South Wexford line status

marno21

What's the current status of the South Wexford line? Is it still open as an "engineering siding"?

I see Wexford County Council have released a tender for a feasibility study of a Waterford to Rosslare greenway.

https://irl.eu-supply.com/app/rfq/publicpurchase.asp?PID=118779

Del.Monte

An Engineers Siding as far as I know. The Greenway nonsense will never happen on the South Wexford line.

Whats an engineers siding?

The greenway might not be a bad idea?

roundymac

Is it worth it, will we ever see passenger services run again? No is the answer, better off to use the money to keep services that people will use going. I know that won't sit well with some people but that's life I'm afraid.

end of the road

roundymac wrote: »

Is it worth it, will we ever see passenger services run again? No is the answer, better off to use the money to keep services that people will use going.

the same will be said at the next closure and the next and the next. "better off to use the money to keep services that people will use going" dispite the fact they may actually be used, more then 1 or 2 that are still open.

roundymac wrote: »

I know that won't sit well with some people but that's life I'm afraid.

it's not life when we know the reasons these services aren't being removed is nothing to do with usership.

Jamie2k9

Part of the line is still an active railway while the rest is "closed to traffic" however there are 2-4 movements per year over the line.

The green way will never happen along the route.

rebel456

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Part of the line is still an active railway while the rest is "closed to traffic" however there are 2-4 movements per year over the line.

The green way will never happen along the route.

A greenway will never happen because IR run the butter-box every 6 months?

Jamie2k9

rebel456 wrote: »

A greenway will never happen because IR run the butter-box every 6 months?

IE only own 50% and couldn't sell it.

rebel456

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

IE only own 50% and couldn't sell it.

That does little to prevent a Greenway. Irish Rail can allow a Greenway through an agreement, requiring the land to be available for future rail use. Another wasted state asset brought back to life and providing an amenity for tourists to come visit for.

Otherwise the land will eventually fall into decay (the stations, etc. along the ling already have). Given the state of the bridge IR will quickly 'suspend' their butterbox excursions.

Del.Monte

rebel456 wrote: »

That does little to prevent a Greenway. Irish Rail can allow a Greenway through an agreement, requiring the land to be available for future rail use. Another wasted state asset brought back to life and providing an amenity for tourists to come visit for.

Otherwise the land will eventually fall into decay (the stations, etc. along the ling already have). Given the state of the bridge IR will quickly 'suspend' their butterbox excursions.

The only station along the line with any buildings is Wellington Bridge and that is intact. Look at this photo of Campile on the 'scorched earth' retreat from Moscow.

rebel456

Del.Monte wrote: »

The only station along the line with any buildings is Wellington Bridge and that is intact. Look at this photo of Campile on the 'scorched earth' retreat from Moscow.

And think of the many tourists who could be cycling past this station on the Waterford-Wexford stretch of their Irish cycling holiday, instead of a train every six months to keep the weeds down.

Jamie2k9

rebel456 wrote: »

That does little to prevent a Greenway. Irish Rail can allow a Greenway through an agreement, requiring the land to be available for future rail use. Another wasted state asset brought back to life and providing an amenity for tourists to come visit for.

Otherwise the land will eventually fall into decay (the stations, etc. along the ling already have). Given the state of the bridge IR will quickly 'suspend' their butterbox excursions.

IE cannot make such an agreement as they have no overall control of the line and IE also won't allow a greenway go ahead unless they can offload the line which they can't because they are responsible for the upkeep of it.

IE have gotten rid of other lines because they no longer have to maintain them (Bridges etc) that is no possible here. The NTA have obliged IE to maintain the line and they are (just about). It's not a state asset as 50% is privately owned.

There is no benefit to IE coming to an agreement for a greenway.

end of the road

rebel456 wrote: »

A greenway will never happen because IR run the butter-box every 6 months?

no . it's because there is no demand for such a greenway in that area. i know the area well and a greenway would be nothing more then a vanity project.

rebel456 wrote: »

That does little to prevent a Greenway. Irish Rail can allow a Greenway through an agreement, requiring the land to be available for future rail use. Another wasted state asset brought back to life and providing an amenity for tourists to come visit for.

