Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Would YOU bury your dead next to the tip?

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?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
28 Responses to Would YOU bury your dead next to the tip?
Filter
Order
miz miz 6:27 pm 26 Apr 11

PS Skid, your last post, re ‘self-righteousness’ – pot, kettle, black comes to mind. And I am not troubled by the location of the tip, but (how many times? *sigh*) the nearness of the proposed cemetery to, and the inevitable drawbacks of, the tip. Consider your Scandi boat sunk.

miz miz 6:07 pm 26 Apr 11

Actually, I don’t think there is a conspiracy at all – more like (to quote you) – “When the process works correctly, nobody really cares . . ” – the fact that people do, indicates poor process.

and . . . “Believe in conspiracy? God no.
“Any investigable event with Government involvement which may be explained by either incompetence or conspiracy, colossal incompetence will almost always be the most correct explanation.”

However, your intolerance of others’ opinions does seem very ACT Govt-like!

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 4:07 pm 26 Apr 11

miz said :

OK Skid, time to declare your particular personal interest in this issue. Mine is obvious.

I’m a South-Canberran with absolutely no affiliation to the ACT Government beyond supplying its finances and benefiting from services it provides, with no financial interest in the funeral industry beyond being somebody who will, and also has family, friends, and acquaintances who will eventually die and need to be provided for?

People are arguing with you because they think you’re incorrect, misrepresenting facts, and on the whole your arguments have been something of a trainwreck (not because of some sneaky ACT Govt conspiracy).

miz miz 3:44 pm 26 Apr 11

OK Skid, time to declare your particular personal interest in this issue. Mine is obvious.

bigfeet bigfeet 2:53 pm 26 Apr 11

Skidbladnir said :

Cemeteries don’t smell. Cemeteries don’t make noise.

Until the Zombie Apocalypse…then they become party zones.

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 1:41 pm 26 Apr 11

There is a lot more you could do, but I’m not about to offer you help, because your NIMBY self-righteousness keeps coming through, your current expression of interest in the cemetery development is a sideline to your hatred of the existing landfill.

miz said :

… most people are OK with most developments. However, no one would be happy with a dirty/smelly/noisy development near them, particularly when due process has been bypassed.

Cemeteries don’t smell. Cemeteries don’t make noise. Cemeteries aren’t dirty.
Source: I lived next to one for years.

Crematoria don’t smell. Crematoria don’t make noise. Crematoria aren’t dirty.
Source: ACT Public Cemeteries and ACTPLA, as well as every other crematory body in Australia.
You also haven’t provided -anything- to support your claim that processes were bypassed.
There were consultation processes that you did not contribute to, there were information sessions that you did not attend, and there were communications with bureaucrats that you didn’t followup. When you received replies, they were accurate.

Your issue seems to be about the landfill that pre-dates your home.

miz said :

I don’t see it as in insult to be labelled as such – it actually reflects that you care about your community… I believe everyone would object to some kinds of development…

In terms of suitable sites, only a few were practical. Of those sites, thoseof the citizenry who chose to participate in consultation and be informed (a group you neglected to be part of) expressed an opinion that the Mugga site satisfied enough criteria to be preferable.
They cared about their community, and were willing to consider options available, and were flexible enough to make concessions.
Evidently it was going to go near someones backyard, and despite the fact that ACTPLA have clearly wanted to make use if the area for some time (See earlier instances of Data-Centre, Gas-Fired Power Plants, recycling centres), it is purely a consequence of your own imagination failure to think that even though you might love your house full of feral children, out remains near:
A landfill,
Close to a highway,
Near an industrial suburb,
Surrounded by rural blocks.

Eventually, someone would want to do something with the area, and it probably want going to involve Tourism.

miz said :

In this case, TAMS’s own grounds that the site is ‘preferred’ flies in the face of what the common or garden member of the public would actually prefer in a cemetery location.

You could have gotten involved. You could have gotten informed. You could have thought ahead about potential for future development in your area. You could have focussed on tring to compromise, our even put your own self-interest aside and tried to win over the greater community to your cause.
You did none of those things.

miz said :

If that makes me a NIMBY, so be it.

Ma’am, it is so. While you were busy not paying attention, everybody who was part of the consultation was playing “Yes, in somebody else’s backyard”. It seems you have only realized what was going on because somebody bothered to point it out to you.

