Tescowatch Seaton

Development proposals for Harepath Road, Seaton - Invitation to Pre-view of public exhibition

2011-12-07T11:04:00.000Z

*From:*Hoey, Anthea C [mailto:Anthea.Hoey@atkinsglobal.com]
*Sent:* 05 December 2011 14:00

Dear Councillors and Officers of East Devon

Following the presentation to the East Devon Members Panel at the end of
July, Seaton Park (Homes) Ltd has been progressing its proposals for
development of land at Harepath Road, taking on board the comments made
in the Council’s response. We have sent a copy of these proposals to the
Planning Officers and requested another Members Panel presentation.

In the meanwhile, on behalf of Seaton Park (Homes) Ltd, we would like to
invite you to a Preview of the Public Exhibition that we have prepared
showing our proposals and inviting comments as a pre-application
consultation.

The preview will take place from 12.30 to 2pm on Monday 12 December at
St Clare’s Hall, Fore St, Seaton.

It will be followed straight away by the public exhibition, which will
remain open until 7pm on the Monday, and will reopen from 2pm until 7pom
on Tuesday 13 December.

We look forward to showing you the latest version of the proposals, and
receiving feedback from all who are interested.

If anyone cannot attend, but would like to receive further information
about the content of the exhibition, please let me know.

Yours sincerely

*Anthea Hoey*
Principal Planner
*ATKINS**Design & Engineering*

The Octagon, Pynes Hill, Rydon Lane,
Exeter, Devon EX2 5AZ
Tel: 01392 352900
Fax: 01392 352999
E-mail: anthea.hoey@atkinsglobal.com

To Drain or Not to Drain etc

2011-12-05T08:59:00.000Z

Walking by the new Tesco store the other day, I was stuck by the lack of a storm drain channel through the site. There is a very slight depression in the ground along the Southern boundary (the sort of thing that normally collects all sorts of rubbish), but I couldn't see any sign of a channel leading to the North of the site.

Did the requirement for a drain get dropped from the plan? Has it been filled by sand from the site or is it really well hidden in amongst the fabulous new landscaping?

Large cylinder at the back of Tesco

2011-11-06T19:46:00.001Z

Message from James

Subject: Tesco CHP

Colleagues,

The Tescowatch item in the Minutes of 5th October required me to
investigate the large cylinder at the back of Tesco. I did something,
but forgot to mention it at the last meeting.

On blowing up some photographs I took of these installations I resolved
the name of a Combined Heat and Power manufacturer called ENER-G.
Looking at their website, the plant will use natural gas to generate
electricity, heat and cooling with 85% efficiency. The National Grid
currently works at about 33%, so this is a significant advance in energy
efficiency. This system stores heat in a large highly insulated water
tank, andI thinkthat is what we can see on the east side of the yard.

I will ask Emma Webster to arrange a guided tour when it is up and running

James

Click and Collect

2011-09-29T08:46:00.000+01:00

Seems Tesco 'forgot' to make provision for people to collect those things that they had ordered via the internet (Click and Collect). Planning application 11/2134/FUL is apparently to allow this to be constructed in the carpark.

So this means either a smaller car park which would be counter productive for profits, or further Tesco expansion on the site (perhaps reducing the amount of affordable housing). Not so good for employment (less delivery drivers needed) and not so good for the environment (more car journeys).

I wonder what else was not included in the original planning application. I seem to recall that an EDDC planning condition at the time was that the store should be no larger to avoid adversely affecting the town centre. Sounds to me like a death my a thousand cuts.

Green Grass or Sand Pit?

2011-09-22T08:09:00.000+01:00

I might have got this wrong, but once land fill was completed the balance of the Tesco land on Harbour Road, the part that is due to have lots of wonderful low cost housing and hotel etc, was supposed to be hydro seeded. I was expecting that this would mean nice green fields, and an improvement in the appearance of the area.

Perhaps it is the unusual growing conditions this year, maybe a bad batch of seed, or maybe even poor application. What ever the reason, the site looks more like a sand pit than a green field. If it was a field planted for food crops, the supermarket buyer would have rejected the lot it looks so poor.

Suerly this should be sorted now while there is at least a small chance for the grass to grow before the winter. What is happening? What about the planning conditions? Who is responsible for overseeing that these are followed through? If they don't do a proper job with the grass, what chance of having the rest of the site planted to the required standard.

Tesco Filling Station

2011-09-06T09:30:00.000+01:00

from Hugh Barlow

I was called today by the Devon County Council petroleum officer with responsibility for this area. In a much earlier conversation with Steve Moore of the Environment Agency, the latter had made it plain to James and me that a filling station in this flood-liable location with high groundwater levels would require casing the storage tanks in concrete (to prevent them from "floating" in his words).

Today the Petroleum Officer informed me that, according to the plans which he had received in early July, Tesco had without prompting met all the requirements of a filling station in this sort of location. There would be approx. 1ft (rather than the usual 6ins) concrete slabs below and above the two 125,000 litre tanks, which would rest at datum level (mean sea level). Along the sides would be a coffer dam of double-skin sheet steel, and, once the tanks were inserted, the space would be back-filled with concrete. Pipework would be double-skinned plastic. Regular inspection should ensure that any deterioration in the outer skin was detected before the second layer was affected.

He himself would have oversight, and there was due to be an on-site meeting in August before work commenced in September. Without the licence which he issues, the site cannot operate. But it is the Environment Agency who would be the official consultee.

Similar provision in other South West locations had proved 100% effective in river flooding, with no leakage at all.

Incidentally, he informed me that two earlier filling stations in the Harbour Road area had been cased in concrete when they were decommissioned.

Our concerns on this particular score appear to have been met.

Taster Day for Wildlife and Environmental Conservation

2011-07-22T18:31:00.001+01:00

From: Hannah Abrehart <Hannah.Abrehart@bicton.ac.uk>
Date: 21 July 2011 10:19
Subject: Re. Taster Day for Wildlife and Environmental Conservation Sat 6th Aug

Hello,

I am wondering whether it would be possible for you to let your members/volunteers know about a taster day that we are holding at Bicton College on Saturday 6^th August for Wildlife and Environmental Conservation, a new course that we will be running from September. Please find the attached flyer and course details. I am very happy to post you paper copies if you’d prefer. The taster is aimed at anybody 16+ who would like to try out some practical aspects of the course and find out more about what it entails from the Countryside Team at Bicton.

Many thanks

Hannah

Hannah Abrehart

School Liaison Officer
T: 01395 562324/07775 034896
E: hannah.abrehart@bicton.ac.uk
www.bicton.ac.uk

Tesco Site Working Hours

2011-06-30T18:55:00.002+01:00

From: Andrew Ennis [mailto:AEnnis@eastdevon.gov.uk]
Sent: 29 June 2011 10:52
To: Nick Stephen
Cc: Cllr Mrs S C J Jones; Cllr J A Knight; Simon Smale; Cllr Peter Burrows; Andy Carmichael; Cllr I Thomas; Mr D Mears
Subject: Tesco Seaton Development - working hours - UNCLASSIFIED:

Dear All

RE: Tesco Seaton Development

A very small amount of site working outside the permitted hours was anticipated and has now been approved by the EHO. The justification is that the processes (continuous concrete pumping) and crane lifts require a continuous operation of around 11 hours so cannot be completed within the approved 08:00 to 18:00 period. None of this work will take place on Saturdays, Sundays or bank holidays. No vehicle movements of work activity will start before 07:00 and works will be completed not later than 18:30. The additional disruption for residents should therefore be minimal but the contractors have agreed that they will deliver a newsletter to households locally before Friday.

Agreed date earliest start time latest finish time reason

July

Friday 1^st 07:00 18:30 set up (1 hour), continuous concrete pour (10 hours) and dismantle pump (30 minutes)

Tuesday 5^th 07:00 18:30 set up (1 hour), continuous concrete pour (10 hours) and dismantle pump (30 minutes)

Friday 8^th 07:00 18:30 set up (1 hour), continuous concrete pour (10 hours) and dismantle pump (30 minutes)

Weds 13^th07:00 18:30 set up (1 hour), continuous concrete pour (10 hours) and dismantle pump (30 minutes)

August

TBC 07:30 18:30 crane lifts – require either a 07:30 start or an 18:30 finish

Andrew Ennis

Environmental Health Manager - Environmental Protection

East Devon District Council

Knowle

Sidmouth EX10 8HL

tel: 01395 571583

mobile: 07872 967 030

web: www.eastdevon.gov.uk

Community Right to Buy in Jeopardy

2011-06-18T21:41:00.000+01:00

Long shot, but do any of us have contacts in the House of Lords?

Hugh

16 June 2011

Community Right to Buy in jeopardy

Dear Hugh,

I am writing to ask if you can help with an urgent piece of lobbying. The Localism Bill is in the House of Lords and I have been tipped off that, as a result of scaremongering by the Countryside Landowners Association and others, the government is considering watering down the Community Right to Buy – for example reducing the window for community groups to prepare a bid to a mere 3 months.

Do you have any contacts in the House of Lords? – if so a personal email from you to them, enclosing Locality's briefing, would be very much appreciated. It would need to get there ideally today or tomorrow, or by the beginning of next week at the very latest. You can find out how to contact peers at the house of lords via http://www.theyworkforyou.com/peers/

You can also highlight this issue by following @localitynews on twitter and contributing to the debate using the tags #bigsociety, #righttobuy and #localism - or by signposting to Locality's blog post on this issue.

Thanks very much indeed.

Very many thanks

Steve Wyler
Chief Executive Officer, Locality

East Devon LDF Danger

2011-06-18T21:38:00.001+01:00

This is not to do with Tesco at all, but I think it would be of interest to all TW members. The Development Trust will be pursuing it in conjunction with the Town Council.

Hugh

Dear All,

You will see from the statement here:

http://planningblog.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/your-verdict-the-draft-presumption-in-favour-of-sustainable-development/#more-3588

that if an area is NOT protected by a Local Plan, LDF or neighbourhood plan, the presumption will be that it is therefore development land and that it should be developed with maximum speed.

If East Devon does not get its LDF sorted soon and if Seaton does not get a neighbourhood plan sorted at the same time, all land in Seaton not covered in the LDF will be at risk, no matter what it is.

Regards
Sandra Semple

EDDC Cabinet Meeting indecision on Underfleet toilets

2011-06-16T19:55:00.001+01:00

A report from Hugh

Outcome disappointing but not disastrous. The decision on whether to demolish as proposed or to retain temporarily has been deferred till next Cabinet meeting in a month. Talk is of refurbishing or replacing with updated facilities: we will have to work very hard to avoid replacement by something like the West Walk toilets.

There was general sympathy with the need at this location, but uncertainty over whether the existing toilets could be retained without detriment to the overall public realm plan.

Asked for background to the issue, a Council officer chose to ignore reference to last night's discussion and decision at the Development Management Committee, and referred back to the decision of Cabinet in Dec. 09 to clear away the toilets with the other redundant buildings in order that nothing should mar the approach to Tesco store (other toilets were due to replace, but not provided by EDDC): he did not see that anything in the situation had changed, and said that the decision had been recorded on the website for anyone to see.

The Chair was at fault in not calling for a report of the previous night's decision, which was to approve the application in principle, but to delegate with a strong recommendation to retain the existing toilets and to look at making the street furniture and lighting more in keeping with Seaton generally and the tram station in particular.

The ward members, along with the Chair (and Vice-Chair, I think it was) were to be part of this consultation, but all of this was subject to a decision of Cabinet whether or not to reverse their decision of Dec. 09. The Tesco representatives had been shown Barbara's redrawing of the public realm, and were perfectly happy with it.

The DMC Chair, Mark Williamson, was eventually called and gave a potted version of this decision. Tonight's discusion was concluded by Coun. Graham Godbeer, who was in a position to say that the situation had changed, in that the building of the Visitor Centre had not yet got even a date, and the Cycle Hub funds had been withdrawn (both of these would have supplied public toilets).

In the course of discussion, several councillors had been in favour of retaining the toilets without further question: Peter Halse (Chair of the Council), Douglas Hull of Axminster, Jill Edson and our own Stephanie Jones had all spoken unequivocally (only the latter two were members of this committee; the other two had attended specifically to support the case, though they also had other matters to address later).

After the decision to defer decision, Mark Williamson (Chair of Development Management Committee) came outside to take me by the hand and ask me to convey to all the people who had come on the coach his appreciation of their attendance and their patience, sitting quietly through this long session. Peter Halse was very disappointed with their indecision, and thought that the Council Leader (Paul Diviani) with whom he had been in touch, would back him (i.e. in listening to public opinion}.

We just have to wait to see who wins. I wish I could have given a more satisfactory report.

Underfleet Toilets Protest Meeting

2011-06-07T21:39:00.000+01:00

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Vicar has agreed to chair the Public Meeting on the demolition of the Underfleet toilets in Seaton Town Hall on Wednesday 8th June from 7 pm.

The Agenda and the graphics to be used by Seaton Development Trust are on the SDT website at http://www.seatondevtrust.org.uk/, go to Groups, then Public Realm.

See you on Wednesday.

James Semple

Tesco Site Noise

2011-06-07T21:36:00.000+01:00

Email from Sandra Semple

To: nwright@eastdevon.gov.uk

Sent: Tuesday, June 07, 2011 10:20 AM

Subject: Nosie and operating hours, Tesco site - Seaton

Dear Mr Wright,

I see from a letter on the planning application site 09/0019 that someone complained about noise coming from the Tesco site from piling. You replied, correctly, that there has been no piling so you say in your letter that there was therefore no particular source of unusual noise. There IS a source of noise similar to (or perhaps greater than) piling. There is a vibrating roller constantly working on the part of the site that will be occupied by the Tesco store. This vibrating roller (which has a decibel level greater than 100 according to Tesco's own documents) has been working most of the time from 8 am - 8 pm Monday - Saturday.

