"I bought a house near a race track, knowing full well there was a track there, and now im gonna complain so hard they have yo shut it down" is one of the worst takes that people have, but you hear about it all the time.
When one party (which in this case will actually be several parties) represents a badly needed asset everyone needs, and the other a niche activity related business only some people like, that's the most unfair fight ever. It's never going to come down to who was there first.
@@scarpfish Good thing the agreement to buying properties in that development is that they have to sign acknowledging they are buying property near the tracks and have to accept the noise they generate.
@@danielingoldby5834 By the way, I meant that the retail density would be symbiotic with the track, and the apartment dwellers would be warned ahead of time.
USA having so much empty land is a blessing and a curse at the same time. In most cases, there is no incentive to save rural land because it seems unlimited. But then you end up with endless suburbs
The worst part about these suburbs is that nobody can buy or rent the houses because the price is unaffordable in most cases, thanks to the way the economy currently is.
Here in Calgary they remove the racing track here for more housing developments. But now every summer you will hear people street racing on local highways. Then the city mayors wonders why theres a lot of car fatal accidents not only in the city but also the surrounding towns
Meanwhile areas that kept their drag strips reduce street racing by having officially sanction open track nights. Some even have "beat the heat" events where people can safely and legally drag race the cops. But many areas are dumb, Just look when areas close their skate parks and then the shopping center owners complain about the skateboarders. So the cops go after the people having fun and the city never looks at it as being a result of taking away the place they could do it legally.
@filanfyretracker we don't have a racetrack anywhere near home, the closest one is well over an hour away, and is only open for events during certain times of the year. Leads to street racing all the time.
It’s great to see urban planning RUclipsrs like you who are pro racetracks. Racetracks (that drag strip especially) would probably reduce speeding and street takeovers as well.
@@ninjalectualx I haven't researched at all, but I'm assuming that if people had a place to race without risking speeding penalties or injuring someone, they would prefer it over the streets
Yes I know you're assuming, that's the problem. I know it SEEMS REASONABLE that a track would reduce street racing, but humans are not logical creatures so we need actual data to know if our guess is true.
Generally the only urban planning types who are anti-car are gonna be teenagers. The moment you hit college and start taking urban planning courses you realize the value of personal transportation, you just also see the consequences of building society *around* it
Yeah, the problem is that these homeowners move in knowing there's a racetrack, and even when they sign contracts acknowledging they know there will be noises (as seen with Cleetus McFarland's Freedom Factory), they still pursue legal solutions, which more often than not results in the race track getting shut down.
Very similar situation close to where i live. Some small hobby airport has been open since 1912, and there are of course people who do not like the noise. I get the argument that the airport was there first. But are we supposed to have things exist in absolute perpetuity, because they were there first? What if you were born within noise range? You didn't choose to be born near an airport, but because the airport was there first, you are not allowed to vote or petition to have it removed.What if the airport is only used a little the year you move in, but 3 years later it is used a lot more. The only solution for the race track is to halt the development. Because humans have rights, not objects. And sooner or later, any legal protection afforded to the race track will be torn down. It could be in 2 years or in 20 years, but it will be torn down eventually.
There's an intersection in Fort Collins Colorado that goes like this: There are two intersections within 15 feet of each other, with a major pedestrian/biking trail going through both, a bus path going through, 2 parking lot entrances right next to it all with a railroad going through. 9 different train, car, and pedestrian traffic flows. It's the W Drake Rd and Bay Rd intersection. You should try to fix it next.
Looking at that reminds me of Hillsborough St, Beryl Rd, and Blue Ridge Rd in Raleigh pre-2022. In late 2022 they actually started fixing that intersection bcz it was a piece o crap. Its almost done. But pre-2022 it was just like the one you mentioned. I can see how that can be an issue
Hey - that intersection looks like it might be able to be turned into something like the intersection between Jensen Beach Blvd and Pineapple Ave in Jensen Beach Florida!
I suggest that you embace urbanism to protect those tracks. Maybe get the adjacent land zoned as multiuse, so that retail can be placed right next to the track, with offices and apartments above the retail. This will act as a barrier to protect the track.
@@DiamondKingStudios haha You joke, but that actually might make sense. The apartments can be designed to give a good view of the track; thus raising the value. Maybe a hotel could be built.
@@DeniSaputtaIf the neighborhood has any sense of cohesion, they’d find some way to drive the opponents of the racetrack to a different residential area, even if they had to go beyond mere passive-aggressive tactics. Actually, that seems a bit scary. That level of power invites probably worse things, given historical precedent. But the point still stands that the racetrack must remain.
If I'm not mistaken this whole issue comes from political power dynamics in the area. This shouldn't happen in the first place, as this was always meant to stay rural area, but then you get those money hungry bozos that do not care. I believe the main dude (is it governor? or like mayor?) is trying to find specific solutions like the historical status to save the racetrack, but we will see how that goes - for most part their hands are bound at this point. They tried to stop the agreement for redevelopment of the area, but there just wasn't enough power in right hands.
