14 January 2010

Is this the end of Tralee?

| harvyk1
Join the conversation
24

There is an interesting article at Crikey about Tralee, and it looks like the airport has won…

Of note is that “Today the Land and Environment Court of NSW ruled that the current rezoning process for the controversial development under Canberra Airport flight paths is invalid”

Whilst I’m sure that the VBC has some other tricks up their sleeve and that until the high court has told them to go away they will continue trying, I see this as a ruling for common sense and a major blow for VBC. Whilst the airport still has to deal with Curfew4Canberra I can also see the major hurdle for the airport will now be convincing the airlines that flying to canberra direct is worth it over the more traditional Sydney \ Melbourne or Brisbane.

Join the conversation

24
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
Latest

Agreed, Al – like the idea of enlarged ACT. Aside from other benefits, it would clear up the planning debacle this particular development has been.

Gungahlin Al6:28 am 19 Jan 10

Do’t know about this ruling, as it seems like a technicality that could be changed were the NSW ALP to change the relevant legislation. But more likely to damage the development is the recent words by Albanese dead against any new residential under flightpaths. This is a guy whose electorate is made up of people in such a situation. So he well knows the falsehoods of the sort of claims being made by the Tralee wannabe developers.

housebound said :

youami said :

harvyk1 said :

So youami, your telling us that the only piece of land available anywhere is a small piece of land underneath a flight path? What happens when Tralee is built and ready to go? Where else will Canberra and Queanbeyan possibly expand to? Do we just simply place the no vacancy sign up on the welcome to Canberra \ Queanbeyan signs and tell people to go away, we’re full?…

I am saying that Quenabeyan can only be further developed south…. Tell me where there is land sufficiently available in QCC other than at Tralee? … Sure, we can send all the NSW Queanbeyan wannabes to the ACT (or to Goulburn lol) but that is not the point. We can create a brand new NSW city (Bungendore West) over the hills and far away but again that is not the point.

That is the point actually. We should be collectively taking a more regional approach to land development. QCC-area is not the only piece of land left in these parts.

And what will QCC do for more land once Tralee is developed? Hope for another council amalgamantion to get more land?

Good point Housebound. But people in these councils will always be stupidly parochial and short sighted, all the while happy to avail themselves of the assets developed by ACT taxpayers. Which is why I believe the whole region should be amalgamated into one enlarged ACT – Yass to Canberra to Bungendore.

Because of the large amount of goods transported to Canberra by road, there is a heap of empty Semis in the freeway back to Sydney.

The aiport is hoping to use this excess capacity to transport goods to Sydney. Trucking firms would be keen for the extra revenue.

georgesgenitals11:02 pm 16 Jan 10

housebound said :

youami said :

harvyk1 said :

So youami, your telling us that the only piece of land available anywhere is a small piece of land underneath a flight path? What happens when Tralee is built and ready to go? Where else will Canberra and Queanbeyan possibly expand to? Do we just simply place the no vacancy sign up on the welcome to Canberra \ Queanbeyan signs and tell people to go away, we’re full?…

I am saying that Quenabeyan can only be further developed south…. Tell me where there is land sufficiently available in QCC other than at Tralee? … Sure, we can send all the NSW Queanbeyan wannabes to the ACT (or to Goulburn lol) but that is not the point. We can create a brand new NSW city (Bungendore West) over the hills and far away but again that is not the point.

That is the point actually. We should be collectively taking a more regional approach to land development. QCC-area is not the only piece of land left in these parts.

And what will QCC do for more land once Tralee is developed? Hope for another council amalgamantion to get more land?

This is the smartest comment of this entire thread.

youami said :

harvyk1 said :

So youami, your telling us that the only piece of land available anywhere is a small piece of land underneath a flight path? What happens when Tralee is built and ready to go? Where else will Canberra and Queanbeyan possibly expand to? Do we just simply place the no vacancy sign up on the welcome to Canberra \ Queanbeyan signs and tell people to go away, we’re full?…

I am saying that Quenabeyan can only be further developed south…. Tell me where there is land sufficiently available in QCC other than at Tralee? … Sure, we can send all the NSW Queanbeyan wannabes to the ACT (or to Goulburn lol) but that is not the point. We can create a brand new NSW city (Bungendore West) over the hills and far away but again that is not the point.

