Noise from heat pumps - seeking any information anyone has on what your local planning authority demands

[JamesPa]

I am trying to collate some information of the spread of requirements for noise levels from heat pumps which planning authorities in the UK impose, when planning permission is sought.  The principal motivation is that mine has finally published its requirements, and they are quite extreme, so I would like some evidence to compare.  However some assembled data might prove more generally useful

 

To kick the table off, here are the requirements for permitted development, and the requirements imposed by East Hertfordshire (the figures being the maximum sound pressure from the heat pump alone at the most affected assessment point)

 

Permitted development: 37dB(A) (figure included for comparison)

East Hertfordshire: Town Centres and 'most' locations within 500m of a main road: 29dB(A), Rural areas - 19dB(A)  (the actual figures they publish are 6dB higher than this, but they insist on applying a 6dB penalty for tonality/intermittency on top of the calculation)

 

If anyone is willing to contribute figures for other local planning authorities I would be grateful, you can PM me if you don't want to link your name to the locality.  I will publish here a table of any figures I collect.

[JohnMo]

Just tried to find details but nothing much to find. Found out there have 14 ASHP planning application ever. The conditions on the planning approvals very from follow manufacturer instructions or follow MCS. Sorry not much to add.

[Post and beam]

My permission is with East Herts. 

Initially ( last year)  i was told that they would measure the sound from my installed ASHP and determine if it was suitable.  I told them there was no way i would buy one first and then find out if it was o.k, nobody would do this.

Earlier this year, when i applied to discharge the environmental condition, i had to submit the manufacturers documents for chosen ASHP ( Vaillant 7kW) and make a written response to each line item of the section notice about heat pumps. Visibility from the road, dont mount it on a wall facing the road, listed buildings etc. Sorry i cannot remember the documents correct name.

Finally i made the point that in our case we were at least 9 metres from a neighbour boundary. I graphed the sound fall off in dB per metre.

They were happy enough to allow me to go ahead.

Sorry this does not answer your question with much in the way of specifics. 29dB(A) is like a ticking clock on your mantlepiece, madness.

 

I could tell you who i dealt with at East Herts but not in open forum. You probably know who.

There is someone else on the forum who has installed a Vaillant in a Rural location near Stanstead. She may see this thread.

keith

[Kelvin]

 

I’ll dig out what we had to meet in Perth & Kinross. Moving today so will be over the weekend. 
 

Eta This was the only condition relating to noise. I had to submit the spec sheet for the ASHP as part of the submission.

 

 All plant or equipment shall be so enclosed, attenuated and/or maintained such that any 
noise therefrom shall not exceed Noise Rating 35 between 0700 and 2300 hours daily, 
or Noise Rating 20 between 2300 and 0700 hours daily, within any neighbouring 
residential property, with all windows slightly open, when measured and/ or calculated 
and plotted on a rating curve chart

Edited July 4 by Kelvin

[Moonshine]

10 hours ago, JamesPa said:

Permitted development: 37dB(A) (figure included for comparison)

East Hertfordshire: Town Centres and 'most' locations within 500m of a main road: 29dB(A), Rural areas - 19dB(A)  (the actual figures they publish are 6dB higher than this, but they insist on applying a 6dB penalty for tonality/intermittency on

 

Where is the permitteded development figure from?

[JamesPa]

33 minutes ago, Moonshine said:

 

Where is the permitteded development figure from?

Mcs020.

 

It's the value you need to achieve in box 6 in the calculation sheet to get a pass at step 10.  Steps 7-10 add in a notional fixed background (and add no value to the calculation). The actual noise level from the ashp is calculated at box 6.

[PhilT]

Here is the new (beta) service from Bucks CC. Includes a section on heat pumps. Quite easy to use.

https://editor.planx.uk/buckinghamshire/find-out-if-you-need-planning-permission/published

[JamesPa]

15 minutes ago, PhilT said:

Here is the new (beta) service from Bucks CC. Includes a section on heat pumps. Quite easy to use.

https://editor.planx.uk/buckinghamshire/find-out-if-you-need-planning-permission/published

Thanks, So far as I can see this only tells you if it needs planning permission not the requirements they will impose if it does.  have I missed something.

