Letter to Launceston City Council on rail trail

My dear Mayor and Aldermen,.

I have received a letter dated 4 October from your General Manager Mr Dobrzynski advising that: “the view of the aldermen was that the Launceston Council supports the provision of additional tourism infrastructure in the region through the establishment of the Rail Trail subject to the reasonable concerns of adjoining property owners being addressed by the Dorset Council as part of the project process.” I’m not sure just how many times this has to be mentioned that this “process” was not carried out! At our last meeting of NERAF, only eight of those present indicated that they had received a letter and all were in Dorset Council. The number of letters allegedly sent out on 17 February 2014 has grown from 130 to 199; however, Cr Howard has no record as to whom these letters were sent. And you accept this as evidence that the reasonable concerns of adjoining property owners has been addressed? That has been our main complaint since our organisation was formed and it still hasn’t been adequately addressed. Again I state: It is not good enough for Launceston to delegate this “process” to another adjoining council.

Mr Dobrzynski has stated that it was the “view” of the aldermen…..” Can I please have details as to how this “view” was obtained, knowing the Mayor’s expressed total disinterest in the Rail Trail from Launceston’s point of view. Also, could my members be afforded the process as to how $3,000 of ratepayers funds were provided to Dorset, as it would appear that this matter was not formally considered by Council. Who authorised the expenditure?

With regard to business plans for rail usage, this is a matter for the tourist rail people. With regards to Tasrail, they will cease to be a party once the Bill, as amended, is again passed by both houses, which includes the transfer of the infrastructure back to the Crown.

I fear you have been seduced by rhetoric. The figures just don’t stack up, either in terms of predicted numbers of users or the average spend. All this just as New Zealand is closing cycle trails, mostly for the reasons of costs of annual maintenance and low gains. And you want to tear up a $40 Million asset (lowest estimate from engineers) to create a $2.2 Million Rail Trail that goes nowhere?
STUART BRYCE Chairman NERAF