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”