Wakefield Park Issues

[GreenMachine]

One element that has not been addressed explicitly (as far as I can see) is how the character of the circuit - the events it hosted/promoted - evolved over time, and particularly with the successive owners. The later ones were keen to turn a buck (and I don't blame them), and by pushing the limits they have come unstuck.

The DA conditions have been known in local circles since day one (obviously), and I have been waiting for this day to arrive because it has been inevitable, the only unknown was when. I could never understand how anyone could part with large sums when the circuit conditions were being flouted so blatantly and the consequences of a legal challenge to the business's viability so serious.

BAC took the bull by the horns with an application for a new DA, something that probably should have been done a long time ago - in fact they probably should have done it as part of their acquisition process (and withheld a very high proportion of the sale price until a satisfactory DA was granted). That might be hindsight, but it is also what due diligence is all about.

Wakefield has provided the venue for me having lots of fun motorsport, I would be sad to think it might fold.

[Casper]

It was made plain to me that the circuit had noise issues and a strict curfew to stop track operations was always enforced but no attempt was made when we used the track to police the noise aspect at all despite the known problems. I believe that this changed in recent years but the local residents were most probably sick of it by then and not likely to be amenable to any proposed changes unless it was to reduce noise. Those that can't see it was an own goal by BAC need to read the ruling.

[Casper]

So before any one gets too excited and starts organising things the question remains

Was WP complying to the DA in every way.

I don't know but there must have been some sort of evidence tendered that said they weren't.

[275 GTB-4]

The two party's involved are talking - watch this space!

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

The two party's involved are talking - watch this space!

You seem to have good information, was WP complying in all respects to the noise requirements from the time they took possession to the time the ruling was made? I spent a lot of time there and I never saw any indication they were.

[GreenMachine]

Is there a link to the LEC decision? Nothing on the LEC site, nothing in the legal databases either.

Perhaps all we have is a decision, but no reasonings? Either way, it would be good to see exactly what Wakefield are having to deal with.

Good to see that BAC and council are talking, but I'll leave the champers in the fridge until we get a result

[bludvl_x19]

Originally Posted by GreenMachine

Is there a link to the LEC decision? Nothing on the LEC site, nothing in the legal databases either.

Perhaps all we have is a decision, but no reasonings? Either way, it would be good to see exactly what Wakefield are having to deal with.

Good to see that BAC and council are talking, but I'll leave the champers in the fridge until we get a result

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decis...6171a28fc91ce5

[GreenMachine]

Originally Posted by bludvl_x19

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decis...6171a28fc91ce5

Thanks.

Every car to be tested for noise prior to entering the circuit, max 124DbA at 1m from exhaust, at max revs (#17, p13) in addition to two forms of on-track monitoring. Is that all?

[Casper]

A maximum of 75 events per year that may be within a range of 85-95dB(A).

A maximum of 50 events per year that may be within 83-85dB(A).

All other events during the year not to exceed 83dB(A).

In the joint expert report, Ex 6, Mr Gauld refers to Tables in his own expert report (Ex 5) which he says demonstrates that the number of events for the entire calendar year were exhausted in the first two months of 2022 when receptors at Receiver locations R1 and R20 logged noise levels above the RBL.

I'm not a lawyer but I think that means WP operations exceeded the DA by a lot. I need to read the document multiple times to absorb the impact of it all.

[275 GTB-4]

Comparative Noise Levels (for perspective)...

https://www.iacacoustics.com/blog-fu...se-levels.html

[275 GTB-4]

Sunday 31st "Cruise for Wakefield" - organiser is Tom Levien who is a based in Japan. Its a global communications world, but I find this a little odd.

https://m.facebook.com/events/goulbu...0117023194631/

[Casper]

What is the point of trying to protest the decision if WP knew they had not been complying with the original DA? I may be a bit thick but can someone explain why the Land & Environment court accepted the evidence, ruled that WP had been operating outside the limits imposed years ago so they are the guilty party and now some race enthusiasts can't accept that WP are guilty and are most probably blaming every one else for the problem. All I can see is if this sort of thing continues then WP could finish up in a worse position than they are now. If the local residents really arc up because they can see that attempts are being made to make their position worse then they could retaliate and move for more stringent rulings. Knee jerk reactions like being organised now rarely end well.

