Volume up on noise complaints

CLAIRE CONNELL

Marlburians rocking to the beats of modern music have prompted a record number of noise complaints in the past year, a Marlborough District Council spokesman says.

Council compliance manager Garth Congdon said the council received 1464 noise complaints in the past financial year, most of which were about noisy parties and loud stereos playing heavy bass music.

The number of complaints is 100 more than the year before, and double those received in 2003.

"A lot of music today has a lot of bass – that low-frequency `boom boom' penetrates through anything," Mr Congdon said.

"It can go through solid concrete, and travel a long way."

People were also probably less tolerant, knew more about the complaints procedure, and could be having more parties, Mr Congdon said.

Only a few complaints were about noise associated with frost fans in vineyards, he said.

Noisy cars also didn't play a large part in the number of complaints, because when cars were on a public road it was a police matter.

Armourguard, which monitors noise complaints on the council's behalf, can issue warning notices on the spot that require the noise to be stopped within 72 hours.

If it continues, equipment such as stereos can be confiscated.

The issue rarely escalated, Mr Congdon said.

"Once they've had their equipment taken off them ... most learn their lesson."

The complaints could also cost ratepayers more in the future, because Armourguard was getting more callouts, Mr Congdon said.

Respect your neighbours and be considerate with noise was Mr Congdon's advice.

The council investigated 1889 complaints in the financial year ended June 2010 over noise and alleged breaches of resource consents, including discharges and land use. Of those complaints, 34 people received an abatement notice (a written notice), and 41 an infringement notice (a fine of up to $1000 issued by the council).

"We work very hard at trying to resolve without having to go down the path of prosecution," Mr Congdon said.

"It's hugely expensive."

One prosecution attempt by the council against a Wairau Valley vineyard operator, Auckland-based Goldridge Estate, was dismissed in the Blenheim District Court last October.

The council was unable to prove that depositing vegetation on a river bed breached the district plan, and that the operator should be responsible for the actions of a contractor.

- The Marlborough Express