As a car guy this is a good Idea because if you don't give people a place to race they are just going to street race. This why you see so many videos of people cutting in up in NYC after the local track closed
I dont think race track should ever considered shut down cause of nearby developent. Everyone have choice where he wanna live. If you choose place nearby racetrack, it your fault, not racetrack owner. You have always choice to move to more quiet place.
Something I've noticed is that car enthusiasts and urbanists want the same things. But too narrow of a view from the former, and incorrect assumptions made by the latter about what the former wants, makes communication difficult between the two. I hope this situation can at least serve to make the two groups understand each other a bit better. As they would be powerful allies. (Hard to write this both without sounding biased and without sounding detached from both groups. Especially when it's midnight at the time of writing this.)
I blame car people entirely for the bad communication. They aren't willing to consider that public transportation benefits them too by getting the rest of us off the road for them
@@ninjalectualx I'mma stop you right there and say there are urbanists actively trying to force drivers out of their cars and onto bicycles and public transit because they're concerned about microplastics and noise pollution. Then go out of their way to say drivers choose to kill people and then complain there's no actual charge for murder via vehicle, when there absolutely is and it's called 'vehicular homicide.' Part of being a motorhead is literally finding an excuse to drive without being inconvenienced by driving just because you like your car that much. Including small trips of less than a mile. Cars are meant to be driven.
@lady Yep you are exactly the kind of misinformed car brain I'm talking about. Nothing you're saying is true. Literally no one is trying to take your car away.
It’s mainly younger car people that think that way and can see the benefits of not needing are a car to get to the auto parts store. while the older car people are more vocal about not wanting more bikabilty or walkability
I agree. I coincidentally mentioned that racers need to embrace urbanism to protect the track. I also suggested: maybe get the adjacent land zoned as multiuse, so that retail can be placed right next to the track, with offices and apartments above the retail.
There needs to be wording in the deeds when the suburbs reach noisy places that were put out at the ass end of nowhere because they were noisy. That wording would be telling the people they acknowledge they are buying a home next to x place that makes a lot of noise and that by buying that home they cannot make noise complaints. Additionally I think planning bodies need to establish "noise zones" around things like tracks, concert venues, clubs, etc. So when residential construction catches up to them or converts previously industrial land that was around them its already in an ordinance that sound curfews cannot be passed.
the closest racetrack to me is route 66 speedway in joliet. there used to be one in my home town but it got closed down. also theres a very long flat and straight road about half a mile from my house and guess what i hear all night long? there are literally skid marks on that road constantly and even donut marks
Racing isn’t safe no matter what, the reason we need racetracks is so that people can race if they want to, they risk their lives, but don’t risk lives of people on the road
If existing areas cannot have increased suburbanization due to zoning laws and the way how it was designed, then they'd always expand all the way to rural areas.
I live a few miles away from this area, and even have a friend that lives maybe 1 minute away from here. Not so disruptive, but that is coming from a guy who absolutely loves cars 😅
People who willingly moved next to a racing complex here and then got it shut down made the roads nore congested, pushed the racers to surface streets, and burdened everyone else in the area with pop-up unauthorized street racing every weekend. The impact of these developments hurts the entire region. Save the tracks and stop the sprawl!
my nearby race track was shutdown a few years ago, owners retired and because of its location they didn't allow it to be bought out. So naturally street racing is way up because of it. Pretty busy highways that were dangerous enough
I live right next to this track and I’m really hoping actual car enthusiasts are the ones who move in to these houses there is a contract they have to sign for this though so it does help with the track not being shutdown
When doing something like this too allows that space near the track to be used for something like a walkable commercial space like a plaza where restaurants and shops could develop which further separates the noise of the race track from the residential area
i once went to a race track near where i live and i loved it but then a few years later houses had been built and there were to many noise complaints on the racetrack so it had to close down
As an engineer who got started in automotive and now aims to work remote... I can't imagine a better township to live in than Racetrack, PA. Thats the equivalent of a cool desk gizmo when working remote. I hope that this works out for both parties. would be a shame to see our system abused for money.
that last point is so important. Portland has a street racing problem and they swear to God if they just opened up the racetrack we already have to the public more often, I really think that it would lessen the issue on the streets
Just gonna say, those houses WILL try to get that racetrack shut down, racing village or not, they say it’s fine now, but later… lawsuits will come, give it 10-20 years i say
I still say the noise dampening systems used by urban airports that are completely surrounded by housing developments & highways could easily be implemented. Earthen sound baffles and noise barrier walls could work in conjunction to reduce the noise levels to a tolerable decibel level no different than a typical busy road.
To fellow anti-car people that happen to read my comment: the last sentence of the video is very true; we should want the moisy race tracks to exist so fast cars fans have an alternative to endangering us at night on the streets.
For some reason I saw the oval and thought horse racing 🐎 and was so confused about the noise problem you were talking about, I'm like, "Are horses neighing really that loud?" 😂
I’d imagine the clatter of hooves supporting hundreds of pounds of weight is something that would quite reverberate. Also any man with a microphone and speakers extending throughout the complex, having once gone to an SEC university.
I think I've said this before but like why do people love moving into areas that are noisy (near airports or racetracks) and then start complaining about noise?
