RE: New operator for Mallory Park
Discussion
Munter said:
Bionic Billy Nav said:
Top one percent, Top Man!
I don't care how good any of the nimbys are at putting up their argument about noise at Mallory Park realistically this is Pistonheads a Petrolhead Website/Forum for car and bike lovers alike which I discovered on my annual pilgrimage to Le Man's in 2006 when a group of TVR's came hooning past me in my BMW all with bloody great Pistonheads stickers on so you ain't gonna get no sympathy here infact I don't think nimbys have any place on this here website so do us all a favour f
k off with your whining and a moaning it's not welcome because no one cares...
Do you think a circuit operator should operate within the law or outside of the law?I don't care how good any of the nimbys are at putting up their argument about noise at Mallory Park realistically this is Pistonheads a Petrolhead Website/Forum for car and bike lovers alike which I discovered on my annual pilgrimage to Le Man's in 2006 when a group of TVR's came hooning past me in my BMW all with bloody great Pistonheads stickers on so you ain't gonna get no sympathy here infact I don't think nimbys have any place on this here website so do us all a favour f
k off with your whining and a moaning it's not welcome because no one cares...This isn't about NIMBYs. It's about the question of do we obey laws or not? Mallory chose to operate outside the law. And they got shut down. Which was daft because it's not like the locals want the place closed down. They just want to be involved. Otherwise what's to stop 24 hour noise 365 days a year at 200db in the house next to yours?
What I like to do in the face of inevitable change is dodge all my contractual agreements, blame the locals, claim that complying with them costs far too much whilst simultaneously declining offers to reduce my costs, put myself into administration and then open up another business with a one word change to the name three days later - quite possibly in a cynical attempt to continue doing what I was doing without those obligations.
In-evitable!
In-evitable!
Edited by trashbat on Thursday 5th December 13:34
trashbat said:
What I like to do in the face of inevitable change is dodge all my contractual agreements, blame the locals, claim that complying with them costs far too much whilst simultaneously declining offers to reduce my costs, put myself into administration and then open up another business with a one word change to the name three days later - quite possibly in a cynical attempt to continue doing what I was doing without those obligations.
In-evitable!
The concept of pre-pack administration will be a revelation to you.... Google it.In-evitable!
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 5th December 13:34
Bionic Billy Nav said:
Well Funnily enough I'm in the process of buying a property within the Nordschliefe boundaries in Germany and having spent alot of time there i'll know what to expect when I move in, if I didn't like motoracing or the associated noises that come with it I'd probably not being buying it now but if I did ignore the fact I lived 1km from a motoracing circuit and didn't like the noise I would sell up and move on having learnt a lesson that I should have done my home work before my big purchase.
Lovely. But my question was do you believe the circuit operator should operate within the law or not?Even the nurburgring has to obey noise pollution laws, and has even done some engineering to keep things quiet. You'll know that and it will have fed into your decision to buy regardless of if you claim you know it or not.
If say honda open a R&D center on land adjacent to your house (Plenty of R&D centers around there, so nothing new), and run unsilenced race engines 24x7 for endurance testing. You'd think you were unreasonable asking them to be quiet about it? And would move house? I suspect not. I really think you'd complain to the authorities who'd tell them to obey their planning rules, and keep the noise down. Well before you thought about moving house so you could sleep or talk on the phone.
AdeV said:
Perhaps you'd like to point out where the new operating company is owned by BARC?
It was a comment addressed to me; MPML did do a prepack administration, possibly to try and shirk their obligations, but they seem to be out of the picture entirely now. Good - their PPA seems very much like it should be filed under 'dubious practices' in this case.Munter said:
Bionic Billy Nav said:
Well Funnily enough I'm in the process of buying a property within the Nordschliefe boundaries in Germany and having spent alot of time there i'll know what to expect when I move in, if I didn't like motoracing or the associated noises that come with it I'd probably not being buying it now but if I did ignore the fact I lived 1km from a motoracing circuit and didn't like the noise I would sell up and move on having learnt a lesson that I should have done my home work before my big purchase.
Lovely. But my question was do you believe the circuit operator should operate within the law or not?Even the nurburgring has to obey noise pollution laws, and has even done some engineering to keep things quiet. You'll know that and it will have fed into your decision to buy regardless of if you claim you know it or not.
If say honda open a R&D center on land adjacent to your house (Plenty of R&D centers around there, so nothing new), and run unsilenced race engines 24x7 for endurance testing. You'd think you were unreasonable asking them to be quiet about it? And would move house? I suspect not. I really think you'd complain to the authorities who'd tell them to obey their planning rules, and keep the noise down. Well before you thought about moving house so you could sleep or talk on the phone.
