Donington Planning Applications

[JimW]

Donington seeking approval for 60 noisy days, not the current 40.

http://www.aboutmyarea.co.uk/Derbysh...g-Applications

Regards

Jim

[JimW]

A bit of devilling suggest the following is the relevant bit:

This application seeks permission to hold a total of 60 race meetings per calendar year above the 98dB(A) threshold but halving the number of unsilenced days from 40 to
20 subject to the conditions set out below;
Of the 60 days a maximum of 20 will be unsilenced.
Of the 60 days a maximum of 40 subject to a noise limit of 118dB(A)
Of the 60 days a maximum of 60 subject to a noise limit of 108dB(A)


If you wish the existing condition to be changed, please state how you wish the condition to be varied:
The following variations are proposed;
Condition 10(a) - The total number of days upon which the application site may be used by vehicles with a noise limit in excess of 98dB(A) for motor or motorcycle racing or
pre race practising shall not exceed 60 in each calendar year subject to conditions 10(b), 10(c),10(d) and 10(e) below.
Condition 10(b) - The total number of days upon which the application site may be used for unsilenced motor or motorcycle racing or pre race practising shall not exceed
20 in each calendar year.
Condition 10(c) - The total number of days upon which the application site may be used for motor or motorcycle racing or pre race practising by vehicles complying with a
118dB(A) test as defined by the relevant motor sport governing body shall not exceed 40 in each calendar year.
Condition 10(d) - The total number of days upon which the application site may be used for motor or motorcycle racing or pre race practising by vehicles complying with a
108dB(A) test as defined by the relevant motor sport governing body shall not exceed 60 in each calendar year
Condition 10(e) - The total number of days upon which the application site may be used for unsilenced motor or motorcycle testing shall be limited to two nonconsecutive
days per week between Monday and Friday inclusive and between the hours of 0900 and 1700. No testing is permitted on Bank Holidays, Saturdays or
Sundays.
No testing shall take place days before or after the use of the track on any of the days defined in Condition 10(b), 10(c) or 10(d).
Condition
11 – The use of the site for the purposes referred to in Condition 10(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e) shall be restricted to the hours between 9.00am and 20.00pm on each of the 60 days.

Regards

Jim

[JimW]

Next question: who can translate the quoted dB levels into MSA or FIA classes?

Is there an "environmental" scrutineer in the house? (Or a Blue book expert?)

Regards

Jim

[brickkicker]

Max noise for a tin top is 105dB and for a single seater is 108dB if that helps.

[brickkicker]

Obviously the above is based on MSA blue book, there are some championships which require less and others which permit more (historic GP's etc)

[Tim the Grey]

Does anyone know what a 737 puts out? It's under a flightpath, next to an airport. How can cars make MORE noise than 150 Sharon & Tony's off to Lanzarote???

[Dave Brand]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Does anyone know what a 737 puts out? It's under a flightpath, next to an airport.

Lots of data here:

http://www.airservicesaustralia.com/...ise_Levels.pdf

[PabloTeK]

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

Does anyone know what a 737 puts out? It's under a flightpath, next to an airport. How can cars make MORE noise than 150 Sharon & Tony's off to Lanzarote???

The planes were drowning out even the GTs the MSVR weekend!

[grantp]

Originally Posted by PabloTeK

The planes were drowning out even the GTs the MSVR weekend!

Funny stuff, noise.

The jets are relatively quiet these days, unless one is directly under the flight path although even then the noise is not what it once was.

But other than the odd private plane or unsilenced biplane struggling endlessly through the air at about 70 mph most craft are heard briefly and then gone. Military stuff can be very loud in on an overfly but there are few of them these days.

There was nothing at all this evening that produced enough noise to stop me hearing the last minutes of the track day evening session as I watered the plants on the patio. Someone had a suitably large spin at about 20:15 and for whatever reason the session closed at about 20:22 although I would have thought there was enough light to go on until 20:30.

And that's the difference for the locals.

Track activity starts at 9 am and depending on the nature of the day will end somewhere between about 16:30 (or a little earlier in the shorter days of winter) and 21:00 in the longer days of summer.

