Tralee (Canberra's own Lucas Heights) starts selling.

IrishPete said :

Instead of berating you for your attempts at trolling, I am just going to pity you for your limited grasp of English.

IP

Must admit my written English ain’t no good (victim of 1980’s English ACT public school style), but I am surprised that is the best you can do.

But two points, for one I am not trolling, I am just discussing your pathetic excuse for a post, this is after all a discussion board where one does that. Secondly even with my poor written English I know the difference between a curfew and noise abatement. You don’t, but still believe it is me who is lacking in English skills.

Just admit for once that you were wrong, as quite clearly proven. On the one hand you call for a curfew like everywhere else, when pointed out you say no you meant noise abatement, fair enough I guess, except of course Canberra airport already has a noise abatement policy and procedures, so no idea what your after, don’t think you do either.

tommy said :

all as measured (by eye) while between trallee and environa on that map.

According to the site there are 3 more scheduled planes still to land. First plane off in the morning is 6am.

Imagine how busy this could be in 10-15 years?

4000 feet is still over 1.2 kilometres above the ground. That’s a long way away – longer still if you triangulate it to either Jerra or Tralee.

Your comment that air traffic will increase dramatically does not seem to be reflected by actual usage. The number of air movements are decreasing every year, and the number of passengers travelling to/from SYD, MEL, BNE, ADL is also declining . The Canberra Airport forecasts of movements and actual movements appear to be about 3x inflated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canberra_International_Airport#Statistics

I think the recent decrease in travel may have something to do with the public service cut backs on travel.

You think that in 10-20 years we won’t have more air traffic?

When I’m sitting in my garden in west belconnon I can still hear the jets and they are already at about 10,000ft. Imagine how bad it’s going to get in the future.

Or should we just give up and let bad planning and developer/government greed doom us to repeat the mistakes of older cities.

JC said :

Curfew and noise abatement are two totally different things.

No, they’re not. Noise Abatement Procedures include when and which runways are available. Curfews (eg. no runways available) are just another noise abatement procedure.

IrishPete said :

Mark of Sydney said :

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

Oh puhlease. A curfew is not a curfew anyway – http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/environmental/curfews/SydneyAirport/SydneyCurfewBrief.aspx

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

I knew that, I just wrote a sentence not a dissertation.

IP

IP, you are in fact correct on this.

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/aip/pending/dap/SSYNA01-129.pdf

Using Sydney as an example here, you’ll notice that Kingsford Smith Airport is restricted to a single runway between 2300-0600. This obviously severely restricts the amount of traffic it can handle, but it isn’t a complete shutdown.

Curfews, or lack thereof, are all part of, not separate to, the Noise Abatement Procedures.

JC said :

IrishPete said :

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

3rd dumbest post. First off you say Canberra should have a curfew like every other airport. When pointed out that few have curfews you start talking noise abatement, and now make the statement no Australian airport has a genuine curfew. Make up your mind for christ sakes or maybe shut up for once.

Instead of berating you for your attempts at trolling, I am just going to pity you for your limited grasp of English.

IP

IrishPete said :

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

3rd dumbest post. First off you say Canberra should have a curfew like every other airport. When pointed out that few have curfews you start talking noise abatement, and now make the statement no Australian airport has a genuine curfew. Make up your mind for christ sakes or maybe shut up for once.

Mark of Sydney said :

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

Oh puhlease. A curfew is not a curfew anyway – http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/aviation/environmental/curfews/SydneyAirport/SydneyCurfewBrief.aspx

So perhaps no Australian airport has a genuine curfew?

I knew that, I just wrote a sentence not a dissertation.

IP

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Many airports have curfews. In Europe they are called “Night flying restrictions”.

Here are some German cities with them: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Nachtflugbeschraenkungen.jpg

The red periods are labeled “flugverbot” which translates to “flight ban”.

“Dumbest statement in a long while”… Hyperbole much, or just dumb?

