Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 12:25PM

end of the road wrote: »

quite simply we believe people are being promised something that is not going to deliver what is being promised, that is not going to be the tourist benanza or economic stimulous being made out.
that is why we believe stopping the greenway is the correct and just thing to do, because it will be spending money on delivering nothing and ultimately set people up to be disappointed.
it's for the greater good.

How does that stack up with a Velorail development that has swallowed €500 K and not Velo has sat upon a rail - nor appeared on a promotional leaflet or web post.

How much economic value has been seen from this bung 'investment' so far - or to be expected in the next few years?

By the way, how do these Velorail vehicles pass each other on a single line rail?

westtip · 20-05-2021 12:31PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

How does that stack up with a Velorail development that has swallowed €500 K and not Velo has sat upon a rail - nor appeared on a promotional leaflet or web post.

How much economic value has been seen from this bung 'investment' so far - or to be expected in the next few years?

By the way, how do these Velorail vehicles pass each other on a single line rail?

Yep indeed they won't answer that one, nor how the velorail got a third capital grant of €198K from Leader in March 2019 before it even had planning permission and having already received almost €300k, how did that happen?. As you say €500K and nothing to show for it and an unworkable ill conceived idea to boot.

end of the road · 20-05-2021 12:59PM

westtip wrote: »

Jaysus how patronizing can you get, many of us have always said this was all about stopping the greenway even though the railway is not going to happen, and to tell us it's for the greater good. I now realise what kind of mindset we are dealing with, it truly makes me want to vomit, but I guess the post was just a way of waving that red flag at many of us that what the railway campaign is about is stopping the greenway at all costs.

the railway campaign is about reinstating the railway, nothing more.
i, and a couple of others on this thread, separately oppose the greenway regardless of what decision is made.

Sam Russell wrote: »

How does that stack up with a Velorail development that has swallowed €500 K and not Velo has sat upon a rail - nor appeared on a promotional leaflet or web post.

How much economic value has been seen from this bung 'investment' so far - or to be expected in the next few years?

By the way, how do these Velorail vehicles pass each other on a single line rail?

you would be best putting those questions to those involved in the project, who i feel would be best placed to answer your questions accurately.there are a couple of possible ways the vehicles can pass on single track.
1. the vehicles are light weight i believe so can be lifted off the track if another vehicle needs to pass.
2. a passing loop somewhere along the line.
3. which i suspect would be the most likely option, vehicles start from 1 end and all travel in the same direction, turning around at the other end.

westtip wrote: »

Yep indeed they won't answer that one, nor how the velorail got a third capital grant of €198K from Leader in March 2019 before it even had planning permission and having already received almost €300k, how did that happen?. As you say €500K and nothing to show for it and an unworkable ill conceived idea to boot.

the idea is very workable and i believe exists in a few countries.
only those involved in the project and the relevant funders can answer your questions in relation to the funding and you would be best to ask them.

eastwest · 20-05-2021 02:10PM

ezstreet5 wrote: »

Let's be clear. There is no "greenway lease" that will ever be converted back to a railway.

That's simply not the case.
Look at the lease for Mullingar Athlone, it's very clear.

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 02:34PM

end of the road wrote: »

Sam Russell wrote: »

How does that stack up with a Velorail development that has swallowed €500 K and not Velo has sat upon a rail - nor appeared on a promotional leaflet or web post.

How much economic value has been seen from this bung 'investment' so far - or to be expected in the next few years?

By the way, how do these Velorail vehicles pass each other on a single line rail?

you would be best putting those questions to those involved in the project, who i feel would be best placed to answer your questions accurately.

there are a couple of possible ways the vehicles can pass on single track.
1. the vehicles are light weight i believe so can be lifted off the track if another vehicle needs to pass.
2. a passing loop somewhere along the line.
3. which i suspect would be the most likely option, vehicles start from 1 end and all travel in the same direction, turning around at the other end.

From looking at these velorail projects, they are almost never on single track railways because of the problem of passing.

Answering you solutions:
1. So they are just 4 wheel bikes with railway wheels. Hmm, why not rubber wheels then they could just pass other vehicles on the pathway, and allow bikes and wheelchairs and buggies and pedestrians to pass.
2. Have they proposed passing loops, and how many? So driver stops ahead of passing loop, flicks the points, and goes into siding and waits for opposing velo to arrive, then flicks the points and off they go - oops another velo arriving, so back into siding. - I don't think so.
3. How far is this track? So every velo has to go all the way to the end, and wait for the last one to arrive, and then wait till the ones ahead leave then they can leave. I can see that being popular. It would require staff at both ends to supervise it, so that wont work.

