Shamelessly cut and pasted from an email from Canberra Airport (and no I am in not in any way shape or form employed by related to mates with or anything to do with Terry Snow):
Today we ask for you to make your voice heard one more time.
The proposal for rezoning the land to the south of Canberra Airport for residential housing (Tralee) is open for public submissions. Join Canberra Airport along with many other concerned citizens and help prevent this rezoning and keep our homes undisturbed by aircraft noise.
Putting forward a submission is easy. You may either send an email to council@qcc.nsw.gov.au with the heading Tralee Rezoning (addressed to the Mayor or the General Manager) or send your submission by mail to:
Queanbeyan City Council
PO Box 90
Queanbeyan NSW 2620
All submissions are due no later than 4:30pm on 22 December 2009.
For further information on the draft rezoning please visit http://www.qcc.nsw.gov.au/page.aspx?page=9718
Many thanks for your consideration of this request – I’m sure that together we can help commonsense prevail.
[Ed] We also got a story in from moneypenny2612 addressing the same topic which I’ve included below.
moneypenny2612
Recently, Rioters engaged in a robust discussion about the proposed Tralee housing development.
Today, Ben Sandilands wrote an interesting opinion piece for Crikey. The edited highlights are:
[T]he reality of Tralee is that because of strict noise rules already applying to aircraft movements over Canberra and Queanbeyan, its rural splendour is the main conduit for flight paths that avoid the built-up areas.Building on Tralee conforms to the institutionalised cretinism of NSW planning’ processes, which is essentially what the federal government, AirServices Australia, Qantas and, surprise, the owners of Canberra Airport have all said.
By creating a situation where noise sharing rules by day and a curfew by night would become inevitable, the Tralee development cuts off the proposed development of curfew-free Canberra Airport as a 24 hours air-freight hub serving Sydney as well as the immediate region.
It also threatens the future use of Canberra Airport by medium-sized new technology wide-body jets to provide Sydney bypass flights to South-East Asia, China, Korea and Japan.
There is, however, a wider issue. Without efficient air transport, no city or region can develop its business, tourism and product distribution to their potential, and thus loses access to future growth in jobs and prosperity.
Queanbeyan risks injuring the city that sustains it.
But this is NSW. Tralee will go most likely go ahead, and Canberra and Queanbeyan will pay an enormous price.
There is more commentary on the always interesting Plane Talking blog (written by Sandilands) about the potential economic dividends for the ACT and Queanbeyan that would flow from expanding and improving the region’s transport capacity. Presumably these economic dividends would far exceed the contributions from aspiring Tralee rate payers?
So, leaving aside the matters of residential amenity that has attracted much RiotACT comment to date, does residential in-fill at Tralee improve the local economy? If so, in what ways and for how long?
Incidentally, the Queanbeyan City Council is consulting the public about the environmental impact of the proposed development at South Tralee – the closing date for submissions is 22 December 2009. Despite claiming that the consultation documents are available online the QCC seems to have forgotten to upload them or has hidden them somewhere even Google can’t find. If any Rioter manages to track down the e-versions, please let everyone know.
moneypenny2612 comment that “…QCC seems to have forgotten to upload [the consultation documents] or has hidden them…” is incorrect. The documents have been available on the Council’s website since their public exhibition was announced. They can be found by clicking on the ‘Plans on Exhibition’ link in the Latest News panel on the QCC homepage. This brings up the link to the Draft Queanbeyan Local Environmental Plan (South Tralee) 2009. Click on this link and all the documents will appear.
I’m all for Tralee if it results in a curfew being imposed in Canberra.
I am the project manager for the Tralee project.
I am happy to repeat an offer I have made previously to invite readers to inspect Tralee and decide for themselves whether aircraft noise is a problem. Please contact me on kineson@villagebuilding.com.au.
You will be surprised by how little aircraft noise there is at Tralee. It has much less aircraft noise than Double Bay in Sydney.
Many people are not aware that the owner of Canberra Airport is the biggest developer in Canberra and a competitor of The Village Building Co. Their ulterior motive is that they do not want competition from the office park and retail areas that will be built at Tralee.
