Filed under: Etc., Government/Legal
Top Gear to be banned from track over city planning violations?
Britain's leading automotive television export, Top Gear, is reportedly in a spot of hot water stemming from its on-track antics. Apparently, the Jeremy Clarkson-helmed show uses Dunsfold Park (an ex-WWII airfield) in the UK for its Stig sessions, and doing so isn't copasetic with the locals.
In fact, the show's apparently been racing around the facility without permission from the local planning commission, and Dunsford's people are upset about the noise levels that the show generates. As such, the show is in danger of being banned from filming on the grounds, and the site's owners, the Rutland Group, is in danger of sanctions for other planning violations.
More details of the controversy at the link.
[Source: Telegraph UK]
(Top Tip, Marion!)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Josiah Cole 2:27PM (5/26/2006)
Wah! wah!
Someone call the wahmbulance, the number is nine-wah-wah.
Reply
John B 2:30PM (5/26/2006)
Re: “It is also dealing with dozens of allegations that the site operators, the Rutland Group, regularly allows activities that are in breach of planning regulations.”
I wonder if they are thinking about activities like dropping caravans on top of cars Jeremy dislikes, or driving through the Top Gear “production office” as in the Hilux episode. Perhaps taking a wrecking ball to an old Porsche didn’t fit with the local council. Oh well, if Jeremy moves Top Gear to Toronto, I’m sure Shannonville race track will accommodate him (and maybe we will get to watch Top Gear).
Reply
DubbedinEnglish 2:32PM (5/26/2006)
WTF!!!!!
Reply
Ian Neubert 2:46PM (5/26/2006)
Sounds like the city just wants to get some "city planning" fees out of them.
Reply
Eric L. 2:46PM (5/26/2006)
Insane. Now I really want to see Clarkson insult the people of Dunsfold on the next episode. That is after all, what he is best at.
Reply
Jason 2:47PM (5/26/2006)
Holy crap, somebody is having fun! Quickly! Cry about it and stop them!
Reply
Andrea Milam 2:52PM (5/26/2006)
Maybe this means Top Gear will come to the US! One can dream.
Reply
Joel, 2:54PM (5/26/2006)
4. Exactly.
Reply
Gunnar Heinrich 3:04PM (5/26/2006)
They'll be able to find another track - but the BBC will probably have to shell out some more quid.
http://automobilesdeluxe.blogspot.com/2006/05/aging-gracelessly.html
Reply
[sinz] 3:10PM (5/26/2006)
Your comments: Oh c'mon, it could be worse, someone could be using it as ... oh I don't know... an airfield. If I bought a house next to an airfield I'd expect a bit of noise from time to time, and if it were only cars I'd be thanking my lucky stars. Hopefully the BBC can swing some weight around and have the local planning commission shut these yokels up.
And yes, I realize it's an Ex-WWII airfield, but someone could lease it as an airfield, and in fact, if you watch Top Gear you often see jet liners in the background during the test laps (one of the current season's episodes has a massive white one in the background with something.com written on it), so someone is clearly using it. Though that may have been Top Gear themselves, if we see a jet liner being used later this season then... uh.. heh, I'll just shut up now.
Reply
risingsun 3:14PM (5/26/2006)
People who don't "get" cars will always bitch about people who do. Like the automotive laws in the US. Let's put a restriction on how loud an exhaust can be, but then let's NOT give the officers the equipment and proper training to actually TELL if the exhaust is too loud. At the same time, let's let people who like trucks put big brush gaurds on the front of their vehicles, negating their bumper and causing vastly more damage to any vehicle that they rear end. Same with trailer hitches. If you're not pulling a trailer, TAKE IT OUT. Lifted trucks are bad too, cars that hit them go under, totally negating the millions of dollars that the manufacturer put in to crash testing and 5-mph compliance. It goes both ways, but in the end it's people who don't know cars (lawmakers) trying to make laws about cars.
Reply
Wildcat0695 3:17PM (5/26/2006)
Setup home in Claifornia or in Atlanta on one of the road tracks and call it a day. Maybe then we can get it back on cable here, cause the show is awesome.
