Nelson speedway may have to cut meetings after Environment Court ruling
A court decision requires the Nelson speedway to hold only one meeting every fortnight.
Nelson's speedway may have to cut its race days after a judge found it has breached its 50-year-old consent.
For many years, the Top of the South Speedway off Lansdowne Rd, near Richmond, has held two-day events.
But in a written decision, Environment Court Judge Brian Dwyer found that a "deemed consent" allowed Nelson Speedway Association Inc to conduct one race meeting on a single day every 14 days only.
Dwyer also found that the association breached the terms of that consent on six occasions in the 2016-17 racing season – four times in January 2017 and once in both March and April, 2017.
READ MORE:
* Nelson police investigate speedway stabbing
* Nelson Speedway loses hotdog stand in early morning blaze
* Building gutted in major fire at Nelson speedway
* Nelson speedway's Easter Extravaganza broken down into bullet points
The decision, which is being appealed, follows a hearing on May 16 after two neighbouring residents of the speedway sought declarations from the court that some 2016-17 meetings were in breach of the terms of the land use consent.
A judge has found the speedway breached its 50-year-old "deemed consent" six times in 2017.
They also argued that the terms of the deemed resource consent allowed the association to hold meetings fortnightly from October to April each year.
In his decision, Dwyer referred to a letter dated April 11, 1968 from the president of the then Tasman Car Scramble Club to a Tasman District Council predecessor, Waimea County Council.
In the letter, the club president requests approval to establish a stock car track.
"It is proposed that the racing season will last from October until April each year and that meetings will be held fortnightly," the letter says before adding that the club wishes to hold its meetings on Sunday afternoons.
On July 24, 1968, the club applied for consent to establish and operate a "scramble car track". On December 11, 1968, the council gave notice by letter of its approval of conditional land use for the track.
The club letter together with a copy of its Rules Applying to Construction of Cars (construction rules), which identify the specifications of racing cars, were held on the council file with the formal application.
"Any person who inspected the council file in response to the public notification of the application would have seen the letter and construction rules, which clearly formed part of the club's proposal," Dwyer said.
"What these proceedings ultimately came down to was to determine whether or not the respondent [speedway association] was complying with the requirement that its meetings were to be held fortnightly as stated in the letter."
A 2014 aerial photograph shows part of the Nelson speedway track off Lansdowne Rd Rd near Richmond.
The association's lawyer, Nigel McFadden, submitted there was nothing in the word "meeting" that required or implied it was limited to a single day.
"That has been the respondent's (and I assume the council's) understanding for a long period of time as it has held two-day events dating back for many years," Dwyer said.
However, the lawyer for the two residents, Gerard Praat, urged a narrower interpretation of the word "meeting" to mean an event that occurred on a single day.
Dwyer said he considered it obvious "from a plain reading of the letter, namely that the club was applying to hold racing meetings between October and April, fortnightly on Sunday afternoons."
There was also a dispute over what was meant by the expression that "meetings will be held fortnightly". McFadden submitted the association could race for two days at the end of one fortnightly block and the first two days of the next block – that is for four consecutive days.
Dwyer said he understood the applicants' position to be that there had to be 14 clear days between every meeting.
McFadden "contended that if the applicants' interpretation was adopted, this would lead to an absurd situation that if two meetings were held less than 14 days apart that would be a breach of the consent even if no other meetings were held for the entire racing season".
"In the normal course of events, I would consider there to be some force in Mr McFadden's submission," Dwyer said. "However, I think that his argument again runs into the difficulty of the letter of 11 April 1968, namely that on the face of its own document, the club proposed to hold racing meetings between October and April, fortnightly on Sunday afternoons so that there would in fact be 14 days between racing meetings."
Neither the speedway association president nor the applicants wished to comment.
Tasman District Council environment and planning manager Dennis Bush-King said the council was obligated to enforce the conditions identified by the Environment Court – conscious that the speedway season would not resume until later in the year.
"The appeal to the High Court does not remove that obligation until they make a decision either way," Bush-King said.
- Stuff
Comments