Failte Ireland report on the Mayo Greenway

kippy · 01-02-2012 11:38am

smacl wrote: »

A good post apart from the above, which reads like "we did our best, some people like, if you don't like if you can f**k off back down the road from whence you came". Not exactly how to sell a nascent tourist facility when faced with constructive criticism, now is it?

This is a good amenity that suffers from some very poor design decisions, and needs be refined to become a great amenity. I'm at a loss to understand why any of the gate / narrow cattle grid combos are required on the route. Surely, you simply fence off the fields and put the gates into those fences. Seems to work well enough for the roads, and would have been cheaper to build. Riding the route gives the impression that some local construction firm was making a swift buck installing a rake of unnecessary cattle grid / gate combos.

As the first tourist amenity of this kind in the country, the green way needs to be great rather than just good in order to generate the required demand for the model is to be repeated elsewhere. For any of you that haven't cycled it for a family break, I'd urge you to give it a go to help this happen.

No, you can read it like that however my slant is ,if it doesnt suit you, you have a secondary option. Two options.
Look constructive critisicm is fine, however one needs to be aware of the context of this project and the barriers which had to be crossed to get it up and running. Ideally the path would be made of hard tarmac, 4 lanes (bikes, walkers, either direction) plenty space, no cattle grids, gates, road crossings, plenty stopping points, and the sun shining all the time.
I am sure lessons will be learned but sometimes it's not possible to implement all the ideals.

gizmo555 · 01-02-2012 12:09pm

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Nobody (bar the OP who later recanted) is saying that the cycle path is crap - I think it's fantastic to see this sort of facility, and I completely agree that without the compromises mentioned then it may not have been built at all. If I can paraphrase Eamon Dunphy, it's a good cycle path, but not a great cycle path.

It's no doubt because this thread is in the cycling forum that this type of comment is so prevalent, but it rather misses the point.

The Great Western Greenway is not a cycle path - it's a walking/running/hiking/cycle path. I live very close to the Westport end of the Greenway and am literally out walking on it every day of the week. From my own personal experience, cyclists are in the minority of users - at a guess, about 25%. Yesterday in the space of 20 minutes I passed about six walkers, twenty joggers and no cyclists.

So far as the cattle grids are concerned, the ones around where I live at any rate are arranged beside gates on either side of a crossing between fields, allowing farmers to herd animals across without having to worry about them taking off at a gallop up the path - which surely makes the path safer for cyclists too! While this is going on, other path users can continue their journey via the cattle grids. When animals are not crossing (which in my experience is almost always) the gates are open and you don't have to cross the grids.

smacl · 01-02-2012 12:33pm

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Because the thing was constructed with the agreement of local landowners. Much of it is built on their land.

The narrow cattle grid / gate combos still make no sense. Why not just put in full width cattle grids across path that don't impede the cyclist and cause a particular hazard to those with wider and or longer bikes, as is the case with anyone towing a child. I'm guessing it's a compromise to allow the local farmer to drive livestock around the route by opening the gate as required, which is fine it being there land. If this was the requirement however, ordinary gates beside regular cattle grids would seem like the sensible engineering solution.

If the greenway sees a busy summer season, I'm guessing forcing any amount of two way cycle traffic through these narrow cattle grids is going to result in a lot of frustration, with a high potential for accidents.

This aspect has nothing to do with budget or meeting local requirements. It is simply poor design, easily enough fixed. No more no less.

mcgratheoin · 01-02-2012 12:37pm

kippy wrote: »

You've (and indeed a few more , from reading the replies since) have completely missed my point.
Ireland, and the West of Ireland in particular, are nothing like Holland, Denmark (thankfully so for a number of factors) or any other country, both in terms of landscape, people and tradition - hence comparing amenities there with here and indeed the means in which they are implemented not the most intelligent thing to do.

I accept your point that there are major differences between the West of Ireland and other countries, but my point is that those differences should not preclude us from seeking the best facilities possible. There are a lot of people here who have experienced similar facilities in other countries and I think it's reasonably intelligent to compare them to a certain extent. Part of the process of designing and implementing any community facilities like this should be a comprehensive review of other projects.

There's no reason why we can't look at specific features that elevate other facilities above the Greenway and ask whether they were considered and why they haven't been implemented. A simple example would be a tarmac surface - this was probably considered and discarded due to the excessive cost - IMO the right decision, it's better to have the amenity in its current state than to not have it at all or to just have a few km of tarmac leading nowhere.

gizmo555 wrote:

The Great Western Greenway is not a cycle path - it's a walking/running/hiking/cycle path. I live very close to the Westport end of the Greenway and am literally out walking on it every day of the week. From my own personal experience, cyclists are in the minority of users - at a guess, about 25%. Yesterday in the space of 20 minutes I passed about six walkers, twenty joggers and no cyclists.

