CL,s versus Aires (1 Viewer)

[The Wino]

I called it "stupid overcrowding" because (as described in the OP) there were 168 vans on a site meant for 70, nothing to do with UK rules.
I agree about Canterbury - as I said there isn't that much space - but it is controlled so that there are no more vans than spaces.

The spacing required is actually 6 metres, not 9, and is in place as a fire precaution. From the model standards:
There are a number of stories to be found about fire spreading between caravans/motorhomes in storage locations where spacing isn't enforced, and plenty of reports of fire spreading to buildings when caravans are parked close.

I don't think one needs a "regimented restrictive set of rules" but the reality is that legislation is in place and it would be a waste of time to promote aires which may be likely to lead to such legislation being flouted.

So what they mean is 6m separation but at least 3m clear to stop the spread of fire same as the 3m in the french aire. But the problem is those who never put up an awning or have a car the CC are clearly thinking of caravan/awning/car in their spacing they could have 3m spaces for m/h cheaper if they wanted but they aren't bothered they are a caravan club!! It would be great if we had the choice in the UK sadly we don't.

 

[GJH]

So what they mean is 6m separation but at least 3m clear to stop the spread of fire same as the 3m in the french aire. But the problem is those who never put up an awning or have a car the CC are clearly thinking of caravan/awning/car in their spacing they could have 3m spaces for m/h cheaper if they wanted but they aren't bothered they are a caravan club!!

I'm sure you are right about the CC thinking on spacing but expect it isn't practical to have different sized pitches for caravans and motorhomes. No doubt users of both would complain that the other had the best pitches and it could well mean empty pitches and turning people away if they didn't have the correct vehicle

 

[The Wino]

I'm sure you are right about the CC thinking on spacing but expect it isn't practical to have different sized pitches for caravans and motorhomes. No doubt users of both would complain that the other had the best pitches and it could well mean empty pitches and turning people away if they didn't have the correct vehicle

They could have an aire type bit in the car parks on a lot of large sites just not interested look at what they charge to empty and fill they are a business and know where the profit lies!!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[GJH]

They could have an aire type bit in the car parks on a lot of large sites just not interested look at what they charge to empty and fill they are a business and know where the profit lies!!

It is actually the C&CC that has an empty/fill &c scheme, rather than the CC. Whether the charge is reasonable or not is a matter of opinion - just as with catering establishments for instance
As a member I should be disappointed if the CC and C&CC were not properly run as the businesses they are in reality.

Why should either club set aside a special area just to cater for a few motorhomers though? Given the relative numbers of caravans and motorhomes in this country it could be argued that any spare land like that should be used for an extra caravan pitch or two. The same could, of course, be said of any site not just those run by the clubs.

 

[2spritelyislanders]

Just to add my twopenneth to the discussion
One good reason for both CC and C&CC to have Aires attached to their big sites would be to accommodate those of us who tour in our vans and only stay a couple of nights. This would avoid the problems that people like us cause on sites when we only want to book a pitch for one or two nights rather than weeks at a time. When we had a Caravan we had exactly the same problems because we toured rather than stayed for one or two weeks. So I think both clubs would offer a lot to both mohomers and tuggers if they provided aire-type facilities..

 

[GJH]

Just to add my twopenneth to the discussion
One good reason for both CC and C&CC to have Aires attached to their big sites would be to accommodate those of us who tour in our vans and only stay a couple of nights. This would avoid the problems that people like us cause on sites when we only want to book a pitch for one or two nights rather than weeks at a time. When we had a Caravan we had exactly the same problems because we toured rather than stayed for one or two weeks. So I think both clubs would offer a lot to both mohomers and tuggers if they provided aire-type facilities..

To repeat what I said in my previous post, the same could be said of any site not just those run by the clubs. So why just single out the clubs? The thing is that the vast majority of sites in this country need (because of the market as a whole) to be able to cater for both caravans and motorhomes. Expecting any site to reduce its overall customer appeal would, I fear, be nigh on impossible.

As regards booking, we have booked just a few days at CC sites on a number of occasions and not had a problem.