Initially, EDDC agreed that infill could take place at any time, 24 hours a day 7 days a week but said that after that Tesco would revert to "normal construction hours". This was put in writing by Ms Wallace of EDDC Environmental Health. However, as soon as the infill process ceased, EDDC gave Tesco permission to work 8 am - 8 pm to level the store site prior to construction of the store said to be commercing on 13 June 2011. After that (again, according to Ms Wallace and again in writing) normal construction hours (8 am - 6 pm Monday - Friday and 8 am - 1 pm Saturdays) are supposed to be in force unless there are exceptional circumstances.

Personally, I predict that normal construction hours will never happen. Tesco will continue to work whatever hours it wants and make whatever noise it wants, citing exceptional circumstances on a daily or weekly basis as it suits them. I think it unlikely that EDDC will do anything whatsoever to change this - it has shown no sign of being able to tame the Tesco tiger.

It might therefore be best not to make sweeping statements about there being no abnormal noise levels on the site. There have been abnormal noise levels, there continues to be abnormal noise levels and I have no doubt that such noise will continue at anti-social hours for many months to come.

Yours sincerely,
Sandra Semple

SAVE ST CLARE'S AND SEATON TOILETS- HELP ME GET 500 SIGNATURES!

2011-06-06T11:48:00.002+01:00

Message from Hugh and forwarded plea from Sophie O'Connell

These issues are related to most members' interests, and the issue of the Underfleet toilets is directly related to Tesco in that EDDC are asking Tesco to demolish them, which is not necessary for their access, and not particularly to their advantage (do they want to provide the public toilets for coach parties?). These issued are more a case of watching DCC and EDDC.

The forms for signature, if people are willing to sign them, need to be printed off and submitted to Town Council by June 10 (St.Clare's) or District Council by June 12 re toilets.

Hugh

From Sophie; her message refers to attached files which ofcourse are not attached here, so please contact Sophie on sophie.oconnell@sky.com to get hold of these.

Hi all,

I really need your help as Devon County Council and East Devon District Council are trying to take away St Clare's and the toilets at the Underfleet!

DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL WANT TO SELL ST CLARE'S on the open market and Seaton Town Council is being offered the chance to have it in either an asset transfer or for an agreed sum. Seaton Town Council have a meeting on MONDAY JUNE 13TH AT 7.30PM to decide if Seaton will keep or lose St Clare's once and for all. I have attached a copy of a form which asks for residents to support keeping St Clare's for Seaton's community and not have it sold onto developers.

I have also attached a poster for a protest meeting on Wednesday June 8th at 7pm in Seaton Town Hall arranged by Seaton Development Trust and Sustainable Seaton to make sure we stop the TOILETS ON THE UNDERFLEET CAR PARK from being demolished bye EDDC and Tesco.

There is a petition that you can sign online to save the Underfleet toilets http://www.petitiononline.com/sosasset/petition.html

or you can print off the attached "SAVE THE UNDERFLEET TOILETS" word document to get your friends and family to sign.

IN TOTAL WE NEED 500 SIGNATURES TO HAVE ANY CHANCE OF SAVING THE TOILETS

Below is a link to the SAVE ST CLARE'S group where you will get regular updates on what is happening with the UNDERFLEET TOILETS AND ST CLARE'S. http://www.facebook.com/home.php?sk=group_124353947645650&id=124372057643839

I have also attached a PDF file designed to be printed off and posted up in windows, cars, shop fronts, or even taken to meetings. Hopefully this will help spread the message showing East Devon and Devon County that we will not be pushed around any longer and that we deserve to keep our tourists and community facilities!

FINALLY .....

PLEASE, PLEASE FORWARD YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY AS WE REALLY NEED ALL THE SUPPORT WE CAN GET!!!!!

Thank you!

Water Polution Reporting

2011-06-02T10:16:00.003+01:00

Message from Hugh Barlow, 1st June. This first message is important and invites your contribution when you have anything to report. The various messages following are there to give you the background on how this came about.

I met Doug Parker today as arranged. He is the Environment Agency officer responsible for water quality, and in this capacity is a regular visitor to this site, among others in Seaton and elsewhere.

It was a pleasure to meet a professional person who welcomes public watchfulness.

Contractors do not usually contact the Agency if they have a problem, but they are obliged to keep the Agency informed once the EA has been alerted, and remedial action or continued monitoring is required by the Agency (Doug is visiting weekly anyway). So they are reliant on the public for informing them of any disconcerting new observations.

He was alerted to the flooding of the tramway car park flower bed, and had asked the site manager to provide a sump just inside the site boundary: once the tidally affected groundwater level had lowered, and the salt water off the site had begun to go down, this had the effect of lowering it more rapidly, until all that was visible was the white deposit on the asphalt and in the flower bed. We discussed this on the very spot.

We inspected the ditches alongside the tramway, and went far enough to see how impossibly silted up the outlet to the estuary is (the outlet is visible in his pictures, under the tramway bridge). This is the responsibility of the County Council, but discussion with Natural England led to the postponement of the clearance last year during the birds' breeding season. He is now concerned that it has still not been done, and may become urgent even in the breeding season, if warmer weather leads to the growth of the potentially toxic blue-green kind of algae.

Currently, all that is visible in the stagnant water is ordinary blue (almost petrol-blue) algae, and ochre staining (which might be iron stain from the site, but is more likely from a local ground source).

He himself is not a flooding expert, but would recognise a potential flooding problem, and will already have advised his colleague Steve Moore of the blocked outlet.

So Doug would like, from any local observations, preferably

photos of any of the following in the ditches:

bright blue salt water
blue-green algae
bright ochre tinting.
serious mosquito infestation

The first is now unlikely to recur, the second is quite possible, the last two are possibilities. Basically, any startling change of colour is worth notifying, because it could indicate serious pollution.

He is also concerned with the Harbour View pumping station, which is close to full capacity. Any blockage there could cause a backflow leading to raised manhole covers. If anyone sees sewage leaking into the water courses, they should contact him immediately and he will try to be on site in thirty minutes. This obviously applies anywhere and not just in the Tesco site. Most of these are problems

of the low-lying ground, and have nothing specifically to do with Tesco.

Problems which happen to be thrown up by the Tesco development are not the only problems, but we are being educated in public awareness. I was given to believe that, on some issues at least, the public will be taken seriously.

Hugh

I have Doug's e-mail address, and the Environment Agency is in the phone book.

From: Doug Parker

To: Hugh Barlow

Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 4:50 PM

Subject: FW: Harbour Road Development Site - Seaton

Dear Mr Barlow,

Thank you for your observations, as this is our first contact I will explain my role in this development. As a basic Environment Officer I cover various areas from Water Quality, Water Resources to Waste and Fisheries Enforcement. I have been aware of the old camp site for several years and more so now with the new development starting with me visiting the site during the demolition phase, checking that all the various types of waste were disposed of correctly, then the monitoring of the returning sea water and now I monitor water quality discharges that leave the site. My main area of interest for now is the water quality of the local watercourses around the site, then once construction starts I will also check their disposal routes of all their packaging and building waste.

Please see the attached photos which were taken on Friday the 20th of May, reference your concerns about the outlet to the estuary. I believe that this part of the drainage ditch has not been maintained by the LA for over 18 months plus see below part of an email which I sent to EDDC only last week.

Regards

Doug Parker

EO - EM East Devon

From: Hugh Barlow
To: Steve Moore

Sent: Monday, May 30, 2011 11:11 PM

Subject: Re: Harbour Road, Seaton: infill consequences

Steve

Thanks for passing this to Doug Parker. Can I through you relay to him my corrected observations?

The berm was not, as I thought at one stage, covered over (I had misread a couple of photographs taken from the tramway by a colleague), but it was clearly overwhelmed by the initial squeezing of sand and water out of the fill and into the ditch. Along the other sides of the development, and clearly visible from the tramway by the car park, the sand heap reaches right to the ditch, and sand obviously blows or is washed directly into the ditch with nothing to prevent it.

At least until the sand is fixed by grass, this situation will continue, the ditches will be clogged with sand, and the salinity of the adjacent area increased. What happens in the event of a major rainstorm?

The increase in the salinity of the groundwater and of the ditches must eventually affect a wider area, and I am not sure what the impact is on the outlet to the estuary.

I should be glad to know what you make of these concerns.

Hugh Barlow

From: Steve Moore, to Hugh Barlow, Doug Parker, May 24th

Hugh , apologies for not getting back to you last week but I've been either on training or on holiday since you wrote.

In general terms I comment upon flooding related matters in relation to planning applications for a number of Councils My involvement therefore typically ends when a planning permmission is granted. It is then for the planning authority to ensure the dev't is built or any 'conditions' are carried out to the satisfaction of the Council. Matters relating to site runoff, water quality , impact upon the wider water environment , etc , are typically dealt with by my colleagues in Environment Protection . In this case Doug Parker is the chap who looks after such matters in Seaton and as such I've forwarded your e-mail to Doug for his information and/or action. I trust this is of assistance . Please feel free to get back to me if I can help you further.

kind regards Steve.

Doug, over to you for action / update to Hugh. Please give me ring if I can be of any assistance to you. Steve.

From: Hugh
Sent: 19 May 2011 10:38
To: Moore, Steve
Cc: James Semple
Subject: Harbour Road, Seaton: infill consequences

Dear Steve

I am content that various consultancies and agencies, including the Environment Agency, are monitoring and advising on site, but I would be interested to know how you view specific aspects of the current state of progress.

As I see it, a gravel-filled berm was constructed per plan between the raised site and the boundary rhyne, but the raised area has been extended over this berm. As it stands, then, there is nothing to prevent sand-laden water from the saturated fill from draining directly into the rhyne and clogging it up, as appears to have happened already. What remedial measures can be taken or have such already been recommended?

Thank you for your continued interest in this difficult development.

Yours sincerely

Hugh Barlow

Chair, Seaton Development Trust

Conversations regarding excess water on Tesco site.

2011-05-19T09:18:00.000+01:00

From Hugh Barlow, 18th May

I have had three conversations today, with Tom Shipp of Jubbs, with Garry Mountain the site manager, and with Fran of the Express and Echo.

Fran was following up the report that EDDC gardeners had not been able to replant the flower beds between the tram station and the car park, because water levels were too high: they were full to a few inches below the surface with salty water. I raised this with Tom Shipp, and he referred me to Garry Mountain.

Garry's understanding was that it was the water level rather than its salinity which was the problem. He pointed out, with some justification, that the previous bedding plants had still been flourishing. We differed somewhat over the question of salinity, and I suspect that he has been over-reassured by Delta Simons, the consultants who have been measuring salinity, that any extra salinity represented only “a drop in the ocean”. My point was that it depended where that drop was concentrated. He knew that the piped outlet had been to a point well away from the coral reefs and sensitive protected area of Lyme Bay.

I suspect that the salt has been more concentrated than they recognise: I have not previously seen the water of the ditch so blue, and we saw the white deposits round the settlement lagoons, where the salt water had evaporated. Fran had very sensibly asked how salt water from the bay became more salty on the site, and I believe that is because it has absorbed salt from the dredged material, particularly as it warmed up out of the sea. Garry also thought the water could not be any different out of the sea rather than in it.

Garry had a mixed explanation for the levels of water oozing out from the site. In the first instance, the sand was super-saturated (more so than the intended gravel would have been), and simply oozed out as it was squeezed down. Then groundwater was being forced up, through fence-holes and other breaks in the surface, as the weight of fill (or surcharge) compacted the underlying silt: this water, though mixing with the site water, would be only brackish to a normal degree. Lastly, spring tides are currently keeping the groundwater levels raised above normal. He expects levels to go down steadily without pumping out or releasing into the estuary.

One explanation here was especially helpful. We had, many of us, been puzzled by the earlier trial embankment, to test the extent and rate of settlement. This was not to test how far the fill would sink, but how far the underlying silt would be compacted by that weight (so it did not matter what the test material was). So they have imported 4 metres of sand and gravel (as surcharge), to compact the underlying silt down to the required 4 metre level. This Garry expected to take about 28 days: I suspect this is more hope than expectation, but it is probably based on what happened with the trial embankment. It clearly explains why the mountain of fill is so much higher than we expected.

My own interpretation of events includes the fact that, according to Mr Shipp and the original plans, there is a ten- or twelve-metre wide gravel-filled berm between the raised site and the ditch, but this has been virtually covered over by the fill material: it was intended to absorb any water and solid materials that were washed out from the site. There were also supposed to be sandbags and straw bales to absorb these, but we only saw sandbags, and no distance between the fill heap and the ditch.

Jubb's site inspection is due tomorrow, and it would be interesting to know what they make of the situation.

Mr Shipp and Jubbs are working together with other consultants on the longer term water management measures. He would be concerned if the present situation persisted.

The Environment Agency and Environmental Health have been kept informed, and I understand something had been done about the mosquito infestation. Otherwise, whatever is in the ditch is not being released, but left to soak away naturally, so the environment is not likely to suffer any sudden impacts, but Garry Mountain is happy to answer questions as best he can, and Mr Shipp says that our concerns have been justified.

CEMP approval query

2011-05-12T19:22:00.000+01:00

Sandra Semple has forwarded to us this message from A D, see below... first Sandra's comment...

I have already told this person that there is no recourse to justice if EDDC walks all over us, unless someone raises the money which would be needed for a judicial review. I have told him to make his views known to EDDC's Development Management Committee (when it is elected on 25 May), Seaton Town Council, our three district councillors and the newspapers but told him that, in my experience, Tesco does exactly what it wants. I have told him to go to next council meeting and the next development trust meeting if he wants to see if he can get any further support or assistance.

You might want to put his point on Tescowatch.

What A D wrote....

