Nelson learns some hard noise lessons

The experiences of New Zealand’s Port Nelson with the vexatious issue of noise and a juxtaposed community reveal how far a port company may have to go to seek a solution.


In Port Nelson’s case, it involved becoming a property developer.


Over time city and residential areas encroached on to the port, with former industrial areas being developed into apartment complexes. The nearest residential properties are only 115 metres from a working berth.


As the port moved to working 24/7, so noise complaints grew. Noise control comes under the city council plan, and when it was reviewed some residents argued curfews should be put in place preventing “graveyard shift” working of vessels.


Nelson is a tidal port with restricted draughts for larger vessels, and needs to be able to work at any time, so not working 24/7 would be a killer blow.


Attention then shifted to noise management within the port, and potential compensation from Port Nelson for modifications to houses near the port boundary to also mitigate noise.


A contour map was developed which indicated those properties on the port hills most affected by port operations. As a result, Port Nelson had to offer to mitigate or purchase 11 properties inside the 65 dBA line, and pay 50% of noise mitigation costs of 122 properties in between the 60 and 65 dBA line, plus potentially half also for an even greater number of homes in the 50-60 dBA line range.


Mitigation can include double glazing, extra-thick lining of walls, air conditioning and air circulation systems.


Of the 11 properties inside the 65 dBA line three have been purchased to date, mitigated and on-sold and the port is in the process of purchasing a fourth. The problem is these are properties at the top end of the market, and the market is in the doldrums.


Port Nelson has therefore been forced to operate as a property developer in a soft market, and has so far incurred costs for mitigation work, purchase and sale of over NZ$1m. It is estimated that will double.
(Source:http://www.portstrategy.com)