Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

westtip wrote: »

As they say in the police force "no sh1t sherlock" Indeed and the problem the velorail has is called the N5 the velorail can go no further north of Kiltimagh than it has permission for, total lack of public support in Swinford and Charlestown, not that it has much support in Kiltimagh, They can't get their hands on anymore money for more capex with Ring not in dept of community affairs anymore and MCC will finally see it as a millstone around their neck financially, the project is already a financial embarrassment and concern for MCC.

That's it in a nutshell really!

when you resort to sarcasm aimed at people with a slightly different point if view, you don't gain much cred in my eyes.

Sam Russell wrote: »

It is a single track line. How do the Velorail vehicles pass each other? If they do not pass each other, what is the point?

If they are battery powered, they will be heavy. This has not been thought out very well.

Some hovering definitely part of the plan.

CrabRevolution wrote: »

What's stranger is that EU/T-ENT funding is sometimes mentioned, under the bizarre impression that EU funding is distributed based on the same "I don't care about business cases and returns on investment, we deserve an X in the west" philosophy common in county councils.

Exactly CR, The EY reports and Jaspers (in particular this one) have been dismissed because west on track don't like them, but they are sitting there as the definitive reports on this whole debacle, they need to be the point of reference when it comes to the "sure we will get money from Europe" idea....Just to remind those folks who think that is the case, lets just look at what Jaspers said, it is this kind of reality those folks are burying their head in the sand over.

Even as part of the Comprehensive Network, the European added value of the current project would still need to be demonstrated, which would require an elaboration of its strategic role in providing connectivity to nodes of the Core Network. It is noted that the award of grants through CEF is subject to a competitive evaluation, and traditionally there is a significant oversubscription of available funding. As such, the probability of being selected
in a competitive call cannot be considered as high in the absence of such a case.
10.5 In the context of lending from EU Financing Institutions (most notably EIB), the project selection process is subject to technical reviews of the project documentation, examining the financial and economic case, as well as general project need, scope, risks and impacts. It is likely that during such review that the issues noted throughout this note would be highlighted, and would influence the final decision. We consider that that gaining support for
project financing of the proposal in its current form would be a challenge.

eastwest wrote: »

I see the rail lobby has made their submission to the Mayo County Development Plan

Reads like the writer(s) of that well-known FB page, West-on-Crack. A bit like farting in a crowded room and shouting out, “Joe! Ya smelly bastid! I toul ye to ease back on the Guinness”. Everyone then knows who really dealt it...

westtip wrote: »

looks like they might hit a thousand submissions demanding a greenway this time around

Was there an official 'call' for greenway submissions from Mayo County Council?

westtip wrote: »

looks like they might hit a thousand submissions demanding a greenway this time around.

That's a phenomenal response from the community, I'd almost say 'unprecedented.'
Has any CDP anywhere ever attracted this volume of submissions? Certainly it will be a record number for Mayo, I would say.
Although I doubt the Council will pay any attention. The submissions process is largely seen as a box-ticking exercise in democratic tokenism. They don't mind letting the common people let off steam, but they rarely depart from a pre-agreed agenda when it comes to the CDP. Didn't they completely ignore almost 300 submissions last time around on this topic, and get away with it? They know there's no kind of penalty to pay for doing the same thing again.
If they want change in East Mayo, the best way to get it is through the ballot box, by running their own candidates in a very strategic way.

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

Would the 1000 submissions include the pre printed free postcards which were handed out on the side of the road?

The ones individually signed, stamped and posted by concerned citizens?
Probably.
They also included one from the department of transport that strongly advised mayo county council to utilise the route as a greenway. Among others.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

I looked at a lot of the "submissions" and they were just postcards saying, "I want a greenway." But there was no substance or content or anything. Just postcards.

Scoff as you may the front of the postcard was written with 4 very deliberate points of discussion, which by the way the planners are obliged to consider. There is quite reasoned argument substance and content written on the front of those cards, and People also made short comment on the back. I don't see the words "I want a greenway" on the front of the cards, so when you find them on the front of the cards please do come back to me. Making these submissions is all part of democratic process, people taking the time and effort to take part; take a close look at the submission from the department of transport, go read what it says.

https://consult.mayo.ie/en/submission/myo-c11-1027/observation/dept-transport-submission#attachments

Read it then come back with more precious comments about "submissions", perhaps you should have written to the department asking them to defend the WRC against the evils of a greenway and to make a submission to MCC on the subject, maybe someone wrote to the minister asking him to intervene, oh as if!

Deleted User wrote: »

Why complicate it, people want a greenway, its simple really

Sure they only think they do. What would ordinary people know about what they want?
'Them that knows' know better.
And the department, sure what would they know? They only give out the money.
And Irish Rail? Don't get me started.

ezstreet5 wrote: »

I am genuinely not scoffing. It's just that with any public participation process, the receivers are acutely aware of duplicative submissions, and group them as such-basically as simplistic 'votes.' I don't doubt our discount the fact that everyone who submitted a postcard honestly believes that the line should be converted to a greenway, based on their own level of knowledge. I would question whether they were goaded to that belief, or whether they fully considered the benefits of a less sexy, but far more utilitarian railway serving their community.

Most people are well aware that the wrc, particularly North of Claremorris, is not part of any railway plan by anybody except a rapidly dwindling rail lobby. Of course people would like a railway if there was one going, but they understand the reality that it's not going to happen. The rail reports into the southern section just confirmed that view.
The upswelling of local support, in the now visible form of the huge numbers who took the trouble to fill in and post postcards, and the groups and individuals who made online and postal submissions, shows public frustration with the councillors who persist in blocking all other interim options for this public asset. They see all the money going to West Mayo and nothing coming to their towns, and they have firmly, politely and emphatically asked for that to change.
Clearly, given the submissions by both bodies, Irish Rail and DTTAS agree with them. Furthermore, the DTTAS submission clearly marks the cards of Mayo County Council. The imbalance in amenity funding between East and West is noted by the funding department. I'd say they'll ignore that little hint at their peril.