If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact

Farmers to get "sweetener money" for not objecting to greenway.

  • 18-12-2021 4:09pm
    Registered Users Posts: 368 ✭✭

    I just read the story on sticky bottle there and to be honest I'm disgusted that they are getting money not to object to greenway if it is running through their land! Whatever happened to compulsory purchase orders for national infrastructure? I'm all for greenways, I use one of them almost 4 times a week but they should be built for the people and farmers and other land owners should not be getting extra money for this. Its outrageous stuff in my opinion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 183 ✭✭mitchelsontour

    Outrageous yes

    But probably more cost effective than having to go through all the legal battles.

  • Registered Users Posts: 976 ✭✭✭8valve

    Easier and cheaper to appease them, rather than the whole thing getting dragged to death through the courts.

    Probably big pressure on from Dublin to get these projects underway/done, as it all fits in with our ''greener way of life and carbon footprint reduction'' plan for 2030 and beyond.

    A prime example is the businessman who encroached on the old Waterford-Dungarvan railway line when it became defunct; the Greenway section passing his property (maybe 100-150 meters) was the final piece to be finished...he got his very own underpass to protect his privacy and workshops he had built on the old railways ground!! This was an easier solution than spending months/years trying to shift him.

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,713 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump

    Do you not understand what the "purchase" part of "compulsory purchase" means? If they CPO land then they have to pay for it, and also pay for any additional damage and loss of value to the landowners remaining property

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,713 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump

    What is your issue? Property rights are protected under the constitution. No matter how special you think you are, just because it suits you to access someone else's property doesn't give you the right to do so.

    If cyclists decided that they'd like to take a nice shortcut through the access gate at the side of your house and punch a hole through the wall into the next garden I doubt you'd be so welcoming. NIMBYism at it's finest.

    So answer this question. If you have a property, do you have anything around the boundary preventing random access across it?

    They wanted to put a bus lane in in Drumcondra a few years ago that would entail taking a tiny slice off the front of gardens and there was uproar. That was with a proposed average of 25k payment

    Such goodwill payments are common practice and are simply put in in order to use peer pressure to prevent any holdouts. If you work hard you can buy your own land and not be so bitter against anyone getting what is, a relatively insignificant sum of money for goodwill for having their land de-facto seized

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭nilhg

    I can't see what the issue is, apart from the slightly sensational SB headline. Most of the stakeholders would call it a goodwill payment,

    which to my mind would be a fairer way to describe it. Farm organisations have been doing deals with infrastructure developers on behalf of their members for as long as I can remember, if they didn't have value for both sides they wouldn't happen, here's one going back to 2001:

    I'd say there's nothing to see here apart from SB losing the run of themselves again.

    NB, in the spirit of full disclosure I'm a farmer.

  • Registered Users Posts: 19,713 ✭✭✭✭Donald Trump

    Almost every road project has goodwill payments built in to it.

    6500 wouldn't be worth a sh1te to a dairy man if it ended up splitting his grazing block. (Example here of a fella who spent over 150k on an underpass to connect two blocks under a road . That's how much it was worth for him not to have his land split by a road. Imagine getting indignant if the poor fella was offered 6.5k as goodwill to have it split again and then have eejits on the internet being bitter at you for being offered it!)

  • Registered Users Posts: 16,285 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore

    Would the OP give away a chunk of his garden? You know, for the good of the community?

    He would in his hoop.

  • Registered Users Posts: 13,826 ✭✭✭✭Danzy

    Yet if your house was to be compulsory purchased you'd be outraged.

    Nimbisy on 2 wheels.

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,416 ✭✭✭FintanMcluskey

    As above, imagine someone cut through your garden OP, just so fat middle-aged men can ride bikes up a path.

    They have to get renumeration for intrusive construction on their business property.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,475 ✭✭✭Markcheese

    Yes the farmers involved will be paid for the land taken if it's cpo'd , but by the nature of a Greenway it's going to be a long strip , which depending on the farm could have a lot of impact on a a holding - or just a lot of legal hassle for a very small piece of ground and very small amount of cash

    So the payment is a sweetner ... Remember this is to encourage those who DON'T really want to sell, or just don't want the hassle ...

