To Environment
Dear Mr …. ,
The email below was sent to you yesterday, to which I have received neither a reply or an acknowledgement.
Today is the second day of continuous unacceptable noise pollution. I believe that STMBC has obligations under the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which require STMBC to “assess the noise level from the premises that the complaint is about and decide whether it is “prejudicial to health or a nuisance”, in which case it is a “statutory nuisance” under the Environmental Protection Act 1990. I would like to invite you to Greens Place the site of my home which is a Grade II Listed Building with single glazed wooden sash windows, situated directly up the bank from the UK Docks River Drive site. I previously extended this invitation to one of your officers in relation to the light pollution caused by UK Docks floodlights (which was never resolved) but heard no more. The lights continue to cause light pollution problems as they are now reflecting off the cladding of the structure.
This morning the shot blasting generator has been moved from the open ground adjacent to the open shed structure (one of the conditions of planning permission was that it would be an enclosed structure), to the slipway next to the open structure, and has actually increased the noise pollution level.
Please advise on the imminent action your department will take concerning the serious noise pollution from UK Docks River Drive site.

I look forward to hearing from you,
Regards,
Melanie Todd,
Greens Place

Begin forwarded message:

From: Melanie Todd
Date: 18 March 2014 10:48:20 GMT
To: Environment

Dear Mr     ,

 Thank you for your detailed response. Construction work has continued at the site and we understand from Planning that a pre planning meeting was held with the developers to discuss further large scale construction adjacent to residential housing.

In 1996 when plans were submitted STMBC Environmental Services made objections to the nature of the proposed work and it’s potential impact upon the local environment and residential areas, namely shot blasting of paint poisons and airborne polluting dust particles. Environmental Services were so involved in the planning process at that time that they participated in the design of planning conditions e.g. cladding of the structure to reduce noise, and to contain and collect pollution, these conditions (along with all others) have not been met by the developer and STMBC Planning have so far taken no action. This morning noisy work has begun on a vessel in the open shed, can I ask that Environmental Services act in the best intersests of the surrounding environment and residents by monitoring these activities rather than by reacting once complaints have been received? With reference to your comment: “…and so far the operator has been very cooperative when approached by us”, I am sure you would agree that Environmental Services at Fukushima are not now congratulating the developers of the plant for their cooperation.

 

The participation of Environmental Services in the planning process was clearly a sensible policy and action to explore constructive environmental solutions and to prevent environmental mistakes and disasters The content of your response to me appears to suggest that consultative and preventative actions in the planning process no longer fall within your remit. You appear to suggest that your role is entirely retrospective in responsive to developers actions upon the environment, is it the case that you see the role of Environmental Services in this way? Do you see Environmental Services as having no role in the planning process? If this is not the case could you explain to me what responsibilities you do have within the planning process?
Can I ask that you send Environmental Officers to the site immediately to witness and monitor the work that is now taking place in this open shed, and then inform the residents what the role of Environmental Services will be in enforcing environmental standards in the interests of everyone, including the unborn. The noise we are experiencing now is not acceptable.

Melanie Todd,
Greens Place