Who is going to feed the velos?

end of the road · 20-05-2021 02:52PM

eastwest wrote: »

That's simply not the case.
Look at the lease for Mullingar Athlone, it's very clear.

again you are not understanding what is being said.
the point he is making is that no rail line anywhere so far that has been turned into a greenway has been returned to rail use and he believes as do i, that such won't be so, and the same will be the case here.
he believes, as do i, that it won't be because a lease prevents it, as the lease will be very clear on what can happen, but because other concerns and pressures, as in politics, will prevent it.
realistically speak of leases may as well be redundant to this part of the discussion, given that if the politicians do not want irish rail to act on it's rights, then it won't be happening.

end of the road · 20-05-2021 03:06PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

From looking at these velorail projects, they are almost never on single track railways because of the problem of passing.

Answering you solutions:
1. So they are just 4 wheel bikes with railway wheels. Hmm, why not rubber wheels then they could just pass other vehicles on the pathway, and allow bikes and wheelchairs and buggies and pedestrians to pass.
2. Have they proposed passing loops, and how many? So driver stops ahead of passing loop, flicks the points, and goes into siding and waits for opposing velo to arrive, then flicks the points and off they go - oops another velo arriving, so back into siding. - I don't think so.
3. How far is this track? So every velo has to go all the way to the end, and wait for the last one to arrive, and then wait till the ones ahead leave then they can leave. I can see that being popular. It would require staff at both ends to supervise it, so that wont work.

Who is going to feed the velos?

1. most of those groups realistically would be better served by building foot paths in the villages and towns themselves.2. point 3 of my original post addresses all of the issues, and there would realistically have to be a start and end point with supervision of some sort so that isn't really an issue as far as i can see rather then an expensive greenway.

20-05-2021 03:10PM

end of the road wrote: »

again you are not understanding what is being said.
the point he is making is that no rail line anywhere so far that has been turned into a greenway has been returned to rail use and he believes as do i, that such won't be so, and the same will be the case here.
he believes, as do i, that it won't be because a lease prevents it, as the lease will be very clear on what can happen, but because other concerns and pressures, as in politics, will prevent it.
realistically speak of leases may as well be redundant to this part of the discussion, given that if the politicians do not want irish rail to act on it's rights, then it won't be happening.

Your "beliefs" has little basis in reality and are nothing more than notions

Some facts
- As you noted the leases cover the legality of who owns what and under what terms. Anything contrary to this is tinfoil hat stuff
- Any greenways which have utilised closed rail lines have used lines which were closed due to not being viable long before the greenway and the viability situation hasn't changed therefore no greenway has been switched back to rail. You can take that as covering the situation worldwide

Now, WRT reinstatement, its a small matter to say "the line is being reopened, we need to rebuild the line to modern specs so the greenway will be moved X meters to the left/right of the line, apologies for any inconvenience during construction".

You are correct in saying no govt is ever going to shutdown a successful greenway however that does not stop a line from being reopened. It just means additional land purchases, additional engineering etc. to move the greenway to one side. In the context of the Western Transport Corridor, you would be talking about adding a few million to a 270+ million price tag if reopening from Athenry to Sligo, so really, not a big deal.

Cycling beside an active rail line is not a big deal, its done the world over and I doubt if anyone in the greenway campaign has any problem with it

Decades · 20-05-2021 03:12PM

end of the road wrote: »

1. most of those groups realistically would be better served by building foot paths in the villages and towns themselves.2. point 3 of my original post addresses all of the issues, and there would realistically have to be a start and end point with supervision of some sort so that isn't really an issue as far as i can see rather then an expensive greenway.

Footpaths are not legitimate shared spaces between walkers, runners, wheelchair users and cyclists - greenways are. We can all learn about each other's advocacy here.

end of the road · 20-05-2021 03:54PM

Deleted User wrote: »

- Any greenways which have utilised closed rail lines have used lines which were closed due to not being viable

that is not completely true.
while some lines certainly weren't viable, some were but were closed for
various reasons nothing to do with viability.

Decades wrote: »

Footpaths are not legitimate shared spaces between walkers, runners, wheelchair users and cyclists - greenways are. We can all learn about each other's advocacy here.

strange seeing as i saw most of those sharing foot paths on a regular basis before covid.
walkers, the odd runner granted early in the morning, wheel chair users i have saw on the foot path also and the odd cyclist, who may or may not be supposed to be there as i do not know the various rules for cyclists.
i reccan foot paths would be perfectly fine for the amount of interested members of most of those groups in the areas of the proposed greenway givenn there seems to be little if any tourist potential and a railway would actually allow the people to travel to the areas where there is something to offer them.

