ShaneC1600 wrote: » Could also ask the council for the 5000 replicated copies of the greenway submission for the Development Plan. They will all need recycling fairly soon.
eastwest wrote: » Shocking isn't it? The plebs are organised, they've forgotten their place in the scheme of things. What next, they'll be asking county councils to be transparent and represent them?
ShaneC1600 wrote: » Yep, seriously organised and well equipped with 5000 lucky cards, ready to be sent and dropped in to a council near you, or at least near if your from Galway!
westtip wrote: » Yep Mayo county council has to deal with 1,000 greenway submissions on the county plan, I think what its actually called is people in their droves participating in the democratic process. Hard to deal with isn't it.
eastwest wrote: » I see some of the WOT stalwarts are branching out into advising on other areas of public policy.https://www.midwestradio.ie/index.php/news/48907-people-will-get-pneumonia-if-indoor-dining-remains-closed-claims-mayo-councillor
People will get pneumonia if indoor dining remains closed, claims Mayo Councillor
ezstreet5 wrote: » Finally just getting to this new WOT-published appraisal report. Agree that a lot of the opening material is superfluous for a rail review & CBA. It may be interesting for historians, but not for transport planners. The WOT analysis does not actually begin until halfway through. The build costs are really going to be a significant driver, though. EY says that those are €263.8m and WOT says they are €153.8m. Given that Phase 1 cost €106.5m for 58km and included five new/refurbished stations, I can't see the Phase 2/3 costs exceeding WOT's estimate. Phases 2/3 would be 6km shorter, and include three fewer stations. On this point, I would have to reject EY's costs as being "officially" exorbitant and incorrect. Perhaps EY were just trying to avoid the embarrassment of a cost overrun, and went a little (way) to far to protect themselves.
A consultant has been appointed to lead a feasibility study on the Quiet Man Greenway between Athenry and Milltown. The proposed amenity has been the subject of long-running local campaigns and would run for 47km, connecting Athenry, Ballyglunin, Tuam and Milltown. Earlier this year, €75 thousand was allocated for the carrying out of a feasibility study. Galway East Deputy Ciaran Cannon says a consultant has now been appointed to lead that process. He points out that two previous studies have outlined how the disused rail line will not be needed for any rail service for the foreseeable future. Deputy Cannon is hopeful we’ll have a final answer on the future of the greenway by the end of the year.
Deleted User wrote: » So a few things You say phase 1 cost 106.5m. Don't forget that was against WOT's estimate of 76m, so it ended up being 40% higher than their makey uppey numbers so they have form in being wayyyyy off
Deleted User wrote: » Next, you say you reject EY's costs. Thats fine. The important thing is their costs have been accepted by Cabinet, Dept of Transport & IE. Whether you or I accept them is irrelevant
Deleted User wrote: » On a final note, its great to see the consultants have been appointed for the Galway section of the greenway, The Quiet Man Greenway.
westtip wrote: » Just a thought on the lobbyist West on Track report regarding Tourism. The EY report mentions 23,000 tourists per annum using the, WOT in their usual robust forecasts say this could rise to 80,000 per annum by 2030 (assuming the line was built by 2025 I think!), In another part of the lobbyist report they state Westport is likely to be the biggest beneficiary tourism-wise of the reopening of Athenry – Claremorris An interesting thought, but what this simple statement shows us is this, small towns say like Claremorris, will not benefit from the tourists on the railway line as people will simply not get off, you cannot monetise tourists on a train looking out the window at your local townland. They travel from one tourist hotspot to anther. That is just a point to make. The other issue is numbers.
westtip wrote: » It is always difficult to get up to date numbers and in many respects it is pre-covid numbers we need to look at, but consider this, the Waterford greenway hit 280,000 visitors and users in 2019 and they weren't just arriving in tourist hotspots like Dungarvan and Waterford they were spending money along the route. Just look at this link or google visitors using waterford greenwayhttps://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/greenways-ireland-tourist-numbers/.
westtip wrote: » Being connected to the national greenway network the greenway we advocate could put half a million tourists on this route a year, they will have no choice but to stop for a coffee, lunch or a night in the smaller communities along the way, and the actual numbers a greenway will bring in will greatly surpass any railway.....and this is not counting the local usage when people locally just pop out for a day out buy a lunch or pint on the way and circulate money around their own local economy. You see the greenway is not such a bad idea and will create an economy of its own.
ezstreet5 wrote: » Pejoratives aside, I think you are wrong on this point. I think both reports agree on 23,000 tourists with respect to the CBA. It's a bit obtuse and simple to say that if we build a bicycle trail, we will have the same results as Waterford or the Great Western Greenway. There is a difference. We will be akin to the Old Rail Trail, and perhaps not even rise to that level as we are not part of a Eurovelo route. We are unconnected. Perhaps we will be depending on the Athlone to Galway route decision, but as of now, it is a disconnected, inland segment.
ezstreet5 wrote: » We will be akin to the Old Rail Trail, and perhaps not even rise to that level as we are not part of a Eurovelo route. We are unconnected. Perhaps we will be depending on the Athlone to Galway route decision, but as of now, it is a disconnected, inland segment.
