PUKEKOHE

[ERC]

If I heard the numbers correctly the highest reading at Timaru last weekend, be it Mazda RX7, V8 Touring car, Mini 7, Porsche or any other vehicle racing during the weekend was 91.2dba.
When TranZam racing was at it's peak most were running around 93dba and some were as quiet as 88dba. Adverse weather conditions did sometimes send crews into a bit of a panic as they repacked their mufflers so as to get back out onto the circuit during testing sessions.

Stop being selfish and just get on with it, save your energy for something you can win and don't fight or create lost causes.

Those figures are low and therein lies the problem. Are those test results comparing apples with chocolate fish in terms of location, weather, surrounding buildings, topography, etc. because if not...

Fighting lost causes to you is fighting injustices/unfairness for me! Win some, lose some, but not standing up for what you believe in makes it easier for the bureaucrats to ride roughshod over common sense. I hate this sanitized cotton wool protection from cradle to grave. When the day comes, I'd like my epitaph to read "At least I wasn't strangled by the red tape..."

Drivers are not using excuses, they are quoting their reasons for not competing. We'd be foolish to ignore them. Maybe when we are all forced into racing hybrids, or electric cars, someone will stand back and say "How the heck did we allow this to happen?" Noise is an integral part of the appeal of motorsport.

[Kwaussie]

Noise control at circuits was something that I spent a lot of time dealing with from 1999 up until 2010. It was so difficult on one hand but so rewarding when you could get it right. We spent lots of money on the best equipment, lots more on appeals to VCAT and hours and hours dealing with various planning managers [six in eleven years] from local shire council.
When you can get your clubs and competitors on side and they realise that to move forward you have to have some form of noise control in place so much the better.
The ultimate is to have a workable planning permit issued for the site and be able to manage that, with no outside influence that could harm your operations.

[RogerH]

With noise monitoring, part of the problem is that Pukekohe Park uses the methodology contained in the MSNZ Manual. This MSNZ regulation is :

"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".

One of the problems with this is that MSNZ specifically excludes compensation for any climatic conditions. This stance is inconsistent with published New Zealand Standards and international procedures such as Nordtest.

Even Auckland Council in their noise monitoring of Western Springs Speedway note :

"Auckland Council Report on Noise Monitoring Western Springs Speedway" - "…. 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.".

New Zealand Standards note that noise monitoring should only occur when the wind speed is between 0 and 5 m/s.

Against all of this MSNZ ignore all climatic conditions and this is likely to mean that results from using their methodology are suspect.

Additionally MSNZ's methodology ignores other accepted influencing factors such as road generated noise, residual noise, reflective noise from adjacent structures and amplified noise from hard surfaces (asphalt roads).

[Kwaussie]

The MSNZ regulation is so similar to the planning permit that I mentioned in my earlier post - but the position of the measuring site must be approved by a registered acoustic engineer. These guys really know their stuff and will give you a point that will satisfy any authority.
In most events any variation caused by wind direction, low cloud, smoke! etc can easily be verified by cross referencing with previous sound records and would not be a problem with the authority.
The one vehicle that caused me more concern prior to an event was the Gould GR55B with Nicholson NME V8 - came in at 93 db[A]

[928]

MSNZ should not have anything to do with noise within the grounds of a race track. It is a local issue only. cars doing rallies are already covered by exsisting road traffic law. as for taking readings during a race they are dreaming. I would be getting any noise regulation taken out of the manual ASAP. if i was running a circuit I would be making the point to the local council that complaints will only be measured at the boundary as i have already made clear.

[rf84]

The point about noise readings being taken at the boundary of the circuit is a salient one. As the rules stand at the moment a circuit built in a very isolated location (e.g. the Army training area on the Desert Road) could breach the noise restrictions even though the nearest "neighbours" are many kilometres away and can't even hear the cars.

[928]

only if a complaint is made.

[RogerH]

It is interesting with the noise at Pukekohe that the necessity to monitor is an Auckland Council (previously Franklin District Council) requirement in relation to noise disturbances with neighbours. As 928 correctly says, it should be tested at the boundary - not in the middle of a race track. A noise at 95 dB in the middle of a track will be less if tested at the boundary.

The problem is that Pukekohe uses the MSNZ criteria which is does not meet by a long way the standards that Council usually adopt for noise monitoring - these are NZS 6801:2008, NZS 6802:2008 and NZS 6806:2010.

Additionally, the testing position at Pukekohe (as far as I can ascertain) is at turn 6 which probably means that in order to be 30m from the edge of the track, the monitoring is taken through the concrete barriers and wire mesh fencing the surround the track.