L1011 · 20-05-2021 03:56PM

Footpaths in villages are not an equivalent to the tourism and amenity value of a greenway in any single cirumstance. And cyclists are not allowed on footpaths.

westtip · 20-05-2021 04:05PM

L1011 wrote: »

Footpaths in villages are not an equivalent to the tourism and amenity value of a greenway in any single cirumstance. And cyclists are not allowed on footpaths.

Honestly there is no point, they just don't gettit and their views are those of the Pale Stale White men. Views that were entrenched 20 years ago and are not allowed to be challenged, really little point in debating the issues anymore the entrenchment of opinion is too great.

eastwest · 20-05-2021 04:22PM

ezstreet5 wrote: »

This line has been advocated by a community group for years..

A small group who know that God is on their side, even if nobody else is. A sort of a wild west on track, you could say.
(West of the Delaware anyway).

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 04:51PM

end of the road wrote: »

that is not completely true.
while some lines certainly weren't viable, some were but were closed for
various reasons nothing to do with viability.

strange seeing as i saw most of those sharing foot paths on a regular basis before covid.
walkers, the odd runner granted early in the morning, wheel chair users i have saw on the foot path also and the odd cyclist, who may or may not be supposed to be there as i do not know the various rules for cyclists.
i reccan foot paths would be perfectly fine for the amount of interested members of most of those groups in the areas of the proposed greenway givenn there seems to be little if any tourist potential and a railway would actually allow the people to travel to the areas where there is something to offer them.

Not only are footpaths shared by pedestrians and wheelchair users, they are also sometimes shared by bicycles (they should not be unless ridden by a supervised child) and by parked cars (who should not park on footpaths nor on cycle lanes).

Now one can allow a bit of latitude for cyclist but not parked cars.

Greenways are great for leisure activities, particularly if it manages to keep motorists and their cars off it. Any greenway will be attractive for locals and tourists, which then makes it possible for locals to power their coffee machine, make a few sandwiches, rent a few bikes and create a bit of local employment.

I cannot see a railway going from Tuam to Athenry creating anything but noise in between those two small places as there is nothing in between.

ShaneC1600 · 20-05-2021 06:18PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

I cannot see a railway going from Tuam to Athenry creating anything but noise in between those two small places as there is nothing in between.

There are towns and cities on both sides of those small towns, one of which has the largest populations in Galway though but sure keep the rhetoric going.

20-05-2021 06:31PM

ShaneC1600 wrote: »

There are towns and cities on both sides of those small towns, one of which has the largest populations in Galway though but sure keep the rhetoric going.

and yet its still not a strong enough justification to build the line yet, might as well use it for something else until there is a strong enough case for reopening

end of the road · 20-05-2021 07:05PM

L1011 wrote: »

Footpaths in villages are not an equivalent to the tourism and amenity value of a greenway in any single cirumstance. And cyclists are not allowed on footpaths.

for the areas we are talking about, the tourism potential seems to be little to none, so foot paths would do the job for most.
it won't help cyclists, but realistically i cannot see large take up anyway as we generally don't have the weather for it a lot of the time, and only a very very keen cyclist would dress up in the appropriate dress in the depths of winter.

Sam Russell wrote: »

Not only are footpaths shared by pedestrians and wheelchair users, they are also sometimes shared by bicycles (they should not be unless ridden by a supervised child) and by parked cars (who should not park on footpaths nor on cycle lanes).

Now one can allow a bit of latitude for cyclist but not parked cars.

Greenways are great for leisure activities, particularly if it manages to keep motorists and their cars off it. Any greenway will be attractive for locals and tourists, which then makes it possible for locals to power their coffee machine, make a few sandwiches, rent a few bikes and create a bit of local employment.

I cannot see a railway going from Tuam to Athenry creating anything but noise in between those two small places as there is nothing in between.

in combination with proper road pricing it would get cars off the road.
i believe that we can do better then a few sandwidges a coffee machine and a few bikes being rented, tbh.
communities deserve actual paying jobs, not more minimum wage ones in my personal opinion.

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 07:17PM

end of the road wrote: »

for the areas we are talking about, the tourism potential seems to be little to none, so foot paths would do the job for most.
it won't help cyclists, but realistically i cannot see large take up anyway as we generally don't have the weather for it a lot of the time, and only a very very keen cyclist would dress up in the appropriate dress in the depths of winter.

in combination with proper road pricing it would get cars off the road.
i believe that we can do better then a few sandwidges a coffee machine and a few bikes being rented, tbh.
communities deserve actual paying jobs, not more minimum wage ones in my personal opinion.

