| home > tka tallent - noise nuisance > History
|
| TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd.- Noise Nuisance History extracts from Parish meetings |
| November 2007 · 307.3 TKA report (see also planning item) There are still reports of disturbance. |
| October 2007 · 297.3 TKA report No reply had been received from South Cambs Environmental officers. Reports that noise seemed to be worse recently, an application is being submitted to improve the conveyer sound proofing and it is hoped that this will enable the district council to apply more stringent conditions. TKA are investigating outsourcing some noisy operations. |
| September 2007 · 287.3 TKA report Complaints been received about the factory night noise, controls are clearly not working. Specific problems were noted on Saturday 14th July and the following Wednesday (18th). The clerk was asked to write to South Cambs portfolio holder and Brian Heffernan, pointing out that controls are not working and asking what remedial action they are pursuing. To be copied to residents. |
| August 2007 · 277.3 TKA report A resident has reported further breaches of the noise order on 18th July 2007. |
| July 2007 · 267.3 TKA report A maladministration complaint from the TKA factory has been proved against SCDC for failing to consider the presence of the factory, when approving new housing. |
| June 2007 · 257.3 TKA reports, Is quieter at night at the moment now that SCDC measures to control the noise have been introduced, in particular the critical time of 10-30 to 11-30pm when residents are trying to get to sleep. There has been unwelcome noise at 5am but for only a short period Traffic to and from TKA at night was disturbing residents near the speed thumps |
| 3 May 2007 · 247.3 TKA reports Further reports of noise. The clerk was asked to write to SCDC asking for details of the progress of promised actions as agreed. |
| 5 Apr 2007 · 237.3 TKA reports heavy lorries using Highfields Road, the clerk will write to TKA. |
| 1 Mar 2007 · 227.3 TKA reports Cllr Martlew reported on a planning training session which confirmed that the correct procedure had not been followed by officers at SCDC. He had sent another letter to the planning portfolio holder but has not yet had a reply. Cllr Martlow is to speak to the residents affected regarding a complaint to the ombudsman. |
| 1 Feb 2007 · 217.3 TKA reports Cllr Martlew presented details of a question he had raised to the South Cambs Planning Portfolio holder. In reply it was clear that officers had failed completely to put the issue to councillors at any time or consulted with anyone but TKA. The conveyer and housing are referred to as “unauthorized development”. TKA have complained to the Government Ombudsman for allowing the planning application for The Willows development. |
| 4 Jan 2007 · 207.3 TKA Continuing reports on noise particularly at night. (See also Cllr Items 212.1) 212.1 TKA – Cllr Martlew presented a copy of the question that he will put to the planning portfolio holder of SCDC. In order to try and find out what went wrong and who was responsible. |
| 7 Dec 2006 · 197.3 TKA The initial application in 2005, for a certificate of lawfulness had been refused. However no enforcement order was served, which meat that TKA could make a similar application in 2006 which was been approved without going to committee and there does not seem to be any reference to where the approval was agreed. The failure to issue an enforcement order in time, despite knowledge of the construction without permission would seem to be gross maladministration. It was noted that the noise nuisance still causes parishioners great distress. |
| 2 Nov 2006 · 187.3 TKA, continues to cause disturbance to residents. Cllr Martlew (SCDC) has presented a question to the portfolio holder asking for clarification of the 4 year period of deemed consented use. What constitutes an objection, a residents complaint or a complaint from the District Council. And asking if SCDC did in fact make an objection to the factory during this 4 year period.. There has been no response from SCDC to our queries raised at the meeting on 5th September. |
|
5 Oct 2006 · 177.3 TKA noise is still disturbing residents. (see planning decisions 180.1.2)
180.1.2 S/1802/06 LDC TKA certificate of lawfullness for scrap conveyer Recommended for REFUSAL Complaints started in the Summer of 2002 and this would be a more accurate estimate of the time when the equipment was first used, specifically the conveyor. The status of the equipment has not been clarified, complaints during the period the equipment has been used should in fact invalidate their claims on the statutes of limitation. They have not used best practical means to reduce the noise levels. Considered over development of the site and inappropriate activity, causing the homes adjacent to be blighted. A recently added container outside of the claimed controlled area is also causing more problems with noise. Proposed by Cllr Lang and seconded by Cllr Whelan |
| 7 Sep 2006 · 167.4 TKA Letter from SCDC was presented and the clerks notes from the meeting at South Cambs on 5th Sept. about the agreement that had been reached with TKA to identify the noisiest operations and stop them being done at night. Some residents were not keen on this as it might make day time operations noisier. It was pointed out that it was going to be impossible to stop all the noise from the factory completely, it has planning permission for industrial use, South Cambs were pursuing the night time controls and residents may like to consider the day time and other noise under a section 82 order. |
| 27 Jul 2006 · 157.2 TKA Tallent – Brian Heffernan (SCDC) had declined an invitation to attend a council meeting. He is arranging a meeting with those affected, probably in September. The council is not able to pursue an appeal to the ombudsman but will support residents where it can. No further contact will be made with Brian Heffernan at this time. There have been further reports from residents about the continuing noise problems. |
6 July 2006 · 149.2.1 TKA – reply from Andrew Lansley and Brian Heffernan email received
A decision by SCDC to agree a settlement was met with disbelief, it was considered that this was not
in any way a solution to the problems, Cllr Martlew has offered to raise the issue at the next SCDC
council meeting.