IrishPete said :

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Sure, there are no curfews at many airports but there are restrictive noise abatement procedures that have the same effect. So you are right about curfews, but possibly being a bit pedantic, and definitely exaggerating about the “dumbest comment”.

You’ve also missed the alternate meaning of my post – add “should have one” to the end and it should be obvious. I can’t recall which meaning I intended.

IP

So having pointed out that only three airports have curfews (of the 11 busiest airports in Australia according to the Bureau of Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Economics) in response to a reasonable interpretation of what you said, JC is being pedantic but you don’t know what you meant.

As someone who is sympathetic to many of the views you post (on climate change for example), can I suggest you stop making throw-away comments about things you clearly don’t know much about, and stop giving ammunition to those who love to jump on glib claims from the left. Please!

(And why not just admit you were wrong:)

IrishPete said :

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Sure, there are no curfews at many airports but there are restrictive noise abatement procedures that have the same effect. So you are right about curfews, but possibly being a bit pedantic, and definitely exaggerating about the “dumbest comment”.

You’ve also missed the alternate meaning of my post – add “should have one” to the end and it should be obvious. I can’t recall which meaning I intended.

IP

Nice attempt at a back peddle, but big fail and now the second dumbest post I have seen.

Curfew and noise abatement are two totally different things. As for missing should have one, no I didn’t miss that, I was having a go at your stupid comment that every other airport has it, not that Canberra should. Though personally Canberra shouldn’t, what I believe is that we should not be building under the approach paths.

Now yes many more do have noise abatement procedures. So even if in saying curfew you meant noise abatement, then your quite clearly you have no idea (as usual) what your talking about.

Proof, simple really Canberra has a noise abatement plan, which no surprise covers night time operations.

So please explain again what you were trying to say?

An overview of those and their effect can be found here:

http://www.canberraairport.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Noise.pdf

JC said :

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

Sure, there are no curfews at many airports but there are restrictive noise abatement procedures that have the same effect. So you are right about curfews, but possibly being a bit pedantic, and definitely exaggerating about the “dumbest comment”.

You’ve also missed the alternate meaning of my post – add “should have one” to the end and it should be obvious. I can’t recall which meaning I intended.

IP

IrishPete said :

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport.
IP

Dumbest statement in a long while. Most airports DON’T have a curfew, in fact in Australia only Sydney, Adelaide, Coolangatta and Essedon have a curfew. Around the world cannot think of too many major airports that have one, Heathrow yes, but not many more that come to mind.

As at 5:20pm: there are 15 more planes to take off tonight and 24 to land. The last one will be at quarter to midnight.

tommy said :

farq said :

Having noise during the day is one thing, but what if the airport grows and it goes on late at night and very early in the morning? Things might be ‘not too bad’ now, but what about in 10-20 years?

All the young families of tralee will moan about how unfair it is and how it wakes the baby (won’t somebody think of the children!).

Eventually and at some future federal election the residents of Eden Monaro will get what they want at the expense of us stuck-up Canberrans.

But if Canberrans and Traleeians want the same thing – no noisy freight hub and passenger/freight flight curfew everyone will be happy?

I’ll vote for that. Canberra Airport should have a curfew just like every other airport. Do you really want Hollywood stars using it as a noise dumping ground? http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/nocurfew-capital-helps-jet-set-party-on-and-on-20121228-2bzou.html

IP

dungfungus said :

Going by the beliefs of the climate alarmists on this blog, Canberra Airport and Tralee will be underwater in 20 years time so unless a B737 with floats is developed between now and then the level of aircraft noise become academic.

I know you are being facetious, but has anyone every claimed a 500+ metres sea level rise will occur? Ever? Really?

IP

hmmm, aviation fuel. Yum Yum

dungfungus said :

Going by the beliefs of the climate alarmists on this blog, Canberra Airport and Tralee will be underwater in 20 years time so unless a B737 with floats is developed between now and then the level of aircraft noise become academic.

