Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie 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 hello@boards.ie

Foynes Line

Options
145791015

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭Board Walker


    They got rid of a few manual crossings too and installed bridges in cork



  • Registered Users Posts: 34 FrankLeeSpeaking


    Some clowns are demanding the project be held up to accomadate a greenway being built next to the tracks. As if these types haven't consumed enough rail lines already.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Can you please explain how a greenway path alongside the railway would require "consuming" the railway?

    I mean, if there's enough space on the alignment for the single track and the greenway, why can't the railway be laid out fairly quickly in a way which allows the greenway to be placed alongside it once it gets planning etc?



  • Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭Board Walker


    Theres loads of it offloaded below in Foynes. All new. Tho its in panels



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,808 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    There is not enough space for this, some of the route passes through narrow cuttings. It cannot be widened without blasting through solid rock, which costs money. The wanting something for nothing brigade strikes again.

    They already have a lengthy greenway running from Ardagh to Listowel and looks likely to extend on into Tralee, surely that is enough for the kiddiwinks on their training wheels??



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 24,516 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    The people campaigning for it say that IE own enough room beside the track for it to work. Might need to go round a few bridges alright. If that's incorrect then all that needs to be done is reject their request and explain why.

    No need for all the vitriol here all because some people asked for a park/amenity in their area.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    If there is space at this stage of reconstruction to allow for a Greenway In the future then it makes sense to ,

    Obviously if it's difficult, costly or will significantly delay the reopening then it's not really a goer ..

    Incidentally name one line that either closed because of a Greenway or wasn't reopened because of a Greenway ?

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,786 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    the contract has already been awarded, I can't see the greenway happening. There may be space but it would require significant changes to the design and I would imagine planning permission is required (I don't think there's even a railway order for the current plans, it's just a straight re-opening of a mothballed line).



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    I'd say you're right. The line was never abandoned. Limerick County Council tried to declare the line as a protected structure in the mid 2000s to force Irish Rail to maintain it but it was blocked on the grounds that any upgrade work would require planning permission.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34 FrankLeeSpeaking


    and loads of new bike bridges to be built. These people are hyper-entitled and really need get a grip.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 15,808 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Maybe they should pay for it if they want it that badly?

    They got the course of the former north kerry for a nominal fee, ie next to nothing.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,731 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    Would you stop. The former north kerry line was rotting away, the Greenway has been a huge success for very little cost and has returned massive benefits.

    If a Greenway were to be built to Foynes, it'll be paid for by the DoT, same as the rail reopening. There's no shortage of hyper-entitled people around.



  • Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Lads, greenways pay for themselves many times over long before railways do. So, the above just looks like petty ranting.

    If somebody is wrong about the available space and there isn't enough space, it doesn't mean that they are looking for rock blasting. That's a bizarre comment to make. I mean, even if there were just some narrow spots, the greenway could be routed away from the railway at those points.

    The childish comment about training wheels says more about you than it does about anybody else.

    The poverty mindset that bridges aren't worth building where needed is a symptom of how backward mindsets are from some in railway circles.

    Also, the overall hangup some rail people have against greenways reminds me of the old thing about the rich guy telling the middle-class guy that poor people eat their lunch.



  • Registered Users Posts: 34 FrankLeeSpeaking


    The railline and RoW is for FREIGHT TRAINS only deal with it.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,731 ✭✭✭Pete_Cavan


    There is no dispute of that, it seems you are the one who is struggling to deal with it. The railway is being upgraded and brought back into use which is apparently exactly what you want yet you still act as though cyclists pissed in your cornflakes.



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,516 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Also greenways are not just for cyclists. So many people seem to get this wrong.



  • Registered Users Posts: 770 ✭✭✭Board Walker


    Greenways are great if the line is a clear non runner.


    Its building greenways on the likes of the Youghal line that grinds my gears.



  • Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    Youghal is a clear non runner

    ,regular services ended in 63 ,

    Sixty years ago

    I think the last freight was beet in the early 80s ..

    IE has kept ownership of the line , and could either partially re-open (to mogely for eg) on a shared line basis or totally ..

    But they're not going to ... Have no plans to ..

