Builders Yard - unnecessarily noisy and wasteful?

The use of the builders yard established beneath Ben Jonson House seems to be bizarrely inefficient, noisy and polluting. Is it possible the the contractor has no incentive to use the most efficient practice, and perhaps even the reverse (e.g. charging for additional vehicles and work)?

I have written to the City to suggest how the negative impact of the project and the builders yard can be reduced.  I'll not hold my breath for any practical response, but one can hope. 

Here is the body of my letter:
___

Regarding the repaving works currently underway around the new Denizen flats on Golden Lane:
http://bjhg-blog.blogspot.com/2021/05/builders-yard-with-us-until-october.html

Since we'll be stuck with this project until October (or later if/when the project slips) I'd like to suggest some better work practices which will:

• Improve efficiency
• Reduce costs
• Reduce environmental impact
• Minimise noise impact on residences

The project is to work around the new Denizen flats, replacing the pavement surface. This involves digging up the existing surface, removing the waste material and installing new paving. The work will start at the junction of Golden Lane and Fann Street, proceeding west along Fann Street and follow the path around the Denizen to eventually end up back at the starting point. When viewed from above the project will move anti-clockwise around the Denizen.

The work will proceed by first clearing a few meters of old paving, preparing that area for new paving and then laying the new paving.

The current method in use as I type:

1. Remove the old paving material and place in a heap on the ground ahead of the current work area
2. From time to time, shovel the waste into a dumper truck
3. The noisy dumper truck shuttles back and forth from the work site to the builders yard area beneath Ben Jonson House
4. … and dumps the waste on the ground
5. From time to time a noisy truck with a grabber visits the builders yard to scrape up the waste back off the ground and into the back of the truck. The grabber truck waits for some time (engine running) while the dumper noisily makes several top-up trips.
6. New material is delivered to the builders yard
7. A noisy forklift shuttles the new material from the builders yard to the work site for installation

Suggested method:

1. Place a skip ahead of the old paving to be cleared
2. Remove the old paving material and place it directly in the skip. The skip will be removed from time to time to be replaced with a new skip a little further along.
3. The materials for the new paving are delivered to an area of pavement (perhaps protected using plywood) behind the current work area.
4. The cleared area is prepared and new materials installed
5. Replace any internal combustion powered site vehicles with electric alternatives.

The current method requires all materials to be moved several times:

• Waste is dug up, dumped on the ground, shovelled into the dumper, noisily shuttled to the builders yard, dumped on the ground again, noisily scraped up again by the grabber and driven away.
• New material is delivered to the builders yard and shuttled up to the current work site using a noisy fork lift vehicle.

The suggested requires far fewer moves:

• Waste is dug up and placed in a skip which is removed from time to time
• New materials are delivered to a point close to where they will be needed
• ... and any site vehicle still needed (if any) could be electric and thus less polluting

The suggested method saves time and effort for the people on the project and would have a significantly reduced impact on the environment from an air pollution and noise pollution perspective.

Since we’ll have to live with this project until October could we at least minimise the environmental impact and pain caused to residents?

Many thanks