You spelt “dumb” wrong.

all as measured (by eye) while between trallee and environa on that map.

According to the site there are 3 more scheduled planes still to land. First plane off in the morning is 6am.

Imagine how busy this could be in 10-15 years?

4000 feet is still over 1.2 kilometres above the ground. That’s a long way away – longer still if you triangulate it to either Jerra or Tralee.

Your comment that air traffic will increase dramatically does not seem to be reflected by actual usage. The number of air movements are decreasing every year, and the number of passengers travelling to/from SYD, MEL, BNE, ADL is also declining . The Canberra Airport forecasts of movements and actual movements appear to be about 3x inflated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canberra_International_Airport#Statistics

tommy said :

…watch a few landings and takeoffs on flightradar24.com – most take offs I’ve seen go north rather than south anyway.

eg http://fr24.com/VOZ1210

Last few mins:

landing: QFA807
time:9:25pm 19/2
plane: 737-838 VH-VXK
alt: 4000ft*

landing: QFA708
time: 9:36 19/2
plane: 737-838
alt: 4,400ft*

landing: EVY81
time: 9: 43
plane: 737-7dt
alt: 4k somthing ft*

landing: VOZ1226
time: 9:48
plane: Embraer ERJ190-100 IGW
alt: 4,125ft*

all as measured (by eye) while between trallee and environa on that map.

According to the site there are 3 more scheduled planes still to land. First plane off in the morning is 6am.

Imagine how busy this could be in 10-15 years?

dungfungus said :

farq said :

Having noise during the day is one thing, but what if the airport grows and it goes on late at night and very early in the morning? Things might be ‘not too bad’ now, but what about in 10-20 years?

All the young families of tralee will moan about how unfair it is and how it wakes the baby (won’t somebody think of the children!).

Eventually and at some future federal election the residents of Eden Monaro will get what they want at the expense of us stuck-up Canberrans.

Going by the beliefs of the climate alarmists on this blog, Canberra Airport and Tralee will be underwater in 20 years time so unless a B737 with floats is developed between now and then the level of aircraft noise become academic.

The Russians are way ahead of you…
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=V8Nu94khHoo&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DV8Nu94khHoo

farq said :

Having noise during the day is one thing, but what if the airport grows and it goes on late at night and very early in the morning? Things might be ‘not too bad’ now, but what about in 10-20 years?

All the young families of tralee will moan about how unfair it is and how it wakes the baby (won’t somebody think of the children!).

Eventually and at some future federal election the residents of Eden Monaro will get what they want at the expense of us stuck-up Canberrans.

But if Canberrans and Traleeians want the same thing – no noisy freight hub and passenger/freight flight curfew everyone will be happy?

farq said :

Having noise during the day is one thing, but what if the airport grows and it goes on late at night and very early in the morning? Things might be ‘not too bad’ now, but what about in 10-20 years?

All the young families of tralee will moan about how unfair it is and how it wakes the baby (won’t somebody think of the children!).

Eventually and at some future federal election the residents of Eden Monaro will get what they want at the expense of us stuck-up Canberrans.

Going by the beliefs of the climate alarmists on this blog, Canberra Airport and Tralee will be underwater in 20 years time so unless a B737 with floats is developed between now and then the level of aircraft noise become academic.

Having noise during the day is one thing, but what if the airport grows and it goes on late at night and very early in the morning? Things might be ‘not too bad’ now, but what about in 10-20 years?

All the young families of tralee will moan about how unfair it is and how it wakes the baby (won’t somebody think of the children!).

Eventually and at some future federal election the residents of Eden Monaro will get what they want at the expense of us stuck-up Canberrans.

Deref said :

switch said :

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I think it is alluding to the fact that the nuclear research reactor at Lucas Heights, built back in the fifties, well and truly predated anyone buying land there now. Sydney was a lot further away in those days.

Yes, and to the fact that the people who bought land near the reactor immediately started complaining about it.