That is the point actually. We should be collectively taking a more regional approach to land development. QCC-area is not the only piece of land left in these parts.

And what will QCC do for more land once Tralee is developed? Hope for another council amalgamantion to get more land?

Jim T, of course CAG operations won’t come to a screaming halt if Tralee is approved. It’s just we don’t have to look far to see the problems that come in with curfews, and building directly under a flightpath is a surefire way of getting one here in Canberra.

Either way, until VBC pulls something else out from their sleave, this is now a moot point, as the courts have ruled…

harvyk1 said :

As for the only people who get advantage from the Airport is CAG, pull the other one. My business is heavily reliant on my ability to travel, and I know I’m not the only business here in Canberra who is reliant on that airport. On that matter, show me one major Australian airport that is operated as a charity?

Harvyk1, you make it sound like CAG operations will come to a screeching halt if Tralee is approved. I don’t think anyone on this forum is naive or ill-informed enough to think that is even a remote possibility. The two are not mutually exclusive. The airport will continue to grow it’s operations regardless. Why? Because it is not a charity. And like other airport owners, such as Macquarie, it’s main aim is to generate as much money as possible.

54-11 said :

As I’ve said before, a pox on both their houses. They both whinge like hell when the public don’t like what they are doing, and lobby hard to reduce community input, but both are quite prepared to use every means possible to further their own financial interests.

Both sides are greedy hypocrites and I hope they fight each other to a standstill.

Agree. Especially the attitude on both sides that if you are not with us you are clearly against us.

And I assume the airport will want the taxpayers to fund the infrastructure to support whatever their latest development happens to be.

harvyk1 said :

So youami, your telling us that the only piece of land available anywhere is a small piece of land underneath a flight path? What happens when Tralee is built and ready to go? Where else will Canberra and Queanbeyan possibly expand to? Do we just simply place the no vacancy sign up on the welcome to Canberra \ Queanbeyan signs and tell people to go away, we’re full?

As for the only people who get advantage from the Airport is CAG, pull the other one. My business is heavily reliant on my ability to travel, and I know I’m not the only business here in Canberra who is reliant on that airport. On that matter, show me one major Australian airport that is operated as a charity?

I am saying that Quenabeyan can only be further developed south. It cannot go further west and the terrain east and north is not suitable for housing. So yes, if they can’t go south where can they go? You seem to think that there are options so I will ask again where is there land available in QCC other than Tralee? Where is it? Tell me where there is land sufficiently available in QCC other than at Tralee? I will happily withdraw all my comments from my posts wrt supporting Tralee if you can justify your comments that there are alternatives to Tralee.

Sure, we can send all the NSW Queanbeyan wannabes to the ACT (or to Goulburn lol) but that is not the point. We can create a brand new NSW city (Bungendore West) over the hills and far away but again that is not the point.

btw, not all airports in Australia are privately owned and thus are not-for-profit because they are run by the Government (or local Councils, etc) – sure they take fees and rent and might be in the black but not as profit but as consolidated revenue.

And I didn’t say Canberrans don’t get an advantage, I said CAG get more of an advantage, there is a difference. I take advantage of the Airport whenever I travel. I was merely refuting your argument that the Airport is for the people when in fact it is but just as much as for the people as Tralee — there are citizens and there are shareholders for both.

And as I have said before I am indifferent to CAG or VBC, I don’t support one over the other, honestly! I really don’t give flying @#*$ if there is a 24hr hub or if there is a suburb called Tralee. I like to be objective (well sometimes I rant).

So youami, your telling us that the only piece of land available anywhere is a small piece of land underneath a flight path? What happens when Tralee is built and ready to go? Where else will Canberra and Queanbeyan possibly expand to? Do we just simply place the no vacancy sign up on the welcome to Canberra \ Queanbeyan signs and tell people to go away, we’re full?

As for the only people who get advantage from the Airport is CAG, pull the other one. My business is heavily reliant on my ability to travel, and I know I’m not the only business here in Canberra who is reliant on that airport. On that matter, show me one major Australian airport that is operated as a charity?

harvyk1 said :

JimT, yes I am serious… The airport is for all in this region. Whilst the airports name is Canberra (International?) Airport it’s also used by residents of Queanbeyan, and anyone else whom lives in this general region.

