Plans for the Sandringham site
This came up on my news feed on my phone tonight.
Sandringham Caravan and Motorhome Club expansion plans
Fifteen safari tents with built-in barbecues are included in plans to extend a campsite on the monarch's Norfolk estate near King's Lynn.
Proposals drawn up by the Caravan and Motorhome Club, which runs the 25-acre wooded site off the B1439 near Babingley, also include 28 new all-weather caravan pitches and 12 new camping pitches, along with two new toilet blocks.
Royal sources said the King would be consulted and would have to approve any alterations on his 20,000-acre estate, which he inherited after the death of Queen Elizabeth II in 2022.
In a planning statement, the club says: "The Sandringham Estate Club Campsite is one of the most popular on the network and is often fully booked.
"The proposal is to extend the touring and camping facility to the south west of the existing site as the land lends itself naturally due to its topography and by being easily accessible from the existing road network.
"This area will be home to a mixture of all weather, serviced, premium and universally accessible pitches which will appeal to a wide range of visitors."
A small shop is included in the proposals, along with a dog and bike wash.
The club, which has 350,000 members, is upgrading its 200 sites to meet modern standards.
Sandringham receives rave reviews from visitors, who love its setting and the woodland walks, as well as nearby attractions and beaches.
But campers complain of poor Wifi and mobile phone signal on the site, where caravans and motorhomes can pitch up all-year-round for £21.90 a night for members and £36.90 for non members.
A decision is expected from West Norfolk council later this year.
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/24096878.sandringham-caravan-motorhome-club-expansion-plans/
Comments
-
I think that next to last sentence is very misleading!!
4 -
Maybe, Nellie, but it’s hardly the crux of the story and isn’t likely to affect anything regarding the redevelopment. It’s now from £21.40.
It’s good to see the site being upgraded.
1 -
I was surprised at that too.
Not checked the prices but I think the word 'from' has been omitted.
Edit I've just checked and it's £21.40 on the site page
I'm sure nothing much will happen for awhile. Our poor King has other, more pressing matters, at present.
1 -
But, B2, it’s not an advert for the site😄. The price is neither here nor there in the context of the article.
1 -
Not that misleading, the WiFi and mobile signal are poor
Anyway it wasn't the club who quoted the price but the news article, they are the ones who got it incorrect? The club's statement is in quotes.
But yes I'm pleased too, hope for some SPs
0 -
Yeah, since when have papers been bothered about accuracy?🙄
Glamping pods are surely the way to go so that's helping to future proof the site.👍🏻
0 -
I agree. The 'motorhome revolution' following Covid wasn't to drive it to a pod and park it, it was 'to see the world' (perhaps while folk still could) and to make use of their investment.
many of these new owners acquired vans with very modern 'self containing kit' like large batteries (often lithium) and solar to feed it...
perhaps the club is catering for 'non caravanners' and 'non motorhomers'. Time for a new name. Something like NCANMC.
some might see this as progress (let's give up 20% of every site for those who don't have a van) but I don't want to see club sites moving towards Butlins (and even Haven who did the opposite and added touring pitches to its static offering) or the like, there's enough of those about for non vanners.
much of the continent is converting (sections of) 'campsites' to lodges, huts, etc and im sure they are very successful (and mightily expensive) and the club has noticed this trend no doubt...
however, while this might be great for non vanners I don't think it's doing much for traditional members.
The club might be setting itself up for 'the modern world' which is a good thing, but if there are no traditional pitches left members will go elsewhere and leave the club (NCANMC) to the new breed.
3 -
I think the Club have got to have an eye to the future and the inclusion of a relatively small number of glamping units on a site probably makes sense. It is very difficult to predict how our hobby will develop over the next 10 to15 years. I have no idea what the occupancy rates are like so my next comment might be misplaced. I just wonder why so many ready erected tents, as opposed to more pod like accommodation? Maybe its an easier sell to the planning authorities? I am sure I have recently read that the C&CC are getting rid of their ready erected tent offer?
David
1 -
YT made mention of “traditional members” but surely tradition is evolving? No longer is it the norm to see only cars and caravans but MHs have gained an immense popularity with pods and glamping coming up on the rails, possibly due to the movement away from ‘proper’ tow cars. Any business needs to keep up with progress in order to survive and those who don’t will go to the wall.
I’ve read that the Sandringham site has become rather tired so it surely makes sense during its refurbishment to extend and include other options such as pods as a foothold for the future.
There are plenty of alternatives for folk who want basic camping. They don’t object to general refurbishment of sites, do they?
1 -
"There are plenty of alternatives for folk who want basic camping"
...the 'traditional' club response to anyone who wishes to debate change...
while glamping maybe 'coming up on the rails', surely the camper revolution has also driven a faster, fewer requirements turnaround when it comes to touring.
