The Monday conundrum - (or how we got to live with the marsh project)
Is purchase of more acres of marshes in Seaton dependent on money to be
received from the major developers of the Seaton Regeneration area?
Can we get one thing clear? East Devon District Council [EDDC] is saying
that the Seaton Wetlands project is NOT linked to the planning
application for the Seaton Regeneration Area.
However, on EDDC’s own website, they have a copy of their own press
release dated 9 November 2006 which can be found
here
It states (amongst other things):
“In his report to EDDC’s Executive Board, Mr Karime Hassan, Corporate
Director Environment,suggests how this contribution could take shape by:
……… Agreeing with the developers that they will part-fund the
acquisition of land between Seaton Marshes and Colyford Common to create
a high quality wetlands wildlife reserve of regional significance.
Whilst each of these proposals would be linked to TDP’s [Liatris –
Seaton Regeneration area] development proposals, they are dependent on
two key events – a series of successful land deals [with EDDC] and,
subsequently, permission being granted by EDDC’s independent Development
Control Committee."
[after they have been guided by EDDC officers who act as a major
landowner on the site, a major developer on the site and the planning
authority for the site AND who have already agreed that the day that
planning permission is granted on the site EDDC will sell its land to
Liatris].
Can someone explain to me how the Wetlands project ISN’T linked to the
Seaton Regeneration area planning application having read the above?
There is one simple way to prove it, of course – don't use the
developer's money to buy more wetlands acreage. Section 106 money is
"dirty money" if used to purchase the Wetlands rather than giving the
people of Seaton what THEY want and need - community facilities which
are being lost and not replaced and the overnight accommodation for
350-400 tourists per night which are being lost and not replaced. The
Wetlands is an excellent concept – so excellent it will have no problems
attracting other funders.
Please explain to us: why have we not been consulted about this? Who
decided how the money should be spent? How can the "independent
Development Control Committee" make an informed decision if they are not
in possession of all the facts and if they are unaware of how the people
of Seaton feel about this betrayal?
Labels: eddc, marshes, who pays the piper?
posted by archmaster @ 8:18 am
10 Comments:
Although this project does seem like a great idea, we must be very careful that Seaton doesn't pay a high price for it. The high price being a modern slum that Liatris are proposing and the 106 that comes with it.
Personally, I am appauled that it is EDDC that decides where any 106 money is spent. Surely it should be the town council?
Anyway, the point is, I'll be watching this project closely. It may benefit the area, but the benefit to Seaton remains to be seen.
That's the problem isn't it?
These people come to see the marshes (no doubt from towns which have community facilities - don't all towns have them?) or go to the (tiny) visitor centre, park in the supermarket car park, spend their money (if any) in the supermarket and think "OK, this looks as if it could interesting, we'll spend a few days here".
And that's when they go to Sidmouth for their overnight accommodation, cafes, small shops, long stay car parking.
Clever that isn't it!
Note from cloud cuckoo land> Of course the Wetland Project isn't linked to the 106 payments.Liatris as a keen supporter of all things green will of course be funding the aquisitions from there own deep pockets so nothing to worry about. La, la ,la, la...:)
I suppose they (eddc) regard the Liatris funding as a fall back position.
So if they get the lottery funding etc Seaton "might" get something extra in its stocking, see we really care about the town... but if they don't get it, Seaton should be thankful to eddc/liatris for the marshes.
So what happens if the Liatris/EDDC partnership doesn't get the funding or the slums?
Is this the point we secede from the county? (now there's a thought!)
I think I mentioned before that someone said that the best thing that Seaton could do would be to secede and become part of West Dorset!
It is a serious point though. It seems that EDDC is putting ALL Seaton's eggs into the developer's basket.
And getting a good price for them. The only problem is most of the profit then goes to Sidmouth, as usual.
We get the massive superstore, the 555 parking spaces, the half-day tourists who can park for a maximum of 3 hours, the homes for second-homers and retirees.
Sidmouth gets 650 houses that just might have had to be built in Sidmouth or Honiton or Cranbrook, a superstore that OUGHT to have been built in Sidmouth, they also get the overnight tourists and the council tax from 650+ new homes in Seaton to spend in other parts of the district.
No jobs in Seaton (except low-wage, part-time), no facilities in Seaton for the nearly 9,000 residents (in fact a net loss on those currently available to those of the 7,500 of us who have no choice to use the holiday village), a monsoon drain that can sweep a man off his feet if it has 10 inches of water in it.
Never mind, the Countryside Team will be able to get out of Honiton Business Centre where they currently have an office and have a nice new one on Seaton marshes, so that makes it all OK.
At Colyford Sandra, where they can park in the White Hart carpark.
What really gets my goat is that District Councillors, the Press and the public in general get a constant stream of pro-development propaganda from EDDC press section, which is inaccurate, one-sided and often designed to mislead, and misinform. Its the sort of nonsense that Governments get up to, yet these people are meant to be serving us, the people, not lying to them
Aaa, of course!
But it's going to be very difficult to get the car in there Monday-Saturday 8 am-6pm as the 180 lorry journeys take in the pinch point at Colyford!
One every three minutes - imagine the noise. Not much birdsong to be heard over that!
Anon 2:39
Yes it's an odd world, the elected representatives at eddc "appear" to make decisions for the benefit of the people they represent. But there's the influence of party politics and the civil servants that moderates that decision making process. Add to that the size of eddc coverage, I for one would like to see a return to small government within the communities concerned rather than this "it's for your own good" mentality remotely foisted on areas.
Is it any wonder that Colyton and Axminster are busy drawing up their own local plans in the light of the Seaton experience?
(no that's not a Jimi Hendrix cue for "all along the watchtower")
Actually, we are working on our own Town Design statement too - I just came back from one of the regular meetings.
Post a Comment
<< Home