The main demand for aires in this country tends to be based on location - i.e. nowhere to stay within walking distance of local amenities. If such proximity is not a requirement for some people then CLs/CSs probably do fulfill their needs already.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[scotjimland]

So I think both clubs would offer a lot to both mohomers and tuggers if they provided aire-type facilities..

Indeed..

most Club sites have late arrivals areas outside the gate with EHU and full use of facilities.. these could certainly be used for motorhomes after a certain time.. and if not required by a late caravan arrival..

It may well have already been suggested and rejected..

 

[GJH]

Indeed..

most Club sites have late arrivals areas outside the gate with EHU and full use of facilities.. these could certainly be used for motorhomes after a certain time.. and if not required by a late caravan arrival..

It may well have already been suggested and rejected..

Presumably that "certain time" would be late evening. Would that be sufficiently attractive to motorhomers who could not be certain of a place until they actually arrived? Even then, given the locations of most such sites wouldn't CLs/CSs fit the bill already?

 

[The Wino]

To repeat what I said in my previous post, the same could be said of any site not just those run by the clubs. So why just single out the clubs? The thing is that the vast majority of sites in this country need (because of the market as a whole) to be able to cater for both caravans and motorhomes. Expecting any site to reduce its overall customer appeal would, I fear, be nigh on impossible.

As regards booking, we have booked just a few days at CC sites on a number of occasions and not had a problem.

The main demand for aires in this country tends to be based on location - i.e. nowhere to stay within walking distance of local amenities. If such proximity is not a requirement for some people then CLs/CSs probably do fulfill their needs already.

No my main demand for aires is on cost/convenience and compared to France a strange feeling of being wanted to visit an area rather than being asked in effect to stay away.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[scotjimland]

Presumably that "certain time" would be late evening. Would that be sufficiently attractive to motorhomers who could not be certain of a place until they actually arrived? Even then, given the locations of most such sites wouldn't CLs/CSs fit the bill already?

yes.. indeed.. but they could still be utilised when not required..

and during winter or wet spells (frequent in Scotland, Wales and up North ).. few CLs have paved roads and hard standing.. that can be a real problem.. even damp grass can be a problem for FWD vans ..

 

[GJH]

No my main demand for aires is on cost/convenience and compared to France a strange feeling of being wanted to visit an area rather than being asked in effect to stay away.

Isn't convenience the same as location? As regards cost, that is governed by market forces isn't it? Many of us would like lower cost goods and services in many areas but businesses aren't going to supply them when that doesn't make economic sense are they?

 

[GJH]

yes.. indeed.. but they could still be utilised when not required..

and during winter or wet spells (frequent in Scotland, Wales and up North ).. few CLs have paved roads and hard standing.. that can be a real problem.. even damp grass can be a problem for FWD vans ..

Yes, I understand what you are saying Jim but it is managing the requirement which may be difficult. Leaving aside advance booking, as far as I understand it people can try to book a pitch (either by phone or in person) as long as the wardens are on duty so it is difficult to see the "certain time" being during warden duty hours. That means that any "aire" usage of late arrivals areas would be by taking a chance on whether there would be any space left (and presumably marking up of any places for genuine late arrivals to prevent them being mistaken as being available).

The weather is just one of the pleasures of this country isn't it? I don't know how much lower demand is for main site pitches during the winter but I expect there would be more available for late or on spec booking.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[2spritelyislanders]

Indeed..

most Club sites have late arrivals areas outside the gate with EHU and full use of facilities.. these could certainly be used for motorhomes after a certain time.. and if not required by a late caravan arrival..

It may well have already been suggested and rejected..

After nearly 7 weeks of blissful touring in France and only using Aires I'm going to write a little note to both clubs when I get home and suggest they give it some thought. I don't know if it's been suggested before but it's worth a try. I think you're right in saying both clubs have some sites where you can use the facilities (I think for a fee of £7 or thereabouts) and the time you can stay is limited to a few hours. This is a good start and maybe they just need a little nudge to embrace the needs of members who are motohomers

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Aires - somewhere to park with occasional extras, generally free.

To repeat what I said in my previous post, the same could be said of any site not just those run by the clubs. So why just single out the clubs? The thing is that the vast majority of sites in this country need (because of the market as a whole) to be able to cater for both caravans and motorhomes. Expecting any site to reduce its overall customer appeal would, I fear, be nigh on impossible.

