Fairgrounds Speedway Racetrack expansion to 30,000 seats

[bnacincy]

8 minutes ago, Luvemtall said:

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

Seriously? Please someone please explain the logic of any of this!

[Melrose]

5 minutes ago, bnacincy said:

Seriously? Please someone please explain the logic of any of this!

Exactly.

[Argo]

4 hours 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. 

Absolutely correct. If there can be Sahcah!!!, there can be racing.

[MLBrumby]

I never even knew about the Fairground RT before a few years ago. And I'm as far from a NASCAR fan as anyone could imagine. I just don't see the excitement and that's from someone who sees the F1/Indy excitement. I think the difference is that NASCAR is more Driver-Driven and Ft/Indy is "Event-Driven" (i.e. the race. and event).  Anyway, as far as the Nashville fairgrounds RT is concerned, I can't help feeling (not thinking) that concnetrated effort is better than divided ("small ball").  So what does that mean? Well,  as the state fair moved to Wilson county, I think the race events should do the same (as the same company owns both venues). and build the Gladeville track into one of the premier events in NASCAR. F1/Indy has the annual Nashville race, and that has become a high-profile event. So put your strength where it will be strongest. 

[nashvylle]

SMI/BMS/Nascar know that the races on large oval tracks in the middle of nowhere aren't doing very well. Given the history of the Fairgrounds, its proximity to downtown Nashville, and the unique/shorter track, it would be a home run for tv ratings and attendance. However, the deal could be much, much better. Guaranteeing the debt would go a long way, as would building much, much more sound attenuation. However, that costs a lot of money. 

[DMilner]

3 hours ago, nashvylle said:

SMI/BMS/Nascar know that the races on large oval tracks in the middle of nowhere aren't doing very well. Given the history of the Fairgrounds, its proximity to downtown Nashville, and the unique/shorter track, it would be a home run for tv ratings and attendance. However, the deal could be much, much better. Guaranteeing the debt would go a long way, as would building much, much more sound attenuation. However, that costs a lot of money. 

Local races aren’t doing well either. 

[Luvemtall]

NASCAR and racing in general are going to be on their way into history. Us older guys/ gals that grew up in the “ era of the automobile “ with the muscle car wars and the rivalries of the big three are a different breed than the new up and coming generations. I see it in my own children who range in age from 36 to 21, they and all their friends/acquaintances could care less about cars and racing. Looking around at all the young kids, their likes and passions are totally different than what was norm. Yes there’s some hold outs of the sport ( mostly small town southern areas) but you could see and feel that it’s a changing demographic and different world than it’s been. I personally don’t care which way this “Fairgrounds track” evolves, if it stays or if it goes, I don’t have any stake in the decision. But I do care about the people and the surrounding community that it does effect, and the Metro as a whole. I do have stake in real estate throughout Middle Tennessee, and I do understand the concern of the community surrounding this issue. I personally hope that all involved can open their eyes,ears, and hearts and come to a resolution that is meaningful and fair to all involved. 

[nashvylle]

11 hours ago, DMilner said:

Local races aren’t doing well either. 

The local races there currently are the equivalent to the AFL and their attendance . It's football, but not College or NFL. Attendance would not be an issue if this renovation happens, IMO. However, even with 100% attendance, would it pay off all debt service? I am not sure. 

[Melrose]

14 hours ago, nashvylle said:

its proximity to downtown Nashville,

This is the whole thing right here.  Bristol has made a very savvy business maneuver to  exploit the Charter amendment that requires racing to continue in some form,   in order to propose a brand new megafacility located 1 mile from an urban downtown ( in this case, it just so happens to also be a city whose tourism brand is also a great fit for them).  There is nowhere else in America where this would be remotely possible because obviously the notion of building a NASCAR track in an urban center is absurd.  From a financial standpoint for Bristol,  the play makes sense, they stand to profit enormously. 

Where it goes wrong of course is they are lying about their plans and spinning this as a "historic preservation and restoration",   and have put forth a ridiculously one sided deal that it seems only one Mayor (the current one) would possibly consider.

[DMilner]

1 hour ago, nashvylle said:

The local races there currently are the equivalent to the AFL and their attendance . It's football, but not College or NFL. Attendance would not be an issue if this renovation happens, IMO. However, even with 100% attendance, would it pay off all debt service? I am not sure. 