Good point, and one I hadn't fully considered. The improvements mentioned here are indeed all to do with the cycling aspect of the route. I'd just like to point out though that implementing any of these would not affect the route as a footpath, but would have a considerable effect on in it as a cycle route.

gizmo555 · 01-02-2012 12:55pm

smacl wrote: »

The narrow cattle grid / gate combos still make no sense. Why not just put in full width cattle grids across path that don't impede the cyclist and cause a particular hazard to those with wider and or longer bikes,

But they would be a hazard to people on foot, who as I point out above, in my experience are the large majority of users of the Greenway.

smacl · 01-02-2012 1:07pm

gizmo555 wrote: »

But they would be a hazard to people on foot, who as I point out above, in my experience are the large majority of users of the Greenway.

Ok, you've lost me. Assuming the gates are closed, how are wider cattle grids more of an obstacle to walkers than narrow ones. If the gates are open, it doesn't make any difference.

When I was down there last autumn, all the gates were closed, I didn't see any farmers, and the vast majority of users were cyclists. I'd guess there would be more walkers and joggers in the vicinity of Westport where you have a larger population with fewer immediate options of tracks, but far less around Newport, Mulranny, and Achill.

gizmo555 · 01-02-2012 1:11pm

smacl wrote: »

Ok, you've lost me. Assuming the gates are closed, how are wider cattle grids more of an obstacle to walkers than narrow ones. If the gates are open, it doesn't make any difference

Maybe I misread you, but I thought you were suggesting replacing the present setup with cattle grids across the full width of the path, which all users would have to cross at all times.

smacl · 01-02-2012 1:29pm

gizmo555 wrote: »

Maybe I misread you, but I thought you were suggesting replacing the present setup with cattle grids across the full width of the path, which all users would have to cross at all times.

Nope.

smacl wrote: »

ordinary gates beside regular cattle grids would seem like the sensible engineering solution

Stollaire · 01-02-2012 1:44pm

Would most cycle from Westport to Achill, then stay in Keel that night for example, and cycle back to Westport the next day?

Sounds like a nice idea for a summer weekend with herself.

gizmo555 · 01-02-2012 1:57pm

Stollaire wrote: »

Would most cycle from Westport to Achill, then stay in Keel that night for example, and cycle back to Westport the next day?

Sounds like a nice idea for a summer weekend with herself.

The Greenway ends at Achill Sound, where the railway terminus was. Keel is another 14km on the ordinary roads. In Achill Sound, there's at least one hotel and I'm sure plenty of B&Bs.

schemingbohemia · 01-02-2012 2:16pm

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

What are you talking about? The land was sold to local people by CIE after the railway closed in 1937

Apologies!:o Sorry I really should have researched that bit before making my comment. I know in relation to other railway lines that the land wasn't sold by CIE and that locals just built onto it.

clonmahon · 01-02-2012 3:09pm

The Russians have a saying “the perfect is the enemy of the good enough”. The people in Mayo built a good enough cycleway within the constraints and the resources available. It is not a world class cycleway as claimed, but it is a very good pilot project that proves beyond all doubt that cycleways make economic sense. For achieving all this at a cost of only 3 million euro the people in Mayo have done this nation a great service.

My original point was that if we accept the figures in the Failte Ireland report, the 3 million investment in the Greenway resulted in 7.2 million of extra spending in the local economy in 2011, this proves that building cycleways is a very good investment indeed. Our economy is in desperate trouble and contracting under the austerity regime. We desperately need some kind of economic stimulus. Cycleways fit the bill, they are relatively low cost, and we have the skills and resources needed to build them. They will create employment and generate economic activity.

Why do we not take the example of Mayo and replicate it on a national scale and build a national cycleway network, but build it to a world class standard – two paved cycle lanes and a footpath and no gates or obstacles, like a road only for bikes and walkers. We can CPO land to build motorways, I don’t see why we can’t CPO land to build cycleways.

A friend of mine told me a story about his brother who was cycling in the Loire Valley in France last summer. On a very hot day out in the countryside he ran out of water. He called to 5 doors and was refused water. It was at the 6th door he found someone to fill his water bottle. The French may have world class cycleways but many of the them are lacking the hospitality and charm of Irish people. I have no doubt just about any Irish person would be willing to refill a water bottle for a weary traveller.