Otherwise the land will eventually fall into decay (the stations, etc. along the ling already have). Given the state of the bridge IR will quickly 'suspend' their butterbox excursions.

the only station building is wellington bridge. IE will suspend the "butter box" runs eventually anyway most probably but for a greenway new-ross has the potential compared to this line.

rebel456 wrote: »

And think of the many tourists who could be cycling past this station on the Waterford-Wexford stretch of their Irish cycling holiday, instead of a train every six months to keep the weeds down.

about 1 tourist.

rebel456

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

IE cannot make such an agreement as they have no overall control of the line and IE also won't allow a greenway go ahead unless they can offload the line which they can't because they are responsible for the upkeep of it.

IE have gotten rid of other lines because they no longer have to maintain them (Bridges etc) that is no possible here. The NTA have obliged IE to maintain the line and they are (just about). It's not a state asset as 50% is privately owned.

There is no benefit to IE coming to an agreement for a greenway.

Nothing in what you say prevents a Greenway. Whomever is in control of the line, be it IR & the NTA (ultimately the Government) along with the other owner, can make an agreement for a Greenway with the proviso that it be returned to railway use should the need ever arise. It's not exactly an impossible scenario given there is no services that require the line's use (well most of it).

rebel456

end of the road wrote: »

no . it's because there is no demand for such a greenway in that area. i know the area well and a greenway would be nothing more then a vanity project.

about 1 tourist.

And I presume you think there would be more than '1 tourist' should the rail-line be reopened?

Jamie2k9

rebel456 wrote: »

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

IE cannot make such an agreement as they have no overall control of the line and IE also won't allow a greenway go ahead unless they can offload the line which they can't because they are responsible for the upkeep of it.

IE have gotten rid of other lines because they no longer have to maintain them (Bridges etc) that is no possible here. The NTA have obliged IE to maintain the line and they are (just about). It's not a state asset as 50% is privately owned.

There is no benefit to IE coming to an agreement for a greenway.

Nothing in what you say prevents a Greenway. Whomever is in control of the line, be it IR & the NTA (ultimately the Government) along with the other owner, can make an agreement for a Greenway with the proviso that it be returned to railway use should the need ever arise. It's not exactly an impossible scenario given there is no services that require the line's use (well most of it).

Both sides could maje ab agreement but it wont happen.

rebel456

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Both sides could maje ab agreement but it wont happen.

Why so? What makes it impossible?

Jamie2k9

rebel456 wrote: »

Why so? What makes it impossible?

It's much more hassle than it's worth.

Would the Barrow Bridge be an issue for a greenway?

end of the road

Karsini wrote: »

Would the Barrow Bridge be an issue for a greenway?

most probably. assuming the line was turned into a greenway, maintenence of the bridge would likely change over to the council, who have no money.

rebel456

Karsini wrote: »

Would the Barrow Bridge be an issue for a greenway?

Well at present it is either a Greenway or eventual abandonment...

In 2014 the Barrow Bridge was listed by an An Taisce in its "Buildings at Risk Register". An Taisce records "The structure does not appear to be maintained and there are obvious signs of deterioration."

A Greenway would encourage the bridge to be maintained & converted for pedestrian/cycle use. That funding would have to be secured from central Gov / the EU, etc. It would in effect save the bridge. If the cost for conversion & overhaul is too prohibitive to start off the Greenway could commence from Campile with access from Waterford via the ferry at Passage East. Not ideal as you want as much of the Greenway to be off-road as possible for recreational cyclists, but certainly not a barrier.

end of the road wrote: »

most probably. assuming the line was turned into a greenway, maintenence of the bridge would likely change over to the council, who have no money.

And the bridge is being fantastically maintained at present...

end of the road

rebel456 wrote: »

Well at present it is either a Greenway or eventual abandonment...



A Greenway would encourage the bridge to be maintained & converted for pedestrian/cycle use. That funding would have to be secured from central Gov / the EU, etc. It would in effect save the bridge. If the cost for conversion & overhaul is too prohibitive to start off the Greenway could commence from Campile with access from Waterford via the ferry at Passage East. Not ideal as you want as much of the Greenway to be off-road as possible for recreational cyclists, but certainly not a barrier.