Start with coffee and sandwiches, and renting bikes, then café and food then accommodation, then shops that sell tourist stuff. There is the option for a Quiet Man museum in the recently refurbished station.

Minimum wage jobs are better than the current no wage jobs.

Why do tourists go anywhere?

20-05-2021 07:27PM

end of the road wrote: »

for the areas we are talking about, the tourism potential seems to be little to none, so foot paths would do the job for most.
it won't help cyclists, but realistically i cannot see large take up anyway as we generally don't have the weather for it a lot of the time, and only a very very keen cyclist would dress up in the appropriate dress in the depths of winter.

I get the feeling you have never been on a greenway by that, umm, observation.

end of the road wrote: »

i believe that we can do better then a few sandwidges a coffee machine and a few bikes being rented, tbh.
communities deserve actual paying jobs, not more minimum wage ones in my personal opinion.

Please outline the jobs that have come about from the reopening of the stations in any of the following
- Craughwell
- Ardrahan
- Gort
- Ennis

Given that all are unmanned stations and any future stations would be unmanned too, outside of the drivers, I don't see what paying jobs you plan to bring to Ballyglunin, Tuam, Milltown, Claremorris etc

Now, you have made the assertion about how "communities deserve actual paying jobs" so I'm sure you can back this up wrt the section that has been open over a decade.

On the flipside, I'll be happy to provide evidence of the employment, investment and growth coming to similar small communities from their local greenways, but as you have broached this topic, I'll let you go first

end of the road · 20-05-2021 08:43PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Start with coffee and sandwiches, and renting bikes, then café and food then accommodation, then shops that sell tourist stuff. There is the option for a Quiet Man museum in the recently refurbished station.

Minimum wage jobs are better than the current no wage jobs.

Why do tourists go anywhere?

realistically most of that is unlikely to happen.
the jobs are in the main towns and cities and that is going to continue to be the case as urbanisation is increasing world wide i believe.

Deleted User wrote: »

I get the feeling you have never been on a greenway by that, umm, observation.

Please outline the jobs that have come about from the reopening of the stations in any of the following
- Craughwell
- Ardrahan
- Gort
- Ennis

Given that all are unmanned stations and any future stations would be unmanned too, outside of the drivers, I don't see what paying jobs you plan to bring to Ballyglunin, Tuam, Milltown, Claremorris etc

Now, you have made the assertion about how "communities deserve actual paying jobs" so I'm sure you can back this up wrt the section that has been open over a decade.

On the flipside, I'll be happy to provide evidence of the employment, investment and growth coming to similar small communities from their local greenways, but as you have broached this topic, I'll let you go first

the stations bring the users to the jobs in limerick, ennis, athenry and galway.

20-05-2021 09:02PM

end of the road wrote: »

the stations bring the users to the jobs in limerick, ennis, athenry and galway.

Ah now come on, you can do better than something that can be brushed away by pointing out those jobs would exist regardless of the line or stations.

Unless of course the line and stations provide no economic benefits when contrasted against the benefits provided by greenways?

Happy for you to prove me wrong

eastwest · 20-05-2021 09:14PM

ezstreet5 wrote: »

There is no example where a rail-trail was reactivated. None, nowhere.

That is entirely down to the reality that most railways that closed, closed for a reason.
The only one likely to reopen in Ireland is Mullingar-Athlone, which may make sense as a reinstatement project at some stage, certainly long before anyone tries to build a second freight line to serve Mayo. In that event, it will be easy to rebuild the greenway alongside the new railway as part of that project, at what will be a relatively minor amount of money in the context of the cost of a railway. The biggest obstacle to building the railway, the loss of the alignment to squatters or indeed to road infrastructure, will have been taken care of by preserving the route with the greenway, and specifically by the terms of the lease with Irish Rail.

It's logical, pragmatic and really easy for most people to understand.

eastwest · 20-05-2021 09:22PM

end of the road wrote: »

the jobs are in the main towns and cities and that is going to continue to be the case as urbanisation is increasing world wide i believe.

If anything, that trend is reversing and this reversal is supported by and forms a core plank of government policy in terms of the national broadband plan. There are currently over 50,000 jobs available in Ireland that can be done from anywhere. What encourages people in the tech industries in particular to locate themselves in rural areas and work remotely, apart from the availability of broadband, is the quality of life, usually supported by such facilitates as greenways, water sporting facilities etc.