We can be very charming and hospitable to visitors, we have a great store of culture in our music, dance, arts etc. We have a beautiful island. We have a thriving artisan food and craft sector. We are easy to reach from continental western Europe and the UK. Put all this together and then throw in a world class national cycle and walking network and we could have a booming cycle and walking tourism industry. Plus a world class amenity for our own use.

It seem to me this is a no brainer, we should start working on it today. Many posters here have outlined problems that need to be overcome to achieve this, but they are problems we need to overcome, not obstacles that have to stop us. There is no reason we cannot have a world class cycle network except our own willingness to settle for a mediocre one, a refusal to think big and a tendency to focus on problems rather than solutions.

If we build it they will come.

Rob A. Bank · 01-02-2012 3:44pm

With regard to the illusion of 'perfect' cycleways on the Continent...

One of the popular routes is the Canal de Garonne/Canal du Midi, which connects the Atlantic to the Mediteranian, and had a cycleway along its toepath.

This is the advice for anyone considering cycling its 433km length..

"There are two ways you can cycle the Canal.

1. Road bike, on the regional paved roads near the canal. This might take you away from the canal for a bit, and are more windy/less direct.

2. Hybrid bike or slightly thicker tires on the unpaved, pebble/rock/tree-root strewn paths along the Canal. I recommend this route. It is much prettier and more interesting than the paved roads. Besides when you come to the locks you might have to carry the bike up and down a couple of steps (concrete)."

So the Mayo Greenway is not so bad after all !

kippy · 01-02-2012 4:49pm

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

With regard to the illusion of 'perfect' cycleways on the Continent...

One of the popular routes is the Canal de Garonne/Canal du Midi, which connects the Atlantic to the Mediteranian, and had a cycleway along its toepath.

This is the advice for anyone considering cycling its 433km length..

"There are two ways you can cycle the Canal.

1. Road bike, on the regional paved roads near the canal. This might take you away from the canal for a bit, and are more windy/less direct.

2. Hybrid bike or slightly thicker tires on the unpaved, pebble/rock/tree-root strewn paths along the Canal. I recommend this route. It is much prettier and more interesting than the paved roads. Besides when you come to the locks you might have to carry the bike up and down a couple of steps (concrete)."

So the Mayo Greenway is not so bad after all !

Well, the grass is always greener elsewhere etc...

yop · 01-02-2012 4:55pm

clonmahon wrote: »

just about any Irish person would be willing to refill a water bottle for a weary traveller.

Padraic Nally wouldn't! :eek:

Good post the rest of it, not sure about their figures though, if they are right then as you said it really should be rolled out, EVEN if the paths are of the standard of those on Achill cycleway.

I can't see how they can have continuous paths to be honest as you will need to cross into fields etc and they farmers will need to get their livestock from field to field.

But again if them figures are correct its a no brainer. I know as a cyclist I would bring the family on that, no good to people who want to cycle on it for big cycle fitness but if it takes 1000's out of their houses and away from the TV, its a no brainer!!!

Then again, if its a no brainer I am sure the gov won't do it! :rolleyes:

smacl · 01-02-2012 5:54pm

yop wrote: »

I can't see how they can have continuous paths to be honest as you will need to cross into fields etc and they farmers will need to get their livestock from field to field.

They seem to cracked this one already for roads, I'm sure a similar solution could be found for paths... :rolleyes:

Sarcasm aside, there is a clear economic case for using a CPO to buy the land if you do the maths. Currently agricultural land has an average cost of €8,500 per acre, and I'm sure sheep farming land would be considerably less, but say we allow this as a rough figure. 1 acre is roughly 4,000 square meters, thus if we allow a 40 metre wide corridor for our cycle lane, it costs €85k per km to buy, or €3.6 million of land costs for the entire 43k greenway route. If you look at the total expenditure cost of the project, it already cost €5.5m of public money, the vast bulk of which came from transport and failte coffers. Given the facility is expected to generate €7.2m p/a, it makes clear economic sense to invest the remaining money to make it a publicly owned piece of rural transport infrastructure, and let the farmers traverse it with their flocks the same way they traverse any other piece of rural transport infrastructure.

It's well and good to say the local people did this off their own bat, using their own lands, but the project still managed to consume €5.1m of central funds in the process. The €7.2m p/a returned will also be primarily to the local good, so you can't really say that Mayo is getting a raw deal whichever way you cut it.

Chips Lovell · 01-02-2012 5:56pm

They could get NTR in to put a toll on it for 10 years until they raised the €3.6 million.

monument · 01-02-2012 6:01pm

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They could get NTR in to put a toll on it for 10 years until they raised the €3.6 million.

