What Would a UK Club Type Aire Look Like
Comments
-
I don't see that the Club needs to create aire type sites just adapt what they have.
We recently stopped at a smallish site. Book online, pay at time of booking. The site had no staff but a barrier to get in, code given on day of arrival. Pick a pitch, all hardstanding with ehu. Small facilities block and drive over waste water dump. It was a mix of MHs and caravans. The owner is nearby if needed. The facilities are cleaned everyday. Everyone seemed to be happy all for £24 a night, open all year.
That's all that's needed surely.
We use CCP Aires while over there and yes they work well. The barrier card is better than a code as its not needed to be changed. We also like sites for a longer stay. Why restrict sites to just caravans or MHs they can live quite happily together it's the way sites are still run that needs to change and the price.
4 -
It seems to me that users of sites fall into two broad categories : those who choose a site purely for its location and then there are those who choose a site for the site itself as a destination.
Finely manicured grass, palatial facilities blocks and miles of picket fencing may suit some people but, for me, its all about location, location, location. I rarely use the facilities block and would be quite happy with more basic pitches.
I also find the noise grounds maintenance equipment generates quite intrusive, particularly in Spring and early Summer. Give me a nicely appointed carpark any day when it is located next to a tourist location or an interesting small community.
As you might gather, I would support more basic sites - I can't be the only member who would be happy with less facilities. Keep it simple and then for those for whom it is paramount, sites also become more affordable.
EDIT and with a lower environmental impact.
5 -
Goodness, I could have sworn that post was from another poster not seen for a while😂.
You may be right about the two (tow😎) categories of site users, Jim, and I’m with you on location being the optimum choice. However, CAMC does already has some non facility sites people can choose and then there are CLs, privately owned sites, CSs with the other club, rallies, THSs etc etc. In view of that massive choice, I really can’t see any need for CAMC to develop offerings only suitable for part of its membership, especially when they proclaim themselves to be all inclusive.
1 -
Very apt for a caravanning organisation though 🤣
1 -
Might one suggest that the Club already has something very similar to a Motorhome Aire in the refurbished Steamer Quay in Totnes? Non awning hardstandings with metered electricity. I understand it will have a facility block because that existed before. On the prices I can see they range from £33 to £43 a night this year for van plus two. I somehow suspect this is not the sort of price range envisaged by those wanting Aire type sites?
I would imagine, at this stage at least, the Club would not be wanting to create sites/aires just for motorhomers when there is, whilst declining, still a substantial percentage of caravan members in the Club. We have already seen quite a lot of push back when the Club proposes new sites around the country, Bristol is just one example, so I don't think it would be any easier with motorhome aires. They could create aires by converting parts of current sites with a number of short term, non bookable parking spaces for motorhomes which would be the far easier option than thinking about new sites. However going back to price per night I somehow don't think there would be the difference that some might expect.
Those who keep an eye on Social Media will be aware that there is a big demand out there for places to park which are not campsites. A lot of pubs are tapping into this demand and some Councils are making provision. The opposite is that there seems an equal demand from local residents to stop people parking on the coast or in beauty spots from parking up and as they see it causing an eyesore. To provide the sort of facilities found in Europe there would have to be a sea change in the attitude of both Clubs to help persuade the powers that be that motorhome aires need to be built.
Just a few thoughts
David
2 -
TW - In view of that massive choice, I really can’t see any need for CAMC to develop offerings only suitable for part of its membership, especially when they proclaim themselves to be all inclusive.
Is there any reason why these aires couldn't be used by both, say 10 M/h pitches and 5 Caravans? If they were built in the right place, say near arterial main routes, caravaners en route to Cornwall from Scotland for example, might prefer a 24/48 hour stopover. A bit like Cadeside.
With modern technology (obviously not operated by CAMC IT) it could be "wardened" using ANPR and set maximum times with water, Elsan and electricity paid by metering.
