Search results for 'seaton'

‘Seaton Heights’ plan reaches a low

21 Jan

The application for a large and highly controversial development planned at Seaton, has been turned down.   Pullman’s View from has the front page story. The link is here:

Colyton/ Seaton ‘Green Wedge’ to stay, says Inspector.

20 Jan

The  Community Action Group fighting  plans to build on the highly prized and environmentally sensitive land between Colyton and Seaton, have today learned that the developer’s appeal has been rejected.

A SIN correspondent from the area sums up :

“All this was caused by the Planning Officer approving in the first place, and we were only saved by the speeches  from the public at the DMC (June 2013) , which forced the refusal, and so EDDC had to defend at appeal. Then a fundraising campaign by local people ( donations totalled tens of thousands of pounds),  put pressure on EDDC to make sure Mr Gordon Lennox did his job for once.”

More details on the East Devon Alliance new website :

The Seaton/Colyford green wedge appeal: not a good start for EDDC

10 Dec

Initial impression from a correspondent, more to follow:

….. EDDC had provided mismatched documentation on the Bat and Planning Law to the Inspector and the Applicant. The Inspector said “I am appalled by this”, and stopped the meeting for ten minutes for EDDC to get its facts straight. EDDC then apologised ….. .

Colyford-Seaton green wedge appeal hearing

24 Nov

The appeal by developers to be allowed to build housing on the green wedge between Colyford and Seaton and adjacent to the Axe Wetlands will be heard on 10-13 December 2013 in Colyford Memorial Hall.

Local campaigners have somewhat unusually been allowed representation by a barrister who will speak on their behalf.

The planning application is contentious not just because of the green wedge and Wetlands but also because the new development would interfere with foraging routes of local bats, one species of which is on the highly-endangered list.

Any member of the public may attend the hearings.

It will be a real test of how we value our independent local communities and our wildlife.

Developers have already submitted an amended planning application to EDDC and the decision on this application will heavily affect the second one.

Should this application succeed the same developer may well attempt to revive their earlier attempt to build on fields on the other side of Harepath Road – a development which was turned down by EDDC and not appealled some years ago – which included a controversial so-called community building that turned out could only be used exclusively by one particular group of people.

Ongoing saga at Seaton (4)….some pipeline pics

17 Nov

hr-bridge31 1. Unlagged pipeline before pumping starts
lagging-1 2. Mid-air lagging
HR-bridge2-7Apr 3. Lagged pipeline after noise

More episodes of the saga no doubt to come…..!


Ongoing saga at Seaton (3)

17 Nov

7. Emails to/from EDDC about noise critique email corresp noise

8. Noise meter picture
9. Tesco noise letter tesco noise letter

Ongoing saga at Seaton (2)

17 Nov

4. Collected correspondence about toxic hazard of infill Infill correspondence collected
5. Letter to HSE re pipeline bridge safety hse ltr
6. Noise critique (JWS) Noise critique

Ongoing saga at Seaton (1)

17 Nov

James Semple’s letter in the latest issue of Pullman’s View from is a reminder of the Tesco development tangle. SIN has been sent some earlier episodes in this saga, which reveal some familiar issues with EDDC.

For the record, we’ll publish the story here.  As sagas are of course lengthy, we’ll be telling it in 3 consecutive posts with three items  each..and some pics…starting with:

1. The text of the letter to View from   view ltr 

2. Record of correspondence with Paul Diviani about alteration of
minutes relating to the Tesco pipeline Diviani corresp

3. Press statement about the above democracy under threat

Seaton: EDDC votes to share the profits with Tesco but no affordable housing on the site

21 Aug

The following comes by email from Sandra Semple, who was at yesterday’s Development Management Committee meeting for the item on Seaton, where Tesco has petitioned for the removal of all the affordable housing on its site to make it more saleable, as it has many problems associated with the infilling of the site which mean that only certain types of houses can be built and fewer of them.

“What I say below is a personal opinion only and reflects my layperson understanding of the debate.

The DMC heard from myself and Paul Arnott:  there were no representatives of the town council in attendance.  District Councillor Peter Burrows was in attendance earlier in the day as a member of the DMC but left before this item.  District Councillor Steph Jones appeared in her capacity as Deputy Portfolio Holder for Housing.

Members of the committee appeared strongly of the view that Tesco was going a step too far.  They particularly disliked the comment from the company’s agent that if EDDC did not agree to what they wanted, they would appeal.  Some thought this was unacceptable pressure.  One member of the committee noted that no affordable housing has been built in Seaton for many, many years and if this reduction was allowed other developers in the town would think they should have the same treatment.

Mr Freeman (I forget what title he has these days) pointed out that there was a mistake in calculations in the documentation (not sure whose fault) and that whereas it had been stated that the company might sustain a loss of over £2 million if affordable housing were included, the real amount on the figures provided was more like £750,000. 

It was suggested that this application was a good candidate for EDDC’s new policy of “overage” and here I get a little fuzzy about what they mean – and to be fair so did some of the members of the committee.  However, what it appears (to me) to be is that yes, Tesco will be allowed to take out the affordable housing BUT EDDC will put in place an overage clause which says that when the potential loss has been recovered (i.e. after the £750,000 loss has been taken into account – or whatever the correct figure is) then EDDC will take a percentage of the profit thereafter.  This means, as I understand it, that, say, Tesco sells the site for £5 million, then they ignore the first £750,000 and the remaining profit is then split between EDDC and Tesco.  The EDDC lawyer in attendance could not remember what the percentages agreed were but I have looked it up and the default allowed in the new policy is 50% each but EDDC has the option to increase this percentage if it sees paperwork which shows that the profit could be extremely high. 

This only applies to the current planning application.  If the site is still vacant when the current planning application runs out then everything has to be renegotiated including the S106 agreements and percentage of affordable housing.

Throughout the afternoon several members of the committee (perhaps with an eye to the next election) said that the economic climate was improving and that this meant that Tesco has less to worry about.

Seaton to pay for Tesco’s mistakes?

18 Aug

The Development Management Committee will discuss on Tuesday whether to agree to officers recommendations that Tesco in Seaton should be absolved from providing 20% affordable housing on the site next to their store which they own.  The site had been expected to provide around 360 homes with 72 of those homes affordable.

The following is given as justification for this recommendation on page 208 of the DMC’s documents for the meeting:

 1. Decreased density of housing –

The fill operations that have taken place to raise site levels would not support terraced or 3 storey dwellings (without prohibitively expensive piled foundations) this has reduced the number of units that could be developed on the site and therefore the site value. It is also suggested that the change to the flood drainage route, required by the fill operations has further reduced the developable area of the site by 0.5 acre and that the demand profile has changed to larger family homes rather than starter units

 2. Decreased land values –

Land values have declined steeply and not recovered since the application was made, therefore the difference between the purchase cost of the site and the residential sale value has narrowed.

 3. Cost of Fill operations higher than expected –

The budgeted costs for the entire fill operation (including those for the supermarket site) were at the time of the application approx £9.5 million, the actual cost to date has been around £11 million and with further work still required (surcharging the site; protection of created land form etc.) this is expected to rise to £12.15 million. It is suggested therefore that the fill operations will have an eventual overspend

of £2.65 million.

 Although the report explains that the development of the site would currently be unviable even with no affordable housing provision, the removal of this requirement would, it is suggested, offset some of the additional and unbudgeted costs sufficient to allow the site to be released for development.

 It seems that Seaton (and wider East Devon) is being expected to pay the price for Tesco’s expensive mistakes on this site.

It will be interesting to see how councillors deal with this matter.