RE: Mallory Park's future in doubt

[Pothole]

majortom said:

FurtiveFreddy said:

Good points they are too.

These are questions which require factual answers from those people involved. And if you don't get answers from those immediately involved, there is the Freedom of Information Act and escalation procedures within local government which should help you get those answers. It can take a bit of time and letter writing, but that's the way it is these days.

It would be easy to make assumptions based on the information you've got here but at the very least it seems indisputable that those running Mallory have acted outside the law and the councils have been (at best) negligent.

Good evening Furtive Freddy I don't suppose you, or anyone out there knows if we can actually sue the council for incompetence or negligence for not actually monitoring over the last seven years (it appears)?

Shame on you. That smacks of revenge and not much else.

[Caractacus]

Pothole said:

majortom said:

FurtiveFreddy said:

Good points they are too.

These are questions which require factual answers from those people involved. And if you don't get answers from those immediately involved, there is the Freedom of Information Act and escalation procedures within local government which should help you get those answers. It can take a bit of time and letter writing, but that's the way it is these days.

It would be easy to make assumptions based on the information you've got here but at the very least it seems indisputable that those running Mallory have acted outside the law and the councils have been (at best) negligent.

Good evening Furtive Freddy I don't suppose you, or anyone out there knows if we can actually sue the council for incompetence or negligence for not actually monitoring over the last seven years (it appears)?

Shame on you. That smacks of revenge and not much else.

Indeed.

This is NOT the way forward if you are to attempt an amicable relationship with all parties involved. This is about, essentially, conflict resolution (I agree MPML have been planks and the orchestrators of the vast majority of this, however) . Trying to sue anyone will merely fuel the flames and lead to an inevitable complete breakdown from all angles.

What's more, is the expense involved is going to come out of the residents pockets? The time frames involved will also be lengthy; surely all would rather see the back of this situation and a replacement, workable solution in its place?

[Ipelm]

Does the closeness of residents to the Hairpin require a redesign and extension of the circuit at its other end?? This is just a question as I am trying to make sense of some of the detail in this increasingly complex argument??

[majortom]

I was merely asking FurtiveFreddie a question that a fellow a resident asked me the other day, being as his opinion on the matter has been very sensible, so I said I'd put on here to see if anyone could come up with an answer or at least some advice and I thank him for that. I think we all should know our legal rights. However I take on board you comments, but in my view, should anyone decide to go down the route of prosecution that it is up to them, I have no intention of doing so and I am would not encourage it. But in support of Mallory Park if HBBC have turned a blind eye to complaints and breaches of the notice then they are as much to blame. May I also point out that no one has mentioned revenge only yourself, that would be childish and I would leave comment's like that for facebook - I presume that HBBC are still prosecuting Mallory Park for some breaches whether that is till the case I don't know, it has all gone quiet at the moment and I hope like many that an agreement is not too far away. What we would like to see however, is some honesty, is that too much to ask for? After all what other corporation/business would be allowed to get away with breaking the law on such a level. Also I can recall a representative of HBBC standing up in a large meeting saying that - "Mallory Park could have drifting every day of the week as the 85 notice does not cover it" After many many months we now know that this is not true. We have been fobbed off with lies for far too long and what I don't agree with and I am unhappy about is HBBC and Mallory Park making decisions without the input of the residents, after all it is us residents that have to put up with it NOT people living outside the area. Many residents now seem to take a hardened view of the situation and the lack of information coming out, therefore I believe that HBBC should now have the decency to hold a meeting in the village or at their offices to update us all on the situation and where we all stand in this matter.

[majortom]

Ipelm said:

Does the closeness of residents to the Hairpin require a redesign and extension of the circuit at its other end?? This is just a question as I am trying to make sense of some of the detail in this increasingly complex argument??

Who knows? looking back on some details of the planning on line I can only find reference to the original oval grass track being replaced with tarmac - and for it to be used no more than 28 days per year, this would then imply that they have no proper planning regulations - is it not the case that you can run any event as long as it does not exceed 28 days? I can not see any reference to a hairpin on any posts on the internet,If someone out there knows any different can you please correct me. Many thanks.