Yup exactly what I was going for.

m00nee said :

The decision to not build under the flight path was not VBC, but a decision of the NSW Planning Authority. If you look at the map it still shows the area to the north of the green area as “Potential Future Development. Seems to be an indicator that they plan to continue “greasing the wheels” that stand in their way.

It’s the salami-slice strategy, slippery slope, death by a thousand cuts. Once some houses are under the flight path, why not a few more?

m00nee said :

tommy said :

I had a look at the map of where the actual development is going. You can see they are quite clever and avoid the flightpath area for housing and put green space in the ‘noise area’. The noise area seems to be worst case – ie if planes take off south which seems to rarely happen (anecdotally I can’t remember taking off south). For landing, the planes are still very high.

http://www.traleevillage.com.au/pdf/DA42.2%20Structure%20Plan%20%20For%20Web%20140205B_and_Directional%20Map_v2.PDF

It’s probably in ACT’s interests to play nice – as all those new Tralee residents will be in a marginal electoral…

The decision to not build under the flight path was not VBC, but a decision of the NSW Planning Authority. If you look at the map it still shows the area to the north of the green area as “Potential Future Development. Seems to be an indicator that they plan to continue “greasing the wheels” that stand in their way.

Pace for another arboretum with tax-deductible status perhaps?

arescarti42 said :

watto23 said :

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

Since when is it the role of the Government to artificially manipulate the market and deny current and future generations affordable shelter in order to gift unearned, undeserved windfall gains to existing homeowners?

Because that’s what you’re suggesting, and that’s what the ACT Government is currently doing.

No I’m not suggesting this the gifting on windfall gains to homeowners, but at the same time you can’t just go mass releasing land to bring costs down, especially when someone has already outlayed a lot of money on land. For every new home owner happy, there would be a lot of unhappy home owners, if you released too much those who borrowed say 90% may find they owe more than what they have.

People also have to learn to live within their means, the number of people who consider themselves poor in this town because they only have 1 house and an SUV is ridiculous.

tommy said :

I had a look at the map of where the actual development is going. You can see they are quite clever and avoid the flightpath area for housing and put green space in the ‘noise area’. The noise area seems to be worst case – ie if planes take off south which seems to rarely happen (anecdotally I can’t remember taking off south). For landing, the planes are still very high.

http://www.traleevillage.com.au/pdf/DA42.2%20Structure%20Plan%20%20For%20Web%20140205B_and_Directional%20Map_v2.PDF

It’s probably in ACT’s interests to play nice – as all those new Tralee residents will be in a marginal electoral…

The decision to not build under the flight path was not VBC, but a decision of the NSW Planning Authority. If you look at the map it still shows the area to the north of the green area as “Potential Future Development. Seems to be an indicator that they plan to continue “greasing the wheels” that stand in their way.

tommy said :

It’s probably in ACT’s interests to play nice – as all those new Tralee residents will be in a marginal electoral…

Alternatively, ACT and NSW could play nice because it’s better for all concerned.

JC said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Actually yes they did and the flight paths were changed. Back in the day flights from the north landing towards the north would turn much closer to Jerrabomberra Mountain. The residents complained and had them moved further out. Ironically the point where the turning aircraft now pick up the run into the runway is right over where the Tralee development is going.

Oh residents of Hackett and Palmerston also complained about aircraft noise heading towards Melbourne, end result is these aircraft now much further to the north than before, before turning back towards Melbourne.

I had a look at the map of where the actual development is going. You can see they are quite clever and avoid the flightpath area for housing and put green space in the ‘noise area’. The noise area seems to be worst case – ie if planes take off south which seems to rarely happen (anecdotally I can’t remember taking off south). For landing, the planes are still very high.

http://www.traleevillage.com.au/pdf/DA42.2%20Structure%20Plan%20%20For%20Web%20140205B_and_Directional%20Map_v2.PDF

It’s probably in ACT’s interests to play nice – as all those new Tralee residents will be in a marginal electoral…

arescarti42 said :

watto23 said :

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

Since when is it the role of the Government to artificially manipulate the market and deny current and future generations affordable shelter in order to gift unearned, undeserved windfall gains to existing homeowners?