    Instead of the back garden analogy, think more of someone compulsory purchasing part of your bike , while your on a ride , they may not take the wheels , but you've been stopped mid ride - and someone is going to take a pedal,or water bottle - or 1 brake or your front derailer , oh and can't just give it to the guy - you have to get a solicitor , and an engineer to converse with their solicitor and engineer ( all at their cost ) , but you just want to enjoy your cycle ... Oh and here's the 20 quid for the water bottle ,although maybe I just want the lid. .. 2 euro maybe ,.

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,261 ✭✭✭saccades

  • Posts: 2,827 [Deleted User]

    The Land Commission has a lot to answer for. It gave unsustainable farms and hamstrung civil infrastructure projects.

  • Registered Users Posts: 368 ✭✭keoclassic

    I did, and I have no problem with cpo's, that's what they are for. I also have no problem with the negotiation around compensation to farmers for their land or any fees etc that must negotiated as a result of the CPO. What I do have a problem with is that farmers are being given a lump sum BEFORE these negotiations take place. That is outrageous, if the farmer enters into discussion and comes up with a fiqure of what their land is worth including compensation, through the process of a CPO then fair enough! Why are they being given more money before the negotiation even takes place?

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,162 ✭✭✭LawBoy2018

    Why does it matter? I assume they've crunched the numbers and this is the most cost-effective approach. The landowners are essentially waiving their right to object to the greenway.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭nilhg

    But you have it totally arseways, the payment applies to a voluntary process, which avoids the need for the formal legal process of a CPO and all the delay that can come with that. You're objecting to something which isn't happening.

  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,752 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl

    A cooperative approach is always going to be better than a forced one. I think giving landowners a few bob to allow access for greenways is a great idea and maybe a subsidy to help maintain them. If you compare Ireland to other countries in Europe, we're still a long way behind in decent marked and maintained walking and cycling routes. Improving this is good for everyone and relatively easy going on the public purse.

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,993 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash

    I think the OP has zero knowledge of farming or the challenges involved particularly in running a livestock/dairying operation in the vicinity of a greenway. It's not as simple as selling a strip of land. As has been said, a greenway going through your land may divide it and make it particularly difficult to farm it efficiently and it will probably reduce the value of the surrounding land. A lone farmer may have to bring milking cows across a busy greenway twice a day and all the opening and closing of gates involved in trying to do it safely. Inattentive cyclist and walkers may not always close gates after them with the risk of livestock straying. And you'd have the whingers complaining about mud deposited on the greenway when tractors and machinery have to cross it or those who will take offence about being held up for a few seconds while animals are brought across.

    If I was a land owner, I'd be expecting a hell of a sweetner before I'd even enter negotiations. There is practically nothing to be gained by a landowner by having a greenway go through their property.

  • Registered Users Posts: 976 ✭✭✭8valve

    What are the thoughts of landowners who have taken over land that was previously CIE railway ground, but became defunct when the railway line was no longer used?

    If a local authority etc want to now use the old railway line for the common good and create a greenway, rather than let the old line disappear, what are farmer's thoughts?

    I'm not being inflammatory here, just genuinely curious? I have zero knowledge of property law, btw. Do 'Squatters rights' come into play here, if the farmer has being using the ground for a certain amount of time?

    I know there was a lot of infrastructure (underpasses/crossing gates/privacy fencing around houses and yards/livestock fencing/etc) for farmers/landowners, included in the construction of my local greenway here in Co Waterford. The line originally ran from Waterford city through Dungarvan on to Mallow, Co Cork, and when there was suggestions of continuing the greenway up to Mallow from Dungarvan, it was said it would be very difficult as most of that section had now been absorbed into agricultural use.

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,993 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash

    As far as I know, if the land was used without formal objection for a certain period of time, it becomes very difficult to get it back. CIE took their eye off the ball on the Harcourt Street line and when the Luas was being developed, they were forced to buy back some of the 'own' property.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,806 ✭✭✭Large bottle small glass

    I've acted for farmers in a few of these; when you have reasonable people on both sides they are really simple to solve.

