Wednesday 7 March 2012

Cum On Feel The Noise?


While marshalling at the Eastwood Stages rally at Mallory Park a month ago I started to pick up the first rumblings of potential issues regarding noise levels at the circuit. In the last week I read on the Motorsport Musings blog that, sadly, there are indeed issues around noise at Mallory, which could see in-week testing being restricted, amongst other petty restrictions on the circuit.

We tend to think of any litigious trend as being a thoroughly modern phenomenon, alongside the rise in personal injury claims by people lacking the required intelligence to walk walk down a street without being attacked by inanimate objects. However, noise complaints about motorsport probably started on the day the first internal combustion engine was fired up, and will no doubt be with us for a long time to come (ironically the likely long-term trend towards the much reviled electric / hybrid cars could actually help save the sport from noise issues in the future).

Noise complaints from local residents stopped the Crystal Palace circuit in London from getting back to its pre-war halcyon days when the Second World War ended, restricting the circuit to only 5 days racing a year - a condition that lasted for most of the post-war racing years at the venue (1). Although there was a clear history of racing at Crystal Palace, the intervening years of the Second World War saw huge social change in the country. Pre-war people 'knew their place' and had little power to complain about noise even if they chose to. The war changed all that, and you can see why those living around a tranquil London city park would have concerns about racing being held on too regular a basis. Only five days a year seems harsh though which ever way you look at it!

When reopening Donington Park in the 1960s, Tom Wheatcroft also came up against noise complaints, from both residents of Castle Donington and from Rolls-Royce, who had set up a base at the venue in the years the circuit had fallen fallow. The complaints from both sides however were dismissed when it was considered that Donington is smack-bang next door to East Midlands Airport. Tom Wheatcroft gives an example of the ridiculousness of the noise complaints in his entertaining autobiography (2), recalling how Rolls Royce told an inspector race engines would stop their staff communicating safely, only for an incoming plane to virtually deafen the inspector. When the inspector enquired when the Rolls Royce manager didn't seem too perturbed he answered, foolishly, that they'd all got so used to the planes they didn't even notice them! Despite winning this earlier fight however the circuit still, frustratingly, had more issues after the recent troubles. Despite becoming a key venue in the British (and World) motorsport scene over the 40 years since Tom reopened it, it seems the gap in racing of less than a year caused by the failed British GP bid was enough to give the NIMBYs a new chance to attack Donington, with last year's race schedule needing to be cut back due to restrictions on the number of loud days it could hold.

Some of the complaints made are even more blatant examples of NIMBY-ism than at Donington however, with people seemingly determined to have their own way no matter the consequence on others - such people often seem to be in a minority of the local population too. In recent weeks an appeal court judge ruled in favour of Mildenhall Speedway, when a local couple complained that noise from the venue was causing them distress. The couple had claimed not to know when moving in that the speedway was so close to their house. It's pretty astounding to think that anyone could move into a house without doing enough research on the area to know a motorsport venue is only 500 yards away. Even more astounding is that the case needed to get to appeal - the original High Court ruling was in favour of the couple, leaving Mildenhall Stadium facing costs of £1 million. In this instance justice was, eventually, done, and it has to be hoped the judgement can be called upon as precedent in any future case. (See Matt Salisbury's blog for a more commentary on the Mildenham case.)

As a motorsport fan I find these noise complaints depressing in the extreme. The actions of a few grumpy neighbours can have a serious effect on the sport - not to mention the livelihood of those involved in both running the venues and the wider motorsport industry. Motorsport technology is one of the success stories of modern British manufacturing. That success story is built upon a bedrock of sporting activity over the past century (and more) at circuits across the UK. The track days and experience events that have become so popular over the last decade also fuel British industry, from the cottage-manufacturing level all the way up to some of the country's major manufacturing companies, employing thousands of people. Motor racing is a part of the UK's recent heritage (especially, ironically, its rural heritage) and its such a shame to see it being restricted by the complaints of a minority of people.
Despite my natural reaction to noise complaints, the legal cases for noise complaints are rarely cut and dry, as the well-known case at Croft illustrate. While we fans may want to characterise each complaint as being clear cut, historic agreements around the number of days allocated to noisy events can often underpin cases, as seems to be the case in the Croft example (though there were many 'intricasies' to that case, including defendants and claimants being divorced from each other!). I can understand why someone would not be happy if they saw a constant increase in the number of days their peaceful meditation was disturbed. Plus, although the sound of race engines is a key reason we love the sport, in some instances a small reduction in noise levels can be enough to satisfy planning conditions. In the Mallory case quoted above it seems that increased enforcement of an existing 105db limit for testing could prevent the sessions being removed. At Croft there have been indications that keeping cars under a 100bd limit could enable some races (in certain circumstances at least) to run outside of the restrictions on the number of 'noisy days' the circuit can host. Would we really rather see events being canned than stick to these noise levels? How much would we really lose in terms of car performance and the sound of the cars by sticking to such limits? If sticking to these noise levels could safeguard racing at the great venues we have across the UK I would be in favour, but this would need to be seen as a clear commitment from the sport - with a corresponding commitment from planning authorities to respect the sports efforts to reduce its impact and to reject speculative complaints from minorities in the local population which go against decades of motorsport precedent.