Decades wrote: » I don't think an Athenry-Claremorris route would even emulate those figures which are quite higher than targeted. .
Pete_Cavan wrote: » You could even flip those figures and you still get the same result; 0.5m tourists on trains heading north of Athenry likely wont spend a penny south of Claremorris, 23k tourists on the greenway would likely each spend something ranging from a bottle of water to several overnight stays and meals. I can't see any tourists getting off a train heading north from Athenry. The journey would likely be less than an hour and the faster it is the less likely they would be to get off. Getting off probably loses you the full day as you would likely have to wait for the train to complete its journey to Claremorris, return to Athenry and then get to where you are on its next northbound journey, before you can continue north.
L1011 wrote: » Ryan making a single statement that has absolutely no substance is not something to be happy about. It brings it no closer to happening
Decades wrote: » Eamon Ryan endorsing the "Atlantic Rail Corridor" from Athenry up to " the Northwest" on Newstalk. He's bought the IRC/WOT/NWRA ARC jargon for sure. There'll be nothing doing on that line while his green arse is on that red hot-seat.
Deleted User wrote: » Cheers, just had a listen to it. Its here for others if they want a listen He made a lot of good points across a lot of topics He raised the point that not building the M20 and instead using the money for bypasses would allow us to bypass 20-30 towns around the country allowing for those places to be revitalized. He talked about having more people living in city and town centers, increasing availability of broadband and amenities in such places. Looking to have bb fully rolled out by 2024. He spoke about loads of investment into rail (electrification, suburban rail in Cork, new stations on existing lines, high density residential on public lands located around stations) escooter legislation, pedestrian-first infrastructure development. He talked about using excess energy from wind to create green hydrogen, off-shore wind, using excess heat from data centers to provide heating/hot water for residential properties, rewetting bogs, massive expansion of forestry, changing how farmers farm etc Loads and loads and loads of really good stuff With regards to the Western Transport Corridor he stated that theres a line already there so it might make economic sense to reopen that line. The rail review is looking at that. However based on the last few reports, its unlikely to find any economic justification for reopening the line. Its impossible to see what kind of calculations they would be able to do that would justify reopening the line at this point in time. Maybe there is something I'm missing, but outside of emotion, I don't see any way they can justify spending the money on that line ahead of other projects with far, far higher CB ratio's.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Cheers, just had a listen to it. Its here for others if they want a listen He made a lot of good points across a lot of topics He raised the point that not building the M20 and instead using the money for bypasses would allow us to bypass 20-30 towns around the country allowing for those places to be revitalized. He talked about having more people living in city and town centers, increasing availability of broadband and amenities in such places. Looking to have bb fully rolled out by 2024. He spoke about loads of investment into rail (electrification, suburban rail in Cork, new stations on existing lines, high density residential on public lands located around stations) escooter legislation, pedestrian-first infrastructure development. He talked about using excess energy from wind to create green hydrogen, off-shore wind, using excess heat from data centers to provide heating/hot water for residential properties, rewetting bogs, massive expansion of forestry, changing how farmers farm etc Loads and loads and loads of really good stuff With regards to the Western Transport Corridor he stated that theres a line already there so it might make economic sense to reopen that line. The rail review is looking at that. However based on the last few reports, its unlikely to find any economic justification for reopening the line. Its impossible to see what kind of calculations they would be able to do that would justify reopening the line at this point in time. Maybe there is something I'm missing, but outside of emotion, I don't see any way they can justify spending the money on that line ahead of other projects with far, far higher CB ratio's.
Remember the Velorail in Kiltimagh. they won't like this in County Hall in Castlebar, Department officials crawling all over them.
Sums up politicians in Ireland🙄
[quote]The project, which is under construction, received a bigger funding allocation than any other local authority project in 2017, according to records released under the Freedom of Information Act.
In 2017 a senior civil servant noted that the project had the “least compelling case” for additional support. However the funding was approved by then minster and Mayo TD Michael Ring.[/quote]
Oh my, that's embarrassing
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w6.vanillicon.com/v2/62877c35768f143f69acd7bb6cd43f3c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/d63d70d8d9d708ce75cb4c559092e20f.svg)