[FurtiveFreddy]

majortom said:

Ipelm said:

Does the closeness of residents to the Hairpin require a redesign and extension of the circuit at its other end?? This is just a question as I am trying to make sense of some of the detail in this increasingly complex argument??

Who knows? looking back on some details of the planning on line I can only find reference to the original oval grass track being replaced with tarmac - and for it to be used no more than 28 days per year, this would then imply that they have no proper planning regulations - is it not the case that you can run any event as long as it does not exceed 28 days? I can not see any reference to a hairpin on any posts on the internet,If someone out there knows any different can you please correct me. Many thanks.

My thoughts about the hairpin:

1. AFAIK,that section of the track was not used for bike racing (presumably too tight/slow to be practical)
2. It is the closest part of the track to the village
3. It possibly generates more noise than other parts of the circuit as cars will be accelerating out of the bend on full throttle, sometimes in 1st gear and generating tyre squeal as a result.

Does this help to clarify anything?

[SuperHangOn]

Maybe I'm too cynical but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody does want it to close so the site can be sold for housing.

[majortom]

SuperHangOn said:

Maybe I'm too cynical but I wouldn't be surprised if somebody does want it to close so the site can be sold for housing.

HI yes this rumour has been going around and I don't now how it started - as far as we know it is just that - a rumour, some resident think it's a scare tactic, after all there is a huge development being planned just down the road in Barwell, lots of housing development in and around HInckley, so you have to ask yourself why would HBBC want another one so close. We shall wait an see.

[majortom]

FurtiveFreddy said:

My thoughts about the hairpin:

1. AFAIK,that section of the track was not used for bike racing (presumably too tight/slow to be practical)
2. It is the closest part of the track to the village
3. It possibly generates more noise than other parts of the circuit as cars will be accelerating out of the bend on full throttle, sometimes in 1st gear and generating tyre squeal as a result.

Does this help to clarify anything?

The hairpin is used in most races and yes you make good valid points in 2 and 3

[majortom]

Well it seems that things are getting from bad to worse, I have been reading lots of posts by bike racers on various forums and comments range from Mallory Park being a death trap because of all the changes to the track and is should be closed down to people loving it, what is interesting though - surprise surprise - that none of these have had planning permission !!!!! therefore no noise assessment etc done. and all necessary searches that I presume should go hand in hand with these sort of applications !!! your comments please help me make sense of all this. I am of course presuming that planning permission should of been applied for?

[Pothole]

majortom said:

Well it seems that things are getting from bad to worse, I have been reading lots of posts by bike racers on various forums and comments range from Mallory Park being a death trap because of all the changes to the track and is should be closed down to people loving it, what is interesting though - surprise surprise - that none of these have had planning permission !!!!! therefore no noise assessment etc done. and all necessary searches that I presume should go hand in hand with these sort of applications !!! your comments please help me make sense of all this. I am of course presuming that planning permission should of been applied for?

I'm not sure it's helpful in any way to be presuming anything. Get facts and work on those.

[AdeV]

majortom said:

Well it seems that things are getting from bad to worse, I have been reading lots of posts by bike racers on various forums and comments range from Mallory Park being a death trap because of all the changes to the track and is should be closed down to people loving it, what is interesting though - surprise surprise - that none of these have had planning permission !!!!! therefore no noise assessment etc done. and all necessary searches that I presume should go hand in hand with these sort of applications !!! your comments please help me make sense of all this. I am of course presuming that planning permission should of been applied for?

Speculating.... tracks don't need planning permission to make (minor) layout changes to the track, e.g. the introduction of chicanes, which is what happened at Mallory.

I believe our championship (the BARC NW Sports/Saloons) were the first - and last - cars to use the chicane immediately after Gerards. The last because it caused 2 monumental pile-ups & the decision was taken to run the original track from that point on.

