Urgent call to residents of Trevelyan and Harbour Roads, Seaton

Citizens, awake !  Your peaceful lives are under threat !  The Tesco pipeline in your back yard looks like being much noisier than they predict.

I used to lecture in Building Physics, specialising in the flow of solid-liquid mixtures for the paint and plastics industries.  When we were looking for someone to vet the Tesco noise predictions for the gravel pipeline, I seemed to be the best available candidate. 

If we were wrong, and there is a slurry transport specialist out there, please get in contact.  Failing such a resource, I had to look at the situation myself.  Not being a specialist, it took me some weeks to read up on the subject and analyse the Tesco consultant's report; but I am now fairly sure that . . .

. . the Tesco prediction for noise from our pipeline is a gross under-estimate.

How so ?  Well, basically, slurry flow through a pipe and the noise it makes is impossible to predict from theory and has to be measured from an actual pipeline.  The Tesco consultants have tested one, but it is a different, much less noisy system than the one we are getting in Seaton. 

I have compiled the details into a paper (with references) which I shall be sending on to the Environmental Health Officer in EDDC, as well as to the planning people.  I have seen two letters of objection to EDDC from Trevelyan Road residents which are not aware of the true noise situation; and I shall send a copy to them as well.   I am happy to send it to anyone else who wants to see it.

However, I exclude Tesco consultants.  Do your own work.

What do you think of this poster ?

Fraudulent correspondence

Letters of support and opposition can be influential in planning applications.

At the Public Information Day we will be helping people to write their own letters of opposition: we shall NOT be doing what Tesco are said to have done in Norfolk.  Take a look at it here.

Public Information Day in Seaton

Most of the Tesco documents have now been acquired - in one form or another - and are undergoing analysis by our team of experts.

Even a cursory analysis reveals major problems for Seaton residents; but to make a useful complaint to the relevant committee requires detailed reference to a range of documents, all couched in the vocabulary of urban planning.

We have some experience with this sort of thing, so we shall be putting on a Public Information Day at which local people can learn what Tesco are proposing, how it might affect them and how to make an objection. 

Public Information Day

Monday 9th August

from 10 am to 8 pm 

at the hall attached to 

Seaton United Reformed Church 

in Cross Street, Seaton.

See you there.  If you cannot come on this day we shall be publishing sample letters which you can put your name to and send on to the District Council.

In the meantime, we shall be working behind the scenes lobbying various authorities and officials to take up various cudgels on our behalf. 

Democracy extended

After my complaint about the early submission date (see below) Steven Belli tells me I have got it all wrong.  Submissions will be accepted up until12th August, not 22nd July.  Well, fancy that.

No-one knows why the 22nd July date appeared in letters to Seaton residents. Something must be a bit off - if not exactly rotten - in the state of East Devon Development Control.  I know the Chief Executive is being shared with South Somerset : perhaps they have lost half their Planning staff also.

Democracy denied

Another scandal . . . East Devon District Council wants comments from the public on the infill application by 22nd July - less than three weeks after validating it.  Here is what I wrote to Steven Belli:

Dear Mr Belli,

I am writing to protest in the strongest terms about the extremely short consultation period provided to the public for the Tesco Infill Operation in Seaton (your ref: 10/1177/MFUL).

The closing date given is 22nd July, which is less than 3 weeks after the validation date.  This is grossly inadequate, for the following reasons :-

1. Insufficient document access    The documents are still not available on your website (11.20 a.m. on 6 July).  The set deposited at Seaton Town Hall is only accessible for 6 hours a week - a total of 27 hours, including the closing date and can only be used by one person at a time.  The set at the Knowle in Sidmouth is not readily accessible to the many Seatonians who have restricted mobility and transportation.  I have ordered (for £15) a set of documents on CD from the Tesco agents, but I have no way of knowing when it will arrive.
2. Highly technical and complex content.   The project represents a revolutionary infill process unknown (to the Environment Agency) with major implications for pollution of protected sites on land and at sea, flooding in the town and noise pollution to a wide range of residents.  It is totally unreasonable to expect lay persons to form any opinion of the enormous volume of detailed technical information in the limited time and access allowed.  Seaton Development Trust plans a public information day - at our own expense - to assist interpretation, but we cannot do this in the time provided.
   
3. High level of public interest.  The noise levels are of particular concern to the residents along the pipeline route.  At the Town Hall today I was asked by one such resident if it was true that the noise of aggregate passing through the steel pipe will resemble an express train passing by outside her window.  I was unable to comment, and any meaningful assessment requires access to acoustic reports which are not easily digested and interpreted.
4. Contrary to recent precedent.  None of the previous applications relating to the Seaton Regeneration Site have been made open to responses for such a short period.  For Liatris, three months were allowed.
   
