Disappointing changes at Southport
Just returned from a 10night stay at Southport club site, first week was fine decent weather and all the usual facilities of a lovely town. The second week was however spoilt by the inconsiderate members who obviously do not understand site etiquette.
The warden decided to open an additional entrance to the toilet block, I understand this was done with the agreement of the area manager, however in doing this they spoilt our holiday. From the time the path was completed and the fence removed we had a stream of people taking a short cut through our pitch. This was disturbing on a number of counts, firstly we have a dog and he was constantly being disturbed. Then we had to endure people looking into our van.
Had I have known this path was to be opened I wouldn't have used the pitch I had, it maybe something that the warden and area manager may think is necessary, however if that's the case why wasn't the additional path and entrance put in place when the site was built. I didn't expect a disturbed week on what I have always found to be a relaxing site, more so having paid £300 for the privilege.
Its the first time in over 30years of using this particular site that I have come away disappointed. Things like this detract from the hard work done by the wardens to keep the site clean tidy and welcoming.
Moderator Comment
This is not what the story section is for so I am moving it to discussions. Don't forget you can also submit a site reports and recently the Club have been requesting feedback on campsites you have recently stayed on which would be a good place to air you views.
Comments
-
We visited the site for the first time recently and used the new facility block but we're, I presume, on the original site. I did mention to the warden on one occasion, in passing, that the entry restrictions to the new block were really silly. I had to walk the length of the block to gain entry and then the length of the block to reach the ladies. I'm fit and able but it was a pain especially in the drizzle one day and lashing down rain another. He advised that there would be a new opening, permission sort and granted to place it, very soon but they'd run out of materials to complete the job!. He also said that whoever used service pitch?106? wouldn't be happy as it was immediately adjacent. I understand it was put there as the cheapest option. Bizarre that a club specialising in caravan sites cannot sensibly design a facility block which offers entry points at each end. I have made lots of comments on the survey I was sent.
Really can only be described as poor planning and appalling scrutiny by the club to not notice such a foopah. (Or lack of footpath 😉😉)
0 -
We noticed this extra gate whilst there recently and I just assumed it had been closed off due to its being adjacent to the rear end of the pitches. Can't believe it has now been opened up and the pitch still being used🙄
0 -
A bit of decent planning design it could have opened off the road like the one at the men's end. Instead of that in now has to be the cheapest place to open up the fencing! This happens to be almost on the service pitch, for which they charge extra, but whatever the pitch it will be a nuisance to the occupant. It was so badly designed the next best option is to take the pitch out of service and loose income. How would that work out as against making a decent entrance off the road where it should have been when it was planned?? It seems the club that specialises in providing caravan sites doesn't think things through properly. This being just another example - maybe not as costly as one that took place earlier this year 😉😉. Maybe this is how this year's name change was paid for?
0 -
I can't think of where the OP would have been pitched to have the problem, but we were there last year pitched opposite the new block, on the other side of the road. The extended fencing to gain access to the toilet block was bizarre. ..... there was miles of the stuff.
0 -
Correction to my posting earlier of the pitch number, memory not what it was! The pitch affected is 109, I checked it on the site map.
As you drive through the 'hedge' onto the new part there is a road on the left, it's the first pitch backing onto the facilities block. The path is at the edge of 109 and the adjoining pitch up the 'side road'. Hope this helps 😆
0 -
Design, planning? This is CAMC we are discussing here.
0 -
Indeed indeed. The motorhome service point has 3 different manhole covers to suit your vehicle but they still need to be lifted up and you not drop a sheet down! There is fresh water and recycling bins but no CDP. That is in the opposite direction. Really well thought out, planned and designed 😉. Definitely exactly what a club which specialises in sites for touring caravans 😉
0 -
There's an easy solution tommcgiv, just find another site. Southport is certainly one of the CC's sites that we won't be going back to, it's just a big car park IMO. The only views one gets from any of the pitches that we could see were of other vans and a toilet block.
2 -
Nelliethehooker couldn't agree more. Only stayed there for visiting Liverpool. Able to walk to the station, but it's not on the doorstep 😉. Very cost effective rail and bus service for the whole area including out to Chester, which we didn't manage 😢, for £5.20 per day. In effect we only wanted to park our motorhome and walk off site. No real difference to any carpark 😲😲. Very difficult not to be watching other vanners activities. Large fenced off area behind the new facilities block with a hope of attracting wild flowers the sign says and add fingers crossed.
0 -
Having just stopped on a pitch close by recently I can fully understand how disgruntled the member concerned feels. The member deserves a full rebate. It has also created a tripping hazard. Set-up of footpath I'll-thought out with no consideration to uses of Pitches 108 and 109 or health and safety considerations.
0 -
Quite agree with the OP. We recently spent two weeks on the site on the serviced pitch opposite pitch 109. The new path was opened up on the day before we left and it became immediately obvious that who ever was unfortunate enough to be pitched there would be constantly disturbed by the number of people using this path. As someone else has mentioned the method the site staff have come up with to accommodate pitch 109's water and electricity pipe and cable is a definite trip hazard. It's a bad idea all round. Pitch 109 should be taken out of use and a proper entrance and exit installed.
I'm a fairly early riser and on the morning we were leaving the site I wa sitting looking out the window at 6am. As I said we were pitched opposite 109 and even at that time of the morning there was a fairly constant stream of people crunching across the pitch hardstanding and up the gravel path to the toilet block. We made up our made before we left the site that although we really like the site location and will probably use it again there is no way we would accept that pitch. If we were booked on a service pitch, as we often do, and that was the only one free, we would ask to be placed on a non serviced pitch rather than go there.
0 -
So the club by opening this foot path with tripping hazards heve opened there selfs up to ambulance chasers great think about it ?
0 -
If there are EHU cables across the access that does seem very strange. However, most CC service pitches we have used utilise individual bollards behind the pitch, is that not the case at Southport. However, the whole thing shows very poor design and planning. Has the CAMC ever asked for members input on these upgrades and changes, like other organisations do?
0 -
I spoke to a warden, mentioned in a previous post, and he said that they'd had permission to open up an entry to the facilities block at the opposite end to those two provided in the design and subsequently built fence. Didn't anyone notice as they were putting the fence in??? If they didn't before 😲😲. I understood from a warden that the wardens, who have obviously had to answer questions about why no access each end ad infernitum, that they requested a solution. This was the result as it means the 2 rails could be removed to form access (very short section there for some reason) so no other work on fence required. I believe the wardens doing it as DIY rather than contractors brought in. The reason it wasn't complete and open during our visit was because they had run out of material to finish and were awaiting a delivery of same. Cheap in one way potentially expensive in another one ( trip/falls) too much disturbance to pitch 109 and possibly 108 resulting in taking them out of service. Warden said that it would cause complaints from occupants! One assumes a proper solution altering the fence from the road side would be expensive especially if the kerb were dropped for easy access. The access that has been constructed does not allow wheeled access so a wheelchair, walking frame or buggy user will not be helped 🙄
Poor design planning, poor on site checking as it's built failing to spot the deliberate 😉 mistake, a quick ill thought through solution that was suggested with the best will in the world. I thought the club were experts in the field of touring sites 😉😉 so it has been missed on so many levels.
I do wish I'd taken a photo of how it was shaping up whilst we were there. A picture paints a thousand words 😆.
Wouldn't it be lovely if this thread could be acknowledged and comments passed on? I made a lot of it when completing the post visit survey...........
0 -
Wishful thinking, B2. Any post with a criticism about the way they work at HO ends up being shut down by the moderators. The expense of putting in a proper entrance certainly won't be any where near as much as they've spent on the so called re-branding!!
0 -
If there is a member of CT on site could they take a picture of the completed mess and post it on here (if they can figure out how to post pics)👍
Probably much easier to post it on Facebook😂
0 -
Too late now but do wish I had taken a couple of photos before we left, would have made it much clearer exactly what has been done.
Just to clarify about cables and pipe work going across the new gravel path. A metal ( I think, might be plastic though) channel has been sunk into the gravel path with a hinged lid. This is about 4 inches in old money deep and broad. There is a notice pinned to the fresh water point, ( two taps servicing pitches 109 & 108, electricity bollard, again servicing both pitches is close to water point) , notice asks members to run cable and water pipe through channel. The lid is unsecured and it is mainly this that is the trip hazard although not sure if the surface of the lid might also be a slip hazard when wet.
To me the main problem is the inconvenience to whoever is stuck on pitch 109 with the almost constant pedestrian traffic going up and down immediately outside their awning, and I do mean immediately outside the awning. There is also a likelihood of guylines and pegs being tripped over.
If this set up was approved by the area manager it doesn't say much for their knowledge and insight into running a site.
1 -
The comment made by Bakers2 about this thread being acknowledged and comments passed on got me thinking, so on the morning of the 20th July I sent an email to the Club, using the contact us facility on this site regarding the pitch alterations. I mentioned the potential trip hazard, the inconvenience to whoever was unfortunate enough to be pitched on 109, I also drew attention to the fact this had been mentioned on two site reviews and finally informed them of the existence of this discussion. An automated response duly arrived, telling me they try to deal with matters within two working days and I would hear back from them shortly. So today is now the 29th July, that's 6 clear working days and the reply from the Club is..... zero, zilch, nothing.
Agree the matter is not of earth shattering importance but doesn't say much for the Club's communication with members.
0 -
I'm not surprised about a lack of response other than an acknowledgement. Pretty poor show but what we members have come to expect 😢.
Other threads are commented on by staff so someone must monitor titles and possibly skim read posts. The devil in me wonders if the comments were on fb what the response would be?
Personally my fb is kept very tight but CAMC does appear as a suggested post and sometimes I glance at the comments. Sometimes the same post will say x posts another y, not always an increase 😉 but decrease! sometimes no posts. But lots of replies to comments by staff. Latest one I can think of is car and caravan literally at waters edge with dunes behind and a poster said about silly place to park was replied to. I totally agree about parking especially as I believe it was prompting their insurance 😂😂
I'll see if I can add the picture here but I'm not tech savvy so don't hold your breath!
0
