Fairgrounds Speedway Racetrack expansion to 30,000 seats

[markhollin]

Of course, with more cars being electric in the next five.years, NASCAR may be MUCH quieter. I know long-time fans who love the roar of the engines will hate it...but if they can make cars go faster, the sport will change in the noise level regard.  

[henburg]

50 minutes ago, Nash_12South said:

(cynically) I think the sound attenuation measures won't have any real affect. Do you thing a "sound wall" around a spot like Ascend would have any real affect? I know there are other measures, but have other areas had measurable success with them, with results from other than proponents of racing? 

I totally agree, it really seems like a false promise that they're putting at the front of the deal to get it passed. The idea that retaining walls will be all it takes to make these races not disruptive just seems impossible. In theory if this were passed and allowed to come to fruition, it's not like there will be any way to hold them accountable to their claims of sound reduction.

The reality is that NASCAR is desperately trying to rebrand itself right now for new generations of fans, and they see the historic track and its unique location within the city as a potential new way to freshen up their model among a population that is rapidly turning toward F1. That said, there are obvious reasons that none of these Speedways are located near people anymore. NASCAR races are some of the loudest events in the world, and asking locals to overlook that multiple times a year for the sake of the nostalgia of some (the vast majority of who will never have to deal with the consequences of living next to the track) is a bit ridiculous in my opinion. It's understandable that they want a piece of that Nashville Sports event excitement, but I'm seriously skeptical this is the best way to get that.

Edited June 15, 2023 by henburg

[samsonh]

Not to mention this is simply a bad deal financially. Yet again Bob Mendes has done some sound analysis if anyone is curious. 

[nashvylle]

1 hour ago, Nash_12South said:

(cynically) I think the sound attenuation measures won't have any real affect. Do you thing a "sound wall" around a spot like Ascend would have any real affect? I know there are other measures, but have other areas had measurable success with them, with results from other than proponents of racing? 

I think the best example is not a racetrack, but look at interstates around urban cores of cities (like Nashville). You see TDOT investing in sound barriers walls next to houses, so yes I do think that there should be some reduction. However, I think perhaps crash walls up to 20' PLUS an ETF wall (see ETF Roof for Titans stadium) up to 50' may make the noise manageable to the area. However, that would increase the cost a ton. 

Another way to effectively reduce the noise is to have an overlay around the stadium (Wedgewood Avenue, Bransford Avenue, Craighead, etc) and incentivize ~20 stories hotels to be built so that noise travels and hits those developments before the residential houses. @Bos2Nashmay be able to verify if that actually would work. 

However, as @samsonh and@Melrose have noted, this deal right now does not make sense financially for the city. Bob Mendes pointed out correctly that not all revenue bonds are the same. Say what you will about the Titans deal, but Mendes noted that the titans have revenue collections 2.5x debt service... this deal does not. 

[Luvemtall]

Yes there is a reason, race tracks are mostly in isolated areas. The noise isn’t going to magically disappear, yes Nascar is expected to go full electric within the next 10 years, but even then 30-40 cars and 30,000 fans are still going to make some noise. Granted soccer fans at Geodis are definitely not quiet, but racing is something totally different. 
how does the Charter actually approach this? Does it state racing to remain at this location regardless if the fair isn’t actually held there? Things evolve, areas change, even the State and fair board realized this and moved on. This area technically isn’t the fairgrounds anymore, so does that fact dissolve any obligation to the Charter? 
As I’ve have mentioned before, I’m not for saving things just because there’s fond memories, if nothing historical has actually occurred there, and going to a race with grandpa doesn’t count, and it no longer is “ The Fairgrounds “ then consider that Nashville and that neighborhood specifically are changing and maybe a race track isn’t the best use for that particular location. 

[nashvylle]

4 minutes ago, Luvemtall said:

Yes there is a reason, race tracks are mostly in isolated areas. The noise isn’t going to magically disappear, yes Nascar is expected to go full electric within the next 10 years, but even then 30-40 cars and 30,000 fans are still going to make some noise. Granted soccer fans at Geodis are definitely not quiet, but racing is something totally different. 
how does the Charter actually approach this? Does it state racing to remain at this location regardless if the fair isn’t actually held there? Things evolve, areas change, even the State and fair board realized this and moved on. This area technically isn’t the fairgrounds anymore, so does that fact dissolve any obligation to the Charter? 
As I’ve have mentioned before, I’m not for saving things just because there’s fond memories, if nothing historical has actually occurred there, and going to a race with grandpa doesn’t count, and it no longer is “ The Fairgrounds “ then consider that Nashville and that neighborhood specifically are changing and maybe a race track isn’t the best use for that particular location. 

