Rail Baltica planners have provided local governments with maps of possible courses for railway tracks, to be discussed at public meetings, in dozens of country communes, in September and October – to select some for further analysis.
Rail Baltica course options up for discussion
19th August 2013, 13:03
Please note that the article is more than five years old and belongs to our archive. We do not update the content of the archives, so it may be necessary to consult newer sources.
«We held a meeting in the commune government, discussing the Rail Baltica issue,» said Rapla commune mayor Ilvi Pere, on Friday. As it happened, they had reason to praise the planners: two proposals vital for the commune have been taken into consideration in the latest version. «We did not want the lines to pass through Kuusiku airport; neither between the two major centres of our commune, the city of Rapla and Alu town, as it would hinder the city’s future growth in that direction,» said Ms Pere. «Now, these options are wiped from the map.»
A further request sent to planners from Rapla is for them to review which households the course would pass through – would these be old forsaken farmhouses of freshly built homes by young dwellers.
As this is summer, and information keeps changing, people most impacted, possibly, by the railway, have not been too actively involved. Positively, inhabitants of Kehtna commune and its Valtu-Nurme village folks stand out by actively defending their rights. Elsewhere, it is rather the local governments that set forth their views; Are commune in Pärnu County, for instance, has a special Rail Baltica information flow on their website.
«Planners need to create a positive rapport with the communes – we are not against the railway, but if this is not attempted, resistance is stirred,» said Karel Tölp, Tahkuranna community mayor from Pärnu County, recalling the planning of Via Baltica with its many mistakes.
An important message to planners, at least from the Pärnu and Rapla County communes, is to try and use forest areas.
In communes with numerous active farmhouses, the main concern is that production planned for decades ahead would not be fatally harmed, leading to large losses. The more so that, often, rented land is being used, meaning that the farmers would not even be compensated for the land.
«Whoever must give something up, must receive fair compensation,» said Lauri Luur, Are commune mayor in Pärnu County. Kohila commune mayor Heiki Hepner (Rapla County) added that for a sauna located close to Tallinn one may receive a market-price related compensation for which something new may be started someplace else; however, a nice mansion in Rapla County might not be worth hardly anything.
Commune elders wish that compromises might be made with Natura areas, rather infringing slightly with the environment than crushing the future of viable farmsteads. «Plants are easier to be replanted than people,» underlined Mr Tölp.
Local leaders realise the importance of state level planning; even so, they question the local benefits of a passenger train rushing through their areas at 240 km/h. Rail Baltica planners say in their last letter of explanation, that while planning the high speed railway they are weighing the options of using it, in the future, for local purposes; still, tracks would not be determined by that.
The Rail Baltica area being 66 metres in width, a 350 m corridor is being talked about in low density areas. An electric railway is being planned, with a freight station in Muuga Harbour and passenger terminals in Ülemiste (Tallinn) and Pärnu.
The plan prescribes that in the autumn of 2013, railway track corridors will be selected; by end of 2015 a preliminary design documentation is to be completed on the basis of which, together with Finland, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland, financial support of 70-80 per cent will be applied for from the European Commission. The costs of Rail Baltica are estimated at €3.6bn, a billion of which falls to Estonia.