Sheryl Lowe, Naracoorte Community News
“Better planning could have avoided the stress and unhappiness the proposed Penola Coonawarra Rail Trail has caused us,” Penola residents Glen and Rita Leggett told The News. The possibility of people having access to their property without invitation, is one cause for distress they said, but what they describe as the lack of consideration from Wattle Range Council, is another.
The Rail Trail has been hailed as a boost to tourism in the future and if it follows other similar projects around the world, it will encourage fitness and well-being and will draw the tourist dollar to the region. The $2.1m project is funded with a Federal Government grant of $1.7 million dollars, Wattle Range ratepayers $200,000 and the SA taxpayers a further $200,000, but there is concern from some residents whose properties adjoin the proposed route it will follow.
“The Rail Trail was a rumour for many years but so was the return of trains, so when we received a letter date September 20th 2021 from Council’s project manager Munivenkata Krishna SR telling us they (council) had entered into a License Agreement with the State Government for the project and had entered into an agreement with Transformer Services Pty Ltd in September 2021 for the construction of approximately 28 kms of rail trail between South Terrace Penola and Father Woods Park Coonawarra, we were disappointed.”
The letter advised the Leggett’s, work on the trail was due to commence in the first week of October 2021, with the Penola section occurring between December 2021 and February 2022.
“So, you can imagine our dismay upon receiving a letter from Mr. Munivenkata Krishna Sunkappa Reddappa advising us that the rail trail has been funded and contracts let, asking us if we had any concerns. Surely it was a bit late in coming after years of design, funding applications and tenders and contracts finalised. Any concerns the affected ratepayers may have had should have been addressed long before now.”
The Leggett’s one-acre Penola property’s boundary adjoins the railway line corridor with vineyards on the opposite side.
“I bought the block in 1994 and built the house in 1995. Every nail, piece of timber, roofing etc., everything you can see I built it, and every piece you see has a story to it. It was to be our ‘forever’ home.”
“We chose the block because of the beautiful gum trees and the privacy it provided. With an acre to build on, we have no close neighbours. We are private people. So now, are we expected to hang our sheets on the outside of the hoist and personal clothes inside or what.”
“For 27 years we have not required a rear fence and considered it convenient not to have, as we have maintained the section of rail land behind our property.”
The Leggets said they contacted the Project Manager and arranged an on-site meeting to discuss the need for a fence, the future maintenance of the land, lack of privacy due to the height of the former railway line, participants being in direct line of sight of their windows, security of their property and buildings, fire risk, possible vandalism, litter and drainage of water.
They learned that under the Fences Act, Council isn’t legally required to fund the fencing. Similarly, Peter and Elke Hocking, have been advised they will be required to pay for fencing the proposed section of the rail trail through their property at Glenroy, via a road reserve to the Father Woods site. The Hockings may also be required to pay land transfer costs and relocation of their cattle loading yards in addition to the estimated $50,000 fence costs.
Mr. Leggett estimates the cost of materials for a post and rail fence on his property, a fence he said they have been strongly recommended to build, will be approximately $5000. He will provide the labour so the actual cost of the fence is more than the $5,000, if the in-kind is taken into account. “We don’t want a tin fence because it doesn’t suit the style of our property, so I have an appointment with the bank at the end of the week to see what we can do.”
The Leggett’s said CEO Ben Gower has offered plantings of screening vegetation along the boundary but implied we, the property owner, could be required to water them at our ‘own expense.’
When the letter came, Mrs. Leggett said “I was shattered, devastated. This takes away our peace, privacy and pleasure. I feel insecure now, this violates our privacy, it was my safe haven.”
“People will be able to access our property without an invitation.”
They are also concerned their property will be photographed as part of tourist behaviour, and their property could become vulnerable through social media posts.
The Leggetts said they have asked Ben Gower to consider a slight deviation to the route of the rail trail which would create a wider corridor between the rear boundary of their property and the rail trail, but they’ve not had a response to date.
“The Project Manager told us the maintenance along the trail would be kept up, as we will no longer be doing it, but CEO Ben Gower told us, at busy times he couldn’t guarantee that.”
Mr Gower told the November Ordinary Council meeting, poisoning along the trail will use a method currently being trialed, which will reduce spray drift into the vineyards.
The Leggetts are also concerned if there will be adequate toilet facilities and rubbish collection along the track.
CEO Ben Gower has been contacted with relevant questions about these matters and opportunity to comment.
“If this project has been in the mindset of the Council since 2015, why have our local elected members not made us aware of the possibility of this rail trail being built. Surely, they should have canvassed the affected ratepayers for their opinion? Why send a letter advising of the rail trail long after the contract has been let, asking for any concerns when our concerns could have been discussed long before now. The outcome probably wouldn’t be any different but surely decency dictates that a bit more consideration should have been provided.”
Glen and Rita Leggett told The News they are not against the rail trail. They acknowledge the benefits to tourism and the local economy but say, they have not been shown the respect they believe they should be afforded as ratepayers and members of the community, as well as being among those most likely to be impacted by it.
“Our wish is that sometime in the future, the powers that be, decide to create a walking/bike track 10 feet from the Engineering Department and the Executive Officers’ (CEO) back door. Then see how they feel.”
The Leggetts told The News, they feel that nothing they say or do will make any difference to the wheels that have already been put in motion. “Legally, we are sure Council and their Engineering team have followed the legal process to the letter, but morally, we consider there are many short-comings in this project.”
This article appeared in Naracoorte Community News, 8 December 2021.
Related story: Rail trail project divides farm and council