Another idea that I've seen implemented here in Tulsa, OK is walls of sorts, to dampen the sound of the racetrack. I don't know if it would be effective, but they're everywhere in Tulsa next to busy interstates that border neighborhoods
Where I live some complain about the noise from jets. The airstrip had been there for years and they warned the city about the encroaching suburbs. But they city keep building closer and closer. But if the city lost that airstrip they would lose a lot of money.
I don't know why some of these developers don't think through this. And when they're building all these houses, they don't take a piece of the land either right down the middle or on one edge, especially if they're going to be building off to another property, that side of it, where they take a 1000 foot, frontage and less than a 100 foot deep and make retail spaces a small supermarket, a gas station? Hardware store dry cleaners pizza place. Oh kind of the basics that you would see. It would be phenomenal for business 'cause it would be literally in walking distance in very short delivery distance if needed, and they can even build apartments on top of the stores. Even better , a lot of problems with restaurants and supermarkets are issues with vermin and rodents , and if the buildings can be built properly from the Beginning , you can eliminate a lot of that issue
Why dont they build a sound barrier wall? Also massive respect for you mentioning people who live out in tge country respectfully you gained my subscription
Sound barriers don’t work too well and are very expensive. You can only reduce the noise by a little bit. And the vehicles racing can’t change to be quieter.
Well, I think USA could learn a lot from european cities. Not only efficient urban planning, but also the convenience of a proper public transportation system, safer roads, roundabouts a lot other things that I can't quite understand why they aren't using
They also could try to sound proof the houses as much as they can so they wont hear it as much. If street racing is what they want, thats what they gana get lol
It's also a shockingly poor use of land as the water table is so high it requires those enormous sumps, which are going to become stagnant mosquito breeding grounds every Summer.
all of these solutions cost developers more money than just developing rural land. stupidly they'd rather spend extra money on lawyers to get the exceptions granted to develop that land than spend it on solutions that don't require developing that land
The cheapest thing for developers to do is to build 2-3 story apartment buildings in the middle of nowhere to don't have to obey to any rules and planning. That's what's happening in Poland.
Land value tax: tax the land (at a higher rate than normal property tax) not the building/use of it, that incentivises efficient use of land, thus reducing urban sprawl and leaving more space for nature and rural areas
@@filip36365 to the contrary, it can help reduce housing prices. The builders wouldn't be paying tax on it, the owners would. The owners no longer pay tax for the building (like they do under current property tax), just the land. This incentives land owners to use the land more efficiently, as having more housing on it increases profits without increasing tax. The increased efficiency leads to increased housing development, thus increased housing supply, and thus lower housing cost.
@@filip36365 to the contrary, actually. First of all, builders aren't paying the tax land owners are. But more important: -The tax is only on the land and not on the building/use (current property taxes that it would replace also tax the building/use) -This means land owners are incentivised to use their land efficiently, as they're paying the same tax no matter what they do with the land (unlike property taxes which discourage efficient use, as that gets taxed more by property tax) -This means land owners will be building more housing (when the demand for it exists) on their land to make the most out of it -This means a larger housing supply, which by supply and demand economics means a lower housing price
@nienke7713 but what happens when the builders develop the land into housing and than sell it off. Wouldn't the new owners (aka citizens) now be paying a much higher rate? Or do you mean that the tax would only apply to undeveloped land?
People buy homes in the suburbs to have their own yard, actually own the property so they can tailor it and build their space to their liking, and not be on top of each other in a noisy, smelly building. Replacing homes with apartment buildings in the middle of the country is both stupid and unpopular.
Yeah, building upon the existing land they already have would be the ideal and logical solution, BUT ARE THEY GONNA ACTUALLY DO THAT! no. Theyre going to force this dude into a legal battle he won't survive and then TAKE his land just like their ancestors took this land feom the indigenous people.
He's going to get a disease from them without ever meeting them and pass away and then decades/centuries later they will occupy the practically uninhibited remnants of his once great space? Dang, does he know we got vaccines and antibiotics and stuff nowadays? 😂
Car centric suburban sprawl like this is bad for the environment. This kind of development is irresponsible, and will lead to increasingly catastrophic natural disasters like the recent hurricanes that have demolished large sections of the American southeast.
Do NOT use free space inside urban areas, they are required for good living. We need a different architecture: either UK style terraced houses along a street with small garden behind. or even real terraced houses with the garden ontop the roof of the home below and parking lots in the space underneath. Yes, you need concrete and maisonry, no US-style cardboard houses. Do NOT hamper individual traffic as that is the main reason why we are so much more productive than 150 years ago. Your critics and suggestions are so limited, free your mind.
@@amadeosendiulo2137 Yes, because the racers will find the next best thing. Racers don't stop racing because it started raining. They just race in the rain ;)
Govt doesn't work like that. "Karen's" don't work like that. NIMBY is huge with society now. The smartest thing to do is build the track in the middle of nowhere, at least 5 miles away from any development. Once that track is done, you basically grandfathered yourself in, and no one can complain there's a racetrack "too close to their house" because it was there before their house...and they already knew the track was there.