And the bridge is being fantastically maintained at present...

no . but how do you expect a council with no money to do it. IE are supposibly obligated to maintain it as they are supposed to be maintaining the line as part of the agreement to suspend services. why that isn't being enforced i do not know but that's the job of our all singing all dancing transport quango.

rebel456

end of the road wrote: »

no . but how do you expect a council with no money to do it. IE are supposibly obligated to maintain it as they are supposed to be maintaining the line as part of the agreement to suspend services. why that isn't being enforced i do not know but that's the job of our all singing all dancing transport quango.

It's not being enforced as IR need to spend their funds on the railway network that actually carries passengers. Not infrastructure that carries the weed spraying train once a year.

In terms of who'll maintain the bridge if a Greenway was installed. That's up to whoever will fund the Greenway in the first place, Dept of Transport most likely via a grant. In reality it's the only hope for the bridge given IR are unlikely to invest any of their funding to the South Wexford Line.

end of the road

rebel456 wrote: »

It's not being enforced as IR need to spend their funds on the railway network that actually carries passengers. Not infrastructure that carries the weed spraying train once a year.

In terms of who'll maintain the bridge if a Greenway was installed. That's up to whoever will fund the Greenway in the first place, Dept of Transport most likely via a grant. In reality it's the only hope for the bridge given IR are unlikely to invest any of their funding to the South Wexford Line.

no it's not being enforced because enforcement seems to be quite lax in terms of the rail operations in general (lots of canceled services on the lj to waterford still)
if they are obligated to maintain it as part of the agreement to suspend services then it should be enforced no excuses. the rest of the network is irrelevant in this context.

man98

There is a much bigger question about the viability about allowing the public on to what is currently the longest (or perhaps second longest) bridge in the country which also has little protection for people on the bridge. There's unbelievable gusts up the Barrow channel, which I wouldn't expect you to know. As well as that, it also has to be opened several times a week to accommodate cargo ships going up to New Ross. On this scale it really isn't ideal to have an unsupervised and unprotected crossing for walkers and cyclists. As a local, it makes very little sense to go anywhere near this bridge with a greenway. As above, this is a glamour project which is doomed to fail, only after it bankrupts the council.

Losty Dublin

Karsini wrote: »

Would the Barrow Bridge be an issue for a greenway?

The bridge is a massive barrier to a greenway as it needs to be able to open and close to allow access to New Ross port.

rebel456

man98 wrote: »

There is a much bigger question about the viability about allowing the public on to what is currently the longest (or perhaps second longest) bridge in the country which also has little protection for people on the bridge. There's unbelievable gusts up the Barrow channel, which I wouldn't expect you to know. As well as that, it also has to be opened several times a week to accommodate cargo ships going up to New Ross. On this scale it really isn't ideal to have an unsupervised and unprotected crossing for walkers and cyclists. As a local, it makes very little sense to go anywhere near this bridge with a greenway. As above, this is a glamour project which is doomed to fail, only after it bankrupts the council.

The current Wateford Greenway, Mulingar-Athlone, Westport-Achill... have these 'glamour projects' bankrupted their councils?

How about we make use of this underused asset in South Wexford and make it destination for those wanting a cycling holiday, and be a place for locals to walk/cycle/run too. We could even envisage a Cork-Wexford Greeenway, mostly off road, a fantastic amenity to offer those in South Munster/Leinster.

The chance of trains returning, bar the inspection car, is remote. The line needed beat to stay alive and that has long since finished with little chance of returning.

The Barrow Bridge will rot away unfortunately, unless it is re-purposed. The Greenway can run from Campile with connection to Waterford via the Passage East Ferry, it's not dependent on the bridge. If the bridge is/can be suitably converted for use by pedestrians & cyclists then it would actually save it from eventual abandonment - would take Gov/EU level investment to do that, but again, Greenway not dependent on a bridge, there is many more miles of near-abandoned trackbed to lay a Greenway.

rebel456

Losty Dublin wrote: »

The bridge is a massive barrier to a greenway as it needs to be able to open and close to allow access to New Ross port.

Go around it, use the Passage East Ferry. I drove to Mullingar to use the Greenway there, no reason folks won't be doing the same by driving to Campile if they only wanted to cycle/walk off road. Folks can of course cycle to Campile too via the road network.