Yeah, my concern is them not being able to repay the bonds with the current attendance they have out there. 

[markhollin]

CityNowNext with summary on where things stand with the racetrack improvements.  Includes some new renders, a fresh diagram, and lots of photos of current conditions at the site:

https://citynownext.com/2023/06/26/the-latest-on-proposed-upgrades-to-the-nashville-fairgrounds-speedway/#more-33637

[Bos2Nash]

While I am a little bummed on the vote, I also understand it. No professional event really generates revenue quite like the NFL or any of the other major sports, so a racetrack will certainly have tighter margins. I have also said from the beginning that any deal for the racetrack should be structured almost identically to the soccer stadium, with the caveat that Metro finds a way to "replace" the 10-acre land giveaway that was included in the soccer deal that obviously cant be included in the racetrack deal. Hopefully things are adjusted and it comes back around. Nascar is has introduced the Next Gen car that they have done testing with mufflers on and have designed the car to incorporate electric components in the future. Not sure how much they are planning on full electrification at this point, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Farigrounds has alot of support in the Nascar circles. Nascar is feeling alot of pressure to get back to the shorter tracks that made the sport so popular. Nascar is also very sold on Nashville, so I dont see the deal as being dead, but hopefully they continue to work on things and tweak things to the right level.

A 20' noise barrier would certainly help mitigate alot of the noise. when we also consider that the existing banking (which presumably would remain after the repave) is already about 10' above the road, the noise barrier would essentially be 30' tall.  Yes you would still hear a bunch of noise, but it would be much more mitigated than our current status quo. I would encourage folks to check out this article from 99% Invisible about the sound walls and how they are deployed on highways. They certainly aren't a perfect solution, but it's much better than what we currently have. The material of the sound wall also is a big driver. Sound is mitigated through mass, but if that mass is hard concrete (like we see on highways) it will bounce the sound. If the sound walls are designed at 20' with less hard materials that still provide mass, then the noise movement up and over the wall is that much more reduced.

Image outside turn 3 currently. Going to be alot of dead space around this corner of the track thanks to the road alignment.

My biggest frustration is the lack of incorporation the racetrack had with the soccer stadium planning and fairground improvements. To me it drives home that the long term plan of the political powers we to essentially drive racing out of the venue. The alignment of Walsh Road and Benton Ave make building anything other than a sound wall around turns 3 and 4 essentially impossible. The image below shows the potential Turn 3 tunnel (this would be needed for the larger hauling vehicles) aligning with the fairground's curb cut (orange), a possible area for race track hospitality but not a mixed-use type building (blue), and then the race track berm (yellow) that isn't big enough to put anything on with the exception of grandstands, but security control for those may be a difficult logistic.

On 6/15/2023 at 11:07 AM, nashvylle said:

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. 

An overlay could potentially work, but it sounds like we are talking about density minimums, which would be a first in town, but not impossible. To me the biggest hurdle there is the area doesn't want buildings that big in this area. A build up like this would almost create a second skyline for the city, kinda similar to cities like Boston that have the high-rises within the CBD and then Hancock and Prudential on the other side of Back Bay. To me though, is packing a bunch of buildings around the racetrack the right idea? I'm still confused on the apartments between the soccer stadium and the racetrack and if that is a wise use of that building haha.

On 6/15/2023 at 12:36 PM, bnacincy said:

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?

Honestly, I don't know how long the Superspeedway really has left in reality. Pannatoni has been buying and developing all around it and 840 is a logistics corridor of cross-dock after cross-dock. And with Nascar's efforts to move closer to cores - look at The Clash at the Municipal Auditorium (which I think is really dumb IMHO) and this coming weekends street course at Chicago - I think Nascar's long term plan is to use the superspeedway as a stepping stone to get back to the Fairgrounds and then SMI may sell the speedway to Pannatoni for more industrial space. Couple the move closer to cores to the move to get back to the short tracks and historical tracks (North Wilkesboro just had a resurgence this year), Fairgrounds checks all the boxes for what Nascar is looking for long-term.

On 6/15/2023 at 12:36 PM, bnacincy said:

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.

