Stagnant Water

----- 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?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

---