A track day is usually silenced but not silent. Who can hear it may vary with the weather conditions and wind direction but someone will have the joy of perpetual noise for about 50 minutes in every hour between 9am and 5 pm minus about an hour for lunch. If it goes on into an evening session they get another short break and then a continuation until dusk.

By comparison the jets can be heard for somewhere between 20 seconds and 40 seconds per flight, depending on air conditions, listener locations and he type and age of the aircraft. Some days, as today, air movements are greater in number than normal days. Theses are normally training days with planes doing circuits as new flight crew are trained. RyanAir today. DHL a few days ago.

Other notably noisy interventions are helicopters. The local Air Ambulance service is a case in point - quite identifable by its noise with, some days, many movements in and out and no particular fixed flight path. It's not unusual for it to head out and then return, hovering around waiting if there is other air traffic being processed, a few minutes later presumably after the callout has been cancelled.

Propeller driven plans tend to be noisier and hang around for longer than the jets.

Engine testing at the airport used to be a problem some years ago and could occur at any time of day or night but this activity seems to have been curtailed or is now silent. I suspect the work has mostly been moved elsewhere.

Perversely race meetings, whether or not they are 'noisy' days, offer quiet periods that track days do not in between the races. On the other hand the race starts and any event that offers longer races or endurance events tend, on balance, to be noisier than a typical track day. They also tend to be days covering weekends of course so there are more local people around hoping to make use of their property for leisure activities without the constant background noise of track activity. During the week this is usually less of an issue.

Having said all of that anyone living in a city or near a motorway or busy train line or in certain places within about 25 miles of Heathrow and Gatwick and thier air traffic stacking systems would probably think that the area around Castle Donington and Melbourne is a comparative island of silence.

But the real key is the nature of the noise not the noise per se. A passing bee may be acceptable whereas a loud fly going around and around can drive people mad. The noise level at a given distance is probably much the same but the type and nature of the sound produced different responses.

The difference between air movement noise and track noise is much the same although one or two people find plenty to complain about with both. Or so we are told.

[Gerryc]

Grant, that has got to be the most rational explanation of the problems with circuit noise that I have read - thank you!

[bella]

here's another less relevant example - i live near duxford airfield. we have air displays 8 or 9 times a year that cause some pretty big traffic issues, especially with people too tight to pay to get in and who insist on disrupting our lives by parking all over the road instead. the noise isn't really a problem because for those of us who have lived here all our lives being divebombed by spitfires and so forth is a normal part of daily life. actually, it's quite comforting.

recently we've had the f1 teams come and play at duxford. for some reason this caused outrage in the local area because the noise was far greater. bear in mind the traffic this causes is non existant, and they don't actually lap the runway constantly. it's actually pretty sporadic and generally it just sounds like someone chavving up and down the a505 on a motorbike. as a result they've put all sorts of restrictions on the number of runs, the timeframe, and the number of days a year.

what these nimbys are completely forgetting is the fact that every time a f1 team pays to use our runway, it pays for an airshow day. that's a massive ton of money that is saved and can go straight back into the war museum and looking after the historical aircraft. also, as local residents we actually get free admission on non-airshow days, and they could actually go and see what the f1 test is about and take their kids along if they so desired. but no, all they see is the negative contribution.

in summary: people are very odd when it comes to noise.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Gerryc

Grant, that has got to be the most rational explanation of the problems with circuit noise that I have read - thank you!

Thanks Gerry.

It's an odd thing, noise. When Donington was close after (and during) the Gillet fiasco one of the more obvious yet unexpected things was to observe just how load birdsong is when not masked or blunted by other background noises. Would have complained about it but I couldn't find a number to ring ...

The airport records all noise related complaints and has a noise control plan that the carriers have to stick to or risk fines on top of their airport charges. I suspect this is one reason why the Russian Antonovs seem to have a very very low rate of climb once off the ground. They may also have a shortage of power of course!

The airport, has a wider potential goegraphic area for complainants of course. Even so most complaints seem to come from a relatively small number of people. Interestingly in recent times one of the more prolific complai9ners about the airport was a retired air traffic controller. Someone must have annoyed him badly before he retired .... or perhaps he wss looking at it as a service to the airpport to ensure that they kept on top of potential problems and thereofre reduced the risk of local popular opinion turning against them. Who knows?