The poorest regions in America are rural and the richest are cities. Dense affordable housing puts people in homes, suburban sprawl is what propagates poverty and homelessness.
There’s plenty of land. That’s not the issue. More density isn’t the answer. Many people don’t want to live densely. The new build neighbourhoods you show as not having much space so space away from neighbours must not be the reason people buy those homes is a failed assumption. While it may be true, it may not. It may be that people buy those houses because it’s all that is available and they’re cheaper. For many people, if there were more options where they had more space away from neighbours, more yards, and didn’t cost a lot, they would buy that.
There’s plenty of land but it’s not utilized correctly, and there are plenty of people that DO want to live in a denser city, it’s just NOT an option for the most part because of city planning laws. Suburban sprawl wasn’t created out of “market demand” it’s the result of those laws
I feel like the whole “having a race track prevents street racing” argument is weak and far from true. Where I live there was a track. And there also was and is a huge “street racing” problem. I put it in quotes because it’s not really racing. It’s a bunch of idiots who just wanna drive like idiots and try to show off the cars that daddy bought them. Sadly I don’t believe that having tracks will ever be a thing for those people. Sure there are some people who would utilize a racetrack and not race on the road but the vast majority would not. See at a track there are rules which are enforced, safety standards built into the cars which must be respected oh yeah and that whole thing, respect. There is a huge lack of respect out there. Why would you want to go to a track when your car is a rattle box POS you have zero safety equipment and zero respect for others?
Go electric! Look forward! Keep it on down low! We have tripled the world's population in less then 80 years!!!! I've seen LI lose tracks like Flys, in less then 40! Like everything, only human things don't last! Now there's a highway, golf course.. Who's going to know or care in a hundred years?
"I bought a house near a race track, knowing full well there was a track there, and now im gonna complain so hard they have yo shut it down" is one of the worst takes that people have, but you hear about it all the time.
When one party (which in this case will actually be several parties) represents a badly needed asset everyone needs, and the other a niche activity related business only some people like, that's the most unfair fight ever. It's never going to come down to who was there first.
You just invented a whole series of events in your own head there.
Then they'll complain that people race in the streets
@@scarpfishRace tracks that are famous need to be designated as historic sites, this same thing is happening to Laguna Seca and it's heartbreaking.
@@scarpfish Good thing the agreement to buying properties in that development is that they have to sign acknowledging they are buying property near the tracks and have to accept the noise they generate.
Damn, car centric planning is so bad they started developing over the only places people actually want to drive cars
Only Americans think there’s “car centric planning “, in the rest of the world it’s just called planning
It's not just car centric planning. It's dense sprawl.
Would density near the track change anything?
@@eugenetswong Density near the track leads to noise complaints and eventually the track closing. It is happening across the country
@@danielingoldby5834 By the way, I meant that the retail density would be symbiotic with the track, and the apartment dwellers would be warned ahead of time.
Car enthusiasts: We like cars
Developers: Okay *demolishes racetrack for car-centric development*
Car enthusiasts: Wait-
USA having so much empty land is a blessing and a curse at the same time. In most cases, there is no incentive to save rural land because it seems unlimited. But then you end up with endless suburbs
Resource curse, I suppose.
This sums it up pretty well. Does lead to Multiple issues like car dependency.
The worst part about these suburbs is that nobody can buy or rent the houses because the price is unaffordable in most cases, thanks to the way the economy currently is.
We need to begin teaching people to buy land and start a family again
Well some areas protect rural land like Central Kentucky's Bluegrass region and I'm sure there's otgers
Here in Calgary they remove the racing track here for more housing developments. But now every summer you will hear people street racing on local highways. Then the city mayors wonders why theres a lot of car fatal accidents not only in the city but also the surrounding towns
Meanwhile areas that kept their drag strips reduce street racing by having officially sanction open track nights. Some even have "beat the heat" events where people can safely and legally drag race the cops.
But many areas are dumb, Just look when areas close their skate parks and then the shopping center owners complain about the skateboarders. So the cops go after the people having fun and the city never looks at it as being a result of taking away the place they could do it legally.
@filanfyretracker we don't have a racetrack anywhere near home, the closest one is well over an hour away, and is only open for events during certain times of the year.
Leads to street racing all the time.
Learning just now about race tracks, such a new concept for me. I had to watch the video twice cause I seriously didn't understand it
It’s great to see urban planning RUclipsrs like you who are pro racetracks. Racetracks (that drag strip especially) would probably reduce speeding and street takeovers as well.
It seems like it would reduce street racing, but does it actually? Had anyone actually studied this?
@@ninjalectualx I haven't researched at all, but I'm assuming that if people had a place to race without risking speeding penalties or injuring someone, they would prefer it over the streets
Yes I know you're assuming, that's the problem. I know it SEEMS REASONABLE that a track would reduce street racing, but humans are not logical creatures so we need actual data to know if our guess is true.
