Re: Worrying development...

[Matthew Semple <matthewsemple@ho...com>]

Good to have some experts amongst the fanbase. 
I liked this question as the date rang a bell - "Friday 6th December 2013 
to Monday morning.  Was this an ‘average’ weekend for noise from the 
venue?"
Look at the date on this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Je2VdXrB4Oo

Thanks Matthew
From: ed.griffin@fa...co.uk
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 10:18:20 +0100
To: blueplanes@bl...org
Subject: [BluePlanes] Worrying development...



















Hi Chris,

 

I’m an architect who works on
schemes like this, so should be able to help in what we can do to protect 
The
Fleeces position.

 

Just by luck I was in Bristol last Thursday so swung by in the
afternoon to have a closer look.  The venue is close to the disused office
building opposite, but it is possible to build flats that have sufficient 
sound
reduction to prevent any future complaints, or if there are complaints, the
Council has a record proving there is no nuisance.  I think it is down to
personal opinion about the benefits of turning a disused office building 
into
residential – it brings an old building into use/means there is a more
natural mix of people in the area out of office hours/but should only 
happen if
it respects the existing local community (The Fleece!)

 

However there a few risks which I have
listed below in no particular order.

 

The Planning Approval if given needs to
very robust by having a good Noise Survey and a Condition attached 
ensuring the
flats get built to the noise reductions levels required.  I have some
comments on the Noise Report below but the requirement is for some very
expensive glazing which the Developer may ‘forget’ to install or it
is carried out poorly and all the benefits are lost.  Therefore my main
objection to this application would be to try and get a Condition attached
forcing the Developer to build them correctly – the best way to do this
would be for the Council to insist on post-completion noise testing of a 
random
sample of flats.  This test data then to be sent to the Council 
Environmental
Health Officers who would also be the people dealing with any future
complaints.  The Council may not be keen on this as it means more work for
them, and the Developer won’t like it because of the additional cost and
will also mean they can’t cut corners.

 

One advantage to the Council however will
be that any noise complaints will go to the Council Environmental Health
Officer who will be able to deal with them simply if they have this test
data.  Otherwise they will have an ongoing problem.  The Fleece
probably already has some contact at the Env Health as they are part of the
Licensing I believe.  If you have any contacts there it is probably worth
talking to them to make sure they are aware of what is happening, and that 
they
will be the ones fielding the complaints if it is not done right.  They
will also be asked to comment on any issues from the Planning Application 
and
so it is an ideal time now to catch them and make our point strongly.

 

Looking at the Noise Report:

 

Is the original survey correct?

It was carried out Friday 6th
December 2013 to Monday morning.  Was this an ‘average’
weekend for noise from the venue?  Were bands/events on Friday and
Saturday?  If not then the survey really needs to be carried out
again.  The microphone position looks like it is right opposite and I
assume is at first floor level as there are no flats proposed at ground 
level
on this side.  The results they get are interesting – they basically
show that the traffic along Victoria
  Street is noisier than the Fleece!  This
could be true as the fleece has the best sound proofing I have ever seen
– massive thick stone walls!  (However are the openings facing St.Thomas 
street
blocked up as well otherwise any noise would just breakout through
these).  The peak noise event on the St.Thomas side is at about 2.00AM
– is this kicking out time and therefore could be noise from numerous
satisfied Fleeceheads on their way whole talking in rather high voices? 
This peak is well above anything else suggesting the music itself is less 
of a
problem.  Noise from people leaving the venue would be raised as an issue
at the next Licensing application and so is just as much a problem.  I
will see if I get one of our Acoustic Consultants to run over the report 
to see
if it was all carried out to the right British Standard etc.  The report
does state that there may be peak levels due to the Fleece venue but says 
the
survey was carried out over a weekend and so represents the worst case for
music from the venue, and higher noise levels than those measured would 
most
likely be from shouting in the street.  I would therefore ask for more
detail on this statement.  Shouting, even if not as loud as the traffic is
likely to be more irritating to residents and so more likely to raise
complaints.

 

Conclusions of the Report:

The report gives a sound reduction
requirement for the new windows and walls for the building.  These are
based on the worst case which would be bedrooms on the Victoria Street 
side at night requiring a
big reduction.  This is shown to be achievable by using a special heavy
double glazing system (10mm-24 cavity-15mm special).  This will be a very
expensive window.  Crucially the report also makes clear the flats have to
be mechanically ventilated so as residents have to open the windows!  The
balconies do not matter as the resident has chosen to go onto the
balcony.  These windows reduce the noise by 45dB on average which works
for the average noise levels, but a peak could still be 65dB which is way 
over
the 45 required.  I think you are allowed to argue that it works for the
average and so can be approved.  I’m not expert enough to know what
this means in reality but seems to mean shouting in the street might still 
be
an issue.  There is also some info on wall construction but this is
simpler and cheaper to get right so will be less of a problem.  Noise
reduction though relies on good workmanship and airtight junctions –
which unfortunately are rarely achieved on new buildings unless the 
builder is
forced to get it right.  Therefore the requirement for post- completion
testing is crucial.

 

Other issue:

On line poll.

The Planners will take the communities
views into consideration and a good Developer would have had some form of
public consultation – either an exhibition or leaflet drop, and request
feedback which should then be incorporated into the application.  If this
was not well publicised they can be asked to do it again.  Therefore the
online poll you have started is important as it will prove what the views 
of
the community are.  All the stuff about the importance of the venue to the
city/internationally really helps even if it not a strict
‘Planning’ issue.

 

Formal objections on the Council website.

As per the link you gave, these are also
just as important and need to emphasise that any development needs to take 
in
the fact that the Fleece exists nearby.  The non-Planning issues are less
important here.  All of these objections will be counted and summarized 
into
a report written by the Planning Officer which will then recommend for
approval/refusal/deferring and go to the Planning Committee for the vote.

 

Planning Committee meeting.

These are held about every month and you
may be allowed to speak as an objector for a few minutes.  We can find out
more about this later.

 

Hope this helps for now.  Can you
check that the times of the survey were OK as noted above.  Any questions
on this lot let me know!  I will follow this up with a written objection 
to the
Planners.

 

Ed 








_______________________________________________
The Blue Aeroplanes mailing list
BluePlanes@bl...org
http://www.blueaeroplanes.org/

_______________________________________________
The Blue Aeroplanes mailing list
BluePlanes@bl...org
http://www.blueaeroplanes.org/