Noted your & Barbara Dearden-Potters concerns in the Seaton Recorder about the latest Tesco planning app.

Are you aware of the situation with the main application 09/0019/MFUL?

There is a condition that they must get approval of their CEMP Construction Environment Management Plan.

They submitted a plan on 7 April, it ignores the DCC HATOC findings of March.

It also says see Planning Documents “Conditions” posted Friday April 8, 2011, page 2 Signet letter, says

“You will doubtless keep us informed of the results of consultation as it is important that what are deemed as acceptable haulage routes are approved at your committee on 3 May so that the overall programme for construction of the store can be maintained”.

Fortunately we managed to stop it going on the Dev Commitee agenda just before the election.

So, I believe at the moment there is an opportunity to say to Tesco – hold it – we have to sort out this CEMP and a few other issues as well.

But perhaps our planners will use their “delegated powers” not to hold up the baked beans.

What is Happening with Water in the Lagoon?

2011-05-04T08:17:00.000+01:00

Now that the pipeline is being dismantled, where is the balance of the water in the settlement lagoons going? Looks like a pump has been set up on Lagoon 2, but where is the water being pumped? Perhaps it is going down the drain, otherwise across the site. Does anyone know or care?

Stagnant Water

2011-04-30T09:22:00.004+01:00

----- Original Message ----- From: "Semple_mail"
To: "Jim Knight <""Cllr J A Knight ">" ; "Cllr Mrs S C J Jones" ; "Peter Burrows"
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2011 6:48 PM
Subject: Tramway/Tesco water situation

Attached pictures, taken this afternoon, tell their own story. Pumps
are going 24 hours a day without making much of a difference. What a
greeting for people coming to visit the tramway.

Regards
Sandra Semple

Note from Hugh: Barbara has raised the issue of stagnant water with Countryside Services.

Is the Steep Sand Hill Stable?

2011-04-25T18:39:00.000+01:00

I was walking by the Tesco site today ( what great weather we are having ), and noticed quite a lot of water bubbling up from the ground by the Tram stop. What really amazed me was the height of the sand mountain ( way over 2 metres ), and with a very steep slope to the top. Hard to judge, but it looked like at least 45 degrees. Now I am not an expert, but with Class 1B material ( the new quiet sand ), the maximum slope for highways use is about 30 degrees once compacted. Anything more is deemed unstable. Is it really safe to allow the tram to run past this mountain? If this amount of sand were to collapse onto the tram tracks while a tram were passing, that would have very serious consequences for tram and driver/passengers. Other than the water being pumped by the contractor and emptied into the drain, where is all of the other water going. What are the potential impacts on the stability of other buildings in the area. Near the tram stop it looked like it was saturating the surface soil. Surely this is contrary to the planning conditions for the site which required bunding to prevent runoff.

Water on the Tramway

2011-04-24T10:28:00.000+01:00

Barbara Dearden-Potter reports:

This problem built up during the week, with water squeezed out of the wet sand of the fill by being pressed down. The boundary rhyne alongside the tramway has filled with stagnant water, which has then reached onto the tramway itself in places.

Contractors ISG Pearce are doing their utmost to contain the problem, drawing off the excess water, and filling holes on the tramway with sand and gravel. They are working together with the Tramway to keep the tramway open.

Barbara is reporting the problem of the stagnant water to the appropriate EDDC officers. We trust remedial action will be taken, and the situation has a chance of recovery over the Easter break.

Environment Agency Response

2011-04-22T12:23:00.002+01:00

At last, a response from the Environment Agency (EA) regarding my query about where the salt water that is entrained in the sand will end up. Actually in the end I got two responses, so that can't be bad.

From Jo Clarke:

ENV. AGENCY REF. NO: DC/2010/107842.
ENGINEERING OPERATIONS AT SEATON REGENERATION SITE, HARBOUR ROAD, SEATON.

Thank you for your e-mails and I apologise sincerely for the delay in response.

Your concerns regarding the imported fill material operations are appreciated. However, I hope it is helpful to hear that we are satisfied that the applicant has followed best practice in undertaking site investigations* and risk assessments related to controlled waters. As such, we do not consider it necessary for the site wide area to be lined.

Given the anticipated tonnage of the fill material, any saline water applied to the site during these operations will be diffused. Therefore, it is not considered likely there will be any major impact from contamination infiltrating the groundwater table. There is no point source pollution and although there will be seasonal variation in groundwater levels, the likelihood of saline intrusion into the underlying deeper aquifer is considered to be low and unlikely to have any significant impact upon this important resource.

I do hope this helps provide a measure of reassurance.

* We do not issue formal approval for risk assessment undertaken in connection with land affected by contamination. The responsibility for appropriate site investigation remains with the owner/developer. The developer takes responsibility to ensure that the development does not result in any impact to controlled waters. This should include the potential for mobilisation.

Also from Steve Moore:

Excess salt will slowly be washed out of fill material and the site by rainfall via ; a) the local man made drainage network and b) under the shingle beach to Lyme Bay.
regards steve.

So apparently not a concern for the groundwater. But if the salty water is going to be slowly washed out to the local man made drainage network, how will this impact on the extensive landscape planting. Most trees will struggle to grow in salt contaminated soil ( sand/gravel ). Most salt tolerant plants would be inadeqate in height to provide any sort of site boundary/screening.

Are EDDC monitoring salt levels in the surrounding surface water systems? If planting fails, who will be responsible for replacement and for how long will they have to keep it up?

PIpeline, Lagging and Sand

2011-04-11T16:41:00.004+01:00

The latest contribution from James...

Well, the noise from the Tesco pipeline is no longer a problem. They achieved this by

extending the pipe lagging up, over and down the other side of Harbour Road (see pictures);
replacing gravel with sand.

The smaller sand particles can be lifted over the roads at lower flow rates than the coarser gravel, which reduces the noise generated. And the lagging - although actually loft insulation designed to stop the flow of heat, not sound - seems to muffle what noise remains. The overall noise level is now so low that I did not believe the pumps were working until I saw the slurry flowing onto the site. This must be a great relief to the residents of Trevelyan Road; but what are the implications for the project?

The first implication is that Tesco and EDDC have lost all credibility in predicting the outcomes of this project. In July last year we pointed out that pumping gravel would be much noisier than they predicted; but we were ignored. Then, in March this year, we pointed out to EDDC that the pipe was unlagged in the noisiest section going over Harbour Road - but this was ignored, also. So, instead of lagging the pipe on the ground, they took time out for a photo session and then had to do the lagging in mid-air (see pictures).

The next problem is getting hold of the sand. The gravel came from the Isle of Wight every 24 hours or so. The sand has to come from Wales, requiring 36 hours for the round trip. So, the infill time will be extended by 50%. As well as extending the nuisance time for the town, this will cost Tesco a fortune in extra project time. Isn't that a shame.

The third problem is the structural implications of using sand instead of gravel to raise the site level. Will a heap of sand be as stable under flood conditions as a heap of gravel ? No doubt Tesco and/or EDDC will tell us that it will; but they made such a mess of the noise issue that nothing they say can now be left unchecked.

Our soils consultant needs to see the particle size analysis of the sand before commenting on stability. We have asked for this data, and will report back when we have more information.

The Third Lagoon in operation

2011-04-05T09:58:00.000+01:00

A few days ago we noticed that Tesco have built 3 lagoons, rather than the 2 approved in the planning application. I have since seen number 3 in operation as a backup for number 1 - namely, to receive slurry from the pipeline, as shown in the picture.

The central lagoon (number 2) is still used to hold seawater until the silt has settled, and the picture shows a fair amount of white sediment which might otherwise have gone into Seaton Bay. I wonder if this water was tested before discharge, as it is supposed to be, according to the Environment Agency.

The picture also shows how the infill collected in lagoon 1 has been spread around the site by the bulldozers.

Interesting times

Excessive noise from pipeline - more

2011-04-02T10:59:00.001+01:00

From: "Cllr P Burrows"
To: "Hugh and Elizabeth" Hugh Barlow
Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: RE: Excessive noise from pipeline

Dear Hugh

I sent this yesterday and I am still waiting for a reply.

Peter

Sent: 31 March 2011 13:35
To: Nick Stephen
Cc: DL Council Members
Attachments:

The noise level created by the Tescos pipeline is far in excess of that agreed. I would ask EDDC to suspend all delivery during the day until this matter has been sorted out. I cannot imagine the residents of Sidmouth putting up with this so why should Seaton.
________________________________________
From: Hugh and Elizabeth
Sent: 01 April 2011 09:21
To: Cllr J A Knight; Cllr Mrs S C J Jones; Cllr P Burrows
Subject: Fw: Excessive noise from pipeline

Dear Councillors

On behalf of residents of Trevelyan Road may we ask for more immediate and urgent action to reduce the intolerable noise levels, considerably above the 85db level of damage to hearing, especially if continuous for more than 2 Hours (the pipeline operation is 3 hours)'.

When Ms Wallace (EDDC EHO) measured it as well over this level, she immediately arranged for nighttime deliveries to be suspended until a solution was found. This was a satisfactory half-measure, but the lagging applied today (Thursday 31 March)has not significantly reduced the noise level. The contractors have tried but not succeeded: it is not their decision.

Please use your influence with the Enforcement Officer to arrange immediate suspension of all deliveries until a solution is found.

We will not for now go into the history of misunderstandings which have led all parties to believe that the noise levels would be no more than sand over Bournemouth beach.

For the sake of residents we implore everyone to put a stop to it now.

Hugh Barlow
Chair, Seaton Development Trust

Excessive noise from pipeline

2011-04-02T09:22:00.001+01:00

From: Cllr Mrs S C J Jones

To: Hugh Barlow

Sent: Friday, April 01, 2011 9:41 AM

Subject: RE: Excessive noise from pipeline

Dear Mr Barlow

Thank you for your email and I note your concerns and comments.

I have been monitoring the situation regarding the infill and pipeline issues, along with our Environmental Health team at East Devon District Council. I have also visited the site during one of the infill operations.

With reference to your comments, the current situation is as follows:

1. Contractors were on site cladding the diagonals of the Harbour Road gantry yesterday. The Council are awaiting confirmation of the material to be used for the horizontal section of the gantry. Once installed they will assess the performance of the lagging.

2. Their observations on Wednesday were that there were significant periods during the discharge when the noise levels were not as loud and were fully compliant. These periods appeared to coincide with the discharge of sand into the lagoon, rather than coarser material. It is sand that forms the majority of the fill due to come from now on.

3. The periods of very loud noise were much shorter on Wednesday than on Tuesday night. In the end on Tuesday night only about 50% of the load was discharged because of the problems and therefore when it arrived back on Wednesday there was still a range of coarser and finer material. This might explain why the noise levels of the material being discharged varied. During the discharge there were long periods of quiet, for example whilst water was returned to the sea.

4. Environmental Health Officers are visiting the site each time a load is being discharged and are checking with the site twice a day. They are able to further restrict discharge times, and are also able to require works to temporarily stop if they deem it necessary. At the end of yesterday the Planning Officers and the Environmental Health Officers were reviewing the situation.

5. The Officers are all concentrating their efforts on resolving the situation as quickly as possible for both the residents and people who are working in close proximity to the gantry's.

6. I have made the Environmental Health Officer who is dealing with these issues fully aware about the lighting issues which have been raised by residents. They are concerned about the lighting and an Officer visited the site yesterday and was going to look into this issue.

8. The site operator is permitted to work in the lagoons between 7am and 10pm as it is necessary to continually clear the material from the inlet end and to maintain capacity for incoming material. They are also able to distribute the fill around the site within those times in due course for the same reason.

I will certainly forward your letter onto the Environmental Health department and make them fully aware of your comments and ask for an update of the situation. When I receive any further news I will contact you again. I do appreciate your concerns and will emphasise these to the Officer's in the EH department and will ask whether the operation can be suspended until all issues have been resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned.

Yours sincerely

Stephanie Jones

From: Hugh and Elizabeth
Sent: 01 April 2011 09:21
To: Cllr J A Knight; Cllr Mrs S C J Jones; Cllr P Burrows
Subject: Fw: Excessive noise from pipeline

Dear Councillors

On behalf of residents of Trevelyan Road may we ask for more immediate and urgent action to reduce the intolerable noise levels, considerably above the 85db level of damage to hearing, especially if continuous for more than 2 Hours (the pipeline operation is 3 hours)'.

When Ms Wallace (EDDC EHO) measured it as well over this level, she immediately arranged for nighttime deliveries to be suspended until a solution was found. This was a satisfactory half-measure, but the lagging applied today (Thursday 31 March)has not significantly reduced the noise level. The contractors have tried but not succeeded: it is not their decision.

Please use your influence with the Enforcement Officer to arrange immediate suspension of all deliveries until a solution is found.

We will not for now go into the history of misunderstandings which have led all parties to believe that the noise levels would be no more than sand over Bournemouth beach.

For the sake of residents we implore everyone to put a stop to it now.

Hugh Barlow

Chair, Seaton Development Trust

Building on Foundations of Sand!!

2011-03-31T14:55:00.004+01:00

From Janet Wallace of EDDC via www.trinitymatters.co.uk

"EDDC observations yesterday were that there were significant periods during the discharge when the noise levels were not as loud and were fully compliant. These periods appeared to coincide with the discharge of sand into the lagoon, rather than coarser material. It is the sand which forms the majority of the fill due to come from now on."

So I take it from this that the pipeline noise will no longer be a problem as they are going to build the platform mainly of sand. Can this really be true? As far as I know, you need to have a good mix of aggregate sizes to create a firm bound surface after compaction. Perhaps they will use piling for the store foundations, but how will this affect any potential hotel and residential development?

What do those who know more about these things think?

Pumping has once again started, and it does not appear that there have been any changes to the sound proofing around the pipe. Surely at 90dB this is excessive even for daytime operation. What is it like down there?