I am posting the following reponse to the story on Crikey by Ben Sandilands:
“I am the project manager for The Village Building Company’s (VBC) development project at South Tralee.
“In writing his story, Ben Sandilands did not contact VBC or bother to check his facts. Ben Sandilands has used the same language as the owners of Canberra Airport including a number of misleading assertions.
“The owner of Canberra Airport is the biggest development company in Canberra and a competitor of VBC. The Tralee development will include an office park and retail areas in direct competition with the rapidly developing office park and retail precinct at Canberra Airport. The Airport owner has a history of taking aggressive action to stop competitors. Several years ago they delayed the development of a competing Direct Factory Outlet by taking a series of unsuccessful legal actions.
“Local Environmental Studies undertaken by Queanbeyan City Council confirmed that the proposed development fully complies with Australian Standard AS 2021 which is the most stringent standard for aircraft noise in the world. Commonwealth policy states that compliance with AS 2021 protects the community from aircraft noise and ensures the long-term viability of airports. AS 2021 results in a series of ANEF contours around airports that determine appropriate land uses. In calculating its ANEF contours, the owner of Canberra Airport has assumed it will grow larger than Sydney Airport. Tralee still complies with AS 2021 under this highly optimistic scenario.
“Tralee is identified in the 1998 ACT and Sub Region Planning Strategy as the only future urban development area in the south of the Canberra region. This strategy was signed off as a formal agreement by the Commonwealth, ACT, NSW governments and local Councils to guide future development.
“Double Bay in Sydney has more than three times as much aircraft noise as Tralee.
“Developments in areas with much more aircraft noise than Tralee are approved every year around every major airport in the nation including curfew free airports.”
Ken Ineson, would you happily live out at tralee for at least a full year, in the standard type of house your planning to build, which will be no more protected from aircraft noise than any other house in the development, and without any changes to current flight numbers, potentially even an increase? Because if the answer is no then I think you need to rethink your development of land directly under a flight path.
I love it when developers fight and squabble among themselves. They are all in favour of abolishing public consultation, except when it suits them to lodge objections and take their competitors to various planning tribunals. Then it becomes all holier-than-thou.
A plague on all their houses.
Ken,
You keep repeating how places in Sydney live with more aircraft noise than is to be expected in Tralee. It doesn’t take a genius to realise this, so don’t try to treat us like idiots.
The single fact you never mention is perhaps the most important. That Sydney airport has a curfew. This immediately makes any comparison nul and void, everyone knows noise travels further and faster (and therefore louder) at night. The good thing about the Canberra Airport is that it is so close to the city centre yet it doesn’t now, and hopefully ever, need a curfew.
Yes, of course Snow has an ulterior motive, but that doesn’t automatically mean that he’s wrong.
in 15 years this tralee burb’ will be another lucas heights.
a handfull of developers will make lots of easy money building the biggest, cheapest homes they can (McMansions). they don’t care what happens to the region in the long term.
i for one will be making a submission as I support the expansion of the canberra airport but don’t want to have aircraft flying over my house.
I would also like to point out that BBP seems pretty full already, mainly with defence, but some private sector as well (I went out there for drinks last night).
What are your plans to convince a bunch of companys and gov’t departments who are already working in an out of the way area to pack up shop and move into Tralee, another out of the way area? Keeping in mind that moving shop costs more than a pretty penny.
Short of doing something amazing I’d say that Mr Snow is more worried about the medium to long term affects that Tralee will have on his airport (look at Sydney’s curfews). Sure the first round of home owners will have signed away their rights to complain about aircraft noise, but what about the second or third round, or the renters. Lest we forget that Tralee is in one of the most marginal gov’t seats in the country. I’d say he’d lose a lot of money from having the airport scaled back after the investment he is right now making in it’s redevelopment.
Just my 2c
Build it and they will come, but let them be silence on aircraft noise.
comparing noise levels in what is basically a rural area, to levels in the most built up city in australia is misleading and a really silly sales trick.
people only put up with sydney’s problems for it’s economic and cultural opportunities. things rural queanbeyan can’t offer. so why compare them?
Here are some questions for the Canberran NIMBYs who want an Airport but don’t want the noise. Funny how you all want to positives of an airport, but don’t want any of the negatives.