1 -
Aire type sites and facilities as described take significant investment for apparently low return, If there is a demand for such sites backed by a sound business case somebody will provide them. An observation - I have seen several disused/abandoned Park and Ride facilities that look Ideally placed and may be a quick start for an Aire. Or places with car parks intermittently used like race courses, showgrounds just a thought.
2 -
"Is there any reason why these aires couldn't be used by both, say 10 M/h pitches and 5 Caravans?"
Who knows, WN, but the OP was talking about the differing needs of motorhomers. I never found my needs much different with a MH than they were with a caravan, tbh🤷🏻♂️. How about you?
0 -
There we go then, we’re all the same so nothing needs to be done👍🏻😀
3 -
The Club has about 150 sites but only 48 are open all year. The CampingCar company model which was mentioned earlier is to keep such sites open all year - but only for self contained, self sufficient motorhomers - without resident staff in order to cut costs.
So their sites have automated payment and automated barrier entry, minimal facilities, low prices, toilet blocks sometimes open for caravanners in summer but usually closed in low season, metered electricity, and only visiting part time clean up staff employed. A cheap model,Motorhomers welcome that model, but the Club is tied to its own model of resident staff with all the costs that means, or closing down all but 48 sites when the main season ends. And some Club sites are closing from September onwards.
2 -
A very interesting thread. We have never been overseas in our outfits, so I don’t feel able to comment on what is provided elsewhere. However, we have used Aire type stopovers in Scotland, and have had some enjoyable overnight stops in such places. The very best was in Kircudbright, three clearly delineated pitches, each had a hook up. There was fresh water, cpd point, drive over MH waste, and garbage recycling. It was run by the towns swimming pool, I don’t think you could book (more on that later). Stunning views, excellent facilities, and it was quarter of a mile easy level stroll into Kircudbright. On the edge of the tidal river, safe, quiet and a mere £10 per night. If you weren’t lucky enough to get one of these spaces (we were two nights running, the max stay), there was also a level field that could take more MH/campers for free if you didn’t need services, £5 if you did.
Another Aire at Castle Corner near Caerlavarock, seven spaces, four landscaped with picnic tables, water, bins, CPD, three you just lined up with spaces. All for £5. We stayed twice, first time it was fabulous, only three of us there. Second stop ten days later going home, the selfish, dirty, disrespectable, thieving arrived. We got a landscaped pitch and made sure our outfit was in fend off position, ie no one could selfishly park right next to us, but we did end up blocked in by some idiot that was going on at 5am, so didn’t think we would mind(😡) That night, by 9pm there were 18 outfits shoehorned into a space for seven. Some blocked footpaths, some didn’t pay, there were none stayers dumping CPD and not staying or paying. Mix of overseas and hired outfits that were the main problem and just didn’t care. We were fine, had taken advance measures to keep other outfits at a distance, but no way would we have wanted to be in the other area, like a ruddy bun fight. Nice village half a mile one way, Caerlavarock Castle the other via a cycle/footpath.
Third and fourth Aire type provision was via Forestry Scotland. Two big car parks at 7Stanes forests, loads of room, and open for caravans as well. No facilities until buildings opened, £8 at one, free at the other. Showers, loos, cafe, shop.
Last stopover we visited in day, but moved on. On edge of Clatteringshaws Reservoir, so fantastic scenery, walks, cycle paths, visitor centre. This was free, only had rubbish and CPD disposal. There were others in D&G we thought of, but found what we needed easily. We were touring, moving on most days and with a small MH had no parking issues in any of lovely little towns and villages. Middle four days we spent on a very nice CL so that our dog was safe while we went cycling. That was £25 per night, a landscaped garden with tap, CPD and hook ups. Someone on site all the time.
I don’t think the Club is the right provider of such, would be too expensive. Something like the swimming pool ran it as a side line to the community pool, and it was excellent.
There are patently some very selfish people out there on the roads, these types would need monitoring and dealing with, my question is is this a British trait, or is it common overseas as well?
Having seen the mess, witnessed the vandalism of freely provided facilities in some towns and villages in UK, I do wonder what might be the fate of provision in some places that don’t have a watchful pair of eyes, or security measures in place. Providing eyes, ears, security comes at a cost. sites without good security here are Carte Blanche for the less respectable to take over, and our police, justice system isn’t able to deal with it quickly, ask any farmer.