It was considered to be maladministration and it was felt this should be reported to the government ombudsman. There would be no relief to the noise problem and it was a totally inadequate agreement. The clerk and chairman will prepare a letter of response. |
| 1 June2006 · 142.2 Items from Annual Parish Meeting. The problems caused by the TKA factory - noise problems were raised again. It had also been reported that residents had also noticed a smell over the village. |
| 19 May 2006 Annual Parish Meeting · TKA Tallent – Noise disturbance continues to be a problem for many homes in the village. The Clerk was asked to write to interested parties to point out that another year has passed, this matter having been raised for several years. |
| 6 April 2006 · 119.2.10 Letter from TKA’s solicitor - requesting copies of correspondence between the Parish Council and TKA companies from 1998 to July 2004 ( under the Freedom of information act). This has resulted in quite a lot of work, around 150 pages have been sent, SCDC also asked for copies of any papers sent to them as well, hence higher photocopying bill this month. It had not been possible to charge for this extra work, the ex clerk and resident Gail Stoehr was thanked for helping out with information. Also Letter copied to the Parish Council from Andrew Lansley MP, suggesting a reduction in times of operation, (after a meeting with TKA).. Also an email copied to the council from Brian Heffernan. The clerk was asked to write to all parties to say that the parish council would not accept any level of disturbance to residents. |
| 2 March 2006 · 107.3 (97.4 77.4 67.4) TKA Court Case – problems mentioned in a recent planning approval S0029/06/F |
| 2 February 2006 · 97.4 (97.4 77.4 67.4) TKA Court Case No further response from SCDC legal office. Cncl Wolton and several affected Caldecote residents had a meeting with Andrew Lansley and made him fully aware of the situation. |
| 5 January 2006 · 87.4 (77.4 67.4)TKA Court Case Reply from SCDC legal office on the councils injunction request, suggesting that it would not be possible to justify any further action.The clerk was asked to write again pointing out the disturbance being suffered by residents for another 9 months, while TKA continue their profit making operation unchecked. |
| 1 December 2005 · 77.4 (67.4) TKA Court Case contact from the office of our MP Andrew Lansley asking if anything is possible to avoid expensive court action, it was reported that the residents affected would prefer a meeting with Andrew Lansley. The clerk was asked asked to follow up the letter to the SCDC legal department regarding the request for a temporary injunction. |
| 3 November 2005 · 67.4 (57.4) TKA – The Court Case At Cambridge magistrates court on Thursday October 20th 2005, the magistrates permitted TKA who are the appellants in this case, to have a trial in respect of the noise nuisance that district council maintains that TKA have created and are continuing to create at their Bourn site. TKA maintain that they will require three weeks of time for the case to be heard as there will be many witnesses from both sides and much technical data to discuss. TKA's solicitors explained that their acoustic consultant would not be available for two of the summer months in 2006 and that their barrister has a busy schedule of cases. For these reasons TKA requested that the court grant them an extension of time to exchange evidence for a three week trial that will have to be heard by a District Judge. The magistrates reluctantly agreed to this request from TKA's solicitors and encouraged both parties to achieve the deadlines in the agreed directions timetable. The trial date was set for a three week period commencing September 4th 2006 in all probability at Ely Magistrates Court. The meeting was adjourned temporarily to allow comments from the members of the public present The meeting was re-convened after 10 minutes. The clerk was asked to write to the SCDC legal department to see if a temporary injunction could be issued to prevent overnight work at the TKA site. |
|
6 October 2005 · 57.4 TKA – The Court Case – A pre hearing meeting is being held next Monday 10/10/05, the clerk was asked to write urgently to the SCDC Legal Officer (Fiona McMillan) expressing the Parish Councils strong views of the public and press concerns over this issue and to ensure that she notifies the Council about the results of the initial meeting as soon as possible. |
|