1. Why should NSW get the aircraft noise from YOUR airport??
2. Why should we care what people in the ACT have to say?? The ACT has never taken anything that people from Queanbeyan have to say into consideration when planning. (eg. the jail)
3. What benefit does Queanbeyan gain from not allowing Tralee to go ahead?? Especially since a lot is gained by allowing it to be approved.
FYI. I want to live at Tralee and I am hoping it goes through. It would provide me with another option to buy a house. I choose to live in Queanbeyan because I do not want to leave NSW. My rego is cheaper, the laws are better and Stanhope has no say over what we do. I don’t suffer as badly from the ‘nanny state’ as ACT residents. Having just had our second child born in the QBN Hospital and having used it in an emergency, I would prefer to go there than either Canberra hospital. Especially after being taken to the Canberra Hospital after a head-on accident and being told I would not be moved to the ward because there were no beds and my family was unable to visit me where I was.
After going to Crace and looking at houses there and also looking at other developments in the ACT, I want Tralee to go ahead even more. Land of a decent size (550m2+ because I want a backyard and eaves on my house) at most places in the ACT was upwards of $280,000 – $300,000. Then it was about $375,000 to build a 4 bedroom house. And at Crace it looks like my only options for any utilities will be ACTEW/AGL/TransACT, all of who provide crap service and crap products at skyhigh prices.
I plan on sending an email now to go and inspect Tralee and I will advise if the noise levels change my mind. But the noise can’t be any worse than the noise of several thousand whingers in the ACT crying when they don’t get thier own way.
SO again I ask, what the hell is in it for NSW not to approve Tralee, and why should we care what you think.
Responses to new comments:
Developments in areas with noise levels as low as Tralee have never resulted in a curfew.
I intend to buy property at Tralee.
We have undertaken over seven years of public consultation on Tralee. We have listened to the adjacent community at Jerrabomberra and we are making provision for the community facilities they have asked for including a private secondary school, an aquatic centre, a scouts hall, a road bypass of Jerrabomberra, etc, etc.
There are many highly desirable suburbs other than Double Bay with more aircraft noise than Tralee, including St Albans in Melbourne, Chermside in Brisbane, Greenmount in Perth, Glenside in Adelaide. Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth are curfew free. New developments are approved every year around other airports without problem in areas with more aircraft noise than Tralee.
The advantages that Tralee will have over office and retail areas at the airport is that people will live within walking disance and parking will be free.
I still havent had any acceptances from any of you people to come to the site and listen.
outdoormagoo, if you wish to live out at Tralee, do so, but don’t make a single squeek about aircraft noise, you know the airport is there, it was there first and YOU chose to move under a flight path. Despite it’s name “Canberra Airport” would you believe people from Queanbeyan also use the airport?
The other thing is Canberra airport has actually being doing a lot to send aircraft along corridors trying to avoid residential housing where possible. Building a development in the middle of the high noise corridor strikes me a idiocy in it’s finest.
outdoormagoo said :
We don’t care what you think, at the end of the day the airport was there first. Any developments here or over in NSW should be subject to an assessment as to whether the current and future aircraft noise will effect them. Given people like complaining, the people living in the proposed Tralee development will have their panties in a twist when they realise that there is infact aircraft noise. Just look at the people in northern Canberra with theirs in a twist with the slightest bit of aircraft noise, they’re calling for curfews etc.
At the end of the day, I couldn’t care less if the development went ahead, as long as the developers and future residents lose all rights to complain about aircraft noise now and into the future. The residents of other areas of Canberra and NSW should not have to suffer for what may be a development mistake.
On a related matter, I noted the airport (guessing as they don’t claim obvious responsibility) have put some humerous cartoons about the development on a number of pages in the CT today.
outdoormagoo said :
Great response Outdoormagoo! I don’t necessarily agree with all of your points, but I admire your sass! I do agree that we really are a bunch of whingers here in the ACT
outdoormagoo said :
Because this way all the poor people in Struggletown will at least be able to look overhead at a magical shiny flying things and imagine what it would be like to one day break the confines of their dreary earthly existence and travel to somewhere exotic … like Sydney.
Ken Ineson said :
The question was will you live out there, not will you buy another investment property.
