Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Well, in the case of Jarama Circuit The issue of the design is quite clear. However, the neighbours who border the Madrid facilities have come to the conclusion that this argument is not sufficient for the continuity of the legendary route.
Recently, the Central Court of Contentious Matters 11 has revoked the license that was previously held by the Jarama Circuit granted in 2022 by positive administrative silence. Then the controversy already plagued the San Sebastián de los Reyes council for taking this decision in favour of the interests of the Jarama Circuit, owned by the Royal Automobile Club of Spain (RACE).
Jarama Circuit: A benchmark for 57 years
As we already told you about the current situation in Laguna Seca, the Jarama Circuit is under constant harassment from the residents who live in the developments adjacent to the circuit. In the words of Jorge Pinedodefense attorney for the plaintiffs in the case, told Economic Jurist, when the sentence is final, they will ask “the closure and termination of the activity until the corresponding title of inhabitant is obtained, which will not be easy to obtain.”
The dispute between the Jarama Circuit and the residents of the adjacent developments has been going on for a long time. Pinedo comments that: “It is difficult to find a suitable technical solution. A renovation was carried out in 1993 to extend the circuit, which means that part of it is above the houses that were built there. It is difficult to incorporate acoustic screens there. These people are experiencing a significant disruption to their lives. They cannot live their lives.”
And continues: “In this context, the solutions would be to not allow cars to pass through there or to use electric vehicles. As legal counsel for a group of affected residents, we have been making claims to the RACE for a couple of years. We have not been able to reach an agreement, which is why we have to resort to legal action, as we have done in this specific case.”
Apparently, and according to the plaintiff, the Jarama Circuit never had a business license as such, and so they have used this argument as the basis for their claim. In fact, the ruling itself states that: “The lack of an operating license for the Jarama Circuit represents a clear violation of the legal, urban planning and environmental regulations.”
And continues: “This will produce two types of administrative legal consequences of a different nature and treatment, as contained in Article 225 of the Land Law of April 9, 1976 and in Article 51 of the Urban Planning Discipline Regulations, of supplementary application, and in articles 193 and following of Law 9/2001, of July 17, on Land of the Community of Madrid.”
This situation is also seen in other parts of our territory, where such emblematic circuits as Cartagena and Calafat are subject to the same pressures that the Madrid track is suffering. The core of the matter is that any of these circuits were built long before the surrounding developments.
The question that must be asked in any case is, knowing the level of noise pollution that existed in the area, why were these types of buildings built, if they were totally incompatible with the activity carried out on any of the tracks currently affected by this situation? Jorge Pinedo gives us the answer:
“This could be fixed with good urban planning and avoiding the issuing of urban planning licenses so close to this type of sports facilities. Now, the circuit that President Ayuso wants to set up at IFEMA in Madrid for Formula 1 should have the appropriate urban planning reports to avoid this type of problem that these citizens who have found themselves immersed in this situation are already suffering.”
On the other hand, the defendants are expected to appeal the ruling before the Administrative Litigation Chamber of the High Court of Justice of Madrid (TSJM). We will be keeping an eye out for further updates on the matter, and the difficult situation faced by a flagship of Madrid competition such as the Jarama Circuit.
