Vibrations and noise caused by ramps on EDG

[heartblock]

Ref: 539360

Bentley Amankwah

Delivery and Coordination Manager

Public realm projects

[email protected]

0207 525 2180

Qassim Kazaz

Group manager - transport

Public realm projects

160 Tooley Street

PO Box 64529

London

SE1P 5LX

[email protected]

[heartblock]

Sorry 539491, not sure where I found those last three digits! I e-mailed Councillor Michael Mitchell and Helen Hayes and the two managers responded to me.

[heartblock]

Conclusion of investigation.

1. HGVs are travelling above the speed limit down EDG despite the ramps

2. The ramps are the correct specification

3. "the Council considers traffic noise is excluded from Part III of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. This means that the Council has no direct responsibility in relation to either the investigation or mitigation of noise from traffic. The act treats noise and vibration as the same"

So any new works carried out by the council that cause an increase in noise pollution and vibrations in a private residential property are not considered to be the responsibility of the Council to either investigate or resolve.

Any thoughts?

[rch]

Hmm, it sounds like residents need to learn about traffic calming tactics and then unite to have proposed schemes tweaked accordingly, before they're even built, which is exactly what we're trying to do on Melbourne Grove.

One thing you might consider is liaising with a sympathetic councillor and submitting a Cleaner Greener Safer bid for a pedestrian island to be implemented in the middle of that ramp, as was originally intended. You may be told that this is now contrary to highway policies, but I think it might be worth fighting with councillor support and devolved funding as it may be the only way to slow the HGVs down.

On a positive note, I noticed the other day that that ASBO drain cover at the edge of the ramp that I'd photographed, had been re-cemented and had cones around it, so hopefully the repair will at least address that particular aspect of the noise?

Let me know, as I'm a bit of a geek.

[rch]

Hang on, one more thought... I think EDG is actually a TfL controlled road, not council controlled? It might be worth escalating a complaint to TfL, as they would have had to approve the works, to see if they can oblige the council to act.

But funding will be the problem, so it's still best to get the CGS bid in place in order to circumvent that excuse. The bidding process opens on Sept 7th.

[heartblock]

Michael Mitchell supported my complaint.

The recommendation from the Council officer was "If you are concerned about damage to your property, you are encouraged to consider an insurance claim" from Southwark Council.

The Council officer also said "The road surface in this location will continue to be regularly inspected as part of our cyclic maintenance regime and should any failing of the road surface that meets our intervention criteria be found, reactive repairs will be undertaken regularly", I find it hard to believe that regular inspections take place as the drain was repaired only because Michael and I asked for an investigation, the road cannot have been inspected for over a year.

[ianr]

heartblock Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 3. "the Council considers traffic noise is excluded from Part III of the Environmental

> Protection Act 1990. This means that the Council has no direct responsibility in relation to either

> the investigation or mitigation of noise from traffic. The act treats noise and vibration as the same"

That traffic noise is not specifically deemed a "statutory nuisance" seems to be borne out by s.79 of EPA1990, unless there's any case law to the contrary.

"s.79(1) Subject to subsections (1A) to (6A) below, the following matters constitute ?statutory nuisances? for the purposes of this Part, that is to say?

.....

(ga) noise that is prejudicial to health or a nuisance and is emitted from or caused by a vehicle, machinery or equipment in a street

......

6A) Subsection (1)(ga) above does not apply to noise made?

(a) by traffic, ...

.....

(7) In this Part?

.....

?noise? includes vibration; "

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1990/43/section/79

I don't know if there are any other heads under which a council might be responsible.

A part of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges ( DMRB ) dealing with noise and vibrations, is at http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/dmrb/vol11/section3/hd21311.pdf (826kB ).

It does mention an EEC Directive requirement to assess the effects of noise from projects, and also provides guidance on monitoring and the legislative framework, including provisions for compensation. Where it itself fits in the legislative framework, if at all, I've no idea yet.

[rch]

heartblock and ianr, the TfL route is probably the next logical step.

Go back to Michael Mitchell and ask him to step you through this, plus put in a CGS bid in tandem.

Yes, your insurance company is another route... if the insurance company identifies that the ramp vibrations are causing damage to your home then they can require the council to address this... this is what happens with tree roots damaging foundations. But it's a long process, as it requires building evidence over time and can be quite expensive.

If there are several of you then it would be best to stick together and take group action, otherwise you'll just be told that no one else is having problems and therefore your problem doesn't exist.