As regards booking, we have booked just a few days at CC sites on a number of occasions and not had a problem.

The main demand for aires in this country tends to be based on location - i.e. nowhere to stay within walking distance of local amenities. If such proximity is not a requirement for some people then CLs/CSs probably do fulfill their needs already.

No my main demand for aires is on cost/convenience and compared to France a strange feeling of being wanted to visit an area rather than being asked in effect to stay away.

Isn't convenience the same as location? As regards cost, that is governed by market forces isn't it? Many of us would like lower cost goods and services in many areas but businesses aren't going to supply them when that doesn't make economic sense are they?

I think claiming aires are generally free is misleading and not helpful to the overall debate. I would guess that more than half of the aires we've used have charged something varying from €3 in a couple of places up to €19 (Bruges, low season) The more popular the area the more expensive the aire. The one at Bruges for example is actually more expensive than the municipal campsite further out of town. Off the top of my head Honfleur and Chamonix aires both charge around €13 per night to give other examples.

I don't think it would be reasonable to expect any site, club or otherwise, to make any of their pitches dedicated motorhome ones. We're still a small minority in this country compared to tuggers so why would anyone want to reduce the overall appeal of their business just to satisfy a minority? I know I wouldn't.

I think you're spot on with location being the most important factor Graham and a fair proportion of club and private sites aren't in good locations so even if they did provide aires or dedicated motorhome pitches or whatever you want to call it, I don't think it would solve the problem. I'd go on to suggest where a site is in a suitable location space is at a premium and the last thing they are going to want to so is reduce the amount of pitches they can sell on the off chance that motorhomes might turn up.

As I posted before the simplest solution I can think of would be for certain car parks or parts of certain car parks be made available to overnight in. No need to provide any facilities until it's proven that the site will be used. You have Canterbury, the one in Chester and the one in Portrush as existing examples. As always when we have this debate it boils down to the same thing - councils are not going to just do it and suggesting they should be forced to is ridiculous. People need to contact them themselves and make the case, preferably with supporting evidence of the potential economic benefit to the town or area.

 

[Humsafer]

Normally when I start a thread it might get a couple of replies and quickly disappears to the bottom of the page, I seem to have lit the blue touch paper on this one. Have enjoyed the diversity of opinions I have read, and some of the picturess may just drive me to look at some more Aires. Not that I have ever been against them, they fill a useful need in France .Just don't think I want or need them over here. One point I would make amidst the constant slagging off of the clubs being for caravans. Last year 43% of new members joining the Caravan Club were in fact motorhomes. Anyone know what % we are of the total number of members.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Steve101uk]

I think we have a clash of cultures here. It seems to me that most people who experience using a motorhome in France or in Europe in general often don't look back to the UK. My parents are a prime example. Keen CC&C member's my mother in particular vowed she would never take the van abroad, Dad was mad keen on the 6 meter rule and putting out the water bucket, he felt any system that allowed parking within a couple of meters was tantamount to heresy. Personally I love the informality of aries, the huge variety, and the French always seem to try and fit everyone in regardless of rule's.

So I eventually managed to con my parents into coming to France and now it seems I have opened a pandoras box, they simply love it! The freedom, the driving, the scenery, they can't get enough to the point my mother has suggested giving up their beloved CC&C membership. Something I don't support as I think the DA thing very good.

So aires are a bit laid back about the rules sometimes, and some aires are rubbish and some are good....but, there are literally thousands more motorhomes all willing to share a little bit of space.

We have more or less given up on using the van in the UK now as it always feels disappointing after France, it just doesn't compare.

 

[2spritelyislanders]

and

laser101uk I (Mrs Spritelyislanders) was just like your parents (without the bucket!) and now as our first moho holiday in France draws to a very wet end! I'm wondering how much mohoming we'll do in the UK in future. We've been on crowded Aires and had a few to ourselves but the overriding thing has always been how welcome we are wherever we go. Supermarkets have dedicated spaces, we've parked next to beaches, historic sites and amazing lakes. France seems to be a country that makes provision for everyone and it's a place where unless it says you can't then you can! Simple as that! We've really been able to enjoy our motorhoming here without the constant feeling of can we go there or is it allowed. To us it has meant motorhoming freedom. Even though we are sitting in the van as it persists down, it's not dampened our spirits!
In fact as we sit here I'm planning the next trip to France

 

[The Wino]

I think claiming aires are generally free is misleading and not helpful to the overall debate. I would guess that more than half of the aires we've used have charged something varying from €3 in a couple of places up to €19 (Bruges, low season) The more popular the area the more expensive the aire. The one at Bruges for example is actually more expensive than the municipal campsite further out of town. Off the top of my head Honfleur and Chamonix aires both charge around €13 per night to give other examples.