1 September 2005 · 52.2 (42.1) TKA – no further progress, noise started again this week after vacation break. Cllr Martlew said that it had not been possible for SCDC to serve an enforcement notice but are doing as much as they can. There is a requirement for them to prove 4 years use, but it was pointed out there had been complaints from the early stages of the problem. |
|
28 July 2005 · 40.1 S/1361/05/F – TKA Tallent (part retrospective) Housing for scrap Conveyor. A copy of a letter from a resident opposing the application was received and it was noted that TKA Tallent did not have permission for the conveyor belt itself. The meeting was briefly closed to allow members of the public to speak. On a proposition by F Wolton, seconded by B Drayton it was agreed that the Parish Council was unable to comment fully on this application at the present time as it had been unable to make a site visit as is normal on this type of application. It was agreed that as it will cause major disturbance that the application should be refused until such time that a site visit could be made and the application is considered further. |
|
7 July 2005 · 26.1 (14.1) Planning Concerns TKA Tallent, Letters from Ray McMurray Planning Officer and Mr Massey, resident regarding the absence of planning permissions at the site were noted. It was agreed to write to SCDC querying information received regarding unauthorised changes over the past few years without notification, particularly the steel conveyer that was now being modified to try and quieten it. There was also a noise nuisance with lorries reversing (warnings sounds). Write to Ray McMurray and David Bard (Planning Portfolio Holder) cc’d to Andrew Lansley MP. The Council and residents continued to be disappointed at the delay to the court proceedings until October 2005. |
|
2 June 2005 ·
14.1 (4.2) TKA Tallent.
It was noted that no reply had as yet been received from Ms McMillan to the Council’s letter. Cllr Robin Martlew reported on the latest meeting held on the 28 May 05 and that Mr Heffernon was not expecting to go back to court until October. An e-mail from Chris Corcoran detailing TKA Tallent’s Environmental Policy was noted.
|
|
19 May 2005 AGM ·
4.5. County Councillor.
"The issues surrounding TKA Tallent were discussed. On a proposition by J Lang,
seconded by N Whyatt it was agreed to write a letter to Fiona McMillan from the
APM on behalf of the residents voicing their concerns about TKA Tallent and the
ongoing problems and delays. A copy of which is to be sent to John Valentine." |
|
5 May 2005 · 4.2. (40.2) TKA date of appeal A e-mail from Ms Macmillan dated 4 May 2005 was considered which stated that ‘TKA were going to ask the court for a further adjournment on the 12’. It was agreed that a letter should be sent to Ms McMillan with a copy to Mr Taylor stating that the Parish Council was disappointed that again there seems to be another delay and that the problem is still ongoing.
|
|
7 April 2005 ·
40.2 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – Appeal update
It was noted that the court date has now been adjourned until 12 May 2005 at 2.pm and that the nuisance continues in
varying degrees.
|
|
3 March 2005 ·
27.2 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd. Appeal update
An e-mail from Fiona McMillan, SCDC dated 2nd March 2005 was read.
A pre-trial review has been set for 17th March 2005 but SCDC have just received a file of information from TKA Tallent
which is being sent to their independent expert for comment. Fiona McMillan will get back to the parish council with
their position as soon as she knows it.
The clerk will inform the Chairman as soon as any further details are known.
|
|
3 February 2005 ·
17.1 Parishioner correspondences
Caldecote Parish Council has received 2 letters from concerned residents in West Drive in connection with TKA Tallent. The first issue raised was the ongoing noise from the factory due to persistent whining from the fans, day and night. The second issue was a terrible smell was experienced from the factory and concerns were raised over the fumes and the possibility they may be toxic. It was agreed that a letter be sent to B Heffernon enclosing a copy of the letters received. The parish council would like to request that any member of the parish who has an issue with TKA Tallent to write direct to B Heffernon so they are made aware of the problems and a copy be forwarded to the parish council for their records.
|
|
6 January 2005 · Not on Agenda
|
|
2 December 2004 ·
3.2 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd - Appeal update.