We ran a meeting at Pukekohe in early October - the first we had run on the new track. It was a bit of a test to see what things were like and whether we would go back again. We had problems with noise monitoring and had a competitor excluded. This resulted in a complaint being made to us from the competitor and as a result we have had to take this up with Pukekohe, Auckland Council and by the look of it MSNZ.

We also had a small turn out of entrants and a number told us they wouldn't run at Pukekohe due to the track re-configuration and noise issues. No doubt we will take all these hassles on board when we decide if we will hire the track again.

Maybe Pukekohe will be forced to do something to sort this issue if their track bookings start to fall off.

[ERC]

Thanks Roger. I was hoping you'd respond. Any comment Carlo, seeing as you think that I am the one in the wrong?

This is a serious issue and if it isn't resolved pretty quickly, we'll be reduced to only running at Hampton Downs with only one meeting a year at Taupo.

Maybe when HD gets its track extension done, we'll have their three track options, plus one Taupo event to spread our races and won't even need Pukekohe to add the variety in what is a minimum of six, maximum of seven races, with the best five to count for points.

Its a great pity that we don't have the annual Whenuapai meeting to look forward to, but that is another story.

[RacerT]

Noise is an interesting issue. We chose the Hampton Downs site after looking at a lot of other areas, such as Helensville, Kaukaupakaupa and the Meremere coal mine quary. Noise was one of the major concerns at every proposed site and it quickly became apparent that the 10 acre block 'Paradise Seekers' were never going to be happy with a nearby circuit - NIMBY's!

The Northern Waikato is sparcely populated and the HD site at the benefit of 1200 acres of Tainui land to the west, 526 acres of Corrections facility to the south, 80 acres of Transit wetland to the north and 530 acres of sheep farm to the east.

Hampton Downs has a noise boundary that extends far from its own boundaries. This is based on the contours of the land surrounding the circuit. All the neighbours within the noise boundary signed of on this noise plan. This took considerable consultation, with many cups of tea and chocolate biscuits! The key to the noise plan is that it is based on the MSNZ 95 decibal rule, 30 metres from the track edge. To add to this, Hampton Downs has a range of days that it can run with varying noise levels. Our noise plan also has quite a degree of contingency in it, so if we have differing weather conditions, we can still comply at the boundary.

Even the 30 metres from the track edge is not definitive enough. I would think that a distance from the middle of the track would be more accurate, because if you take a 12 metre wide track, the cars position on the track can alter the distance to the noise meter by up to 20%.

It doesn't seem to be an exact science! When I was at a Goodwood club meeting in 2001, they were measuring in a static manner with a noise meter behind the exhaust pipe. This obviously takes no account of induction or aerodynamic noise.

A good noise plan with the neighbours buy in is imperative for any circuit to survive. We have many neighbours around Hampton Downs that were consulted and most of these people are supplied with Gold Cards for free access to events as part of our long term strategy.

[Rod Grimwood]

Stop moaning, pull your pants down and bend over and cop it. The 'green do gooders' are right, so they think and have been allowed too much say in all this crap over along time.
928 with you, measure it from the outside boundary and allow for conditions etc.
There is too much of this going on and we are getting shafted by it.
So the 'no smacking' effort is a real winner, 'Yea Right"
No oil of the coast, no mining, all this by dick heads who don't work but live of the tax's from all these products.

Noise at a race track, how terrible, if they don't like it, move on else where and get a life. The tracks were mostly there first. Amazing how a few can stuff it for the majority of people, only because we sit back and let them go on instead of dealing to them. They all have the same hair, beards (some women included) and drive vehicles that pour out diesel fumes or smoke with 'no mining', 'no offshore drilling' etc on back of them.

PS; regarding Puke, the concrete dump will not be helping with noise.

[RogerH]

The 30m issue is very crucial.

The MSNZ regulation is not definitive enough as it just says "The measurement shall be taken 30 metres at a right angle from the track at a point where the vehicle is at maximum power". As Tony says - does this mean 30m from the track edge or 30m from the source of the sound (which could be anywhere from 30m to 42m to the sound microphone).

The sensitivity of this issue is shown by the New Zealand Standard - NZS 6801:2008 which states at 7.2.3 that if the sound source is more than 30m from the microphone, recording can only be undertaken if the wind is in the range of 0 to 5 m/s (5 m/s equates to 18 km/h).

If the MSNZ regulation is interpreted as 30m from the track edge (as I believe is the case at Pukekohe) then the sound source would be more than 30m from the recording microphone. That would mean that all readings taken when the wind is over 5 m/s are unreliable (to the extent that NZS indicates that monitoring should cease).