[JamesPa]

Im reposting this to remind people who 'come in at the middle' can easily find what the post is seeking to achieve.  Thanks to all who have replied so far, more replies welcome.

 

I am trying to collate some information of the spread of requirements for noise levels from heat pumps which planning authorities in the UK impose, when planning permission is sought.  The principal motivation is that mine has finally published its requirements, and they are quite extreme, so I would like some evidence to compare.  However some assembled data might prove more generally useful

 

To kick the table off, here are the requirements for permitted development, and the requirements imposed by East Hertfordshire (the figures being the maximum sound pressure from the heat pump alone at the most affected assessment point)

 

Permitted development: 37dB(A) (figure included for comparison)

East Hertfordshire: Town Centres and 'most' locations within 500m of a main road: 29dB(A), Rural areas - 19dB(A)  (the actual figures they publish are 6dB higher than this, but they insist on applying a 6dB penalty for tonality/intermittency on top of the calculation)

 

If anyone is willing to contribute figures for other local planning authorities I would be grateful, you can PM me if you don't want to link your name to the locality.  I will publish here a table of any figures I collect.

Edited July 4 by JamesPa

[sharpener]

I have got express permission in an AONB as HP is too big for deemed PP.

 

South Hams DC (Devon) have applied no conditions in their Decision Letter about noise or anything else.

 

Their Planning Officer's report includes only the following about noise

 

Environmental Health Section: We have considered the application and the proposed make and location of the heat pump. The pump is a low noise pump with sound pressure level at 3m being around 36-38dB. The nearest neighbouring residence is further away than this and there would be no direct line of sight with windows to a habitable room. Therefore we do not anticipate that there would be any unreasonable noise impact from this unit.

 

The statements about the neighbouring house are not entirely accurate, but work in my favour. I said in my application the installation would comply with the noise requirements of MCS020, my calcs show on a strict interpretation this might require at least a partial screen.

 

I do not know where they got the 36 - 38 dB from, the data sheet I sent with the application has these noise figures with a picture that only applies to the smallest sizes. For the 12kW model the correct figure at 3m would seem to be 42dB(A), and even at 5m (which is just meets) it is still 1 dB over the 37dB limit. However I am not complaining.

 

 

 

 

[Moonshine]

39 minutes ago, JamesPa said:

East Hertfordshire: Town Centres and 'most' locations within 500m of a main road: 29dB(A), Rural areas - 19dB(A)  (the actual figures they publish are 6dB higher than this, but they insist on applying a 6dB penalty for tonality/intermittency on top of the calculation)

 

This is not what you want for this thread, but some points about the East Hertfordshire methodology (https://www.eastherts.gov.uk/planning-and-building/planning-sustainability/heat-pumps), this looks like an copy of the IoA / CIEH calculation  with some interpretation of background noise levels and urban and rural locations, also a fixed 6 dB for tonality/intermittency (which is not always the case). It shoud be noted that the IoA / CIEH calculation which has 6 dB for 'Character adjustment' states 'The numbers shown are examples and are not associated with any particular installation'.

 

https://www.ioa.org.uk/heat-pump-briefing-notes-calculation-sheet-ioa-cieh 

 

I think that the East Hertfordshire methodology is a high level screening tool, that finds installations that are definitly not going to be a problem, rather than where they may be an issue, but could be o.k.

 

Their guidance states 'Environmental Health do not require that a noise assessment is carried out by a third party, but should the applicant wish to do so, this must be carried out by a suitably qualified person'.

 

I can certainly see scenarios which would fail the test in the spreadsheet, but with proper assessment (which Environmental Health would accept) the installation can be found to be suitable.

 

btw i thnk your rural areas criteria should be 20 dB(A) based on the East Hertfordshire spreadsheet. Also the permitted development limit is 37.8 dB (to 1 d.p) if you don't use the table in Note 7, and do proper logarithmic  calcs 😁

 

Edited July 4 by Moonshine

[Moonshine]

deleted

Edited July 4 by Moonshine

[JamesPa]

4 hours ago, Moonshine said:

 

This is not what you want for this thread, but some points about the East Hertfordshire methodology (https://www.eastherts.gov.uk/planning-and-building/planning-sustainability/heat-pumps), this looks like an copy of the IoA / CIEH calculation  with some interpretation of background noise levels and urban and rural locations, also a fixed 6 dB for tonality/intermittency (which is not always the case). It shoud be noted that the IoA / CIEH calculation which has 6 dB for 'Character adjustment' states 'The numbers shown are examples and are not associated with any particular installation'.

 

https://www.ioa.org.uk/heat-pump-briefing-notes-calculation-sheet-ioa-cieh 

 

I think that the East Hertfordshire methodology is a high level screening tool, that finds installations that are definitly not going to be a problem, rather than where they may be an issue, but could be o.k.

 

Their guidance states 'Environmental Health do not require that a noise assessment is carried out by a third party, but should the applicant wish to do so, this must be carried out by a suitably qualified person'.

 

I can certainly see scenarios which would fail the test in the spreadsheet, but with proper assessment (which Environmental Health would accept) the installation can be found to be suitable.

 

btw i thnk your rural areas criteria should be 20 dB(A) based on the East Hertfordshire spreadsheet. Also the permitted development limit is 37.8 dB (to 1 d.p) if you don't use the table in Note 7, and do proper logarithmic  calcs 😁

 

Thanks.  I agree that the East Herts tool is basically the IoA/EIEH spreadsheet.  The optimistic picture you paint of how they might use it doesn't, unfortunately, correspond to my personal experience (if you have a different experience with East Herts I would of course be very interested to hear it).  I am 120m from a busy A road and thus would apparently qualify easily as 'Urban'.  However they have rejected an application for a Quitemark rated air source heat pump (Quietmark takes into account tonality) which would lead to a projected noise pressure of 33dB(A) (albeit without the tonal penalty - which Environmental Health weren't even prepared to discuss discounting or reducing) and told me that the requirement is 25dB(A).  This is as recently as March this year.  Furthermore the guidance text provided by East Herts makes it clear that a 'fail' is 'likely to result in a refusal', so its clearly not just to screen the obviously OK ones.

 

If you plug some numbers into the EHDC spreadsheet as it stands, for a typical 8 or 12kW heat pump (which would be fairly normal in a retrofit situation) you will find that the required distances are unrealistic in most cases for anyone with a 'normal' size plot.  

 

I take your point about the MCS limit, but the 'MCS Planning Standards' (which define the requirement for PD) mandate that you use the specified calculation method, Note 7 is part of the specified calculation method, so you cant just 'ignore' this table.  If you set the result at box 1 to be 37.1dB, box 8 is 2.9dB, leading to decibel adjustment of 2.1dB (according to Note 7), which must be added to 40 to get 40.1dB, a fail.  By way of confirmation the The MCS spreadsheet also gives a 'fail' if box 6 is above 37.0dB.   I think, therefore that a strict interpretation of the documentation leads to a figure of 37dB(A) being the highest permitted. 

Edited July 4 by JamesPa

[SteamyTea]

This is from the Cornwall Council Website.

 

Noise

In addition, as air source heat pumps can be noisy. You must comply with the Microgeneration Certification Scheme (MCS) or equivalent in order to be permitted development.

 

https://www.cornwall.gov.uk/planning-and-building-control/planning-advice-and-guidance/air-source-heat-pumps/#:~:text=Noise,order to be permitted development.

 

It is the old 'MCS or equivalent again.

 

I think all we want is an agreed standard and a testing methodology.

[JoeBano]

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/air-source-heat-pump-noise-emissions-planning-guidance-and-regulations Might have some help to you. 

[MikeSharp01]

Hi @JamesPa you went through a lot of this in 2022. 

 

You are clearly more knowledgeable now and it is clear that this current bit of work shows how variable this is across the UK. I cannot find anything on either of our councils (home and build) Web sites referring to ASHP one of them does not mention them in their ,(our) plan to 2040 published in 2023. 

[MikeSharp01]

Ah a bit more due diligence done and I find that the planning committee here millstone Manor (Sevenoaks) have asked officers to find out what other councils are doing about ASHP! So they will find East Herts and we will get it to. Not that it's a problem here as we are 50m from our nearest neighbours window but it does look like council's are floundering around a bit. 

[JamesPa]

@MikeSharp01  Thanks for this and also thanks for reminding me I had asked a similar question before, how did you remember?  Things move on however so its worth asking again.