Despite the name change being with us for a while now, the club doesn't seem to have even acknowledged the premise that MH owners don't need to pay £40 for a bit of chippings not to need full blown services on their pitch.
perhaps there is a section of the membership who've moved from a caravan to a MH and just 'do what they did' before and like a serviced pitch, but there is also a vast number of owners (old and new) who don't want to be shelling out nearly £300 a week for a parking spot, hence the massive interest in CAMPRA, Britstops and other 'pub' type overnights, where mutual benefit is enjoyed by the provider and the customer.
How about every club site having a cheap quick turnaround pitch for every pod being built, then the club could truly be catering for all parts of its customer base.
in fact, that last statement is probably wrong and those looking for short term cheaper pitches won't be using the club they'll be 'going elsewhere' as above.
6 -
I just wish to see more of MY money being spent on club facilities that benefit me. Very little of the currents club’s refurbishment programme helps enhance my uk touring.
i would like to see more sites without facilities blocks, every pitch with optional hook up, less emphasis on pristine grass edges etc. Even sites like Thetford, which used to be reasonably cheap, have been put onto this overly elaborate fees schedule.
A few sites with timed entry and fees per 24 hours would be a useful experiment.
8 -
There are usually comments about MHs not needing whatever but it's not about need, it's about what certain MH owners want.
There can be no doubt from those who use club sites, and there have been numerous posts confirming this, that SP and club sites with all the bell and whistles, full fat...are very popular with MHs. SP are often more popular with MH than caravans. Certain owners don't want to use club sites as they are and that's fine just choose what you like and let others choose what they like.
The club I'm sure will have data showing this and what pays well and what doesn't and in this way it is giving its members exactly what they want.
As for glamping pods and the like, it's a small parentage of all pitches and on a small number of sites. It's simple future proofing and will bring in money from maybe people who wouldn't use club sites and all that income helps out somewhere.
If one isn't happy about the club using 'your money' in this way then don't 'invest' with your membership fee and/or use club sites. Why is anyone paying for something they don't want?
2 -
If one isn't happy about the club using 'your money' in this way then don't 'invest' with your membership fee and/or use club sites. Why is anyone paying for something they don't want?
Totally agree CS. We are happy to use the two clubs sites when touring in this country, in a similar manner (except for booking) to minimal facility offerings over there. We do this because we like using them, even service pitches on occasion. This seems to apply to many of the MH’s on site, although some are used as we did with our caravan, just a 1 / 3 night stop is equally common.
2 -
Nothing to worry about with new pitches for pods and similar tents. Just uncouple the water and drain, unplug the electric and lift it away with a fork-lift to creat a normal fully serviced touring pitch.
Much more concerning when they start to do the same process in reverse.
0 -
So it is wrong to expect money that I pay to the club to be invested in facilities that support my type of camping. The “advice” is not to invest, not to use club sites, go elsewhere. That is obviously a really inclusive approach. We are not the only motorhomer or caravanner who do t want holiday park facilities on sites that we pay for. For information we very rarely use club sites because we don’t wish to pay for facilities we don’t need and don’t want. We do use some of the ccc sites because we can opt out of ehu and a consequent price reduction. We do use CLs but normally those not trying to imitate a club site. We also use Aires where available. So what does the Club provide for me? The certification process for CLs and whatever support the Club gives to CL owners. For me the balance of club expenditure is all wrong, hurtling as it is to holiday park types facilities.
7 -
I'm not sure what you mean by "the 'traditional' club response to anyone who wishes to debate change". I am applauding change by voicing my opinion that provision of pods etc is a positive move and my comment about alternatives stands.
CAMC provides various types of sites and not all of them will meet the needs of all people but some will. It can’t be feasible to make Sandringham, and every other site, meet the needs of the range of campers from basic users through to high dependency users so it’s very much a case of finding the right site for the individual. Inevitably, one size will not fit all but the variations are there under the umbrella of CAMC.
1 -
We are not the only motorhomer or caravanner who do t want holiday park facilities on sites that we pay for.
I'm sorry but, as I've posted before, I cannot really get my head around paying for something that anyone does not want.
But in reverse, so why should 'my money' be used to pay for CLs which does not support my style of camping, or the overseas booking services, or whatever?
In reality I don't care about that one bit and I'm happy for the club to use my membership as it sees fit for the benefit of all its members in the club who have different wants to myself, and that to me is what being inclusive is really about. One simply takes the parts of membership that appeals.
Everyone (I assume) joins the club with knowledge of what is available to them when joining and certainly has full knowledge when re-joining and re-joining rates are at the highest ever we're told.
1 -
You prove my point of there not being one size fits all in terms of sites. Some of your membership fee is spent on things you don’t want while some of Corners' fee is spent on things he doesn't want but you do. It’s swings and roundabouts and, overall, you both get what you want. I see no problem there at all.
