The Round Hill Society

Veolia 2009-Noise Diary

Veolia index

 NOISE DIARY [28th June - 14th July 2009]

From residential property to the south of MRF and WTS (50M to 200M away from the installations respectively.

Although I have recorded breaches of operating conditions, the noise nuisance is the product of authorised operation.

The noise of tipping is not greatly reduced by doors being correctly closed.

The WTS/MRF sheds bang and rumble. Although my property is several times nearer geographically to the MRF, the main nuisance source is without any doubt the noise from the WTS.

Smell has not proved enough of an issue to complain about during the period of these records (1 windy day with poor air quality including the smell of rubbish).

Noise is a factor of the WTS and MRF being in normal operation.

There is marked variation from day to day on how intensively the WTS and MRF are being used. There are ‘quiet’ days when the facilities are ‘tolerable neighbours’ and days when it is unpleasant to use my rear garden and when I am frequently disturbed even on the south side of my home with all the north-facing (rear / double-glazed) windows of my home shut.

Engine noise and reversing sirens become especially irritable when the MRF and WTS are being intensively used.

Nuisance is experienced when lorries, which halt at the one-armed barrier at the entrance, need engine power to set themselves in motion again. Every time a vehicle sets itself in motion to go to the southern perimeter (door 14) of the MRF, the shunt of its acceleration is very audible.

Very heavy vehicles bound for the WTS, set themselves in motion in the same way. They then stop and reverse into door 2 or 3 of the WTS. Not only does this multiply the engine noise of the lorries pulling away, but there is the noise of the reversing sirens as well.

The issue of both reversing sirens and the exhaust systems used by lorries was raised with John Collis of Veolia during the Public Meetings concerning the WTS/MRF planning applications. I recall assurances being given.  

The vehicles using the WTS are of several different types and appear to come from so many different places that it is difficult to understand how any standard assurance could be given or what measures could be taken to ensure that all reversing alarms/sirens emit tolerable ‘white noise’ more acceptable to the ear (i.e. what is called ‘broadband sound’ in the industry). If this is already an observed condition, then I would also query why so many of these vehicles are doing so much reversing (e.g. the Yull & Dod SWT lorry which entertained me on 2nd July with a symphony of ‘beeps’ while reversing clockwise around the WTS)

While the WTS has several different doors, It appears that reversing is the standard way to enter the WTS, as if the facility was especially designed to give maximum ‘siren and engine noise’ to local residents.

It does not help that Hollingdean Depot amplifies noise like an ancient auditorium, something which residents living on the north side of Princes Road will confirm. The choice of location for the WTS shows minimum regard to local residents.

Nuisances for residents in Princes Road
Summer 2009


The Council's sparse resources for enforcement affords little protection to neighbouring residents in relation to noise, odour and fugitive particles


Note that: Condition 16 (regarding closure of the doors) was set by Brighton and Hove City when granting planning permission for the WTS & MRF. It is not part of the operating licence for these installations issued and monitored by The Environment Agency. Its observation depends on the resources available to the Council to enforce its planning conditions, of which there are thousands altogether!

See also Noise Nuisance (May 2013) and Odour Diary (1st June to 20th July 2013)

Veolia index

Veolia's Project Director, John Collis, speaking at the Public Meeting at The Downs Infants School on 23rd June 2005.

John Collis: I would like to say that I don't personally know if there's a WTS and MRF next to a school, but I can assure you that there is an Energy Recovery Facility. The issue is invariably transport issues.

[Cries of "No" in disbelief] 

Member of the public: I don't think it's just the road and the traffic that we're talking about.

John Collis: from the point of view of noise, I'm aware that my noise consultant hasn't been able to speak. However, the generation of noise is so slight, it is negigible against the existing background. Unfortunately, the existing background is there. There is nowdays the possibility of having bleepers that can be turned down. Our lorries will be Euro 4 and that will be a much quieter vehicle than most on your roads. And its emissions will be lower as well.