Again, come back when you’ve learned how to be heard.

miz miz 12:40 pm 26 Apr 11

Merc, Skid’s post is disingenuous. The map he kindly attached indicates, as you state, that the cemetery is proposed for the parcel of land between Isabella Drive and Long Gully Road (see google maps link here http://maps.google.com.au/maps?hl=en&tab=wl )

Doesn’t matter how many trees they plant etc, there is no getting around the fact that that parcel of land is directly across Isabella Drive from opposite Rose Cottage. Long Gully Road/Mugga Lane is also a hazardous road, given the numerous roadside memorials on it.

miz miz 12:28 pm 26 Apr 11

Skid, what else can a citizen do? I read the papers published by TAMS when they were published, attended community meetings, made a submission in response to the discussion paper, and emailed TAMS at least three times seeking more info. I remain unconvinced (see above) that TAMS’s ‘preferred site’ is *actually* preferable for cemetery users.

Jim Jones, most people are OK with most developments. However, no one would be happy with a dirty/smelly/noisy development near them, particularly when due process has been bypassed. If that makes them a NIMBY, so be it. I don’t see it as in insult to be labelled as such – it actually reflects that you care about your community, albeit a derogatory name calling term used by others when there do not appear to be any genuine arguments. I probably wasn’t clear above – what I was trying to say was, I believe everyone would object to some kinds of development, so it is specious to argue that there is anything wrong with being a NIMBY in such cases, and it is superficial (in fact, it is only namecalling) to assert that so-called ‘NIMBYism’ should be opposed simply because it is portrayed by others (obviously, by those who want the development to go ahead) as NIMBYism.

In this case, TAMS’s own grounds that the site is ‘preferred’ flies in the face of what the common or garden member of the public would actually prefer in a cemetery location.

Jim Jones Jim Jones 9:34 am 26 Apr 11

miz said :

As for NIMBYism, everyone in the world is a NIMBY.

No. No they’re not.

The fact that you think this is absolutely staggering.

Skidbladnir Skidbladnir 3:18 pm 25 Apr 11

MERC600 said :

So is it going to be opposite the Rose Cottage Inn ?

Nope. Anyone telling you that it will be opposite Rose Cottage is lying.
It will be within 1km direct line from Rose Cottage, but you won’t be able to see it from Rose Cottage, iirc, and over 1km by road, with access off Long Gully Rd\Mugga Ln.
(see Page 20 of this document for site map)

miz:
You’re still not able to cite detail, didn’t follow up with the relevant parties, and still not adding any value to a discussion.

MERC600 MERC600 11:25 am 25 Apr 11

So is it going to be opposite the Rose Cottage Inn ? Be like going to the present silver grill, where you can pull into the Harcourt Inn and throw a couple down, just in memory of the deceased of course. But hell that tip can pong somethin’ firece. Was in Hume the other day and it was very bad.

JC JC 8:06 pm 24 Apr 11

miz said :

As for NIMBYism, everyone in the world is a NIMBY. Let’s put a few things your way and see how you react, JC. I attempted to indicate this by giving northsiders an indication of what it might be like having this kind of development placed on the corner of Coulter Drive and Belconnen Way.

Feel free to come and build a cemetery and a crematorium in the vacant land near me. As my old mum has always said it is the ones walking amongst us we should fear the most not the dead. Though we might need some negotiations with NSW over the land as I live on the border in Dunlop and the vacant land is in NSW.

No need for a landfill though, there is already one of them a few KM’s away (probably closer than you are in Chisholm to the proposed site and the tip. Though yes it is disused for general refuse it is, I believe still in use for asbestos and tyre dumping. Oddly never smelt a thing from it even when it was in full use as a tip, except once in the early 2000’s when there was a small tyre fire.

Oh we also have them dangerous high voltage lines out here too, no issue from this little black duck. In fact about the only thing that I think I would be a Nimby about is if they built an airport next door. Think most would agree that an airport and a cemetery/crematorium are different kettles of fish.

miz miz 1:51 pm 24 Apr 11

Skid said“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.”

Actually, I did seek yet another response from TAMS in March 2011, to which I got no response whatsoever.

JC, I am well aware of those documents – which, I might add, already assumed that the cemetery would be built at the govt’s ‘preferred site’ instead of actually allowing the community to have some say in the location through a consultation process. THAT, in fact, is my main point – and also the salient fact that the supposed ‘preferred site’ is only ‘preferred’ by govt due to its access to a gas pipe, as raised earlier. It actually does not offer other preferable criteria that other sites offer – such as a pleasant aspect to grieving families – and, if there were a true consultation process, would be found to be less ‘preferable’ than some of the other sites.

As for NIMBYism, everyone in the world is a NIMBY. Let’s put a few things your way and see how you react, JC. I attempted to indicate this by giving northsiders an indication of what it might be like having this kind of development placed on the corner of Coulter Drive and Belconnen Way.

Skidbladnir 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 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 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 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 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 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 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.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2020 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | riotact.com.cn | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site