London's Pulse: Medical Officer of Health reports 1848-1972

View report page

City of London 1963

[Report of the Medical Officer of Health for London, City of ]

This page requires JavaScript

SMOKE NUISANCES
The smoke produced by the burning of coal on improperly constructed grates caused such a
prejudice against its use that a proclamation was made in 1307 making it a capital offence to
bum coal in the City of London, and there are records of execution for the offence. By comparison
the penalty for emitting smoke in' the City of London at the present time is very lenient.
During the year, 57 complaints of smoke nuisances were received. On investigation it was
found that in 3 (5.3%) of the complaints no nuisance existed. The remainder of the complaints
emanated from the following sources : —
(1) Oil-fired boilers 34 (59.6%)
(2) Solid fuel fired boilers 5 (8.8%)
(3) Domestic appliances 3 (5.3%)
(4) Incinerators 2 (3.5%)
(5) Bonfires 10 (17.5%)
The main cause of nuisances from boilers in (1) and (2) was inefficient combustion which, in
most cases, was due to mismanagement of otherwise efficient apparatus.
Smoke nuisances occurred from domestic grates when unsuitable fuel was used or when
suitable fuel was not available.
Smoke and fly-ash emissions occurred from an industrial incinerator and these were mainly
due to an obsolete appliance which has since been replaced together with a proper water bath to
catch fly-ash.
Of the total number of smoke complaints, 10 were of bonfire nuisances. Advice was obtained
from the Comptroller and City Solicitor with regard to bonfires and he was of the opinion that
these particular smoke nuisances could not be dealt with under Section 4 of the City of London
(Various Powers) Act, 1954 but would fall within the provisions of Section 16 of the Clean Air
Act, 1956.
Most bonfire nuisances occurred on demolition sites where the contractors had to dispose of
timber, felt, bitumastic and painted materials, and a certain amount of co-operation had to be
obtained with regard to destruction of infested and rotting timber as it is inadvisable to remove
these from the site. Some contractors are very reluctant to remove any timber owing to high
haulage costs. Co-operation was secured in all cases without recourse to further action.
NOISE
Since the introduction of the Noise Abatement Act, 1960, members of the public seem to be
increasingly more "noise-conscious" and this is reflected in the general increase in the number
of complaints received in the Department.
Whilst it will be appreciated that that which is a nuisance to one person may be tolerated, or
even accepted by another, it is of interest to note that of 39 complaints investigated during the
year 31 (80%) were in respect of pneumatic drills on building sites which were confirmed to be
causing a nuisance within the meaning of the Act and subsequently remedied without the need to
resort to legal action, whilst only 1 (2%) was in respect of a comparatively trivial sound — from
an office machine — which could not be considered to be a nuisance. The remaining 7 complaints
representing 18% of the total, comprised 5 concerning general noise from building sites and 2 of
noisy fans situated at roof level, all of which were remedied following a verbal request by the
Public Health Inspector. It will be seen, therefore, that City workers and residents do not generally
complain of noise without reasonable cause.
Much has been achieved through informal meetings with builders representatives, resulting in
the increased use of muffles to pneumatic drills, erection of temporary baffles to deflect noise
away from office buildings and, in certain cases, double-glazing of windows to increase their
insulative value. These measures, together with agreed restricted periods for noisy building
operations, have resulted in substantial improvements.
On 9th May, 1963, a noise meter was purchased for the Department and has since been in
constant use in connection with noise complaints. In addition to its usefulness in assessing the
noise level of the subjects of complaint it has been found that its presence on site is treated
with respect, if with some resentment, by building personnel with the result that voluntary cooperation
is even more readily forthcoming.
6