1 -
One of the best places I have seen for an Aire that isn’t there, would be at The Sill just below Hadrian’s Wall. Huge car park, empty overnight, not that many sites, CL/CS in area. It has ANPR, it has staff in the day, and cover at night as it is a Youth Hostel. Arrive after 6pm, depart before 10 am or move/ pay for daytime parking. Brilliant for those interested in HW, walking, cycling.
We use Pub Stops as well. Some have all facilities, some have none. Never stayed on one we didn’t like, or wouldn’t return to again.
1 -
I believe the recommended donation at Castel Corner is now £10. We stayed last month.
Fairly recently some research from the Club identified that motorhomers staying at club sites were more likely to spend fewer nights, move on more often, than caravanners. It is certainly what we do.
In the most recent magazine which we received last week there was a very brief report of April (?) Council meeting. It referred to the number of motorhomes now in membership and the need to ensure the appropriate "facilities" were on offer. There was mention of detailed discussion groups exploring this. No indication of what they were exploring, and I seem to remember reading something similar before from the Club, but dont remember where.
The Camping Car organisation mentioned above was hoping to expand into the UK but clearly has not done so, presumably because of a variety of difficulties.
The increase in motorhomes in this country has been matched with an increase in a different form of touring i.e. touring around more. The problem in the UK is a lack of aire type sites near attractions including easy distance to towns and villages, or along the way. Couple that with the difficulties of parking a motorhome much longer than 6m in towns and it is no wonder that frustrations show themselves in many social media posts.
We rarely stay more than 2 nights anywhere. We visit attractions on our way between a and b. This works in Scotland with lots of aire type sites, many helped in their establishment by CAMPRA.
We tend not to arrive at a "site" until mid/late afternoon and we are off the following morning. We dont use facilities blocks, we dont need or want pristine pitches. And we certainly will not spend £40 for the privilege.
The CCC club allow use of facilities for a limited period of time for a fee. It works for them in some of their sites. A starting point would be for the CAMC to copy that. Their argument that this encourages wild camping is a nonsense. Lots of vans use pub stops, park & Rides, other carparks etc etc (all legitimate overnight stops) but do need emptying and filling facilities. The Club misses a trick by not allowing this. Similarly it needs to roll out optional and metered hook ups far more quickly that it is doing.
The Club is supposed to be inclusive, but at present does not include provision within this type of touring within its offerings.
2 -
"The Club is supposed to be inclusive, but at present does not include provision within this type of touring within its offerings"
I disagree. CAMC is inclusive because it offers the same facilities to everyone. If motorhomers choose to stay only a few hours overnight and don't use the facilities, that is their choice. There are plenty of less pristine / non facility stopping places around for those who don’t wish to avail themselves of the facilities. CAMC / C&CC provide exactly what is needed for MH-ers, caravanners, trailer tenters et al but they also provide other things to each and every one of you. Use them or not but it seems odd to criticise the provision of too many facilities.
2 -
That’s great news PD👏👏👏 I actually wrote to NCC suggesting something after we got home. Good news they decide to take a look, maybe a good few others had done the same.
0 -
The club can only be inclusive to its members, not to all different types of touring.
These members join voluntary and then decide to go to club sites again by choice. What is offered is clearly laid out, times to book in, times to leave. Really if anyone joins (and re-joins) and then decides by choice not to use part of the site, or part of the day, it's their choice. If one's touring type or style rather doesn't fit in then why pay to join and use club sites?
At present no one member's outfit is excluded in anyway, everyone is offered the same and that is inclusion.
2 -
When we joined the CAMC back in the early 1980’s, the Club had a network of smaller basic, no frills sites, that catered excellently for those who had and used their own facilities, regardless of what kind of outfit you had. They were safe, pretty, quiet, easy to use, and most operated on a basic one price for all basis. Not always busy granted, but they did get more busy with the introduction of hook ups in some areas, around the late 1990’s. Back then users were primarily caravans, so needing public transport, location wasn’t much of an issue. Two decades on, and these have all but disappeared, and are now subject to the same dynamic pricing. Few of them ever had any kind of upgrade money allocated to them, and Club members fell out of love with them for various reasons.