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 09:30PM

end of the road wrote: »

realistically most of that is unlikely to happen.
the jobs are in the main towns and cities and that is going to continue to be the case as urbanisation is increasing world wide i believe.

Who would build a tourist holiday park in Longford to create jobs?

Central Parks - that's who. Try booking a place - it is booked out for as far as they take bookings.

There is no reason for such a project not to be built anywhere - even in East Galway.

Camping, glamping, that kind of thing is possible - providing there are things to do - like cycling, walking, that kind of thing. Not everybody thinks that a holiday means sun and sand.

end of the road · 20-05-2021 09:34PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Ah now come on, you can do better than something that can be brushed away by pointing out those jobs would exist regardless of the line or stations.

Unless of course the line and stations provide no economic benefits when contrasted against the benefits provided by greenways?

Happy for you to prove me wrong

they do provide economic benefits in the form of less spend on roads.
or at least so if we were a grown up country.
anyway only some greenways bring some economic benefits and i think only a couple of them would bring reasonable benefits with the rest very minimal from what i can see.

eastwest wrote: »

That is entirely down to the reality that most railways that closed, closed for a reason.
The only one likely to reopen in Ireland is Mullingar-Athlone, which may make sense as a reinstatement project at some stage, certainly long before anyone tries to build a second freight line to serve Mayo. In that event, it will be easy to rebuild the greenway alongside the new railway as part of that project, at what will be a relatively minor amount of money in the context of the cost of a railway. The biggest obstacle to building the railway, the loss of the alignment to squatters or indeed to road infrastructure, will have been taken care of by preserving the route with the greenway, and specifically by the terms of the lease with Irish Rail.

It's logical, pragmatic and really easy for most people to understand.

the fact they closed for a reason doesn't mean that reason was valid either at the time, or is valid now.
youghal is another reopening candidate and should actually have been done years ago with the midleton line, and not forgetting navan which also fits the same, should have been open years ago.
so there are a couple of lines which should be reopened, and realistically if athlone mullingar was to reopen personally it would be better to send the greenway elsewhere and fund it from other sources.

eastwest wrote: »

If anything, that trend is reversing and this reversal is supported by and forms a core plank of government policy in terms of the national broadband plan. There are currently over 50,000 jobs available in Ireland that can be done from anywhere. What encourages people in the tech industries in particular to locate themselves in rural areas and work remotely, apart from the availability of broadband, is the quality of life, usually supported by such facilitates as greenways, water sporting facilities etc.

on a world wide basis that is not the case, urbanisation is increasing.
the trend to de-urbanisation in ireland is small fry and isn't really going to be a major thing.

20-05-2021 09:38PM

ah lad, weak sauce, do better

end of the road · 20-05-2021 10:00PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

Who would build a tourist holiday park in Longford to create jobs?

Central Parks - that's who. Try booking a place - it is booked out for as far as they take bookings.

There is no reason for such a project not to be built anywhere - even in East Galway.

Camping, glamping, that kind of thing is possible - providing there are things to do - like cycling, walking, that kind of thing. Not everybody thinks that a holiday means sun and sand.

they are not building the park to create jobs, they are building the park to make a profit.
which is absolutely fine and i hope it's a long term success, but the first goal of any business is to make a profit with creating the required jobs a simple necessity to make that happen.

Sam Russell · 20-05-2021 10:48PM

end of the road wrote: »

they are not building the park to create jobs, they are building the park to make a profit.
which is absolutely fine and i hope it's a long term success, but the first goal of any business is to make a profit with creating the required jobs a simple necessity to make that happen.

So you do not want low level jobs nor do you want major investment to create jobs, just rains to trundle from one small town to another small town carrying a few passengers, just to have a Victorian train back burning money rather than coal.

Dream on.

end of the road · 20-05-2021 10:53PM

Sam Russell wrote: »

So you do not want low level jobs nor do you want major investment to create jobs, just rains to trundle from one small town to another small town carrying a few passengers, just to have a Victorian train back burning money rather than coal.

Dream on.

no i want rail lines reopened providing quality services so as to provide an alternative to our over dependence on roads.

mayo.mick · 20-05-2021 11:10PM

end of the road wrote: »

no i want rail lines reopened providing quality services so as to provide an alternative to our over dependence on roads.

The transport corridor from Claremorris to Collooney is 47 miles long with 48 level crossings, x amount of slatted sheds and 1 domestic back garden that I know of. The N17 is currently being upgraded from Knock to Collooney.

Western Rail Corridor / Rail Trail Discussion

Comments