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

Sunday 31st "Cruise for Wakefield" - organiser is Tom Levien who is a based in Japan. Its a global communications world, but I find this a little odd.

https://m.facebook.com/events/goulbu...0117023194631/

You still haven't answered the question, was WP compliant with all aspects of the DA, a simple yes or no will suffice. If no then what is the "cruise" going to achieve and if yes why bother at all because other avenues may be available to reverse the decision.

We could go at this for a year, WP have not to my knowledge denied they were not compliant and I blame their incompetent management for removing access to the circuit for motor sport in NSW. If they had done their due dilligence when they bought the circuit perhaps we would not be in this position.

[bludvl_x19]

From my lay and uneducated reading, there have only ever been two DAs issued for Wakefield; the 1993 one, and the one just granted by the LEC.
(Important to note that the BAC appeal was sucessful, and they had a new DA approved as a result of this court action)
In the LEC ruling, it states that the "trigger" for acceptance of the new DA is the holding of more than 4 events in a month. If Wakefield does hold more than 4 events, then all of the other restrictions in the new DA are applied (noise, restricted events etc)

Wakefield are in a holding pattern, and being very careful not to trigger the new DA, which does have adverse conditions from their point of view, by only having 4 days of activity a month until they can sort a course of action (ie propose another DA with the Goulburn council etc.)

Nothing to this point seems objectively "bad" to me, except that I think that the residents who have put in objections in the past may now have a leg to stand on with regards to a massive increase in activity/noise from the situation when they moved in (subject to the '93 DA)

And Casper, no, I don't think that any owners since the original owners of Wakefield Park have been operating inside their DA.

[GreenMachine]

Yes, I think you are on the money there.

Essentially, WP is now operating under the 1993 DA conditions as it always should have been (unless and until it is replaced). There now is a new one (per the LEC), but BAC are taking care not to trigger it because of the consequences of its noise mitigation measures. The LEC decision is looking smarter and wiser by the minute - 'you have three choices: the 1993 DA conditions, the LEC draconian(?) DA conditions, or you can negotiate a new DA with council (and by implication, the residents)'.

The 'talks' will be about a new DA, and in that context I note that the council have made some quite strong statements supporting the benefits WP provides, which I find encouraging.

It will be up to BAC to balance the costs of doing business (noise monitoring and attenuation, limits on noisy events, etc) with the revenue they think they can pull from a program that is more restricted. It will also require BAC to genuinely negotiate with residents and council to try and get the best conditions it can. It probably means the ambitious works program in their last DA is dead, at least for the moment.

[V8 Fireworks]

Is it not possible to build a giant earth mound around the circuit which would double as spectator viewing?

Or does that already exist, but not provide sufficient noise attenuation?

Where there is insufficient space for an earth mound, then a standard concrete noise barrier (like on a motorway) could be used instead, no?

[Casper]

Earthworks of any description are hugely expensive and I doubt that any that the BAC could afford would do anything to fix the situation. I notice that the question I have asked twice to 275 GTB-4 has gone through to the keeper with no response so I guess the answer is that WP have not been complying with the 1993 DA. If they have not been non compliant all the hordes that are going to descend on Goulburn support the non compliance and think that not complying is perfectly fine. I can't see this ending well, BAC have blown this big time and now have to grovel to the council after their bull dozer attempts to get their way have failed and they have now deprived motor sport enthusiasts of 50% of the available venues in NSW and that may become permanent. If readers here think I am p'd off they would be right.

I wonder what genius thought that a Facebook campaign designed to target Goulburn Council members by publishing their contact details was a good idea. Does anyone think running a social media campaign was a good way to get the council's support?

