Laguna Seca is under attack

[sixty4half]

Laguna Seca is being attacked by rich neighbors that decided to move next to a race track and then decided that they don't want to live next to a race track.

Laguna Seca was built out in the middle of the desert in the 1950s so that motorspoets enthusiasts would have somewhere to enjoy their sport away from annoying NIMBYs. Over the last 3 decades more and more affluent subdivisions have been built, normally with a new Golf Course or Country Club being built within the housing division. I fail to understand the logic in this.

The big problem is that Laguna Seca's grandfather clause specifies its historical activities are exempt, but it defines "historical" activities as having happened at the racetrack within the last 3 years. Because of COVID, what is Laguna Seca returning to normal activities appears to be a gigantic spike in activities (viewed thru a lens of "previous three years"). The worst result Possible is a cessation of racing activities at Laguna and that is exactly what these people are asking for.


IDK what anyone can do about it but I thought ya'll deserved to know.

Laguna Seca Sued by Rich Neighbors for Being a Race Track

The historic California track Laguna Seca faces a lawsuit from neighbors who want to see racing shut down—even though it was there first.

www.thedrive.com

 

[RACECAR]

From what I remember about the arrangement, it won't happen. Whatever "Case" they have isn't going very far.

I do love this reaction though:

 

[DC5Remy]

I’m in Colorado where they torn down the speed way that’s been here for forever, all because the rich people bought new houses right across from it. Money always wins.

 

[Greycap]

Over here they're complaining about noise from a military air base. One that has been active since 1918 and it's worth remembering that we're located about 60 km from the NATO border with Russia. The bottom line: there's no limit to stupidity.

 

[RACECAR]

I’m in Colorado where they torn down the speed way that’s been here for forever, all because the rich people bought new houses right across from it. Money always wins.

Thing is, the land Laguna Seca is on is owned BY the county. These folks gonna need way more then just cash to shut down this track. That and apparently, there is an agreement with the army from a long time ago that it must be a park of some sort. So good luck to these big pocket wannabes trying to bully the County AND the Army.

The bottom line: there's no limit to stupidity.

Yep. To quote someone else: "You can't fix stupid, its forever"

 

[kjb]

The crazy thing about the group suing they don't live next to the track it some shell group representing some corporate interests that want the land to turn into more houses. There's a gun range nearby the neighborhood in question that makes way more noise than the race track but no one complains about that

 

[Greycap]

Yep. To quote someone else: "You can't fix stupid, its forever"

I much prefer the fact that the universe consists of protons, neutrons, electrons and a whole lot of morons. As evidenced once again.

 

[eran0004]

The big problem is that Laguna Seca's grandfather clause specifies its historical activities are exempt, but it defines "historical" activities as having happened at the racetrack within the last 3 years. Because of COVID, what is Laguna Seca returning to normal activities appears to be a gigantic spike in activities (viewed thru a lens of "previous three years").

That’s a misunderstanding. The lawsuit points out that historical use means use that has been occurring for at least three years prior to a change in zoning that prohibits such use. They also say that the zoning was changed in that manner back in 1985, so historical use in this case is thus use that existed prior to 1985. It has nothing to do with the pandemic.

The worst result Possible is a cessation of racing activities at Laguna and that is exactly what these people are asking for.

That is the worst possible result, but it’s not what they are asking for. They are asking for a reduction in activities back to the levels prior to 1985, arguing that an exemption to zoning allows for continued historical use, but not increased use.

 

[Liquid]

I would like an investigative journalist with a camera to find these residents and ask them why they moved next to a racetrack.

If there are residents, their answers will be hilarious. If there are no residents and the investigation turns up a shell company looking for more land, that tells its own story.

 

[eran0004]

I would like an investigative journalist with a camera to find these residents and ask them why they moved next to a racetrack.

That sounds like a really bad idea. They have the right to file a complaint and don’t deserve to be exposed in media because of it. You may think that their complaint is unmerited, but that is up to the court to decide. Laguna Seca is a great racetrack, but it’s not so great that it would be worth suspending the rule of law in order to preserve it.