Tralee on the otherhand will mainly benefit VBC shareholders, that’s it. There are other pieces of land which can be developed on which is not directly under flight paths. Whilst yes I know people are crying out for more land to be released, this is partly the fault of developers who purchase up large amounts of land and the release it in stages to inflate the price. I would be surprised if VBC at Tralee doesn’t do this as well.

Where is the land harvyk1 and housebound? Please post up some co-ordinates or a google map as I am interested to know where you are suggesting VBC (or QCC) could build if Tralee is abandoned? Put up facts rather than hearsay. And remember we are talking NSW here (not ACT), and it has to be close to and/or within easy reach of Queanbeyan – in particular in QCC land but possibly Palerang at last resort. You also seem to forget that the people who do not live in their own houses (renting etc) are also interested in seeing new development not just VBC shareholders.

You also seem to forget that Canberra and district residents don’t get much out of Canberra Airport, other than a transport hub that is as effective (and immature) as the railway station or Jolimont. Think about landing fees, parking, taxi fares, all added up and going to CAG coffers not Canberra. The Airport itself is nothing compared to the mess of buildings they call Brindabella and Majura and Fairbairn and they are all for the CAG shareholders, not for the better good of Canberra — there are many many vacant commercial spaces in Civic and in the parlimentary zone. And what will a 24hr freight hub provide for Canberra? As I and others have mentioned before, it will do nothing and achieve nothing without decent infrastructure in and out of Canberra. High-speed rail would in fact go contrary to the 24hr freight hub by taking a lot of freight and passenger traffic away from the Airport. It would be interesting to build high-speed infrastructure first then we shall see if the Airport is truly as important as it is made out to be.

Maybe Tralee residents wont have anything to complain about!

25,000 new full-time, part-time and casual jobs will be created at the Canberra Airport over the next decade from the freight hub alone. Imagine how many more jobs will be added to that if international flights commence as well. A bigger Canberra Airport is a victory for the people of Canberra.

JimT, yes I am serious… The airport is for all in this region. Whilst the airports name is Canberra (International?) Airport it’s also used by residents of Queanbeyan, and anyone else whom lives in this general region.

Tralee on the otherhand will mainly benefit VBC shareholders, that’s it. There are other pieces of land which can be developed on which is not directly under flight paths. Whilst yes I know people are crying out for more land to be released, this is partly the fault of developers who purchase up large amounts of land and the release it in stages to inflate the price. I would be surprised if VBC at Tralee doesn’t do this as well.

JimT said :

… It’s putting the needs of Queanbeyan (apparently the fastest growing city in NSW) residents – desperate for more housing.

Queanbeyan is a rather small council area. There is no reason Queanbyean Council couldn’t come to an agreement with Palerang Council (which adjoins it) and have a suburb build out there (a shift of only several kms). That would solve the land supply problem, and give Palerang a straw of financial viability to clutch at.

I’m really, really sure that Queanbeyan Council’s main aim on this is to supply housing to the citizens of NSW rather than enjoy the rates and other revue as it rolls in, so there should be no problem.

harvyk1 said :

The problem I have is it’s putting the needs of a few (aka VBC shareholders) against the needs of the many (aka anyone in the Canberra region who needs to travel or anyone in the world who needs to travel to the Canberra region).

Are you serious? If you are going to make comments like that, at least compare apples with apples. Depending on which way you look at it: it’s putting the needs of a few (VBC shareholders – with a vested financial interest in Tralee going ahead) against the needs of another few (CAG owners – with a vested financial interest in the airport’s 24hr freight hub going ahead).

Or alternativly, and in a more positive light – It’s putting the needs of Queanbeyan (apparently the fastest growing city in NSW) residents – desperate for more housing – against the needs of Canberra residents – desperate for whatever it is they think a 24hr freight hub is going to provide.

As I’ve said before, a pox on both their houses. They both whinge like hell when the public don’t like what they are doing, and lobby hard to reduce community input, but both are quite prepared to use every means possible to further their own financial interests.

Both sides are greedy hypocrites and I hope they fight each other to a standstill.

bd84, in the contract of sale there will be clauses which stop 1st generation home owners from complaining. Renters and 2nd hand home owners will be the ones who are free to complain.