Here's a little query for our angry chum Toponepercent (of what I wonder?) .
Your stance seems to be that Mallory, as an established race circuit , should legally be able to do what it wants, when it wants and if the intensification of use and noise upsets people then they should put up with it and not rely on any perfectly reasonable remedy available to them . Let's suppose that when you moved to Toponepercent Towers a few years ago there was an established traveller encampment down the road. It enjoyed good relations with the community until things changed. The new site owners decided to quadruple the occupancy levels and hugely intensify the previously low level of metal recycling etc. Lots more traffic , noise, and a lot of antisocial behaviour.
Do you decide to be a nimby - in your terms - by lobbying the Council to issue enforcement proceedings , breach of planning etc ? Or do you simply say-' ah well gypsy site innit , my fault for moving here..'? Do tell.
Your stance seems to be that Mallory, as an established race circuit , should legally be able to do what it wants, when it wants and if the intensification of use and noise upsets people then they should put up with it and not rely on any perfectly reasonable remedy available to them . Let's suppose that when you moved to Toponepercent Towers a few years ago there was an established traveller encampment down the road. It enjoyed good relations with the community until things changed. The new site owners decided to quadruple the occupancy levels and hugely intensify the previously low level of metal recycling etc. Lots more traffic , noise, and a lot of antisocial behaviour.
Do you decide to be a nimby - in your terms - by lobbying the Council to issue enforcement proceedings , breach of planning etc ? Or do you simply say-' ah well gypsy site innit , my fault for moving here..'? Do tell.
Bionic Billy Nav said:
I do agree No an operator must abide by the terms of his licensing but what I do not like is when you get the "nimby" attitude it stalls progress and sometimes causes a lot of unnecessary problems
Good so you 100% agree with what has happened. There has been no nimby attitude here.The locals quite happy if the law is obeyed. Once it wasn't the operator got into trouble. And has been replaced. Everybody (residents included) expect/want racing to continue. Excellent news all round.
So why have a dig at the residents?
Munter said:
Bionic Billy Nav said:
I do agree No an operator must abide by the terms of his licensing but what I do not like is when you get the "nimby" attitude it stalls progress and sometimes causes a lot of unnecessary problems
Good so you 100% agree with what has happened. There has been no nimby attitude here.The locals quite happy if the law is obeyed. Once it wasn't the operator got into trouble. And has been replaced. Everybody (residents included) expect/want racing to continue. Excellent news all round.
So why have a dig at the residents?
trashbat said:
AdeV said:
Perhaps you'd like to point out where the new operating company is owned by BARC?
It was a comment addressed to me; MPML did do a prepack administration, possibly to try and shirk their obligations, but they seem to be out of the picture entirely now. Good - their PPA seems very much like it should be filed under 'dubious practices' in this case.Mr "top" 1% seemed to be ignorant of the matter however.
Munter said:
Bionic Billy Nav said:
I do agree No an operator must abide by the terms of his licensing but what I do not like is when you get the "nimby" attitude it stalls progress and sometimes causes a lot of unnecessary problems
Good so you 100% agree with what has happened. There has been no nimby attitude here.The locals quite happy if the law is obeyed. Once it wasn't the operator got into trouble. And has been replaced. Everybody (residents included) expect/want racing to continue. Excellent news all round.
So why have a dig at the residents?
Judging by the posts from those who claim to be from the village, MPML were a disaster area who flouted the law and simply expected to get away with it because they "need to make a profit". A phoenix company was then set up - but it appears to have not been chosen as the replacement operator. In fact, from the sounds of it, the new operator, the village, the council and the circuit owner have worked together in what appears at first blush to be a perfect example of co-operation, one that it would be rather nice if certain residents who live in certain villages near certain other racing circuits (coughlittlebudworthcoughoultonparkcough) could do well to emulate.
A big relief for me as it's my local. Let's hope the new operators do a better job and take the residents into account. Just a thought for those shouting NIMBYS.... If your neighbour played their music occassionally, you would probably accept it. You would get sick of it all the time I'm sure. People bought the houses thinking that there would be days, where no events were on. Maybe they thought it was an acceptable comprimise but it was constantly breached?
From looking into it in some depth, I got the impression that the VAST majority of locals wanted the track, as previously stated, it did appear to be just two families making most of the complaints. It did seem that the previous operator's actions were the biggest problem.
I just hope they aren't too bike biased in the future.
From looking into it in some depth, I got the impression that the VAST majority of locals wanted the track, as previously stated, it did appear to be just two families making most of the complaints. It did seem that the previous operator's actions were the biggest problem.
I just hope they aren't too bike biased in the future.
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff