Increase size of CLs?

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.

The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.

Why the need to accept tents and other options.

The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.

A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?

Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.

Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.

Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.

Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.

The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable. Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CL

The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable. Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CL

Write your comments here...From memory, most of those that have commented on CL's use them because they are small with spacious pitches and without hook-up, preffering the peaceful nature of the sites.

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.

The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.

Why the need to accept tents and other options.

The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.

A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?

Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.

Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.

Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.

Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.

 

BM - I agree 100%. That must be the most sensible post on CT for some considerable time. Well said! 

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. 

 

Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income. 

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. 

 

Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income. 

Don't follow your logic there ET, f the sites are empty of 5 vans they'll be just as empty with more pitches available.

The Cl criteria was set up 60 years ago when there much fewer vans and with very basic facilities ie no electrics, built in tolets etc. and a corner in a field was acceptable. Those of us who van all year now require an EHU and hard standing (nothing more).To put those in is a considerable expenditure and no way will a max 5 van site pay for irself. We see here in the Nat Park, cls going commercial. They allow overcrowding and use that to justify the expansion. The Nat Park is so for it that unless there are objections from the immediate neighbours planning is granted without going through the formal planning committee. The cost of £160 to apply is negligible in the total cost of the expansion. Beware what we seek as the Cl network is diminishing and looking with rose tinted glasses will only exasperate things. Wonder how many of those against expansion actually use CL

Perhaps it would be good to hear from a CL owner, who has those facilities, if it's worth while. I can think of a few who think that it's been worth their while. 

The logic in my part of the world is that CLs are empty for much of the year, but have to turn people away in holiday times because they aren't allowed to take more than five caravans. 

.

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. 

 

Well, the owners of those empty CLs might want things to change and might be looking for ways to increase their income. 

Write your comments here...why would they want more empty pitches

Differnt options are even more essential in peak periods.

As we have no children, we choose adult only sites  in peak periods, which allows others that have children to also have more chance of a pitch.

Why is there always the clamour for change?

Around the country, I pass many CL's that are almost empty. Why is there a need to increase the number of pitches.

The CC provides a considerable number of sites that cater for caravans / motor homes.

Why the need to accept tents and other options.

The C&CC offer availability for caravans, motorhomes and tents.

A great alternative to the CC. Why should they offer the same?

Hundreds of comercial sites that offer statics, tents etc. They also offer entertainment directly for families that want that option.

Sites that are adult only, some without dogs.

Surely we want options that give everone the type of site they require, without this clamour for change.

Enjoy the differences as they stand and choose which option suits you.

 

BM - I agree 100%. That must be the most sensible post on CT for some considerable time. Well said! 

Write your comments here...Thanks.