Generally the only urban planning types who are anti-car are gonna be teenagers. The moment you hit college and start taking urban planning courses you realize the value of personal transportation, you just also see the consequences of building society *around* it
@@ninjalectualxi would defiantely go to one of there was one in my area. Closest one is an almost 2 hour drive
Yeah, the problem is that these homeowners move in knowing there's a racetrack, and even when they sign contracts acknowledging they know there will be noises (as seen with Cleetus McFarland's Freedom Factory), they still pursue legal solutions, which more often than not results in the race track getting shut down.
Very similar situation close to where i live. Some small hobby airport has been open since 1912, and there are of course people who do not like the noise. I get the argument that the airport was there first. But are we supposed to have things exist in absolute perpetuity, because they were there first? What if you were born within noise range? You didn't choose to be born near an airport, but because the airport was there first, you are not allowed to vote or petition to have it removed.What if the airport is only used a little the year you move in, but 3 years later it is used a lot more.
The only solution for the race track is to halt the development. Because humans have rights, not objects. And sooner or later, any legal protection afforded to the race track will be torn down. It could be in 2 years or in 20 years, but it will be torn down eventually.
I wouldn’t be surprised if some idiot planner plans to establish suburbs near the Talladega Superspeedway and they want to close it down.
A lot of them are paid by private equity that wants the land
Their streets will be the new race track
@@Pearloryx Take one look at what has been happening to Laguna Seca. Its goddamm Laguna Seca and there imbeciles trying to close it
A RACE VILLAGE???
that sounds like heaven
There's an intersection in Fort Collins Colorado that goes like this:
There are two intersections within 15 feet of each other, with a major pedestrian/biking trail going through both, a bus path going through, 2 parking lot entrances right next to it all with a railroad going through.
9 different train, car, and pedestrian traffic flows.
It's the W Drake Rd and Bay Rd intersection. You should try to fix it next.
Looking at that reminds me of Hillsborough St, Beryl Rd, and Blue Ridge Rd in Raleigh pre-2022. In late 2022 they actually started fixing that intersection bcz it was a piece o crap. Its almost done. But pre-2022 it was just like the one you mentioned. I can see how that can be an issue
Holy crap, I mean, he should do a livestream of that.
Hey - that intersection looks like it might be able to be turned into something like the intersection between Jensen Beach Blvd and Pineapple Ave in Jensen Beach Florida!
I can attest, it does look hideous, both of them.
Ok
We can only pray at this point may our racetracks be protected and not overlooked
I suggest that you embace urbanism to protect those tracks. Maybe get the adjacent land zoned as multiuse, so that retail can be placed right next to the track, with offices and apartments above the retail. This will act as a barrier to protect the track.
@@eugenetswongThe Terraces at the Racetrack- I can’t wait to see such a sign!
@@DiamondKingStudios haha
You joke, but that actually might make sense. The apartments can be designed to give a good view of the track; thus raising the value. Maybe a hotel could be built.
As a racing fan, I appreciate your comment at the end.
😂In a few years, there will be neighbors who want the place closed because it's noisy.
You seriously think one closed off race track is enough for street racers, GFY, quit talking out the side of your neck
@@DeniSaputtaIf the neighborhood has any sense of cohesion, they’d find some way to drive the opponents of the racetrack to a different residential area, even if they had to go beyond mere passive-aggressive tactics.
Actually, that seems a bit scary. That level of power invites probably worse things, given historical precedent. But the point still stands that the racetrack must remain.
Why not make the the racetrack a historical building. That way it can’t be demolished or removed.
If I'm not mistaken this whole issue comes from political power dynamics in the area. This shouldn't happen in the first place, as this was always meant to stay rural area, but then you get those money hungry bozos that do not care. I believe the main dude (is it governor? or like mayor?) is trying to find specific solutions like the historical status to save the racetrack, but we will see how that goes - for most part their hands are bound at this point. They tried to stop the agreement for redevelopment of the area, but there just wasn't enough power in right hands.
Has to be like fifty years old.... And has to prove it's historic and of historic significance.
As a car guy this is a good Idea because if you don't give people a place to race they are just going to street race. This why you see so many videos of people cutting in up in NYC after the local track closed
Dude literally got me hooked on shorts. Like seriously great shit.
that racetrack is absolutely cooked
The Freedom Factory is going to stand strong to the housing development.
Thankfully cleetus ain't standin down anytime soon :)
I dont think race track should ever considered shut down cause of nearby developent. Everyone have choice where he wanna live. If you choose place nearby racetrack, it your fault, not racetrack owner. You have always choice to move to more quiet place.
Something I've noticed is that car enthusiasts and urbanists want the same things. But too narrow of a view from the former, and incorrect assumptions made by the latter about what the former wants, makes communication difficult between the two.
I hope this situation can at least serve to make the two groups understand each other a bit better. As they would be powerful allies.
(Hard to write this both without sounding biased and without sounding detached from both groups. Especially when it's midnight at the time of writing this.)
I blame car people entirely for the bad communication. They aren't willing to consider that public transportation benefits them too by getting the rest of us off the road for them
@@ninjalectualx I'mma stop you right there and say there are urbanists actively trying to force drivers out of their cars and onto bicycles and public transit because they're concerned about microplastics and noise pollution. Then go out of their way to say drivers choose to kill people and then complain there's no actual charge for murder via vehicle, when there absolutely is and it's called 'vehicular homicide.'
