The slow inexorable death of culture.
Complete hyperbole. While there are musicians who want to gig, there will be places for them to play.
Are you talking about the residents or the venue?
The venue was there first by around 30 years, the venue is an important part of what makes that area what it is and most importantly the venue enriches the lives of the 1000's of people who frequent it on a regular basis. Read the article. Its one persons selfishness.
Urban myth that a townie moved into countryside and complained about a farmers cock crowing, went to court and incomer won, next thing they know is the rest of the village went out & bought some cocks 🐓
Just to address a point that a couple of people have made up thread, I know from following the local news up here that the venue in question have taken all sorts of steps to try and minimise disruption as much as possible.
It is just not the case that they are simply expecting to continue without making any sort of reasonable adjustment at all.
Its one persons selfishness.
You've spent the thread chucking insults around and avoiding the swear filter:
Anyone moving into the area and then complaining about one of that areas most important aspects is an utter *.
But hey, * culture eh?
Which as you know is breaking forum rules. And that to support a business that has twice been served notices for breaking the rules.
Some people seem incapable of respecting rules that are in the general interest.
A bloke I know rented a flat and after a few weeks mentioned in a mildly objecting way to a local garage / mechanics / business that once a week a noisy alarm went off and was there any need for it? Garage blokio said it wasn't their alarm but the one for the big scary maximum security hospital on the other side of the trees and the alarm's used for announcing to locals to lock and nail their doors and grab a baseball bat. Dude'd just moved to Crowthorne in Berkshire and had no idea what was next door....
Read the article. Its one persons selfishness.
The venue operators do also say in the article that the area has become more residential. So it's not like they've suddenly had residents nearby;
"Night & Day is located at 26 Oldham Street. Over the past 15 years, flats have been built or existing buildings converted to flats around us"
although they make the point that there's been little consideration made to what's there already. Having said that, it's hardly the residents fault either
What rules have i broken? Can you point to the one where you are not allowed to allude to a swear word and use asterisks? Who have i insulted? The only person i have insulted is the person who made the complaint.
Having said that, it’s hardly the residents fault either
Its a bus route into Piccadilly Gardens, literally the absolute centre of Manchester in a spot renowned for its music and nightlife scene. You'd have to be a special kind of dickhead to move there and imagine it'll be a haven of peace and quiet.
This is the worst aspect of gentrification. The things that make an area popular get pushed out. This includes people as well as businesses. Losing Night and Day would be big loss. Hopefully Sacha Lord will get on the case. Happy 30th N&D.
Here you go, Blackflag:
No abusive or foul language – There is a swear filter on the site that will capture what we consider to be the most offensive vocabulary but any attempt to evade this swear filter will result in that post or thread being deleted. Repeat offenders will be banned. Our swear filter is not exhaustive and the moderators reserve the right to moderate any language regardless of its inclusion or otherwise in the swear filter library.
I'm not bothered about you swearing and avoiding the filter. But you're defending a business that knows the rules and continues to break them hence the petition.
Happened to the Nags Head* in Wycombe, flats built nearby, occupant(s) complained so the venue did what they could to reduce the noise resulting in the music "loft" becoming an overheated hell hole when gigs were on. Now the venue has been converted into flats itself 🙁
*admittedly the final nails in the coffin were 1. becoming a gay bar & 2. the landlord not paying the vat bill..
* only pub I've been told off by the landlord for being too smartly dressed
Not exactly a quiet cul-de-sac.
Seems a pity to waste moderator time to explain the rules to you Blackflag. I don't noramally like disturbing them but in this case they're the only one who can settle the argument.
But you see where you're going with this, the same direction as the Night and Day owner.
Youv'e gone running off to the mods because i put an asterisked swear word in my post?? Because i don't agree with your viewpoint? Or have you self appointed yourself as a mod too? Thats so amazingly pathetic.
I'm mimicking what's happening to the venue, Blackflag. You're the shouty sweary one, not me. I'm being reasonable, your language is sweary and hyperbolic.
Of course I'm not a self-appointed mod, I'm not a mod either. But there's a system and it's there to be used.
I don't agree with your viewpoint but that's no reason to get shouty and sweary, so I don't.
Whos shouting??? You seem to be making this personal. All my posts are talking about the people involved in the situation. You are the one who decided to try and interact with me directly.
In a previous career I had a job doing noise impact assessments and the like for new developments. In general the process is poor and lacks technical rigour, despite the efforts by most involved to try to better it. When I was involved, anyone with a calibrated sound level meter could do an assessment and write a report. The incomer would appoint a consultant to do an assessment for the planning application. They could do with this assessment what they liked, even bin it and get another consultant if they wanted. Contracts were often awarded to the cheapest bidder. As with a lot of the building industry it was a race to the bottom on cost and quality. Most councils are stretched with resources and can lack technical competence, especially in areas outside of the cities.