We don't need another new arena for WNBA. It would be great, but we have Bridgestone and Municipal Auditorium (which would and should need a major upgrade). But building another new arena here would be silly IMHO. I think that having the soccer stadium and the racetrack side-by-side like this gives Nashville the opportunity to have a really unique entertainment node. We have the chance to set ourselves up with three, distinct nodes with major sporting venues. Soccer/Racing in the South, NFL/TPAC on the EB, Baseball/something else(?) to the west. Having those three nodes could be a huge assist in getting help for transit as well to connect all three with the CBD. 

Apologies for the long winded post. Basically it comes down to is Racing as a whole does not need to be a rural environment sport. I think it can thrive much closer to cores and people use "noise" as their excuse to try and relegate it out into the burbs. 

[samsonh]

The race in Chicago this weekend has abysmal attendance. Amazing how far nascar has fallen unpopularity.

[titanhog]

48 minutes ago, samsonh said:

The race in Chicago this weekend has abysmal attendance. Amazing how far nascar has fallen unpopularity.

Dropping by to make my “once every 6 months post”

NASCAR made the fatal decision, first of all, to leave a market like Nashville in the first place back in the 80’s.  Then…in the 90’s, it became a major fad, pulling in millions of new viewers, filling up 100k+ tracks.  They started expanding the circuits outside of the south and eastern seaboard, sometimes taking away a race from a southern track.  And…as the “good ol boys” started retiring (or worse)…guys like Dale E, Darrell Waltrip, Mark Martin, etc…the entire sport started losing it’s “bad boys” persona and became way too polished…kinda “Hollywood-ed”.

They’re actually making the right moves by trying to come back to the smaller tracks and get back to their roots…but MAYBE it’s too late and maybe they’ve actually stuck a dagger in their own sport?  

[samsonh]

7 minutes ago, titanhog said:

Dropping by to make my “once every 6 months post”

NASCAR made the fatal decision, first of all, to leave a market like Nashville in the first place back in the 80’s.  Then…in the 90’s, it became a major fad, pulling in millions of new viewers, filling up 100k+ tracks.  They started expanding the circuits outside of the south and eastern seaboard, sometimes taking away a race from a southern track.  And…as the “good ol boys” started retiring (or worse)…guys like Dale E, Darrell Waltrip, Mark Martin, etc…the entire sport started losing it’s “bad boys” persona and became way too polished…kinda “Hollywood-ed”.

They’re actually making the right moves by trying to come back to the smaller tracks and get back to their roots…but MAYBE it’s too late and maybe they’ve actually stuck a dagger in their own sport?  

I think other sports have also done a better job of capturing attention. The NFL and NBA have become nearly year round sports with the draft and free agency. Formula 1 has grabbed a lot of people’s attention. MLS has gained lots of momentum. There are limited hours and nascar seems to have dropped the ball a bit, but things change and they can turn it around. 

[MontanaGuy]

10 minutes ago, titanhog said:

Dropping by to make my “once every 6 months post”

Drop by more often, we miss your posts!

[MLBrumby]

2 hours ago, titanhog said:

Dropping by to make my “once every 6 months post”

NASCAR made the fatal decision, first of all, to leave a market like Nashville in the first place back in the 80’s.  Then…in the 90’s, it became a major fad, pulling in millions of new viewers, filling up 100k+ tracks.  They started expanding the circuits outside of the south and eastern seaboard, sometimes taking away a race from a southern track.  And…as the “good ol boys” started retiring (or worse)…guys like Dale E, Darrell Waltrip, Mark Martin, etc…the entire sport started losing it’s “bad boys” persona and became way too polished…kinda “Hollywood-ed”.

They’re actually making the right moves by trying to come back to the smaller tracks and get back to their roots…but MAYBE it’s too late and maybe they’ve actually stuck a dagger in their own sport?  

I only know 3 people who have been avid NASCAR fans and they are all now F1 fans. They're in their 40s however; so I don't know if it's becoming popular with a younger fanbase now or not. I'll watch a big race on TV as a background event if nothing else is on. Personally, I didn't get the move of NASCAR to put on a major race on the same day as the Indy 500, but I'm not their target fan. Not being a motorhead myself, I prefer the GP races, especially through cities.  I wish NASCAR the best, but there's just so much competition for the sports/entertainment dollar these days. Occasionally, I'll see the videos of the 1970s/80s NASCAR events with the halter mommas standing on the motorhomes and think that's why it became so popular. 