TP 3000, whilst I’m not anti-highspeed train, I for one will always take the plane. Could a high speed train get me from here to Adelaide for a full business day and back again not quite in time for dinner on the same day? Lets assume that a high speed train averages 200km/h and it’s built in an almost perfect straight line, it would still take nearly 5 hours for a train trip. It’d be the same sorts of times for Canberra to Brisbane return, and that’s if there was a direct route (hey they can’t even get a direct normal speed train service from Canberra to Melbourne, what chance do we have with Adelaide or Brisbane?)

Having done the day trip from CBR to ADL several times last year, I noticed that quite a few people on the evening flight where also on the morning flight there. High speed rail between Canberra and Sydney are realistic (it’s much of a muchness between flying and driving now, only advantage of flying to Sydney now is that you don’t have to pay for parking in Sydney’s CBD), high speed rail elsewhere though I don’t see as a viable alternative.

Well since their plans for trams through Canberra died, maybe the VBC should push the case for fast rail through Australia harder. As if we had a high speed train between Adelaide-Melbourne-Canberra-Sydney-Brisbane there would be no need for planes over Canberra & thus they could build there.

I don’t think it’s the end of the story and I have no doubt there will be more to the process.

They should use Hackett as the rule of thumb when thinking about the development, if it’s going to create another community of whingers when they even remotely hear an aircraft overhead, then the development should not proceed. Either that or put a condition on the development that they accept the aircraft noise over the development now and into the future, including no rights to complain. If the developers and the council think the aircraft noise is satisfactory, then they should have no problems with inserting these clauses.

6xin, I expect the VBC still has another trick or two up it’s sleeve, even without gov’t support.

The problem I have is it’s putting the needs of a few (aka VBC shareholders) against the needs of the many (aka anyone in the Canberra region who needs to travel or anyone in the world who needs to travel to the Canberra region).

I think the Canberra Airport has finally won this epic battle. The VBC is only backed the NSW Labor Government, who are the most unpopular government in Australia. Also, the NSW Liberal opposition says that they are on Canberra Airport’s side, so if the NSW Liberal party wins the 2011 state election, Tralee will be dead.

To be honest youami, I have no idea why airlines would choose us over SYD \ MEL \ BNE. We are not a major hub by any stretch of the imagination, and there are very few transit passangers who would use CBR without actually starting or ending their trip here.

That said, if the airport does manage it, as a fairly frequent airport user as far as I’m concerned it can only benefit me. Furthermore in this case the airport was there first, and I would say it’s unreasonable for people to move near a major piece of infrastructure without the minimal expectation that the infrastructure will increase in size over the years. (GDE near Aranda is another classic example)

Saying that Tralee invalid is just as broad-brush as saying that there will be a Data Centre built in Banks. If you look at the actual decision and also look at the plans of VBC you will see that this decision affects bugger all to the development of Googong. And IMHO, so be it, Queanbeyan (and the district) needs housing! I am interested to know your thoughts harveyk1 on why airlines would want to land in Canberra over Sydney or Melbourne or Brisbane? Canberra is not a second airport solution for any of these without infrastructure to get people and freight to Sydney or Melbourne or Brisbane. I would love to see it a 24hr hub and second sirport to Sydney but in the present situation I like many others don’t want the 4hr train ride or 3.5hr bus ride to Sydney just to land in Canberra. High-speed rail? If only…

btw, I am indifferent to VBC or CAG.

Interesting that that is your take on it harvyk1 (although not surprising, given the article is on a aviation blog, and is directly referencing a Canberra Airport press release.)

The gist I got from the general media (links below) is that this will only be a minor delay in the process until the legislation is amended, especially given Tony Kelly’s comments in latter part of this mornings SMH article.

http://www.smh.com.au/environment/drafting-error-puts-rezonings-in-jeopardy-20100113-m71m.html

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/local/news/general/tralee-put-in-holding-pattern/1725028.aspx

It looks to me like the airport’s last ditch effort at halting Tralee was mearly a speedbump, and has left Byron with very few straws left to clutch. It will be interesting to see what other imaginitive attempts the airport makes to derail the process of a project that VBC, QCC and the NSW Government have consistantly stated meets all the necessary planning requirements.

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.