From what I have been told the noise complaints for the track are also generated by very few people. But they have to be taken seriously in these days of H&S - hence the perpetual monitoring. The difference between the two is that the track is thought of as a leisure activity for a small and distinct group of people whereas the airport is seen as a major contributor to the community coffers and an asset (especially as a cash cow) so long as the level of complaint is kept under control.

[Gerryc]

Originally Posted by grantp

Thanks Gerry.

It's an odd thing, noise. When Donington was close after (and during) the Gillet fiasco one of the more obvious yet unexpected things was to observe just how load birdsong is when not masked or blunted by other background noises. Would have complained about it but I couldn't find a number to ring ...

[Al Weyman]

One other annoying thing in the Donington mix and too me would be the most annoying of the lot is the pop concerts. It sounds horrendous when you can hear the din especially the bass but not make out precisely whats being played or sung. I dont think that helps at all especially as it goes on into the night.

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

One other annoying thing in the Donington mix and too me would be the most annoying of the lot is the pop concerts. It sounds horrendous when you can hear the din especially the bass but not make out precisely whats being played or sung. I dont think that helps at all especially as it goes on into the night.

There's only the Download festival these days. The arrival days beofre the live music days tend to be noisiest late into the night and if the weather conditions are a certain way the sound spread around a bit form the camp site.

However the stages have ben re-positioned for the last couple of years and are not that easy to hear any more - at least from where I live.

The village does tend to be taken over by a lot of oddly dressed 'sights'. But the income generated seems to make that acceptable.

The Live music nights with the bands seem in recent years to be finished by 10:30 no matter what happens - no extended encores and they seem to stick with the timetable pretty well.

Even the once common end of event (a lot of events, not just Download) fireworks displays seem to be fewer these days. Almost non-existent.

Other things change too. Last year the locally kept Spitfire was in the air frequently. I haven't heard it for months this year so I assume that Rolls Royce or whoever owns it these days has moved it elsewhere. Sad, although it was noisy. I nice noise though and quite distinctive.

This year the old power station North West of the village has seen a huge and very ugly building development. The pile driving activity (or at least something with constant thump, thump noises, went on from dawn to dusk for months. Now that was an annoying noise. I wonder for a while, since it started before Xmas, whether the noise was actually the nearby quarry attempting to make good the shortage of road grit but I think it was just the building work. Quite how anyone would allow such a monstrous and ugly structure in such a visible position I cannot imagine. But there you go, presumably money talks.

No doubt the next noise intrusion will be the trains feeding whatever this thing is going to be and a couple of thousand truck movements a day. Something to look forward to ...

[JimW]

If you go to http://plans.nwleics.gov.uk/public-a...=LOWCIDLR0DD00 and have a look at the document "NOISE APPLICATION STATEMENT", you will find a very interesting statement from Donington.

I will leave it to the reader to spot any inconsistencies (never mind the spelling mistakes) but I note that the complaints currently appear to come from 11 or 12 people only.

Regards

Jim

[gary396]

Originally Posted by JimW

......but I note that the complaints currently appear to come from 11 or 12 people only.

But using Croft as an example - it only needs one to be successful with such a complaint (if they want to take it as far as the courts etc).

[Flat12-Aircool]

Originally Posted by JimW

If you go to http://plans.nwleics.gov.uk/public-a...=LOWCIDLR0DD00 and have a look at the document "NOISE APPLICATION STATEMENT", you will find a very interesting statement from Donington.

What are these proposed track changes, are they just basically asking for permission to modify the Melbourne loop?

[grantp]

Originally Posted by gary396

But using Croft as an example - it only needs one to be successful with such a complaint (if they want to take it as far as the courts etc).

That's true Gary but bear in mind that the proximity of the Airport is a factor for the area around the track and with all due respect to Croft as a circuit, Donington (when fully operational) is likely to have a greater influence over local business revenues and, perhaps most importantly, income generated for the local council.

Donington and its surroundings as a whole is quite a developed area and ever likely to be more developed although I notice that one of the local quarries seems to be closed these days. It may be non-viable or perhaps there is no demand for it's product at the moment.

On the other hand someone has allowed a massive structure to be erected on what was originally billed as a 'Distribution Park' where the old Power Station used to be. No idea what it will be doing but there are teams of Germans (and maybe others) installing stuff at the moment.