    When you have pride, stubbornness in abundance they can be close to impossible to solve.

    Typically Local Authorities have a license from Railway company to use property in question.

    I'm not sure if Railway company have a wayleave or own the properties in question.

    Squatters rights don't have the same currency they used to have particularly if there are deed maps with wayleaves marked etc, but the last thing you want if developing a Greenway is a collection of seperate circuit court equity cases, which are tardy processes at the best of times.

    I've never seen money change hands, the negotiations are usually around underpasses/bridges/fencing/material movement/disease control etc rather than anything else.

    Each location is different; a dry cattle holding between Klimactomas and Durrow is a different proposition to a dairy farm near Dungarvan one will work fine with gates and crossing when weather is damp the dairy farm being completely incompatible with a Greenway.

    I'm not sure endless Greenways is the right way to go anyhow but it's what we are going to do regardless

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,511 ✭✭✭hesker

    Totally agree the impact on farmers is under appreciated. Whatever compensation offered is unlikely to make up for the hassle involved.

    Cork CoCo published an assessment for a greenway a number of years ago to run on the dis-used west Cork railway. It would run from Cork city all the way to Skibbereen. Potential for a really terrific amenity. If I recall correctly there were at least 20 cases where owners of private dwellings had extended their property onto the remnants of the railway line. Good luck trying to sort that out and reach agreement.

  • Registered Users Posts: 18,990 ✭✭✭✭Del2005

    Don't forget about dogs. Plenty of irresponsible owners will happily let their dogs off the lead. Dogs can worry livestock and have dangerous diseases in their poo, so a farmer could lose a lot of grazing land having a greenaway through their land.

    Squatters rights kick in after 12 years for private property and 30 for public property, no idea what a old railway line is. But as said for the Luas they had to buy back a lot of land in Foxrock, I'd say buying back farmland would be a lot cheaper.

  • Registered Users Posts: 12,537 ✭✭✭✭Varik

    With public acess you'd have turned a possible one man job into a two man job, unless as youd said they'd wait but if it was one man it'd be a long wait as he'd have to open the gate first and then herd and drive them through or have a second person waiting at gate to open it. Most farmers are one man working alone which is why 150k for an underpass made sense from the article above, it make moving them 100 times easier and makes it easier to for one person to do.

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,993 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash

    You'd have to have gates. Otherwise the livestock could stray onto the greenway instead of crossing it.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭nilhg

    If they are used to an electric fence a bit of string will usually work OK, depending on how excitable the stock are. Not ideal though.

    There's a section of the Grand canal greenway where a herd of cows walk along side the greenway for quite a distance, and have to walk along the actual greenway to cross a bridge, somewhere west of Rahan IIRC.

  • Registered Users Posts: 24,993 ✭✭✭✭Wishbone Ash

    I doubt that string would be permitted where cyclists are crossing. They might not see it or understand its significance.

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,142 ✭✭✭nilhg

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,475 ✭✭✭Markcheese

    Cattle grids could be installed to allow stock to cross a path frequently , gates where it's less regular , of course cyclists would have to give space when crossing , and it wouldn't be great if a tractor just whizzed across a path - which if it's silage season is perfectly possible -

    Not every part of proposed greenways are going through decent fields or near busy farmyards .each case would be different ..

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,844 ✭✭✭Mefistofelino

    On the Southern Greenway, agricultural crossings (and there are a lot around Newcastle West) are managed by two pairs of gates which can be swung through 90° to either block the greenway or block the field entrances on either side. There are spring-closed pedestrian gates provided to allow greenway users through even if the main gates have closed off the greenway. The crossing itself is concrete rather than the tarmac surface to prevent damage.

    It seems to work fairly well and have seen them being used for cattle and farm machinery the few times I've ridden there. One major change I noticed was that the first time I used it, a large proportion of the gates were left in "farm priority" position - ie obstructing the greenway. the last two times I was there, they were all in "greenway priority" position.