Because that’s what you’re suggesting, and that’s what the ACT Government is currently doing.

I don’t think the gifting of “unearned, undeserved windfall gains to existing homeowners” is the primary motivation of the ACT Government – it is surely about revenue – in this case, primarily from land sales. It might also be argued that ACT Government revenue benefits from high property prices through stamp duty and rates, but it is, of course, be open to the ACT Government to vary the percentages at which those taxes are charged, in order to maintain revenue levels in the event of stagnant or falling prices (or activity) – the new rates system is doing just that.

Criticisms about propping up property prices for other reasons are probably better levelled at Federal Governments (of both persuasions) and their authorities – in the case of the Reserve Bank, I suppose they could be forgiven for having some concerns about the effect a substantial property price correction could have on the stability of our banking system.

All of that said, yes – there is a serious issue (and has been for some years) about property prices in Australia.

chewy14 said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Oh and didn’t complaints from Jerra force them to change the southerly takeoff route (to over the Tralee area) 20 odd years ago?

This. But it won’t happen again – there’s nowhere else for it to go, and they have known all along. And ACT Govt is adamant they will not be spending a penny on infrastructure to assist Tralee-ites.

Deref said :

switch said :

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I think it is alluding to the fact that the nuclear research reactor at Lucas Heights, built back in the fifties, well and truly predated anyone buying land there now. Sydney was a lot further away in those days.

Yes, and to the fact that the people who bought land near the reactor immediately started complaining about it.

In fairness, some of them were under the misapprehension that ANSTO was going to close down and go away.

switch said :

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I think it is alluding to the fact that the nuclear research reactor at Lucas Heights, built back in the fifties, well and truly predated anyone buying land there now. Sydney was a lot further away in those days.

Yes, and to the fact that the people who bought land near the reactor immediately started complaining about it.

watto23 said :

chewy14 said :

Stormfront Org said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

This!
I know a couple of colleagues who live there, no problems.
And after a while people don’t tend to notice the noise anyway.

It seems to me that the ones commenting negatively (esp. on CT comments page) are the ones who’d bought overpriced blocks in scheiße-hole suburb of Crace and similar new neighbouring developments (don’t even know the names of other suburbs).
If you look at it, Tralee is only a short drive to Fyshwick, Woden and Queanbeyan.
I wish all future residents of Tralee good luck and congratulate them.

The funny thing being that although Tralee looks close, at present the main road connection is going to be through Jerrabomberra. A nice 5-6km drive just to get to the monaro highway.

Actually that is another part of the problem. They will build a direct link to the monaro further adding to congestion on that road. As a non Jerra resident with friends there i can hear the planes. I’m sure there will be a fight if those in Tralee ever try and move the flight paths. There is more than enough public material regarding how this was a bad idea, hopefully they’ll get no sympathy if they complain.

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

What’s the ACT gov’s motivation to put a road through to the Monaro Hwy?
As I’ve read it, access through Hume or lack of it, has always been the unspoken issue with the Tralee development. It is a rather large assumption……….

chewy14 said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Oh and didn’t complaints from Jerra force them to change the southerly takeoff route (to over the Tralee area) 20 odd years ago?

Landing to the north yes to go a bit wider, but take off to the south they have always gone pretty straight as they do now. As mentioned in the post above residents of Hackett/Watson and Palmerston had the take off route for flights to Melbourne changed to go further north before heading back to Melbourne. Adds about 5 minutes to the trip.

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Actually yes they did and the flight paths were changed. Back in the day flights from the north landing towards the north would turn much closer to Jerrabomberra Mountain. The residents complained and had them moved further out. Ironically the point where the turning aircraft now pick up the run into the runway is right over where the Tralee development is going.

