Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Charity and fundraising auctions for the Canberra community

Tralee development, Take 2

By DeadlySchnauzer - 7 October 2010 29

The Queanbeyan Age quietly brings word that the public submissions process for the Tralee housing development has now started for the second time.

People might remember that the first submission process was shot down by the snowster in court earlier this year, either because of a small technicality or a fundamentally flawed plan (depending on who you believe).

Who’s cuisine will rein supreme this time round?

Anddd… go.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
29 Responses to
Tralee development, Take 2
sepi 10:12 am 08 Oct 10

If I’m sitting in my insulated house and I hear aircraft noise, and then I read in the Australian Standard that i shouldn’t hear noise, is the noise really there……..

And if noise is such a non-issue for Tralee, why will all the houses have to be noise insulated?

Knows Best 9:54 am 08 Oct 10

Amazing to hear people comment on this when they haven’t a clue about the processes and the legislation, seems everyone has been taken in by the Canberra Airport’s propaganda. The court case was about a small part of the NSW planning legislation and had nothing to do with the merits of the Tralee proposal. Tralee housing will be well outside the noise contours which allow for housing to be developed and you can’t compare the problems with Sydney Airport to Tralee, where Tralee is much further out and the planes will be a lot higher, therefore less noise.
All the homes will be insulated in accordance with the Australian standard for aircraft noise, but they don’t even have to do that. Obviously Sepi is an expert on the Australian Standard.
Canberra Airport’s prediction are that aircraft movements for the airport will one day exceed those of Sydney today. What a joke, Sydney has 4 mill people and is the gateway to Australia, Canberra’s population will top out at 500,000, do the math and if you have been taken in by Airport’s arguments about Tralee I feel sorry for you.
For anyone who doesn’t know where Tralee is and I suspect most of you, it is at the southern end of Hume, miles from anywhere and looks as though Farq has got it all farqen wrong when the housing proposed will be a very high standard, much like Jerrabomberra and much better then the slums of Gungahlin etc.
By the way I noticed the the average income in Queanbeyan now exceeds the ACT average for most areas, maybe a few of you bogans might step up one day and come and live in Queanbeyan/Jerrabomberra/Tralee if you can afford it?

DeadlySchnauzer 9:24 am 08 Oct 10

If you look at the airports own published noise maps, Tralee experiences the same or *less* noise than existing inner north and jerra residents. Despite the fact that tralee is under the flight path, it is much further from the airport than other areas, hence the planes are higher and the noise is less.

so imo there is nothing special or unique about Tralee and airport noise as the snowster would try and have us believe. I think he is just concerned that it will be yet more residents complaining about noise to the same degree as existing hackett and jerra people do, and they might therefore reach some critical mass and actually get restrictions applied.

tommy 10:34 pm 07 Oct 10

banshee – Fyshwick is a lot closer to the airport that Jerra/Tralee though (ie 1km vs 14km).

zig 10:16 pm 07 Oct 10

The airport should have been moved further out of town a looooong time ago.

sepi 9:34 pm 07 Oct 10

I wonder if anyone can be bothered to even respond to this round. I certainly can’t and I hate aircraft noise. Perhaps Bob Winnel win win by boring us all to death with the subject.

Soundproofing doesn’t really work though, so that isn’t much of an option. We have all the obvious sound proof stuff and still hear planes loud and clear. Unless Tralee will be bunker style underground accomodations, they will hear planes no matter how much double glazing they put in.

Not to mention that sometimes they might want to sit outside, or open the back door.

Stupid Idea. So it will probably happen.

screaming banshee 8:29 pm 07 Oct 10

georgesgenitals said :

Having bogans living that close to Queanbeyan would impact the town’s quaint charm.

ROFPMLMAO!

Seriously though, I was in a quiet building in Fyshwick the other day and noticed the aircraft noise, why the hell would anyone want to buy at Tralee. As for the sound proofing argument, it wont work real well when you have the doors/windows open to let a breeze through.

farq 8:19 pm 07 Oct 10

Freddyp said :

I really don’t get this. If people want to live under the flight path I don’t see any problems with that. As long as each purchaser signs a release saying that they relinquish any right, now and in the future, to seek any form of compensation or restriction based on any effects of being under the flight path.

Remember happened in Civic with the Waldorf apartments? Lucas Heights?

Even if current noise levels can be deemed acceptable, any expansion of the airport will impact directly on the residents of Tralee.

I don’t want to lose the economic benefit of an expanded airport for some slum outside Queanbeyan.

tommy 8:01 pm 07 Oct 10

Fred – that’d be great… as long as the privatised airport corporations would be willing to compensate for or restrict new activities (eg 24×7 freight plane noise) that affect residents who didn’t have to experience it before – eg Hackett, Campbell, Kingston etc.

Chop71 7:03 pm 07 Oct 10

The problem is if we ever grow up and get the odd international flight into “Australia’s Capital” do those people really want to live under a 747s flight path.

Seems very strange to me that you can’t even fly to NZ from Canberra.

p1 7:00 pm 07 Oct 10

The developer should have to build a massive glass dome over the entire housing estate to keep the noise out.

harvyk1 6:34 pm 07 Oct 10

Freddyp said :

I really don’t get this. If people want to live under the flight path I don’t see any problems with that. As long as each purchaser signs a release saying that they relinquish any right, now and in the future, to seek any form of compensation or restriction based on any effects of being under the flight path.

Just look at Sydney airport to see the problems which will be created. Those people moved under the flight path and complained bitterly. Rather than being told they chose to move under a flight path of an airport which was one of the first airports to be built in the world (early 1920’s if my memory serves me correctly) suck it up, they brought in the horrible curfew, which causes problems left right and center.

The really sad thing is the bulk of the complaints about air-traffic noise comes from only 20 people. I believe it was one complaint roughly every 14 hours from some of the worst offenders.

Freddyp 5:48 pm 07 Oct 10

I really don’t get this. If people want to live under the flight path I don’t see any problems with that. As long as each purchaser signs a release saying that they relinquish any right, now and in the future, to seek any form of compensation or restriction based on any effects of being under the flight path.

georgesgenitals 5:23 pm 07 Oct 10

arescarti42 said :

Is aircraft noise really that big an issue?

Depends on the price. I personally hope they don’t build cheap housing there. Having bogans living that close to Queanbeyan would impact the town’s quaint charm.

arescarti42 4:47 pm 07 Oct 10

Is aircraft noise really that big an issue? I would have thought it’d be pretty easy for the local government to just require all homes in the new suburb to have extensive soundproofing.

Sure it would make construction more expensive, but lower land prices (due to being under a flight path) would have to make up for that.

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site