Picture of the Site this morning

2011-03-31T13:57:00.001+01:00

From James...

Noise levels under pipeline - letter from James

2011-03-30T15:53:00.001+01:00

From: James Semple

To: jonathan.harris@hse.gsi.gov.uk

Noise l
Subject: Noise levels under pipeline in Seaton

Dear Mr Harris,

The Tesco pipeline we thought might be unstable went live last night, and did not fall over or show any signs of structural failure that we could see. This is good news for everyone, although we remain a little concerned about future operation in high wind conditions.

Not good news was the level of noise emitted. Janet Wallace the EDDC EHO on site measured it at 90 dB at the maximum, which I understand is above the level at which ear protectors must be worn to avoid hearing loss.

This is a serious public hazard on which I trust you will be taking action.

I attach a letter from Tesco on the matter which came this morning. We have been warning all concerned since July last year about this problem, but have been ignored as usual. It is no consolation to have been proved right at last at such a cost to public health and amenity.

James Semple

Pipeline Noise - latest from Tesco

2011-03-30T15:43:00.006+01:00

From James...

As ever, Ian Thomas's blog (www.trinitymatters.co.uk) had the ear of the main players in the Tesco saga and was able to report in detail on the first discharge of infill through the contested pipeline in Seaton.

I, also, was there on Tueday night with my little noise meter and was appalled at the racket coming from the unshielded pipe rising from the yacht club grounds past the windows of the terrace in Trevelyan Road and over Harbour Road. My little noise meter read 83 decibels (54 was predicted), but Janet Wallace, the EDDC Environmental Health Officer using professional equipment measured a maximum of 90 dB.

Now, anything above 85 dB can damage your hearing, and ear protectors are recommended. Tesco then circulated a letter (click here to see) saying how unexpected this noise level was.

This is a flat lie. In July 2010 I wrote a detailed, referenced report showing how Tesco's noise estimate was far too low and sent it to Tesco and to EDDC. It was ignored, and the Development Management Committee instead talked about a gentle swish with an occasional ting. In March this year I sent another report about how the rising pipe was not insulated against noise, and suggesting how it could be improved. This was ignored also.

So, Tesco and EDDC had previous information with ample evidence - and they ignored it all. It is bad enough that Tesco do not care about local people, but EDDC are supposed to be our representatives.

I think it was Thomas Jefferson who said that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. That, and the imminent local elections are what we need now to use to protect ourselves and our town.

Sound level readings of pipeline

2011-03-30T15:42:00.000+01:00

From: James

To: Janet Wallace

Subject: Sound level readings of pipeline in Seaton

Dear Ms Wallace,

Thank you for the information about the sound levels you read from the pipeline over Harbour Road this evening while the infill was being discharged. Your reading of 90 dB at the maximum was higher than the 83 dB my inferior equipment was reading. I understand that any levels over 85dB require ear protection to avoid hearing loss and I should be grateful for your comments on the hazard this represents to passers-by, as well as local residents

I did notice that the unlagged rising section of the pipeline seemed to be emitting the most noise. Perhaps Westminster Dredging might now consider lagging it, as I suggested in my email of 23rd March.

James Semple

Pipeline structure - Calculation Errors ?

2011-03-28T17:55:00.001+01:00

From James:

To: Joanna.Teasdale@hse.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2011 11:14 PM

Subject: Proposed temporary pipeline - Seaton

Dear Ms Teasdale,

Following recent developments, I am once again troubling you about this pipeline which Tesco have constructed across two roads in Seaton. We have obtained further evidence casting doubt on it's stability and we are writing to ask you to resolve the issue by restricting public access during the first infill run, and perhaps convening a meeting of the parties concerned chaired by yourself at which we are present.

You may remember we used the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 to requisition details of the latest pipeline design from the local authorities involved. These were eventually supplied by Devon County Council in electronic form, albeit late and with all names and attributions deleted - often to the detriment of the sense of the documents. East Devon District Council has still not provided any information.

Mr James Lindsay-Smith FICE and I have made a preliminary inspection of these design files. We detected several calculation errors, one of which is serious enough to cast doubt on the stability of the structure crossing the two roads in Seaton. We have described the errors in the attached review document and may find others after a more detailed examination.

Time is now of the essence. Tesco propose piping in fill material on Tuesday 29th March - that is, in two day's time. If you think our objections have merit, we suggest you have the two roads closed at the crossing points during the first run in case the structure is unstable, and carry out what further checks are required to establish longer-term stability.

Thank you, once again, for your help with our problems.

James Semple

On 10/02/2011 16:51, Joanna.Teasdale@hse.gsi.gov.uk wrote:

Dear Mr Semple

I have just spoken to the project manager at ISG Pearce who is dealing with the Seaton project. I have obtained verbal assurances that the project has been notified, and that the temporary pipeline design has undergone independent checks over and above the standards set out in BS5975. ISG Pearce will be confirming this to me in writing in the next couple of days. I will let you know once I have received their communication.

HSE would not expect to have any further input at this stage, though if you have concerns about work on site as it progresses, please let us know.

Best regards

Joanna Teasdale

More on the PIpe Noise Issue

2011-03-27T13:11:00.003+01:00

Another from James....

The planning permission granted to Tesco requires them to insulate the slurry pipe against noise where it runs along behind the houses in Trevelyan Road. There are strong doubts whether insulation will in fact reduce the noise enough to allow the residents to sleep, but it seems that even this precaution is inadequate and incomplete.

The picture shows how the pipe is boxed in at ground level, but the boxing stops as the pipe rises up to cross Harbour Road, even thought the rising section is closer to the upper windows of the houses beside it. The rising pipe could easily be wrapped with acoustic tape (widely advertised on the internet), but it has been left totally uninsulated.

Even the boxing is lined with the wrong sort of insulation. They used thermal insulation - used in lofts to control heat flow, rather than acoustic insulation designed to control noise transmission.

Now, either Tesco does not know the difference between noise and heat, or else it just does not care what happens to the unfortunate residents trying to sleep only yards from the pipe.

And, worst of all, East Devon District Council - elected and appointed to serve the people - are doing nothing whatsoever about it.

The elections are coming. Use your vote to tell them what you think about this situation.

Hugh comments...
Ms Wallace insists she is monitoring things, but she does not seem to believe there will be any significant noise. Will she change her tune if there is ?

How Many Lagoons...?

2011-03-27T13:07:00.002+01:00

James writes....

Tesco's plans for infilling the Seaton flood plain show two earth dams, or lagoons. One lagoon receives the gravel slurry from the dredger: the gravel settles quickly and the sea-water left then passes into the second lagoon to stand until the silt has settled out of it. It is then pumped back into the bay.

That is what the plans show; but the picture shows what they have actually built. Not two lagoons, but three. What is the third lagoon for ?

Now, it is fair to say that Tesco have taken on a hugely ambitious operation, and plans made at the start of such a project can reasonably be expected to be modified in the light of experience. Nothing wrong with that, but East Devon District Council are supposed to give their approval for any changes and post the new plans on the website. Nothing of the kind has appeared.

So, either Tesco has not applied, or else EDDC has not updated their website . . . and in either case the Council is to blame. In the first case, they should remain constantly aware of progress on the site, and require the submission of any deviations for approval: and in the second case, any documents relevant to the application should be posted to the website for public scrutiny.

If one of us little people deviates slightly from the plans for a garden shed, EDDC come down on us like a ton of manure. But for the big boys, anything goes - and they see no need to tell anyone else about it.

However, the coming election gives us all a chance to stand up for ourselves. When 5th May comes along, use your vote to show EDDC that the little people can still make a difference.

Correspondence re Flood Management Works

2011-03-26T09:44:00.003Z

Hugh comments on these emails:

In view of this latest response from Janet Wallace, it would seem that we have to let people people know that we still want their reports, but that I may have to leave direct response to them.

----- Original Message -----
From: Janet Wallace

To: Hugh and Elizabeth

Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 1:31 PM

Subject: RE: Flood Management works

Dear Mr Barlow,

This site was a holiday camp way back to the 1930’s and before that grasslands (probably wet). It has not had any previous contaminative use, there was no “decommissioning process” on it ( that was on an adjacent site owned by East Devon) and cannot in any way be compared to an MOD site with tank testing. It is these extreme comparisons which can lead to misinterpretation.

It is standard practice to require a contaminated land survey for almost any large developement site, and the planning condition in relation to that is a standard, nationally applied condition. It was not required because we thought there was contamination, quite the contrary. The request does not pre-suppose in any way that there is contamination – it requires developers to confirm that there is not (strangely enough so that we can confidently answer queries such as yours). If contamination is found in minor or major amounts it requires the developer to agree with us the appropriate way of dealing with it. If you read the whole report you will see that the method used is for consultants to predict what might be there given previous uses of the site or surrounding land and then look for it. It seems that some people have stopped reading at this point. However the report goes on to conclude that contaminants were not found and therefore no specific works were required. This concurs with what we would have expected on this site which had no former contaminative uses. As far as we are concerned that is the end of the matter unless the developer comes across anything of concern during the developement, at which point he will contact me.

Since your email of this morning I have had further correspondence from the EA confirming that they are perfectly satisfied with the arrangements in place for handling surface and groundwater.

As I said I would prefer to answer queries from people directly affected by the site, but have nothing further to add on these particular matters, and will not do so via a third party.

Yours sincerely,

J H Wallace

Janet Wallace, EHO

Environmental Protection Team

East Devon DC

Knowle

Sidmouth EX10 8HL

01395 571647

jwallace@eastdevon.gov.uk

From: Hugh and Elizabeth
Sent: 22 March 2011 12:19
To: Janet Wallace; Barbara Dearden-Potter
Subject: Re: Flood Management works

Dear Ms Wallace

I had not sought to irritate you, and, if what they are doing in excavating for the lagoon etc. is not digging deep enough to raise any contaminants (and I am prepared to believe that, as most of the possible contaminants from earlier land use would be heavy minerals such as lead), then there is indeed no cause for concern. Thank you for the full and helpful detail of your reply.

At a much earlier stage, you yourself had been concerned about the possibility of contaminants on the site, and I do not think we had been made privy to the results of any subsequent checks you may have made. We were only aware that you had not raised concerns at the final planning stage, but that sampling of the water to be returned during the pipeline operation was part of the recommendations. We are happy in particular to be reassured that sampling procedures are in place, and we could not be aware that they were already so.

I do not think it is quite accurate to say that there never was any contamination on the site, but I accept that the decommissioning process may have been thorough enough. I am simply aware from my own previous experience (of a former MoD site) that an area of tank testing, for example, had been excluded from available land for house building or fruit tree planting, while it was perfectly safe for surface activities.

In this location, you may speak of conjecture, but it is a reasonable line of inquiry. As far as hearsay is concerned, I may say that Mrs Dearden-Potter herself has a clear view of the site from her flat, and her informant as to what was being done may well have been her upstair neighbour, a retired builder who also has binoculars. She herself was a longtime member and sometime Chair of the Town Council, and is familiar with planning regulations and procedures. As you may see, I am forwarding our correspondence to her.

We are not ignorant, and it is better that we, from a base of some understanding, raise legitimate concerns, so that we have the information to pass on to other local people who are concerned.

We will do so.

We are not questioning your professional judgment, on this or, for example, the noise issue. We are quite confident that you would not wish to be responsible for anything that went badly wrong.

I hope we may be able to put ourselves back on a footing of mutual respect.

Yours sincerely

Hugh Barlow

----- Original Message -----

From: Janet Wallace

To: Hugh and Elizabeth

Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2011 11:07 AM

Subject: RE: Flood Management works

Dear Mr Barlow,

Thankyou for contacting me.

Firstly, I would like to reassure you that extensive investigations over several years have concluded that no contaminants of concern have been found on the site – it has a long history as a greenfield site and holiday park. There was a gas works in the past just off the site but this was decommissioned and dealt with many years ago and in the intervening years no contamination issues have arisen on that land, which incidentally East Devon DC still own. There may have been some minor surface deposits in the holiday park but these have been properly removed in the oversite works and there never was any indication of contamination at any deep level so I don’t know where you have got your information from. I note that you imply that they are “digging deep”. This is not the case as they have no reason to do so. We often find that some local people do not believe what they are being told and there has been a certain amount of conjecture locally based on no facts at all. This is not helpful to anybody and all the advice, assistance and legal controls we are using is based on our collective professional experience and analysis of factual information.

Secondly, you seem to be confusing two issues. All issues associated with ground and surface water run-off are being carefully monitored by both the developers and the Environment Agency, and the discharge arrangements have been agreed. We are all working closely together and are visiting the site often. Again I don’t know where you have got this information from but if you wish to ask that person to contact me directly I would be able to explain to them what is happening. None of the regulators involved have any concerns at the moment and have had nothing but good reports about the operation of the site. Clearly this is a very large site, with some unique aspects to be dealt with and a very large developement to follow. It is inevitable that from time to time issues will arise but they will be followed up as appropriate at the time.

The issue with the return of sea water from the lagoons to the sea is a separate matter. Again I don’t know where you have got your information from but I will explain the process. Sand will be dredged from the sea bed near the Isle of Wight in exactly the same way as it is done all the time to replenish beaches – most recently those at Bournemouth and Eastbourne. This has been done by Westminster Dredging for many years and the public have of course enjoyed the new sand quite safely! Once on board the ship it is dewatered prior to being transported to Seaton. Once in our waters, sea water is then added to enable the material to be pumped ashore. The material plus water is pumped straight into settling lagoons. The sea water is then piped back out to sea. We are expecting that there may be airbubbles entrained in this water which may be visible. At no time in this process is there any potential for the seawater to become contaminated and this process is done on a regular basis elsewhere without a problem.

