Council. Which begs the question. Did he pay to get in or alternatively, is he allowed access to private land without permission, or, as the council have coughed up a few bucks for improvements, are council employees exempt from paying?
As HRC booked the track, are they obliged to let council officials in?
I think you will find as part of the resource consent for the circuit to operate, that access for council/ govt officials is a given. Another one we use to see a lot of was a Govt. dude who would check the radio channels you were using in the driver communication systems. Happened to use in the Supertourers a tPuke last yearOriginally Posted by ERC
When we as a club hire Puke for events we have to pay an additional fee for the noise control monitoring guy.
Who does this "noise control guy" belong to. do you ask, for and get, a copy of his recordings. How much does he cost?
Last edited by 928; 03-01-2014 at 11:24 PM. Reason: addition
What a lot here fail to understand, its the RMA, that controls the limits on noise, and really has sod all to do with MSNZ or the circuits, and you have have the NIMBY following, which puts the dampeners on over "limits' noise. I think Hampton Downs is the only circuit that has taken a good look at how to go about this when applying through the RMA to set their levels, even Highland Park have restrictions placed on them.
Roger
What a lot here fail to understand, its the RMA, that controls the limits on noise, and really has sod all to do with MSNZ or the circuits, and you have have the NIMBY following, which puts the dampeners on over "limits' noise. I think Hampton Downs is the only circuit that has taken a good look at how to go about this when applying through the RMA to set their levels, even Highland Park have restrictions placed on them.
Roger
This is not the case with Puke under the current regime. Auckland Council regulations specific to the Puke track state that noise monitoring shall comply with "industry standards". Auckland Council have interpreted these industry standards as the being the MSNZ noise regulations and they are the ones imposed at Puke. That is a big part of the problem as MSNZ noise monitoring criteria is inconsistent with NZ Standards noise regulations and noise monitoring procedures Auckland Council use at other motor sport venues such as Western Springs Speedway.
Hi Roger, I always thought that the Springs had grandfather rights, and that this was their great defense to the Council and the RMA, and they have stood their ground while making some small concessions. But Speedway never seems to make the noise while still producing god awful amounts of power.
Roger
The main issue is that MSNZ regulations state at Schedule A 3.8 that "No vehicle may exceed 95 db(A). The measurement shall be taken 30 metres at a right angle from the track at a point where the vehicle is at maximum power. No compensation for differing climatic conditions shall be applied".
The important section is that I have underlined as NZ Standards state on a number of occasions that climatic conditions are crucial and that, for example, noise monitoring should cease if wind speed exceeds specific levels. Additionally, Auckland Council regulations with respect to Western Springs state that "…. in addition to noise monitoring, meteorological conditions such as wind speed are observed. This is essential information to collect as weather conditions have a significant impact on noise levels".
Against this, MSNZ state that all climatic conditions should be ignored and this would seem to place doubt on the validity of MSNZ's monitoring regime.
I think he works for the Puke track and supplies the results of monitoring to Auckland Council. The cost (from memory) is $150. The results were supplied to us after the completion of the event but I understand he wasn't too keen to even discuss matters with the competitor who was excluded at our last meeting - I suppose he was just following instructions.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote