Increase size of CLs?
Comments
-
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water .
Maybe this an option ?
presumeably, they are a CL, or hold an exemption as would a CL?
in france there is an organisation called France Passion that allows a small number of vans to overnight on a farm or smallholding, vinyard etc....
obviously, these provide seclusion and are free to use, although customers might want to purchase wares from the site holder.....an annual membership fee is required.
im not sure what 'their' planning regs are (if any...?) and guess that to replicate this sort of impromptu 'service' would still require an exemption certificate as a normal CL.....?
im not sure that the FP sites (necessarily) require any provision for fresh water or for waste disposal and may be limited to MH in this respect.
this may be a (very) low cost option for a potential CL owner?
edit: just looked it up, its a CC CL.
0 -
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water .
Maybe this an option ?
See my earlier comments... it shouldn't be an option:
I do think the club are stretching the rules when licencing one CL next to another with just a hedge between them. It's likely to be pushing the boundaries of the Clubs licence and if they get caught it could jeopardise all CL owners for the sake of av
few that really should pursue a commercial site permission if they want more units...0 -
Vulcan, I don't doubt that you and other members are happy with things as they are. I was simply pointing out why one local CL owner was not. The declining number of CLs shows that there are other owners who feel the same way.
There are many reasons CLs close, one reason may be as you suggest in your posts. You are assuming that many CLs are closing as unviable, but it could be because of retirement, change of ownership, overbooking or change of use for the land etc. Until the CC go back to giving the reason for closures as they used to, sadly none of us will know.
0 -
I do think the club are stretching the rules when licencing one CL next to another with just a hedge between them. It's likely to be pushing the boundaries of the Clubs licence and if they get caught it could jeopardise all CL owners for the sake of av
few that really should pursue a commercial site permission if they want more units...I agree wholeheartedly, the point of using a CL is knowing that you are going to be one of a maximum of five and not next to another site. I have questioned the legality of this but it appears that in a minority of cases on commercial properties, farms/smallholdings
etc. if they have a different holding number for different parts of the property, this is classed as a seperate property as far as Natural England are concerned, certainly not in the spirit of CL's as far as i am concerned.0 -
I am sure that there's many reasons why CL's close but I bet a major reason is they forgot the basic maths. With a 5van limit (and long may that last) there is an absolute maximum level of income achievable.
With no or minimum capital investment then £10 a night should turn a reasonable profit. Start putting in electric then hard standings toilets andshowers and a return on investment might never be made
KISS Keep It Simple Sunshine.You can only sell 5 units per night
0 -
No, you misunderstand me, Graham. It was either change or shut up shop. The present 5 van limit wasn't one of the options for her.
No, I do understand you, and that the 5 van limit wasn't an option in that case.
However, as she did have the option of converting to a licensed site it shows that existing legislation caters for such circumstances and there is no need to increase the CL limit.
Graham
0 -
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water .
Maybe this an option ?
See my earlier comments... it shouldn't be an option:
I do think the club are stretching the rules when licencing one CL next to another with just a hedge between them. It's likely to be pushing the boundaries of the Clubs licence and if they get caught it could jeopardise all CL owners for the sake of av few that really should pursue a commercial site permission if they want more units...
Are there actually many such "dual" sites? I know of only one more, near Malvern where a C&CC CS is adjacent to a MCC CL.
Is there any indication from Natural England that they frown on the practice? Even if there were then I dare say they would deal with the few individual cases, rather than be heavy handed, as they simply don't have the resources for protracted battles.
Graham
0 -
Are the CCC's CS's (equivalent of CLs) 10 vans?
We have been to a fair few CLs and CS's with more than 5 vans on - but then many dont even ask to see a membership card anyway
0 -
Its not about return on investment... it's whether you're willing to give up your summer, and the associated hassle for running a CL.
If you consider most basic CLs are only open 7 months of the year, 60% occupancy (if your lucky) of 5 vans at £10 per night equates to £5880 per year. Minus business rates, a decent mower, servicing and fuel, hedge cutting, rubbish removal, water and foul rates, time taken for bookings, mowing, sorting recycling, repairing the ground etc etc... on top of water, foul, electric installation, gates, gateway hardcore, fencing, landscaping etc
Would you give up your summer for what's left?
Like i say i think we need to rebrand and value what CLs offer, not just look at the basic investment etc. Pay for the tranquility, rest, relaxation otherwise they will disappear... After all you don't really think that meal in the pub cost the landlord £12 to make do you? Why should CLs be different if it means we can keep those excellent sites?
Just a devils advocates view...
0 -
Are the CCC's CS's (equivalent of CLs) 10 vans?
We have been to a fair few CLs and CS's with more than 5 vans on - but then many dont even ask to see a membership card anyway
No, the limit is still 5 caravans/motorhomes (1960 Act) but they may also be able to accommodate up to 10 tents as well with a separate exemption under the Public Health Act 1936.
0 -
Its not about return on investment... it's whether you're willing to give up your summer, and the associated hassle for running a CL.
If you consider most basic CLs are only open 7 months of the year, 60% occupancy (if your lucky) of 5 vans at £10 per night equates to £5880 per year. Minus business rates, a decent mower, servicing and fuel, hedge cutting, rubbish removal, water and foul
rates, time taken for bookings, mowing, sorting recycling, repairing the ground etc etc... on top of water, foul, electric installation, gates, gateway hardcore, fencing, landscaping etcWould you give up your summer for what's left?