5. Other people have a longer period.  The Town Council and other statutory consultees have longer to compile their responses than the people of Seaton - who have the most to lose and the fewest resources for analysis. 
   

The whole proceeding is a gross injustice and represents, in itself, grounds for contesting any decision reached.  While I realise that Tesco want to get started, they MUST be brought to understand that they cannot just ride rough-shod over local people in this way. 

We look to the District Council to represent the public interest in this matter, in spite of any partnership arrangement you have with Tesco Stores.

Any reply will be posted here: don't hold your breath.

The Big Bad Infill Application

Well, folks . . . it's here.  It's called:-

10/1177/MFUL  
Temporary engineering operations to import approximately 300,000 cu m fill material to raise levels on Seaton regeneration area by an average of 2 metres, installation of temporary pipe route from Seaton regeneration site to seaborne fill delivery point.  
Land Adjacent Harbour Road (north Of Harbour Road And Between Harbour Rd/Seaton Beach) Seaton 

When I say it's here, I mean it has been validated by EDDC and the documents concerned have supposedly been posted on the EDDC website.  Unfortunately, when I tried to access these documents I got only an error message.  Isn't that a shame !

I have complained to EDDC about this.  You might like to do the same.

There is a lot riding on this operation, and we have decided to scrape together our coppers and mount a public information day in Seaton Town Hall - if we can afford it.  In the meantime, you might like to look over such documents as you can get access to, and flag up areas of concern.

Progress on site, but not on consultation

As it happens, the part of the site where work has begun is visible from a nearby roof terrace, from where the following pictures were taken.

And also . . .

The Environment Agency has appointed someone (call him Mr X) to oversee this development, and he very kindly agreed to tell Tescowatch when work began.  Having heard nothing from Mr X, I therefore sent him the above pictures, and received the following reply :

After the latest activity was reported to me last Thursday, I made several calls to various colleagues expressing my disappointment in not being told about this deposit of waste material, and I am still waiting for a satisfactory answer as to what is going on at the site.  As yet I do not have a direct contact with Tesco, 95% of my information/notification comes from . . . . . at Exminster. He is now awaiting a response from delta-Simons.

I did for my peace of mind visit the site this afternoon at 15:00hrs (no one on site) to check the mound of construct waste your photo shows, interestingly the mound has been levelled off at approximately 2m high.  But still I need to know where this waste material has come from.

Please kept me informed if you see or hear of anything that happens on site that is of a concern to you and I will try to find the answers if I do not know them. Some contactors are not very good at communicating with the Agency and some individuals within the Agency do not always remember to pass the relevant information down to the person on the ground.

So, for whatever reason, the Environment Agency officer is being kept in the dark: what chance does the community have ?  And what does this tell us about Tesco's attitude to anyone else but their shareholders ?

The Tesco leaflet

Some people got leaflets, and others did not.  I hope Tesco will not object if I publish material taken from their leaflet - without modification - so that more of us can see what they have to say.

Page 2 tells us about the infill source . . .

Then there is a new diagram of the infill site . . .

This needs a little study; however one point is worth emphasising. Item 11 is the new flood relief channel, which appears for the first time, and only after Tescowatch complained about it's absence.  Tescowatch has thus made a major contribution to the safety and viability of the project; so, can we expect a Tesco hamper for our efforts ?

The other processes are easier to follow after looking at the next page . . .

Stage 5 is interesting.  What exactly are they testing the water for ?  Presumably to see if all the sediment has settled out in stage 4.  If not, they can wait a little longer.  But what about the toxic metals ? 

The Environmental Health Officer has determined that the site is contaminated with Chromium and other poisonous materials soluble in water.  How much of this will be collected by the seawater which is going back into the bay ?  It is all very well waiting for sediment to settle: it will do this all by itself (unless there is a lot of clay); but toxic metals in solution do not go away with time: they can only be removed by complex and expensive chemical processes, and I don't see any provision for these.  They do not even seem to be testing for toxins, let alone treating them.

Another point arises about the Axe estuary, which is a Special Conservation Area.  The site is in hydraulic continuity with this estuary and marshes - which means that water from the site can seep into the river and the marshes through the porous silt.  If they pour millions of gallons of sea-water onto the site, how much of the toxic metal will be flushed into the estuary ?  I don't know, and nor does Tesco . . . but they should be finding out.  What about it, guys ?