Plagiarism Checker X Originality

Report
Similarity Found: 45%

Date: Friday, September 15, 2017

Statistics: 779 words Plagiarized / 1722 Total words
Remarks: High Plagiarism Detected - Your Document needs Critical Improvement.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

4.1 Suggestions: To reduce Noise: · Working hours limited eg to 8-5.30pm and 8-

1 on Saturdays. · Work was halted during sensitive times · Barriers such as plastic
and plywood sheeting were used to reduce noise. · Breaks were defined to give
neighbours relief from the noise.

To reduce Dust: · Water should be applied at least three times a day or more,
depending on the atmospheric conditions. Also, you should be aware of the
quantity of water applied and prevent excess water
<https://www.thebalance.com/what-is-dewatering-844520> that can cause
erosion problems.

To reduce Soil problems: · Piles were covered with plastic sheeting · Construction
workers offered to shovel the soil back on to the main pile. To reduce Dirt: ·
Wheel washers were used on all site vehicles. · Allowances were made in the
budget for keeping roads clean. · A road sweeper was based permanently on the
site. To overcome Parking problems: · Car parking was provided within the site as
much as possible.

· Local labour was used where possible so workers could walk to site or use public
transport. To reduce Traffic: · Park and ride schemes should be introduced and
their usage monitored and encouraged. · Designated car parks located further
away to keep traffic from developments have been introduced · Access roads to
developments should be constructed as far from homes as possible to cause
minimum disruption. Closure of Roads: · Residents were sent letters warning of
road closure and explaining the reasons. CHAPTER 5 5.1

Findings: Noise: · Noise was felt to be particularly bad during demolition and the
early stages eg pile driving, drilling, hammering. · Noise was caused by extra
traffic, lorries, heavy machinery, and engines. · Local businesses were affected as
doors had to be kept closed, and this reduced custom. · Normal site hours began
early, 8am, meaning residents could not have a 'lie-in', eg on Saturdays. · Local
residents kept windows closed at all times.

· Residents complained to the Noise Abatement Society who monitored levels

and found them unacceptably high. · Residents complained of unsociable
working hours outside the watershed, either very early in the morning (eg
5.30am), late at night (after midnight), or Sunday working outside the agreed
limits. · Pets were disturbed, eg dogs made nervous on walks.

Vibration · Damage occurred to houses, eg cracking of walls. · Possessions were

damaged, eg cracking of window and door glasses. · People were stressed by
vibration from demolition and drilling at the same time. Pollution · Residents
were worried about pollution, eg asbestos dust from the site coming into homes.
· A diesel tank was positioned outside homes.

· Residents were worried about possible pollutants in the dust. Dust · Homes were
covered in dust, both inside and outside, particularly in summer. Windows,
curtains, and bedclothes were covered in dust, even when the windows were
closed. · Plants and gardens were damaged. · Cars were covered in dust. ·
Children could not play outside for many months. This was problematic,
particularly in the summer. • Windows and doors were kept closed at all times.

· Large piles of crushed concrete etc were left on sites. These blew around in the
wind particularly in dry weather. · Health problems particularly asthma, bronchitis,
conjunctivitis, and coughing were aggravated. · Residents were not informed how
long the problem would last so wasted time cleaning up only to find the same
thing happened next day Soil · Piles of soil on site slipped into residents' gardens
when wet.

The problem recurred and complaints were made to the Local Authority and
construction workers Dirt · Pavements were made dirty with mud and sand. · Dirt
was filled into houses/shops and damaged carpets etc. · The roads were very
dirty, particularly in winter · Site access roads were not surfaced until the end of
the project, increasing the amount of dirt.

· In sites where the construction work was carried out in stages, the facility was
open while construction was continuing, the dirt was a major problem for users.
Parking · Construction vehicles were parked in the surrounding streets, including
heavy equipment. · Access to homes, shops, and bus stops was blocked by
parked cars. · Passing trade to shops was negatively affected, as customers could
not park nearby.

It also reduced access for deliveries. · Access for the elderly was restricted,
disabled bays were blocked. · Access for emergency services was reduced. ·
Locals/visitors could not park outside homes. · Dangerous parking reduced
visibility, eg for children crossing roads, mothers taking children to school. ·
Double parking narrowed Closure of roads · This prevented residents' access to
homes and local facilities.

Increased traffic · Increased traffic movement was caused by construction

materials which were brought to the site location by various means like, lorry
movements etc. · Employees and visitors' cars caused increased traffic movement.
· Emergency vehicles had access problems. · Hold ups in the vicinity of the
construction works caused increased journey times.

Pavement obstruction · Workmen's equipment and materials caused problems on

pavements. · BT junction boxes and temporary bollards blocked fire exits from
offices. · Hoarding/fencing on the site perimeter moved outwards to take over
the pavement so that people had to walk in the road. Health and safety · Physical
risks to health from pollution, dust etc were feared. Local GPs were concerned
about this.

Accidents occurred, eg from falling materials or patholes. · Broken pavements

were not mended quickly enough. · Pits in roads and pavements were not
covered, resulting in some residents tripping. · The constant noise and disruption
caused stress. · Dark temporary access ramps / alleys caused falls. · The elderly
were afraid to go out in the evening because of uneven surfaces and inadequate
lighting.

· Some reports of rats in the neighbourhood were made, possibly because of

disruption to their habitats. These are the few major issues which the respondents
are currently facing when construction process is undertaking in nearby premises
where the past studies have not fully focused as follows: Resource consumption
The resource consumption group of environmental impacts was ranked highest
by all the respondents put together.

