Mr and Mrs Routledge

Could I refer to a copy of your email to Councillor Anglin forwarded to us concerning the use of a mobile platform on the UK docks site next to your property on Monday morning. I understand that Mrs Routledge also spoke to one of our officers about the occurrence.

I acknowledge your concern about activities on this site and would assure you that we will investigate issues raised with us as we have already done. The objective is frequently to identify the cause or source of the noise and judge its reasonableness and measures used to control noise levels. I have explained to one of your neighbours that we cannot ignore the fact that this immediate area of industrial activity on Wapping Street/ River Drive lies close to housing and therefore there is a possibility that activity on this and neighbouring industrial sites may at times have an impact to a degree upon nearby properties. You have a legitimate expectation that the operators consider your proximity, and your reasonable expectations in terms of your local environment, but I need to explain that whilst we can limit the degree of that impact where appropriate, we would not be able to close any operation down and working in the open environment means that there are sometimes limited practical controls that can be applied. The complex situation that is often presented by mixed land uses can give us a problem in achieving a complete solution if residents expect the ideal to be no noise or odour or light (for instance).

Investigation of complaints normally results in a site visit, the determination of a cause and identification of possible solutions. We can measure noise levels where appropriate and they will be compared against a normal environment for the area and any appropriate guidance. In determining statutory nuisance we will consider the reasonableness of the activity, the noise level and its duration and times of day, and the frequency of occurrences. I am afraid it is not feasible to continuously monitor noise levels on an individual site, but this does not prevent us from taking action and we find that our methods are more than adequate to deal with most complaints.  Our task is mainly to assess if the noise amounts to a statutory nuisance and whether the operator is complying with a ‘best practicable means’ test, including hours of operation and available technical measures used to minimise noise.

If I use the event that you have recently complained about as an example, the operation of a lift or hoist platform on the dock during normal daytime hours, and for the twenty minute period that was originally mentioned by another resident, might not be formally actionable, though we would also look at the noise levels that were emitted and whether (if it was operated by an engine) it had a suitable exhaust silencer. We would however contact the site operator; which we have already done in this case and have previously stressed the need for him to manage site operations in ways that minimise noise.

I hope this helps to explain how such issues are approached. I am happy to advise on any matter that arises on the site, and so far the operator has been very cooperative when approached by us.

Finally could I please assure you that we are keen to ensure that residents fully understand what can be done, and what limitations exist by virtue of environmental legislation. In terms of any future planning issues (such as enforcement of conditions, requirements for planning permission etc) I would suggest you direct such enquiries to our Planning team, but of course I am happy to pass them on myself if you wish.

Finally the Council’s Customer Contact Centre is open for calls between 8am and 8pm each day; please feel free to ring 0191 427 7000 or use the online complaints enquiry service at any time. Calls are logged onto our complaints system and we will respond as soon as possible; officers are often in work outside standard office hours, and certainly before 9am

Trust this helps

Regards
Principal EHO Environmental Health