[majortom]

Pothole said:

I'm not sure it's helpful in any way to be presuming anything. Get facts and work on those.

Well I'm getting contradicting information, I have just come off the phone with a planning officer to get some facts and spoke to a lovely young lady and she said yes !!! (I hasten to add that I did not mention Mallory Park just a track in general) I think I'll leave it at that - just wondering after what FurtiveFreddie said about the acceleration and deceleration around the hairpin and the noise it would generate that this would be the case at other areas on the track where these changes have been made would contribute to the noise increase.

[Caractacus]

majortom said:

Well I'm getting contradicting information...

Planning officers in the same council can interpret things in their own way, hence the possibility of conflicting information.

Still, what you need are cold hard facts.

First off, you'll need to identify what has gone on (works wise) that you feel should have had permission, and then see if any precedence have been set. There may also be planning law that state certain works will not require written consent. For example, I own a property with quite a few acres and I did not need planning permission (PP) due to the term 'agricultural determination' which means that I have the right to erect agricultural buildings without PP. There may be something similar for Race Circuits or just Mallory?

[Pothole]

I'm not sure what planning permission or lack thereof has to do with the current conflict. Residents have a genuine grievance with Mallory's management for running events in excess of the number they were licenced for. Why not just attend to those and not try and find other sticks to beat them with? As I said before it starts to seem like revenge (and intolerance) and not a genuine will to reach a compromise which will work for ALL parties.

[majortom]

Pothole said:

I'm not sure what planning permission or lack thereof has to do with the current conflict. Residents have a genuine grievance with Mallory's management for running events in excess of the number they were licenced for. Why not just attend to those and not try and find other sticks to beat them with? As I said before it starts to seem like revenge (and intolerance) and not a genuine will to reach a compromise which will work for ALL parties.

It's not just the fact that Mallory have breached the 85 notice that is the concern for most residents its noise levels too, and obviously it affects some more than others depending on location in the village and wind direction. I'm Sorry but I am merely trying to understand why the noise has increased, the management of Mallory Park seem to think that bikes have gone quieter and can't understand why there is a noise issue, this could come down to a number of factors

1 More bikes on the track at any given time
2 No monitoring
3 Construction of the bunds with out proper calculations hence deflecting noise back into the village
4 Change in the circuit layout
And others no doubt, its not just the frequency of events that have upset the residents but the volume of noise too not to mention the fumes.

I'm not blaming Mallory for this but, what seems like lack of control by HBBC - it is very clear in previous parish council minutes that there have been noise complaints and reference made to modifications of groundworks, should alarm bells not of rang at the parish council when there have been no planning applications put in front of them for such work? To understand the problem would, in my opinion would help to solve it and that is exactly what we want to do.

[Pothole]

majortom said:

Pothole said:

I'm not sure what planning permission or lack thereof has to do with the current conflict. Residents have a genuine grievance with Mallory's management for running events in excess of the number they were licenced for. Why not just attend to those and not try and find other sticks to beat them with? As I said before it starts to seem like revenge (and intolerance) and not a genuine will to reach a compromise which will work for ALL parties.

It's not just the fact that Mallory have breached the 85 notice that is the concern for most residents its noise levels too, and obviously it affects some more than others depending on location in the village and wind direction. I'm Sorry but I am merely trying to understand why the noise has increased, the management of Mallory Park seem to think that bikes have gone quieter and can't understand why there is a noise issue, this could come down to a number of factors

1 More bikes on the track at any given time
2 No monitoring
3 Construction of the bunds with out proper calculations hence deflecting noise back into the village
4 Change in the circuit layout
And others no doubt, its not just the frequency of events that have upset the residents but the volume of noise too not to mention the fumes.

I'm not blaming Mallory for this but, what seems like lack of control by HBBC - it is very clear in previous parish council minutes that there have been noise complaints and reference made to modifications of groundworks, should alarm bells not of rang at the parish council when there have been no planning applications put in front of them for such work? To understand the problem would, in my opinion would help to solve it and that is exactly what we want to do.

