tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-863336524369281662.post7471222483965247707..comments2023-09-20T07:12:07.398-07:00Comments on Veater Ecosan: "The World About Us": Veaterecosanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12641952897751927118noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-863336524369281662.post-28177306036443104922018-06-11T03:33:37.561-07:002018-06-11T03:33:37.561-07:00See also on 'The National Planning Framework&#...See also on 'The National Planning Framework' (NPPF) and an MP's response to it here:<br /><br />https://veaterecosan.blogspot.com/2018/05/derek-thomas-mp-st-ives-on-syrian.htmlVeaterecosanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12641952897751927118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-863336524369281662.post-28006275623625562152018-06-09T05:53:44.462-07:002018-06-09T05:53:44.462-07:00These are good letters that should carry weight - ...These are good letters that should carry weight - probably more than individuals alone as it is representative of a wider constituency. <br /><br />Simon emphasised the Planning Committee is likely to rely heavily on the opinion of their Planning and Environmental Health Officers and would be anxious not to make a decision that opened it up to another Judicial Review, whether on the cards or not. I feel strongly that as noise is one of the principal, though certainly not the only, importantant adverse impacts, were the Council having been made aware of the deficiencies of the acoustical information, to base their approval on it, it would lay itself open to such a course. In those circumstances the decision would be reliant on seriously flawed - even intentionally misleading - information.<br /><br />Simon also said that he was aware that Environmental Health experts had expressed no reservations about the WYG report and which they may now be reconsidering. With some experience of how things work internally, I might hazard the guess that the status quo and prevailing ethos may have had its effect. There is in such issues a reticence 'to throw a spanner in the works', if every other indicator appears to be in favour of a proposition. That may have been an unexpressed factor in not subjecting the WYG report to more rigourous examination.<br /><br />However from another point of view, much of the WYG results (with certain exceptions) are genuine and accurate. The problem is the sampling points appear to have been chosen to subtly influence the baseline results upwards, by placing them adjacent to busy traffic routes. (The figures thus produced may be optimistic by 15 or 20 dBA compared to quiet residential areas!) These have then been used to conclude that helicopters will only increase noise by only (sic) by 8.4 dBA with no significant impact. Any genuine investigation would also have chosen the quietest and most vulnerable locations, such as schools and hospitals, on which to base the predictions. To do other, is nothing short of misrepresentation, which always voids contracts and could justify an appeal.<br /><br />We have established, by its own admission and methodology, the WYG is partisan and unreliable. If reliance is to be based on noise parameters the information MUST be reliable, and only an independent assessment of both source and background can be acceptible. Who would commission and/or pay for this will be an issue. I am not sure the Environmental Health department would have either the necessary resources or independence to do so but I could be wrong. What is clear is that any such must:<br /><br />* accurately measure the noise of the proposed aircraft <br />* under FULL working load<br />* at the proposed location<br />* representing a full flying cycle (arrival, landing, idling, take-off, departure)<br />* from a representative number and type of sampling positions including at least one under rural flight path<br />* this should then be translated (with additional theoretical calculations) into a noise contour map of the area<br />* on which accurate predictions and assessments can be made<br />* and on which appropriate times and any other planning conditions could be applied (if approved)<br /><br />In my view, this is the only way Councillors and Officers should proceed, if they wish to avoid the possibility of legal challenge.Veaterecosanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12641952897751927118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-863336524369281662.post-44962601473512040132018-06-09T05:49:21.073-07:002018-06-09T05:49:21.073-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Veaterecosanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12641952897751927118noreply@blogger.com