Finally you have not mentioned noise in this email but you have done so in the past. I would like to stress that the measures put in place to mitigate some potential noise issues have been done and completed in full consultation with us and we consider that the developer is achieving Best Practicable Means for these operations. It cannot be the case that a developement of this scale can operate with no additional noise of any type and our negotiations have reflected this. We have had to take into account that the importation by sea process was offered primarily with a view to restricting noise disturbance to residents of Axmouth and Seaton who would otherwise have been affected by substantially more vehicle noise than is now the case. We have also taken into account that the pipeline will only be used for a few hours in every 24 hour period, and that these will themselves be temporary works. Finally it would have been entirely inappropriate to try and manage any noise emissions from the pipeline by setting noise levels as the background noise levels in that area vary so much – between 30 and 70dB depending on the weather conditions, sea conditions, natural movement of shingle and flapping of halyards in the yacht club.

We will not be able to follow up any anonymous or conjectural enquiries. If any individual residents have concerns it would be helpful if you could ask them to email me.

Yours sincerely,

J H Wallace

Janet Wallace, EHO

Environmental Protection Team

East Devon DC

Knowle

Sidmouth EX10 8HL

01395 571647

jwallace@eastdevon.gov.uk

From: Hugh and Elizabeth
Sent: 21 March 2011 15:39
To: Janet Wallace
Subject: Fw: Flood Management works

Dear Ms Wallace

Works at Harbour Road, Seaton

I am informed that Tesco contractors have been emptying waste water from their operations into the drainage system. Whilst in the normal way there is nothing to prevent their doing so, it would be concerning if they were draining possible contaminants from deep excavations.

It would be disproportionate to make an issue of this, but one of the principles of the conditions attached to the subsequent pipeline operations is that, when water is to be discharged from the site, it should first be sampled to check for contaminants.

I wonder if you might request of the contractors that, as soon as they have the sampling equipment, they should test for contaminants before discharging any water to the drains or to the sea?

Thank you for your early attention

Hugh Barlow

Chair, Seaton Development Trust

Pipeline Pictures

2011-03-19T17:19:00.005Z

Insulation being installed

The Pipeline stretches into the distance
Both pictures taken Saturday 19th March

The Pipeline has arrived

2011-03-17T18:27:00.003Z

Sent by James

Pipeline Towing Schedule

2011-03-11T17:54:00.000Z

Click to read all about the
Towed Pipeline Operation

Contributed by James

"Don't Sacrifice Axmouth on the Altar of Seaton Regeneration"

2011-03-10T08:52:00.004Z

Once again, there is plenty to learn from the Trinity Matters website.

This link http://www.trinitymatters.co.uk/axmouth-traffic/221-mp-neil-parish-pledges-support-for-axmouth-weight-limit gives some information on the recent visit by Neil Parish MP to Axmouth.

I thought the following was a great quote:

Neil wrote - "I would further ask the County Council to review the overall local road network, with specific reference to access for HGV, and general increased traffic volumes to the Seaton Regeneration site"
"I envisage such a review will recognise the need for investment in the lower Axe estuary transport infrastructure. This must produce the transport network essential to support the economic regeneration of Seaton, yet duly cognisant of the pressures on, and need to properly protect, our unique historic local villages."

No mention of the impact this could have on the local school run in Seaton or Colyford, or of the pedestrians ( walking is good for the environment ) trying to use Seaton town centre.

Now where were the planning authorities when this was raised months ago? Perhaps there is a plan to bring all of the petrol and retail goods in by sea.

Where is the Money?

2011-03-07T17:44:00.002Z

So, the development has well and truly started. Crusher is arriving tomorrow, so I assume they will start breaking up the concrete recovered from the site to use as part of the fill material, which is probably better than carting it away for land fill somewhere else ( not sure how much noise and dust this will make though ).

In anycase I digress. Now that the development has started, what do we know about the monies that were to be paid by Tesco towards community infrastructure. I have seen mention of a section 106 agreement, but don't know when this kicks in and who is responsible for looking after Seaton's interests. Not that I don't trust EDDC, but I have seen what national government recently did with 4 billion pounds and private sector companies ( Nimrod scrap metal anyone ). And EDDC did agree to the current degeneration on a site with totaly inadequate transport infrastructure.

Does anyone out there know how this is supposed to be handled and what are the timings? Perhaps someone in the know could point me in the right direction. It just seems to have all gone very quiet.

Saturday 5th March Pipeline Exercise

2011-03-05T19:44:00.001Z

Doesn't seem to have happened... anybody know why?

Outside hours working and noise at Trevelyan Road

2011-03-04T17:54:00.003Z

From Ian Thomas, Trinity Matters web site, via James:

Further to the recent agreement between Tesco and EDDC on noise limitation measures and normal site operating times, exceptional works are required on Saturday evening, 5th March.

The installation of the return pipeline to the beach can only be completed supported by suitable tides and weather conditions. The subcontractor due to complete these works has advised that tide times in Newhaven and Seaton mean that works will need to commence at 5.00pm in Seaton, to coincide with the need to sail from Newhaven at high water, and be in position to complete local pipework positioning in Seaton at high water.

In order to ensure that the pipeline is positioned safely, it is essential that the sea and weather conditions are favourable. These conditions are currently forecast for early Saturday evening. ISG Pearce have therefore approached EDDC Environmental Health Officers seeking agreement to vary Working Hours Conditions for this exceptional operation. This approval has been given.

Two excavators will be required to position the pipe on the beach. ISG Pearce intend that these machines will be in place at 17.00hrs and that all works will be completed by 20.30hrs.

James comments:

Bad news about noise. It just shows you how much resident interests count for at EDDC.

EDDC and Tesco Agree Noise Control Measures for Seaton Tesco Pipeline Project

2011-03-01T18:36:00.002Z

For those that have not seen the latest update from the Trinity Matters website, checkout the link below.

http://www.trinitymatters.co.uk/component/content/article/30-environmental-health/204-eddc-and-tesco-agree-noise-control-measures-for-seaton-tesco-pipeline-project

Apparently an EDDC Environmental Health Officer will be on site for the first pumping of gravel to assess the level of noise. Assuming he knows what he is doing, this seems like our best means of getting a measurement for that noise. It could also be useful to have other measures taken at the same time, using mobile phone applications, as suggested by James in an earlier post.

This could provide a means to determine if the noise levels increase on subsequent pumping runs, due to failure of the mitigation measures.

Message from Ian Perkins

2011-03-01T14:50:00.001Z

In answer to the question of timing in the email of 24th Feb I now have more information about the erection of the bridges. Tesco's are proposing the following: Friday 11th March, Riverside Way closed 8am - 6pm; Mon 14th March, Harbour Road closed 8am - 6pm.

Those dates, as far as I am aware, have at this stage neither been approved nor disapproved by the County Council's traffic engineer.

From James - The Site, and latest on the Bridge

2011-02-23T15:04:00.004Z

It is here already - in sections 5 x 3 x 1.5 metres. Bolted together they will span the roads involved. I have measured and photographed a section and discussed it with JLS. He thinks they look "substantial" and should be adequate.

From a Trevelyan Road resident

2011-02-23T15:02:00.000Z

I spoke to 'Tesco man' this morning at the Racal site. They have managed to 'gain access' and now have a squad of their own 'security men' at the gate in Riverside road - allowing hard hats entry but keeping the gates firmly closed at all other times. Diggers are working on site and the bridges will probably go up between '7th and 14th' (of March?) - so that puts them betwen 2 and 3 weeks behind schedule.

More Than a Cubic Metre of Gravel

2011-02-23T13:10:00.004Z

I noticed when scanning the Non Technical summary of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the filling operation, that :

"The settlement lagoon in the north east part of the site which will control the return of water back to the sea and reduce suspended solids will include a membrane to prevent saline sea water entering the ground water and, as such, there will not be an impact to salinity. Water within the settlement lagoon will be allowed to stand during the dredger’s cycle period until enough settlement has occurred in the water to allow safe discharge back to the sea. "

This seems to be backed up by the main EIA.

Now I am not an expert, but I have shifted plenty of gravel and sand mixes by hand, and can say for certain that when wet, a given cube of the material is much heavier than when dry. I have found no mention of washing the gravel to remove the saline pumping water, so can only assume that this will be spread over the site with the gravel.

Figures I have seen show that a cubic metre of sand/gravel when dry is about 1650kg and when wet about 2000kg (this will I am sure vary, depending upon type of rock, grade range of material etc). Calling it 300kg of saline water per cubic metre of sand/gravel would probably not be miles out i.e. about 15% of the total fill weight.

If as is implied by the EIA, saline water entering the groundwater is not a good thing, and mitigation measures are in place for the settlement lagoon, then what about the balance of the site. I see that Natural England had some concerns, though I can't find any mitigation measures in place to address these.

I would like to understand what if any affect this will have on the local ecosystem? Any experts out there care to comment.

Traffic through Axmouth

2011-02-20T18:56:00.000Z

For the benefit of people who have not seen the Axe Valley Weekender 18 Feb p4:

All parties have accepted that just the abnormal loads bringing the bridge structure will be allowed to pass through Axmouth, at reasonable times, notified to an Axmouth councillor for each traffic movement. All other construction traffic will travel by the route specified in the original conditions. As I understand it, these loads are too long to negotiate the pinch points at the junctions of Harefield Road with Manor Road and Seaton Down Road, probably too long and certainly too heavy for a weak point on Colyford Road, so that the Axmouth route is the only route possible. Axmouth residents are not happy, but have accepted this compromise; they will be alert for any breach of these modified conditions, now or later.

Letter from James Semple re Noise Report

2011-02-20T18:46:00.003Z

9 February 2011

Simon Stephenson,

Bureau Veritas SA

By email

Copies Janet Wallace, EDDC.

Chairman, Trevelyan Road Residents Association

Dear Mr Stephenson,

Your report number 4195376/2 for Westminster Dredging Company

This report dated 7 January 2011 was posted on the East Devon planning website on 2 February, hence the delay in this enquiry.

We represent a number of our members who live in Trevelyan Road Seaton, next to the pipeline your clients are constructing to convey gravel to the Tesco construction site. Initial analysis of the pipeline system indicates that the noise levels predicted by the planning application – and even by your report - fall short of the levels likely to be generated, and that they are likely to be high enough to cause sleep disturbance to local residents.

I am writing to enquire if you feel able – on behalf of your clients – to consider the reasons for our concern and explain to us why they are unfounded. In the hope that you will agree to this request I am attaching my original critique dated 25 July 2010 and including further comments on your report below.

In section 4.1, you take a pipeline at Boscombe beach as producing sound levels similar to the Seaton pipeline. We feel this is unsound, since the Seaton gravel is coarser and has to rise 5 metres over two roads. This will require much higher volume flow rates – probably twice the settling velocity of the largest particles - than the Boscombe pipeline, which we understand did not rise to any significant degree and probably conveyed most of the solids as bedload. This means Seaton should be noisier than Boscombe, for reasons explained in the attached critique.

I should be grateful for your comments, which I shall pass on to the Trevelyan Road Residents Association.

Thank you for your attention.

James Semple

Seaton Development Trust

Stresses on the bends of the pipeline

2011-02-15T08:32:00.002Z

On 13/02/2011 22:56, Hugh wrote:

Bill Collier, industrial chemist, remembers Flixborough, and wonders who has checked the stresses on the bends in the pipeline. It has probably been independently checked, but how do we know? Do we happen to have a retired mechanical engineer?

James replied:

James Lindsay-Smith has made contact with his old colleagues, including a numerate one with computer capability who is capable of checking all appropriate calculations. However, the main problem is gaining access to the data - which is refused - and another is the indeterminacy of slurry flow at this level of solids and particle size. Ask Bill if he is familiar with slurry transport. if so, send him my noise critique which contains most of the information in the public domain

Hugh comments:

It appears that we have access to the expertise, but not yet to the data.

Open Seams in Axe River Bridge

2011-02-12T11:33:00.004Z

----- Original Message -----

From: James Semple

To: Ian Perkins

Cc: ben.moore@hse.gsi.gov.uk

Sent: Friday, February 11, 2011 1:31 PM

Subject: Open seams in Axe River bridge on B 3172 in Seaton

Dear Ian,

I have been asked by Mr Price of Colyton to bring to your attention a number of open seams on the bridge carrying the B3172 over the Axe river, which has been taking Tesco construction traffic, and will be taking more.

I don't know how significant they are, or when they appeared; but Mr Price thinks they were not there some months previously.

All the pictures were taken today from the old bridge from the sea-ward side at the Seaton (west) end of the bridge. I have labelled them in Photoshop and compressed them for transmission; but they are otherwise unaltered.

The hand holding the steel rule in some pictures belongs to Mr George Boswell, a retired architect and member of Seaton Development Trust.

Thank you for your attention.

James Semple

Road Closure letter & maps

2011-02-12T10:44:00.005Z

Letter from James Semple to various involved parties

2011-02-09T17:16:00.003Z

From: James Semple

To: various

Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011 12:06 PM

Subject: Detailed design of footings for pipeline bridge in Seaton

Madam and gentlemen,

It is clear from the attached photograph - as well as from the amount of heavy traffic though the town - that Tesco's contractors are about to erect the bridge carrying their pipeline across public roads in Seaton.

This structure, according to all publicly available documents, has serious technical flaws which might well cause it to collapse across two public roads (one the B3172), an electricity substation and close to a terrace of houses in Trevelyan Road.

These flaws relate to the design of the footings for the support pillars and have been described to you in previous correspondence. We understand that another footing design has been prepared; but it has not been released to the public.

We can see no reasonable explanation for this continued secrecy. We have no interest in commercially sensitive or contractual information, and any such could be deleted or obscured. The only explanation seems to be that the design is inadequate and open to technical or other criticism.

