Track bosses face having to demolish 320m pile of earth
OFFICIALS at Darley Moor look set to be asked to demolish a 320m pile of earth after they failed to convince planners it had been built to prevent noise from the track bothering its neighbours.
Derbyshire Dales District Councillors voted unanimously to turn down retrospective planning permission for an 11 metre-wide “noise attenuation bund” built off a hairpin of the circuit, which is a mecca for motorcycle racing enthusiasts.
Ahead of the discussion, at the council’s latest planning committee meeting last Wednesday, Edlaston and Wyaston Parish Council had submitted a lengthy objection letter, outlining its concerns over the siting and scale of the bund. Among the concerns was the suggestion that the siting of the structure, across a public footpath at the south east of the circuit, did nothing to reduce the noise being heard on race days.
Circuit bosses had submitted a series of noise readings taken near the bund during a race on the circuit, and during an event on the nearby Pennine Autograss circuit on the other side of the bund, however, Environmental Health officers had said the data was “insufficient” and planning officer Chris Whitmore concluded in his report that the bund did not serve that purpose.
He also suggested the bund was “waste disposal on a very large scale”, despite assurances from Darley Moor that the bund was formed from bare earth, and it was due to be seeded with wildflowers.
Ashbourne councillor Sue Bull asked Mr Whitmore, during the meeting, whether it would be possible for the circuit to present a proper noise assessment to prove its worth, or whether the materials could be used to build a better bund elsewhere, but he told her the bund was simply in the wrong place.
He said: “Officers are of the opinion that the siting of the bund has no actual noise attenuation capabilities. So in terms of its permission relative to the nearest noise receptors, it’s not effective as a noise bund. So we feel it’s just an inappropriate form of development, and not something we can resolve through further noise assessment.”