ShaneC1600 wrote: » Tuam has exceptionally high unoccupied commercial premises in the town, as a start that could be addressed. The town itself is horrendous and looks terrible. Antisocial behaviour is rife, drugs are a problem and underage drinking is very visible. These issues are probably similar to other towns of similar size but this does not take from the fact that Tuam needs to be cleaned up drastically. Tuam needs a unique selling point, the greenway will not address this, forget about everything else, if the disused railway was not passing through Tuam nobody would want the greenway to go through it, that needs to change. Other places are known for being full of activity or adventure sports, other towns are known for nice quite walks with cafes and super restaurants, others are heritage towns, others are known for street music, others for beautiful walks through the town, others simply for their scenery. Tuam needs to address this and find its own purpose and not rely on the potential of a greenway because there could be many people disappointed with the result. Tuam has massive potential no doubt but we need the council rehabilitation plan to be completed and get the people of Tuam to love the town again before we expect people to actually want to come in from any future greenway.
donvito99 wrote: » But wait, isn't your case that there is significant demand from Tuam to Athenry? I believe Greaney was always pointing to the school traffic between the two towns. So why wouldn't people avail of a bus?
donvito99 wrote: » There's a lot of conclusions being made here on the basis of we know and hardly anyone uses with little actual evidence.
donvito99 wrote: » His 'game' seems to be to actually deliver a decent public transport service instead of just talking about a hugely expensive investment which has taken decades to not happen but one which you like to talk about. Actions speak louder than imaginary railways.
Muckyboots wrote: » It reads, your town is a pile of ****e. Learn to love it. Don't try and change it. Trains are great.
end of the road wrote: » no his game is to deliver a subpar option based on his belief that the train is only going to deliver tuam athenry and nothing else.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » wouldn't a bus service which allows people get the train into Galway be a good interim solution in the meantime?
Pete_Cavan wrote: » If the Tuam line opened in the morning, trains from Tuam which would not go directly to Galway. There isn't the capacity on the single track, unless you think trains from Tuam should take priority over Dublin - Galway or Galway - Limerick trains. Direct trains from Tuam wont happen until the mainline is double tracked, until then it is a shuttle. A bus using M17 & M6 from Tuam to Athenry would be fast, some bus priority measures in Athenry town would really help though. It obviously wouldn't add to Galway traffic as it doesn't go near the city, the bus passengers still get into the city on a train. The refusal to even consider a bus connection to Athenry really exposes the rail campaign, this has nothing to do with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household or any of that. If that were the case, you'd be calling for the fastest implementable service, particularly as bus does not negate rail, as you said yourself. A bus service has nothing to do with getting out of building rail, no building rail is happening with or without the bus service.
donvito99 wrote: » No because apparently a bus service will completely prohibit a railway being developed and people should have to live without decent public transport until such time as hundreds of millions can be allocated to their particular cause ahead of those which are more deserving.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » In the absence of double tracking between Athenry and Galway, that is all that can be delivered on the Tuam line. Both double tracking and reopening to Tuam have to go through years of planning, design and construction, not to mention not being in government spending plans until the latter part of this decade at least before any of that can start. If people are concerned with sustainable transport, allowing young families with workers commute to jobs that can support a household, supporting regional development, etc., wouldn't a bus service which allows people get the train into Galway be a good interim solution in the meantime?
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Ah well, hopefully the economic assessment will be published soon so we can see just how much of a blank hole for taxpayers money this would be, only then can a sensible conversation be had.
end of the road wrote: » we are having a perfectly sensible conversation, it's just that the idea you propose is sub par hence barely any support for it, that's just life i am afraid.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc. Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent? The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream. If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time. The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service. Like I said, hopefully the report will be published soon to tell us exactly how much this would cost the taxpayer (both capital and operational costs).
Pete_Cavan wrote: » The rationale put forward for restoring train services is sustainable commuting, carbon reduction, greater connectivity, etc.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Such a train service is many years away, wouldn't it make sense to put in place now an easily implementable, low cost alternative which meets these goals, albeit not to the same extent?
Pete_Cavan wrote: » The constant dismissal exposes that these things are not a concern at all for those supporting a train service, merely buzz words to try give some semblance of credibility to this pipe dream.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » If they were a concern, you'd want some progress on addressing them now, not in 10+ years time.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » The "not good enough" attitude to buses just shows the sense of entitlement here, far bigger commuties have to rely on buses but Tuam needs a €100m train service.