I don't think it would be reasonable to expect any site, club or otherwise, to make any of their pitches dedicated motorhome ones. We're still a small minority in this country compared to tuggers so why would anyone want to reduce the overall appeal of their business just to satisfy a minority? I know I wouldn't.

I think you're spot on with location being the most important factor Graham and a fair proportion of club and private sites aren't in good locations so even if they did provide aires or dedicated motorhome pitches or whatever you want to call it, I don't think it would solve the problem. I'd go on to suggest where a site is in a suitable location space is at a premium and the last thing they are going to want to so is reduce the amount of pitches they can sell on the off chance that motorhomes might turn up.

As I posted before the simplest solution I can think of would be for certain car parks or parts of certain car parks be made available to overnight in. No need to provide any facilities until it's proven that the site will be used. You have Canterbury, the one in Chester and the one in Portrush as existing examples. As always when we have this debate it boils down to the same thing - councils are not going to just do it and suggesting they should be forced to is ridiculous. People need to contact them themselves and make the case, preferably with supporting evidence of the potential economic benefit to the town or area.

We spent 9.5 euros last year for 10 nights but it depends what you want and where you are going so it might be misleading to claim they are generally free if you choose to pay for them!!!!

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Reallyretired]

In my experience more aires are free than are charged for, but as stated by other posters, a popular area is more likely to charge. We prefer not to stay anywhere larger than a village. The capacity given in the aires books don't necessarily bear much resemblance to reality. The last time I looked the Bergues aire had an official capacity of 20 vans. I have seen over 100 and it still wasn't full.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

We spent 9.5 euros last year for 10 nights but it depends what you want and where you are going so it might be misleading to claim they are generally free if you choose to pay for them!!!!

The location is most important to us and I certainly wouldn't go anywhere out of my way or plan a route just to avoid paying for an aire.

I never even look at the cost, it's irrelevant. If the aire or site is where we want to be then we're happy to pay whatever is asked.

 

[chaser]

Don't know why anyone wants Aires in uk , because they are never going to compare with France, for what it costs to get there , there's just no comparison, weather , ambiance, empty roads,people who actually welcome you into their village, and everything else I can't think of .

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[The Wino]

The location is most important to us and I certainly wouldn't go anywhere out of my way or plan a route just to avoid paying for an aire.

I never even look at the cost, it's irrelevant. If the aire or site is where we want to be then we're happy to pay whatever is asked.

My point was you said it was misleading to claim aires are generally free but it depends where you want to go. We don't go to aires just because they are cheap we just like going to areas off the beaten track.

 

[Lot lover]

My comment about aires in France in general being free for parking was based on my looking at the 2016 book. Perhaps the ones I chose were in the less popular and unrepresentative areas but that would certainly apply to my dept and probably most of rural France.

I cannot imagine parish, town or district councils in UK ever providing aires or anything similar but I admit I know very little about that country in the 21st century.

 

[Littlewheels]

I like the to follow the rules when staying on Aires! There are none at least as far as the French are concerned and I follow their lead.
We just get on with it and rub along with everyone.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[Deleted member 29692]

My point was you said it was misleading to claim aires are generally free but it depends where you want to go. We don't go to aires just because they are cheap we just like going to areas off the beaten track.

OK, how about this:

Aires in more out of the way, less popular areas, especially rural ones, tend to be free whilst aires in more popular "tourist" locations, especially on the coast, tend to charge.

Would you agree with that? I'm sure there are exceptions in both cases but it's got to be more accurate than a big sweeping statement either way.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

I cannot imagine parish, town or district councils in UK ever providing aires or anything similar but I admit I know very little about that country in the 21st century.

