"Weymouth and Portland needs to diversify its tourist market into walkers who want nice countryside, yachtsmen who love the coastline and visitors who are interested in our world heritage status. More static caravans would destroy the very views and environment that these people come to see."

This is absolutely true; more caravans will turn the area into a ghetto. While I appreciate that planning cannot be refused on these grounds, it is blatently evident to local people that at certain times of the year, crime rates (specifically burglary, car theft and assualt) in the areas sore.
Furthermore (and more relevant to planning regs) the local infrastructure cannot cope with more static caravans and the myriad of people that will be housed in them. The local shops struggle to maintain stock; small roads such as Church Lane are not designed for the level of traffic and the environmental impact on the local countryside is totally unacceptable.
I sincerely hope that all the Preston councillors will continue to follow this appeal and let the public know when they need us to write letters of objection (again!) I see no reason why the management of Waterside Holiday Park should ruin our local environment just to line their own pockets. It is bad enough that they are always blocking the A353 with those **** caravans....(and yes I am a NIMBY).

I do hope the local council will be able to reclaim their costs of going to appeal from Waterside...
------------------
Some useful info for anyone wishing to take part in the appeal :

http://www.planning-
inspectorate.gov.uk/
pins/index.htm

Guide to taking part in planning appeals - If you want to comment on someone else's appeal

What you can do
If the appeal is to be decided by the written procedure, you can write to us with your views. If there is a hearing or inquiry, you can still write to us, but you may also want go to the hearing or inquiry and take part.

The LPA will send us copies of any letters of support or objection they received about the planning application while considering it. If you did not write at that stage, or you did write and now have something new to say, you can write to us. But there are strict time limits for sending us your comments.

The time limits for sending your comments
Whichever procedure is followed, if you want to make written comments, you should send them to us within six weeks of the starting date for the appeal (the LPA will tell you this period when they write to you letting you know about the appeal).

The time limits for sending comments to us are important, and everyone taking part in an appeal must follow them. If you send us comments after the end of the time limits, we will not normally accept them. Instead we will return them to you. This means that the Inspector will not take them into account.

See the written, hearing and inquiry procedure sections and the diagrams and template at the appendix.

Regulating recorded evidence
Recorded evidence (video, audio or other recorded evidence) is governed by legislation. Any recorded evidence sent to us must have been obtained legally. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘RIPA’) RIPA does not prohibit individuals from recording evidence as long as the recording is for their own use.

Recording evidence is prohibited if the evidence is made available to another person or organisation and, where necessary, if those involved did not give permission for its use or for the recording to take place. Those involved must also be given the opportunity to confirm the recording is accurate. If not, we will not accept it.

Getting help
If you would like help in taking part in a planning appeal, you can contact Planning Aid. Planning Aid provides free and independent advice on town and country planning issues to people and groups who cannot afford consultancy fees. You can contact:

Ian Silvera
National Planning Aid Co-ordinator
Royal Town Planning Institute
Unit 319
The Custard Factory
Gibb St
Birmingham
B9 4AA.

Phone or fax: 0121 693 1201
E-mail: planaidcoord@rtpi.or
g.uk
Website: www.rtpi.org.uk

Fabian,I guess you don't want more static caravans then!
Although I think statics cause less congestion than tourers.

Tell you what, swop you 6 wind turbines each one 480ft high, for a dozen caravans- or would you prefer both?
some of us here may not have that choice!!
The white horse with his flicky tail will gallop even faster from the area if he knew that would be happening!!

Tru Belle wrote:
Tell you what, swop you 6 wind turbines each one 480ft high, for a dozen caravans- or would you prefer both? some of us here may not have that choice!! The white horse with his flicky tail will gallop even faster from the area if he knew that would be happening!!

If you could see the White Horse.Another Weymouth landmark now neglected.

Tru Belle wrote:
Tell you what, swop you 6 wind turbines each one 480ft high, for a dozen caravans- or would you prefer both? some of us here may not have that choice!! The white horse with his flicky tail will gallop even faster from the area if he knew that would be happening!!

If you could see the White Horse.Another Weymouth landmark now neglected.

Tru Belle wrote:
Tell you what, swop you 6 wind turbines each one 480ft high, for a dozen caravans- or would you prefer both? some of us here may not have that choice!! The white horse with his flicky tail will gallop even faster from the area if he knew that would be happening!!

I'll happily swap you a wind turbine because at least they are doing some good for the majority. Also they don't come round your house and try and burgle it or nick your car and set it on fire...