Reply
J. Dock 3:18PM (5/26/2006)
I'm with Josiah. Jezza Clarkson is a sport-jacketed hater, and this is overdue justice.
Reply
md 3:33PM (5/26/2006)
"11. People who don't "get" cars will always bitch about people who do. Like the automotive laws in the US. Let's put a restriction on how loud an exhaust can be, but then let's NOT give the officers the equipment and proper training to actually TELL if the exhaust is too loud. At the same time, let's let people who like trucks put big brush gaurds on the front of their vehicles, negating their bumper and causing vastly more damage to any vehicle that they rear end. Same with trailer hitches. If you're not pulling a trailer, TAKE IT OUT. Lifted trucks are bad too, cars that hit them go under, totally negating the millions of dollars that the manufacturer put in to crash testing and 5-mph compliance. It goes both ways, but in the end it's people who don't know cars (lawmakers) trying to make laws about cars."
the majority of cars don't actually meet those five mph requirements anyways. Hitches are not designed to be taken out. I have to take my rear bumper off to remove my hitch. 99% of the time when you rear end somebody it is your fault anyways and manufacturs sometimes design their hitches to be incorporated with the bumper. How is hiting a lifted vehicle any different than hitting a tractor trailer or other large truck that sits high off the ground? Lifted vehicles and large trucks are legal, it is the consumer's fault for not buying a vehicle that is not designed to absorb impacts with those types of vehicles if it is a concern for you.
How can you claim to "get" cars, but then turn around and blast trucks?
Reply
Laz 3:44PM (5/26/2006)
Tell Jeremy to pack up and head over to RAF Bentwaters. They won't disturb anyone but the Muntjac deer. When the base was in use, you couldn't hear an SR-71 until it cleared the trees level! "New" runway as well.
Don't forget to take all your localized business with you. Woodbridge would love to have you lot.
Reply
Josh 4:08PM (5/26/2006)
" wonder if they are thinking about activities like dropping caravans on top of cars Jeremy dislikes, or driving through the Top Gear “production office” as in the Hilux episode. Perhaps taking a wrecking ball to an old Porsche didn’t fit with the local council. Oh well, if Jeremy moves Top Gear to Toronto, I’m sure Shannonville race track will accommodate him (and maybe we will get to watch Top Gear)."
I believe all they do is run the races on the track. Some of these other things are probably done off site. However, I do also think they film on the airstrip too. They could totally get another airfield. They are on their second airfield for the recent series as it is.
Reply
That One Person 4:25PM (5/26/2006)
I bet the people complaining are over the age of 60.
There is a Ford test track right down the street from me. Once in a great while I will hear someone locking their brakes up or someone doing a burnout...but its not loud. And they run cars on that thing 24/7. Hell, theres more noise from the freeway near me.
After living near that test track for my whole life, I can bet you the noise from that airfield is minimal. The town just wants to point fingers and collect money...
Reply
Yaroukh 4:25PM (5/26/2006)
I feel sad a bit about Stigs' lap-times (if they move elsewhere with TG)
Reply
i.p.freely 4:37PM (5/26/2006)
@ 1... that would be Nine-nine-nine in England. so the Wahmbulance won't be coming.
They would need to dial, whine-whine-whine,
Reply
ZoomZoomin' 5:06PM (5/26/2006)
Now if only they could return to the peace and quiet of the Spitfires and WW2 bombers. Those were the good 'ol days. Ah, country folk...really, about the loudest thing I can imagine during filming was when they were playing cat-mouse with an AH-64 Apache, but this is all at an old airfield we're talking about. The article is very devoid of any real details about the specifics of the complaints. In the end, it is probably just a money shakedown anyway.
"I have to take my rear bumper off to remove my hitch. 99% of the time when you rear end somebody it is your fault anyways and manufacturs sometimes design their hitches to be incorporated with the bumper."
I'm pretty sure he's referring to heavy duty hitches and people who drive around with the actual ball-joint/arm in the receiver.
Reply