Ken Ineson said :
Melbourne, Brisbane, and Perth are all major cities with lots to offer as a trade off against road and aircraft noise. None of them are comparable to what is still currently a big paddock 300km from the beach, don’t compare them.
Ken Ineson said :
Do youself a favor and hire somebody to help you with PR before you call us plebeians or something.
Ken, I’m impressed that you will live in your own development, it shows that you have faith in it. My next question, do you wish for Canberra airport to have a curfew, and more to the point, can you place in a guarentee that if a curfew is imposed that it’s not due to the residents of Tralee (with of course exception to the one or two who love just making trouble for the sake of it?)
My personal concern is that as a frequent airport user, I don’t want to see services reduced (I’d love to see them increased, with regular international flights), and I’d hate to be stuck somewhere due to a curfew. (Like what happens to Sydney and Adelaide on a somewhat frequent basis)
harvyk1 said :
It’s just a chance to make money. Nothing more, nothing less.
Long term consequences for the future economic growth of the region (which includes quenbeyan) is not something that VBC really needs to be concern itself with.
Talking about the ACT’s lack of consideration for Queanbeyan has anyone noticed that the ACT Government has cut down dozens of native trees on the old entrance to Queanbeyan (Norse Road). This once pretty tree-lined entry to Queanbeyan will soon become another ‘Fyshwick’ right on Queanbeyan’s door step. The Stanhope government with their Green alliance love to trumpet their green credentials but thought nothing about culling the dozens of trees.
harvyk1 said :
Look at the plans! No development is “directly” under a flight path at all. All this has been completely taken out of all proportion! In a posting I made on this similar topic on RA a couple weeks ago Queanbeyan has no choice but to develop south because it cannot develop east, north, or west. Let them build it!
And for outdoormagoo, I agree with you, why should NSW care about the ACT? (btw, I live in ACT but I appreciate your sentiments especially that ACT is a nanny-state. At least you turn your red arrows off at traffic lights at night lol).
Ken, why would I want to check out noise levels at Tralee when I already hear aircraft in Chisholm? It has to be worse, and I certainly do not want it to increase after Tralee residents start complaining.
Furthermore, it’s disengenuous to cite other cities that have more noise in supposedly ‘highly desirable’ areas – the suburbs of Canberra are practically silent, unlike those cities. Even noise that allegedly complies with noise level standards is far more noticable here than in eg Double Bay, where the traffic is constant. In my home, when the windows are open on a hot summer’s evening, I am woken up when a car drives past!
People live here because of the peace, quiet and ambience and because they do not want to live in other cities.
And I am no friend of the Airport either.
youami said :
Because everyone knows that sound is completely directional, if you want to get away from aircraft noise all you have to do is step 5 meters to the left.
People don’t mind the idea that a plane is overhead (Canberra is directly under the flight path of one of the busiest air routes in the world, the difference is that us on the ground can’t hear them). People care about the noise generated by an aircraft close to the ground. If planes where silent I doubt this would even be an issue.
i hadn’t even thought about why canberra airport was so against tralee before. yes i realise how that sounds. but anyway now that i know tralee will put a stop to or inhibit the expansion of canberra airport, including the possibility of having international flights out of ACT – well now i am even MORE against tralee. this is of course in addition to the flight path redirect over my house issue.
as for those banging on here about how they want to live in tralee – that’s fine, absolutely fine with me. but don’t move there then start whingeing about the noise. because you are making the CHOICE to move there, making an INFORMED DECISION to live under a flight path. those of us living in houses now without a flight path will not have the luxury of that choice.
harvyk1 said :
Fair point, although lacks substance when you think that northern parts of southern Queanbeyan (aka Jerra) the noise would be more significant given aircraft lower at that point. Further south the higher the aircraft is (albeit 3o higher or whetever the formula) so logic would suggest that the noise (even though not directly under the flight path) would be less in the newer suburbs than the existing established suburbs.
Oh and it is ‘metres’ in Australia.
Oh and I am all for capitalism so would like to see Canberra airport expand. I am sure there can be a compromise somewhere.
Ah the wonders of selective information…
What many people don’t realise in all the talk about Tralee is that it is a scattered and varied beast, as you can see in this map.
