while everyone supports the concept of a greenway, it was precluded by the Regional Spatial Strategy from being constructed on the railway line.
"The greenway can go anywhere but not on the railway and it is time we have to face up to it."
"The greenway can go anywhere but not on the railway and it is time we have to face up to it.That is the law."
Ballinasloe councillor Michael Connolly concurred with Cllr McClearn's sentiments saying it was important that Galway was a place people can live and work and not a location where people go on their holidays.
"I am the chair of inter county rail committee [and the railway line] is a vital part of development of Atlantic in rail corridor. It is important we don't turn Galway into a park for those from Dublin and around the world. People have to be able to live and work here."
Lord Glentoran wrote: » Meanwhile, on the Other Island, no greenway here but a serious proposal to reopen a low density line to passenger traffic after fifty years... https://www.facebook.com/153132638110668/posts/3207874485969786/?vh=e
Deleted User wrote: » What is your definition of low density in this case? The line is in the New Forest District of Hampshire. 240/km2 in the district, so about five times denser than Galway. Hampshire itself has a population of about 1.8 million in an area about the same as Clare. Despite still having military traffic and industrial traffic until recently it will cost £45,000,000 for 10km.
westtip wrote: » Yep and no bridges to replace.
Lord Glentoran wrote: » Oh noes... what an impossibly expensive thing to replace (seemingly) :rolleyes:
westtip wrote: » Burke and Hare (this time Hare) at it againhttps://www.dropbox.com/s/qpjv2m7gcq2sgx4/B-Quinn%20interview_MWR_07-08-20.mp4?dl=0&fbclid=IwAR3Hck7yMrWD2pBLSzDf0b73CcQWMqfrVwEkryby_7qba3Gigk4M-Qgf5I0
Losty Dublin wrote: » For some reason it sounds as if chunks of audio have been clumsily edited out of the interview. Are Midwest Radio that unprofessional or has the file been snipped in places by whomever it is that posted it?
blackwhite wrote: » Without having listened to the clip, I can definitively say that yes, yes they are that unprofessional. A friend’s teenager did work experience with them a few years ago. The level of responsibility delegated to a transition year work experience student (on a two week placement!) was shocking.
Greaney wrote: » I've just come back from the Raheen Woods Hotel. The impressions I got were... 1) They are interested in only discussing establishing a route between Athlone & Galway, 2) They are interested in using State owned land, so they want the state to 'own' the greenway. That's a higher spec than the eurovelo on mainland Europe. They want to meet landowners who are keen/interested in the project 3) They are not interested in using Rail infrastructure. CIE own that. If it crosses or comes near existing infra, all good and well 4) They do however, seem to be talking to Board-na-mona regarding using tracks on bogs The purpose for them is to link Routes 1 & 2 of the eurovelo Edit; I forgot to add, and this is very interesting, I was talking to one of the head engineers. It happens they have 'clickers' counting numbers in the towns etc. along different greenways to gauge success. He said he's walked most of the Greenways in Ireland (his wife doesn't cycle). The Waterford & Westport green ways are off the charts busy, however, the others are not. On one (was it Moate??) he said they saw..... not one bike on their entire walk. He implied that many believe every green way is a goldmine,.. (the rumor of it will make green ways more appealing to some, and that's not a bad thing) . I've been in tourism groups etc and I've seen many businesses lack 'cop on', fail to take advantage of an opportunity and expect everything on a plate. Personally, I believe the green way will be as successful as the communities they go through make them.
Muckyboots wrote: » A lot of hearsay and anecdotal stuff in there. A bit incongruous, if you don't mind me saying so, that consultants would be dishing out "no gos" and personal anecdotes as evidence in the forum of a Public Consultation- but I don't doubt for a minute that you said what you said and heard what you heard. Doesn't make it so, though.
ezstreet5 wrote: » I believe the poster described the statements as his "impressions" and not sworn evidence on affidavit.
Greaney wrote: » [PHP][/PHP] Pop over to Loughrea today & Oranmore tomorrow, engage on a one 2 one if you can and ask them yourselves.
Deleted User wrote: » I did After speaking with them, they confirmed one of their biggest constraints is the necessity to avoid as much private land as is possible. This pretty much kills the Ballinasloe to Loughrea route as there is virtually no state owned lands that way. There is a significant amount of state owned lands between Athenry and Ballinasloe though, mostly Coilte & bogs so while they have no route selections announced yet, this will likely be a fore-runner. They had a very interesting map up showing the ownership of all the various land parcels in the area under review, sorry I didn't take a photo of it. Also mentioned that running alongside the Dublin-Galway rail line would not be done as it would require too much of a land grab involved due to the second line requirements, additional space for safety, higher spec for fencing etc etc. Would just make it unfeasible They mentioned that the route would be 3 meters wide so they would be looking at 4-5 meters wide requirements but their preference would be double that to allow for space for fencing, hedging, amenities (benches, water points etc) but where the route needed to go through private land this would likely not be a realistic ask. They are also very mindful of landowners concerns and 3 different people I spoke with stated that where they had to purchase land, they would do their best to use a route that would mean as little disruption to the landowner as possible i.e. running along field boundaries. This will probably mean a twisty-turny route when using these lands. While I completely understand this approach, lets just hope it doesn't reach silly levels of accommodating landowners which would result in a farcical route
Deleted User wrote: » They had a very interesting map up showing the ownership of all the various land parcels in the area under review, sorry I didn't take a photo of it. Also mentioned that running alongside the Dublin-Galway rail line would not be done as it would require too much of a land grab involved due to the second line requirements, additional space for safety, higher spec for fencing etc etc. Would just make it unfeasible
ezstreet5 wrote: » I do hope that the current effort for EV2 succeeds, and that local TDs and politicians will stay away and not interfere. It sounds as if the project team were charged to have a bit of vision to create something great. That is, a gateway to a real greenway from Galway to Moscow. And I trust this will attract the necessary investment on the order of tens of millions of euros. I continue to reject calls by men without vision for so-called cheap and easy "greenways" on or beside rail lines with limited potential. You need to think bigger.
Deleted User wrote: » lol
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c998303aa0fcfcedb419267ab426bd5.svg)