A copy of a letter from South Cambridgeshire District Council to Mr. C J Corcoran dated 12th November 2004 was summarized and read. TKA Tallent is being asked to submit retrospective planning applications for a range of alterations that would have required the formal consent of the Local Planning Authority. These developments are:
|
|
4 November 2004 ·
2.2 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd - Appeal update
Fiona McMillan, Legal Office, South Cambridgeshire District Council has informed the Parish Council that the court date has now been adjourned until Wednesday 24th November 2004 at Cambridge Magistrates Court. No more adjournments without attendance will be permitted. Experts from both sides are meeting again on 16th November 2004 to attempt to narrow the issues and progress the matter. It was agreed that the parish council should request an update on the situation after the meeting on the 16th November 2004 has taken place. County Cllr R Martlew informed the parish council that he will be speaking to Mr. B Heffernan in connection with this meeting
|
|
7 October 2004 ·
2.2 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd - Appeal update
|
|
2 September 2004 3.1 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – update Information on TKA’s appeal against the abatement notice and complaints statements was noted. It was noted that the noise from the reversing beepers had improved but new thumping and fan noise had been heard. A background paper from C Corcoran on broader issues was received. The court hearing has been postponed until 13th October 2004. The Parish Council expressed its disappointment over the length of time it has taken to deal with this matter and also the lack of progress information being provided by the District Council. Councilor Martlew stated that this was not acceptable. It was agreed to prepare a statement ready for the court hearing and that the Parish Council should attend if possible. |
|
1 July 2004 3.1 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – update A letter from Andrew Lansley reporting that he had met with TKA was noted. A complaint from a resident regarding light pollution from TKA and his concern about lack of planning permission was noted. It was agreed that residents should continue to keep a diary of events and report monthly to the Parish Council. |
|
3 June 2004
3.1 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – update
Mr Massey’s report which recorded hearing the factory on 17 days of which 5 were considered particularly bad days. Problems with scrap metal dumping still remained unresolved.
|
|
6 May 2004
4.4 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – update
Correspondence from Brian Heffernon, Environmental Health Officer, South Cambridgeshire District Council, dated 6th April and 23rd April 2004 was considered. It was noted that it had finally been agreed by the District Council to take enforcement action and that the matter had now been placed in the hands of the District Council’s legal department. The Parish Council’s solicitor had been informed and therefore his involvement in this matter had been put on hold.
|
|
1 April 2004
4.6 TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – update
Letters from residents in West Drive were received and considered. It was noted that there was now a new contact at the factory, Mr John O’Sullivan, who had visited Mr Massey’s home with Mr Heffernon and the acoustic surveyor to undertake some monitoring very late one night and into the early hours of the morning. |
|
4 March 2004 4. TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd – to consider correspondence received and consider the next steps A letter hand delivered from Mr Heffernon, Mr Massey’s report and letters from Mr & Mrs Bell and Mr & Mrs Corcoran were all considered. On a proposition by Cllr Wolton, seconded by Cllr Lang it was resolved that a complaint should be put to the District Council’s Scrutiny committee in the form of a question along the lines of ‘Why is the Council failing in its duty to prevent a statutory noise nuisance?’ and that up to two hours of solicitors time be approved to support the Parish Council in preparing its case. It was also agreed that that a reply should be sent to Mr Heffernon with copies to Mr Lansley, Dale Robinson (Head of Environmental Health Department) Patrick Adams (Scrutiny Committee Clerk) and the Chairman of the District Council and the Portfolio Holder for Environmental Health amongst others. |
|
5 February 2004 Two letters from Mr Heffernon and Mr Massey’s report, expressing concern that an acoustic engineer had not been out despite three requests were all considered. On a proposition by Cllr Breeze, seconded by Cllr Wolton it was agreed that a letter of complaint be sent to Mr Heffernon threatening to take the matter to the scrutiny committee and individuals taking the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman if the District Council still had not taken action to enforce the Environmental Protection Act 1990. It was agreed that this letter should be copied to Mr Lansley, Dale Robinson (Head of Environmental Health Department) Patrick Adams (Scrutiny Committee Clerk) and the Chairman of the District Council amongst others. |
|