If there are residents, their answers will be hilarious. If there are no residents and the investigation turns up a shell company looking for more land, that tells its own story.

There is nothing in the lawsuit suggesting that this is about finding more land for development. On the contrary, they are asking for reduced activity - not for the racetrack to close.

 

[HarVee]

Reducing activity? Then you might as well close it.

There is no better way to kill a track than to have regulations on every little aspect of activity that can take place there. Yet again, this is California, home of American stupidity, so I shouldn't be surprised by it.

 

[Blitz24]

Reducing activity? Then you might as well close it.

There is no better way to kill a track than to have regulations on every little aspect of activity that can take place there. Yet again, this is California, home of American stupidity, so I shouldn't be surprised by it.

I mean, this same process is what killed Mesa Marin Speedway so it wouldn't shock me if it worked. Then again, it's not a private owner so the county might be harder to push around.

 

[sixty4half]

That’s a misunderstanding. The lawsuit points out that historical use means use that has been occurring for at least three years prior to a change in zoning that prohibits such use. They also say that the zoning was changed in that manner back in 1985, so historical use in this case is thus use that existed prior to 1985. It has nothing to do with the pandemic.

That is the worst possible result, but it’s not what they are asking for. They are asking for a reduction in activities back to the levels prior to 1985, arguing that an exemption to zoning allows for continued historical use, but not increased use.

I'll take your word for it. I just found out about this and you sound like you've known about it for a while so maybe you understand something I don't. I did see this in the article I did read about it though:

"They assert that said land use permit and zoning laws only allow non-racing track use, and that renting out the track (in what capacity the plaintiffs didn't define) is forbidden. They seek to have all legacy protections stripped if the track is found to have a negative environmental impact, which they claim to be self-evident."

That sounds like a really bad idea. They have the right to file a complaint and don’t deserve to be exposed in media because of it. You may think that their complaint is unmerited, but that is up to the court to decide. Laguna Seca is a great racetrack, but it’s not so great that it would be worth suspending the rule of law in order to preserve it.

We also have a freedom of press, and they aren't anonymous, they filed with the courts. Nothing he suggested is illegal or would suspend the rule of law. Journalism 101 is follow the money, find the individuals and ask them their motivations.

 

[opelgt1969]

I would like an investigative journalist with a camera to find these residents and ask them why they moved next to a racetrack.

If there are residents, their answers will be hilarious. If there are no residents and the investigation turns up a shell company looking for more land, that tells its own story.

Wonder how many of them have a "Track Car" in their garage or close by storage building.

 

[eran0004]

I'll take your word for it. I just found out about this and you sound like you've known about it for a while so maybe you understand something I don't.

You can read the lawsuit yourself. There’s a link to it in the article you shared. Which is weird, because it seems that whoever wrote the article didn’t read the lawsuit, or they are deliberately misrepresenting it in order to get a more viral article. After all it’s more provoking for their audience to read that someone wants to close the racetrack rather than reduce the level of activity.

I did see this in the article I did read about it though:

"They assert that said land use permit and zoning laws only allow non-racing track use, and that renting out the track (in what capacity the plaintiffs didn't define) is forbidden.”

They do assert that, but they also write that since the zoning changed in 1985, it’s still allowed to function as a racetrack with the level of activities that existed prior to the zoning change that prohibited it. Their claim is that the racetrack activities are not allowed to expand beyond the levels prior to 1985. So they don’t question the legality of the racetrack per se, but the increased activities at the racetrack. Historic use is fine, new and expanded use is not.

“They seek to have all legacy protections stripped if the track is found to have a negative environmental impact, which they claim to be self-evident."

No they don’t. They seek to have the activities reduced to levels prior to 1985. What they want removed is the exemption to environmental review, and that is for the same reason as stated above. An exemption to environmental review, they claim, is only allowed as long as the activity does not increase beyond historic levels and as long as there are not unusual circumstances that could warrant an environmental review. It’s not enough for the activity to have a negative impact on the environment (even though it’s clearly self evident for a race track), in this case they allege that the unusual circumstances are that the racetrack does not have a supply of drinking water and therefor relies on bottled water, that events on the track leads to congestion on the nearby highway and that the sewage treatment is inadequate to handle the influx of people during these events.