Ken Ineson talks about his role as selling Tralee South, and offers tours to experience how wonderfully noise free it is and will be. Tralee South is indeed a fair bit further south and west of the main approach corridor.
But if you subscribe to the “omission is as bad as a lie” thought, then you’d not be pleased to know that Tralee North is completely the other side of Environa, making it a lot closer to the noise impacts that Ken is offering to demonstrate. And then there’s “The Poplars”, or what you might like to call Tralee East, or even Tralee Approach? Or how about Tralee ANEF25?? This is even further north and east, making it slap bang under the approach flight path.
So this house Ken is buying – want to take odds on it not being in The Poplars??
Double Bay? What an absurd comparison. Some people (with a lot of money) would put up with a lot of noise to live close to the Sydney city and harbour. And then there is the ambient noise issue again – a point Ken continues to slide past.
On Sandilands, I don’t hold that Tralee and curfew are linked, and the only way to achieve a curfew is to allow Tralee. What is needed is ministers of transport and planning at state and federal levels with vision beyond the election timetable, or who don’t view noise moved out of their airport-side electorate to “somewhere else” as a “good thing”. With the blinkers off, they could realise that putting a curfew in place early will be beneficial going forward for all due to the known situation and stable investment environment, rather than always having the curfew campaign hanging over it and getting ever more strident as noise inevitably increases.
And not to let the airport off the hook, a note their series of cartoons in the CT today are uncredited and not designated as ads. And let’s face it: it is misleading to imply that neighbours won’t be able to talk with each other because they’ll be wearing ear protectors – everyone knows neighbours don’t talk to each other anyway!
Ken Ineson said :
I must say I had to laugh when I read this. Very nice sidestep, Ken. Almost politician-worthy…
The ACT hasn’t exactly been a good neighbour to Queanbeyan, so I’m not surprised this is going ahead.
As a New South Welshman… BWA HA HA HA HA HA!
sloppery said :
I agree we haven’t been an overly good neighbour (Although the jail shouldn’t really impact on the lives of those who live in Jerra, it’s not like the people in the jail are given free roam of the streets during the day).
That said Canberra airport also doubles as the airport that Queanbeyan uses, so really you would only be shooting yourself in the foot.
Jim Jones said :
LOL, lets go for the make fun of Queanbeyan defence. The funny thing is that ‘who is worth more’ is not a pissing contest you want to start. I already own my house plus another in Queanbeyan. I recently sold an investment house in Gungahlin, because I was sick of the stupid planning laws (can’t put in a small shed without approval which could take over six months). I drive a brand new car that I own. I have no debt and I did it all with my own money, not my parents, and I am still under 30.
And before you ask, I am planning on living in the house I build in Tralee and renting my house I currently live in.
I would wager that there is more money in Queanbeyan than anywhere in the ACT, especially ‘old money’.
Besides, don’t forget which city/town made the building of Canberra possible. Life would have been much harder for canberrans without ‘Struggletown’
I normally oppose anything proposed by Canberra Airport’s management, but building a new suburb under a well-established flightpath seems to be a really dumb idea.
Bugger it – if Tralee DOES get approval, I’ll probably do a Ken and buy a house there too – because it’ll be cheap as chips off the plan and then when the flight paths get reduced over my house when my tenants and their Tralee neighbours start whingeing and moaning about all the noise – watch that property price go up!
toriness said :
You wish. There’ll be plenty of demand to push those prices up…
Ken Ineson said :
There are many highly desirable suburbs other than Double Bay with more aircraft noise than Tralee, including St Albans in Melbourne, Chermside in Brisbane, Greenmount in Perth, Glenside in Adelaide. Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth are curfew free
Sorry Ken – there are many desirable suburbs in Adelaide that get aircraft noise. But Glenside isn’t one of them. It’s not under the (regular) flightpath for either runway. Walkerville, St Peters, College Park etc yes. Did you mean Glenelg?
I assume flight paths are set by Airservices Australia, but when I have flown recently, we seem to have taken off to the south more often, even though there is no wind. Coincidence or another Snow conspiracy???
