Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Community

Charity and fundraising auctions for the Canberra community

Would YOU bury your dead next to the tip?

By miz - 23 April 2011 28

Jon Stanhope appears to have decided [ABC] that the proposed Southern Cemetery should be progressed without further ado at the very smelly, visually unappealing and difficult to access site adjacent to Mugga Lane tip (right on the traffic-jam corner of Isabella Drive) –

(For Belco residents, this would be like putting it on one of the corners of Coulter Drive).

I note that Mr S has strategically chosen the school hols and the Easter Break to make this announcement, hoping it will get ‘buried’.

Mr S attempts to bamboozle the general public by claiming that the ACT govt has been ‘developing the case for a new cemetery for more than two years’, and that ‘The support is overwhelming that . . . we want and accept that we need a new cemetery’. No one has any argument with this. However, this fact in itself does not indicate widespread support for the terrible location he is proposing.

Mr S goes on to say ‘ “we believe” that this is an appropriate site and “we believe” that there should be a crematorium’ [at that site].

If I were needing to bury someone, THAT site would be last on my list

[Canberra Times story on disgruntled residents]

It’s not even convenient to most Tuggers residents, as it is right on the edge of suburbia; the location in Greenway was far better for most Canberrans.

Surely a location in a greenfields area such as Molonglo would be more appropriate, instead of attempting to retrofit this kind of development in an established area?

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to
Would YOU bury your dead next to the tip?
Skidbladnir 11:28 am 24 Apr 11

I have honestly has enough of the Macarthur and Gilmore residents somehow thinking their poor choice of location is a community problem, that requires a development standstill and their total approval on land usage in the nearby rural or industrial zoned areas.

For the record, I am not opposed to the cemetery at either Mugga or Greenway, and can see cons to both sites, and ‘a chance of smells’ is one of the least impactful and potentially manageable cons of the Mugga site.

JC 9:22 am 24 Apr 11

miz said :

Hey Skid, I was advised by TAMS as recently as November 2011 that “at the present time the government has not yet made any decisions regarding whether or not the proposed cemetery or crematorium will go ahead nor has any decision been made in relation to a preferred site. I am unaware of a time frame in which these decisions will be made by Government nor, if or when, feedback in relation to the discussion paper will be made available.” That advice was in response to my third email seeking info about whether the cemetery would proceed. This info is quite a contrast to Mr S’s recent comments. Once again, it appears that community consultation has been a sham.

A cemetery essentially is for the grieving families – it should be a place of peace and tranquillity. People like to revisit where their loved one it buried. Personally, I think it would be disturbing and unpleasant to have a rellie buried at that noisy, smelly, quasi-industrial location, solely because the government considers it convenient to a gas pipe. Whereas, Woden Cemetery is lovely. I would have thought they could come up with a more peaceful, convenient locale.

Yep a more peaceful location away from where you live..

As for consultation you clearly missed this early 2009 fact sheet where this site (and others) were identified:

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_6FD47722E0AA1DE1E7109D64CFDD1D4719F80200/filename/Proposed_Cemetery_Fact_Sheet_Sites_and_Planning_Process.pdf

And this more detailed Nov 2009 document.

http://www.tams.act.gov.au/pv_obj_cache/pv_obj_id_49B980620DA115EA023414DB6C818D319B226F00/filename/Southern_Cemetery_Site_Assessment_190110_Low_Res_2.pdf

JC 9:10 am 24 Apr 11

miz said :

For the record, JC, I live in Chisholm.

Yep over the hill, so my nose did indeed sniff out a NIMBY.

astrojax 8:01 am 24 Apr 11

i can’t say the symbolism of the proposal is ideal, but the details seem fine and, in a decade or so [what life-span, no pun intended, a cemetery?], who will really recall the adjacent land’s previous use?

taninaus 7:54 am 24 Apr 11

Miz – you obviously don’t work in a policy area of Government – many things are going on and are sitting in the in tray of the minister for months, sometimes years until they decide it is convenient to announce whatever the outcome is. the public servant responding to you was doing exactly as they are meant to as until the Minister decides to agree or otherwise with whatever they have put up the chain all you will get are generic responses without any committments.

On the Cemertery – both Gungahlin and Woden are both in similar proximity to very busy road ways and intersections, and Gungahlin to industrial areas – noisy and smelly – but you wouldn’t have a clue about that once you are inside. The Government will spend a heap of money making sure this is a plesant, tranquil set up where you wouldn’t have a clue there is a tip on the other side of the road and you wouldn’t hear much of the traffic on the Monaro (Isabella drive is quite a distance from the tip!). Besides the major traffic issues are 1 hour in the morning and 1 hour at night.

Convenience wise – actually this is a great location, much better than having to travel to Gungahlin everytime someone dies, as you have to at the moment. Any travel less than 40 mins for us southsiders will be highly convenient in my books. As for Woden – well that pre-dates much of the building around it!

mikal 7:19 am 24 Apr 11

Isn’t this the site that was proposed for that data center? I though they’d been talking about a cemetery there since the data center was forced to move, and that must have been close to two years ago. I note that the data center never did recover from its NIMBY invasion. Also, a cemetery is a long term decision, and the tip is going to have to close eventually.