Part of being a motorhead is literally finding an excuse to drive without being inconvenienced by driving just because you like your car that much. Including small trips of less than a mile. Cars are meant to be driven.
@lady Yep you are exactly the kind of misinformed car brain I'm talking about. Nothing you're saying is true. Literally no one is trying to take your car away.
It’s mainly younger car people that think that way and can see the benefits of not needing are a car to get to the auto parts store. while the older car people are more vocal about not wanting more bikabilty or walkability
I agree. I coincidentally mentioned that racers need to embrace urbanism to protect the track. I also suggested: maybe get the adjacent land zoned as multiuse, so that retail can be placed right next to the track, with offices and apartments above the retail.
There needs to be wording in the deeds when the suburbs reach noisy places that were put out at the ass end of nowhere because they were noisy. That wording would be telling the people they acknowledge they are buying a home next to x place that makes a lot of noise and that by buying that home they cannot make noise complaints. Additionally I think planning bodies need to establish "noise zones" around things like tracks, concert venues, clubs, etc. So when residential construction catches up to them or converts previously industrial land that was around them its already in an ordinance that sound curfews cannot be passed.
the closest racetrack to me is route 66 speedway in joliet. there used to be one in my home town but it got closed down. also theres a very long flat and straight road about half a mile from my house and guess what i hear all night long? there are literally skid marks on that road constantly and even donut marks
You could plant more trees to muffle the noise we do this in england with train tracks !
Race Village sounds sick
Racing isn’t safe no matter what, the reason we need racetracks is so that people can race if they want to, they risk their lives, but don’t risk lives of people on the road
Yep
If existing areas cannot have increased suburbanization due to zoning laws and the way how it was designed, then they'd always expand all the way to rural areas.
I live a few miles away from this area, and even have a friend that lives maybe 1 minute away from here. Not so disruptive, but that is coming from a guy who absolutely loves cars 😅
People who willingly moved next to a racing complex here and then got it shut down made the roads nore congested, pushed the racers to surface streets, and burdened everyone else in the area with pop-up unauthorized street racing every weekend. The impact of these developments hurts the entire region. Save the tracks and stop the sprawl!
my nearby race track was shutdown a few years ago, owners retired and because of its location they didn't allow it to be bought out. So naturally street racing is way up because of it. Pretty busy highways that were dangerous enough
I live right next to this track and I’m really hoping actual car enthusiasts are the ones who move in to these houses there is a contract they have to sign for this though so it does help with the track not being shutdown
The track will also get income for the area so it is also beneficial that way
When doing something like this too allows that space near the track to be used for something like a walkable commercial space like a plaza where restaurants and shops could develop which further separates the noise of the race track from the residential area
i once went to a race track near where i live and i loved it but then a few years later houses had been built and there were to many noise complaints on the racetrack so it had to close down
I don't understand theses people. They built houses near noisy places and complains about noise pollution.
As an engineer who got started in automotive and now aims to work remote... I can't imagine a better township to live in than Racetrack, PA. Thats the equivalent of a cool desk gizmo when working remote.
I hope that this works out for both parties. would be a shame to see our system abused for money.
The best way to not shut down racetracks is to not shut down race tracks.
They were there first.
that last point is so important. Portland has a street racing problem and they swear to God if they just opened up the racetrack we already have to the public more often, I really think that it would lessen the issue on the streets
If you build next door of a pig farm or a race track, it is on you. If you buy the house, enjoy all the smell and noise.
Just gonna say, those houses WILL try to get that racetrack shut down, racing village or not, they say it’s fine now, but later… lawsuits will come, give it 10-20 years i say
I still say the noise dampening systems used by urban airports that are completely surrounded by housing developments & highways could easily be implemented. Earthen sound baffles and noise barrier walls could work in conjunction to reduce the noise levels to a tolerable decibel level no different than a typical busy road.
To fellow anti-car people that happen to read my comment: the last sentence of the video is very true; we should want the moisy race tracks to exist so fast cars fans have an alternative to endangering us at night on the streets.
For some reason I saw the oval and thought horse racing 🐎 and was so confused about the noise problem you were talking about, I'm like, "Are horses neighing really that loud?" 😂
I’d imagine the clatter of hooves supporting hundreds of pounds of weight is something that would quite reverberate. Also any man with a microphone and speakers extending throughout the complex, having once gone to an SEC university.
I think I've said this before but like why do people love moving into areas that are noisy (near airports or racetracks) and then start complaining about noise?
Another idea that I've seen implemented here in Tulsa, OK is walls of sorts, to dampen the sound of the racetrack. I don't know if it would be effective, but they're everywhere in Tulsa next to busy interstates that border neighborhoods
Where I live some complain about the noise from jets. The airstrip had been there for years and they warned the city about the encroaching suburbs. But they city keep building closer and closer. But if the city lost that airstrip they would lose a lot of money.
That racetrack’s days are numbered.