8 January 2004 Mr Massey’s report, expressing concern that the speed that Mr Heffernon was suggesting meant that this matter would not be resolved until spring at the earliest, was read out. Nothing had been heard from Mr McCrystal in response to the Parish Council’s request for a site visit. It was agreed that any residents experiencing noise nuisance should contact Mr Heffernon directly and that he should be asked to provide his night time contact number. |
|
4 December 2004 Mr Massey’s report was read out. It was agreed that the Parish Council fully endorsed the comment within Mr Massey’s report and that a site visit to the factory should be arranged one evening when the main press would be in full operation and that Mr Heffernon, Mr Massey and other residents from the village disturbed by the noise should be invited to attend. |
|
6 November 2003 A letter, dated 3 November, from Brian Heffernon and another dated 15 October from Mr McCrystal at TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd were read. Mr Heffernon’s argument that he would not serve an abatement notice because he believed this would lead to an appeal which would both delay matters and not stop the noise was considered. Some residents who were present indicated that they thought the noise had improved slightly over the last few weeks however reversing bleepers possibly from visiting lorries were still causing a problem. A letter is to be sent to Mr Massey asking him to send a report to the next meeting and another to Mr Heffernon asking how long the process will go on. |
|
2 October 2003 A letter from Brian Heffernon was read. On a proposition by Councillor Breeze, seconded by Councillor Drayton a reply is to be sent asking why Mr Heffernon had once again appeared to have changed his stance on this matter and expressing concern that the proposed survey keeps being delayed. |
|
4 September 2003 No response had been received from Mr Heffernon to the Parish Council’s letter. Councillor Stewart had reported to the Clerk that he was pursuing the matter with the District Council. It was noted that the complaints continued and that approximately two weeks ago loud scraping noises were heard from the factory at 6.45am. Reversing bleepers had also been noted on several occasions. It was agreed that another letter should be sent to the District Council insisting that enforcement action is taken. |
|
7 August 2003 A letter was considered from Mr Heffernon, Environmental Health Officer, dated 17 July explaining that he had already come to the conclusion that he would have to serve a noise abatement order and that he had already hired an acoustic consultant prior to the Parish Council suggesting this. He also indicated that a meeting was scheduled for the forthcoming week with Mr McCrystal and it was agreed that a letter be sent to Mr Heffernon asking for a report on the meeting and that the pressure be kept on the District Council to make the factory stop the noise nuisance. Copies of the letter are to be sent to the Leader of the Council and Dale Robinson, Head of Environmental Health. |
|
3 July 2003 A letter was considered from Mr Heffernon, Environmental Health Officer dated 2 July regarding a letter he had sent to TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd, in which he advised that if a statutory noise nuisance is proved it would be necessary to serve an abatement notice. On a proposition by Councillor Kember, seconded by Councillor Phillips it was agreed to write to Mr Heffernon to ask how long the investigation would take and to request that the District Council undertake an independent acoustic survey. |
|
5 June 2003 3.1 (5.3.3) TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd - noise nuisance Mr Heffernon and Mr McCrystall were both welcomed to the meeting. Mr Heffernon began by giving a short presentation on the legislation governing noise enforcement the consideration of complaints registered under the Environmental Protection Act of 1990. In particular the legislation relating to BS4142 Industrial Noise. Mr Heffernon explained that he had been investigating residents' complaints and had visited the village both in the day and night time. He suggested that he felt that it was preferable to work in tandem with the factory to find a satisfactory conclusion to the noise nuisance than to serve a noise abatement order. Mr McCrystall presented a report(1) titled 'Noise Emissions Reduction Actions and Plan' as prepared by him on 6 May 2003. This was considered in detail by the meeting. It was noted that: The sound booth to stop the sound of dropped metal was installed at the end of May and parishioners commented that these noises had not been heard since the beginning of June. Changes had been introduced at the factory to prevent the opening of the large doors during the night time - this was disputed by the meeting as on occasions the noise levels obviously indicated that the doors had been open. The bund wall construction had to date cost approximately £45,000 and that in excess of £70,000 had been spent by the company to day to try to reduce the noise levels. Acoustic measurements by TKA's own consultants had been taken on the 4th and 5th of June and Mr McCrystall apologised if on these nights residents had been disturbed by the noise levels The factory had three presses
