Help shape future facilities at UK Club campsites

And not many car parks have this sort of view.

To reinforce DK's point about people wanting SP these are the standards pitches and there were more outfits on the service pitches (39 out of 44)  that weekend than the standard pitches (35 out of 144). On both there were the same proportion of motorhomes, about one third.

The site is all HS so the popularity of the SP can't be due to that and so it would appear that people were prepared to pay the extra £4.90 to have a SP. I notice the same pattern for the next BH with less than 5 pitches remaining on SP. 

"It would be interesting for those that claim such campsites are like car parks to provide some photos of examples of sites that have hardstanding that don't look like carparks."

Hi David, I think its the hard standing that leads to some of the perceived issues.

So far as I can see the reasons that hard standings are usability in all weathers and a level pitch and costs dictate that the pitch size will usually be the minimum usable and invariably this means pitches are as in your picture.

The weather aspect is probably the most significant which means, for us, staying on UK sites will see us looking for hard standings so that we have no issues with muddy surfaces etc.

However, when abroad we would not think about a hard standing and don't recall ever using one, but what you do get, due to the dryer weather, is a surface more likely to tolerate a caravan being maneuvered onto it than would generally be the case here.

So, if in the UK would have no expectations that sites would look different than you and TW pictured, and would be happy to stay there, but cross the water and I would neither expect nor find such layouts.

Cant see either provision changing much so "vive la difference!"

This site has hardstandings and no SPS, it's the location that counts and the views are all around at Derwentwater with no need for a vehicle. We'd never use Troutbeck due to the need for travel. I've never seen Derwentwater with empty spaces. Not sure what this means except some like different locations. 

Plus it’s £32 cheaper for us, for the four days we’ve booked in October. Unless of course the C&CC add on a surcharge, they’ve not said anything yet. Given the loss of the CAMC’s USP and the obvious advantages for those with a MH it’s a fairly easy choice. I don’t think we would make a different one even if we didn’t get the age related discount. That’s from someone who likes Troutbeck. We had several long holidays there with our caravans. We even used it for a night on route last year with our MH.

Location does indeed count, but the site too, and having stayed at Derwentwater we were disappointed by it and certainly not in the same league as TH in our view, views are good and access to Keswick but that is all, of course everyone is entitled to their opinion preference as you allude to. We need variety. 

Also location wise, it's well placed but walking up to the tops you're pretty much stuck to either Skiddaw (and only one route up really, the 'tourist' route, which is great once but say the Ullock pike ridge route is far better which you need to travel to start it), or you have Catbells onwards route but it's either back the same way and/or follow the two ridges to Newlands and then it's a fair way back to Keswick, and up to Bleaberry Fell. After those you do have to travel. TH is far better placed for any other area in the lakes I would say.

But my picture and post to was give an example of not a 'car park site' and to show that for CAMC members SP are quite in demand over standard pitches, and that is true on every site I've been to that has them. Everyone chooses what they want in terms of prices and location or SP the end there is no right or wrong decisions. It's good there is so much variety to choose from.

Black Knowl when the days are shorter and the grass pitches not in use usually has a herd of deer jumps over the fence to feed on site

It could be Aldridge Hill next door to Black Knowl, a much more relaxed non ehu site blending in to the NF with animals roaming, no need for them to jump over fences. 

The user and all related content has been Deleted User

Without a picture I'm unable to comment. And of course your definition of a car park site isn't necessarily the definitive one.  

Actually I've just had a look at the photographs on its webpage and it comes no where near my idea of a car park. My local par car at the local shopping centre looks nothing like that at all. They look nothing alike to my eyes? I just don't get this car park analogy at all I'm afraid

 I did complete day 2 of the survey - which as has been said up thread was all about toilet blocks.

One question was to allocate about 30 different items into essential, desirable etc.  They ranged from toilets to wet suit washing & drying, to music in the loos, to separate bathrooms..

A number of different sites were highlighted with pictures and comments asked for - Black Knowl, Carnon Downs, Hillhead, Cayton Village.

Questions around would you rather have one super duper loo block or a couple of standard ones.

I managed to get some stuff in about only loo emptying being essential and preferred no facility sites.  This seemed to cause some consternation and I had a couple of responses asking for further info about this, including from the moderator/admin why did I prefer this sort of site and how could the Club "help" with this!!!

Unfortunately I then lost e mail access for two days.  I did send an e mail to the organisation giving answers to these point - dont know if it will be accepted or not.  

However the loss of internet meant I didn't see or complete day 3.