There are a few, mostly areas of car parks, but there's no reason why any local authority would provide anything unless the potential benefits are demonstrated to them. Unfortunately most people would rather scream and rant that councils should be "forced" to provide them facilities (and they usually want them for free) than actually do anything constructive like identify a potential site and then contact the relevant authority and work with them.

Motorhomers are still a pretty small minority in this country so there's no reason why any council would divert resources on the off chance that people might come. Where there's been a proven demand demonstrated some have done it but for any more to appear that demand would need to be demonstrated over and over again with accurate evidence specific to that location

@GJH is more knowledgable than most on this subject and has certainly done more work on it than most

 

[Lot lover]

Perhaps this subject could be closed with the words of a one-time boss of mine "don't confuse me with the facts, I've made up my mind".

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}

 

[jongood]

There are a few, mostly areas of car parks, but there's no reason why any local authority would provide anything unless the potential benefits are demonstrated to them. Unfortunately most people would rather scream and rant that councils should be "forced" to provide them facilities (and they usually want them for free) than actually do anything constructive like identify a potential site and then contact the relevant authority and work with them.

Motorhomers are still a pretty small minority in this country so there's no reason why any council would divert resources on the off chance that people might come. Where there's been a proven demand demonstrated some have done it but for any more to appear that demand would need to be demonstrated over and over again with accurate evidence specific to that location

@GJH is more knowledgable than most on this subject and has certainly done more work on it than most

Sorry. I agree with much of what you ve said but do want to disagree with a couple of points here:

1, I dont think we need the councils to give us anything. We need them to relax the rules.

2, @GJH is without doubt an expert on UK parking but I think has limited experience of the extensive aires networks that exist in other countries.

3, I am under the impression that there are more new MHs being registered than caravans being sold.

BTW I agree totally - Its all about location - within reason I dont really care what it costs either.
Jon

 

[GJH]

Sorry. I agree with much of what you ve said but do want to disagree with a couple of points here:

1, I dont think we need the councils to give us anything. We need them to relax the rules.

2, @GJH is without doubt an expert on UK parking but I think has limited experience of the extensive aires networks that exist in other countries.

3, I am under the impression that there are more new MHs being registered than caravans being sold.

BTW I agree totally - Its all about location - within reason I dont really care what it costs either.
Jon

I don't have limited experience of foreign aires, I have absolutely no experience of foreign aires. That is of little relevance to aires in the UK, though, because (as with anything else) requirements can be defined without reliance on existing solutions.
I don't understand point 1. The "rules" consist of fairly straightforward legislation governing granting of site licences and planning consent. What is more difficult to achieve is a suitable site and that is where councils "giving" something comes in because they tend to own most potentially suitable land.

 

[Deleted member 29692]

Sorry. I agree with much of what you ve said but do want to disagree with a couple of points here:

1, I dont think we need the councils to give us anything. We need them to relax the rules.

2, @GJH is without doubt an expert on UK parking but I think has limited experience of the extensive aires networks that exist in other countries.

3, I am under the impression that there are more new MHs being registered than caravans being sold.

BTW I agree totally - Its all about location - within reason I dont really care what it costs either.
Jon

Relax the rules how? If you mean make it easier for private individuals or organisations to operate such stopovers I don't agree. Anyone trying to run an aire type as a commercial operation would want to charge commercial rates or and would feel compelled to justify their rates by providing extra facilities. All you would end up with would be another CL type network which isn't the answer.
This is why I think LA provision in the form of car park space with no facilities provided at all would be the most desirable option, at least initially. The set up cost would be minimal and they wouldn't need to make a profit, only charge enough to ensure it wasn't costing them anything. As we know though they aren't going to do it off their own backs, each one individually would need to have the potential benefits demonstrated. The other big advantage of using car parks is that they tick the location box without tying up valuable land that could be used for other things.

The systems in other European countries aren't really relevant to any provision here. There are many many more motorhomes in Europe with a whole different culture surrounding their use. Trying to emulate the French, or any other, system wouldn't work.

Their may be more being registered but we're still a minority and as long as large numbers of us keep using campsites it will be pointed out that there is adequate provision for us already.

^{_{Subscribers  do not see these advertisements}}