[Luvemtall]

First of all, Titanhog great hearing from you. 
second thing, I personally believe Nascar lost it and shot them shelf in the foot when they decided in the late ‘90’s to go “Hollywood “ and made the mistake of focusing on the personalities and not the cars. I was raised in the great Nascar era of the ‘60’s &’70’s was a big fan. But lost interest as did all my friends and family when it wasn’t about a particular brand winning , but a particular driver. The younger generation seemed to hang with it longer, but as they are getting older they are fading. I understand some of the safety features that needed to be addressed, but the sole purpose of NASCAR was “stock” cars. It was win on Sunday, sell on Monday the factories were battling it out and Nascar was the stage. It was Ford , GM , Chrysler, Hudson, etc. , and the sole purpose was to go all out and simply the fastest car won. Then they made it all about the drivers and the “Pretty Boy “ era began, taking away the fan base that was loyal to their brand and pushing the personality and popularity of drivers instead. Come on ‘ they started selling sushi at Daytona, that alone should have been a red flag for what was to come. They alienated all those that made Nascar what it was in favor of selling out to Hollywood.

[Bos2Nash]

19 hours ago, MLBrumby said:

I only know 3 people who have been avid NASCAR fans and they are all now F1 fans. They're in their 40s however; so I don't know if it's becoming popular with a younger fanbase now or not. I'll watch a big race on TV as a background event if nothing else is on. Personally, I didn't get the move of NASCAR to put on a major race on the same day as the Indy 500, but I'm not their target fan. Not being a motorhead myself, I prefer the GP races, especially through cities.  I wish NASCAR the best, but there's just so much competition for the sports/entertainment dollar these days. Occasionally, I'll see the videos of the 1970s/80s NASCAR events with the halter mommas standing on the motorhomes and think that's why it became so popular. 

I actually took an avid F1 fan who refused to look at Nascar to the Nashville Xfinity race two years ago and upon leaving the track he told me he gets the draw of it. The biggest issue with street tracks/F1 races is you see the car for 5 seconds and have to wait a couple minutes to see it. The races are geared toward the TV audience more than anything and as a result the hospitality aspects need to be shifted to make it "worth the ticket price". The reason my guest had a better understanding on Nascar after the race is you can literally see the car the entire time versus only a few seconds a lap.

16 hours ago, Luvemtall said:

First of all, Titanhog great hearing from you. 
second thing, I personally believe Nascar lost it and shot them shelf in the foot when they decided in the late ‘90’s to go “Hollywood “ and made the mistake of focusing on the personalities and not the cars. I was raised in the great Nascar era of the ‘60’s &’70’s was a big fan. But lost interest as did all my friends and family when it wasn’t about a particular brand winning , but a particular driver. The younger generation seemed to hang with it longer, but as they are getting older they are fading. I understand some of the safety features that needed to be addressed, but the sole purpose of NASCAR was “stock” cars. It was win on Sunday, sell on Monday the factories were battling it out and Nascar was the stage. It was Ford , GM , Chrysler, Hudson, etc. , and the sole purpose was to go all out and simply the fastest car won. Then they made it all about the drivers and the “Pretty Boy “ era began, taking away the fan base that was loyal to their brand and pushing the personality and popularity of drivers instead. Come on ‘ they started selling sushi at Daytona, that alone should have been a red flag for what was to come. They alienated all those that made Nascar what it was in favor of selling out to Hollywood.

Win on Sunday, Sell on Monday was a good monday years and years ago. Unfortunately in the game of motorsports, its all about the money and when the manufacturers dump money to be the fastest car you move further and further away from stock. That is more of a result of a free market system. F1 had this as well and it got so out of control the sport put a salary cap of $145 million per year to help keep a form of parity. My biggest issue with F1 versus Nascar is F1 is almost purely based on the car's performance and the fact that the driver is last to know everything about the car (electronics tell the crews everything who then relay it to the driver). Nascar has been modernizing, but so much about the handling is up to the driver being able to give the correct feedback to improve the car. Sure there are big boys like Hendrick, JGR, Penske out there dominating, but you are able to see guys like Corey LaJoie in a medium to low funded team like Spire Motorsports or Michael McDowell with Front Row Motorsports improve and have shots at races here or there. 