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

Sunday 31st "Cruise for Wakefield" - organiser is Tom Levien who is a based in Japan. Its a global communications world, but I find this a little odd.

https://m.facebook.com/events/goulbu...0117023194631/

The cruise was "postponed" to the 7th AUG. Clashes with SMSP round. I am very skeptical that this well meaning(?) individual has no idea about organization

[275 GTB-4]

Glbn Council and BAC continue to have positive discussions, hoping to bring about a workable solution. State Ministers (Sport), the Local Member and Shadow Ministers are being engaged by both the Council and BAC to bring about concessions (my word) for certain events...

[Hi Casper ole Son, you don't seem to be a very friendly ghost ;-( ]

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

Glbn Council and BAC continue to have positive discussions, hoping to bring about a workable solution. State Ministers (Sport), the Local Member and Shadow Ministers are being engaged by both the Council and BAC to bring about concessions (my word) for certain events...

[Hi Casper ole Son, you don't seem to be a very friendly ghost ;-( ]

And you don't seem to want to address questions put to you. Was Wakefield Park operating outside the DA as it was and is? If so why would anyone support an organisation that operates outside the lawful rules put in place by the DA? I presume you are supporting the operation outside the DA and as such have no intention of acknowledging that. I guess you support breaking the law of this state?

[275 GTB-4]

8th AUG - Mayor Peter Walker says discussions still ticking over. Main issue is Events vs Activities. The Mayor raised the issue at a Sydney meeting of Country Mayors so that they are aware of what can happen...

[Casper]

Originally Posted by 275 GTB-4

8th AUG - Mayor Peter Walker says discussions still ticking over. Main issue is Events vs Activities. The Mayor raised the issue at a Sydney meeting of Country Mayors so that they are aware of what can happen...

I don't know what annoys me most, the fact that WP management has screwed the motor sport community in NSW through its illegal activity for years refusing to address the fundamental legalities surrounding its operation or people like you who seem to support those illegal operations and refuse to recognise that the support you give it was to support those illegal operations and won't face the facts of it all. You seem to think not discussing it on any level makes it OK but it is not a good look to support illegality on any level or haven't the people such as yourself worked that out. So tell us who is going to get the neighbours to the circuit to agree that the reasons the operation was altered does not matter any more and a more intensive operation will not affect them. Please let us know how any application to the Land and Environment Court could even be contemplated without the support of those who objected to its operation in the first place.

Please tell us why you are continuing to support an operation that was illegal and why you think that anyone can persuade the community surrounding the circuit to suddenly change their minds and remove their objections. Face facts it is never going to return and operate the way it was.

[275 GTB-4]

10 AUG 22 - heard today...Wakefield to close (permanently) 01 SEPT 22, watch this space...

[GreenMachine]

Good. I presume they will try to sell it, and that clears the deck for somebody fresh to come in and take over, negotiate with council and residents with none of the BAC baggage, and maybe come up with a DA that allows the circuit to resume at some level.

BAC will take a bath, but they deserve that for all the poor decisions made at WP, starting with buying into something that was already outside its DA, and then inflaming the situation.

They have sunk a fair bit into the circuit, and their income has been slashed - and the longer the stand-off continues the more money they are losing, interest rates are going up, a move like that is no surprise.

If they think that will exert leverage on council they are living in a fools paradise, it is the residents they need to deal with, and the residents will be dancing under the stars at this news.

If it is confirmed?

[Casper]

I wonder if this whole thing will sink BAC and cause problems at Winton thus inflicting damage on Victorian motor sport as well. Closing is one thing, selling it is another and selling it to reasonably recoup some money is a totally different thing altogether. They sure kicked an own goal because of their bloody minded attitude to the whole thing. I bet there will be a fire sale on race cars in NSW shortly unless someone can provide a miracle. Motor sport in NSW just got screwed in a big way.