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Registered Users Posts: 28,989 ✭✭✭✭end of the road



    in fairness it is a runner but there is going to have to be more development in the areas.

    IE don't do plans for anything so that's irrelevant really, most of what they have done has been forced upon them rather then being done off their own back, the introduction of maynooth services in the 80s, reopening of the phoenix park tunnel to passengers, introduction of higher frequencies on lines in the mid 2000s as examples of where they have been forced to do things they wouldn't have done off their own back.

    any of the closed lines that have been reopened have had their services end in the 60s or 70s, so that's irrelevant really, as if we aren't going to reopen anything because it lost it's services in 63, 67 or 76 then we will never reopen anything or should never have reopened anything, meaning the midleton branch which is part of the youghal line would never have reopened which would have been a stupid decision if it wasn't reopened.

    navan lost it's services in 1958 as well as another example.

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,808 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    Greenways are not necessarily some sort of silver bullet for instant tourism and money either. What works for one area may not work in another. The GST has been there for decades and the area it passes through is still a tourism backwater, a local greenway for local people, if you will. If a railway is a runner and can take trucks and cars off the roads let's go with that.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,833 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    Better a greenway built than some houses or buildings or farmers claiming ownership over disused rail lines

    If IE have enough land in the holding along Foynes line then a greenway is a great way to protect their holding in future, not only is it a good amenity for the area but the lands surrounding the line are protected against any unwanted development.

    If they had the sense to pave the old rail lines in the 50s and 60s instead of letting them be built on or farmed we would have far more options today



  • Registered Users Posts: 24,516 ✭✭✭✭breezy1985


    Never ever said they were. I was just pointing out that the language used was suggesting people believe these to be cycling infrastructure.

    Terms like "cycling bridges" for instance or "training wheels"

    I often come across peoples anger towards cyclists and cycle infrastructure seeping into the greenway thing but they are not related.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    It really depends on whether the line, particularly the bridges, was initially built with double tracking in mind or not. If it was then adding a greenway may not be too much of an issue if correctly segregated. Otherwise it would require the bridges to be modified and that could be significant.



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,808 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    The railway may need to be double tracked or passing loops put in.

    Also who is supposed to be responsible for and maintain this greenway as it may be partly or wholly on IE land, or are IE getting into the greenway business??



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    Indeed, with the GST the land was transferred to Limerick and Kerry County Council. That's not the case here so personally I can't see it happen.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,833 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    there is no obligation on a greenway to strictly follow the course of a railway, especially if there is an existing one running parallel

    the greenway can divert course away when there are pinch points, its not rocket science.

    if the railway needs double tracked in future, then having a paved greenway on the alignment is a good thing as it ensures no other, more difficult to remove developments will ever happen next to the railway. much easier to dig up a tarmac greenway than to knock buildings etc



  • Registered Users Posts: 15,808 ✭✭✭✭whisky_galore


    No ones going to encroach on it when it's an active line. Indulge this local group and run the risk of them whining and mounting objections if their leisure facility is taken away, no I dont think IE will be up for that at all.



  • Registered Users Posts: 39,511 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    I’ve said it before but there are lines that clearly have no hope of being reopened and some of those lines were in very scenic parts of the country and I’m happy they are being used for a good cause rather then being bulldozed away. The reason why Youghal bugs me like it seems to do with you, is that the line has been reopened to Midleton so it not completely far fetched to reopen the rest, and yes I know there are no short to medium plans to reopen it to Youghal but it’s got a chance. And as much as I love east cork having spent many summers down there, the land the line passes through isn’t all that scenic. Bar the climb out of Youghal it’s flat enough.



  • Registered Users Posts: 6,833 ✭✭✭timmyntc


    If the last 60 odd years have taught us anything, its that people will encroach on any undeveloped land, be it corridor for a future road, or land surrounding an active rail line. Local politics will trump long term planning as it has in the past, reserving extra land along rail lines is a totally sensible plan in the long term - but if there is no immediate viability or plans in motion to add a rail line/passing loop etc on that alignment then the pressure to develop the land instead will trump all else



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,018 ✭✭✭Glaceon


    Not my upload but some excellent drone footage of the current state of the line.




Advertisement