Oh residents of Hackett and Palmerston also complained about aircraft noise heading towards Melbourne, end result is these aircraft now much further to the north than before, before turning back towards Melbourne.

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I was going to write the same thing then it dawned on me what the poster was trying to say. Basically Lucas heights was first, then came the residents nearby that started to complain. Same as what the OP thinks will happen in Tralee.

watto23 said :

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

Since when is it the role of the Government to artificially manipulate the market and deny current and future generations affordable shelter in order to gift unearned, undeserved windfall gains to existing homeowners?

Because that’s what you’re suggesting, and that’s what the ACT Government is currently doing.

watto23 said :

chewy14 said :

Stormfront Org said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

This!
I know a couple of colleagues who live there, no problems.
And after a while people don’t tend to notice the noise anyway.

It seems to me that the ones commenting negatively (esp. on CT comments page) are the ones who’d bought overpriced blocks in scheiße-hole suburb of Crace and similar new neighbouring developments (don’t even know the names of other suburbs).
If you look at it, Tralee is only a short drive to Fyshwick, Woden and Queanbeyan.
I wish all future residents of Tralee good luck and congratulate them.

The funny thing being that although Tralee looks close, at present the main road connection is going to be through Jerrabomberra. A nice 5-6km drive just to get to the monaro highway.

Actually that is another part of the problem. They will build a direct link to the monaro further adding to congestion on that road. As a non Jerra resident with friends there i can hear the planes. I’m sure there will be a fight if those in Tralee ever try and move the flight paths. There is more than enough public material regarding how this was a bad idea, hopefully they’ll get no sympathy if they complain.

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

How do you know they will be making a road connection to the highway? From the plans on their website it only says “possible future road connection” or something similar. I was assuming that Roads ACT were denying them a connection based on the problems you’ve raised.

Unless you’ve got other information, I think they’ll be connecting through Jerra.

chewy14 said :

Stormfront Org said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

This!
I know a couple of colleagues who live there, no problems.
And after a while people don’t tend to notice the noise anyway.

It seems to me that the ones commenting negatively (esp. on CT comments page) are the ones who’d bought overpriced blocks in scheiße-hole suburb of Crace and similar new neighbouring developments (don’t even know the names of other suburbs).
If you look at it, Tralee is only a short drive to Fyshwick, Woden and Queanbeyan.
I wish all future residents of Tralee good luck and congratulate them.

The funny thing being that although Tralee looks close, at present the main road connection is going to be through Jerrabomberra. A nice 5-6km drive just to get to the monaro highway.

Actually that is another part of the problem. They will build a direct link to the monaro further adding to congestion on that road. As a non Jerra resident with friends there i can hear the planes. I’m sure there will be a fight if those in Tralee ever try and move the flight paths. There is more than enough public material regarding how this was a bad idea, hopefully they’ll get no sympathy if they complain.

Yes the ACT gov could release more land, but guess what, then existing owners would face a depreciation on their land also and if they sold would lose money. Its not as simple as everyone makes it out to be. Just like interest rates going down is often bad for self funded retirees.

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Oh and didn’t complaints from Jerra force them to change the southerly takeoff route (to over the Tralee area) 20 odd years ago?

Stormfront Org said :

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

This!
I know a couple of colleagues who live there, no problems.
And after a while people don’t tend to notice the noise anyway.

It seems to me that the ones commenting negatively (esp. on CT comments page) are the ones who’d bought overpriced blocks in scheiße-hole suburb of Crace and similar new neighbouring developments (don’t even know the names of other suburbs).
If you look at it, Tralee is only a short drive to Fyshwick, Woden and Queanbeyan.
I wish all future residents of Tralee good luck and congratulate them.

The funny thing being that although Tralee looks close, at present the main road connection is going to be through Jerrabomberra. A nice 5-6km drive just to get to the monaro highway.