Raw materials consumption was determined by all respondents It is encouraging

to note that contractors and consultants interviewed also admitted that raw
materials consumption is the most important environmental impact. It also
consumes 40 percent of the energy and 16 percent of water annually. Water,
electricity and fuel consumption which are all under the resource consumption
group .

Effects on biodiversity The effects on biodiversity group were ranked the second
most important environmental impact of construction activities by the three
groups of respondents. Vegetation removal, interference with the ecosystem and
loss of edaphic soil which are all under the effects on biodiversity . Local issues
Respondents together ranked local issues group as the third most crucial
environmental impact of construction activities Some of them ranked noise and
vibration generation as the most important. This result may be due to the
personal experience of the respondents in their day to day activities.

Transport issues: Transport issues as an environmental impact group was ranked

the fourth most important environmental impact of construction activities by the
respondents. Within this group of respondents agreed that interference in road
traffic was the most important environmental impact of construction activities.
On the other hand, some ranked road traffic the most important factor.

Waste generation: All the respondents together ranked waste generation as the
fifth most essential environmental impact of construction activities with relative
construction activities contributes approximately 29 percent of waste in the USA,
more than 50 percent in the UK and 20-30 percent in Australia to the overall
landfill volume. However with 43 percent less waste going to the landfill through
recycling, and it delivers cost savings of up to 50 percent on waste handling.

Atmospheric emissions The atmospheric emissions group of environmental

impacts was ranked sixth by all the respondents. Architects, Quantity Surveyors
and Structural Engineers all agreed that within the atmospheric emissions group
of environmental impact of construction activities, emissions of volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) was a major environmental
impact.

On the other hand, some are ranked breakage of service pipes as the most
important factor. Some respondents also raised the issue of building collapse in
the course of construction as part of accidents and incidents. Soil alteration The
respondents together ranked soil alteration as the eighth most essential
environmental impact of construction activities.

Soil alteration as an environmental impact group was ranked relatively low. Most
of the respondents agreed that land occupancy was the most important factor in
this category. Water emissions: The water emissions group was ranked the lowest
by the respondents.

Regarding all the factors in the group, all the respondents ranked water from
excavation his the major reason. 5.2 Conclusions: This study focused on impacts
of construction activities on the environment. The study sought the views of
respondents in and around Bengaluru on the relative importance of the
environmental impacts of construction activities.

The study showed that, out of a total of all the environmental impacts identified,
the top ten most important environmental impacts factors agreed by all the
respondents are as follows: raw materials consumption, noise and vibration
generation, vegetation removal, interference with the ecosystems, water
consumption, electricity consumption, dust generation from machinery, ordinary
waste and fuel consumption.

The environmental impacts identified in the study were grouped into nine
categories and ranked accordingly. The results also indicated that, all the
respondents agreed that the resource consumption group of environmental
impacts was the most influential impact. Effects on biodiversity impacts were
considered the second most important causing environmental deterioration
followed by local issues impacts.

Finally, there is a pressing need for government to intervene in order that the use
of sustainable construction designs and construction strategies that is
environmentally friendly. The paper therefore recommends that government with
the support of stakeholders in the construction industry should come up with
special legislations, codes or standards relating to sustainable construction
practices proper and effective implementation.

Specifically, the national building regulations should be reviewed to take account

of environmental regulations. There were specific problems that local
communities are facing during construction like noise from the machinery,
increased traffic and congestion caused by construction vehicles and by the
workmen, Dust during demolition and sandblasting, parking disruption by the
workmen and site visitors, falling of materials on roadside and health impacts
from dust and pollution. So, the construction companies should plan certain
measures to control, dust, noise and traffic.

The companies should maintain good relationship and communication with the
local communities. By taking care of these impacts that cause problems to the
community, the construction company will get positive image in the society.

INTERNET SOURCES:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
0% - http://realestate.findlaw.com/neighbors/
2% - https://www.thebalance.com/control-dust-
2% - https://www.thebalance.com/control-dust-
0% - Empty
0% - https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Doc
0% - http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm72.htm
0% - http://www.historictownsforum.org/files/
0% - http://www.epd.gov.hk/eia/register/repor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
0% - http://www.buildingsolicitors.com.au/rec
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
10% - http://projects.bre.co.uk/productive_wor
0% - https://44000091.r.bat.bing.com/?ld=d37B
0% - http://www.aafp.org/afp/2001/0115/p277.h
0% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.100
0% - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1
0% - https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-t
0% - http://pmbook.ce.cmu.edu/02_Organizing_f
0% - http://legalbeagle.com/7800190-park-comm
0% - https://harlow.jdi-consult.net/ldp/readd
0% - https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.100
0% - http://www.bradda.org/N_Plan/Traceabilit
0% - http://www.northumberland.gov.uk/Northum
0% - https://www.nrdc.org/stories/environment
0% - http://trafficwatchni.com/traffic-news
0% - http://www.alanbellarchitect.com/pdf/Pol
0% - https://issuu.com/tdgarden/docs/rain_gar
0% - http://www.historyofosh.org.uk/brief/
0% - https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_6?0::NO:6:P6
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
0% - http://www.seametrics.com/blog/water-fac
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
0% - http://www.plant-maintenance.com/article
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
1% - http://www.ielts-simon.com/ielts-help-an
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
1% - http://oilandgasuk.co.uk/atmospheric-emi
1% - https://link.springer.com/article/10.100
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
0% - http://eprints.utm.my/1635/1/CRITICAL_SU
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
21% - http://www.academia.edu/6046663/Impacts_
0% - http://www.steelconstruction.info/Sustai
0% - http://www.thefilesafe.co.uk/buildregs/o
0% - http://archive.unu.edu/unupress/unupbook
0% - http://www.evancarmichael.com/library/ma
0% - http://www.mentalhealthamerica.net/condi