CACOPHONOUS CAPITAL

Submitted by Editor on Wed, 03/09/2014 - 16:50

David Hill – better known to some for his tweets as @NewTownFlaneur – disagrees with those who want to retain St Stephen's chimes around the clock. Here he delivers a counterblast demanding peace and quiet at night ...

As the Spurtle reported yesterday, in a development that would, perhaps, have annoyed the late Marc Bolan of T-Rex as much as it has angered some locals, St Stephen’s won't be banging its gong again for some time. It has been rendered mute by concerns about the level of nighttime noise in adjacent properties.

The rather predictable ensuing outrage focuses on the apparent belief that even jingle-free nocturnal hours at St Stephen’s would damage the area's traditional – and apparently much cherished – soundscape. Newcomers' complaints ­– regardless of any merit they may have – should not, it seems, be permitted to interfere with long-established local practices.

The claim underlying this indignation certainly merits unpacking. The 'appeal to heritage' argument sits very uneasily in an area clogged with less than traditional – and, sadly, some way from being whisper-quiet – 4x4s. Moreover, claims concerning long-standing chime status appear unsubstantiated: Has nocturnal noise always attended St Stephen's? Historically, it has not been normal for church bells to sound all night. The seeming indifference to the evidently genuine suffering of others is also worth noting. 

Happily, City of Edinburgh Council’s noise people appear to be paying more attention to World Health Organisation guidelines on noctural decibel levels than spurious claims from knee-jerk New Towners, whose collective heritage-wisdom, let's not forget, is of a quality that ensured we spent years in the area having to wade daily through chicken carcasses and dirty nappies.

While genuine heritage concerns in this city deserve more support than they often get, it would be an error to see this issue as falling into that category. In reality, it's primarily an issue of intrusive nocturnal sound, and, more than anything, actually serves to illustrate how remarkably clueless we are about issues of noise pollution generally.

We tolerate ever greater incursions into our peace and quiet. The constant increase in daytime noise is unpleasant enough, but, more damagingly, we also acquiesce to ever more serious raids on our nighttime tranquility and, thus, general well-being. We endure, among other things, noisy bottle recycling, the banshee-like wail of street-cleaning vehicles, pre-7am pub deliveries, car and shop alarms, tram bells, individuals' anti-social behaviour and speeding vehicles. Why do we accept this nocturnal cacophony?

Silence is, of course, an unrealistic expectation to have of a city, but we could certainly do a lot more to minimise harmful noise. It seems self-evident that a more peaceful soundscape would greatly benefit the vast majority of us, and yet, as things stand, the issue often seems like a hopeless cause.

It's beyond dispute that many Edinburgh inhabitants are adversely affected by noise, especially at night. While the Council may frequently be willing to help with individual grievances, the process can take some time, it has to work within a less-than-robust legal framework, and is under constant adverse pressure from business interests. Unfortunately, the Council is also itself the source of much noise pollution during the supposedly quiet hours. This is not an ideal state of affairs.

A wholesale culture change on this issue is required. At the individual level, a better understanding of, and less tolerant stance towards, intrusive noise would encourage much greater respect for the issue at the corporate level. Indeed, it's probably a pre-condition for it.

It's time for change, and not just in St Vincent Place. 

Photo of Calton Hill above, courtesy and ©Dominie F.D. McIntosh.

----------------------

 [See also Breaking news (2.9.14) and Letters (3.9.14).]

 euan leitch ‏@euan_leitch  12h

@NewTownFlaneur @theSpurtle hot damn! I wanted to suspect who you were forever. Aren't 4am bells to be a romantic part of our ICH?

 [ICH = intangible cultural heritage]

@euan_leitch @theSpurtle If so, ICH is clearly overrated..

 Broughton Spurtle ‏@theSpurtle  13h

@AndrewDBurns @LAHinds Interesting debate with citywide implications: http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/silence-clangs  … and http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/cacophonous-capital 

@theSpurtle @LAHinds Thanks for links ... wasn't immediately aware of this --- been very busy with other lWard planning issue :-(

@theSpurtle @AndrewDBurns since it is my ward I am aware of the residents views. Only temporary until a solution can be agreed

[Email to Councillor Lesley Hinds, copied to Spurtle, 4.9.14]

Dear Lesley

I note your tweet on Twitter regarding the article in Spurtle in which you appear to be dismissive of the residents concerns - 'It is only temporary until a solution can be found'. I live right next to the clock and like many others find the clock chimes reassuring and all part of the joy of living in a world heritage site. While you state that it is temporary, any solution is likely to result in changes to their operation. As the councillor for the area it would be appreciated if you could take on board the strong feeling of the majority of residents that want the bell to remain as is. Can you re-assure the residents of Circus Lane that I represent, that no changes will be made and the bells fully restored? What if any actions are you taking/able to take on behalf of the residents you represent to get this decision reversed. The World Health Organisation guidelines are clearly being misused by the Council in this instance.

Clive Johnson-Cooper
Circus Lane Residents Association

@LAHinds @theSpurtle @AndrewDBurns Civilised balance needed, bells do disrupt sleep at night and should not chime then