An assessment for new housing should not miss an existing music venue or a noisy rail yard. That's incompetence on the part of the consultant. If such venues or industry exist then the incomer should migrate against them. If that's not possible then planning should be refused. However, unless there is a complaint, the effectiveness of mitigation proposed is never tested. It would be unlikely that say a barrier fence was checked that it does what it should, other than someone seeing that a fence was built.
The preferred assessment process has/had flaws. It allowed for the background noise level to slowly creep up, as long as you weren't a certain amount over the existing background noise level you could match/add to that background level. Then the next factory/rail yard/takeaway/supermarket comes along and is assessed against the background noise level which now includes the last factory/rail yard/takeaway/supermarket. They push the background noise level up a bit more. Repeat.
An alternative approach other countries use is an absolute level that can't be exceeded within a zone so if someone else is making the all noise you can't build your noise making thing there.
Maybe @rt60 can comment on my thoughts?
An example I can think of where the existing noise producer has stood their ground is Dalton's scrap metal yard in Leith, as seen in Trainspotting 2 outside Sickboy's flat. 
Words look shouty??? Is that the voices in your head your applying to my text? I can't help that...
And yes i got personal eventually, but only after you did by trying to tell me how to behave and saying you were going to go telling the mods about me avoiding the swear filter by not actually swearing.
I don’t noramally like disturbing them but in this case they’re the only one who can settle the argument.
You come across like a retired teacher who's in everyone elses business. Oh hang on "edukator" is that where the name comes from?
I had a look at the building on Google Earth before commenting. It's pretty clear that the building is of the order of 100 years old and the dwellings above it were there before the music venue.
Edukator comes from a bunch of anarchists in one of my favourite films:
As for being in everyone's business, I'm arguing against people signing a petition which is none of their business.
Well i'm intrigued now... Why is a petition to protect a music venue none of their business? They could be signing it because they live in the area, have visited and enjoyed the venue, want to see the vibrancy of the NQ maintained or as part of an overall attempt to stop the ongoing reduction of live music venues in this country (especially smaller venues). All of these are quite valid are they not?
Well one of them lives in Australia.
Well one of them lives in Australia.
So?
We did this topic some years back. I mentioned a French farmers answer to a British couple who complained about him farming close to their new business venture.
People were up in arms like I hung their pet dogs from a tree in the garden or made the programme broadcast on a national TV channel!
It’s pretty clear that the building is of the order of 100 years old and the dwellings above it were there before the music venue.
Barring the fact people who actually lived there over the past few decades say otherwise.
EDIT - Aaargh **** I got sucked in!
You guys still haven't grasped it. I'm playing the town council who are acting on complaints and you're playing the venue owner. You can rant and isult as much as you like but it won't progress your cause, in fact it'll just result in entrenched positions.
If there was a time to salvage something it was at the time of the first noise abatement order a couple of years back. That was the time to sound insulate and get kitted up with db meter sound limiters on the PA. Cooperate with the authorities and get within the rules. The venue got a second noise abatement order which tells us that wasn't done.
In some cases the crowd is making so much noise the PA won't work, the crowd noise is already so high the system only lets whimper out of the PA.
If there's professional experience I have relating to this it was with Welsh Water as one of those reading people their rights in pollution cases. The wise people invested in pollution control, got their house in order and cooperated. Some others thought ingnoring my recommendations and setting the dogs at me or marching us off the land at shotgun point was a better solution. Thing is we went back with the police (bizarrely unarmed) and there was no longer scope for compromise/cooperation, it was with a court order for remedial work at their expense.
It's just the way the world works, and collectively were better off for it. Take on the authorities who defend the rights of you, me, all of us and you'd better be sure you're within your rights, because if you aren't you'll lose.
You guys still haven’t grasped it.
I think anyone familiar with your posting history grasps it perfectly.
BTW it's Tort Law, Nuisance.
There's loads of websites with the case law/precedents, some of them quite surprising! There's even a precedent for the number of dogs kept in a dwelling!
@dmorts I would broadly agree with everything you said, I will try not to derail the thread with a rant or long boring lecture (it may be to late for that mind!). Noise nuisance and abatement notices etc is a key part of what i do, unfortunately i have been an expert witness in court on both sides of the fence far too many times.
The biggest issue in the UK is that noise has no real Central Government management, unlike most other countries there are not really any national rules or directives as to acceptable levels, for planning guidance the NPPF and indeed the noise planning practice guidance make no mention of decibel levels. It is just farmed out to Local Authorities to manage th ebest they can, and they have had a massive loss in expertise over the last 10 years or so.
Anyone can set themselves up as a consultant, and historically most of the wide-boys got picked up by the Local Authorities and after a while of all their reports being refused they stopped getting so much work. I would be very surprised if that was happening today.