And then buy it back off them for five times as much?

clonmahon · 01-02-2012 7:56pm

yop wrote: »

Padraic Nally wouldn't

Very good, never thought of that when I wrote the post.

yop wrote: »

Good post the rest of it, not sure about their figures though, if they are right then as you said it really should be rolled out, EVEN if the paths are of the standard of those on Achill cycleway.

Agreed, even if the figure are only half of what the report estimate we should still be rolling out Greenways.

yop wrote: »

But again if them figures are correct its a no brainer. I know as a cyclist I would bring the family on that, no good to people who want to cycle on it for big cycle fitness but if it takes 1000's out of their houses and away from the TV, its a no brainer!!!

Absolutely apart from attracting tourists there are other benefits of cycleways. As you say in health and also in creating new cycle commuter zones around major towns, so saving on oil imports.

yop wrote: »

Then again, if its a no brainer I am sure the gov won't do it! :rolleyes:

On this I am afraid we are agreed, it is not going to happen, we are going to throw all our money to those bloody bondholders and our economy is going to go on sinking. Although if it sinks far enough we may no longer be able to afford cars and then the roads will be our cycleways.

Captain Havoc · 01-02-2012 8:11pm

Not the first time I've said this but here in Kilkenny we've two new motorways which have taken traffic off lovely wide hard-shouldered national roads. Irish people are fully aware that they are for pedestrians and cyclists but people still have a moan about no cycling facilities. If a few quid was spent on a few signs, painting a bicycle/ walker on the ground, a wee bit of rearranging at junctions/ roundabouts (OK, I know that'd be costly) and I think it'd create something very marketable to include in Fáilte Ireland ads/ brochures that show horsies/ golfers etc.... Print and charge a tenner for Green way guides as to maximize revenue.

That's what it's like in Switzerland, you can cycle from Geneva to Zürich by following the signs. I cycled on 40km of what I suspect was converted railway in France, two way bicycle/ walking lane at every place where it met a road there were barriers that meant you had to slow down but not get off (there was a sign telling you to walk across), all very safe and with a super surface.

galwaycyclist · 01-02-2012 9:43pm

+1 on the idea of marketing the hard shoulders as a cycling resource and ensuring adequate surfacing etc.

However there is a row going on between Cyclist.ie and the Minister for Commuter Transport at the moment. Its over his direction/promotion that some hard shoulders in his constituency be remarked as "cycle lanes".

The beauty of hard shoulders is that they are effectively self cleaning since occasional use by motor traffic keeps them swept of grit and glass.

Cycle lanes on the other hand act as collectors of gravel, grit and broken glass if you can't keep them swept you are making cycling conditions worse. Cycle lanes also carry false expectations of safety that hard shoulders don't. Hard shoulders also don't attract expectations of compulsory use for cyclists.

Hard shoulders aren't perfect but for Irish conditions they are more perfect than other treatments.

Rob A. Bank · 01-02-2012 11:07pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LG0x6NTbA8Q

For those who may not have experienced the Greenway...

An extract from the RTE series 'Tracks & Trails' of garden designer Diarmuid Gavin, who cycled 18 km of the Great Western Greenway with his daughter.

clonmahon · 02-02-2012 1:52am

The bar is about to be raised on what constitutes a "world class cycleway". The swedes are planning a 20 km, 4 lane cycling superhighway linking Lund & Malmö. It will cost 50 million Swedish crowns (US$ 7.1 million) and will include bicycle service stations.

http://www.treehugger.com/bikes/new-cycling-superhighway-not-us.html

Will we ever provide anything like this rural dutch cycleway for our kids to cycle to school on

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OrQ-d2PBUto

And here (again) is the video showing the Lourdes to Soloum cycleway in the Pyrenees in the south of France. This cycleway is in a rural area, built on an old railway line, in an agricultural and tourist area. The scenery is spectacular, with the mountains and the Grave de Pau river. Two paved cycle lanes and a footpath, no obstacles expect yield signs where it crosses roads. When I think of the kind of cycleways I would like to see us building in Ireland, this is what I think of.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9KFx0jVGqI&feature=related

We are a very, very long way behind in Ireland, and the rest of Ireland is now a long way behind Mayo. But if we want to go world class this is the kind of thing we are going to have to aim for.

clonmahon · 02-02-2012 2:00am

Rob A. Bank wrote: »

With regard to the illusion of 'perfect' cycleways on the Continent...

One of the popular routes is the Canal de Garonne/Canal du Midi, which connects the Atlantic to the Mediteranian, and had a cycleway along its toepath.

This is the advice for anyone considering cycling its 433km length..

"There are two ways you can cycle the Canal.

1. Road bike, on the regional paved roads near the canal. This might take you away from the canal for a bit, and are more windy/less direct.

