Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Keysbrook track: public comment

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Keysbrook track: public comment

    The Keysbrook racetrack referral is now out for public comment.

    I encourage you all to comment on the proposal as the more positive comments, with justified reasoning (rather than just a "hell yeah, I support a new track"), the more it will help to balance out EPA concerns about general community negativity about the track.

    To make a submission go to the EPA website consultation hub section for the proposal - https://consultation.epa.wa.gov.au/s...ltation/intro/ and fill out the electronic form. You should tick the “do not assess” box in question 5 and use the following text in the box under question 6 to explain the reasons for this recommendation.

    Suggested text for question 6:
    “I/We strongly support the proposed Keysbrook Motorsport Facility. The proposed facility is consistent with the Department of Local Government, Sport and Cultural Industries’ final draft Western Australian Motorsport Strategy 2019. The proposed Facility will be an invaluable addition to the motorsport industry and local economy.

    While it is acknowledged that there will be potential impacts to noise and inland waters, the proposal incorporates best practice environmental management measures to ensure that impacts on inland waters will not be significant and that noise will be managed in accordance with current best practice for motorsports facilities.

    The proponent has already prepared a detailed noise management plan for the proposal which incorporates Australian and international best practice measures aimed at minimising noise impacts on the local community. It is also noteworthy that benchmarking undertaken by the proponent identifies that the number of residences located within 2km of the site is substantially less than other similar operating or recently approved motorsport
    facilities within Australia and New Zealand.

    It is considered that a formal level of environmental impact assessment is not required based on the best practice management measures proposed as well as the fact that noise emissions can be adequately managed through existing processes available under the Environmental Protection (Noise) Regulations and the Planning Act.

    On this basis, we/I urge that the EPA determine not to assess the proposal.”

    Add whatever else you'd like.
    Thanks all, let's do what we can to get this up and running. *A lot* of time, effort and money has gone into getting it this far - please comment and help add to the positive endorsement of the track. Even if they do choose to assess it, an overwhelming amount of positive comments may help sway it towards a lower level of assessment which is better for all involved, and will help reduce time frames.
    Last edited by Kristy; 02-04-2020, 02:36 PM.

  • #2
    I was going to like but then read you don't want EPA approval? If its being built with best practice then surely it should meet environmental approval.

    Also noise, no point building a track if it then gets closed down due to noise complaints. Look what happened to the RAC track. One fool complained and it was shut.

    Here, people did not buy in a noisy area and deserve to have it kept that way.

    Comment


    • #3
      Not assess isn't the same as not approved. My understanding is that they don't conduct further investigations.

      Comment


      • #4
        The "do not assess" is because the studies undertaken and design plans provided to date adhere to best practice and where possible, meet relevant legislation and regulations; thus EPA is already armed with the necessary info to make an informed decision (meeting EPA requests for further information has already taken a year longer than expected due to having to commission more studies etc.). If they decide to assess, this will not make approval any more or less likely - all it will do is add to the timeframe.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kristy View Post
          If they decide to assess, this will not make approval any more or less likely - all it will do is add to the timeframe.
          Thanks for clearing that up.

          Peeps, please comment. Should take less than 5 minutes. Show them that people are interested in the track.

          It closes in a day or 2.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kristy View Post
            Even if they do choose to assess it, an overwhelming amount of positive comments may help sway it towards a lower level of assessment which is better for all involved, and will help reduce time frames.
            Allegedly around 95% of people said do not assess.............so they are going to assess! WTF!

            Time to start harassing parlimentarians me thinks. think of the jobs this would create!

            Comment


            • #7
              OK, spoke to the Project Manager earlier in the week. The level of assessment has been set at Public Environmental Review which is higher than she expected. This has a 2-week public comment period associated with it. They are awaiting an Environmental Scoping Document from EPA shortly (outlining the key issues to address, etc.) and the intent is to have a draft to EPA by end of July. The studies are pretty much done so this is largely a compilation of information into one document. She reckons a 12-month timeframe. Once everything is submitted for the final time (it goes back and forth *a lot*...), there will be a 'yes' or a 'no' from the EPA. There is a lot of ministerial support for this project so she is hopeful/positive for a good outcome.

              If we were the US where enviro restrictions are being lifted, we'd be laughing (but I don't wish for one second we were the US).

              Comment


              • #8
                This project has my full support, it's a shame that I cant contribute anything more than a statement at this time.

                I just read the Wanneroo raceway master plan, the risk assessment makes it look highly unlikely.
                Also, there is a serious lack of runoff on some of those corners.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Kristy View Post

                  If we were the US where enviro restrictions are being lifted,.
                  Covid may help get this project across the line. We need to create jobs and this will do that.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by datsikk View Post

                    Covid may help get this project across the line. We need to create jobs and this will do that.
                    The govt stimulus packages has bought forward so much work in the infrastructure and land development sectors so it's unlikely they're going to jump at every possible job creation project. The project is probably a year away from a decision so by then, things might be looking a bit better (then again stimulus packages may be reaching their end by then). I'm wondering if it came down to jobs creation they'd be more likely to give the green light to govt projects, rather than private investment? Not sure, just a thought. If they were looking to get it up and running to create jobs, they would have set it at the lower level of assessment, but they didn't (COVID was definitely a thing and its ramifications known when it was up for public comment). it is, at its heart, an environmental approval so it's still going to have to meet relevant legislation, guidances etc first and foremost e.g. the noise issue was something that threatened to stop it in its tracks about a year ago.

                    As for the Barbs thing, haven't seen the plan but my first thought was they're doing that in response to Keysbrook proposal and the very real threat of a rival track! (Oh shit, we might awaken the sleeping TTPM).
                    Last edited by Kristy; 23-06-2020, 09:18 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      The Barbs plan appears to be a rehash of the last lot of plans that did circulation and dates mid 2019.

                      12 months for yet another review of Keysbrook is a joke, especially when, as you said, a draft will be done by end July and is a compilation of existing info...

                      Still a bloody joke that such a small portion of the response can do this when vast majority was in support of it.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X