New neighbours threaten venues future

[bazzbass]

A pub in the very heart of our city was the best for new bands,we played there every month.

Then they built high rise apartments right behind the pub and wanted them to ban live music.

Of course the music scene were outraged, we were preparing to take them to court.

Then they offered the owners of the pub the top apartment.

The band courtyard is now glassed in and bands have to turn right down


ANYone can be bought, if the price....is RIGHT

[Monkey Steve]

I seem to recall from a conversation with the landlord of a pub that was we'll know for live music who also had a complaining neighbour, he was ok with the authorities as long as he could demonstrate that he had made reasonable adjustments and wasn't taking the Mick. So curfews were strictly enforced and he had some baffles made to put over the windows when bands were on. His local authority were pretty much on his side and made it very clear to the nimby that he had to provide evidence to show that the rules were being broken, not just ring up to complain that there was loud music again.

Not that it wasn't a pain in the backside for the landlord, but he benefitted hugely from a sympathetic ear at the council.

I'd suggest a sensible conversation with the authorities to agree guidelines.

Though it reminds me of when i used to have a season ticket at Chelsea and one week the programme had a rant from the chairman about the plans to extend the ground being held up due to objections from a local resident that this would lead to large crowds in the area on matchdays!

[fleabag]

[quote name='Rich' timestamp='1493117294' post='3285700']
I hope the git who complained has an infestation of fleas.
[/quote]

I'll see what i can do

Edited April 26, 2017 by fleabag

[gjones]

Surprisingly, despite the fact that Edinburgh hosts the world largest arts festival, the council, for a while, were dead against music venues and they were clamping down on bars with music relentlessly.

The problem was, that in order for a venue to lose it's licence, all that was needed was for the music to be 'audible' to the complainer.

There was a campaign started, by local musicians, to change the local rules. There was a lot of support and eventually the campaign managed to get the rules changed. Now there has to be an 'audible nuisance ' caused by the music instead of it just being 'audible'.

If your local council is being a pain, you should start up your own campaign to change the rules, just like Edinburgh.

Here's the link to more information [url="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/licensing-board-votes-to-relax-noise-test-for-live-music-1-4240995"]http://www.edinburgh...music-1-4240995[/url]

Edited April 26, 2017 by gjones

[tauzero]

[quote name='Ashweb' timestamp='1493158450' post='3286205']
AFAIK, if you move into an area where there is an existing 'noise issue' you have no real basis of complaint as the noise was already there; if however a 'noise issue' is introduced to an otherwise peaceful area then any complaint will be investigated and either removed or mitigated to all parties satisfaction.
[/quote]

My understanding is that everybody has the right to peace and quiet, regardless of whether they've moved in next door to somewhere noisy or not.

[url="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8535219.stm"]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8535219.stm[/url]

[Count Bassy]

I thought thought that the "Agent of change" principle had been adopted. Perhaps not.

[Kiwi]

In planning, the principle of buying next to a source of nuisance and then complaining about the nuisance is called reverse sensitivity. It's not really defensible unless the nuisance activity doesn't have permitted development rights (i.e. permission under current or previous planning permission) or the activity contravenes existing policies/regulations.

If the pub is playing within permitted noise levels then there's no case to answer. The neighbour also risks being subject to legal action for harrassment and abuse of legal process. If the pub has been louder beyond permitted levels and neighbours simply haven't complained then the new neighbour does have rights.

Best thing for the pub to do is an independent noise monitoring check of its own. Square off with the neighbour at every step and neutralise or introduce reasonable doubt to each of their claims.

[Chris2112]

[quote name='dmccombe7' timestamp='1493128298' post='3285851']
Have always wondered about people buying a house next to a known source of noise and then complaining.
In 80's my local pub / venue sold off flats above the pub. Low and behold the people that bought one of them complained of the noise from the bands.
Didn't help that one of the couple was in the police and knew his rights.
No idea how they got around it or whether the couple just moved but al of a sudden it was ok again.
Have to say if i would never buy a flat above any bar / pub / venue as there will always be noise during busy nights.

Dave
[/quote]

I'd be surprised if this bloke was actually in the police. He might have worked for them but not been a police officer. They have very strict rules about residing on licensed premises, for whatever reason, it's just not allowed. A girl I know in the police wanted to move with her husband (a landlord himself) into a flat that was part of the title of the pub. It wasn't physically part of the pub, it was actually in a courtyard round the corner and was simply a small bedsit. No trade went on at all there and you'd never know it was part of the pub. She put in to live there, thinking it'd be okay as it wasn't physically connected to the pub. She was refused the move because it was on the deeds and rules is rules. That went for unafilliated flats that were above pubs too, but those rules wouldn't apply to police staff. Anyways...

I find the culture of the NIMBY rather distasteful, particularly when someone is moving to an area and taking issue with the established landscape there. I can see why you might not want a football stadium being built next to your house and I wouldn't chastise a reasonable objection there, but to move to an area and start shutting things down is just insulting and moronic.

I find the noise limits at UK racetracks to be complete nonsense. Barely a decatted car can get round without being flagged for noise now that they're no longer turning blind eyes to people lifting off past the noise sensors. TVR's driving round with slip-on silencers and motorbikes with bungs in the exhausts. It's stupid - my road bike has an exhaust so loud it wouldn't even pass a static noise test on a UK circuit, yet it's road legal, just about. I display a little consideration in my home village when I'm riding in or out, of course. The restrictions on the UK circuits are down to NIMBYs, many who moved in knowing their neighbour was a full time track.

[Krysbass]

There's a rehearsal studio in my neck of the woods that has been operating successfully for several years, but it's opposite what was a large plot of industrial land that is now being cleared and new houses are being built there.

I've used the studio numerous times, but we're now waiting to see what happens when people start moving into the new houses, as a certain amount of sound escapes from the studio - which currently has bands rehearsing there until 11:00pm most nights.

Complaints about the noise seem inevitable and despite the fact that the studio was there first; I fear that the demands of the new house-owners will be given priority.