2. Hybrid bike or slightly thicker tires on the unpaved, pebble/rock/tree-root strewn paths along the Canal. I recommend this route. It is much prettier and more interesting than the paved roads. Besides when you come to the locks you might have to carry the bike up and down a couple of steps (concrete)."

So the Mayo Greenway is not so bad after all !

No one but yourself made any reference to perfect cycleways on the continent. Are you saying, here is an example of a poor quality French cycleway this is what we should aspire to.

monument · 02-02-2012 2:13am

Just to note...

The one from Sweden is a planned urban / inter-urban cycle superhighway (a real one, not a fake London one) -- not too comparable to a rural, mostly for leisure route.

That's not a cycle way in Bogota, it's a road closed off temporarily for "Ciclovía" -- which is an event where some roads are closed for cyclists every Sunday.

clonmahon · 02-02-2012 2:18am

monument wrote: »

Just to note...
That's not a cycle way in Bogota, it's a road closed off temporarily for "Ciclovía" -- which is an event where some roads are closed for cyclists every Sunday.

I worked that out a minute after I posted it and edited it out. But here is the link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpQVcRH3ZdE

Also came across this interesting film about cycling infrastructure in Bogota
http://www.streetfilms.org/lessons-from-bogota/

clonmahon · 02-02-2012 2:20am

monument wrote: »

Just to note...

The one from Sweden is a planned urban / inter-urban cycle superhighway (a real one, not a fake London one) -- not too comparable to a rural, mostly for leisure route.

I appreciate that but it does show how far ahead of Ireland mainland Europe is getting on cycling infrastructure.

mcgratheoin · 02-02-2012 7:47am

galwaycyclist wrote: »

+1 on the idea of marketing the hard shoulders as a cycling resource and ensuring adequate surfacing etc.

I understand where you're coming from, but this idea fills me with dread. Painting a couple of lines and road markings down the side of a main road does not a cycle facility make. There is very little that any such road markings could do to make a hard shoulder a more attractive or safer place to cycle. I think this is a get out clause for the government whereby they can delude themselves that they're providing cycling facilites whilst actually not doing any work.
Additionally, as a marketable resource, I'm not sure that roads with hard shoulders are usually the most scenic and in the areas where tourists would like to travel. As an example, when I cycle from Dublin to Waterford, I would rather travel along small, low traffic volume scenic roads than just stick to the old N9.

galwaycyclist · 02-02-2012 9:05am

I am sorry but I disagree. Hard shoulders are very much a cycling facility, and walking facility, and the use of hard shoulders puts us way ahead of the British for example whose A roads tend to be way more hostile for cyclists.

In the 1970s it was reported that using hard shoulders had lead to a 50% reduction in cycling accidents on the treated routes.

They cannot be promoted as resource for families with small children for instance but for adult cycle tourers they.provide an adequate treatment to be going on with. In particular they provide a means of getting the adult cycle tourers to the more scenic back roads.

In a word they facilitate a cycling product based on touring rarher than going around in circles.

Ideally our main roads would have parallel cycleways a la the Netherlands etc. The problem for us is that our highly dispersed population patterns based on the "ribbon development model" make that very difficult. Since it means the cycleways would have to go through peoples front gardens.

smacl · 02-02-2012 9:34am

mcgratheoin wrote: »

Additionally, as a marketable resource, I'm not sure that roads with hard shoulders are usually the most scenic and in the areas where tourists would like to travel.

+1, I think when you're planning a piece of infrastructure like this you need a primary design goal. Either tourism or transport first, and if it offers some degree of the other as a secondary benefit, well and good. I think the greenway illustrates there is both scope and a good market for the former, and this should be repeated elsewhere. As for the quality of surface, I think it is fine for leisure cycling, as rural Ireland already has an abundance of beautiful, quiet rural roads for the keen roadie but far less for the family. I'd be more concerned about erosion and maintenance costs of the softer surface. A bigger concern would be capacity. If you look at the RTE video (about 30 seconds in) and imagine three or four towed buggies going in different directions, with pinch points at narrow gates, it could suffer from congestion very easily.

Comparing the greenway with European equivalents is a useful exercise, as the economic projections for revenue earned include a significant chunk from foreign tourism. We will compete with those other European routes for the same tourists. I've no doubt many will come and try the greenway, but they will draw comparisons with similar options elsewhere, which will dictate whether or not they return.

The greenway is still an excellent illustration of what can be achieved on a tight budget, when people make the effort. Hopefully we'll see many similar amenities in the future.

Failte Ireland report on the Mayo Greenway

Comments