Osmington campsite given two-week extension despite complaints from locals
There have been concerns about campfire smoke, litter and traffic issues at Eweleaze
Two-weeks of extra time has been agreed for the Eweleaze Farm campsite at Osmington – despite residents claims about the impact it has on their lives and the World Heritage Coast.
The extra time, agreed as a change of use application, was decided at an area planning committee meeting by a majority vote.
During it, councillors heard complaints from residents about camp fire smoke, dumped contents from chemical toilets, litter, noise and road access problems.
Some of these will now be dealt with under a series of conditions which will have to be signed off before the extra days are allowed. One includes having no fires on the ground and having to prepare a full biodiversity plan.
Residents said the site, which is in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, should be better protected and called for the application to allow the use of the site for 42 days a year to be refused.
Under existing rules the site can be open for 28 days each year although a Government Covid dispensation had briefly doubled that, but has since lapsed.
Negative impact on environment despite its income
Site owner Peter Broatch says that while there will be some minor negative effects of the temporary campsite the benefits of using the nine fields, mainly for family holidays, has an overall positive effect on the local economy. He had previously claimed it could amount to £3million a year.
Previous applications for longer use were refused in 2019 and earlier this year – mainly on the grounds of the harm it causes the landscape.
Councillors were told that, despite the claims about waste, fires and litter there had been no negative comments on the application from the council’s environmental health team or highways.
Weymouth councillor Louie O’Leary said he believed the site, which he said ‘blighted the skyline’, could have a detrimental effect on attracting other visitors to the area and, according to most statutory agencies, did impact negatively on the AoNB.
He said to have the site, on the only World Heritage Site in the country, was a detriment to the area and should be refused, but his move was lost by a 6-4 vote.
Cllr Kate Wheller said that despite the income from the site for the area, it did have an impact on the natural environment.
She explained:
“There comes a point where we have to say we need to protect the environment. It’s good as it is, but let’s make it better and not extend it."
Owermoigne councillor Nick Ireland, whose ward the site is in, said there are traffic problems in the area, but not only caused by Eweleaze.
Mr Ireland said:
“You could say that’s a sign of success. We are a low-wage tourism economy…tourism is a huge factor in keeping people in our area employed.
“There is a benefit on the business case, it obviously does contribute to the local economy, but there is an impact on the AoNB.”
He said the existing 28-day use was mostly reversible and queried what harm an extra two weeks would cause.
Cllr Dave Bolwell questioned if camp fires could be prevented to help mitigate the effects of the smoke on the local area and the burnt patches left on the grass.
Osmington Mills Protection Society spokesman Jill Dunning told councillors the site was a blot on the landscape and, despite claims to the contrary, was widely visible along what she described as a “special” part of the coast.
Ms Dun**ning warned:**
“If this is successful there will be no way back and the coastline will be flooded with pop-up campsites."
Another resident Jane Lock said she often ran in the area and could, to this day, still see the remains of camp fires almost a year after the site was last used.
She claimed that site users created litter in the hedgerows, that there was often a strong smell of urine and she had seen people empty chemical toilets down the cliffs.
She told Councillors:
“Let’s protect this special and precious area, not only for our children, but our children’s children."
Charlotte Dempsey said that during the summer the fields looked like a pop festival site which ruined the area for those hoping to walk quietly through the natural beauty of the area.
She said during the Olympic sailing events the whole world was able to see the impact of the site on what was supposed to be one of our finest coastlines.
Mr Broatch said the business provided 6.5% of all visitor nights to Weymouth and Portland in the peak season and ten per cent of Weymouth and Portland and West Dorset camping visits across the whole year.
He said that because of that the camping use of the site offered wider benefits for the local area and the business took great pride in returning the site to grass at the end of the season.
He claimed that Eweleaze, which aimed to be as ‘green’ as it could, was likely to have a wider biodiversity than if the fields were used for more intensive farming and, as a result of the income from camping, had been able to carry out landscape improvements, including planting trees.
Planning officers had recommending refusing the application because of the ‘significant adverse effects’ it would have on the Dorset Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
The 36 hectare site, over nine fields, is classed as agricultural land with camping usually taking place for a maximum of 28 days a year.
The application for 42 days had seen more than 300 letters of support, mainly from previous campers, and sixty letters of objection, mostly from Dorset residents.
The change of use, subject to final agreement on conditions, will allow 42 days camping, subject to surfacing the first 10m of access road, having only tents on the site, steps to control dogs, a biodiversity plan and no fires on the ground.