Howard Price said changes to national planning policy mean there is no longer such an emphasis on the separation of conflicting building uses.
He also cited local authority funding cuts as another issue that is resulting in complaints from residents being dealt with by “untrained” council officers who routinely “equate noise with anti-social behaviour”.
He was speaking to the Publican’s Morning Advertiser (PMA) about the problems that arise after new housing developments are built next to established pubs and bars.
He said: “Because the Government is looking for a construction-led economic recovery, they’ve weakened national planning guidance.
“Local planning authorities have to conform. If they try not to, developers simply go to appeal and are almost always bound to win, and the planning authority incurs unnecessary costs.”
He said soundproofing can almost never be achieved “for technical reasons” and “reducing intrusive sound isn’t always a matter of building construction”, adding the best solution would be for developments only to be approved when in the right locations.
Complaints
Recent CIEH statistics show there were about 480,000 noise complaints made to local authorities in England annually, and about 26,000 were about noise from licensed premises. Last year, around 26% of all complaints were upheld following investigation.
Publicans have spoken out in the PMA about “Draconian” conditions placed on their licences by environmental health officers (EHO) following reasonable levels of noise, or in one case following ‘noise’ from an event that never happened.
However, Price slammed the idea that environmental health officers are quick to penalise pubs and said there are already concessions in law in favour of businesses.
He said: “As far as businesses are concerned, there is a ground of appeal they use — the ‘best practicable means’ to minimise the nuisance. That only applies to businesses and can be used as a defence against noise abatement notices and any later prosecution.”