Perhaps:

5. people becoming older, grumpier and more noise sensitive.
6. people perceiving an increase in noise levels when there's actually 'only' an increase in the number of times they hear it.

etc, etc.

[majortom]

Pothole said:

Perhaps:

5. people becoming older, grumpier and more noise sensitive.
6. people perceiving an increase in noise levels when there's actually 'only' an increase in the number of times they hear it.

etc, etc.

Well I don’t think many will take kindly to your comments, at the last meeting I attended there were around 50 residents all of the same view and their ages ranged from early 20’s to 80’s, some whom have lived here for many years and have noticed the dramatic change, please don’t revert to the same comments/tactics as Facebook that it’s the retired people that are doing the complaining, because believe you me it is not, however we are in a better position than most to judge the situation being as we have lived here when the Overends ran the track and now with the current managers and believe you me there is a vast difference. You come to the next meeting then and you tell the young couples who have got children that wont go outside to play because its too noisy – “don’t be silly its just your perception that it’s got louder “ There have been stupid comments made like _ “why don’t residents go out for the day!! “- Well excuse me why should we be driven from our homes at the expense of the track? It is difficult for families in this current economic climate as it is without the added expense of taking them away from their homes most weekends so that the track can break the law. A bit of give and take would go a long way, we have one week end as quiet and the track has the next and so on. There has been no proof only hear say from the track that it will be forced to close – give us figures and facts, and talk with residents, not dish out malicious rumours about us, this has not been constructive in anyway towards this situation. In fact it has only resulted in personal insults to residents and damage to their property.

Please can I add –
7 incompetent management

[Pothole]

majortom said:

Pothole said:

Perhaps:

5. people becoming older, grumpier and more noise sensitive.
6. people perceiving an increase in noise levels when there's actually 'only' an increase in the number of times they hear it.

etc, etc.

Well I don’t think many will take kindly to your comments, at the last meeting I attended there were around 50 residents all of the same view and their ages ranged from early 20’s to 80’s, some whom have lived here for many years and have noticed the dramatic change, please don’t revert to the same comments/tactics as Facebook that it’s the retired people that are doing the complaining, because believe you me it is not, however we are in a better position than most to judge the situation being as we have lived here when the Overends ran the track and now with the current managers and believe you me there is a vast difference. You come to the next meeting then and you tell the young couples who have got children that wont go outside to play because its too noisy – “don’t be silly its just your perception that it’s got louder “ There have been stupid comments made like _ “why don’t residents go out for the day!! “- Well excuse me why should we be driven from our homes at the expense of the track? It is difficult for families in this current economic climate as it is without the added expense of taking them away from their homes most weekends so that the track can break the law. A bit of give and take would go a long way, we have one week end as quiet and the track has the next and so on. There has been no proof only hear say from the track that it will be forced to close – give us figures and facts, and talk with residents, not dish out malicious rumours about us, this has not been constructive in anyway towards this situation. In fact it has only resulted in personal insults to residents and damage to their property.

Please can I add –
7 incompetent management

I'm not sure I could care less what anyone thinks of my opinion and/or comments.

You'll notice the word 'perhaps' before my addenda. You'll also notice that I categorically did NOT use any patronising language like 'don't be silly'. Do try to read and understand what I actually write and not lump me in with anyone else.

Your own comments are a little inconsistent, talking about 'give and take' one minute and asking if you can sue the council another (or vice versa).


You've mentioned Facebook twice in replies to me. Why? I have read nothing on there about this issue, nor entered any debate on it.

ETA: You may find this interesting. Read all the way to the end... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21784548

Edited by Pothole on Wednesday 20th March 10:57

[AdeV]

Pothole said:

Perhaps:

5. people becoming older, grumpier and more noise sensitive.

People tend to become LESS noise-sensitive (i.e. deaf, or deafer) in old age.