Motorsports is always a big money sport. It is very unfortunate honestly. One of the reasons Soccer is so popular globally is due to its low cost of entry. The exact opposite of motorsports. So to have Soccer next to Racing is a great tandem of the sports world in my opinion. It makes for a great story that Nashville is able to nurture both kinds of world within soceity.

[henburg]

On 7/2/2023 at 12:56 PM, samsonh said:

The race in Chicago this weekend has abysmal attendance. Amazing how far nascar has fallen unpopularity.

In fairness to that event, there has been torrential rain and flooding all throughout Chicago for the past few days. I still don't think that the attendance for this would have been great in perfect weather, but those factors certainly had an affect. When strictly comparing the highlights of that race to the average NASCAR Superspeedway race, the street race looked infinitely more exciting.

That said, my personal opinion of NASCAR simply being a bad product shouldn't matter. I just don't see a racetrack located in a dense, growing urban neighborhood as a good idea and any comparisons to draw on for it are pretty much non existent for a reason. There is some history with the track that predates many of the neighbors now, I get it, but frankly nothing too noteworthy. It was also allowed to virtually decay over the past few decades and any historic charm that could have been preserved is long gone.

In my opinion, I think that the best course of action would be to just demolish it and reconfigure the property for further development, an alternative event venue, greenspace, a WeGo transit hub, etc. You name it, I think there are probably 20 better uses for that property than a NASCAR track. Then, if NASCAR truly wants to increase their presence in Nashville, devote these resources to improving the Wilson County Superspeedway or even host a street race here like they just did in Chicago, I think that could be a lot of fun. I just think that investing in NASCAR (a sport that is dying by most measurables) over amenities for the residents of one of Nashville's fastest growing new neighborhoods would be a mistake.

Edited July 3, 2023 by henburg

[PruneTracy]

Just leaving this here again.

The Chicago street circuit turned out better than I expected, but perhaps the weather played into that. I still don't understand NASCAR's insistence on bringing the sport to markets where there is little interest in it and will never be. They take dates/locations with consistently high attendance (this weekend would have been the second Daytona race) and go to places like Los Angeles and Chicago, then wonder why ratings are declining. 

[markhollin]

A summary piece from the Nashville Post on the situation at it stand now with the Racetrack:

The ongoing feud over a deal to overhaul the Fairgrounds Speedway escalated last week with a back-and-forth between the mayor’s office and an anti-racetrack group. 

Mayor John Cooper’s race to get the racetrack deal done this term has been tumultuous. Last month, chaos ensued when it was announced District 17 Metro Councilmember Colby Sledge would be holding the community meeting required for the legislation to proceed on July 25, leaving only two meetings until the end of the term. The racetrack deal requires three Metro Council meetings to pass, so it would effectively be pushed to next term, a prospect that constituents and councilmembers critical of the racetrack deal support. 

An attempt by Councilmember Zach Young, who has loudly supported the racetrack deal, to circumvent Sledge was met with distaste from most of the chamber. But despite these setbacks, the mayor’s office has plunged ahead, with high hopes that there’s still a narrow avenue for the deal to pass this term. 

Last week, at a meeting of the Sports Authority, another body that must approve the racetrack deal, fuel was added to the fire during a presentation by Ben Eagles, senior adviser to the mayor, and Metro’s Deputy Legal Director Tom Cross. 

During the presentation, Eagles directly addressed some of the loudest anti-racetrack voices, calling them out for spreading misinformation about the deal, and even referenced mayoral candidate Jim Gingrich’s most recent ad. In the ad, Gingrich said that the money being used for the racetrack deal should be used somewhere else, such as on schools or affordable housing, a claim that has also been made by anti-racetrack groups. With the racetrack funds coming from bonds, Eagles said this is a false claim. 

“Absolutely none of the dollars in this project are available for Metro to use on schools or infrastructure,” Eagles said. “We would never propose a deal that suggested rerouting money from teacher pay, neighborhood infrastructure, affordable housing, public safety or other important priorities to a sports deal.”

Eagles examined two different mailers during his presentation, going through each one and dispelling pieces of supposed misinformation that have been commonly circulated by those opposed to the racetrack. He directly responded to criticism of the deal by Nashville SC owner John Ingram, who expressed concerns over having side-by-side concert facilities on the fairgrounds.

