Transporting infill and construction materials into Seaton
Well, all leaflets in process of being delivered (contact me if you don't get yours before Tuesday: axevalleyrocks@yahoo.co.uk). So back to normal well, what passes for normal in Seaton these days! Already I have had a lot of feedback from people - my phone is hot, hot hot. However, I'm not going to reveal what people are talking about in this blog - I don't see why I should work for the developers, do you!
One thing that recently crossed my mind was about the lorries bringing in the spoil (remember 60-90 lorries per day, 120-180 journeys a day, six days a week for 2-3 years, the lorries bringing the pilings and then the construction material lorries. What I had forgotten is that presumably the Axe Riverside development will also be taking place at the same time as well as the construction of the superstore, so in fact we are talking about even more lorries (though I gather their site will not need as much raising up as it was raised when the railway was built so theirs will mostly be construction traffic I presume). And the superstore expects to be up and running within 12-18 months so we can add traffic from delivery lorries and shoppers. No tourists, of course, because there will be nothing for them to see - unless we run tours to see the building of a self-contained island of shops and houses on a flood plain on the World Heritage Coast .....
Now, let's think about this infill and construction traffic. What are the routes into Seaton?
First of all, mention is made of it coming from "the north" in the planning application. Now to me that says either it will come through Honiton or through Axminster and down through Musbury. If it comes from the west not via Honiton it would have to come through Sidford - no the lorries just couldn't get up that hill fully loaded surely (better hope not Sidford!) or along the minor road from Honiton to Seaton with its almost single line traffic on the Seaton side - love to see the lorries passing there! If it comes from the east and not on the dual carriageway it will come through Rousdon or Musbury. If it comes in from the south it comes in from the sea.
OK so now we've got it somewhere near Seaton having come in from north, south or east. Let's think of all the routes into Seaton and pick the most likely.
1. Though Axmouth. No surely they wouldn't use that route, there is that awful pinch point where the 2 pubs are.
2. Along the Colyford Road. No surely not - if they are coming from the Axminster direction - there's the bridge by the White Hart and the narrow road from Colyford to Seaton.
3. Down Harepath Lane. No surely not - that would bring it along past the primary school and the two doctors' surgeries (on different sides of the road) and to the pinch point at the traffic lights where Harepath Road meets Manor Road.
5. Down Seaton Hill. No surely not - first the loaded lorries would have had to go up to the Water Tower fully laden and then they would have two pinch points: Seaton Down Road where it turns into Harepath Road and then the same pinch point at the traffic lights where Harepath Road meets Manor Road.
6. Well, only one road left - from Beer. No surely not ..... surely not!
7. There has been mention of it coming from the sea. Now exactly where would you park a boat full of infill on the beach in Seaton. How would you transfer it from the boats to the lorries. What would the effect be on the sea, marine life and on the beach - a very, very vulnerable area when it comes to storms and tidal swells as we saw with the recent "mini-tsunami". And remember Lyme for the last two years - that's nothing compared to this.
And that's it folks - take your pick. Perhaps they will come in one way and out the other?
So - increased traffic, increased pollution, increased particulates, increased noise. increased damage to the roads. It's amazing what a council will foist on a town in the name of regeneration isn't it. Perhaps they are hoping to kill of the least healthy 20% of us or run us out of town so that when we get the 20% increase in population the net result will be zero!
Whatever happens they end up on Harbour Road. Now there's another problem - turning into the site. That's going to be interesting. Perhaps they will have to queue up sometimes. Nice! Especially opposite the bus garage with the school double deckers trying to get in or out.
posted by Fighting for East Devon's future @ 9:16 pm
9 Comments:
I recall Mr Dinham explicitly stating that lorries will not be travelling through Axmouth.
Finally we have someone who knows the minds of truckers...or is he making a promise (as in "you promissssed me my precioussss" another trustworthy character) that does nothing for the residents of Colyford or points West.
It was reassuring to see that Colyton has decided to object as well, I tip my hat to them.
Good for Colyton. They probably realise that these lorries are going to go part way into Colyford - and possibly right through it when the inevitable accidents mean that one or more roads into Seaton gets blocked. When the buses for the grammar are there it will be total chaos - and who is going to get all those kids across the road safely? Has Devon County even considered them?
Yes the obvious road into Seaton is the one used by Axe Valley school buses past the primary school and the doctors surgeries. That road is narrowed by onroad parking - or are residents going to be barred from that? So accidents are inevitable and when the road is blocked the lorries aren't going to stop coming - so through Colyford or Axmouth it is!
That narrow bit at Colyford Bridge by the White Hart is going to be a nightmare. Can you imagine it when everything is held up for the tram to cross over the road - which happens every half hour or so in the summer (though come to think of it why would anyone travel to Seaton whilst it is a building site?)!!!