Yes the racetrack is charter protected. The charter does not require the state fair to be there, just a local fair. 

[Rick Dalton]

NASCAR? In 2023? We’re still doing this?

[dmillsphoto]

21 minutes ago, natethegreat said:

NASCAR? In 2023? We’re still doing this?

Same old circular thinking...

[Luvemtall]

24 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

Yes the racetrack is charter protected. The charter does not require the state fair to be there, just a local fair. 

Is there a local fair? I don’t remember a Davidson County Fair, flea markets don’t count. Anyway I’m still in the thinking that there’s got to be a way to get passed the Charter, things can change. There’s better ways to utilize this property than a race track, sorry to upset some of you, but it’s time has come .. move on

[Nash_12South]

A lot of folks keep going back (understandably) to the vote to keep the racetrack. Couldn't folks propose/organize another vote? As has been said times and WH have changed since the "vote". 

[Melrose]

53 minutes ago, nashvylle said:

I think the best example is not a racetrack, but look at interstates around urban cores of cities (like Nashville). You see TDOT investing in sound barriers walls next to houses, so yes I do think that there should be some reduction. However, I think perhaps crash walls up to 20' PLUS an ETF wall (see ETF Roof for Titans stadium) up to 50' may make the noise manageable to the area. However, that would increase the cost a ton. 

Another way to effectively reduce the noise is to have an overlay around the stadium (Wedgewood Avenue, Bransford Avenue, Craighead, etc) and incentivize ~20 stories hotels to be built so that noise travels and hits those developments before the residential houses. @Bos2Nashmay be able to verify if that actually would work. 

However, as @samsonh and@Melrose have noted, this deal right now does not make sense financially for the city. Bob Mendes pointed out correctly that not all revenue bonds are the same. Say what you will about the Titans deal, but Mendes noted that the titans have revenue collections 2.5x debt service... this deal does not. 

Thanks.  The bottom line is if Bristol is bringing the big race or races that supposed make this  new speedway possible (which is literally what their owner Marcus Smith has said)  then they as the user of the facility should be on the hook for any debt shortfalls, especially where the debt service ratio here is sooooo much smaller than the Titans deal (I believe it is 1.2X).  Where the user has not done this, like with the Sounds ballpark,  Metro has been on the hook and paying the debt in recent years.   If Bristol won't do this, it's pretty obviously because they know the numbers don't add up.  

On the sound walls,  at a Fair Board meeting in December,  the Fair Board Chair wanted taller sound walls than 20 feet, because she said they weren't good enough.  But then that point just disappeared,  so it seems pretty clear that they know the walls they want to build aren't going to be good enough.   

 

 

 

[Luvemtall]

The walls will be good for nothing but advertising!, plain and simple, Bristol and anyone else involved know damn well , they’re not going to subdue any sound.

[bnacincy]

I understand the racetrack is in the Metro Charter but what I don't understand is why Nashville needs 2 racetracks-there is a bigger one out in Wilson County that already has a NASCAR race, correct?

I would think Nashville would be better served with a new arena (smaller than Bridgestone) at that location that could hold events like the WNBA and smaller concerts and other things-then the city could tear down Municipal Auditorium, sell the property to the state who could then consolidate some of their far flung offices into a new location taking advantage of the transit center nearby.

Just sayin'.

[Luvemtall]

bnacincy , thank you for thinking outside the box! 
What I’ve been trying to say all along, there’s better uses for this valuable land . There’s no reason at all for this track to still be a subject of debate, just a short drive to the East and there’s The Nashville SuperSpeedway already functional ( Nascar racing this weekend) with plenty of parking and hardly any residential to worry about noise. It’s really a no brainer kinda thing . 

[PruneTracy]

16 hours ago, FrankNash said:

^^^I lived in Green Hills near Lipscomb University in the early 2000s.  The noise from The Fairgrounds Racetrack is unbearable.  It can ruin an entire weekend for people living in here.  If it were up to me the racetrack should cease being a racetrack at this location.  Have a vote of the people that actually live within a 2 mile radius of the track.  

Thing is, the speedway was there before you lived there in the early 2000s. In fact, it was there before you or anyone else who lives within a 2-mile radius of the track was alive.

Is it the best use of the property? I dunno. But I bet if I moved next door to Geodis Park, then complained about the match-day traffic and noise, and petitioned Metro to close the stadium down, most of this board would laugh in my face. 