Eventually it would be nice to see the bridge re-purposed - little else will save it. But it certainly is not a barrier, Greenways are dependent on decent countryside stretches of off-road pathways, something the South Wexford track has plenty of.

end of the road

rebel456 wrote: »

The current Wateford Greenway, Mulingar-Athlone, Westport-Achill... have these 'glamour projects' bankrupted their councils?

irrelevant and doesn't change the facts and the reality of the infrastructure and route of the south wexford link of the irish cross country rail corridor, which has no potential for a greenway.

rebel456 wrote: »

How about we make use of this underused asset in South Wexford and make it destination for those wanting a cycling holiday, and be a place for locals to walk/cycle/run too. We could even envisage a Cork-Wexford Greeenway, mostly off road, a fantastic amenity to offer those in South Munster/Leinster.

there are plenty of areas for locals to walk/cycle/run that are off road in this area. there is no demand for a greenway on this corridor and there is nothing to attract tourists to this area via a greenway. the route of the former line to new-ross is the alinement with the potential for a greenway.

rebel456 wrote: »

The chance of trains returning, bar the inspection car, is remote.

doesn't matter, a greenway is not viable here.

rebel456 wrote: »

The line needed beat to stay alive and that has long since finished with little chance of returning.

the line survived 4/5 years after beat went, so that was only an excuse. the beat traffic was a huge boost, but the passenger service was used.

rebel456

end of the road wrote: »

irrelevant and doesn't change the facts and the reality of the infrastructure and route of the south wexford link of the irish cross country rail corridor, which has no potential for a greenway.

there are plenty of areas for locals to walk/cycle/run that are off road in this area. there is no demand for a greenway on this corridor and there is nothing to attract tourists to this area via a greenway. the route of the former line to new-ross is the alinement with the potential for a greenway

doesn't matter, a greenway is not viable here.

Who are you to say that there isn't demand or this resource won't be used? Can you point me to a Greenway in Ireland that isn't used? I have pointed out some of the Greenway projects in Ireland, all of which are well used. The Mullingar to Athlone stretch doesn't have a fraction of the scenery the South Wexford would have, and it's mostly flat & straight. Linking up Wexford & Waterford, eventually to Cork via a Greenway would be a tremendous asset to attract tourists but give locals an amenity too - and given the experience in other areas, they do use it. Try one sometime!

end of the road wrote: »

the line survived 4/5 years after beat went, so that was only an excuse. the beat traffic was a huge boost, but the passenger service was used.

The line survived as it was 2006, we could afford to splash the cash back then. When the recession hit some sense was found. The line has a population per KM in the single figures - it would struggle to maintain a mini-bus service, never mind a train line and associated costs.

end of the road

rebel456 wrote: »

Who are you to say that there isn't demand or this resource won't be used? Can you point me to a Greenway in Ireland that isn't used? I have pointed out some of the Greenway projects in Ireland, all of which are well used. The Mullingar to Athlone stretch doesn't have a fraction of the scenery the South Wexford would have, and it's mostly flat & straight. Linking up Wexford & Waterford, eventually to Cork via a Greenway would be a tremendous asset to attract tourists but give locals an amenity too - and given the experience in other areas, they do use it. Try one sometime!



The line survived as it was 2006, we could afford to splash the cash back then. When the recession hit some sense was found. The line has a population per KM in the single figures - it would struggle to maintain a mini-bus service, never mind a train line and associated costs.

the new-ross railway is the only former rail route with potential for a greenway in county wexford. the south wexford line survived after 2006 as the so called service was still used, as even in the state it was it was more competitive then the road option. sense was not found when this service was removed against the wishes of the users and others. it has a population to support it, it not being able to attract users to a low quality service such as a minny bus service which is never going to attract anyone anyway isn't relevant.

once again, the new-ross railway is the only line that has potential for a greenway in county wexford, and the council have better things to spend the money of the people on.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

goingnowhere

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Its owned by Swedish company actually, but they have no financial interest in it. You do need an act of parliament in London however.

GM228

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

The British Government have no ownership rights of the line anymore.

GM228

goingnowhere wrote: »

Its owned by Swedish company actually, but they have no financial interest in it. You do need an act of parliament in London however.

It's actually owned by the Fishguard & Rosslare Railways & Harbours Company, the F&RR&H itself is jointly owned by Stena (hence the Swedish link) and IE (not CIE), Stena took over the British Transport Commissions interest of the F&RR&H years ago (when it became successor to BRs Sealink operations I believe).