I don't know why some of these developers don't think through this. And when they're building all these houses, they don't take a piece of the land either right down the middle or on one edge, especially if they're going to be building off to another property, that side of it, where they take a 1000 foot, frontage and less than a 100 foot deep and make retail spaces a small supermarket, a gas station? Hardware store dry cleaners pizza place. Oh kind of the basics that you would see. It would be phenomenal for business 'cause it would be literally in walking distance in very short delivery distance if needed, and they can even build apartments on top of the stores. Even better , a lot of problems with restaurants and supermarkets are issues with vermin and rodents , and if the buildings can be built properly from the Beginning , you can eliminate a lot of that issue
Why dont they build a sound barrier wall? Also massive respect for you mentioning people who live out in tge country respectfully you gained my subscription
Sound barriers don’t work too well and are very expensive. You can only reduce the noise by a little bit. And the vehicles racing can’t change to be quieter.
Race Village, is so cool
Embankment can also redirect the sound upwards.
0:25 why doesn't every place look like that, that looks amazing compared to the empty streets
Thank you for supporting racetracks, fuck greedy real estate developers
So wait? The race track that opened first is being forced out? To me it sounds like it is entirely the new houses issue
Well, I think USA could learn a lot from european cities. Not only efficient urban planning, but also the convenience of a proper public transportation system, safer roads, roundabouts a lot other things that I can't quite understand why they aren't using
We should be building on brownfield sites meaning sites that have already been developed then took down
They also could try to sound proof the houses as much as they can so they wont hear it as much. If street racing is what they want, thats what they gana get lol
Wait until they find out what top Fuel is, lol.
It's also a shockingly poor use of land as the water table is so high it requires those enormous sumps, which are going to become stagnant mosquito breeding grounds every Summer.
RACE TRACK ENTHUSIUST OWNERS ONLY OR DONT BUILT THERE SICK OF OUR TRACKS BEING SHUT DOWN SAVE PEOPLE FROM RACING ON THE STREETS
Is that the freedom factory?
One vid on indian roads mate
You should review Singapore roads and housing, and compare it with america
I probably get more news from my near by communities up north here than my actual near by communities
all of these solutions cost developers more money than just developing rural land. stupidly they'd rather spend extra money on lawyers to get the exceptions granted to develop that land than spend it on solutions that don't require developing that land
The cheapest thing for developers to do is to build 2-3 story apartment buildings in the middle of nowhere to don't have to obey to any rules and planning. That's what's happening in Poland.
Look at those home sets😟
Land value tax: tax the land (at a higher rate than normal property tax) not the building/use of it, that incentivises efficient use of land, thus reducing urban sprawl and leaving more space for nature and rural areas
That is just gonna make housing more expensive as builders will pass these costs onto the buyers
@@filip36365 to the contrary, it can help reduce housing prices.
The builders wouldn't be paying tax on it, the owners would.
The owners no longer pay tax for the building (like they do under current property tax), just the land.
This incentives land owners to use the land more efficiently, as having more housing on it increases profits without increasing tax.
The increased efficiency leads to increased housing development, thus increased housing supply, and thus lower housing cost.
@@filip36365 to the contrary, actually.
First of all, builders aren't paying the tax land owners are.
But more important:
-The tax is only on the land and not on the building/use (current property taxes that it would replace also tax the building/use)
-This means land owners are incentivised to use their land efficiently, as they're paying the same tax no matter what they do with the land (unlike property taxes which discourage efficient use, as that gets taxed more by property tax)
-This means land owners will be building more housing (when the demand for it exists) on their land to make the most out of it
-This means a larger housing supply, which by supply and demand economics means a lower housing price
@nienke7713 but what happens when the builders develop the land into housing and than sell it off. Wouldn't the new owners (aka citizens) now be paying a much higher rate? Or do you mean that the tax would only apply to undeveloped land?
Funny... Don't do what people want :)
Except for rundown and abandoned industrial areas, but they are a hard sell
Why expand the suburban area if they're just going to charge 700k-1.2m dollars for a house?
You can try best explanation to city skyline 2
Bro can you try fixing traffic in South East Asia? 😅 example Metro Manila, Philippines
Can you do something like your videos on Indian roads and intersections
Yeah, nuke the continent. What a stupid suggestion; as if traffic signals mean anything when every major city is at 340% capacity.
People buy homes in the suburbs to have their own yard, actually own the property so they can tailor it and build their space to their liking, and not be on top of each other in a noisy, smelly building. Replacing homes with apartment buildings in the middle of the country is both stupid and unpopular.
Place noise barrier around the race track?
Yeah, building upon the existing land they already have would be the ideal and logical solution, BUT ARE THEY GONNA ACTUALLY DO THAT!
no. Theyre going to force this dude into a legal battle he won't survive and then TAKE his land just like their ancestors took this land feom the indigenous people.
He's going to get a disease from them without ever meeting them and pass away and then decades/centuries later they will occupy the practically uninhibited remnants of his once great space? Dang, does he know we got vaccines and antibiotics and stuff nowadays? 😂
USA! 🦅🇲🇾
Why not build noise reducing fence around the race track
The racetrack was there first, better suck it up
you should look at Malfunction Junction, helena MT
What track is that?
