Page 227 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 16 February 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
The first piece of information is that officers from Roads ACT monitored traffic noise from Isabella Drive between 1 June and 9 June 2010 after a noise complaint was made and that a copy of the report was provided to the constituent. The report was prepared by the Acoustics and Vibration Unit of the University of New South Wales. Further, the average level of noise recorded over an 18-hour period from 6 am until midnight each day was between 54 and 59 decibels, below the planning criterion for road traffic noise for residential areas, which is 65 decibels.
In our letter on this matter, I specifically inquired about the time of day the tests were conducted, as this would affect the results of the tests. I do believe that the 18-hour period that the tests were conducted in was substantial and would establish general noise levels in the area for that time of day. I also mentioned in my correspondence that noise abatement measures should be considered if traffic levels increase along Isabella Drive in the future; that is something which has been reflected in the government’s amendment.
I would like to touch on the point that Roads ACT have taken action and investigated this case—and, as I have already noted, found that noise pollution has not exceeded the guidelines that are in place. Both Ms Le Couteur and I, however, are interested in investigating the criteria used to assess traffic noise complaints. It would be informative to compare the criteria used in the ACT with those in other jurisdictions and look at when this criterion was last reviewed. This point is particularly important, since the planning criteria used for Isabella Drive come under the road traffic noise for residential areas provisions established before 1996; the criteria that were used for these tests may be outdated and may need to be reviewed.
These are matters that the ACT Greens are interested in finding out, which is why we are supportive of the amendments that have been included in the government’s amendment and that the review into noise pollution should be tabled. That will be a positive thing to see also.
In my letter to the minister, I noted that the noise should continue to be monitored, particularly if traffic increases in the area. This has been reflected in the amendment, including that measures be implemented if acceptable noise levels were exceeded.
This is an issue that both Mr Smyth and I have taken an interest in. I have, as I have noted, written to the minister regarding this. We have to recognise that the study was undertaken by an independent party and found that noise levels were at an acceptable level. I acknowledge the constituent’s concerns, but I think that the department has acted responsibly in this matter and addressed the concerns to the degree that they could. I acknowledge Mr Smyth in pursuing this matter, and I acknowledge that he is doing that for the residents there, but I reiterate that I think the department has worked to address this matter.
It is important that Isabella Drive is continually monitored for an increase in noise pollution and that if there is an increase in complaints they should be acted on. Again, I acknowledge that the issue around planting trees has been raised. That would be a good measure to pursue. I hope that it will be, given that the Chief Minister has raised
it in the chamber today. That could be a way of addressing any future concerns that may be raised by residents.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video