Skidbladnir 10:00 pm 23 Apr 11

“As recently as November 2010”?
As in almost six months ago?

Let us know when you’ve caught up with current events , or read through the proposals to the point you can reference detail. Otherwise you’re just regurgitating media coverage without adding any value.

grunge_hippy 8:40 pm 23 Apr 11

mmmm yes, i would love to visit my dead relatives with the heady smell of garbage as my companion. nice.

its not so much the tip that makes the smell, its not that bad, i used to drive past it every day. its only recently that its smelly, like the article suggests. its now the recycling plant that reeks. drive past that on any day and you have to hold your breath. i don’t know how the people at revolve deal with it all day.

miz 8:12 pm 23 Apr 11

Hey Skid, I was advised by TAMS as recently as November 2011 that “at the present time the government has not yet made any decisions regarding whether or not the proposed cemetery or crematorium will go ahead nor has any decision been made in relation to a preferred site. I am unaware of a time frame in which these decisions will be made by Government nor, if or when, feedback in relation to the discussion paper will be made available.” That advice was in response to my third email seeking info about whether the cemetery would proceed. This info is quite a contrast to Mr S’s recent comments. Once again, it appears that community consultation has been a sham.

A cemetery essentially is for the grieving families – it should be a place of peace and tranquillity. People like to revisit where their loved one it buried. Personally, I think it would be disturbing and unpleasant to have a rellie buried at that noisy, smelly, quasi-industrial location, solely because the government considers it convenient to a gas pipe. Whereas, Woden Cemetery is lovely. I would have thought they could come up with a more peaceful, convenient locale.

Antagonist 4:34 pm 23 Apr 11

I think I would sooner have my dead head cemented to the ground under a table and an umbrella inserted in my rectum than be buried out there. All the more reason to be cremated and shoved in a box at the back of an obscure relatives wardrobe I guess.

cranky 4:29 pm 23 Apr 11

I too live just over the hill from the proposed site. (Circa 1 kilometre)

However, I consider the proposed site to be excellent. The tip has never registered as malodorous, and it does not jump out visually. Traffic problems are not worthy of consideration. To claim it as being on the edge of suburbia is also an overstatement.

Build it – and I guess they Have to come 🙂

Skidbladnir 4:23 pm 23 Apr 11

So, people built their homes next to a trashpile. These people did not notice the government consultation on the proposal, which CLOSED MORE THAN A YEAR AGO, but had consultation and community information sessions about two years ago.

These same people complain about the occasional smell that wasn’t there on the day they bought their house-next-to-a-trash-pile.
These same people who were already complaining about the smell of a trashpile, now decide to complain, not for themselves, on behalf of others about experiences that have not yet and may never happen, re: smells of trashpile and potential funerals, despiet having not read any of the documentation which describe the Governments plans to deal with these ‘features’ of the location.

These are the same people who complained previously about air quality and deathplumes coming from a data centre, proposed for the same site earlier, but did not want it there because of baseless fears their children could possibly be even more braindead than their parents.

Somehow, the current cemetary gets equated in the finds of the feral trashpile retards as “OMG THEY’RE CONSTRUCTING A PILE OF ROTTING CORPSES OPPOSITE ROSE COTTAGE AND WILL FORCE US TO DEAL WITH EVEN MORE TRAFFIC” when in fact, these statements are verifiably false.

Firstly, we do not create a pile dead bodies.
Secondly, it is not going ‘opposite’ Rose Cottage, merely near (within 1km by road) of Rose Cottage.
The government’s own cemetery proposal identifies Rural blocks 1676 and 1677 as the site of the cemetery.
Appreciably, the proposed sub-section of site 1677 contains no access from Isabella Drive, as it is primarily the central third of the section identified as ‘Blocks 1676 and 1677″ they are interested in. (See page 14 of linked document, see also Map 5 on page 17, Page 20 has the final proposal).
One of its elements is, and I quote: the [proposed cemetery site] requires access from Mugga Lane.

As you seem to be having a rant about how you missed the boat for consultation, MAYBE YOU SHOULD READ UP ON AN AREA AND CHECK OUT LONG TERM PLANS (or the mere presence of a potential stinky trashpile) BEFORE YOU MOVE INTO IT.

If you have further doubts about zoning decisions near you, maybe you could look into using ACTMAPi occasionaly and checking the TAMS website to see what is going on in your area. Or just attend a consultation session. Or simply ask one of the people at your shopping centre if they can read aloud (but not too fast though) one of the GREAT BIG INFORMATION SIGNS that get put up all around the place.

miz 3:54 pm 23 Apr 11

For the record, JC, I live in Chisholm.

JC 2:40 pm 23 Apr 11

I smell a NIMBY. Let me guess, you live on the other side of the hill and your real objection is you are worried that smoke from the crematorium will waft on over? Because other than that what exactly is the issue with the site? The dead don’t give a toss about the smell from the tip, though to be honest on all the times I have been out that way I have never actually smelt the tip, to do that you more or less have to be inside. The roads can be fixed if access is a real issue. Seems like a good site actually.

MrPC 2:24 pm 23 Apr 11

It’d be very convenient for residents of Jerrabombera and Tralee though.

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