
Silverstone to lose 3 more corners...?
#1
Posted 19 February 2006 - 21:32
In a major redevelopment of the Silverstone Circuit in Northamptonshire, England, St Modwen developers have proposed to wipe out three of the circuit's most famous corners in order to secure the long-term future of the race. After the frightening revelations of last week with the Belgian Grand Prix being cancelled due to lack of top-class facilities, St Mowden Properties has put foreward a plan to alter the current track layout to make room for new plots of land, which could be sold to make money, money that would be needed to keep the race alive.
The plans would see Club, Abbey and Bridge corners disappear off the map. Both Club and Abbey have been a corner on the Silverstone circuit since it's opening in the mid-ninties, with Bridge being added in 1991. The news was broken by the Daily Telegraph newspaper, which also revealed that President of the British Racing Drivers' Club (BRDC), owners of Silverstone, Sir Jackie Stewart is in favour of the proposals. They will be presented to the BRDC next week for discussion, and Stewart has recommended that the members accept the proposals.
Is the new plan available for all to see?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 19 February 2006 - 22:54
DCN
#3
Posted 19 February 2006 - 23:17
So this is all p*ss and wind then ....Originally posted by Doug Nye
Just hold your water -
DCN

The grammar and spelling of the original announcement are pretty much b*ll*cks anyway:
So 1991 is in the second half of the decade then .....Both Club and Abbey have been a corner on the Silverstone circuit since it's opening in the mid-ninties, with Bridge being added in 1991.

#4
Posted 19 February 2006 - 23:37

#5
Posted 19 February 2006 - 23:49
#6
Posted 20 February 2006 - 02:25
Guaranteeing the future of Silverstone?
Probably as a golf course, not a circuit.
#7
Posted 20 February 2006 - 03:41
Originally posted by zakeriath
From the Manipe web site
St Mowden Properties has put foreward a plan to alter the current track layout to make room for new plots of land, which could be sold to make money, money that would be needed to keep the race alive.
That worked out so well for Kyalami...
#8
Posted 20 February 2006 - 07:52
As an aside given JYS has subsequently been found to have an undisclosed interest on some of the other BRDC decisions do we know whether he is completely independant to this propert company?
#9
Posted 20 February 2006 - 08:47
#10
Posted 20 February 2006 - 09:09
That must rank as one of the most stupid suggestions for a circuit ever. I have just been told that my plans to race at Monza this year have been put on hold because of a legal challenge to the circuit becsause of noise. If this is happening to Monza in Italy what chance is there of long term survival of Silverstone ?Originally posted by ehagar
Let me get this straight... They are proposing housing developments on the edge of the circuit? Isn't that just asking for trouble?
#11
Posted 20 February 2006 - 11:18
Originally posted by Terry Walker
...........Guaranteeing the future of Silverstone?
Probably as a golf course, not a circuit.
Yes Terry, and if you think about it it's perfectly logic.
If you think about people who run motor racing all along this years,
what they really love is Golf, not motor racing. Team owner, drivers, politicians, journalists.....
MonzaDriver.
#12
Posted 20 February 2006 - 21:13

DCN
#13
Posted 21 February 2006 - 08:18
#14
Posted 21 February 2006 - 11:44
DCN
#15
Posted 21 February 2006 - 12:07
#16
Posted 21 February 2006 - 12:13
#17
Posted 21 February 2006 - 16:34
St Modwen already own outright the 450 acre Longbridge site a time deadline passed last week and they will now proceed with obtaining planning consent from Birmingham city council to re-develope 350 of those acres of factory buildings and brown field site in to housing estates , retail and warehousing. The remaining 100 acres of factory buildings Nanjing say they want to arrange a short term lease and possibly also a medium term lease if terms can be agreed. Otherwise we can expect this to go for re-development as well.
With the present massive pressure on to build houses anywhere and everywhere in the south of England and the Deputy Prime Ministers willingness to fast track consent for anywhere that could possibly be defined as pre-used or brown field for housing schemes , the bigger the better.
This sort of development is evidently just up St Modwen and their partners' street .
Well you don't need to be a genius to guess what the likely long term outcome here is likely to be.
#18
Posted 22 February 2006 - 22:45
So they voted instead to postpone The Vote - while the board has been sent off to review the proposals, and moreso their fine detail, and report back.
Democracy rules.
DCN
#19
Posted 22 February 2006 - 22:52
I think the venue in question's status within the history of the F1 World Championship qualifies it well enough, Doug.Originally posted by Doug Nye
Not sure if this is really TNF material but...

No blood on the walls, then?
Advertisement
#20
Posted 22 February 2006 - 23:34
DCN
#21
Posted 03 March 2006 - 18:03
Which sides of the present scare are the board on ? What is the likely outcome ?
Anyone got an inside line ?
#22
Posted 06 March 2006 - 08:38
#23
Posted 06 March 2006 - 10:07
Is this a part of the story ?Originally posted by simon drabble
at least one previous decision made by either the board or JYS have later shown possible conflicts of interest - maybe the members just need to be sure they are not being sold short...
http://www.autosport...e=news&id=49777