There simply won’t be enough Members who tour like this in the Club any more. That’s why Club Sites offer the facilities that they do, the set up is geared around the Club’s biggest market share, and the prices reflect this. Nothing wrong with that if it keeps the Club solvent. But they are very unlikely to move away from provision that is popular and keeps the money rolling in. I asked about the demise of these small sites a few years ago, at AGM. The answer was, use CLs.
0 -
All CCP sites supply 6 amp electricity and most have wifi included in the price. We have never found a site with metered electricity. As a business model it works really well for the company, the site owners and is very popular with camping-car users.
1 -
LLM, Thanks for putting that right - no wonder the CCP model is popular.
0 -
The ultimate model (in my view) would be to follow the CCP method of operation but being realistic, I doubt the Club are likely to adopt that approach.
As a halfway measure, I would like to see the current ANPR entry and exit trial adopted across the network so that reception blocks and associated staffing can then be eliminated.
I would also suggest that when sites are redeveloped, more all weather pitches are put in with less spacing so that a larger number of MHs and campervans can be accommodated. This would be particularly useful for adding capacity to locations which frequently get fully booked.
Another change I would like to see is to have the option of using any pitch - apart from maybe fully serviced pitches - without EHU, not just economy pitches.
These changes would be a start and would go some of the way to reflect how modern MHs are being used for touring.
2 -
ANPR, yes please as it will speed up booking in and ingress and exit for outfits, however not getting rid of staff in the office. How many posts have there been about staff not being on reception duties due to cleaning.
with less spacing so that a larger number of MHs and campervans can be accommodated.
So your approach is to increase the risk of fire spreading? You're happy with that? Have you seen the horrific photographs of fires on club sites with the current 6m spacing and what happens to neighbouring outfits? The 6m rule/guideline is there for a reason, given by fire services and/or local rules and I think is a condition of insurance for sites.
Well the metering solution might become the norm but not in the foreseeable future.
So keep costs down by getting rid of staff or wardens, the one aspect that numerous review praise? Perhaps the one aspect that draws in people to club sites?
Also again not very inclusive to all members.
But again why change club sites to suit what you (I assume) want to the detriment of others, including by the way, current MH users who use club sites in vast numbers?
Why not find such sites as you describe and use them? Why does it have to be a club site?
1 -
I'm all for using the CCP model it works brilliantly, but that requires top notch IT and CAMC have proven time and again that that is not exactly their strong point; plus CCP operate 24/7. Their system is superbly customer focused and proactive. I can't imagine CAMC becoming anywhere near that.
I'm not keen on ANPR, expensive and quite unnecessary if you have a RFID membership card.
1 -
CCP and Club sites are two different things of course. As far as I can see many of the CCP sites have taken over redundant campsites, usually previous municipal sites. Club sites are still well used and with the majority there would be no incentive to change things. I accept in time this could change but currently I don't see that happening. If you introduced sites without staff I think that would alienate a large proportion of current site users. People often use Club sites because they have a sense of security.
As an aside I have just been watching a video on East West Rail. When they build these large infrastructure projects they always build temporary compounds to house offices and catering for the workmen. These compounds are often near villages and it wouldn't take a lot of imagination to convert these into motorhome aires once the work is complete? You might have to accept trains running nearby.
David
1 -
GE, with CAMC closing a few sites at the end of this season, you might want to suggest the club turns them into your model aire sites instead.
I suppose those sites aren’t where you want them…….
0 -
Latest announcement from Club……..four more sites are closing for good. RIP Nunnykirk and Bromyard Downs, I don’t know the other two, but suspect they are similar. Another two at least of the basic sites I mentioned previously. They will have been too remote for a lot of folks, but for many a great overnight stop location as well as beautiful locations.
2