References

(1) - Motor Racing Circuits in England, Peter Swinger
(2) - Thunder in the Park, Tom Wheatcroft


6 comments:

  1. With reference to you’re fore mention of the residents at Kirby Mallory and “a few grumpy neighbours” complaining about the noise from the track, you have clearly not heard the side of the residents in this instance, if you had then perhaps you would take a better view of the matter. Just to clarify a few points. It is not just “a few residents” that are complaining about the noise but the majority of us and it is about the increase in noise and activities at the track. You only have to refer back to the parish meeting held in August after the Awsomefest weekend where in excess of 75 residents turned up and lot more later in the evening to protest and voice their concerns. I could probably count on one hand they amount of people there to defend the track. May I also point out that the management of the track were invited to attend but declined. This was not just for the Awsomefest (which did bring it to a head) but also for the increase over the past 3 – 5 years of noise, traffic and use of the circuit with no consideration to the residents. The current management whom I believe took over in 2005, knew that there were regulations that they should be working to both noise levels and the amount of track use they were allowed and they decided not to take any notice of this, therefore it is their own fault for flouting these rules laid down by HBBC. However In defence of the track, HBBC have failed in their due diligence in monitoring the noise even after pervious complaints by residents therefore a good part of the blame should lay on their shoulders. Never the less there are life long residents, long term residents and new residents included in all of this and at the following meeting held at the track with HBBC, representatives of the track and various councillors in attendance. It was mentioned at the meeting by HBBC that a liaison committee should be set up. This was done by a large democratic vote by the villagers. These few are now unfairly being blamed as the “few grumpy neighbours” where in fact they are voicing the concerns of the majority of the villagers. Years ago there was no issue, so you can not blame people for moving into this “sleepy village of Kirkby Mallory” or it’s vicinity when noise and usage are being kept to the correct levels. If the current owners had abided by the rules and regulations laid out to them there would not be a problem. You only have to read certain forums where it is blatantly mentioned that they do not monitor or measure the noise at Mallory Park and they have the nerve to turn round and blame the residents, It beggars belief. Like you mentioned and I fully agree, in your article there are ways and means around this if they wished with strict monitoring –they are now being forced to monitor noise and take steps to make sure the riders/drivers are all within the legal noise limits. – a lesson learnt I think - After all, say you moved into a house who’s neighbour you knew had a barking dog, which you would tolerate, then they have another, and then another until they have around ten, all barking away day after day and at the week end and you can’t sit out side and have a nice quiet drink or have friends round and have a BBQ and enjoy your time in your garden, and this went on for every weekend from April to the end of October - I think you might then have something to complain about don’t you !!!! So please do not go round slandering us residents of Kirby Mallory until you get your facts right. – There are always two sides to every story you have only heard one side .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi Happy Bunny. Thanks for your comment. as you say, my post coming from a motorsport perspective can only tell one side of the story, and so it is good to have the alternative point of view.

    In my defence, the blog post clearly suggests that cases of noise disruption are very rarely cut and dry, and that though it may be tempting to jump on the side which most matches your own preconceptions (whether pro or anti motorsport)the reality is always more nuanced. It also clearly suggested that all parties have responsibility to look for solutions, motorsport included.

    The only real reference I made to Mallory was to the noise testing issue, which was hardly against the residents. The 'grumpy neighbours' comment was not in relation to Kirkby Mallory residents, though I apprechiate that may not have been clear and potentially came across as being aimed at any/all complaints.

    My only wish as a motorsport fan is that ways can be found for everyone to work together so that the sport can continue to be enjoyed - especially at such a cracking place as Mallory Park.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi and thanks for your understanding reply (this is my 4th attempt to reply !!) anyhow It is a mystery why the noise levels and track/motocross activities have increased over the past 3 or so years as there are restrictions in place. It might be the new spectator bunds they have constructed who knows. It is such a shame as we have embraced the track here for many years as you know. In fact if you remember we had the super-bikes championships here a few years ago and we could only hear a buzz in the distance !!! anyhow lets hope harmony will be restored soon.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks HappyBunny - sorry, I missed so many replies!

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi no worries I think it must be me - just getting used to the internet after pressure from the family to keep in touch !!! it was the same reply just couldn't send it !! hope this gets through!! It was noisy at the track yesterday what was on? were you there marshalling ?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hi its great that you have an opinion. Howvever the villagers are only objecting to noise and disurubance outside the regulations. I have a very enthused son and husband along with a brother in law who races an OMS and various others. I do sympathise. HOWEVER Mallory Park has abused their licence (Awsomefest!!! and the track bikes to name but a few instances) We should , as we have always said work together. We are a small village and as you must know the track started long before the racing of cars. There is not as far as I know a facilty to race in such close proximity to a village community, it is rare and both need to work together. The road networks are not that good and it affects both residents and visitors when it happens. Noise levels are not always monitored, although I understand this is improving. Yes we choose to live here but the choice was made some years ago, then it was acceptable, now it is not. The Race track has always been there, so who have changed most the residents (who a lot have been hear throughout their lives) or the track!! who have increased the noise and activity.

    ReplyDelete