The nuisance that arose from the repetitive 12 strokes per minute was not transmitted by air but by the ground and that the effect on the properties in the village was worse when the ground was wet. A new roaring noise had recently started causing distress to residents On 2 June at approximately 1pm reversing beepers were heard by residents in West Drive Concern was expressed at the vibration from the presses felt in many homes in West Drive. Many residents complained that although having kept very detailed diaries of the disturbances and having had noise measuring equipment installed which indicated the level of the problem and there being little doubt and certainly plenty of documented evidence to show that there factory was above permitted levels this had not been resolved. The factory was first built in the 1940's prior to the need to have planning permission which was first introduced in the 1960's. Residents in Highfields Road and Highfields Court had also recently complained about the noise. There is a senior manager on site 24 hours per day. The night shift manager's name is Tony Hilsden. Jobs had been prioritised with red jobs being the most noisy. A schedule had been drawn up to minimise red jobs at night. A complaints form was completed by either the night time manager or the security manager for all night time telephone complaints. These were then forwarded to Mr McCrystall. Mr McCrystall acknowledged that the noise levels constituted a nuisance and emphasised that his company would continue to work to put in place measures to reduce this as it had both legal and moral obligations and that the company wished to be 'a good neighbour'. Councillor Martlew offered to look into the powers of the County's Development Control Department. In noting that the company's acoustic report was due within two weeks on a proposition by the Chairman it was agreed that, once received, a copy of the report should be circulated to everyone present at the meeting and that the matter be discussed further at the next meeting. Residents were asked to give their comments on the survey report to the Clerk so that the Parish Council may consider these. |
|
15 May 2003 5.3.3 Complaints from residents regarding ongoing noise nuisance problems from TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd were received and noted. On a proposition by the Chairman it was agreed to invite both Mr Heffernon and Mr McCrystall to the next meeting. |
|
14 March 2003 2.2.2 Noise from Bourn airfield NP stated that Ashwell accepted that noise would have an impact on the northern site. The screen was in the process of being installed by Tallent and it was difficult to intervene. It was, however, accepted that it was up to the District Council Environmental Health Officer to tackle the problem, Members of the parish council noted that it would be useful if Ashwell could pressure the Environmental Health Officer to take more positive action and NP agreed to look into this. It was also agreed that Ashwell would look into the possibility of constructing an earth bund around the north western part of the site and/or acoustic fencing. |
|
7 November 2002 Thyssen Tallent Chassis Ltd – complaints. A letter had been received from Mr McCrystal (dated 11 October 20020. He will investigate the cause of the noise and reply in the near future. Letters of complaint from Mr and Mrs Bell were also considered. The matter was carried forward until Mr McCrystal’s reply is received. |
|
3 October 2002 3.1.5 TKA Tallent Chassis A letter of complaint form Mr and Mrs Bell of West Drive regarding continuing noise disturbance was considered. It was agreed to carry this letter froward to the next meeting until Mr McCrystall had replied to the Chairman's letter. |
|
1st August 2002 Tyssen Krupp A letter has been forwarded to Tyssen Krupp, plus there are also two other people considering writing regarding the noise. |
|
4 July 2002 4.1 Tyssen Krupp - update on bund wall progress The recent letter from Mr McCrystall apologising for the delay to the bund's construction was considered. Residents concerns at increased noise especially in night/early morning were noted and they were asked to contact Mr McCrystal to give details of their complaints. |
|
7 March 2002 3.1 (4.1) TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd A letter had been received from Mr McCrystall requesting contact details for Mr and Mrs Bell so that noise-monitoring equipment can be installed in their home. Councillor Wolton reported on the recent site visit by members and parishioners. In particular: a) noise emissions when the south facing door housing the two largest presses is opened when deliveries are received; b) the long chimneys deflecting the noise from the vents are effective c) the silencers on folk lift trucks work well however there now the crane bleepers can be heard. |
|
7 February 2002 4.1 (3.1) Krupp Camford/TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd. In response to Mr McCrystal's letter it was agreed that the overall noise levels had dropped however there were still loud noises when something was dropped. The beepers were not heard anymore. A site visit has been arranged for Saturday 23 February. |
|
3 January 2002 3.1 (3.1) Krupp Camford/TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd. It was noted that apart from one complaint in December the factory seemed to have been quieter for reasons not immediately apparent. |
|
