Sounder City The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy March 2004 Sounder City The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy March 2004 copyright Greater London Authority March 2004 Published by Greater London Authority City Hall The Queen’s Walk London SE1 2AA Enquiries 020 7983 4100 Minicom 020 7983 4458 www.london.gov.uk ISBN 1 85261 594 X Cover photograph credit Montage of images © Transport for London Visual Image Service Copies of a highlights document and this strategy are available from www.london.gov.uk or by calling 020 7983 4100 (a limited number of printed copies of the full document are available at a cost of £25). Acknowledgements The Mayor would like to give special thanks to the Noise Strategy Team at the GLA, Max Dixon and Alan Bloomfield, and to the steering group, Victor Anderson, David Goode, David Hutchinson and John Duffy. The Mayor would also like to thank everyone who contributed to preparation of this strategy, not least all Londoners who responded to public consultation. Particular acknowledgement is given to the work of John Stewart and Val Weedon on behalf of people who suffer most from noise, and to the many specialists, including those listed in the Appendix, who work to advance understanding of the sound world. © Crown copyright material is This document is printed on 75 per cent recycled paper, reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and 25 per cent from sustainable forest management the Queen's Printer for Scotland The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy Mayor of London contents foreword i executive summary vii 1 introduction 1 2 challenges, effects and information 7 The context 7 Adverse impacts of noise 8 Changes in noise 11 Information on noise in London 12 3 vision and linkages 31 A vision for the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy 31 Objectives of the Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy 31 Guidelines, limit values and targets 32 Linkages and cross-cutting themes 34 Linkages with the Mayor’s other strategies 39 4 policies and proposals 53 Principal mechanisms for delivering noise reduction 54 Procurement 55 An indicative noise management hierarchy 56 4A road traffic noise 57 Managing London’s streets 58 Quieter vehicles 60 Traffic reduction, street space allocation and routeing 64 Quieter, smoother and safer driving 66 Better streetworks and street maintenance 68 Noise-reducing road surfaces 70 Tree planting, noise barriers, landform and highway structures 71 Spatial planning and urban design 73 Building insulation 74 Neighbourhoods, town centres, public spaces, walking and cycling 75 Central London Congestion Charging 78 Road freight 79 Bus services 83 Taxis and private hire vehicles 88 Fleets and facilities of the GLA and functional bodies and other emergency services 89 Motorcycles, mopeds and scooters 90 Assessing and prioritising action 91 Mayor of London The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy 4B railway noise 99 Issues in controlling railway noise 100 Track type and quality - including wheel-rail rolling contact 100 Quieter rolling stock and operation 102 Railway structures and noise barriers 104 Spatial planning and urban design 105 Building insulation 107 London Underground 108 National Rail 110 Construction and maintenance works 111 Noise mapping of railways in London 112 Passenger stations and interchanges 113 Train noise for passengers 113 Rail freight 114 New schemes and assessment 115 4C aircraft noise 119 Issues in controlling aircraft and airport-related noise 121 Quieter aircraft and aircraft numbers 121 Noise abatement operational procedures 125 Operating restrictions, including restrictions on night flights 128 Ground noise and surface access 131 Spatial planning and building insulation 132 Public information and communication 137 Air freight 139 Other airports and airfields 139 Helicopters 140 Future spatial distribution of airport facilities 144 Applying the ‘polluter pays’ principle 145 4D noise on rivers and canals 151 Powering of craft 152 Tourist and party boats, piers and moorings 153 Wharves, boatyards and waterside planning 154 Water and waterside soundscape quality 155 4E industrial noise 159 Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control and Waste Management 160 Issues in controlling industrial noise 162 Economic development potential 166 Aggregates 166 Transport routeing and access 167 The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy Mayor of London 4F spatial planning, urban design and open spaces 169 Urban renaissance 169 Housing, schools and health facilities 171 Mixed uses, town centres and the late night economy 177 Sound-conscious urban design 181 Open spaces and the wider public realm 185 5 integrated noise management 193 Hearing-friendly design and management 194 Healthy hearing and leisure sound - pubs, clubs, and other pastimes 194 Neighbour noise 195 Housing and neighbourhood management, crime and disorder 195 Education and public awareness 196 Low frequency noise 196 Construction noise from building operations 196 Setting priorities 197 Noise mapping 199 Effects and people’s priorities 201 Organisation 201 Costs 203 Training and staffing 206 A Mayor’s Sound Award? 206 Sounds of the city 207 appendices 210 A1 implementation framework 210 A2 what is noise? 218 A3 typical noise levels and indicative noise reductions 226 A4 who does what 228 A5 guidelines and standards 230 A6 requirements of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 related to noise, and relevant international obligations notified to the Mayor 239 A7 external noise insulation of housing 243 A8 abbreviations and glossary 245 A9 bibliography 265 A10 contributors’ and photography credits 278 A11 index 280 The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy Mayor of London i foreword Noise may not be top of everyone’s priorities, but it is a big issue for many. That is clear from those who welcomed this first city-wide strategy when the draft was published for public consultation in March 2003. It focuses on getting more action going on ‘ambient noise’, mainly noise from transport and industry, but also looking to better housing and good building design. My legal remit is ambient noise - mainly from transport. This strategy reflects that duty. However, I am in no doubt that neighbours from hell can leave people at their wits’ end. Noise makers need to be aware that music systems or other equipment can be confiscated if they cause real nuisance to others. In much of Europe, local police offer the first line of defence against excessively noisy neighbours. New Yorkers call NYPD. In London, the boroughs are responsible. Even so, more people call the police about noise than call their council Environmental Health Departments. In the long term, I would like to see properly resourced and responsive local policing being able to sort out most breakdowns in neighbourliness, with the noise specialists as back up. I have already expanded police numbers. More neighbourhood wardens and community support officers are coming through. Clearly there are going to be other pressing priorities for some time to come, but I will work for a future in which those responsible for these services can consider new options with potential