And I’m not from Melbourne, but I think it is long bow to call St Albans desirable
Current flight paths:
http://www.canberraairport.com.au/PDF/currentflightpaths.pdf
Right over Tralee.
Parking will be free in Tralee? Ohh pleaze!!!!! When does a land owner or the local council ever, I mean ever, not try to gouge out the poor commuter.
Having read that, I think Ken you are trying to sell us the Broklyn Bridge.
harvyk1 said :
“Despite claiming that the consultation documents are available online the QCC seems to have forgotten to upload them or has hidden them somewhere even Google can’t find. If any Rioter manages to track down the e-versions, please let everyone know.”
Sounds like Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy – so maybe its the online equivalent to the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard’
Correction printed in the Canberra Times today about the cartoons acknowledging that they were ads, and that they were placed by the Canberra Airport.
Personally, I don’t have any problems with the Tralee development – naturally the ACT local Government will refer any complaints to their Queanbeyan counterparts to deal with.
My concern is less over today’s flight noise being an immediate issue for those who buy residences there, and more over Tralee becoming a future source of noise complaints and so being a hurdle to economic growth.
outdoormagoo said :
1) Its a regional airport, its not like its economic benefit ends at any particular line on a map. The airport and its economic return-to-region benefits the ACT and surrounding region now, so its growth will be of benefit to you also.
3)
Queanbeyan has homes and business roughly as close to the Airport and Brindabella Park as the ACT does.
Assuming Queanbeyan has a greater share of tradies than Narrabundha, any construction activity at the airport will have boons to the labor force Queanbeyan.
Larger airport – > Larger scope for on-site airport employment (High regional employment, a driver of economic growth and wages)
Larger airport – > Larger demand for purchased services directly by the airport, and associated businesses at Brindabella Park. (greater overall economic output)
Larger airport – > Larger supporting economic activity and value added by having an efficient airport, such as greater deliver times. (boons to regional domestic product)
Every thousand of so flights will put an extra few person-years of labour demand onto your services sector.
Larger airport – > Larger scope for business travel growth, and business services sector.
Larger airport – > Larger scope for leisure travel growth, and tourism services sector.
Reasons like these are why people encourage airport development, but Tralee becomes a hurdle to these gains, by restricting both the size of the airport and the stifling related demand for goods, services, and labour, by limiting its hours of operation thanks to future noise complaints and demands for curfews.
But if the under-flightpath land is cheap it will sell to pepole who take Ken & VBC at face value, and if Queanbeyan Council is in need of an influx of ratepayer cash, they’re playing for a very short-sighted gain.
RE Ken’s generous offer of a visit to a greenfields site:
Canberra Airport plans to ramp up scope of operations after the coming development now that their Master Plan is approved, so sending people to stand out in a field while its only a regional airport flightpath, and leaving
the markspotential homebuyers to assume that it will stay that way forever is something of aconstrange game to play with investors.Ken:
Even if Tralee home & commercial property buyers are given a caveat limiting on their rights and scopes for complainining about current & future aircraft noise, how enforcable would these contract provisions be (either under ANEF Standards\Planning legislation \ procedures or Aircraft Noise regulations \complaints legislation, whatever process buyers would be forgoing their right to…), and what are the likelyhoods they could be overturned later in courts or by future exceptions in law?
There has been an enormous amount of misinformation posted on RiotACT. I will respond to the major concerns that have been raised.
Gungahlin Al has attached an outdated map and hasn’t correctly read the legend. Housing is not proposed in the Poplars. South Tralee is not where Gungahlin Al has described. It is just at the back of Hume and 10 to 12 km from the airport. The proposed housing at South Tralee is not under any current or proposed flight path.
The fact remains that South Tralee easily complies with the most conservative standard for aircraft noise in the world. The owners of Canberra Airport have prepared noise contours under that standard that assume the airport will grow larger than Sydney
There are well over 1 million people living in mostly highly desirable suburbs with more aircraft noise in every city in Australia. Some examples of these are given in the following report http://villagebuilding.com.au/news/documents/WilkinsonMurrayNoiseExposurereport.pdf
Virtually all of those one million people experience more night time noise than Tralee and many are near curfew free airports.
