Assertion of Nimbyism over track misplaced

Assuming that speed, not the production of noise, is the objective of the racetrack, the solution is to require low-noise rated mufflers.

Dear Mr. Wolf:

In your recent opinion piece, you hit the nail on the head with the assertion that NIMBY is associated with reaction to a proposed development.

However in the case of the racetrack it is already built. And there was no public input or debate whatsoever into the proposal when it was still in the planning stage. So your assertion on Nimbyism is misplaced in my opinion. Then you go on to make fun of people who may have justifiable concerns about a project. You also state that you were at the racetrack once and it wasn’t too loud.

One visit is hardly a representative sample. I live on Gibbins Road, exactly three kilometres from the racetrack in a straight line and I can hear the racetrack even from inside the house.

Regarding the example of the logging truck going down the road, I feel that a reasonable amount of noise is justifiable if it is for someone’s job. However, wanton noise is not justified or acceptable (racetrack noise, loud speeding motorcycles). Also, if you accept that a lot of noise is already being produced in the Cowichan Valley, we should not blindly accept further noise.

Assuming that speed, not the production of noise, is the objective of the racetrack, the solution is to require low-noise rated mufflers.

According to the Drivesmart article by Tim Schewe in the July 29 Citizen “there is ample legislation in place to control noise from vehicles. The Criminal Code, Motor Vehicle Act, and municipal bylaws all provide rules and penalties.”

 

Harry Williams

Old Road Farm