I am sure I need not emphasise the serious consequences to yourselves personally and professionally if this structure fails in any way. Any court action would be bound to take into account the warning given, and the decision taken to ignore it. Even if the structure does not malfunction, public servants will have withheld important environmental information from ratepayers in the face of reasoned and informed disquiet, and a private company will have hidden information from the community in which it hopes to locate a major residential development.

None of these scenarios is desirable. I am therefore writing to you - as the responsible landowners (or their agents) - to ask for immediate access to all latest design documents for this structure.

Thank you for your attention.

James Semple

Axmouth Protests

2011-02-09T17:15:00.000Z

Take a look at

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/axmouth_protest_over_tesco_construction_lorries_1_796717

It shows how much attention Tesco pay to planning decisions

An interesting insight into "The Ditch"

2011-02-08T17:19:00.006Z

I think what we know about THE DITCH would be useful for other necessarily interested parties ... not that I expect any notice will be taken either by Tesco or by the Wicked Witch of the East.

Our information is not too official, but came from a Manager of one of the Contractors, who told me that ::

"There will be no retaining wall to keep the IoW sludge in place. It will just be allowed to trickle over the edge, making a slope.

As far as the Kings Court frontage, a 'Natural Country Ditch' will be left, resulting in a ditch on the Tesco side.

We asked if it would be surfaced ... apparently not.

... and what sort of drainage sytem there would be ... no reply.

... and did they plan to raise our wall, to prevent yobs running along their wretched ditch and climbing over into our carpark, but again there was no information available.

Lack of info is typical of Tesco. If they want to say anything, it is blazoned over everything. If they don't, the almost certain answer is "we aren't planning to meet your concerns /requirements."

Contributed by James Hiney

Latest on the Pipeline Bridgeworks

2011-02-01T09:13:00.002Z

We have received information from one of the landholders that Tesco contractors intended to start bridging work 31 January, but have been denied access until the final structural drawings have been received and approved by the competent authorities (presumably EDDC, Health and Safety, and Highways) which had required these further drawings. It sounds as though someone had tried to jump the gun, but the relevant authorities had acted with propriety. On the whole this sounds reassuring, but it does keep you on the edge of your seat, especially in the light of their seeking a road closure mid-February to carry out these works. Tell us if you see works commencing on Riverside land.

Sound Monitoring - A simple solution from James

2011-01-28T12:01:00.008Z

Above are pictures of two mobile phones showing sound metering applications - one on the iPhone 2 and the other under Android on the Samsung Galaxy Tab. This is in answer to the Tescowatch blog question about these devices.

The main barriers to professional acceptance is frequency response and calibration. Mobile phone microphones are probably designed around human speech frequencies, and drft in any electronic device means frequent calibration is required for professional results. The Android app claims to have been calibrated on the Galaxy Tab but I don't know how reliable that is.

Still, they are free, easy to operate and should indicate any gross violation.
James

Further News on the Pipeline & Bridge Works responsibilities

2011-01-28T11:50:00.006Z

To keep you informed, we have been promised access to the full construction drawings as soon as they are available, by all three landowners involved.
Watch this space.
Hugh Barlow

Bridge Works - Responsibilities of various parties - Correspondence between SDT and EDDC

2011-01-28T10:16:00.003Z

From: James Semple

To: Kate Little

Cc: dbest@eastdevon.gov.uk

Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 7:49 PM

Subject: Re: Serious danger of collapse of bridge over roads in Seaton

Dear Ms Little,

Thank you for your reply.

I note your denial of responsibility on behalf of the Planning service, and your opinion that it lies with the Health and Safety Executive and with the land-owners over whose land the pipeline passes.

However, the Council is also the landowner of a site on which one of the structures under question is to be located, and so this responsibility must also accrue to the Council as a whole.

I should therefore be grateful if you would advise us further as to what duties of care exist for such land-owners and which officer of the Council we should approach to discuss the situation.

Thank you for your assistance.

James Semple
Chairman
Seaton Development Trust Ltd

On 25/01/2011 16:53, Kate Little wrote:

Dear Mr Semple

In response to your questions about the structural stability of the overbridge to carry the pipe over the public highways involved, this is not a matter dealt with by the Town and Country Planning legislation, nor by the Building Regulations. The Planning service (which includes the Building Control team) therefore has no legal obligations in this matter.

The structural integrity of the bridge is a matter for the Highway Authority (Devon County Council) over whose land the structure runs and for Tesco who will have Health and Safety obligations to comply with.

Sorry that I am unable to assist you in this matter.

Yours sincerely,

Kate

Kate Little

Head of Planning Services

East Devon District Council
From: James Semple

To: Kate Little

Cc: dbest@eastdevon.gov.uk

Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 7:49 PM

Subject: Re: Serious danger of collapse of bridge over roads in Seaton

Dear Ms Little,

I attach a letter which explains our concerns about the bridge proposed by Tesco to carry the pipeline across roads in Seaton. A signed copy of this letter will be posted to you later today.

I also attach a copy of the drawing in question from your website for 10/1177/MFUL.

Thank you for your attention.

James Semple
Chairman
Seaton Development Trust Ltd

Pipeline & Bridge Works - Letter to Axe Riverside from SDT

2011-01-28T10:12:00.004Z

Copies to EDDC, tram, DCC, SDT, TrevRoad

Dear Mr Willis-Fleming

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.

Kate Little of East Devon District Council has replied to our email dated 22^nd January (of which you have a copy) advising us that responsibility for the safety of these structures resides with the owners of the land over which it passes.

The Axe Riverside Company is one of these landowners and I am therefore invoking regulation 2 (d) (iii) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 and requiring you to supply us with all the latest drawings, technical documents, agreements and relevant correspondence with East Devon District Council and other bodies relating to the design and construction of the pipeline and associated structures to carry infill material from the sea to the regeneration site.

Thank you for your assistance.

James Semple Chairman - Seaton Development Trust

Change of Name - What do you think?

2011-01-28T10:01:00.005Z

There has been a suggestion that we change our name to Planning Watch. What do you think? We would not want to get into confrontations with individual residents, but there are other issues which may concern us. There is, for example, the Court Lane application by Cavanna Homes. They acquired the property of the former primary school, and were granted permission to build St. Clare's Close. They failed to get permission to develop the former school playing field, which is designated public open space; but they fenced it off, and EDDC did nothing about it. Cavanna are now reapplying, and pretending that there never was public access: it had been well used after school hours, and particularly by the children of cricket and tennis club members. Residents would prefer their neighbours to be other householders like themselves, rather than children or the general public. What do you think? Look out for the resubmission of this planning application.
Hugh Barlow

State of the Watch - Message from Hugh Barlow

2011-01-28T09:57:00.007Z

TescoWatch has undergone some reorganisation since James gave up his role as Blogmaster.

After checking with the group Coordinators (Hilary Arnold, Brian Johnson and Doug Smith), I undertook to maintain the TescoWatch operation through the good offices of Peter Arnold as Blogmaster.

We have been grateful to James for continuing to alert us all to recent developments, even if we have not all shared his slightly confrontational approach. Whatever we think of Tesco and EDDC, I judge that they are likely to respond more favourably to approaches that do not assume they are determined to ignore the hazards which we identify. While I am sure that Tesco are keen to save time and expense, and that EDDC would prefer not to be continually raising issues with the developer and their agents, that does not mean they are the direct cause of every problem.

As far as the current issues are concerned, clearly Delta Simons as Tesco's agents, tried to slip pass unnoticed a change of plans, contrary to Jubbs's recommendations which were adopted in the original plan. Now that the change of plans has been detected by the Environment Agency, their quickest and probably cheapest option is to reinstate the original plan. Not to do so would be to incur the displeasure of both the Environment Agency and Jubbs, whom they really need onside. We wait to see, and hope to get inside intelligence again of Delta Simons response. Tesco themselves would probably only get to know of it if there was a major delay.

TescoWatch members individually are welcome to get in touch with the appropriate parties, such as Health and Safety on the bridge issue. The bridge-building contractors themselves have no interest in being responsible for a bridge collapse, and may well have raised the question themselves: they just need someone to pay for the extra work, if it is not budgeted for. Again, we need to be alert to what is happening on the ground, but, unless we actually see the erection beginning without foundations, we need not assume the question has been ignored.

In general, I think we may be better received if we approach EDDC and Tesco as individual residents rather than as a campaigning group. Clearly, James himself cannot but be identified with the Seaton Development Trust.
Your comments and views welcome.
Hugh Barlow

Archaeological Update

2011-01-21T14:43:00.006Z

Brian writes:

Just caught up with the progress made on achaeological matters and it seems that Stephen Reed (Devon County Archaeology Department) is happy with the procedure so far, and has been on site several times monitoring the works carried out over the whole area. So far, nothing significant has been discovered after several deep ditches crisscrossed the site. Also I understand, core bores have been done to a depth of 4 metres. The report on this is expected after the fill.

Just a thought. Can we obtain gadgets at reasonable prices to monitor noise levels?

Another serious problem with Tesco pipeline

2011-01-21T14:38:00.004Z

A note from James:

I heard rumours that all is not well with the Tesco pipeline. Looking again at the pipeline drawings I noticed that the bridge carrying the pipeline over the roads has no foundations. The drawings show a massive concrete pier but it is sitting on an un-dimensioned but very shallow pad. The pipe is heavy enough but when filled with water and gravel the weight is enormous, yet no significant footings are provided.

SDT has a member who is a fellow of the Institute of Civil Engineers. He has taken an interest in the noise issue but I am also going to see him with the bridge drawings for his opinion.

If this problem is confirmed, a very serious hazard is indicated. A collapsing bridge would endanger passing traffic and also the surrounding properties.

More in due course.

Environment Agency queries latest plans

2011-01-21T14:23:00.005Z

An interesting document has emerged in the form of an email from the Environment Agency, dated 5th January 2011, to Tesco agents Delta Simons raising serious doubts about the latest plans to raise the regeneration site level. You can access the download link for a pdf of the document by clicking HERE

Changing the guard

2011-01-04T14:52:00.000Z

My previous post reported the death of Tescowatch: but it seems this demise - like Mark Twain's - was an exaggeration. Whatever my feelings on the matter, a number of Tescowatch stalwarts are keen to continue with the project, and I am happy to support them.

I think it is in the nature of civil protest, where the few and weak tackle the many and strong, that some activists get so wrapped up in the banner of the protest as to lose sight of the rest of the army. I fancy this has happened to me.

But, while I may have lost touch with the movement, the movement will continue with other leaders. I will still do work for Tescowatch; but others will be forming policy and representing Tescowatch to the powers ranged against us.

The lesson I will try to learn - and which I suggest as a policy objective for Tescowatch - is to keep in touch with the grass roots. To this end, your comments are important. Heretofore these comments have been moderated: that is, they come to me first and I can decide whether or not to allow them onto the blog. This filters out the crazies and the Tesco PR people, but it also stifles legitimate comment.

Therefore, as my last administrative action, I am removing this filter and allowing direct posting without moderation. It will be up to the new leadership to decide whether or not to continue with this policy.

2011 will bring many changes to Seaton: here's hoping we can live with them.

What has been happening with East Devon and Tesco

2010-12-26T18:06:00.001Z

Apologies for a long silence.

Quite a lot has been going on - none of it good - and it always seemed sensible to wait for the next development before reporting back to you. Now we seem to have reached a dead stop, so I can lay out the whole sorry story.

Briefly to recap. The EDDC Development Management Committee agreed on 21 September to stop the Tesco pipeline operating between 11pm and 7am, and this decision was witnessed by several solid citizens, myself amongst them.

However, this time restriction was removed from the record by EDDC officers after meeting with Tesco. I complained about this to all the officers and elected members involved - without result. They neither deny nor admit it, but refuse to do anything about it.

My last post (below) reported the result of a freedom of information request for the actual notes of the4 meeting. EDDC spun this out to the last moment, and then said there was nothing to show. I then identified and wrote directly to the clerk to the committee who took the notes and wrote the first draft of the minutes.

He explained that his notes were only retained until the official minutes produced from them were approved at the next committee meeting. The notes were then securely destroyed. This complies with the mandatory data protection regulations, although good practice would be to keep them for 6 years to resolve any possible disputes - like this one.

I have also written to a variety of public law officers, but they all refuse to get involved. The Serious Fraud Office suggested going to the local police if we suspect corruption - but, of course, we have no proof of that. EDDC are quite capable of using illegal data manipulation against the public interest without getting paid for it - other than by the long-suffering tax-payers.

Since none of us has the funding for judicial review, we shall just have to let them cheat us and lie to us as much as they like: we can do nothing to stop them. But there are two lessons for us all:

1. When the elections come around next in 2011, use your vote to expel the miscreants. If your local candidate is amongst the members of the Development Management Committee, then vote for someone else. These people have demonstrated that they care nothing for their constituents, for democracy or for the rule of law. You can find their names by clicking HERE

2. Tescowatch is futile. We set it up to watch over Tesco and tell EDDC about any transgressions, expecting them to jump to defend the public interest. How naive can you get ? EDDC are active collaborators in making things as easy as possible for Tesco, whatever the cost to the public whose interests they exist to defend. Since no-one will listen to us, there is no point in complaining about anything - however monstrous.

So, unless someone comes up with evidence we can take to the police, this will be my last post.

Goodbye and good luck. .

Hot off the press

2010-12-01T12:21:00.000Z

I wrote to EDDC saying their 20 days for providing the intermediate minutes under Freedom of Information were up, and my email crossed in the ether with their response.

No other minutes exist, they say, so there is nothing to provide. I had asked about sound recordings of minutes, since every speaker uses a microphone. They say recordings are not allowed in the meeting. One can see why.

I need to take advice to see how next to proceed. Keep in touch.

Missing minutes - the story to date

2010-12-01T11:53:00.003Z

It is a whole month since I have posted anything to this blog and some of you may have wondered if I have given up the fight. Not so. I have been engaged in voluminous correspondence with East Devon District Council, and also ordinary citizens of the town.

