Comments from October, 13th Meeting with King County and Pacific Raceways

My husband and I have been involved with the raceway when it was still known as SIR in the late 70’s & early 80’s.  Through strong Community commitment, hours of research, and lots of donated funds, the 1984 Conditional Use permit was born.  As a whole, it was felt that the rules of the CUP were lenient toward the track, but were fair, giving the County, Community and the track a basis to work with to make this facility a ‘good neighbor’.

From the get-go, there were problems with track management trying to ‘sneak’ past permit conditions.  The County, at that time, was more responsive to neighborhood complaints and violations, taking a firm stand with the track to resolve issues immediately.

This year, Pacific Raceways has been allowed, due to lack of enforcement, to complete an entire racing season without complying with the rules listed in the CUP.

Community relations with track management have deteriorated to the point that we are gathered here in an attempt to bring this facility back into line with the original CUP conditions.

The 1984 CUP sites the following conditions:

1a.  Closed Mondays and Tuesdays. 

This has been ignored all season long.  Per Berteigs definition in the 02/19/92 letter, “SIR shall be closed to all race testing & racing on quiet days…….any activity on quiet days must be quiet”.  Per 02/22/10 letter from Mr Sandin to Mr Fiorito, “no noise above the ambient noise level”.  Per 07/13/2010 letter from Ms Sawin to Mr Fiorito, “Monday and Tuesday racing & non-emergency testing may resume only if a noise study finds there is no impact.  Cease all race testing & Kart racing year round by 07/10/10”.

Mr Fiorito was well aware of the Monday and Tuesday ‘closed’ restrictions spelled out in the CUP, yet he blatantly ignored them to the detriment of the surrounding community.

1b2.  SIR shall notify BALD prior to May 1 each year for the seasons quiet day weekend days.  …shall be posted on the entrance sign for neighbors and track users.

Per Mr Berteigs letter 02/19/92, SIR was to be denied being able to change the quiet weekend days after May 1.  Two quiet weekend days in one month is not allowed.  SIR is to be closed to all race testing and racing on quiet days.                                    

On 02/10, Mr Sandin to Mr Fiorito ..reminded him to post the 5 quiet weekend days prior to May 1.   07/13/10 Sawin to Fiorito  - 5 quiet weekend days still not posted.

There were a total of2 quiet weekend days this racing season.  The community is owed 3 additional weekend days in the upcoming year.

15.5 - The plot plan shall designate camping areas…camping shall only be allowed to race participants.

Directly from the Pacific Raceway FAQ site:  Can I camp at PR?  Camping is available during all multiple-day events. …must be paid in advance for NHRA due to strong demand

Another violation

Kart Track… The Kart track advertised as being open for various events 7 days a week.  It was to be operating under the same permit as issued to the racetrack.  Only after the July 13 letter from Sawin to Fiorito did the Monday and Tuesday racing end.  Kart track was approved for 4 stroke Kart racing only.  All noise studies done by the track and the county addressed only Kart racing.  Directly from the Kart racing site, the track has been advertising for Kart racing, supermoto, drifting, car lapping.  These are unapproved and illegal activities per the Kart track permit.  Should Mr Fiorito wish to expand the use of the Kart track to other vehicles, it then should be open to a public hearing since this is a ‘new’ use. 

The above listed violations require that the County levy substantial fines against this facility for flagrant abuse of the Community throughout this year.  In addition, the CUP must be reopened to a full public hearing so that there can be definitive wording that will eliminate the need for further definition or meaning of each word in the permit.

Further, there can be no consideration of expansion of any type for this track until they have demonstrated for several years that they have the ability to abide by current rules.

In addition, any expansion must include stringent County over site for all future development since management has shown such a blatant lack of regard for both the surrounding Community and County authority.

October 13th, 2010 Pacific Raceway Questions

Jason Fiorito,

1. Would you agree that the track has certainly expanded since it began as an off-road casual racing area for high school kids in 1960? And race cars are noisy are they not? So with every expansion, the activities have increased and so has the noise, correct? And have you ever been encumbered with noise restrictions such as SeaTac airport? Why is that?

2. Are you, Jason Fiorito, the CEO of Pacific Raceways and responsible and in charge of all operations and management of Pacific Raceways, today. If not who else? Why? Give us the exact corporation name please.  More...

Fort Erie Race Track Causes Property Stigmatization

PRESS RELEASE - September 1, 2010

Contact: Dianne Giliforte – Dianne.giliforte@gmail.com

FORT ERIE SPEEDWAY LIKELY TO BRING PROPERTY
VALUES CRASHING DOWN

Property values in Fort Erie will likely plummet due to the effect of a speedway on the local environment, according to staff at the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation‟s Toronto Office. The Canadian Motor Speedway is a proposed development which would attract 60,000 to 100,000 participants to NASCAR-style racing events in the midst of a community of 30,000.

Concerned local resident and home owner, Susan Speck, has diligently amassed data which supports the correlation between a speedway and decreased property values; and recently brought her findings to the attention of the Citizens Coalition of Greater Fort Erie. According to Ms. Speck, “This occurrence is commonly called "Property Stigmatization‟ and is associated with health, environmental or investment risks.” She learned that property stigmatization “may be due to natural hazards and aesthetic disamentities; social conditions such as the crime rate; and infrastructure conditions with potentially obnoxious characteristics such as nearby highways, airports, industrial facilities, and racetracks.”

This reality is echoed by real estate professionals in both the United States and locally. “Everybody living within five miles or more . . . will have their property values decreased by 50 percent or maybe more,” said Realtor Robinson Leach, recounting his experience selling property in the small town of Lakeville, CT; adjacent to Lime Rock Raceway. “The experience of selling homes around our local auto race track for over 30 years bears me out on all my opinions.” Local real estate agents concur that noise and traffic congestion are known irritants that will decrease property values; and the Appraisal Institute of Canada concurs that “Diminution in value to a property is a result of buyer resistance which may be real or perceived”, and it follows that the public perceives health risks and other stigmas associated with close proximity to site which generates noise and air pollutants.  More...

