|
|
|
|
|
Topic: No Lights For Altamont In `08 - 6 pm Curfew
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 1 of 1 of 5 replies
|
|
|
|
January 25, 2008 at
01:56:21 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
02/01/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
792
|
|
|
Ken on Skippers posted this:
The 90-foot infield lights at Altamont Motorsports Park will be used sparingly during the 2008 racing season, as an Alameda County Planning Commission decision means the illegally raised lights cannot be used. Press file photo.Altamont Motorsports Park’s infamous wind and cold won’t plague race fans for at least the 2008 racing season, thanks to a set of rules imposed Tuesday by the Alameda County Planning Commission.
At a revocation hearing at the commission’s Hayward offices, the commission ruled, 6-1, to allow the track to keep its permit, but with the following restrictions:
• Restrict racing to daylight hours, with a 6 p.m. curfew.
• Limit the total number of “race days” per season to the minimum amount required by NASCAR for the track to keep its sanction, not to exceed 27 per racing season.
• Limit the total amount of “race days” per calendar month to no more than four.
• Install noise meters on all sides of the track to make sure it stays within the 95 decibel level required by county law.
• Prohibit the track from using its MUSCO light system — installed in the infield on 90-foot poles that the commission said were installed without county permission or approval — for any racing event.
Lights in the parking and pit areas can be used for up to an hour after racing ends so fans and racers can exit the track safely.
The commission did not define what it meant by a “race day.” A typical weekly race includes a day of practice before the race day.
The ruling does not apply to the track’s public services, for example, Get Real Behind the Wheel’s driver training.
No members of the county planning department were available for comment Thursday. The track can appeal the ruling to the Board of Supervisors, and had until Thursday to do so ahead of the board’s March meeting.
Neil Sebbard, of San Francisco-based investment firm Stone and Youngberg, LLC — one of the track’s three owners — did not return a telephone message seeking comment.
In 2007, the track hosted anywhere from two to four NASCAR, United States Auto Club, motorcycle and other sanctioned racing events per month, and allowed private groups such as the Porsche Club or Corvette Club to rent the track out when not racing.
Second-year Altamont General Manager Jeff Macey did not attend the meeting, and by Wednesday evening had not discussed it with the track’s owners, but said that the ruling won’t affect the upcoming season.
He pointed out that many tracks across the country, including Infineon Raceway in Sonoma County, operate successfully without using lights.
“It’s not a big deal,” Macey said. “We’ll make it work — it doesn’t even matter to me.”
“I’m just glad to be able to operate under any circumstances,” he added.
For drivers and fans, the earlier end time just means an earlier start — and it also means a reprieve from the track’s infamous wind and cold, which usually descend around dusk.
“It (the ruling) doesn’t affect the driver or the car,” said Tracy’s David Philpott, a three-decade racing veteran who, along with his son, Justin, raced part of both the last two seasons at Altamont, including a Sunday daytime-only schedule in 2006. “It just means things roll a little faster.”
Philpott added: “They (the track) might sell less hot dogs and beer — but that’s the way it goes.”
|
|
|
|
January 25, 2008 at
07:15:23 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/26/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
3334
|
|
|
|
Looks like someone pissed in someone's Cherios.
Save your butt, get a colon screening TODAY
For complete line of Sponsor Awards check out
MarshallTownLaser.com
Duane Davis
Laser Engraving
641-751-7777
101 N Center
Marshalltown, Iowa
|
|
|
|
January 25, 2008 at
08:41:41 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/30/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
1973
|
|
|
|
It seems to me that the key word here is "unapproved". Based on the report, it looks like the track took it upon themselves to modify the light system, failing to get Alameda County approval. So if that's pi**ing in Cheerios, well. so be it.
So while the ruling seems a little draconian in nature, the County could have pulled their use permit, too....
Chuck.....
|
|
|
|
|
|
January 27, 2008 at
12:43:31 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/27/2004
|
|
Posts:
|
361
|
|
|
|
Oh Well....Top can't stay out after dark anyway.
|
|
|
|
January 28, 2008 at
01:33:15 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/29/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
1773
|
|
|
|
is it just me or has anyone else noticed how unfriendly and how controlling most of the areas in california have become in regards to motorsports? maybe altamont made some alterations and/or improvements to the facility that it did not permit or get approval for. i do not know, but what does that have to do with the continued opperation of the track? usually when someone does that they are requiered to return the property back to it's prior configuration or to remove the improvments that are in dispute. i did not hear that the county was making the track remove the lighting. was the track fined for not permitting the lights. the county saying the track can keep them but not use them seems kind of funny to me. it sounds to me the county was more conserned with controlling the operation of the facility than with the violation of unapproved or unpermitted improvments. but i do not know all the details of the story and under what conditions the track was to follow to keep it's operating permit.
|
.jpg)
|
|
|
January 29, 2008 at
02:16:15 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
11/06/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
711
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: team wright-one on January 28 2008 at 01:33:15 AM
is it just me or has anyone else noticed how unfriendly and how controlling most of the areas in california have become in regards to motorsports? maybe altamont made some alterations and/or improvements to the facility that it did not permit or get approval for. i do not know, but what does that have to do with the continued opperation of the track? usually when someone does that they are requiered to return the property back to it's prior configuration or to remove the improvments that are in dispute. i did not hear that the county was making the track remove the lighting. was the track fined for not permitting the lights. the county saying the track can keep them but not use them seems kind of funny to me. it sounds to me the county was more conserned with controlling the operation of the facility than with the violation of unapproved or unpermitted improvments. but i do not know all the details of the story and under what conditions the track was to follow to keep it's operating permit.
|
Welcome to California! That's why I live in Nevada, but unfortunately whatever happens in Cal. eventually happens here too............
SUPPORT WILDLIFE, go to a sprint car race!
|
|
|