[Nash_12South]

I think most of us understand that the racetrack has been there 100+ years, but there hasn't been regular racing in 5+ years and the WH demographics have hugely changed with millions invested.  Before we invest millions more into an expanded racetrack I think there needs to be a fuller discussion and understanding what the current area will be like with full time racing. Just my opinion, families with kids under 5 won't want to live where naptimes and regular bedtimes will be disrupted - potentially several days a month.  Will folks go to restaurants/shops where yelling at each other is required during racing days? Whether it's actually a problem or not, the perception could hurt property values. When we looked to downsize last year, WH was a definite NO on our list of urban neighborhoods.  Most folks agree that no one would build a new racetrack in WH so why essentially rebuild the existing one?

Edited June 15, 2023 by Nash_12South

[Melrose]

13 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

Thing is, the speedway was there before you lived there in the early 2000s. In fact, it was there before you or anyone else who lives within a 2-mile radius of the track was alive.

Is it the best use of the property? I dunno. But I bet if I moved next door to Geodis Park, then complained about the match-day traffic and noise, and petitioned Metro to close the stadium down, most of this board would laugh in my face. 

This is a false construct.  Most people aren't saying close it down.  They've been saying change how things are done and things have changed in recent years,  there are curfews and limits and the races end a lot earlier.   Ever Metro owned building or property changes or evolves over the years. This is no different. 

But what Bristol wants to do is not keep the status quo, they want build an all new speedway that is twice the size and operates like a modern NASCAR speedway way out in the rural areas,  with all new,  constant events and convention and tourism events on top. Being opposed to that is very very different than you are trying to portray.  

[go_outside]

25 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

Thing is, the speedway was there before you lived there in the early 2000s. In fact, it was there before you or anyone else who lives within a 2-mile radius of the track was alive.

Is it the best use of the property? I dunno. But I bet if I moved next door to Geodis Park, then complained about the match-day traffic and noise, and petitioned Metro to close the stadium down, most of this board would laugh in my face. 

Cities grow. When the track was built, it was on the outer edge of town. Now it’s surrounded by densifying neighborhoods.

Should residents have anticipated a major investment and resumption of large races at the old track? Maybe? But regardless of whether the nuisance was foreseeable or not, it’s a nuisance all the same.

Should this deal move forward, it will be another clear example of Nashville prioritizing event-driven economics and tourists over residents.

[PruneTracy]

1 minute ago, Melrose said:

This is a false construct.  Most people aren't saying close it down.  They've been saying change how things are done and things have changed in recent years,  there are curfews and limits and the races end a lot earlier.   Ever Metro owned building or property changes or evolves over the years. This is no different. 

But what Bristol wants to do is not keep the status quo, they want build an all new speedway that is twice the size and operates like a modern NASCAR speedway way out in the rural areas,  with all new,  constant events and convention and tourism events on top. Being opposed to that is very very different than you are trying to portray.  

My understanding of the SMI deal is that the number of test days, race events, etc. would stay largely the same and the sound barriers would help to reduce noise*. Are they lying? Don't know.

But the notion that the neighborhood can't handle a change in use when there's a brand-new soccer stadium literally next door doesn't make a lot of sense. We get 30,000 people showing up for 17 matches, that didn't exist three years ago, on top of concerts, friendlies, etc. occurring at the stadium every chance the management gets. I think at one point SMI said straight up they are looking for a deal similar to that for the soccer stadium, which may be good or bad depending on how you look at it. But when the soccer stadium was up for debate the same people who are now complaining about the racetrack were in favor of the stadium, while also dismissing the concerns of, for example, the flea market folks.

I'll be a little more honest than I need to be, I think the root of the problem is that MLS is fine and NASCAR is not because the people on this board and residents nearby and in Metro as a whole are more approving of MLS image/demographics than they are of NASCAR image/demographics. That's fine, that's your opinion. I'm not anti-soccer or pro-NASCAR, I go to NSC matches all the time and I'll be out in Lebanon this weekend, to me they are both fun activities where you can put 25% of your attention towards what's going on and 75% towards having an excuse to party. If you said to me you opposed the speedway deal because you perceive NASCAR as a dying sport (or "sport") frequented primarily by boomer yokels I'd largely agree with you. But put it out there, because many of these arguments don't hold a lot of water when we just went through all this for soccer a few years ago.