1 -
Next time we go away with our friends, if we can get the special offers they do, we will go in a glamping pod. It was cheaper than hauling out the MH and paying for a pitch at Cayton Bay🤷♀️ Wouldn’t use them at the normal price, but then we don’t use Club Sites at the normal prices either🤣
2 -
Of course one size won't fit all, but equally most members want their views represented...you've obviously decided the club doesn't do it for you as you're no longer a member...proves a point, perhaps?
I don't think any member's money (the clubs money) pays for CLs...aren't these owned by those that run them?
...and as mentioned by posters upthread, the Club obviously isn't catering for all its members as some don't want money spent on pods etc...and certainly not at the expense of touring pitches.
...and posters putting random words in italics or bold doesn't make one person's view any more valid than anyone else's, does it?
its interesting to hear folk refer to Club sites as having 'all the bells and whistles'...IMHO they are pretty much at the basic to middle end of commercial sites we've used in the UK and typical resort sites all over mainland Europe....
if pods is the way forward then it verifies my stance that we remain members solely for access to CLs (not funded by the club).
3 -
...and posters putting random words in italics or bold doesn't make one person's view any more valid than anyone else's, does it?
You've brought this up before C and as before I use italics for words that are not my own but from others as I find it easier than using quotation marks, so they are not random at all and I use bold for emphasis, (see what I did there?) and of course it doesn't make it more valid, but why should it?
CLs are not paid for by the club but it was stated by the club somewhere that what they pay to the club does not cover the costs to the club sucg, advertising, search facility, the website, CL inspectors... so I am correct in saying my membership fees do go to those costs. As I have said I don't care.
0 -
Very interesting post. The concept mooted in your last sentence is one that's used abroad (of course) by Camping Car Parks in that your entry is timed.
also, many sites there have 'aire type' facilities attached to the main site so all types of customer can enjoy the type of pitch they desire/require...from the fully serviced ones to the smaller, cheaper, no facs type...
of course, there's no customer discrimination as all would be welcome to use reception services, the bar or lounge or pool or laundry or showers or......
....the only difference is the parking location and the price.
2 -
Of course the biggest and best way for members to have their views represented, as in any business, is to actually buy the product being sold, or rather not to buy it.
In this case upgrades, SPs, glamping pods. Another way is numbers on club sites and which type of pitch and site sells the best. This is a far better indicator to the club than posts on a very small sample on CT that is not representative of its users.
SP, HS, upgrades sell well. Glamping pods sell well and bring in valuable all year round income to the club. Motorhomes use SP in far greater numbers now that caravans. Some MH users can't the logic in this but it is the reality.
The only thing the club will take heed of is falling income and despite repeated claims that there will be empty pitches down many years this has never happened.
0 -
I no longer have a need of any club so no point is proved at all.
I didn’t mention CLs but, seeing you do, there has to be an element of cost to CAMC (ie the membership) in overseeing the exemption arrangements, inspecting, advising, listing and so on. As I said, all the various sites are under the umbrella of CAMC.
Where I have used italics to quote a few words it is simply a matter of sensible layout in making the sense of the words clearer.
For some reason you state things in your reply to me that isn’t actually relevant to me or my posts which rather muddies the waters. 🤷🏻♂️
1 -
"I no longer have a need of any club so no point is proved at all."From another thread...posted this afternoon
"At 50 years they give you free annual membership, a badge and a certificate. I recently got mine🤣🤣🤣"
how recent is 'recently', then?
I use the bold above as it is simply a matter of sensible layout in making the sense of the words clearer.....😉
im sorry some of the text may not have applied directly to you but they were just general observations from the previous postings....feel free to ignore👍
0 -
Can I please ask members to post about the topic and keep the conversation relevant to the OP. All views and opinions are welcome but we do ask that members keep discussions friendly and free from arguments and disagreements as per our Community Guidelines.
2 -
Of course land is generally a lot more expensive here and there is the small point that if CAMC did Aires there would be 6 metres between units. Meaning a reasonable area would be required even for a few vans. Given the club can sell them very easily and folk are asking for more, it surely makes business sense to invest your money and land in more service pitches rather than discount MH ones, which would hardly be inclusive unless they could also be used by caravans. I’m also not sure how much they would be able to discount them given that you say they would have access to all site facilities.
3 -
All this discussion is doing is making me annoyed that the Club have lost, ditched, whatever, most of the really nice, simple, one basic price no facility sites. Where these are still limping along, the pricing has changed drastically. We spent ,any happy years fully utilising sites such as this, with our basic caravan, and our less than high tech MH. For two persons, these are now dearer than lots of CLs. So it’s a valuable, basic resource gone.
5