Creeping backgrounds will continue in urban areas, the changes to BS4142 in 2014 made things better but didnt fix the issue, and unless there is the will from Central Government to fix it then it will not change.
In terms of noise nuisance and this case, there are no fixed levels for noise nuisance, the assessment is always (and the courts have ruled can only ever be) a subjective one. This takes into account among other factors the nature of the area, the frequency of disturbance, the time of disturbance, the impact of the disturbance.
That an abatement notice was served in the past and another was served recently indicates that works were successful in abating the previous nuisance, but there has been a change (most likely new residents) which has lead to another one being served. Abatement notices do not have an expiry date so if the original nuisance was reoccurring then the first notice could in theory be enforced.
If the issue is structure borne noise then the addition of insulation etc will not have any impact, it will likely be necessary to construct a room within a room to mechanically isolate the sound from the structure, that can be more expensive than building a new building.
There is no absolute requirement to abate the nuisance, for any commercial premises there is a defence of 'best practicable means' which means that everything that can reasonably be expected to abate the nuisance, taking into account both cost and loss of earnings, has been done.
The petition will have no impact on getting the Council to withdraw the notice if they are confident a nuisance is occurring. But i hope that a way forward can be found that will allow the venue to keep operating and achieve best practicable means (oddly they may already have it, as the duty to serve a notice is still in place even if the council think they may have a BPM defence).
Happened to the Nags Head* in Wycombe,
I went to a few gigs there! Very spit and sawdust, loved it. Such a shame!
You side easily with people prosecuted under the control of pollution act 1972, Blackflag. If ever you sit on a Welsh beach with clean sand and water, think of the bloke who was prepared to take on the polluters and win. Though clean sand and water are no longer a given since the wilfully destructive were elected to run the show and ripped up the rule book.
You side easily with people prosecuted under the control of pollution act 1972, Blackflag.
COPA was 1974 and in any case has largely
been repealed.
34 years since I read it to anybody. the 1974 COPA was based on the European Communities Act 1972.
This can be so loud that the bass vibrates everything in the flat - even the water in the toilet is rippling!
Ahh, reminds me of having bath & my eldest was into dj'ing his drum & base shit next door, such fond memories.
When I play my bass I have to go around picking up things that have fallen off shelves.
In Glasgow a couple moved to the flat above a butchers and before long complained to the council the noise of the cleaver chopping in the morning was annoying them.
The council banned the shop from chopping before midday and they shut up shop 6 months later. They had been on that site for 70 years.
A year later the couple moved.
Edukator
You simply missed the point that 30 years ago this was not a residential neighbourhood and the rooms above the venue were empty and the buildings around it not residential
The occupier has every right to complain. In tort law, the 'coming to nuisance' defence is incredibly weak.
I've just remembered the flat my fiance lived in when I met her. Under a paint shop... Bedroom directly under the paint mixer.
As for feeling bass in the bath. That's what farts or for isn't it?
We used to send kids up chimneys - doesn't mean it's okay for N&D to carry on being noisy ****s as the landscape has changed around them.
34 years since I read it to anybody. the 1974 COPA was based on the European Communities Act 1972.
Is that your way of admitting that you got the wrong year?
I'm of the opinion you buy a flat in a town centre next to a live music venue and you don't expect noise you are an idiot.
I'm sure they could have bought another **** flat 200m away and not had am issue.
Issues with the developer.
We used to send kids up chimneys – doesn’t mean it’s okay for N&D to carry on being noisy **** as the landscape has changed around them.
It hasn't really, though. The street is full of other bars, shops, pubs buses and people the whole time and is in the middle of Manchester City Centre. Closing N&D won't transform it into a quiet, leafy suburban paradise.
Chimney sweeps is a daft comparison, we stopped doing that because it was inhumane, it wasn't the subject of a civil legal dispute about nuisance.
As someone else has already said the fault must surely lie with the developers and the planning laws. I'm sure there is a reasonable middle ground between a tenant listening to bass every night and a 30 year old music venue that is loved by the community having to move premises every time a single person complains.
There’s a thread running about people moving next to a school and complaining that it gets busy at drop off and pick up time….. 🤣
is this any worse than those who buy a house opposite a school then moan about the parking for 2 hours every weekday?
That's the analogy you're going to use? Well ok, let's fill it out further. 🙂 No problem with the school or the traffic, it's just the few that break parking regs for their own convenience and screw things up for all other parents. It's like moving near a music venue and not minding the venue, or most of the patrons, but being a bit annoyed at the handful that piss up your front door every now and then. Clearer? 🙂
I’m sure there is a reasonable middle ground between a tenant listening to bass every night
I think the resident has actually not really complained that it's a venue that plays loud music, He understood that plainly when he moved in, he's complained that it that plays music until 3 or 4AM. Which, if we're honest, for a area that now does share it's space with home owners, is somewhat anti-social
"The slow inexorable death of culture.