Like i say i think we need to rebrand and value what CLs offer, not just look at the basic investment etc. Pay for the tranquility, rest, relaxation otherwise they will disappear... After all you don't really think that meal in the pub cost the landlord
£12 to make do you? Why should CLs be different if it means we can keep those excellent sites?Just a devils advocates view...
The extent to which an owner gives up their summer depends on the CL itself doesn't it? If the CL is on a farm, at a garden centre or at a pub which is being worked anyway then the summer is already "given up".
The investment is the same. If the CL is in a field which would be used for little else then there will be few outgoings to set against the income.
Naturally one should expect to pay a price which allows the owner to recover costs and make a profit but that does not mean that all CLs have to be full of facilities and priced accordingly.
Graham
0 -
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water .
Maybe this an option ?
See my earlier comments... it shouldn't be an option:
I do think the club are stretching the rules when licencing one CL next to another with just a hedge between them. It's likely to be pushing the boundaries of the Clubs licence and if they get caught it could jeopardise all CL owners for the sake of av
few that really should pursue a commercial site permission if they want more units...Are there actually many such "dual" sites? I know of only one more, near Malvern where a C&CC CS is adjacent to a MCC CL.
Is there any indication from Natural England that they frown on the practice? Even if there were then I dare say they would deal with the few individual cases, rather than be heavy handed, as they simply don't have the resources for protracted battles.
Graham
there is one (two?) such site at Bibury....two adjacent fields run by different partners.....both nice and a notice on the gate tells you which fiels 'your' cl is in....
0 -
On larger sites it would make sence to allow 7 pitches at week ends only. This would give weekenders a choice of site to use allso it would help to keep the overheads of the site down.
The rules have never been changed in 40 years on CLs
I don't know when CC rules regarding CLs last changed but the number of vans allowed on CLs is governed by law, not a mere club rule. That has not changed since 1960 and is hardly likely to as successive governments have shown no interest in changing legislation
which, in the main, works well.Graham
0 -
Pushing for a change in the law to increase the number of pitches could backfire very badly.
Having the entire exemption scheme debated in parliament could give those who think Caravans are an abomination an opportunity to abolish the exemption scheme entirely.
Best not to kick any dog but kicking a big sleeping one that can bite can be a risky business
0 -
Vulcan, I don't doubt that you and other members are happy with things as they are. I was simply pointing out why one local CL owner was not. The declining number of CLs shows that there are other owners who feel the same way.
There are many reasons CLs close, one reason may be as you suggest in your posts. You are assuming that many CLs are closing as unviable, but it could be because of retirement, change of ownership, overbooking or change of use for the land etc. Until the CC go back to giving the reason for closures as they used to, sadly none of us will know.
Am I right in thinking that you've closed your CL, oakapple? If so would you be willing to relate the reason for doing so?
0 -
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water
Within 40mins towing time from me is Little Baddow fruit farm , they have 2 CL's , hookup , waste disposal and water .
Maybe this an option ?
See my earlier comments... it shouldn't be an option:
I do think the club are stretching the rules when licencing one CL next to another with just a hedge between them. It's likely to be pushing the boundaries of the Clubs licence and if they get caught it could jeopardise all CL owners for the sake of av few that really should pursue a commercial site permission if they want more units...
Are there actually many such "dual" sites? I know of only one more, near Malvern where a C&CC CS is adjacent to a MCC CL.
Is there any indication from Natural England that they frown on the practice? Even if there were then I dare say they would deal with the few individual cases, rather than be heavy handed, as they simply don't have the resources for protracted battles.
Graham
there is one (two?) such site at Bibury....two adjacent fields run by different partners.....both nice and a notice on the gate tells you which fiels 'your' cl is in....
Disagree with you there, BB. The fields are certainly not adjacent. Infact one cannot see one site from the other unless you're in the extreme corner of each. However I do agree that they are both nice sites, one being all grass and the other having H/S pitches.
Having ready through the site directory many times I would guess that there may be about half a dozen owners that run two seperate CLs but without looking on Goolge Earth I'm not sure how close to eachother they may be.
0 -
I think two separate CLs is rare, but we know of a number of other arrangements, such as a CL and a CS, CL and private site. The examples I am thinking of are all very nice and we use on a fairly regular basis.
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.
The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.
Why the need to accept tents and other options.
The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.
A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?
Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.
Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.
Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.
Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.
0 -
The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable. Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To
put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections
from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted
glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CL0 -
The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable. Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CL
Write your comments here...From memory, most of those that have commented on CL's use them because they are small with spacious pitches and without hook-up, preffering the peaceful nature of the sites.
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.
The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.
Why the need to accept tents and other options.
The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.
A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?
Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.
Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.
Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.
Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.
BM - I agree 100%. That must be the most sensible post on CT for some considerable time. Well said!
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty.
Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income.
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty.
Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income.
Don't follow your logic there ET, f the sites are empty of 5 vans they'll be just as empty with more pitches available.
0 -
The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable.
Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding
and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost
of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CLPerhaps it would be good to hear from a CL owner, who has those facilities, if it's worth while. I can think of a few who think that it's been worth their while.
0 -
The logic in my part of the world is that CLs are empty for much of the year, but have to turn people away in holiday times because they aren't allowed to take more than five caravans.
.
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty.
Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income.
Write your comments here...why would they want more empty pitches
Differnt options are even more essential in peak periods.
As we have no children, we choose adult only sites in peak periods, which allows others that have children to also have more chance of a pitch.
0 -
Why is there always the clamour for change?
Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.
The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.
Why the need to accept tents and other options.
The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.
A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?
Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.
Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.
Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.
Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.
BM - I agree 100%. That must be the most sensible post on CT for some considerable time. Well said!
Write your comments here...Thanks.
0
