Brisbanes Airport Gets $ 1B Runway
Brisbane Airport gets $1b Runway
Erik Jensen | September 18, 2007 - 12:48PM Brisbane times
The Federal Government has approved the construction of a second runway at Brisbane International Airport, tripling passenger numbers over the next three decades.
The runway, and its use without a curfew, is a key issue in Kevin Rudd's seat of Griffith. With Transport Minister Mark Vaile's approval of the project this afternoon, it could become a political battleground reversible if Labor came to power at the next election.
"During the community consultation process, the Brisbane Airport Corporation consulted very widely, conducted workshops throughout communities in the adjoining suburbs in Brisbane," Mr Vaile said.
"During our process there's been 196 submissions received that obviously focused on the issue of aircraft noise, environmental issues; it also contained a number of submissions actually supporting the proposal."
Of the 196 submission, however, only 12 supported the construction of a curfew-free runway.
Mr Vaile defended the runway, saying it would create 2700 jobs over its eight-year construction. Flight paths would be negotiated during the construction phase, he said, but he did not anticipate extra air traffic over Mr Rudd's electorate.
Mr Vaile said the second runway would direct most traffic over Morton Bay and would ultimately alleviate aircraft noise by spreading traffic across two parrel runways working in both directions.
"This is planning for the future," he said.
"Currently Brisbane Airport accommodates, I think, around about 16-17 million passengers per year. By 2015 that will be 23.5 million passengers. By 2035 that will be 50 million passengers."
The $1 billion construction will displace a white-bellied sea eagle nesting population, with the Brisbane Airport Corporation being forced to construct a new nesting site and fund ecological monitoring for remanent seagrass, mangroves and saltmarsh.
The Minister for the Environment, Malcolm Turnbull, had already approved the project. end
Here is another devlopment on Moreton Bay Foreshores & Runnway will Spell The End of Jackons Creek another good nursery gone forever Not happy Janeso what chance do we have with Green zones coming in next year for Moreton Bay read it above their was 196 submissions were sent in only 12 supported for the constuction of a curfew-free runway
So its A waste of time writing letters to Goverment's of the day and their agency's and putting in submissions to them the only way is to hurt them a the ballot box don't vote for them
Mitch
In life, start off wrong and you'll finish wrong. Put just one skeleton in the closet and you'll have to put another one in to hide the first, and so it goes.
But start off right and you'll finish right. There's no comeback when you stick to the truth - and no skeletons!
well Mitch...the runway is a Federal Govt issue and the closures in the Bay are a State Govt issue...I think they should be kept separate as different people are involved in each instance.
and if we don't vote for the incumbents..who do we vote for..some other bugger that gets their butt in a leather seat and does not listen either..they are all the same...regardless of party.
Read this link to the report.
15 MILLION cu mts. of sand to come from middle banks of moreton bay. Progress?
No curfews. Progress?
http://www.newparallelrunway.com.au/...ks_Moreton_Bay
Link to details of new proposed runway and flight paths
http://www.newparallelrunway.com.au/...flightpath.pdf
The flighpath is a largish pdf file, may take a minute to download
Mike
Last edited by Marlin_Mike; 18-09-2007 at 06:44 PM.
Hope that new runway includes more roads in and out of the terminals
PinHead,
I am very aware its a Fedral issue here they are not separted issues really when you look at the State goverment has control of the EPA which letting them take sand coming out of middle banks which is in Moreton Bay is under State goverment area not fedral they could have said no this part of the project happening or made it harder to go ahead with the 2nd runnway and belive you me they are a stake holder in this project as well
Now current State Goverment and the EPA has double standards when they are trying to bring in green zones next year into the Bay caring about the Bio- diversity / habitat areas of the bay want to keep it for future but on the other hand they will let big projects like this happen in Moreton Bay and its foreshores let them filling the creeks and tear down mangroves and also let them change the tidial currents in around in the bay which cause areas to silt up and kill off good bredding grounds for fish species and other marine life in these habiat areas they live in this what really annoys me one rule for one another set of rules for the other
Mitch
Ps Thanks Marlin_ Mike for the info there
In life, start off wrong and you'll finish wrong. Put just one skeleton in the closet and you'll have to put another one in to hide the first, and so it goes.
But start off right and you'll finish right. There's no comeback when you stick to the truth - and no skeletons!
Ive got a question.
If we decided to build a new runway for Brisbane that was not on the current Civil Aviation land at Eagle Farm, where would we build it?
It would have to be within a 50km radius obviously and would have to be in a area that has either nil population or in a currently high noise area.
It would also have to be serviced quickly and easily via all forms of transport on the ground.
For the life of me i can not think of any other location within 100km radius that fits these criteria.
The mangroves of Jacksons creek and the habitat that provides will be lost most certainly and that is unfortunate, however I would not be surprised if the green push and the current laws about vegetation protection or replacement will come into play and a marginal boundary forest of mangroves will be planted to offset the loss of jacksons creek.
Jack.
marlin mike has hit the nail on the head i reckon.
government reckons bay is in decline (obviously by having influential groups whispering into their ear) so tries to nail the blame onto the people using it by closing areas off.
when the government needs 15 million cubes of fill however !!!!!!!!!!!
If you want to live in a modern city, you will have to put up with an airport. The fact that it is expanding is just a reflection of the growing population of the area.
They certainly could build a new airport. By necessity it would be a long way from the present one. No one anywhere seems to want an airport built near them, but all want the convenience of a nearby airport when it suits them. So if they built a new airport for example outside Toowoomba, the people there would whinge (including me), but the people in the city would be happier. So you just can't please everybody. It's probably much cheaper to build another runway than a whole new airport with all its facilities, so another runway is a reasonable result.
Everyone who owns property in the area close to the airport knows that the airport is there. The airport was there before most of them moved anywhere near it. Now they want to complain about noise. Move away from the airport, and have less jet noise.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote