Txenergy Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 SAS,, should be a piece of history , it has been there for a long time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 I rest my case.... I can be pretty anti establishment myself. But I also have a problem with choas. Do you really want me putting my pig farm right next door to your house? I don't think some corrupt, power-hungry politician or bureaucrat should make that decision.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathy Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Ok, this may be a dumb question, but what if the owner of the SA track doesn't want to sell the land that it sits on? Then what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Budman Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 >>>>> (Meyer and Pan Am) Photos by Txtom ................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rosie Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Ok, this may be a dumb question, but what if the owner of the SA track doesn't want to sell the land that it sits on? Then what? The way things are looking, the City will just take the land. It's called Eminent Domain by some. I call it plain old Theft... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KISS_Racing Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Ok, here goes one last time and I'll quit. Hwy 16 has how many 1000's cars, trucks, SUV's and tractor trailers come up and down it every day. The Toyota plant has a rail yard, a 2 mile test track and how many 1000's of people who use Hwy 16 and Applewhite to get to work. Then you have airtraffic flying over the area. Folks, there is more to this than the noise that would come from the track. I'm willing to stand up, I'm willing to sign a petition and I'm willing to Rally the court house if it means we will be heard in our concerns. Obviously in a civil and respectful manner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kathy Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Thanks Rosie! I forgot about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
txenergyman Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 In everyone blaming the mayor or city council,we are missing the key ingredient that promotes actions taken on land,PROGRESS. Life progresses whether we like it or not,and we are the cause of it,ourselves,our kids,their kids, our relatives and so on.How many can relate a story of a 2 lane or 4 lane or even an interstate that used to be "a dirt road". What about the mom and pop corner stores where we walked to get a soda or candy and now its a corner house. Favorite burger joint or putt putt,now a shopping center. We dictate progress by growth of population,jobs and needs. So blaming City Council or Toyota or such is not the core action,WE created the situation and as such WE are to blame for land grabbing or whatever you want to call it,the City has to meet the demand of GROWTH,which again is US! James.....JMO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogcaller Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 DIFFERENTS BETWEEN A PIG FARM AND A RACETRACK ..BOTH ARE NOISY OF COURSE ... THE RACE TRACK HAS BEEN THERE THIRTY PLUS YEARS .AND A TOYOTA PLANT WAS BUILT OUT THAT WAY AND NOW THE TAX BASE IS ALOT LARGER THAN WHAT THE CITY COULD RECIEVE FROM THE SPEEDWAY ..SO AS USUAL THE PROPERTY YOU OWN IS ONLY GOOD TO YOU WHEN THE CITY COUNTY DONT WANT IT .ONCE THEY DECIDE THEY WANT IT ..TO BAD SO SAD BY BY ..YOUR OUT .PERIOD ..SO YOU NEVER REALLY OWN ANYTHING ASLONG AS IT COMES DOWN TO WHAT SOMEONE ELSE WITH TON.S OF GREENBACKS WANTS .. THE ONE THING ABOULT CC SPEEDWAY IF IM CORRECT IS. IT IS GRANDFATHER IN ..I DONT THINK SAS WAS .JUST REMIMBER THE SPEEDWAY WAS THERE BEFORE THE PIG FARM ...LOL Seems to me everyone is leaving out a key element to this whole discussion about property rights. Racers aren't the property owner. So racers aren't being pushed aside. The people that own the property are probably all for this, because it is raising their property value. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KISS_Racing Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 I said I'd quit, but this is just to much to resist. First off I'm not blaming anyone. My statement is straight forward and to the point. Find out who to talk to and let's do it. Whether it's SAS or building a new track lets talk to them(Mayor and City council). I DIDN'T say beat them over the head, T A L K to them. I agree that progress happens. Live here for over 40 years and seen alot of it happen. 5.5 million bucks and we can buy SAS and property, then do what the flip we want with it. I have talked with several friends who have built well known prosperous golf courses in San Antonio from dirt up and they agree it(SAS)looks appealing. That being said, it may be better to call this one a wash and walk away. I don't have the answers, just some suggestions. I have a soap box I'll be listing in the Classified Section... Peace and God Bless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USRA23TRUCK Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Definitive Posted June 18, 2007 Report Share Posted June 18, 2007 Round and round we go.Urban sprawl will happen regardless of who the politicians are.The fact that the city is even trying to stay on top of any zoning issues should be looked at as a godsend.I have spoken to the mayor.He is not the typical politician so many of you refer to.He has no false hope of becoming President one day.He is truely in the seat to try and change things that have fired him up over the years.Some of those issues are very large,like all of the constructin on our freeways.Some are small like his first success of synchronizing the downtown traffic lights.If you call Trey's morning show he will listen and call you back later if you have a valid issue.We are going crazy over one little racetrack.What is going to happen when they announce the relocation of the airport?We should all drop this demonizing and stand behind J&S or any entity like them.Get a brand new clean as a whistle racetrack to play on,and go into a museum and read about SAS.Too many people are trying to see just one pixal on their big screen tv,and if it's a 1080p,they are in big trouble.Think about the big picture.James,Shelma,Debbie,Rick,etc...all seem to be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SWitzsche Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 Must be considered for the greater good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAPA Posted June 19, 2007 Report Share Posted June 19, 2007 OK I back J&S 110%. My gripe is with our elected officials putting 30 years of history down the sewer so they can advance their political careers. They kiss Toyotas back side so much. They just passed An Ordinance authorizing payment in the amount of $3,384,000 to Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas, Inc. as approved under the Project Starbright Agreement and establishing a payment schedule for the remaining balance. And they just spent $1,745,712.87 for Alamodome Sound System Improvements. Check out the council agenda. It will make you sick how they are spending our money. But we are all suppose to crawl under a rock and not make waves. Thats BS!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oatey220 Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 It looks like the show is over.... let SAS rest in peace. Its time to move on, she (SAS) has served the racing community well. Its time to support our current as well as future racing facilities. So why don’t we pour ourselves a nice glass of champagne (and throw the bottle at the first Toyota that drives by) and say a good-bye and thanks for the memories toast. Remember everything happens for a reason and I believe great things for the racing community are just around the corner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bubbac Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 I know this is long and the last paragraph really sums up what is happening with the property around the plant. Isn't the intersection Of Watson Rd. & Hwy. 16 well within the three mile radius of the plant? Oh well. I own land in Bexar county and the city has taken some of it from me and will take more in the future. This is my donation to the better good of all San Antonions. Oh wait, I do not recieve any city benefits for my donation! I better stop now. It is done and overwith. The column below was taken from the Express/News websight. Subdivisions wouldn't stop Toyota Web Posted: 08/14/2004 12:53 AM CDT Barbara Powell Express-News Business Writer Toyota has no intention of altering its plans to build a truck plant in San Antonio, a company official said, despite a zoning dispute between the city and heirs of restaurateur Bill Miller that could result in housing subdivisions being built within sight of the plant. "We've invested a lot in San Antonio and nothing's going to run us out of town," said Manuel Pelaez, the senior counsel for Toyota Motor Manufacturing Texas, which is constructing a 1.8 million-square-foot Tundra truck plant scheduled to open in fall 2006. Pelaez said the last thing Toyota wants is to get entangled in the dispute between the city and the Millers, who want to build as many as 2,000 homes within 11/2 miles of the Japanese automaker's facility in far South Bexar County. But as much as Toyota — known for keeping a low profile and being a good neighbor wherever it builds a plant — may wish to remain in the background, it can't. Mayor Ed Garza said last week that he feared the Millers' determination to build two high-density subdivisions on 385 acres could jeopardize the Toyota project and also the automaker's ability to expand its plant in the future. Garza said Friday that city officials will offer the Millers a compromise — perhaps permission to zone commercial — contingent on dropping their plans to build houses on the land. The Millers have said they support the Toyota plant but want the right to develop their property as they wish. Still, their attorney, Barry McClenahan, said earlier this week that his clients remain willing to negotiate with the city. "Where we're at now is trying to provide an alternative zoning solution," Garza said. "I think it's the density of the housing the Millers are proposing that is the concern. The ideal situation would be no housing." Pelaez said Toyota hasn't discussed the housing project with either the city or the Millers, who submitted their plans before the city imposed land-use controls designed to prevent such a development. "We don't want to have to negotiate zoning disputes," he said. "We're just here to build trucks." But that doesn't mean Toyota isn't concerned about the type of development that occurs around its plant, Pelaez said. Or that Garza isn't right to fear that the specter of thousands of residences on the Millers' land would make Toyota think twice about expanding its plant. "What we don't want is high-density housing," Pelaez said. "It doesn't make sense from a safety point of view. But Toyota is not opposed to housing, and the city never promised there would not be housing. And we never dictated what kind of zoning there should be around us. We left that to the city." Toyota has consistently stated it has no plans to increase the plant's capacity to manufacture 150,000 Tundra trucks yearly. However, auto industry analysts believe Toyota will add production capacity to the plant, given its track record of expanding its Indiana and Kentucky plants and its aggressive push to move more manufacturing to the United States. But if and when Toyota decides to expand in San Antonio, the city's ability to control zoning around the plant would loom large. "When and if it comes time to expand," Pelaez said, "we will look at the area around the plant and say, 'Will it support it? Is it worth risking our reputation as a good neighbor?' And we will look at how successful the city was at zoning land nearby and how compatible the zoning in the area is." What does Toyota want? "What we want is very simple," Pelaez said. "We want two things — that the area around our plant be zoned appropriately and according to what we will be doing on our site, and a happy ending for us would be our neighbors and the city would reach a mutual agreement and walk away happy." It seemed so much simpler when public officials signed the original agreement with Toyota in early 2003. In that pact, the city in broad terms agreed it would "initiate appropriate zoning" within a 3-mile radius of the plant. To Toyota, "appropriate zoning" meant compatibility with a huge manufacturing plant where 2,000 workers converge daily, along with dozens of 18-wheelers and trains to haul away the new trucks — with accompanying noise, lights and traffic. And without the fear there would be nearby residents to pepper the city with complaints about all the bustle. "When we went through attracting Toyota, it was very clear Toyota does not like issues to come up after the fact," Garza said. "They don't like controversy." But complying with the letter of the agreement, if not the spirit, became complicated. Both the city and Toyota agreed that having a 3-mile buffer proved unrealistic. "There were houses already within three miles, and three miles is a big chunk of land to expect nothing to go on," Pelaez said. But the city also promised Toyota it would move to control zoning on land nearest the plant, Garza said. By the time the city extended its zoning control to land the Millers owned just south of the Medina River, the Millers had already submitted their development plans. Garza also fears the 10 to 12 suppliers who plan to build factories next to Toyota's plant will get cold feet if the Millers don't alter their plans. Pelaez, however, said the suppliers will move onto the site as planned. But he said suppliers are also worried about the prospect of nearby high-density residential developments drawing complaints about their own operations. "It's not just Toyota that is affected," Pelaez said. "If this doesn't get settled, we have to explain to our suppliers what's going on. In the end, this is really all about relationships." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- bpowell@express-news.net -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Online at: http://www.mysanantonio.com/business/stori...pute.fb43b.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mel Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 I think I remember seeing a salimaster (sp) or a finch from the hill country building a nest out there! Or maybe we can consider the ole asphalt as a "Historical District" J/K We must support Thunder Hill before it gets swallowed up by a city or municipality. Mel Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lenny66 Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Man after reading this article about Toyota and The Millers, sounds like $$$ Money Talks and Racetracks stop!!! The Millers get preferential treatment just because they have deep pockets. As for our typical political a$$-kissing city council, woo's Toyota here with promises of muncho land and no hassles they accept and we get screwed. What is this so called "buffer zone"??? A certain radius around the plant that will not be inhabited by anything. Is this zone 2 mile or 3 mile radius??? With all the road traffic down HWY 16 South everyday, how is some racing, one night a week going to pose a problem for noise. I am not sure if anyone else ever noticed this, but if you park on the side of HWY 16 and face the track, with cars running around the track the noise is minimal. So if you put mufflers on these vehicles, WA-LA!! Less noise. It may be a futile attempt on our part to try and reopen the track, but we should at least be heard and not just by the folks who read this forum daily. Thanx for your time. Lenny66 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingaces Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 SAS,, should be a piece of history , it has been there for a long time... THATS REAL EASY FOR YOU TO SAY FOR THE SIMPLY FACT YOU WANT TO BUILD YOUR OWN TRACK AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY HISTORY/MEMORIES OF SAS, MANY OF US CUT OUR TEETH ON THAT TRACK. MANY OF US GO WAY BACK WITH THAT PLACE SO IT IS PART OF OUR LIFES. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Txenergy Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 SAS,, should be a piece of history , it has been there for a long time... THATS REAL EASY FOR YOU TO SAY FOR THE SIMPLY FACT YOU WANT TO BUILD YOUR OWN TRACK AND YOU DON'T HAVE ANY HISTORY/MEMORIES OF SAS, MANY OF US CUT OUR TEETH ON THAT TRACK. MANY OF US GO WAY BACK WITH THAT PLACE SO IT IS PART OF OUR LIFES. Flying Aces I use to sit in those stands... and sponsoring cars there.... hhmmm so yes I go way back.... I've lived here 42 yrs and that's how far back I go.... Have a Great Day... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maz1438 Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Flying Aces I use to sit in those stands... and sponsoring cars there.... hhmmm so yes I go way back.... I've lived here 42 yrs and that's how far back I go.... Have a Great Day... Just out of curiousity, what cars did you personally sponsor and in what class? TY Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Txenergy Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 Flying Aces I use to sit in those stands... and sponsoring cars there.... hhmmm so yes I go way back.... I've lived here 42 yrs and that's how far back I go.... Have a Great Day... Just out of curiousity, what cars did you personally sponsor and in what class? TY Maz Sorry got a call from Jimmy and he said no one has to state who they sponsor.... Had to deleted.. Shelma Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conrad Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 FIRST OF ALL, THE SAN ANTONIO CITY COUNCIL DID NOT SEAL THE FATE OF SAN ANTONIO SPEEDWAY. IN FACT, THE CITY HAS FOUGHT AGAINST HOMES BEING BUILT WITHIN 3 MILES OF TOYOTA. ON ALL PROPOSED ZONING MAPS, THE SPEEDWAY PROPERTY IS ZONED AS LIGHT COMMERCIAL. THE SPEEDWAY WOULD EASILY FALL WITHIN THE CITYS SCOPE OF USAGE FOR THAT PROPERTY, PROVIDED THAT THE OWNER, NOT THE LESSEE, WAS NOT OPPOSING IT. THE WAY IT STANDS NOW, THE CITY ONLY WANTED THE LESSEE TO BRING THINGS UP TO CODE. LIKE IT OR NOT, SAFETY IS THE COMMON DENOMINATOR THERE. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE LESSEE TO DO THIS, AND HE REFUSED AND WALKED BECAUSE IT DID NOT MAKE ECONOMIC SENSE TO HIM. SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE TO THE LANDOWNER TO CLEAN THAT UP. IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE ELSE WILL GET CAUGHT HOLDING THE BAG, NOT THE LAST LESSEE. BAD DEAL FOR SOMEONE. TXENERGY, WE ALL KNOW WHY YOU WANT THIS TO TOTALLY FALL APART, HOWEVER YOU MAY BE DIVIDING THE RACING COMMUNITY BY BEATING THIS DEAL DOWN. SOMEONE ELSE IS IN CONTROL, NOT YOU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad Posted June 20, 2007 Report Share Posted June 20, 2007 SOMEONE IS RESPONSIBLE TO THE LANDOWNER TO CLEAN THAT UP. What exactly do they have to "clean up"...what does that mean? IT LOOKS LIKE SOMEONE ELSE WILL GET CAUGHT HOLDING THE BAG, NOT THE LAST LESSEE. BAD DEAL FOR SOMEONE. Yeah I think we all can see who it is too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.