It is totally disproportionate to the buildings initially erected on the 190 acre site and, apart from the now abandoned Regional Fire Control Centre project building on a nearby industrial development, has to be one of the ugliest structures I have ever seen.

I think this little corner of North West Leicestershire seems to have been earmarked as the dumping ground for brown field developments for the area - probably to annoy people in Derbyshire a few hundred metres away.

Against that revenue creating background I would imagine the local council would be fairly tolerant of DP so long as no one tries to take the mickey and the majority of the noise complainst come from Aston on Trent - which is in Derbyshire.


ETA: Well, a quick 5 seconds on 'tnet tells me that the enormous structure is a "1 million sq ft" scheme that will be an M&S distribution centre employing 'hundreds' of people. Apparently.

Hopefully they will landscape its surroundings as well as banging on about its 'green credentials' from water capture to solar panels. (Do I hear subsidies calling I wonder ....?)

[grantp]

Originally Posted by Flat12-Aircool

What are these proposed track changes, are they just basically asking for permission to modify the Melbourne loop?

I don't think there are any track changes that need planning permission. Changes to suite revised racing licence requirements don't, so far as I am aware, require planning permission.

There is a section in the 'history' that refers to the Melbourne Loop but that was, from what I read, an historical record of the planning conditions that applied in 1979 when the Melbourne Loop development planning permission was applied for.

Did I miss something else?

[JimW]

No changes to the track are proposed in these revisions, they are only to get the number of "noisy" days up from 40 to 60.

I suspect the changes are being proposed as amendments to the existing permissions (which included the track changes, buildings etc.) rather than new applications so as not to have to go through the full ab initio processes as these are longer and include a number of hurdles which changes may not.

But don't forget that the planning permissions for the "GP" proposals will still be available. Who knows what is planned for the infield!

Regards

Jim

[grantp]

Originally Posted by JimW

But don't forget that the planning permissions for the "GP" proposals will still be available. Who knows what is planned for the infield!

Regards

Jim

Last I heard was that the infield was likely to be landscaped and reopened for use rather than developed - at least for the foreseeable future.

Bit of a questionmark about the new tunnel though. It seems that full completion could be somewhat costly. It would be a shame not to bring to into use if the infield is indeed re-opened. I would have thought the improved accessibility potential could be a great attraction to expanding the scope of events.

Of course you may have other information ...

BTW I read the Noise related application as being a reduction of unsilenced noisy days but an icrease in the total number of race meeting related days with noise limits applicable to the additional days. That's a move that seems to make sense in the general context of moves by the MSA and other bodies to steadily reduce the noise levels of motorsport events. (Thats not to say I approve of such moves without some reservations of course!)

[JimW]

Originally Posted by grantp

Last I heard was that the infield was likely to be landscaped and reopened for use rather than developed - at least for the foreseeable future.

That's my understanding, but mainly from the lack of any other plans.

Bit of a questionmark about the new tunnel though. It seems that full completion could be somewhat costly. It would be a shame not to bring to into use if the infield is indeed re-opened. I would have thought the improved accessibility potential could be a great attraction to expanding the scope of events.

I agree with you.

BTW I read the Noise related application as being a reduction of unsilenced noisy days but an icrease in the total number of race meeting related days with noise limits applicable to the additional days. That's a move that seems to make sense in the general context of moves by the MSA and other bodies to steadily reduce the noise levels of motorsport events. (Thats not to say I approve of such moves without some reservations of course!)

I read it as swapping 40 "noisy" days (no limit) for 20 "noisy" days, 20 MSA upper range days and 20 MSA lower range days.

The net effect will be 20 extra race days. Only a few meetings have "noisy" cars/bikes, most club meetings will fit into the other two groups.

One effect may be that clubs are invited to plan their meetings so that at least some have no races with cars in the higher two groups. Might there be a financial inducement to this?

Regards

Jim

[Greem]

A little piece of local news can be found here.

Quite a succinct explanation of the application: they did have 40 days, all unsilenced. They're asking for 60 days, with only 20 unsilenced. And it looks as though they'll get a 2 year approval with monitoring.

Hopefully good news, but we'll find out later on or tomorrow for definite. The meeting is going on as I type.

[Greem]

And here's the outcome

Good news!