We also have a freedom of press, and they aren't anonymous, they filed with the courts. Nothing he suggested is illegal or would suspend the rule of law. Journalism 101 is follow the money, find the individuals and ask them their motivations.

If it makes them hesitate to seek legal relief then it is suppressing the rule of law. It’s one thing to investigate people in a position of power, like ministers, corporate leaders and influencers - they need to be held accountable for their actions. But sending an investigate journalist with a camera in order to “expose” ordinary citizens who seeks legal relief in court is absolutely unethical. The only reason to do that would be if you fear that the law is not on your side, so you want to try to bully them into withdrawing the suit.

If the county did nothing wrong, fine, the lawsuit will be dismissed. If the county did something wrong, the court will make sure it’s corrected. If you think such a decision in court is wrong, then either the court or the law is wrong - don’t blame the plaintiffs.

As for “follow the money”, the region makes about a quarter of a billion dollars annually from this racetrack. If anything, “the money” wants to keep the racetrack, not shut it down.

Laguna Seca's Major Events Brought $246 Million To Region In 2022

WeatherTech Raceway Laguna Seca's six major events brought over $246 million in economic impact to Monterey County, California in 2022.

www.roadracingworld.com

 

[Veinz]

Common sense should prevail here and I hope this Highway 68 coaltion has to pay all the legal fees.

But this is also California so I’m a bit worried for this track.

 

[Dragonwhisky]

Three words. Riverside International Raceway.

I'll have more to add to that when I get home.

 

[Dragonwhisky]

The more to add. Channeling some harbinger of doom.

What was once this, I might have actually been at the track as a teenager when this shot was taken. I have to dig for my photos from that era.

Is now this.

With Laguna Seca sitting where it is, and the suburban creep coming out of Monterey to the west, Salina to the east and Corral De Tierra to the south, somebody wants that land for purposes other than an historic race track.

With a detrimental environmental impact study found/created, a group of idiots that moved/built nearby, now complaining after they made the decision to do so and enough money behind it all, attempting to limit that $246mil is the first shot fired to get the economic impact of the events held there decreased to the point that an offer by whomever wants to develop that land for commercial/industrial/residential purposes will look great.

It may take them another 20 years to get it done and I may not live long enough to see it happen but, I'm bettin' it goes the same as RIR did. 'Course, if the San Andreas ever pops its cork completely and most of the folks in CA surf to Denver, none of it will matter a tin fart in a whirlwind.

I could be wrong.

 

[eran0004]

The more to add. Channeling some harbinger of doom.

What was once this, I might have actually been at the track as a teenager when this shot was taken. I have to dig for my photos from that era.

View attachment 1322809

View attachment 1322810

Is now this.
View attachment 1322811

View attachment 1322808

With Laguna Seca sitting where it is, and the suburban creep coming out of Monterey to the west, Salina to the east and Corral De Tierra to the south, somebody wants that land for purposes other than an historic race track.

Extremely unlikely.

1. There’s plenty of land on all sides around Laguna Seca. There’s no suburban sprawl anywhere near to it. If you want a piece of land for development, just buy a piece of land and develop it. Why would you need the exact spot where the racetrack is located?

2. The land is a park, owned by the county. They probably wouldn’t sell it to you even if you managed to get the racetrack to close.

3. The Highway 68 Coalition has opposed development plans for the area around the highway since at least 1981. It’s a group of of local residents and property owners who are looking after their own interests - not a group of real estate developers.

4. The lawsuit doesn’t oppose racing at Laguna Seca, it just asks for less of it.

With a detrimental environmental impact study found/created, a group of idiots that moved/built nearby, now complaining after they made the decision to do so and enough money behind it all, attempting to limit that $246mil is the first shot fired to get the economic impact of the events held there decreased to the point that an offer by whomever wants to develop that land for commercial/industrial/residential purposes will look great.

Corral de Tierra has been inhabited since the 19th century, and has been a sizeable community since the 1960’s. The Highway 68 Coalition has been active since at least 1981. The group is complaining that activities at the racetrack have increased significantly since the 1980’s and want to have the legality of that tested in court.