“It seems inconceivable that two or three concerts per year represents ‘a recipe for disaster that could threaten the economic integrity’ of Geodis Park. Of course if that were actually the case, I would have expected to hear opposition to other venues being proposed and built at various capacities and configurations,” Eagles said.

(Eagles' full remarks are here. The full video of the Sports Authority meeting can be found here.) 

But following his presentation, Cross presented the Sports Authority with new information that Citizens Against Racetrack Expansion (CARE) latched onto in a press release the following day.

During the presentation, Cross said that construction costs of the racetrack renovations will not be known until November and that if those costs are more than the number pledged by the state, Convention and Visitors Corp. and Metro, then Speedway Motorsports/Bristol Motor Speedway can stick with the deal or walk away. 

“If it is more than the bond amount, Cross said BMS will ‘…have to make a decision’ … to participate or walk away,” reads CARE’s press release. “Delay this project so a new council and a new mayor can get the hard numbers and make an informed decision about using taxpayer money to bring NASCAR into a Nashville Neighborhood. There is no urgency and reason for the current deadline.”

The bonds pledged for the deal would not actually be pulled until after construction costs are confirmed and BMS has made their decision to stick with the deal or walk away. A Cooper administration spokesperson said there would effectively be little to no cost associated with Metro making the deal this term should BMS ultimately walk away. 

That being said, the path to finalizing the deal remains tough. Proponents of the racetrack went back to the legislature in the spring to change the threshold for demolition of the existing speedway grandstand from 27 votes to 21 votes. A charter referendum in 2011 requires two-thirds of the Metro Council to approve demolition on the Fairgrounds Nashville site.

Metro’s Department of Law filed suit over the state law, arguing that the bill, which effectively singled out Nashville, was a violation of home rule. There are four suits total, including one filed last week seeking declaratory judgment in Chancery Court on the threshold question needed to tear down the old grandstand and build a new one.

“Such proposal by the Speedway agreement does not fall within the definition of ‘demolition’ contemplated by Section 11.602(d) of the Metro Charter. Therefore, the supermajority requirement of Section 11.602(d) does not apply to the Speedway agreement. Rather, only a simple majority vote from the Metro Council is required to approve the Speedway agreement,” reads a complaint filed by Howard Tucker, a racer at the Fairgrounds Speedway who is sponsored by Santa’s Pub. Tucker’s attorney is Jamie Hollin, a former Metro councilmember who helped lead the coalition that stopped Karl Dean’s administration from demolishing the site and redeveloping it. That effort established the 27-vote threshold that he now seeks to have clarified. 

The suit by Tucker would effectively make the Metro Legal suit moot. 

If a deal is going to be approved, Cooper’s administration has very little margin before he leaves office. 

In an interview with the Banner, Vice Mayor Jim Shulman said this deal could be delayed until after the elections and a new council is seated. But Cooper and his team would not be in office to push for it.

“It could be punted,” Shulman said. “And I’ve had the discussion with the mayor’s office and said, ‘you know, we’re down to the end of this term.’ It’s really hard, I think, to push major projects right at the end of the administration, particularly when there’s a new administration coming in. Because, you know, the council can vote on something, and then they leave it for the next administration to try to handle. I know that the mayor is very interested in this. And he and his staff has put a lot of time into it. But it could be passed to the next administration.”

 

[markhollin]

Fairgrounds Speedway debate turns murky amid timeline snag and competing messages:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/davidson/2023/07/06/nashville-speedway-fairgrounds-renovations-nascar-race/70383937007/

[Melrose]

On 7/3/2023 at 12:28 PM, henburg said:

In fairness to that event, there has been torrential rain and flooding all throughout Chicago for the past few days.

They hit some really unlucky weather for sure.  It should be noted that if there was a weather cancellation or similar significant delays that depressed attendance and spending  under the current version of  Bristol/Fairgrounds proposal,  Metro would take a major hit from the lost revenue and have to cover the whole resulting shortfall in debt service.  Bristol wouldn't be on the hook for even a fraction of this,  which again is one of the many things that could have been fixed here if Bristol had been forced to negotiate a fair deal and not just the Mayor taking whatever they put out there...

[bnacincy]

From what I've been reading online, the Ally 400 race was a sellout-also the TV ratings were the highest of any season opener in 3 years.

So if the stands are full and the TV ratings are solid, then what exactly is the problem with the Superspeedway that only the Fairgrounds track renovation could solve?