To load the blog with the documents themselves would generate too many words for any sensible person to read, so I have compiled a summary in the form of a timeline. Anyone who does want to see the originals can send me an email address and I will forward them.

21 September 2010
EDDC Development Management Committee (DMC) chaired by Paul Diviani discusses the Tesco infill proposal. After several presesntations from the public, it approves the application, subject to various conditions including those recommended by the Environmental Health Officers (EHOs), namely that the pipeline bringing infill through the town should be insulated and should not operate between 11pm and 7am

6 October
Decision Notice published, requiring pipeline insulation, but making no mention of restricted hours of operation.

29 October
Rather late in the day, I consult the Decision Notice and observe the missing item. I consult the offficial minutes of the meeting and find this item missing from them also. The minutes also contain much more information than was mentioned at the meeting and are not therefore a record of the discussion. I write to Paul Diviani asking him to correct the situation.

2 November
Paul Diviani replies, enclosing an email from an EHO, Janet Wallace, which, he says, clarifies the matter. In this memo JW says the EHOs met with Kate Little (Head of Planning) and Tesco and it was decided that restricting the hours of operation was not necessary, since the pipeline was going to be insulated against noise. No mention was made about the committee decision.

2 November
I put in a Freedom of Information request to EDDC asking for the note-takers record of the DMC meeting. I write to PD saying I need to consult.

After some investigation I locate a number of citizens who were present at the DMC meeting and who remember, as I do, that the restricted operating hours recommendation was accepted by the committee. One of them remembers a relevant item of the discussion: one committee member said 11pm to 7 am was still too disruptive; why not make it 10pm to 8am ? He or she was voted down in favour of the EHO recommendation, but it helped to fix the item in his memory.

11 November
I write to PD dismissing JW's argument, reporting on the citizens' recollections and calling on him to resign for not safeguarding the integrity of his committee's deliberations

15 November
PD replies, denying any falsification of minutes and refusing to resign

18 November
I write to all the officers and members of the DMC present at the meeting in question reporting our disquiet and asking the person who suggested 10pm to 8am to come forward. I end up with a stirring call for them to defend representative democracy - an unspoken reminder of the elections early next year. To date no replies have been received.

1 December
I write to Kate Symington (EDDC Freedom of Information officer) saying that the statutory period for providing information (20 working days) has expired without anything having been provided and asking for information on how to take the matter further.

Watch this space.

More thoughts on Committee Minutes

2010-10-31T13:47:00.001Z

Since my last post about the noise decision reached by EDDC Development Management Committee on 21 September, I have been looking more closely at the documents involved.

As posted to the EDDC website, the important ones are as follows:

1. The Committee papers. This is a great wodge of collected documents handed out at the start of the meeting. Committee members get them earlier so that they can study them. This is where the EDDC Environmental health officers recommend a time limit for pipeline operation.

2. The Minutes. These are quite short and cover who was there and who had a conflict of interest. There are no details about what was said: instead, we are referred to the Schedule.

3. The Schedule. This records the decisions reached.

This seems quite reasonable until you look in detail at the decisions as described in the schedule . They include an enormous amount of technical detail - far more than was mentioned at the meeting. Paragraph 6 dealing with pipeline noise was quoted in the last post, and mentions the specific addresses likely to experience noise. I am quite ccertain that this was not mentioned during the meeting.

Clearly, what has happened is that someone took preliminary minutes during the meeting and then passed these over to the planning officer, who fleshed them out with all appropriate detail. In the process, they seem to have left out something - namely, the restriction on operating hours.

As promised, I have written to Paul Diviani, the Chair of the Committee for further information. In the meantime, I would like to hear from anyone else who was at the 21 September meeting and remembers anything about the pipeline noise decision . . . for example, the residents of Trevelyan Road ?

Pipeline Noise is back again

2010-10-29T14:56:00.002+01:00

There is bad news for residents of Harbour and Trevelyan Roads in Seaton. Pipeline noise will be 24/7 after all.

At the Tesco planning meeting on 21 September the committee papers included a recommendation from EDDC Environmental Health officers that the pipeline should be insulated against noise, and the hours of operation restricted to exclude the hours between 11pm and 7 am. As I remember the discussion, this restriction was agreed, yet the Decision Notice makes no mention of it.

I asked EDDC if the discussion was minuted, but it is not: they record only decisions taken, and this record makes no mention of any time restriction. I did not take detailed notes myself, so I cannot be sure that my recollection is accurate. I have written to the Committee Chairman, Paul Diviani, but he hears so many cases I should be surprised if he remembers anything at all.

So, what lies in store for Seaton residents near the pipe ? The Decision Notice paragraph 6 is as follows:

The pipeline shall be enclosed at all places where noise generated during the movement of material within it is likely to be clearly audible at the facade of nearby residential properties. Prior to the commencement of filling operations the noise levels (during the day and at night time) at the facade of those properties namely nos. 1-8 Trevelyan Road, Bay View, 66 & 68 Harbour Road,113-115 Harbour Road and Bridge Cottage shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The filling operation shall not exceed the noise levels so agreed. (Reason - To protect the amenities of local residents.)

This seems to mean that the pipeline cannot make more noise than the residents experience at any time of the day, or night. But it also means that daytime noise levels can occur at any hour, including the middle of the night.

The other aspect is enforcement. What happens if noise levels are higher ? How will we know? Will we have to measure noise levels at 2 am before complaining to Environmental Health? And what will they do about it ? Do they have a ship-to-shore link to the dredger out in the bay so that they can tell them to stop the discharge?

I advise the residents referred to above to get together with Janet Wallace of the EDDC EHO team to discuss and agree these procedures well before discharge starts in the New Year.

Incidently, those of you with iPhones, there are several applications to measure noise levels.

Progress Report

2010-10-11T14:37:00.004+01:00

My thanks to those of you who have made comments, two of which have been added to the post below this one. For the moment, I will go on with my report, but further comments are welcome.

I had a reply to my Freedom of Information request to the Environment Agency; but it was incomplete - consisting of a few emails of peripheral interest. I have formulated a more rigorous request; but have been baffled by the EA email system. Replies to the sender of the information have bounced back twice, and I could not get anyone there to explain why. I shall therefore put in another completely separate request.

My complaint to East Devon has also been delayed. I had intended sending it from the group, but quailed at the level of consultation involved; so it has gone in under my own name. I will report when I hear something.

In the meantime, we had a visit from a Norwegian journalist who is doing a feature on Tesco. I don't read Norwegian, so I don't know what he will make of our situation - if he mentions it at all. Any Scandanavian linguists reading this blog should let me have their contact details and I will send the name of the publication concerned.

Feeling better

2010-09-24T14:23:00.000+01:00

Sorry to have been so feeble. I am feeling better now.

I have put in a FoI request to the Environment Agency for their report on the Tesco Ziggurat, and am compiling a complaint to EDDC.

Tesco Planning decision

2010-09-21T21:50:00.000+01:00

Well, the infill application 10/1177/MFUL was approved, after a very poor quality discussion. Neither the officers nor the committee members seemed to understand the issues, or be very interested in them.

Now, my contact at the Environment Agency is refusing to tell me what he has found on the Tesco site. I could bludgeon it out of them with Data Protection legislation, I suppose; but I don't feel like doing this any more.

The Tesco heap of dirt

2010-09-18T20:17:00.002+01:00

I had an email from an anonymous reader of this blog questioning the relevance of my earlier posts on the Tesco Ziggurat. After all, he/she said, it is just a heap of dirt !

So it is, but upon a heap of dirt just like this one, Tesco propose to regenerate our town: by selling the land on to someone who (hopefully) will build houses, a hotel and a community centre on it. If they collapse like the heap has collapsed, what good will that do ?

In the meantime, let us see what has happened to the heap. Look at the following pictures:

You will notice a big change, from the usual shape on the 14th to the seriously flattened shape on the 17th. So what happened between the two dates ?

I don't know for sure, but on the 16th September the site was due to have a visit from the Environment Agency. Either Tesco made the changes, or they did.

I have written to the EA asking for information on the heap before the Tuesday planning meeting. If it arrives in time, I will let you know.

The Crucial Meeting

2010-09-17T17:38:00.001+01:00

Oyez ! Oyez ! Oyez !

The Tesco Infill project is being discussed at the meeting of the East Devon Planning Committee at the Council Chamber, the Knowle, Sidmouth on Tuesday 21st September 2010 from 2 p.m., and public participation is invited.

In fact, come earlier at 1 p.m. and talk to the Panorama camera team who are doing a programme on supermarkets. They are not being allowed to film inside the Council Chamber, so will need to meet people outside.

This is your chance to tell the world how Seaton is being treated.

Rain damage continues

2010-09-09T21:15:00.001+01:00

After my last post (below) about erosion of the test ziggurat, we had a lot more rain. Exeter airport was flooded, and it rained quite hard in Seaton also.

Today I had a look at the ziggurat, and it showed even more erosion, as shown below.

I wrote again to the Environment Agency, and this time, also to East Devon District Council, pointing out the serious implications of the situation. I will report back when I get a reply.

Washing away the infill

2010-09-07T11:59:00.000+01:00

Seatonians who can see the site will have noticed a neat, pyramid-shaped heap of rubble (a ziggurat ?) on the Tesco site. Here is what it looks like.

This is how Tesco is going to build up the land. They will pile up a lot of gravel, slope the sides (as shown here) and then grow grass over it.

Those of us who have kept an eye on this ziggurat have noticed that the left hand side (behind the two TV aerials) seems to have been washed away to some extent - perhaps by the heavy rain we had recently.

If this is what has happened, it is not a good sign. The whole development will have sides like this, and one side will be acting as a drain to carry flood water away from Harbour Road. If this is what a couple of heavy rain storms can do, imagine the erosion of a fast stream of flood water.

I have written to the Environment Agency officer who is supervising this site, but he is away at the moment. I will let you know what he says.

Tesco in the Daily Mail

2010-09-06T18:36:00.001+01:00

It seems to be "Tear into Tesco Time" in various organs of the press. After the Scottish item (see below) the Mail has weighed in with a wide-ranging critical summary.

Take a look at the on-line version by clicking HERE

Tesco in the Times

2010-09-01T13:15:00.004+01:00

In the past, Tescowatch has been criticised as being mindlessly opposed to Tesco - usually on the grounds of elitism and contempt for the concerns of people on a restricted budget.

There is no truth in this accusation; but it is true that we do not trust Tesco to act in the best interests of the community. Further evidence for this mistrust is given in the Times newspaper of Tuesday 31st August in an article entitled "Tesco's secret shop front" on page 31. The Times operates behind a paywall, so you would have to pay to read this article online. However, the same story was covered in The Herald, which does not operate a paywall, so you can read it by clicking here.

The town of Linwood in Scotland has a town centre composed of retail and community facilities. In 2001 this centre was bought by Balmore Properties, but fell into decline over sucessive years. Retailers were evicted, shops not relet and requests for lease extensions refused. Balmore refused to discuss the derelict shops with local groups and the centre became a magnet for antisocial behaviour.

Then Tesco bought the centre and promised a multi-million-pound superstore, new retail premises, new health centre and a library – all paid for by themselves.

Naturally, the residents were delighted . . . but they were less delighted when they found out that Balmore had been a front company acting on behalf of Tesco; and so Tesco had been responsible for running down the centre for years before deciding to develop it.

Now, what can we infer from this ? Clearly, that Tesco will act ruthlessly to maximise profit without consideration for the community in which it is embedded. But what about the Seaton context ?

Linwood has a population of about 9,000 and will receive :
* A new community library
* A new community centre to replace the Tweedie Hall
* Potential relocation and upgrading of Linwood Health Centre
* New retail units for businesses currently operating in the centre, designed in a modern shopping mall format
* Design features to minimise the risk of crime in the local area.

Seaton has a population of 7,500 - rising to 12,500 if we include the surrounding villages making up the market town area. What do we get ?
* Loss of the Holiday Village, providing 140 full-time jobs and 400 tourist beds with 80% occupancy bringing over £9 million into the area every year.
* Loss of the Youth Club, with £80,000 cash (about 10% of the cost) to replace it -
* A contribution of £1.75 million towards a new Visitors Centre, which will be half the size specified in the original consultants' report
* £45,000 towards the salary of Town Manager
* Continuous traffic congestion - not only during construction, but also afterwards.
* Increased flood risk for the Harbour Road area.

Some people may point to houses and other buildings to be built on the site; but remember that Tesco are not going to build these: they will be selling the land on to someone else who may build them, or may build something else.

Linwood people have had their mouths stopped with Tesco gold - and who shall blame them for swallowing it. But, there is precious little gold for Seatonians, so we might as well spit it straight back into the Tesco corporate face.

The EHO speaks . . .

2010-08-19T11:49:00.010+01:00

The Environmental Health Officers of East Devon District Council have made a comment on the Tesco pipeline project. The full text can be located in the comment section of application 10/1177 on the EDDC website; but the salient points are as follows:

"1. No discharge of material either to or from the site shall take place between the hours of 11pm and 7am on any day.

2. The pipeline shall be enclosed at all places where noise generated during the movement of material within it is likely to be clearly audible at the facade of nearby residential properties. Reasons : To protect the amenities of local residents.

3. The return pipe shall discharge on the sea bed at a point beyond the Bathing Water Zone , at least 100m off-shore, in accordance with the requirements of the Marine Management Organisation. Discharges through this pipe shall be supervised at all times, shall only take place during daylight hours, and shall be at the rate specified in the Environmental Impact Assessment. Return material shall be sampled at frequencies agreed with the Local Planning Authority for suspended fine materials. Reason: To protect Bathing Water Quality. "

The noise provisions in 1 and 2 are less than we asked for; but do provide a measure of protection to those Seatonians unfortunate enough to live close to the pipeline. We now await Tesco's new prediction of pipeline noise (see post for 4th August below).