Against this situation, MSNZ dictates that all climatic conditions should be ignored.

Noise is an interesting issue. We chose the Hampton Downs site after looking at a lot of other areas, such as Helensville, Kaukaupakaupa and the Meremere coal mine quary. Noise was one of the major concerns at every proposed site and it quickly became apparent that the 10 acre block 'Paradise Seekers' were never going to be happy with a nearby circuit - NIMBY's!

The Northern Waikato is sparcely populated and the HD site at the benefit of 1200 acres of Tainui land to the west, 526 acres of Corrections facility to the south, 80 acres of Transit wetland to the north and 530 acres of sheep farm to the east.

Hampton Downs has a noise boundary that extends far from its own boundaries. This is based on the contours of the land surrounding the circuit. All the neighbours within the noise boundary signed of on this noise plan. This took considerable consultation, with many cups of tea and chocolate biscuits! The key to the noise plan is that it is based on the MSNZ 95 decibal rule, 30 metres from the track edge. To add to this, Hampton Downs has a range of days that it can run with varying noise levels. Our noise plan also has quite a degree of contingency in it, so if we have differing weather conditions, we can still comply at the boundary.

Even the 30 metres from the track edge is not definitive enough. I would think that a distance from the middle of the track would be more accurate, because if you take a 12 metre wide track, the cars position on the track can alter the distance to the noise meter by up to 20%.

It doesn't seem to be an exact science! When I was at a Goodwood club meeting in 2001, they were measuring in a static manner with a noise meter behind the exhaust pipe. This obviously takes no account of induction or aerodynamic noise.

A good noise plan with the neighbours buy in is imperative for any circuit to survive. We have many neighbours around Hampton Downs that were consulted and most of these people are supplied with Gold Cards for free access to events as part of our long term strategy.

[928]

racert if you take measurements from the centre of the track surely you are condoning the noise level what ever it is after all you either paid to get there or are being paid to be there. i accept that you have precise knowledge of your situation but disagree with some of your statements. MSNZ must not be involved as they are just another layer of people who will not fight your corner, but will require paying to advise should you get a problem.

[RacerT]

racert if you take measurements from the centre of the track surely you are condoning the noise level what ever it is after all you either paid to get there or are being paid to be there. i accept that you have precise knowledge of your situation but disagree with some of your statements. MSNZ must not be involved as they are just another layer of people who will not fight your corner, but will require paying to advise should you get a problem.

Hi 928. I presume you are saying that noise levels shouldn't be a MSNZ regulation, but should be a council concern, with noise measuring at the boundary? Tony Roberts

[rogered]

Just thinking after reading all this.

A. I thought this noise ruling had been around for a long time, may be 20 years(ish).
B. Why is it suddenly, and currently an issue?
C. How many cars actually have an issue with it?
D. if, say, 5 cars at a meeting, with say 200 entries, are deemed to loud, them I guess they need a muffler. the other 98% need not worry.

oh and dont get me wrong i think that anything (rotarys excluded) should run a straight pipe

[rogered]

Just thinking after reading all this.

A. I thought this noise ruling had been around for a long time, may be 20 years(ish).
B. Why is it suddenly, and currently an issue?
C. How many cars actually have an issue with it?
D. if, say, 4 cars at a meeting, with say 200 entries, are deemed to loud, then I guess they need a muffler. The other 98% need not worry.

oh and dont get me wrong i think that anything (rotarys excluded) should run a straight pipe

[RogerH]

The MSNZ noise regulations have been around for a long time but in all the years I have been racing I had never come across it actually being monitored until Pukekohe in recent times. For that reason I suppose it has never an issue until now and people are therefore starting to focus for the first time on what the MSNZ regulations actually say.

As a committee member of a club that puts on meetings, the noise monitoring at Pukekohe has become an issue. I think it is having an effect on entries as some people don't want to take the risk of paying their entry fee and then finding they are sent home after one race. They say the monitoring results are variable and they could be OK one weekend and not OK the next.

Also, from an organisers perspective, there is extra hassle in dealing with the noise monitoring process - especially when we end up having to deal with complaints. It is hard enough to put on viable meetings without the extra issues related to noise to deal with.

I was thinking about the matter of boundary noise being the real issue. At Pukekohe the monitoring is done from inside of the track not at the boundary. My car has an exhaust exit on the left hand side and has no muffler - when passing the noise monitoring station the exhaust points towards to boundary of the circuit and the car body shields the noise from the monitoring station. I am sure any noise reading for my car would be much higher if taken at the boundary (where the real issue is). It all seems a bit dumb.