Could it be the end of the racetrack? It’s not impossible, if it turns out to be hard to turn a profit with a reduced level of activity that may well be the case. But it would not be the fault of the Highway 68 Coalition, because they are not responsible for making the law, they are not responsible for the zoning and they are not responsible for the activities at the racetrack.

 

[Dragonwhisky]

@eran0004 I could agree with your points, if we could rely on humans to interpret and apply existing laws, or enacting new ones, in a pure and noble fashion. Humans are notorious for adding things to laws to use to their advantage, abolishing existing and enacting new laws advancing their agendas or, just flat ignoring laws in their entirety. If someone, or group of someones, with enough money wants that land, they'll get it, one way or another.

I'll ask you to consider this; Is the economic impact, of the events held at Laguna Seca, to the county it sits in and owns it, more or less than the economic impact of it being used for industrial/commercial/residential purposes? Whichever exceeds the other will be what it gets used for.

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for the track staying and being used as much or more than it ever was. I have very little confidence it will be.

 

[eran0004]

@eran0004 I could agree with your points, if we could rely on humans to interpret and apply existing laws, or enacting new ones, in a pure and noble fashion. Humans are notorious for adding things to laws to use to their advantage, abolishing existing and enacting new laws advancing their agendas or, just flat ignoring laws in their entirety. If someone, or group of someones, with enough money wants that land, they'll get it, one way or another.

You’re describing corruption, not law. What makes you think someone wants that land?

I'll ask you to consider this; Is the economic impact, of the events held at Laguna Seca, to the county it sits in and owns it, more or less than the economic impact of it being used for industrial/commercial/residential purposes? Whichever exceeds the other will be what it gets used for.

What kind of business could you run at Laguna Seca that would generate a revenue for the county of more than a quarter billion dollars annually? And why is it essential that it’s located at the exact same spot as the racetrack?

 

[Dragonwhisky]

You’re describing corruption, not law. What makes you think someone wants that land?

Hmm. Now we're getting into philosophy. There cannot be corruption, in this frame, without laws. Who makes those laws and who corrupts them? It is the nature of humans to do both.

What kind of business could you run at Laguna Seca that would generate a revenue for the county of more than a quarter billion dollars annually? And why is it essential that it’s located at the exact same spot as the racetrack?

It's not just the business(es) that generate the income. There's indirect revenue generated when factories and commercial interests get built. That indirect revenue will be much steadier than the bursts Laguna Seca events generate. I'm not doin' the maths on that but you can bet someone is. Did you have a look at what's been built over the site of RIR? That was just commercial and residential. Admittedly, that became a much more populated area back in the 80s & 90s and it's a bit closer to much larger metro areas than Laguna Seca and Monterey. I expect that difference to slow down the process there quite a bit. None of this belays that someone(s) could subdivide that land into lots,whatever the zoning, and make a lot of money. The incentive to get the gov't to change the laws to allow it and the owners, whomever they are, to sell, boils down to what I'm sure you'll call more corruption. That kind of thing has happened before and it'll continue to happen.

BTW, I didn't say what was happening there is "sprawl". Sprawl is what happened to Moreno Valley, which, when I lived there was 3 separate towns. In 1981, the year I left Sunnymead, there were still grapefuit orchards just outside the subdivision I lived in. I would state there's a corridor between the South Boundary Rd and CA 68, extrapolating S Boundary along the ridge, towards Salina, that I would consider prime land for the "suburban creep", as I called it, to spread. It already has somewhat. It appears, from the satellite imagery on google maps, they've already improved a portion of the road west of Salina to 4 lanes. Some of the terrain north and west of Creekside might be a bit challenging to develop for. It's not even improbable that humans would consider it. If the spread does occur, I see CA68 becoming 4 lane all the way to Monterey. With any luck, it won't happen in a lifetime or two.

Doesn't really matter to me, or you I suspect, as both of us are far removed from what happens at a sleepy little racetrack in some hills near the California coast.

 

[Jump_Ace]

I just want to shout something republicans would in this case. And that is, 'THEY ARE ATTACKING OUR CHURCH!"