Complete hyperbole. While there are musicians who want to gig, there will be places for them to play."
It's really not - loads of music venues are being closed because of the rising cost of premises (rents, rates etc), most manchester city centre music venues have had licence challenges like these and the costs defeat them. And they aren't being replaced because the alternative venue locations just don't exist, because everything that can be a residential is being converted (look at the proposed block of flats that they are trying to build right next to the Britons Protection on a square of land that's too small for a pair of houses). The physical space doesn't exist for new music venues and the ones we do have need to be cherished.
And before anyone says that there are loads of pubs and bars opening up, look at the average size of your new craftbeer bar, loads of them are tiny and don't have enough clientele to support turnover plus bar profit plus gig fees for working musicians.
There are loads of musicians out there that don't have places to play.
It’s really not – loads of music venues are being closed
The problem is that nobody knows, because there's never been any sort of census of small music venues. It's really easy to announce that these places are under threat nationally because some well known venues are being threatened with closure but, as I say, nobody actually knows anything more solid than there are aren't as many pubs around now than there used to be, therefore there are fewer small music venues.
From The Guardian:
“The live music industry’s thriving,” Davyd says, “but the smallest venues are falling off the chart. What we’re left with are these megashows with very high ticket prices, which buoy up the headline figure. Will two more new shows at the O2 in London feel the same as 250 shows at a small venue?”
Each city is unique, but while London’s music scene is partly regrouping away from the centre – Hackney thriving while Soho fades – the headline figure is one of decline. Of the 430 music venues that traded in London between 2007 and 2015, only 245 are still open, according to the trust. National figures are currently unknown, but Davyd says he’s been contacted by more than 60 troubled venues in the last year.
Anecdotally, the places I go to watch gigs these days are not the places I used to go - not so many sports halls or school/community halls and more small converted chapels or town centre basements with a bar wedged into the corner - but there are still as many venues around here as there used to be, give or take. As it says above, other areas will be different.
What we’re left with are these megashows with very high ticket prices, which buoy up the headline figure. Will two more new shows at the O2 in London feel the same as 250 shows at a small venue?
that just doesn't make sense, because it's not really comparable - small bands at small venues are like a different industry from the over-charged 02 type gigs.
It is comparable. Although people will pay over the odds for some heavily promoted big show, fewer people turn up at a small venue speculatively to listen to a local or smaller-level touring band than ever. The problem is multifactoral but the closure of small venues, or pressures on them such as cost / threats of closure / people wanting them to move to the middle of nowhere, doesn't help.
threats of closure
To be clear in this particular case, no-one is threatening to close the venue, just asking it to stick the licensing laws that it's previously agreed to.
"that just doesn’t make sense, because it’s not really comparable – small bands at small venues are like a different industry from the over-charged 02 type gigs."
Think of it like the fishing industry. All the big commercial trawlers swallow up all the fish so there's nothing left for the little guy.
Opportunity is key, if there are no small venues left then there is a lack of opportunity for new artists to perform or experiment, and a lack of opportunity for audiences to get involved and start to support and create scenes, (the lifeblood of the British music industry for most of our lifetimes).
What you end up with is corporate interests taking control and corporate interest don't like change, they prefer spread sheets and predictability. Underground scenes emerging, introducing creative volatility and shaking up the music industry is a threat to their business model.
If you are an independent promoter, try booking an established artist in this day and age, you'll find they are usually on retainers with big corporate promotion companies (Warehouse Project etc), meaning the artists are prohibited from playing for smaller promoters during specified times of the year (the profitable time of year).
[i]Think of it like the fishing industry.[/i]
It's **** all like the fishing industry. Small fishing vessels mostly pick up the quality higher priced items and big commercial trawlers sell cheap, bulk. Pretty much the opposite of the live music industry.
Anyway, I'm on the small venue side, I love small venues and go to multiple every month. I actually don't see them dying out, but that's another matter.
Yep, all those Cornish fisherman love the big commercial trawlers from Europe hoovering up all the fish up to the 6 mile limit. It's amazing how the big trawlers nets manage to discriminate between the 'cheap bulk and the quality high prices items', leaving only the tastiest morsels for the local boats.
Anyhow, the fishing analogy was just a humorous aside, why are you taking it so seriously? Having worked in music promotions, (as it happens, promoting a few nights at the venue in question back in the day) I can assure you that the fishing trawler analogy served me rather well at the time.
In fact, I probably got out of the game when I saw the big trawlers circling. Like the little boats, I was interested in quality over quantity but when the big boats come along and scrape the seabed dry you end up working with scraps.