The control of sediment discharged into the bay (3) ignores the concern of local fishermen; and depends on the details agreed with the LPA. We shall be keeping an eye out for this.

Some progress on noise

2010-08-10T22:57:00.001+01:00

This morning I went to a meeting at East Devon District Council with Jim Knight, District Councillor for Seaton, who arranged the meeting. We met two officers from Environmental Health, Simon Smale and Janet Wallace and a spirited exchange of views took place for about half an hour.

Eventually, the officers agreed to advise that the pipeline be fitted with acoustic insulation and that the hours of operation be restricted to avoid the night time hours.

When this advice appears in writing I shall make further comments.

The new pipeline noise prediction . . . and District Council inertia.

2010-08-07T15:09:00.005+01:00

There isn't a new prediction yet; but from the previous post you will see that Tesco propose to do one. Since the existing noise prediction is now obsolete, we shall need to see the new one before being able to make comments.

This means that the hand-in date for comments (currently 12 August) will have to be extended to a date some weeks after the glorious 12th: and so far, this has not happened.

I have written once more to Steven Belli (how much he must be looking forward to his new job) asking for news of this new date in advance of our PID on 9th August. No answer as yet.

My noise critique was earlier passed by Steven Belli to the Environmental Health Officers in East Devon. Nothing then happened until I started badgering them about it: then I was told by an EHO staff member - who had clearly not read it - that such difficulties could usually be "engineered out".

They would not discuss it further, so I petitioned one of our District Councillors to intervene. He has now arranged a meeting next week - after our Public Information Day.

When things like this happen, some people mutter about the idleness and corruption of civil servants - but I am not one of them. Civil servants work for the public good with inadequate resources and have often to juggle competing priorities. I am sure the officer concerned had lots of other work to do, and the corporate culture of East Devon always seems to involve a barrier against public consultation: so I suspect my noise critique was directed to the bottom of the pile. I shall what I can do - next week - to drag it to the top.

Tesco tries again

2010-08-04T15:05:00.001+01:00

Seatonians will already have had the pleasure of reading about Tesco and us on the front page of Pulman's View from Seaton.

Entitled "Building claims refuted by store" it summarises my noise paper rather roughly, then includes quotes from Julie Bishop - Juliette to her workmates - dismissing our noise figure (which came from Tesco documents) and saying we had "misunderstood the issue".

She then admitted that their consultants would be retesting their pipe using our conditions.

I sent her an email, from which this quotation is taken:

The fact that you are now repeating the pipeline noise measurement with more realistic conditions - conditions which we found to be absent from your first effort - suggests that it is Tesco who have misunderstood things, not Tescowatch Seaton.

That being so, I should be glad to cast an eye over any further noise estimates you produce to see if they comply with Seaton conditions. My fee for doing so can be donated to the Seaton Youth Club, which you are going to demolish without replacement.

We are holding a Public Information Day in Seaton on 9th August, (not the 10th) which you are very welcome to attend to present the latest modifications to your proposals.

No reply so far.

Urgent call to residents of Trevelyan and Harbour Roads, Seaton

2010-07-25T19:28:00.000+01:00

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 ?

2010-07-25T17:37:00.000+01:00

Fraudulent correspondence

2010-07-17T17:48:00.000+01:00

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

2010-07-17T15:19:00.000+01:00

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

2010-07-13T18:26:00.000+01:00

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

2010-07-06T13:42:00.000+01:00

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 :-

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.
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.
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.
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.
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

2010-07-03T19:44:00.000+01:00

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

2010-07-01T21:16:00.003+01:00

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

2010-07-01T20:57:00.000+01:00

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 ?

Work starts on the ziggurat - and some Tesco leaflets

2010-06-09T20:35:00.000+01:00

Our observers report that a small hole was dug on the regeneration site today - presumably to begin the construction of the settlement test structure approved by 09/2337/FUL - which we call the ziggurat.

To be sure, this is not very exciting news to the world at large, but to us Tescowatchers (who have had nothing to watch for months) it is the first sally in what we expect to be a major campaign.

And there is more news. The residents of KIngs Court, which is adjacent to the Tesco site, complained about Tesco ivy growing on their fence. They were told that steps would be taken to remove the ivy tomorrow (Thursday10th June).

On the same day (Thursday), Tesco staff would distribute leaflets at various points throughout the town. Make sure you get your copy and tell them what you think about their project.

What's going on ?

2010-05-30T22:29:00.000+01:00

At the General Meeting of the Development Trust last week someone asked me what was happening about Tesco, as they had not heard anything for ages. I had to say that, aside from on-site soil sampling, I had heard of nothing.

Since then, I have heard a rumour that Tesco's next planning application was submitted to East Devon District Council last Thursday . . . by co-incidence, the very day of the Trust General Meeting.

Any application would need to be validated before appearing on the EDDC website, so we would need to wait some days at least before any hard information is available.

Watch this space

Tesco in Seaton hits the National Press

2010-05-06T16:22:00.000+01:00

While having no direct connection to TescowatchSeaton, it should be of interest to all Tescowatchers to have a look at Wednesday's Guardian. The Society supplement had on page 1 a large picture of the Mayor of Seaton looking more than usually pugnacious and talking good sense about the impact of Tesco on her town

For those non-Guardian readers, the article can be seen here

Letter to the press about new flood hazard

2010-04-11T15:41:00.000+01:00

Here is the letter I sent . . .

I have sent you a copy of our email to Stephen Belli about this new flooding hazard for Seaton. I am now sending you the supporting diagrams and explanatory argument. Much of this is discussed on our blog at http://www.tescowatchseaton.blogspot.com/, but this had no pictures and these are essential to understanding our concerns.

Look at T1 above This is taken from the sucessful Tesco planning application and shows the overall layout of the whole regeneration site. Important here is the role of the flood relief channel, which I have marked.

This runs from Harbour Road at the bottom of the picture (south) to the marshes at the top (north). Harbour Road is the lowest part of Seaton and most susceptible to flooding from the sea or river. This danger is greatly increased by raising the regeneration site and so stopping flood water draining north to the marsh. To reduce this danger, the Tesco plan provides a flood relief channel (also called a monsoon drain or berm) running north-south right through the development site at low level, so cutting the site into two halves.

When the site is raised and a flood comes, water can flow from Harbour Road to the marshes along this channel. Without the channel, raising the site means a serious increase in the flood risk for the whole area, which is largely residential. We were not terribly happy about this solution, but it is better than nothing.

Now look at T2. This shows Tesco's proposal to raise the whole site by pumping in infill from the sea. The idea is to build a high wall right round the site, pump in a mix of seawater and aggregate along the black pipeline grid, allow it to settle, collect the seawater in a lagoon (blue arrows) and then pump it back out to sea.

The flood relief channel (FRC) is visible (and dotted by me), along with all the later buildings, so they seem to have just pasted their proposals on top of an earlier version of T1 without paying attention to the details. They clearly have no understanding of the function of the FRC, as both the black pipeline and the blue water arrows flow straight over it, and it will be filled up with the rest of the site. Without the FRC, the only flood protection device is lost and the whole area is at enormously greater risk of flooding.

We complained about this to the Environment Agency. The correspondence is covered in the blog but, basically, they said leave it to the Tesco engineers. But we can see no economic solution, and after 5 weeks, nor (it seems) can they.

Consider the options.

1. Fill the site in two halves, on either side of the FRC. This will require two separate filling operations, with separate piping and drainage lagoons. It might be possible, but it is going to be very slow and very much more expensive.

2. Fill the whole site and then dig out a new FRC. This has two objections.

While the site is being filled, there is no FRC. If a flood comes along during the filling process, Harbour Road has no protection.
Digging a channel through slippery sediment deposited from seawater is not going to be easy - and may be actually impossible.

There is no official acknowledgement of these problems, nor of the hazard to Seaton. The Tesco contractors have made mistakes in the past (see the blog) and we are worried that they may be about to make another one - with potentially catastrophic results.

We want EDDC and the EA openly to acknowledge the problem and tell us how they propose to deal with it. Under these circumstances, we can only appeal to the power of the press and public opinion to bring this about.

No satisfaction yet on wall safety and flooding hazard

2010-04-03T21:49:00.000+01:00

On 8th March (see below) we flagged up a new flood hazard presented by the Tesco scheme, and wrote to the Environment Agency on 9th March for their reaction. In addition, we asked about the safety of the high temporary walls to be built around the site. For several weeks there was silence - presumably while the EA consulted the Tesco consultants. Then, on 25th March, we received their reply.

On the issue of the wall safety they say . . . "The use of hydraulic fill is a well established civil engineering technique and has been used to fill dams and move aggregates and minerals for many years. We are currently unaware of any examples where this technique has been used to fill prospective development sites in the manner being suggested in Seaton. You may wish to search the internet for examples as they may exist. However, we cannot rule this technique out as a possible solution to the raising the site in an efficient and timely manner. Civil liability would rest firmly with the consultants/contractors in the event of any problems occurring.

The integrity of any temporary impounding banks is largely a matter for the consulting engineers, to satisfy themselves upon as part of any overall scheme design. We must wait to consider any proposal that Jubbs wish to promote but shall at all times seek to protect the local environment and ensure as far as we are able that any proposal is safe. "

To summarise the reply on wall safety. . .

This site infill method is unknown to them
If anything goes wrong, sue Tesco
It is up to the consultants (Jubbs) to decide on the quality of their own work
The EA will ensure safety as far as they are able, but no further.

Now, Jubbs are a well-known firm of engineering consultants who advised Liatris, the previous potential developers of this site. However, anyone can make a mistake, and we were able to find a serious flaw in their flood risk analysis for Liatris. By using an outdated version of our old friend PPS25, they proposed a much smaller (hence cheaper) infill volume than was actually required by law. This was not noticed by the EA, nor by EDDC . . . it was left to our small team of amateurs to detect and correct it. Our correction was then enforced without explanation or apology.

Now we are looking at a much more ambitious procedure - totally new and untried on this kind of site (says the EA). Who is to say that Jubb may not make another mistake - as they did before? Who is going to be checking their work ? Only the EA, as far as they are able; and how far is that ? Judging from past performance, and the letter above - not very far at all.

Tescowatch will do it's best; but without access to the site or professional advice we may miss something. It would be far better for the regulating authority (EA) to take on this role with committment and enthusiasm on behalf of us all - as is their function.

As far as flood protection during construction is concerned, the EA reply says . . . " Separate drainage proposals would need to be agreed prior to the main body of work proceeding. Consideration would have to be given to adverse weather, impact on watercourses and potential impact on groundwater. We understand Jubbs have been considering a number of options to fill the site so we do not wish to speculate upon which, if any, might meet with our approval. "

This sounds reasonable enough (if rather vague), except for the fact that several site plans have already been tabled by Tesco - and approved by the EA - which show no flood protection at all during the infill phase. Why was this problem not raised by the EA at that stage ? Why did it have to wait for us amateurs to query it ?

No-one doubts the expertise available to the EA. Why won't they use it ?

Work about to start

2010-03-11T12:40:00.000Z

ON 4th March, East Devon District Council gave Tesco's contractors the go-ahead to start work on . . . "Construction of temporary trial embankment to assess compaction/water absorption rates of soil/compacted concrete in advance of future filling operation".

The document is called "Conditions11038258.pdf" and can be downloaded from the EDDC planning portal under the number 09/2337/FUL. It is 16 pages long and consists of reports from:

PJ Carey (Contractors) Ltd of Wembley describing the crushing of the hardstanding and formation into test bunds;
Aspect Ecology from Banbury outlining the ecological safeguards to be adopted - mostly slow-worms and japanese knotweed - and providing a blurred site plan;
Delta-Simons Environmental Consultants of Lincoln who reply to queries from the Environment Agency about unexpected contamination procedures.

The various Tescowatch teams are looking in detail at these reports; but a problem is presented by the poor quality of the site plan. I have written to Aspect Ecology asking (nicely) for a better copy of the plan. If and when it arrives, I will post it on this blog.

It is clear that Tesco are calling in contractors from across the land - no local employment opportunities here. It also looks serious - giving every indication that they mean to go ahead with this very ambitious operation.

Interesting times . . . in the Chinese interpretation.

A new flood hazard for Seaton

2010-03-08T21:42:00.000Z

Many of us are worried about flooding along Harbour Road in Seaton - one of the lowest streets in the town. What is more, we consider that building an eight-foot embankment between the road and the marshes will only make things worse. Tesco's solution is to cut a channel - a monsoon drain - in the embankment half-way along Harbour Road leading to the marshes to drain the flood water away from the road.

The trouble with this solution is that the flood water will have to flow from both ends along Harbour Road towards the middle to reach the drain. Their engineers admit this flow would be fast enough to knock someone off their feet - which seems to us to be a serious disadvantage .

However, East Devon District Council saw no problem, and the monsoon drain has been adopted as the solution to flooding in Harbour Road. We might be knocked off our feet, but the water level will drop, sooner or later, so hold on tight to something or other and there will be nothing to worry about !

Since then, we have heard about the sea-borne infill plan to raise the level of the land by the eight feet required. Tesco want to build a twelve foot wall around the whole site, pump in a slurry of sea-water and silt, let it settle and pump the water back into the bay. This is a very ambitious - some say impractical - operation with a long list of disadvantages. To this list we must now add one more - a major increase in the flooding risk.

Tesco's twelve foot wall has no monsoon drain: it runs without a break round the whole site so that the slurry can spread to all parts and find it's own level. So, if a flood comes while the wall is up, Harbour Road will lack even the inadequate protection of a monsoon drain to the marshes.

We have asked the Environment Agency to look at this problem. We will let you know what they say.