Jerome

 

[eran0004]

Hmm. Now we're getting into philosophy. There cannot be corruption, in this frame, without laws. Who makes those laws and who corrupts them? It is the nature of humans to do both.

What corruption? Do you have any specific example of that occurring in this case?

It's not just the business(es) that generate the income. There's indirect revenue generated when factories and commercial interests get built.

Nobody wants to build a factory at Laguna Seca.

That indirect revenue will be much steadier than the bursts Laguna Seca events generate. I'm not doin' the maths on that but you can bet someone is. Did you have a look at what's been built over the site of RIR?

RIR was closed because the land around it was being developed, not because someone wanted to build something at the racetrack.

Admittedly /…/ it's a bit closer to much larger metro areas than Laguna Seca and Monterey.

Quite an understatement.

None of this belays that someone(s) could subdivide that land into lots,whatever the zoning, and make a lot of money. The incentive to get the gov't to change the laws to allow it and the owners, whomever they are, to sell, boils down to what I'm sure you'll call more corruption. That kind of thing has happened before and it'll continue to happen.

Where has that happened before? What signs of it happening again do you see in this case? What laws are being changed to allow for such a development? And of course the billion dollar question: if Monterey wanted to redevelop the land, why would they oppose this lawsuit?

I would state there's a corridor between the South Boundary Rd and CA 68, extrapolating S Boundary along the ridge, towards Salina, that I would consider prime land for the "suburban creep", as I called it, to spread. It already has somewhat. It appears, from the satellite imagery on google maps, they've already improved a portion of the road west of Salina to 4 lanes. Some of the terrain north and west of Creekside might be a bit challenging to develop for. It's not even improbable that humans would consider it. If the spread does occur, I see CA68 becoming 4 lane all the way to Monterey. With any luck, it won't happen in a lifetime or two.

Sure, in a century or so the situation could be different. But it’s completely irrelevant to this case.

 

[Dragonwhisky]

Stay pure dude.

 

[RACECAR]

Think the slightly cynical narrative is abit overreaching and at best, this is only noteworthy because "People living next to racetrack complaining about noise". Case won't go far as previously stated and you don't have be "pure" to not react in such a doomsday matter.

 

[Mirai]

County of Monterey and Friends of Laguna Seca reach settlement for Laguna Seca Recreation Area - The King City Rustler | Your Local News Source in King City, California

SALINAS — The County of Monterey Department of Public Works, Facilities and Parks and Friends of Laguna Seca (FLS) have announced the execution of a comprehensive settlement that ends the Laguna Seca Raceway lawsuit, “Highway 68 Coalition vs. County of Monterey.” “We view this as a very...

kingcityrustler.com

Bit of a thread revive, but it looks like common sense wins this round

 

[EngieDiesel]

County of Monterey and Friends of Laguna Seca reach settlement for Laguna Seca Recreation Area - The King City Rustler | Your Local News Source in King City, California

SALINAS — The County of Monterey Department of Public Works, Facilities and Parks and Friends of Laguna Seca (FLS) have announced the execution of a comprehensive settlement that ends the Laguna Seca Raceway lawsuit, “Highway 68 Coalition vs. County of Monterey.” “We view this as a very...

kingcityrustler.com

Bit of a thread revive, but it looks like common sense wins this round

The settlement clarifies the long-term plans of FLS to conduct a previously planned sound impact assessment at the racetrack and carry out appropriate sound mitigation measures, all as part of being a good neighbor to the surrounding community.

So pretty much "we were already working on this before you decided to complain about it, thus all you did was give money to some lawyers to do basically nothing."

 

[Nielsen]

If you don’t what to be disturbed by the world around you, don’t choose to live where things are happening. It’s quite simple.

Shutting down Laguna Seca would just turn Monterey into another coastal city. It’s usually good for a community’s capacity for growth when something local is world famous. Those idiots should should be happy to own properties nearby.

 

[Roo]

If you don’t what to be disturbed by the world around you, don’t choose to live where things are happening. It’s quite simple.

Follow the money. If you buy a property for cheap because it's near a noisy thing and you can get the noisy thing shut down, your property goes up in value.