River Suir wrote: » It’s not just about Tuam. Perhaps it suits your argument to frame it that way.
Deleted User wrote: » Where else is it about? Heavy rail is about moving lots of people efficiently along a corridor. There are no significant commuters into Galway north of Tuam.http://census.cso.ie/p6map42/ Claremorris would be what an hour and 20/30 minutes from Galway by train? Promoting commuting that distance would not be a sustainable solution. Why are people so negative about Tuam? It has its problems like any rural town but it it is grand. It has modern industry that many towns around Europe would want to attract. It is older than any of our cities having been founded as a monastery by Jarlath nearly 1,500 years ago. There is a nice redevelopment plan someone referenced earlier in this thread. If rail is found to be sustainable, it should be full steam ahead. (pardon the pun) If not let's use the line as a relatively cheap and popular local amenity. It might bring a few tourists along but more likely it would be used by people like me who want to bring the kids for a walk or cycle away from traffic and have some lunch after. Coole Park got our business last weekend, Salthill probably this weekend.
Deleted User wrote: » Where else is it about? Heavy rail is about moving lots of people efficiently along a corridor. There are no significant commuters into Galway north of Tuam.http://census.cso.ie/p6map42/
westtip wrote: » The census figures were laid out before EY consulting in a presentation I made to them in Galway in July 2019 along with a well known politician who supports the greenway. The comment from the EY consultant at the meeting when we showed a slide with the figures below was yes we are looking at those numbers and are fully aware of the facts of the matter.Claremorris 4,487 Ballindine 349 Milltown 207 Tuam 8767 Total living in towns along the propose route: 13,810. +10,000 people for the wider rural areas Building a commuter rail route to accommodate such a low level of population. Does not stack up economically It is why we need to see that report, because if they come up with a recommendation to build this route they will lose their professional credibility.
ShaneC1600 wrote: » You better get onto Irish Rail and tell them not to bother with the Woodbrook station so because they are planning that for a potential population of 5000.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » It will cost a couple of million to open Woodbrook station, development contributions will contribute towards the cost, it will be an extra stop on an already operational service so there is little additional operating cost, etc. None of that applies to WRC which will cost many multiples as much to rebuild and will be a new service with associated operating costs. It is possible, even likely, that more people will use Woodbrook station per day than would use Tuam despite the respective populations.
ShaneC1600 wrote: » I understand the costs, I understand the reasons, I am referring to the population equivalent between the locations. It is possible, even likely that more people will use a greenway in Dublin than in Galway so does that mean we shouldn't build greenways in Galway? No it doesn't, same for transport.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » You've well and truly scraped through the bottom of the barrel at this stage if thats your retort.
ShaneC1600 wrote: » My point was simple enough, I thought you would understand it rather than a response like that but I guess it was lost on ya.
Pete_Cavan wrote: » Your point was based on comparing one single factor in isolation which is pointless.
westtip wrote: » As others have come in on this, and answered perfectly well, adding another station between Bray and Shankill on the Dart line and comparing it with the service required on the northern branch line of the Western Rail corridor is somewhat bizarre, but if it is a comparison you wish to make so be it. There is inadequate parking at Bray Station, it is difficult to get into the station and traffic clogs the area up. I am less familiar with Shankill station, my guess is Woodbrook will ease pressure on access to both of these stations, and for that particular commuter service it makes perfect sense for Irish Rail to propose such a station. Compared to the distance between Stations from Dalkey into Tara Street the new station at Woodbrook is a great idea, but comparing this investment with the line to Claremorris is just stretching it beyond the realms of reality, but you are entitled to your view and no I won't be writing a strongly worded letter to Irish Rail, the Minister or asking 25,000 people to sign a petition against the idea.
ShaneC1600 wrote: » Where did I compare the Western Rail Corridor to the Dart line? I referred to the 5000 potential population in the Woodbrook area which was the basis for the planning application to the population breakdown you love to tell everybody you presented to EY-DKM. So nothing really bizarre about it at all!
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w4.vanillicon.com/v2/4c998303aa0fcfcedb419267ab426bd5.svg)
