- Email: [email protected]
Noise consents for work on construction sites
NOISE
CONSENTS
FOR WORK SITES
ON CONSTRUCTION
B. HAY
Department of Civil Engineering and Building, Lanchester Polytechnic, Coventry CVI 5FB (Great Britain)
S UMMA R Y
The aim o f this paper is to consider the question o f who is responsible for obtaining the noise consent for work on construction sites, under Section 61 o f the UK Control o f Pollution Act which came into force on 1st January, 1976. One point was made clear by the civil engineering contractors at a recent conference: 1 namely that the noise consent should be obtained before the specification goes out to tender. The consensus o f opinion was that the consultant engineer was the best person to apply to the local authority .['or prior consent for work on construction sites, when these were situated in noise-sensitive areas.
INTRODUCTION
At a recent conference held in Coventry on the control of noise from construction sites, the general consensus of opinion was that the question of who is responsible for obtaining the noise consent under Section 61 of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act has not been properly thought out by MP's sitting in Parliament at Westminster. This section of the Act 2 came into force in England and Wales on I st January, 1976, and it says that prior consent for work on construction sites may be applied for by the 'person' who intends to carry out works from the local authority. One thing was made clear by the contractors at the conference: namely that the noise consent should be obtained before the specification goes out to tender. They went on to say it was not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents. His prime function was to get on with the construction programme, and any delay meant loss of money for which somebody had to pay. 259 Applied Acoustics (10) (1977)---© Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1977 Printed in Great Britain
260
B. HAY PRACTICAL EXAM PLE
A practical problem was considered where a client wanted a factory to be built on a particular site in a residential area. The client would either approach a consultant engineer or an architect who would carry out feasibility studies. The engineer would use the 1973 ICE conditions of contract, 4 while the architect would use the 1975 RIBA standard form of building contract.5 Conference members suggested that any reputable consultant engineer would know in outline what was required for this job. He would have knowledge of the site subsoil conditions and whether the office should be built on piles or on a raft, together with awareness of any demolition requirements. Indeed, his design may well be influenced by the necessity of constraints on the level of construction noise. The consensus of opinion was that the consultant engineer was the best person to apply to the local authority for prior consent for work on construction sites which were situated in noise-sensitive areas. Under Section 61 of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act, this application should contain particulars of the works, and the method by which they are to be carried out, and the steps proposed to be taken to minimise noise resulting from the works. Once the local authority consents to the application, the consultant engineer or architect may draw up the specification and send it out to tender. One of the contractors suggested that he would prefer a noise level to be laid down in the specification. The contractor will then produce a tender in response to the specification. It is suggested in Section 4(20) of the 1975 Code of Practice 3 for noise control on construction sites that the contractor should present a detailed specifica'tion of working methods and machinery. To sum up, only a small percentage of construction sites will be situated in noisesensitive areas and will require the prior consent procedure. However, the noise consent should be obtained by the consultant engineer before the specification goes out to tender. It is not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents.
T H E ROLE OF T H E L O C A L A U T H O R I T Y
One of the new duties in the 1974 Control of Pollution Act is the responsibility given to the local authority to decide how to exercise its powers concerning noise abatement zones. It has been left to the individual local authority to establish the ambient noise levels 6 in the different types of area, e.g. industrial or mainly residential. Using this information they will thert be in a better position to specify the level of noise which m a y be emitted from a particular construction site, having regard to the type of area. At the conference ~ it was said that the reason no noise level limits have been laid down in the Control of Pollution Act was due to the lack of quantitative information
NOISE CONSENTS FOR WORK ON CONSTRUCTION SITES
261
on community reaction to construction noise. Only one survey Vof 976 people in North-West London was known about. Thus, although this is an area where further research is needed by the local authorities, they are hampered by the general cutback in public spending which does not allow them the necessary manpower to do the social survey and equipment to make the noise measurements.
CONCLUSION
The implementation of noise consentsunder the ControlofPollution4Act can best be achieved by cooperation between the consultant engineer and the local authority environmental health department, together with those personnel responsible for such matters as highways and planning. This will usually involve liaison with the Metropolitan County Council in connection with motorway or highway construction. All this should have been spelt out in the Act. It is not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents.
REFERENCES I. INSTITUTEOF ACOUSTICS, Meeting on Construction and Demolition Noise, May 1976. 2. Control of Noise (Code of Practice./br Construction Sites) Order, H MSO, London, 1975. 3. British Standards •nstituti•n C•de •f PracticeJbr N•ise C•ntr•• •n C•nstructi•n and Dem••ti•n Sites• B.S.I., London, 1975. 4. Institution of Civil Engineers Conditions of Contract, ICE, London, 1973. 5. Royal Institute of British Architects Standard Form of Building Contract, RIBA, London, 1975. 6. Control of Noise (Measurement and Registers) Regulations, S.I. No. 737, HMSO, London, 1976. 7. J. B. LARGEand J. E. LUDLOW,Community reaction to construction noise, Proceedings t~/the InterNoise ConJerence, Sendai, August 1975.