benefits for all concerned. Meanwhile, I invite London boroughs to reconsider the wide variations which exist in local noise services across the city. Some have good out of hours services, dealing with noisy parties and other nuisances. All boroughs need to achieve the standards of the best in this vital service to Londoners. Opportunities for shared services across borough boundaries need to be considered. I am keen to work with boroughs to get better funding for London’s noise services, ring-fenced if necessary. I also want to see better control of noise from roadworks and building works. Transport for London will play its part. This may not be defined as ‘ambient noise’, but all those responsible must pull together, so we can secure the benefits from growth, while keeping construction noise under control. London is a noisy city. Its buzz is tangible. But everyone needs to rest and recover at some time. Noise can interfere with speech, learning and concentration, as well as leisure. Good modern city management needs to minimise noise for the wellbeing of all those who live, visit or work here. London is leading the way for the UK with this first city-wide strategy for ambient noise. The Government has said it needs five years, noise mapping costing £13 million, and many other studies to prepare a national strategy. ii Mayor of London The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy The Greater London Authority Act required me to produce a strategy for probably the country’s noisiest city, but with no new money and no new powers specifically to reduce noise. I am very aware of the costs of properly addressing noise - but also of the needs, and the benefits for Londoners’ wellbeing. In our current system, only the Government can secure the changes required. It must speed up development of an effective national noise policy, incuding work on costing. I am keen to do whatever I can, but no-one can pretend that it will be quick and easy to reduce noise in Europe’s biggest city. London is ahead of national strategy, so there are many issues on which I must urge Government to act. Many practical actions will be pursued at city level, but we will still need further reductions at source, including quieter road vehicles, railways and aircraft. International agreement and action is vital, particularly for a world city. London can demonstrate practical action. Progress on noise demands partnership, with the Government, the London boroughs, and others. I want to play my part, especially through Transport for London, and with the London Development Agency. A major early priority is making up the backlog of street re-surfacing. But we must have sufficient transport funding. We will build noise management into as much of our transport and other work as we can. ‘Streets for People’ policies can help reduce noise in local areas. Local highway authorities need to consider alternatives to the ‘road hump’. Fuel cell buses are being trialled. We also plan to trial hybrid-electric buses. If we can find suitable locations and funds, I would like to get some noise barriers in London which also generate solar electricity, so that we can increase renewable energy at the same time as reducing noise. I was glad to support action in the European Court of Human Rights on night aircraft noise, though, like many Londoners, I was very disappointed that the Court went back on its earlier decision which had found for the residents. Trafalgar Square remodelling has, however, been a great success, with people remarking how they can hear the fountains from the gallery steps for the first time. Open spaces and watersides need special attention. Good planning and design of buildings can stop road and railway noise spreading. With good design, new development can create new quiet spaces. I extend my thanks to all who gave views and advice, especially Victor Anderson, my Environment Adviser. I am glad to have received constructive input from the London Assembly and from many others during public consultation. Noise policy is becoming more positive. It is an exciting and creative time for those concerned with the sounds of the city. Parliament gave London a pioneering role. London carries an extra noise burden as gateway to the UK. Action here can help in national policy development. Government must recognise this by supporting exemplary projects, and setting up funds for on going noise reduction. Ken Livingstone Mayor of London The Mayor’s Ambient Noise Strategy Mayor of London iii preface the Mayor’s Environmental Strategies This Strategy is one of a series dealing with environmental issues in London. The Mayor is required to produce four environmental strategies addressing Air Quality, Ambient Noise, Biodiversity and Municipal Waste Management. He has also decided to produce an Energy Strategy for London. The main elements of each environmental strategy are reflected in the overall London Plan and where appropriate in the Transport and Economic Development Strategies. Together these strategies provide the basis for improving London’s environment. They also provide an integrated framework for sustainable development. Whilst improvement of London’s immediate environment, by reducing pollution and improving the quality of life for Londoners, is the main purpose of the environmental strategies, this is not the sole objective. The strategies also need to take account of London’s wider impacts on the global environment and identify action to reduce damaging or unsustainable processes. To do this we need to understand the way that London functions in terms of its daily processes and be aware of its wider ecological footprint, recognising that this extends to virtually all parts of the globe. A detailed analysis of London’s ecological footprint, published in 2002, quantified the energy and materials used or wasted by current practices. This was summarised in the Mayor’s State of the Environment Report for London published in May 2003. It demonstrates unsustainable levels of resource use resulting from a fundamental difference between the way a city works and the processes of the natural world. Whilst natural ecosystems have a series of inbuilt circular processes, preventing most wastage, the metabolism of a modern city is almost entirely a one-way process. This is particularly true of affluent cities in developed countries, where vast quantities of material are imported daily for human use and waste products are discharged as unwanted residues. London is no exception. Examining individual elements of London’s functional metabolism, such as waste or energy will help to identify action we can take to improve our environmental performance and reduce damaging impacts elsewhere. This is crucial if we are to be successful in combating climate change and reducing London’s global impacts on biodiversity and natural resources. The Mayor’s draft London Plan makes it clear that to become an exemplary, sustainable world city, London must use natural resources more efficiently, increase its reuse of resources and reduce levels of waste and environmental degradation. As London grows, these objectives will become ever more important. The shift towards a compact city, which is inherent in the London Plan, will contribute towards these objectives. It