Just thinking after reading all this.

A. I thought this noise ruling had been around for a long time, may be 20 years(ish).
B. Why is it suddenly, and currently an issue?
C. How many cars actually have an issue with it?
D. if, say, 5 cars at a meeting, with say 200 entries, are deemed to loud, them I guess they need a muffler. the other 98% need not worry.

oh and dont get me wrong i think that anything (rotarys excluded) should run a straight pipe

[Malcolm McLeod]

Ohhh, I gotta reply to this.... :-)

The people who have the best, um, idea of noise from competing cars are certainly not the drivers, the neighbours, the clerk of the course, event organisers or the track owners......it is us flag marshalls!!!!!!

We are the ones standing right next to the track, the car's exhaust pipes pointing towards us, so if we think it is loud, then it is.......loud!

Now, to give credit where credit is due, I have actually been troubled by very few cars in my fairly short time of flagging, obviously I DO wear hearing protection for most races, depending upon what classes are racing.

In fact, if I recall correctly, the only time I have suffered from PAINFUL noise, was during a sports car race at Pukekohe, where I was at point 4 down the back straight. In fact, I actually reported it officially, however I couldn't work out which car out of a group of 3 it was. As it was, the CoC was unable to action it....I believe Morty said it was because the sound meter was monitoring elsewhere. He did admit however that yes, there was a couple of cars that were making his ears ache.

Not trying to be a goody-two-shoes, but I believe it is everyones duty to report a car or cars that is/are obviously causing painful noise to persons wearing ear protection.

Unfortunately, unlike some of Brunty's flaggies, I can't just go and remove hearing aids...lol :-)

Rant over!

[Carlo]

As just about the only person on here who is a member of a car club that actually owns as well as operates a race circuit in NZ and one who was actually part of the team that built the place some 47 years ago I very much understand the concerns of the circuit owners for after much prudent fund raising we were able to purchase the block of land alongside of the back straight at Levels with a view future development only to a few years later being forced into the position of having to sell it off so as to gain sufficient funding so meet the legal costs in fighting the battle with the District Council, the RMA and the problems that started after the amalgamation of various councils that put us into the position of having to go through the whole consent process again. We were not assisted while this very long expensive process was undertaken by some users of the facility ignoring requirements. For many years of this on going legal process I was the Clerk of Course, hell we even had to totally relocate our public address system so as to reduce noise emissions off the property.

The Council do not need a complaint, they are bound by the act and the courts to measure our noise emissions whenever we conduct a race meeting and to issue an abatement notice should we be over the limits. We still get the account for this service after every race meeting held

For what it is worth, it was usually during testing or free practise that we had issues at National meetings and this was usually with V8 engined cars that were Auckland based for the other northern circuits such as Bay Park and Manfeild were policing the on track limits for they too had resource consents to comply with. Once the adjustments were made to the cars, usually a simple case of repacking the mufflers we never had issues and I have difficulty remembering having to black flag a car off the circuit during a race for excessive noise unless it had been damaged. During the past 15-20 years it has not really been an issue as all comply. There were 44 cars on the circuit last weekend during the Endurance race, no issues

The fight to keep Timaru Motor Raceway open took up the lives of a few of our group for the best part of 10 - 12 years and while they were doing that the other few kept all operations running. The personal cost of this commitment by the likes of Bill Brown and those assisting him cannot be measured but it was immense.

Now if those of you from Auckland actually owned Pukekohe, and it is a damn shame that no car club up there can make the commitment to own a circuit, I am sure that you too would be doing everything to protect it so as to ensure future generation could derive the pleasure from it that those of previous and current generations do.

We all need to forget about ourselves and think about our sport and as a final observation I sometimes get the feeling that Pukekohe is more important to those south of the Bombays and I include the South Island in that, than it is for those who live north of the place. For sure we enjoyed our many visits with the cars and the challenges presented by the white coats.

I am sure that if you, the members of Auckland motorsport actually owned the facility then these current issues you are facing up their be it noise, barriers or catch fencing would no longer exist.

We all need to realise where we sit in this world for there are users and then there are providers and without the later the former would have nowhere to exist.

You really should get a consortium together an purchase Pukekohe and then be both

[Kwaussie]

I can recall an incident at Teretonga Park when Aucklanders pressured the club officials on the day to black flag Craig Baird for an over the noise limit vehicle at an International event. The same vehicle was not noise tested at Pukekohe or Wigram prior but the poor old southerners had to bow to Mallard & Co from the north. Baird blamed the over/ noise on the fact that TV3 were filming the event as he had never been called out prior!