View report page

76
*Sites
Smoke
(Microgrammes per Cubic Metre
Sulphur Dioxide
(Microgrammes per
Cubic Metre)
MonthlyAverage
Highest DailyReading
Monthly
Average
Highest
Daily
Reading
A
B
C
D
A
B
c
D
A
B
A
B
1968
July 37 28 68 31 114 68 94 48 142 100 360 200
August 33 30 59 32 70 61 91 50 101 99 260 348
Sept. 43 35 74 41 128 69 123 65 136 128 431 400
October 50 54 98 67 157 166 226 153 201 202 717 625
Nov. 73 71 156 80 167 146 283 145 307 305 573 598
Dec. 109 102 N N 229 286 418 232 412 436 1277 1203
1969
Jan. 65 78 132 88 210 225 268 236 329 353 678 646
Feb. 73 64 129 84 198 186 200 172 381 371 594 719
March 84 67 140 88 175 141 231 137 427 418 881 1030
April 132 33 70 39 442 153 187 72 212 234 353 780
May 37 28 73 N 93 6l 155 88 203 183 605 364
June 35 24 68 N 63 49 120 51 138 141 348 330
"N" - level of readings insufficient to obtain accurate measurement:
Site address:
A - Chenil Galleries, King's Road, S.W.3.
B - The Red House, Hornton Street, W.8.
C - Public Library, Lancaster Road, W.10.
D - Child Health Centre, Redcliffe Street, S.W.10
(Sites C and D have smoke measuring apparatus only)
NOISE ABATEMENT ACT. 1960
Sixty-two complaints concerning alleged noise nuisances were received,
thirty-seven fewer than during the previous year, 68% of the complaints
related to noise caused by industrial works, road works (use of pneumatic
drills, and compressors, etc.), building operations and miscellaneous
plant and machinery in commercial premises. Noise caused by neighbouring
residents in private dwellings accounted for 11% of the total complaints
received and the remaining 21% concerned noise from pop groups, clubs and
animals, etc.
All the complaints were thoroughly investigated and, in the majority
of cases, an approach to the offending contractors or firms resulted in
the fullest co-operation and assistance being given to implement suitable
noise reducing methods.
In five cases there was no health nuisance and in the remaining cases
remedies were secured without recourse to legal action. In the few cases
where complainants were not satisfied with the action taken by the officers
of the Health Department their rights under private action were explained
to them.