Diggety said :

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

I think it is alluding to the fact that the nuclear research reactor at Lucas Heights, built back in the fifties, well and truly predated anyone buying land there now. Sydney was a lot further away in those days.

arescarti42 said :

“The firefighter said land in the capital was almost unaffordable for the average Canberran and he hoped Tralee will be a wake-up call for the territory.”

And there you have it. If the ACT Government’s land release program was focused on providing affordable land and housing instead of abusing its monopoly power to extract enormous profits from new home buyers, there’d be no need to build houses under the flight path in NSW.

Spot on. This will blow back on ACT residents, and the ACT government is the problem.

Ages ago when this was all controversial I went out to have a look myself. The planes are pretty high in the air and Tralee is a long way from the airport.

If you can’t be bothered driving out, watch a few landings and takeoffs on flightradar24.com – most take offs I’ve seen go north rather than south anyway.

eg http://fr24.com/VOZ1210

Is that his friend…”Tim”?

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

Noise complaints are usually attributable to a small group of dedicated whingers. I recall reading in a previous RA article that a large proportion of the airport’s current noise complaints come from one guy with a noise meter. I guess Jerra hasn’t developed a motivated cadre yet.

Reminds me of how Harry Seidler lobbied the NSW government to close Luna Park and sell the land to him for a unit development. The NSW government refused to sell so Seidler bought a block next door, built a block of units on it, moved into the penthouse then took legal action against Luna Park over the noise. The court ruled that Luna Park could stay but the big dipper had to be closed down.

The Sydney Morning Herald published an uncomplimentary cartoon about Seidler’s developments, Seidler sued for defo and won. Fairfax had to pay the multimillionaire a huge compo payout. The day after Seidler died the SMH published the cartoon again, this time on the front page.

“The firefighter said land in the capital was almost unaffordable for the average Canberran and he hoped Tralee will be a wake-up call for the territory.”

And there you have it. If the ACT Government’s land release program was focused on providing affordable land and housing instead of abusing its monopoly power to extract enormous profits from new home buyers, there’d be no need to build houses under the flight path in NSW.

I don’t understand the Lucas Heights comparison.

Tralee doesn’t look too bad, and along with only a few other locations in the Canberra area, are where I could almost justify the price of land.

You sound very ‘involved’ in this farq what’s wrong?

Read the “article”, or as they should have said: This has been a paid announcement of the Village Building Company. Wonder how much Bob Winnel paid those 2 to camp out overnight.

Affordable? What a load of BS. You can get land and/or house land packages for the same or less in the ACT, and Googong land is up to $40,000 less for similar sized blocks. Add in the cost of the noise insulation and you are looking at substantial premium to live in the prestige area, beside the flight path and behind the expanding industrial estate.

Yes, it’s near the flight path. Yes, there will be aircraft noise.

But with the price of new land in the ACT, do you really blame people for buying there? I have no doubt there will eventually be noise sharing, but until the ACT government pulls its finger out and gets on top of its land release program, people will be searching for better value alternatives. Tralee is well priced, well located, and you’ll have a new home, not a cold, leaky ex-guvvy in a NIMBY suburb.

grunge_hippy said :

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

This!
I know a couple of colleagues who live there, no problems.
And after a while people don’t tend to notice the noise anyway.

It seems to me that the ones commenting negatively (esp. on CT comments page) are the ones who’d bought overpriced blocks in scheiße-hole suburb of Crace and similar new neighbouring developments (don’t even know the names of other suburbs).
If you look at it, Tralee is only a short drive to Fyshwick, Woden and Queanbeyan.
I wish all future residents of Tralee good luck and congratulate them.

You have to be mad to think Tralee is going to be a pleasant place to live.

the flight path is over Jerra, do they complain?

And when the seemingly inevitable happens, there will be wide-eyed surprise all around.

Building under the airport approach/departure airspace is just crazy and we all know how this is going to end.

It’s like when someone buys a unit next to a brilliant live music venue.. and then they complain about the noise.