Yes! Stop the street racing before it looks like outta control Portland 😂
These "copy paste" houses look so creepy :|
Suburbs are cancer, change my mind
i don't know why american suburbs are always just the same exact house copy/pasted 100 times, it looks so boring
Another way is do more advertising and add some events
But would it make money for the capitalist class?
Car centric suburban sprawl like this is bad for the environment. This kind of development is irresponsible, and will lead to increasingly catastrophic natural disasters like the recent hurricanes that have demolished large sections of the American southeast.
we need to build underground.
Do NOT use free space inside urban areas, they are required for good living.
We need a different architecture: either UK style terraced houses along a street with small garden behind. or even real terraced houses with the garden ontop the roof of the home below and parking lots in the space underneath.
Yes, you need concrete and maisonry, no US-style cardboard houses.
Do NOT hamper individual traffic as that is the main reason why we are so much more productive than 150 years ago.
Your critics and suggestions are so limited, free your mind.
We actually do have houses and areas in the style you're talking about
The problem is just that America just sucks entirely.
Suburbs suck
Do racetracks actually reduce street racing? That's not a claim you can just throw out without evidence
For the same reason skateparks reduce trespassing, yes. They do.
@@f4andrew7yeah, but the hood gangstas don't stop shootin up the block just cuz a range is nearby...
@lady can you link to the study proving this is true? I know it SEEMS true but that doesn't mean it actually is
Think the other way around: would removing racetracks increase street racing?
@@amadeosendiulo2137 Yes, because the racers will find the next best thing.
Racers don't stop racing because it started raining. They just race in the rain ;)
Govt doesn't work like that. "Karen's" don't work like that. NIMBY is huge with society now. The smartest thing to do is build the track in the middle of nowhere, at least 5 miles away from any development. Once that track is done, you basically grandfathered yourself in, and no one can complain there's a racetrack "too close to their house" because it was there before their house...and they already knew the track was there.
if you watch the original video, that's exactly what they did with this; nothing is "grandfathered" against development lol
Did you not watch the same video?
Except that's EXACTLY what they did. But the gov gotta print that money, so they violated their own No development past this line rule
TaretardaWheels
It’s like you didn’t watch the video lol
Could you be any more simplistic?
What’s wrong with it
They could just built a new, similar racetrack furter out, then everyone is happy
Imagine they build a new track an hour to 2 hours away. Not good.
WHO PAYS FOR THE NEW RACE TRACK BUILD HOUSES SOMEWHERE ELSE
Good ideas, but as I say, you just air your mouth. No one cares about people, just the money
i like your videos but this is nonsense look into your topic a bit more
Most of America is empty. I don't know why people live so darn close together.
Because it's more efficient
I like living near people. I'd hate to be isolated, away from the real world.
Money. It costs money to buy land.
Living so far apart is the biggest infrastructure problem in the United States
@@ninjalectualx Small town's made up America before WWII.
First
Dense housing encourges poverty. Name me a rich densely populated area. They exist but are far and few between.
The poorest regions in America are rural and the richest are cities.
Dense affordable housing puts people in homes, suburban sprawl is what propagates poverty and homelessness.
Everyone who lives there gets a free ticket to use the track?
There’s plenty of land. That’s not the issue. More density isn’t the answer. Many people don’t want to live densely.
The new build neighbourhoods you show as not having much space so space away from neighbours must not be the reason people buy those homes is a failed assumption. While it may be true, it may not. It may be that people buy those houses because it’s all that is available and they’re cheaper.
For many people, if there were more options where they had more space away from neighbours, more yards, and didn’t cost a lot, they would buy that.
Yes, I'm sure everyone would prefer a would where there are no trade-offs between contradictory things
The land isn't the issue, it's the fossil fuels we're forced to burn just to go to the damn grocery store. High density housing is the ONLY solution.
There’s plenty of land but it’s not utilized correctly, and there are plenty of people that DO want to live in a denser city, it’s just NOT an option for the most part because of city planning laws. Suburban sprawl wasn’t created out of “market demand” it’s the result of those laws
I feel like the whole “having a race track prevents street racing” argument is weak and far from true. Where I live there was a track. And there also was and is a huge “street racing” problem. I put it in quotes because it’s not really racing. It’s a bunch of idiots who just wanna drive like idiots and try to show off the cars that daddy bought them. Sadly I don’t believe that having tracks will ever be a thing for those people. Sure there are some people who would utilize a racetrack and not race on the road but the vast majority would not. See at a track there are rules which are enforced, safety standards built into the cars which must be respected oh yeah and that whole thing, respect. There is a huge lack of respect out there. Why would you want to go to a track when your car is a rattle box POS you have zero safety equipment and zero respect for others?
Shut down motor sports completely. It’s an affront to nature.
no
Go electric!
Look forward!
Keep it on down low!
We have tripled the world's population in less then 80 years!!!!
I've seen LI lose tracks like Flys, in less then 40!
Like everything, only human things don't last!
Now there's a highway, golf course..
Who's going to know or care in a hundred years?
Nope, street takeovers and street racing incoming. Many younger racers don’t even bother with tracks and legality anymore