New developments are approved every year without objections in every Australian city in areas with more aircraft noise than Tralee. Examples are in the attached report. Many of these new developments are in a currently rural setting with less ambient noise (other than aircraft) than Tralee. Tralee is about 1 km away from the Monaro Hwy.
The threats of noise sharing and a curfew are just scare mongering by Canberra Airport. If there was any chance of these being implemented in Canberra they would have been implemented many years ago at Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Launceston and all other airports which all have residential areas with more noise than Tralee.
Parking throughout Queanbeyan is free and the same policy will be adopted at Tralee.
Without starting any marketing we already have hundreds of names of people wanting to buy at Tralee. They all say they are not concerned about aircraft noise.
I repeat my earlier unanswered invitation to take anyone who is genuinely interested on a tour of the site. I am disappointed that a few people are prepared to criticise Tralee due to a scare campaign undertaken by a competing developer who also happens to own an airport without first attempting to establish the facts.
Ken I think you’re missing the point of many of the arguements against that have been put here (noting your bias towards the tralee development).
It DOES NOT MATTER if the development complies with noise regulations either now or in the future. Should future residents in a marginal political seat threaten to vote the other way because of a PERCEIVED noise concern (regardless if it complies with guidelines) then politicians representing, or hoping to represent those consituents will act to preserve those votes.
Ken Ineson said :
Hang on, maybe it won’t be aircraft noise new tralee residents (both residential and business) will be complaining about, maybe it will be noise/smells from the Hume. And isn’t there suppose to be a gas fired power station built next to Hume in that general area?
Ken, if you were willing to schedule for a time when your proposed audience is free, its more likely.
(I for one, now work from about 0730am until like, 9pm at night every weekday. For most RA-reading public servants, weekday morning site-visits to Tralee and then out before peak hour is nigh impossible)
Since we’re all enthralled by the discussion of noise from jet turbines, I know I shouldn’t, but I will mention of the data centre and gas-fired power station, destined for Hume. Alongside Tralee South, just under the arrow head of Hume Industrial on the map linked above.
Those turbines will nicely complement the almost identical jet engines on the aircraft. Ground and air assault combined.
Conflicting developments, anyone?
Anna Key said :
Coincidence. Where possible planes will take off to the north, however if the winds are in a certain way (eg coming up from the south, blowing to the North) it makes more sense for a plane to take off to the south (facing into the wind) as the speed which it needs to be going to get lift is less.
As for Ken, I’m sorry, but all the airport has to do to make people think that Tralee is not a good idea is to remind them of the Sydney curfew. In this case they have better PR people than you do, and I don’t really think your helping your cause, remember PR is about winning hearts and minds, having a go at RiotACT members because we didn’t instantly jump at your offer is not going to help.
So lets hear some actual facts and figures,
in DB what is the average noise of an aircraft flying overhead? (and don’t forget the nearly daily B767 early morning flight)
what is the maximum noise of an aircraft flying overhead?
What is the lowest altitude you expect an aircraft fly overhead at?
How many aircraft movements are you expecting?
How will you handle if Canberra airport gets it’s wish and becomes a 24 hour freight hub, or actual international airport? (Probably wouldn’t see B747’s or A380’s frequently, but you could see A330’s or B777’s on a frequent basis)
What legal conditions will be placed on the sale of the land to stop noise complaints now and into the future?
You have stated the link to the map is an old zoning map, where is the new one, and to really prove your point, why not include lines indicating the normal flight paths of the planes?
Will you do anything to help reduce the noise?
Basically so far Ken you have placed in a whole lot of fluff stating “don’t worry just trust us” couple with an offer which can not possibly replicate living there 24 x 7 (remember the first flight leaves the airport at around 6:00am), and pulling apart “mis”-information without posting the real information. You guys really need a PR person on board.
Jazz,
Only Sydney, Adelaide, Essendon and Coolangatta airports have curfews and for very good reason. They all have old residential areas in areas with a hundred times more noise than Tralee.
Melbourne, Brisbane, Perth, Launceston and all other airports in regional centres do not have the same noise problems of curfewed airports but all still have housing in areas with far more noise than Tralee. Most of these have adjacent marginal seats either now or in the past. Noise sharing and curfews have not been introduced at these airports.