I don't believe any Act in London would be required as such.

whisky_galore

Losty Dublin wrote: »

The bridge is a massive barrier to a greenway as it needs to be able to open and close to allow access to New Ross port.

It is in this country, endemic learned helplessness when confronted with anything H&S related. There are H&S issues and therefore nothing can be done...

I crossed a shared cycle/pedestrian bridge with an opening span myself in Copenhagen, I'm sure there are others elsewhere.

L1011

It's the cost, not h&s. If the line is legally closed they'll remove the lifting span as there'll be nobody employed to open it. A Greenway will need that ongoing cost covered and is likely to be higher than you think

Grandeeod

L1011 wrote: »

It's the cost, not h&s. If the line is legally closed they'll remove the lifting span as there'll be nobody employed to open it. A Greenway will need that ongoing cost covered and is likely to be higher than you think

Which is why the opening span will eventually be removed and the route will fall into dereliction. The really strange part of this possibility/reality is that rail enthusiasts will accept it quicker than a Greenway.

Claude Wilton

Grandeeod wrote: »

Which is why the opening span will eventually be removed and the route will fall into dereliction. The really strange part of this possibility/reality is that rail enthusiasts will accept it quicker than a Greenway.

That view, which not all supporters of railways accept, is formed on the basis that greenways will never facilitate the reopening of any railway in Ireland.

If it ever does, I will ride naked on my bicycle down any Irish greenway on its last day of operation before it closes for railway reconstruction.

I can just see the happy faces on greenway advocates now

tabbey

Claude Wilton wrote: »

I will ride naked on my bicycle down any Irish greenway

Please remember your lights as you cycle through the dark night.

marno21

Wexford County Council have appointed consultants to design a greenway for the closed railway line:

https://www.wexfordcoco.ie/community/recreational-and-community-development-projects/rosslare-to-waterford-city-greenway

Grandeeod

And that's that so. Next!

LeinsterDub

12 million for the greenway is for nothing and will be a great asset for the area

Bigus

LeinsterDub wrote: »

12 million for the greenway is for nothing and will be a great asset for the area

Very attractive for cycling tourists to hop off the boat and straight onto a safe separated Greenway all the way to Waterford .

Hugh Jampton

Bigus wrote: »

Very attractive for cycling tourists to hop off the boat and straight onto a safe separated Greenway all the way to Waterford .

As opposed to a train that used to take them to Waterford, Limerick and Cork, and could have brought them to Galway.

But that's Ireland for you.

marno21

Hugh Jampton wrote: »

As opposed to a train that used to take them to Waterford, Limerick and Cork, and could have brought them to Galway.

But that's Ireland for you.

In fairness to this line, when it was closed back on the day the service on this line was shambolic bordering on non existent, similar to the Limerick-Waterford line today.

I am surprised a greenway proposal appeared so soon after closure especially given the regular inspection trains that still patrol the line

tabbey

Bigus wrote: »

Very attractive for cycling tourists to hop off the boat and straight onto a safe separated Greenway all the way to Waterford .

Presumably they will have to cycle on ordinary roads to Killinick, as the railway will still continue between Rosslare Harbour and Rosslare Strand,
or is closure of the latter now taken for granted?

Bigus

tabbey wrote: »

Presumably they will have to cycle on ordinary roads to Killinick, as the railway will still continue between Rosslare Harbour and Rosslare Strand,
or is closure of the latter now taken for granted?

In fairness they're ahead of you "preliminary design and associated studies for the development of a greenway along the existing rail corridor from Rosslare to Waterford City with a link from Rosslare to Rosslare Harbour."

LeinsterDub

Hugh Jampton wrote: »

As opposed to a train that used to take them to Waterford, Limerick and Cork, and could have brought them to Galway.

But that's Ireland for you.

Great idea run a steam train on the line because you most certainly can't be talking about regular commuter trains.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

tabbey

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Looking at An Taisce - Buildings at Risk (antaisce/buildingsatrisk), I see that the Barrow viaduct is now included.

It is described as suffering from neglect / lack of maintenance, as well as suffering from structural problems.

Perhaps An Taisce is worrying unnecessarily, or maybe their assessment is correct.

Does anybody have any hard information as to the actual structural status of the viaduct?