6 December 2001 4.1 (3.1) Krupp Camford/TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd. The letter and update from Mr McCrystall of TKA Tallent, Chassis dated 15 November, was considered by the meeting. The proposal by Councillor Wolton, seconded by Councillor Kember it was agreed that a letter in reply be sent saying that there is a consensus that the noise is worsening and complaints increasing. The Clerk reported that Brian Heffernon, Environmental Health Officer was investigating one complaint against TKA Tallent Chassis Ltd and had installed noise monitoring equipment at 17 West Drive. Details of how he can be contacted are to be put in the next Journal. |
|
1 November 2001 3.1 (3.1)Krupp Camford The letter and update from Mr McCrystall of TKA Tallent Chassis was considered by the meeting. It was noted that there was no mention of the staggered fencing. The clerk was instructed to consult with the main complainants in West Drive to ask if they had noted any improvement. It was agreed that a letter be sent thanking the company for their efforts to alleviate the noise nuisance to date. |
|
4 October 2001 3.1 Krupp Camford The Chairman welcomed the representatives from TKA Tallent Chassis to the meeting. Mr McCrystall presented a document he had prepared titled 'Noise Emission Reduction Plan'. This outlined the actions and timescales to be taken by the company to reduce noise emissions from the extraction system, the fork truck reversing beepers and the Weingarten Press. At 7.46pm the Chairman proposed the meeting be closed to allow public participation and he reopened the meeting at 7.52pm. The Parish Council thanked Mr McCrystall for taking the village's concerns seriously and for working to resolve them within the time scale outlined in the document. |
|
6 September 2001 3.1 Krupp Camford The Chairman welcomed the representatives of both Krupp Camford and Hydra Consulting to the meeting. Mr McCrystall and Mr Patel explained activities at the plant over the last twelve months and the results of the recent acoustic survey to identify hot spots of noise nuisance affecting Highfields Caldecote. The results clearly identified three noise sources:
Mr McCrystall openly admitted that his company was a noise nuisance and gave his assurance that they would construct a 6m high bund wall within a reasonable time, estimated by Christmas. The exacerbated noise experienced by residents over the last seven to ten days was attributed to a mixture of northerly wind and warm temperature conditions. Commitment was given that a review of the forklift reversing beepers would take place and the outcome be reported back to the Parish Council before the next meeting, that no further dumping of scrap onto the runway would take place during the evening or night and that additional noise monitoring may take place in selected West Drive back gardens. At 8.06pm the Chairman proposed the meeting be closed to allow public participation and he reopened the meeting at 8.27pm. It was agreed that a canvassing of residents' views would take place 6-12 months after the bund completion and an open invitation was extended to all residents to contact the factory direct at any time, day or night, with any concerns/complaints. Mr Rutter offered the use of their builders to help either play equipment group with any building work required. It was agreed that the groups could contact Krupp Camford to discuss this offer further. |
|
2 August 2001 3.2 (3.1) Krupp Camford Nothing further had been heard from Mr Pearson, Plant Manager. The licence for the bund wall had now been approved. Members reported still hearing noise from the plant. |
|
5 July 2001 3.1 (4.2) Krupp Camford An invitation had been extended to Mr Neil Pearson, plant Manager to attend the meeting. It was agreed to carry this item forward until he arrived. |
|
14 June2001 4.2 Krupp Camford The Clerk reported on complaints received from parishioners regarding noise emanating from Krupp Camford both early in the morning and late at night and the visit by senior managers to West Drive in response to the complaints. It was agreed that the Plant Manager should be invited to the next meeting. |
|
3 May 2001 10.11 Concern was expressed at late night noise from Krupp Camford. It was agreed that a letter be sent to Mr Bolland highlighting the Council's concerns. |
|
5 April 2001 11.7 It was noted that Krupp Camford proposed to close its Bedford plant and relocate to Bourn Airfield |
|
1 March 2001 3.0.4 () Bund wall at Krupp Camford. Reply outstanding |
|
1 February 2001 (3.04) Bund wall at Krupp Camford. Councillor Martlew had contacted the Clerk regarding methods sometimes used to construct bund walls. The proposal by the Chairman, seconded by Councillor Phillips that ‘Krupp Camford be contacted to ask if they will make a contribution towards a named parish benefit’ was carried unanimously |
|
4 January 2001 3.0.5 (4.5) Bund wall at Krupp Camford. District Councillor Stewart had spoken with planning officers on the Parish Council’s behalf. It was thought that the bund wall height may now need to be amended to 9 metres for the application to be approved. |
|
2 November 2000 4.5 The District Council had written asking for further details regarding the proposed noise attenuation bund on the Krupp Camford site and the Parish Council’s reasons for supporting the application. The Clerk asked for approval to photocopy all correspondence on the matter and this was given. |
|
5 October 2000 A letter of introduction from Mr Gerry Warmsley of Krupp Camford |
|
|