One tram, traffic held up for five minutes, 2-3 lorries already backed up, school exit time, rainy day - just think about it - it will be like being in London.
Let's be constructive on this issue. Whatever developmnent comes to Seaton is going to bring with it the infilling and lorryloads of aggregate.
Even if we decide on what we want as a town, it will still require tremendous sacrifice in terms of noise and dust pollution and construction for a period of time that will be excessive in anyone's book so, put this in context.
We would put up with all of this if we, as a town, were getting something back , and surely at the end of the day that is the point isn't it?
We would put up with all of this and more, if at the end of the day it was worth it to Seaton.
Or, are we saying NO to construction traffic - full stop!
The argument surely is over the development not the construction traffic, it is over the housing demanded, not the infilling. It is over the planning concept not the regeneration.
Kill the construction traffic and you kill all construction, not just the Liatris plan.
The Liatris plan is the enemy, everything else is just unnecessary diversion.
Attack everything in sight and you get branded as NIMBY's
Keep your focus and you make a sharper point that goes deeper and could prove terminal to Liatris.
I don't agree with this. There are ways of requiring MUCH MUCH LESS infill and getting what we need - so little infill that you have far less of a problem and construction traffic we can live with AND which benefits Seaton.
The way to do this? Accept that the site is a flood plain and work with it and not against it. Have a stunning holiday village on boardwalks and stilts - useful if you have to raise it again due to global warming. Have things on the site that can be built on a floodplain - lakes, recreational facilities, tourist facilities such as parks and gardens, lakes, indoor and outdoor recreational facilities. Then you raise only the part of the site that has homes or shops on it. Shops only have to have a "flood life" of 50 years so you don't need that much infill. Build ALL the homes on the Axe Riverside site - Seaton was down only for 300 homes and we have already built 150 of these already so we need only another 150. The Axe Riverside site hardly has to be raised at all - it was raised for the railway and is much higher than the rest of the site.
It really is totally untrue that we HAVE to build up a flood plain - that's what the developers want us to think.
If we build our regeneration AROUND marshes and water We then become a tourist resort predicated on water like a real seaside town - the river, the sea and the regeneration area all included. We would have people coming for miles for outdoor watersports, indoor and outdoor recreation, birdwatching and a sensational holiday village - you name it.
We need creative, modern solutions using a floodplain for regeneration (not development) not old-fashioned ones.
So, we are in agreement then, the Liatris plan is the objective and the rest is down to a decent plan for the regeneration.
Bear in mind that any solution needs to also provide a commercial return for the landowners developers and builders and all we need then is a decent set of projects that give Seaton what it wants and NEEDS.
If we can achieve all that without infilling and heavy construction I will be the first to cheer.
Wishing for it won't make it happen. Planning for it will.
It daened on me that if planning permission for anything is given by East Devon District council and they allow the area to be raised above the flood plain level. Seaton will become a landfill site for the next few years. As the developer can charge builders £100s per load to dump stone and crushed concrete from other building sites. Like the the enormous pile at Gatcombe farm.
So the developer is telling EDDC that it will cost him millions to raise the level, when actually they will make millions importing the stone. This would be a very valuable site as landfill and I don't mean rubbish landfill, but stone, rubble and mud. The developer could make so much out of this source of income that he may not build for years, he wouldn't need to as it would generate enough income from dumping rubbish alone!
What is worse than a development that we don't want would be a landfill site!
pLEASE CAN YOU COMMENT ON YOUR FRONT PAGE ABOUT THIS.
tHE DEVELOPER WOULD HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO BUILD US A SPORTS CENTER/SWIMMING POOL/SOCIAL HALL/HERITAGE CENTRE.
If you suddenly see that he will get paid £100s for every load and that he wont actually pay for it to be brought here.
Keep up your good work.
When the Grove carpark was developed into a supermarket one of the requirements by EDDC was that they had to pay for part (I think ) the New road, which goes alongside the Tourist info centre and the Youth club. Up to Fore st. It is amazing what EDDC can do when they put there mind to it. This is a much bigger development and we must make sure Seaton GETS SOMETHING FROM IT!
there are ways to work with the flood plain and not against it. The developer could also take material from the marshes. They don't want to do that because the canny person who sold them the land gets paid if they take it from there. But it would permit development without masses of lorries. Or they could take longer to develop the land so that the lorries don't have to come so thick and fast. Or they could build a jetty and bring material in by sea. Lots of possibilites that don't involve total mayhem on the roads.
Objecting to traffic chaos doesn't have to mean no development. There was a vision for Seaton once - called the O'Rourke Plan. It wouldn't involve as much material because the holiday camp remained and that's the lowest ground with the biggest need for material to raise it up. Perhaps the developer should have made some effort to comply with it!
Post a Comment
<< Home