As you say Old Synic , I'm not a fan of any caravans...static, touring or otherwise. Why can't these people frequent the excellent hotels, guest houses and B&B's we have to offer, instead of ruining our landscape?

Fabian wrote:

Tru Belle wrote: Tell you what, swop you 6 wind turbines each one 480ft high, for a dozen caravans- or would you prefer both? some of us here may not have that choice!! The white horse with his flicky tail will gallop even faster from the area if he knew that would be happening!!

I'll happily swap you a wind turbine because at least they are doing some good for the majority. Also they don't come round your house and try and burgle it or nick your car and set it on fire... As you say Old Synic , I'm not a fan of any caravans...static, touring or otherwise. Why can't these people frequent the excellent hotels, guest houses and B&B's we have to offer, instead of ruining our landscape?

Hmm, will reserve judgement there- but re caravans versus local hotels and b+bs- where on earth do visitors park who stay in these fine places??? what are the odds of finding your car windows smashed?
Agree that the shimmering effect of caravans as you come down the hill is a shock, perhaps the Army or bold]Royal marines could provide camouflage netting with leaves and branchy bits to disguise them? Why doesn't any one drop a hint , eh?

It is a good idea Tru Belle to put camouflage over the caravans but the environmental impact goes much further than the visual damage. All the visitors (and many of these caravans accommodate 8 people at a time) have feet and cars, some use bicycles and others try horse riding. All of these pursuits involve an impact on the local landscape causing erosion damage, pollution (cars), litter and disturbance to the local fauna and flora in a beautiful rural area. With YET MORE caravans, we will be forced to endure more damage. I do apologise for hogging the floor on this one, but the original planning application was turned down for very good reason; forcing a public inquiry really is taking the (how do I put it) urine.

Burn all the **** caravans they are a blot on the landscape and harzard on our roads. These gypos should be supporting the local hotels & motels and stop blocking our roads! Enough of these **** tourist's we derserve a better class of vistors to our lovely county!

Posted by: Fishman68, Weymouth on 7:31pm today

we derserve a better class of vistors to our lovely county!

I'm sure they all come for your eloquence!

Fishman68 does represent a core of local feeling though. His rather raw expression shows just how fed up we are with large companies exploiting and desecrating our beautiful countryside and giving little back but a few poxy summer jobs to students.

Been doing my sums: If the 45 caravans were granted and say, (for arguments sake), they were all 2007 Willerby New Horizon currently on sale for £61,950.00 from Waterside. Then this would raise the not to be sniffed at sum of £2.8 million pounds for the holiday park.
It could also inflict on us locals an additional (max) of 18,720 grockles per year...

Would we be having all this fuss if a caravan park for seventy caravans was to be set up on portland or is this a another case of nimbsyism in weymouth or more importantly the fine area of Preston..

Yogi , I'll be the first person to put my hand up and say I'm a NIMBY (I don't want anymore caravans in my back yard). But, if you want to see why people are objecting look at the aeriel view on google or msn maps and see the extent on caravans in this area of Preston already.
As far as I am aware the population of Portland is about 13k; if you had a potential influx of 18k visitors, I think you'd be kicking up a fuss too. Imagine the co-op on Portland trying to feed that many people! Easton would be gridlocked...

The aerial maps on Google are at least two years old - if not more!

Lateral thought here-
Swathes of white caravans and all the glimmer shimmer from their white roofs .Would this contribute to an unatural rise in immediate local temperature, the heat bouncing off etc?
So another thought is, if these things are there to stay- harness the bounced off heat , and some brilliant mind could come up with a solution similar to solar power, which would give something back to Weymouth and the rest of us, thus contributing towards the 85% renewable energy that Dorset is aiming for. Simple innit???

So I am right then

Well Tru Belle you may be on to something...put solar panels on top of all the caravans...

The Fish: I think google maps are probably 4 years old in this area but MSN is approx. a year.

yogi wrote:
So I am right then

In what way? How can you dismiss a valid argument by saying that people are only objecting because it will affect them? That is the whole point of planning regs isn't it? Looking at the detrimental affect on the local surroundings and populace.

Static caravans-more revenue- loads a dosh by the time the Olympics is with us, can you scent the smell of filthy lucre?
I'll bet everyone everywhere is rubbing their hands with delight at the thought of a once in a lifetime cash grab!!

You load of old cynics, you know full well that these caravans will get the go ahead because someone somewhere will be getting there palms well and truely greased, there will be a mere pittence as a donation to the local bourgh council, or a tree planted in some obtuse area as a good will gesture and then it will be passed, God im becoming Cynical in my old age.