* A word on sound barriers. They do work to some degree, we do fairly detailed studies on noise mitigation for highway projects that include before/after comparisons on them. The reason you don't see more of them is that they are fairly expensive for what the federal government considers to be a lesser environmental impact. Don't know if those are the same proposed here or if they are as effective for races as they are for typical highway traffic.

10 minutes ago, go_outside said:

Should this deal move forward, it will be another clear example of Nashville prioritizing event-driven economics and tourists over residents.

It would, but that's been the case for most all decisions for the past two decades. We built a convention center, we built a minor-league ballpark. We built the soccer stadium and are about to build a domed football stadium and once that's done we'll more likely than not have to build a new hockey arena. God willing we'll be either gutting and rebuilding the ballpark or (much more likely) be building a brand-new major-league ballpark in the near future. You would be challenged to find a deal that Metro has said no to for this, so I assume since we are putting our foot down here we'll also be telling the Predators and Stars/A's/Diamondbacks/Rays/O's/whoever no as well, right?

[Nash_12South]

Much of this doesn't revolve around the sport of racing but rather the level of the noise and the hours of noise. I've never heard any soccer stadium noise (other than the one concert). The concept that the race track cannot move seems contradicted by the fact the Sounds moved in getting a new stadium. We moved the convention center and we are moving Nissan (albeit not far). If we are rebuilding the racetrack, there are better locations.  It's not racing, it the noise racing generates and unless you live near the current racetrack, you really can't appreciate the situation. There are 100 annoyances in living in 12South. I will not move because of them, but if I had the chance to mitigate or change any of them, I'd take it.

 

Edited June 15, 2023 by Nash_12South

[Melrose]

1 minute ago, PruneTracy said:

My understanding of the SMI deal is that the number of test days, race events, etc. would stay largely the same and the sound barriers would help to reduce noise*. Are they lying? Don't know.

 

Yes, they are lying.  Read the agreements. 

2 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

But the notion that the neighborhood can't handle a change in use when there's a brand-new soccer stadium literally next door doesn't make a lot of sense.

But it's a second 30,000 seat venue on top of the first one, but with way fewer controls/limits.

3 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

I think at one point SMI said straight up they are looking for a deal similar to that for the soccer stadium, which may be good or bad depending on how you look at it.

What SMI got was a deal much much more one sided in their favor,  with almost no financial accountability on their part.

5 minutes ago, PruneTracy said:

I'll be a little more honest than I need to be, I think the root of the problem is that MLS is fine and NASCAR is not because the people on this board and residents nearby and in Metro as a whole are more approving of MLS image/demographics than they are of NASCAR image/demographics.

Don't disagree, this not an entirely inaccurate characterization, in some part.   But again,  this Bristol proposal is so much worse and is such a change from the status quo that is the real problem.   The other night at Council, Bob Mendes said that this deal "is a lot worse than the Titans deal, no matter what you thought of that deal."  I know this board has lots of feelings about Mendes's feelings about the Titans deal, but if that is his take on this Bristol deal after his thoughts on the Titans deal,   that should say something. 

[Baronakim]

As a native Nashvillian, I think it is time to move the track.  The remaining carcass of a once great facility is doing nothing much for the city IMO.  If only the old facility had not burned back in 1965.  There was still a vestige of grace and history remaining.  I fondly remember climbing those continuous steps up to the food stalls and narrow benches at the rear of the stands.  I think the biggest mistake was dropping the dirt horse racing track for auto racing.  It didn't work a damn for Sulphur Dell either.  i am glad I am old enough to have more gentle and fond memories of both.

Edited June 15, 2023 by Baronakim

[Luvemtall]

It really doesn’t matter if it’s been there 100+ years, time takes its toll and things evolve. There is absolutely nothing historically significant to say this track needs to remain. Especially since SMI plans to basically destroy this as it is and rebuild. 
there’s no need for this track , when there’s already a bigger nicer version already in the MSA. NASCAR and racing might be fun and and I’ve been to many , but there’s no need for two tracks this close to each other. 

[bnacincy]

If Bristol is all in for the Nashville market then why don't they make an offer on the track in Wilson County? It's a bigger, newer facility with nowhere near the issues the Fairgrounds track presents.

I have to be honest, none of this makes any sense to me.

[Luvemtall]

15 minutes ago, bnacincy said:

If Bristol is all in for the Nashville market then why don't they make an offer on the track in Wilson County? It's a bigger, newer facility with nowhere near the issues the Fairgrounds track presents.

I have to be honest, none of this makes any sense to me.

That’s the thing SMI ( Bristol) already owns the SuperSpeedway in Lebanon