Croft loses noise appeal.

[Nick Harrison]

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/n ... se_appeal/

[tristancliffe]

Sad news indeed. Some are claiming, perhaps with a bit too much negativity, that this marks the beginning of the end of motorsport in the UK. I hope not - indeed, it's similar to Combe's position. But legal precidents are dangerous things; perhaps the lawyers amongst us could expand on what this could mean for motorsport?

It will shortly be announced [possibly] that all future Mono races will held at Rockingham and Anglesey, the only places built recently enough to have had noise factored into their build.

[samier]

Very sad indeed! I personally think football fans cause more nuisance on their way to and from matches!!

Motorsport is an easy target for eco warriors and green activists!!

[GP]

Looking at the whole picture constant use of trackdays. not race days appears to be the issue here as a race compettitor i feel . sheer greed is at the root of all this every side has its arguement. however if most people were retired and logical most would get fed up with disturbance however generated [motorsport activity or not] however its long overdue in this country a race meeting should be that complete with noise etc. and if people choose to live next to any airport football stadium etc common sense law should dictate you choose you loose. planning permission was granted at croft. so why are the council not being held to account.if the entry fees where not so probhitvely rediculous to race more people would.... and this situation may not have had any grounds in law. ps reeed the northern echo report and comments..this will then make perfect sense

[tristancliffe]

Looking at the whole picture - constant use of trackdays, not race days, appears to be the issue here. As a race competitor I feel sheer greed is at the root of all this. Every side has its argument, however if most people were retired and logical most would get fed up with disturbance however generated [motorsport activity or not]. However it's long overdue in this country.
A race meeting should be that, complete with noise etc., and if people choose to live next to any airport, football stadium etc., common sense law should dictate you choose you lose. Planning permission was granted at Croft, so why are the council not being held to account. If the entry fees where not so prohibitively ridiculous to race then more people would.... and this situation may not have had any grounds in law.

P.S. read the Northern Echo report and comments.. this will then make perfect sense

Sorry to be irritating, but I added punctuation to understand what you wrote - please tell me if I added it in the wrong place[s] in an Eats, Shoots, and Leaves scenario... Sorry again.

Greed surely is a large part. As I understand it the claimant moved into that house because their partner at the time was to work for Croft. They have since split up and now the noise is suddenly unacceptable after ~10 years.

I do agree with you that if you move in next to a circuit, airport or whatever then you should have no grounds for claim. However, the issue is when you move in next to a small, private airfield when you're 20, but by the time you're 60 it's a 3 runway international airport - you didn't move in next to that, so why should you put up with it?

And that is what, I believe (correct me if I'm at all wrong) happened with Croft. It was barely used, and therefore quite quiet, when the claimant moved in. But now it is used all year round (nearly), which creates a lot more noise than it used to.

Notwithstanding the above, I still think that some things should have exemptions from noise if they are reasonable. And 40 days use is not reasonable considering the infrastructure, staff and money required to operate a circuit.

Perhaps when we go up there (if?) we should all throw bricks through the claimant's windows? :p

[Nick Harrison]

The claimants are the ex wife of the current owner of Croft and her parents. Does that put a different spin on it?

Why couldn't she just cut the sleeves off his Armani suits, flush his Chateau Plonk 1947 down the toilet or trash his Porsche as most ex wives would do?

[andrewcliffe]

I read that yesterday via ten-tenths and clicked the link today and found it to be the same thing as I read yesterday again today (almost). The article had been edited since yesterday as originally it included this (found in my internet cache)

Edited! Sorry Andrew, whilst I agree with your sentiment. We cant really allow this on the Mono site!
Russ