CONSENTS
FOR WORK SITES
ON CONSTRUCTION
B. HAY
Department of Civil Engineering and Building, Lanchester Polytechnic, Coventry CVI 5FB (Great Britain)
S UMMA R Y
The aim o f this paper is to consider the question o f who is responsible for obtaining the noise consent for work on construction sites, under Section 61 o f the UK Control o f Pollution Act which came into force on 1st January, 1976. One point was made clear by the civil engineering contractors at a recent conference: 1 namely that the noise consent should be obtained before the specification goes out to tender. The consensus o f opinion was that the consultant engineer was the best person to apply to the local authority .['or prior consent for work on construction sites, when these were situated in noise-sensitive areas.
INTRODUCTION
At a recent conference held in Coventry on the control of noise from construction sites, the general consensus of opinion was that the question of who is responsible for obtaining the noise consent under Section 61 of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act has not been properly thought out by MP's sitting in Parliament at Westminster. This section of the Act 2 came into force in England and Wales on I st January, 1976, and it says that prior consent for work on construction sites may be applied for by the 'person' who intends to carry out works from the local authority. One thing was made clear by the contractors at the conference: namely that the noise consent should be obtained before the specification goes out to tender. They went on to say it was not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents. His prime function was to get on with the construction programme, and any delay meant loss of money for which somebody had to pay. 259 Applied Acoustics (10) (1977)---© Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1977 Printed in Great Britain
260
B. HAY PRACTICAL EXAM PLE
A practical problem was considered where a client wanted a factory to be built on a particular site in a residential area. The client would either approach a consultant engineer or an architect who would carry out feasibility studies. The engineer would use the 1973 ICE conditions of contract, 4 while the architect would use the 1975 RIBA standard form of building contract.5 Conference members suggested that any reputable consultant engineer would know in outline what was required for this job. He would have knowledge of the site subsoil conditions and whether the office should be built on piles or on a raft, together with awareness of any demolition requirements. Indeed, his design may well be influenced by the necessity of constraints on the level of construction noise. The consensus of opinion was that the consultant engineer was the best person to apply to the local authority for prior consent for work on construction sites which were situated in noise-sensitive areas. Under Section 61 of the 1974 Control of Pollution Act, this application should contain particulars of the works, and the method by which they are to be carried out, and the steps proposed to be taken to minimise noise resulting from the works. Once the local authority consents to the application, the consultant engineer or architect may draw up the specification and send it out to tender. One of the contractors suggested that he would prefer a noise level to be laid down in the specification. The contractor will then produce a tender in response to the specification. It is suggested in Section 4(20) of the 1975 Code of Practice 3 for noise control on construction sites that the contractor should present a detailed specifica'tion of working methods and machinery. To sum up, only a small percentage of construction sites will be situated in noisesensitive areas and will require the prior consent procedure. However, the noise consent should be obtained by the consultant engineer before the specification goes out to tender. It is not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents.
T H E ROLE OF T H E L O C A L A U T H O R I T Y
One of the new duties in the 1974 Control of Pollution Act is the responsibility given to the local authority to decide how to exercise its powers concerning noise abatement zones. It has been left to the individual local authority to establish the ambient noise levels 6 in the different types of area, e.g. industrial or mainly residential. Using this information they will thert be in a better position to specify the level of noise which m a y be emitted from a particular construction site, having regard to the type of area. At the conference ~ it was said that the reason no noise level limits have been laid down in the Control of Pollution Act was due to the lack of quantitative information
NOISE CONSENTS FOR WORK ON CONSTRUCTION SITES
261
on community reaction to construction noise. Only one survey Vof 976 people in North-West London was known about. Thus, although this is an area where further research is needed by the local authorities, they are hampered by the general cutback in public spending which does not allow them the necessary manpower to do the social survey and equipment to make the noise measurements.
CONCLUSION
The implementation of noise consentsunder the ControlofPollution4Act can best be achieved by cooperation between the consultant engineer and the local authority environmental health department, together with those personnel responsible for such matters as highways and planning. This will usually involve liaison with the Metropolitan County Council in connection with motorway or highway construction. All this should have been spelt out in the Act. It is not the job of the contractor to waste valuable working time seeking noise consents.
REFERENCES I. INSTITUTEOF ACOUSTICS, Meeting on Construction and Demolition Noise, May 1976. 2. Control of Noise (Code of Practice./br Construction Sites) Order, H MSO, London, 1975. 3. British Standards •nstituti•n C•de •f PracticeJbr N•ise C•ntr•• •n C•nstructi•n and Dem••ti•n Sites• B.S.I., London, 1975. 4. Institution of Civil Engineers Conditions of Contract, ICE, London, 1973. 5. Royal Institute of British Architects Standard Form of Building Contract, RIBA, London, 1975. 6. Control of Noise (Measurement and Registers) Regulations, S.I. No. 737, HMSO, London, 1976. 7. J. B. LARGEand J. E. LUDLOW,Community reaction to construction noise, Proceedings t~/the InterNoise ConJerence, Sendai, August 1975.