 

50 minutes ago, MikeSharp01 said:

Ah a bit more due diligence done and I find that the planning committee here millstone Manor (Sevenoaks) have asked officers to find out what other councils are doing about ASHP! So they will find East Herts and we will get it to. ... but it does look like council's are floundering around a bit

That's scary really.   East Herts think they are 'ahead of the pack', and they are certainly correct that they are ahead of the pack in making it almost impossible to get planning permission for an ASHP.  If you put some figures into their newly published tool, its quite easy to demonstrate that a very large number of properties simply wont realistically be able to comply.   Reading between the lines (and from FOIs, also in the lines) the officers see them as a significant threat, largely because of the potential for complaints but also because of the rural nature of the area and believe that its necessary to 'control' them quite strongly.  I suspect EHDC are not alone in taking this view.

 

We could easily end up with Government relaxing the rules for PD and heaping on incentives, whilst some LPAs try to control them ever more rigidly.  I'm also increasingly concerned about yet to be aired flaws in the permitted development rules.  The current PD rules contain a loaded gun for LPAs in the form of the conditions in clauses G3 b and c.  These conditions are rarely, if ever, talked about but are ambiguous and contain a superlative ('minimise').  An LPA, if it were so minded, could very easily use these to challenge any installation under PD for up to 10 years after it was completed (this figure went up from 4 years earlier in the year) and it could prove quite difficult/expensive to prove they were wrong.  If they issue a 'breach of condition, notice' (which is the obvious enforcement route) the only way to appeal is through the High Court, there is no free of charge appeal to a planning inspector.  Nasty.  I don't find it difficult to imagine this happening if a local authority receives a complaint from a neighbour, however ill founded.   Its much easier for a local authority to coerce/enforce (and thus be seen to be doing something) using planning law than it is using environmental health law.

 

This needs to be sorted out from the very top IMHO.  ASHPs are very much second class citizens when it comes to planning law, fossil fuels face none of these difficulties.

Edited July 4 by JamesPa

[JamesPa]

3 hours ago, JoeBano said:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/air-source-heat-pump-noise-emissions-planning-guidance-and-regulations Might have some help to you. 

Thanks

 

I did read this a while ago and I presume that the practical upshot was the consultation on PD rules earlier this year, from which as yet there is no outcome so far as I am aware (although the questions asked made it fairly clear what the likely outcome was).

 

[JamesPa]

4 hours ago, SteamyTea said:

I think all we want is an agreed standard and a testing methodology.

... which should relate, as far as planning law is concerned, solely to noise.  All the other stuff in the MCS standards, which has been (wrongly IMHO) imported into planning law by MCS, belongs (if it belongs anywhere) in building regulations not planning law.

 

We also need, IMHO, a fix for the threat posed by the conditions in clauses G3 b and c of the PD rules (England).  I say a bit more about this above, and am in the process of writing an article for the Renewable Energy Hub about the risks that these conditions pose.

 

 

[JamesPa]

Im reposting this to remind people who 'come in at the middle' can easily find what the post is seeking to achieve.  Thanks to all who have replied so far, more replies welcome.

 

I am trying to collate some information of the spread of requirements for noise levels from heat pumps which planning authorities in the UK impose, when planning permission is sought.  The principal motivation is that mine has finally published its requirements, and they are quite extreme, so I would like some evidence to compare.  However some assembled data might prove more generally useful

 

To kick the table off, here are the requirements for permitted development, and the requirements imposed by East Hertfordshire (the figures being the maximum sound pressure from the heat pump alone at the most affected assessment point)

 

Permitted development: 37dB(A) (figure included for comparison)

East Hertfordshire: Town Centres and 'most' locations within 500m of a main road: 29dB(A), Rural areas - 19dB(A)  (the actual figures they publish are 6dB higher than this, but they insist on applying a 6dB penalty for tonality/intermittency on top of the calculation)

 

If anyone is willing to contribute figures for other local planning authorities I would be grateful, you can PM me if you don't want to link your name to the locality.  I will publish here a table of any figures I collect.

[MikeSharp01]

8 hours ago, JamesPa said:

how did you remember?

The Google elephant - if you put in ASHP and planning (included Sevenoaks & Canterbury) and its the top answer! Which also tells you something - we (here) are talking about this more than anybody else!!!!!