Track Attendance is Down

Track attendance is down across the country.

And Canada, too.

Statement turned in at Meeting October 13th, 2010

Statement at Pacific Raceway’s annual meeting, October 13^th, 2010

I, for one, would not be here if Pacific Raceways followed their Conditional Use Permit.  When I moved in ten years ago, it was always quiet on Mondays and Tuesdays, and Thursdays as well.  Some Wednesdays there would be racing, and also the weekends.  It was liveable.   It is not now.   Pacific Raceways has escalated their noise and scheduled events.   The stress of this endless noise is hurting my health. This is POLLUTION that we neighbors are suffering from.   Plus, as a person with my house on the market, when I try to plug a showing into a ‘quiet’ day – racing is going on – and I lose the opportunity to sell.  

In addition to polluting our atmosphere with noise on Mondays and Tuesdays, PR did not post the quiet weekend days, and only in July they posted 3, but two were in a row, a direct violation of the CUP. They still owe neighbors these quiet days.  They should be made to provide EXTRA quiet days next year to pay their debt to their neighbors.

Jason Fiorito told me he is overextended financially, having sunk lots of cash into his effort to upgrade and expand.  He told me he has no money for “noise mitigation” and that he can race on Mondays and Tuesdays if it is “muffled” and “non impacting”. In fact, John Starbard and I were in conversation on a ‘quiet’ Tuesday and the loud racing was clearly defined.  This was not ‘quiet and non impacting’ 

This Raceway has been asserting this and going ahead and doing what they want, in the face of non enforcement.  PR twists statements from DDES, particularly the Greg Borba letter I have here for perusal.   PR lawyers quote from this letter, but leave out the most pertinent part, Quiet day activities should be non impacting, no noise above ambient levels

PR has deceptively scheduled supposed “driving schools” that are really racing on Mondays and  Tuesdays.  (  see printout, from their own website, scheduling racing on Mondays and Tuesdays  AND this was not the intent of the CUP.   

King County

1. We want proof that Pacific Raceways did the required sound berms.   No where in the Public Disclosure we received is that information.    We want to see if King County followed through to make the Raceway invest in noise mitigation.     And we want to know why berms erected have been removed.

1. We want the newest version of the proposed Ordinance File 2010-0189

1. We want King County to revoke the CUP and call a public hearing  on the existing Conditional Use Permit, revising it for the new century.  There need to be added  significant fines to be levied for each and every violation, by the hour.  These continued violations and blatant disregard for its neighbors and the County warrant such an essential action.   King County DOES have the right to revoke it, and they must.

1. We want all environmental laws upheld in regard to Pacific Raceways.  We possess DDES  documents of discussions between PR and DDES in ways to circumvent existing laws to allow development of the site. We want the author of this document (00455330.DOC;1)  It is titled,   “Required King County Code Amendments for Raceways Master Plan”

In this document  they strategize ways to construct buildings on steep slopes, fill wetlands, remove trees on slopes and in wetlands, and to erect buildings at the edge of a steep slope,  evade critical area regulations.  This, amazingly, when there have ALREADY BEEN SEVERAL SIGNIFICANT LANDSLIDES ON THIS VERY SLOPE  and two Salmon Streams are affected by this proposed development.  This casual disregard for environmental laws and salmon protection must not stand.  AMAZINGLY, THERE IS NO MASTER DRAINAGE PLAN, AND PACIFIC RACEWAYS HAS BEEN PERMITTED FOR THE SHIFT CART TRACK AND DRAG STRIP RELOCATION ON A GRANDFATHERED BASIS!

I, for one, will make it one of my missions in life to fight this Raceway Expansion for as long as I live nearby.

“ Pacific Raceways has an obligation it its many supporters, organizations and businesses to manage its affairs responsibly and not continue to jeopardize their interests”   

Notification Distance

I am concerned about the notification distance stated in the meeting notice.  It was 500 feet, if you remember.  See fine print at bottom of 2010-10-13 Meeting Notice    Some people, who actually have a common property line with Pacific Raceways, did not receive notice of the meetings, so it does not appear that the notification distance is measured from the property line.  Emails with King County did not clarify this issue.  Defining a circular area from a location is one common way for planners to describe effected areas.  Just to see what would happen, I created a few maps using google maps.  First, I used google maps to locate the address for:

Pacific Raceways
31001-144th AVE SE
Kent, WA 98042

Then, I used "get directions" to locate 528 feet along the road from the address.  I used 528 feet, because that equals 0.1 mile, which is easier to deal with and it also gives King County an extra 28 feet of notification distance.
See Google Map: 528 feet from Pacific Raceways address

Next, I printed out the map version of this location with google showing the route for 528 feet along 144th AVE SE.  I then used the distance, from A to B, as the radius for a circle that could describe the notification area.
Notification Map: Pacific Raceways street address with a 528 foot radius drawn around it
Satellite Notification Map: Pacific Raceways street address with a 528 foot radius drawn around it

As you can see, the notification distance does not leave Pacific Raceways Property.  King County needs to show on a map, how they define and use their notification distance.  If the distance is, in effect, the radius of a circle, then the only one notified by that particular criteria, has been Pacific Raceways.

The hardworking folks at CARE wrote a very good summary of some of the history of the Conditional Use Permit (CUP).  In their letter, they detail some of the issues with the CUP and the lack of enforcement of the CUP by King County.  Pacific Raceways is asking for a new permit that will give them the ability to operate however they please, with little or no restrictions.
Please Read Letter from CARE