# Ambleside Aire Closure



## Midnightrambler

Have just received this email from Graeme. Please read it & if possible lend your support to keeping it open
Thanks
Alan


Good afternoon

Miller Field Motorhome Camping is under threat of imminent, permanent closure. The Lake District National Parks Authority served an Enforcement notice on the site, we appealed against the notice but an inspector appointed by the Planning Inspectorate has upheld the Enforcement Notice following a visit to the site on November 7th 2013.

The two major reasons given for the Enforcement Notice are a) that the site is located on a functional floodplain and b) the site has a visual impact when viewed from Loughrigg Fell.

We do not, and never have, disputed either of the above issues but our stance on point a) that the functionality of the floodplain has been improved as a result of works carried out by MFMC and b) the judicious planting of indigenous trees/shrubs/hedges will in time soften the visual impact, have both been pretty much ignored.

Even during the severe wet weather conditions of October 2009 not a single motorhome was put under any risk; the option to temporarily close the site due to conditions has always been available.

Our next step is to present our case to our local MP, Mr Tim Farron, and to this end we have a meeting with him on the afternoon of Friday 29th November. We aim to discuss the options available to oppose the Enforcement Notice and we are looking to take as much ammunition as we can to this meeting in order to support our case.

Consequently we would appreciate your comments, in the form of a reply to this email, stating your past experiences of staying on the site and the benefits your stay has had on the economy of the local area etc.....

Please do not contact the LDNPA directly as we do not wish to antagonise them further, likewise we do not wish to bombard Mr Farron with correspondence prior to our meeting with him.

Thank you for taking the time to read this email. Should you feel strongly enough to respond we would request that you do so at your earliest opportunity, we look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

Graeme Drylie


----------



## Midnightrambler

Forgot to show his email address
[email protected]
Sorry


----------



## barryd

For goodness sake. Lets find something else to discourage trade. It will be a great pity if this facility goes as I think it was very popular and also served well as a bit of a shining example that could be presented to Councils etc when campaigning for Aires.

It just reminds me of when they imposed the speed limit on Windermere because it spoilt the tranquility. It had a massive negative effect on the Windermere Economy and still does.

I dont think you will have any trouble getting support from the MH communities on this one. 

Good luck.


----------



## 100127

Email sent off to Graham with our support, as we are going there this Sunday.


----------



## 747

They will not be happy until they have driven every local and tourist out of the place. :roll:


----------



## 113016

Thanks for informing us about this. We are regulars at Millers field and will send an email.
If they do close the facility, the shops, restaurants, pubs and trip boats will certainly get less business. I think that everybody who goes there would use most, if not all of the above!
It looks like another short sighted council.
If, it does close, then we will no longer spend any money there!


----------



## rickwiggans

Email sent directly to Graeme


----------



## nicholsong

Graeme

Sorry to read about this problem.

We were touring round there last summer and because I had read about the site we looked in, although did not stay because it was mid-morning and had plans to travel further. The facilities looked to be just what we might need sometime.

Some points which might help, of which you may already have some in your ammunition.

Re Flood Plain;

I know it was the Parks Authority who served the notice.

Who is responsible for the flood plain management? Is it another authority and did the Parks authority consult them?

The appeal was to the Planning Inspectorate. Have you found any evidence of planning permission being granted for houses on flood plains in the area? - permissions have been granted elsewhere. They have to be consistent. If evidence found, point out that a house, unlike a MH, cannot be moved when a flood warning is issued

As you point out the site could be closed if there were a threat of flooding. I am sure you have made the point that the site could be evacuated in an hour or less if need be.

Do the Parks Authority ban wildcamping on other flood plain sites within their jurisdiction? If not, are they expecting the MH owners to take care of themselves? If so, why should that not apply to the Aire? A warning notice could be posted to the effect that it is a flood plain and to take care.

Try contacting the MH Clubs(although they may not want to help an Aire operator - in which case get a Club Member to do it - I am not) The reason I suggest this is that they have some sites nearer water than yours. C+CC at Chertsey is a prime example - the Thames is 2-3m from the fence and about 3' below the site. It gets flooded regularly and they block off a lot of the pitches in the winter. They also have outside winter storage pitches which could not be evacuated at short notice.


Visual Impact

I cannot help much with that as I do not know the area. 

Did the Parks Authority cite specific complaints, if so, how many and were they from residences from which the site could actually be seen? Or were they from 'Grumpy of Bowness'?


Were you represented by an experienced Planning Lawyer at the appeal? If cost were a factor maybe the Membership on here would chip in if there is any possibility of a further appeal, e.g. for Judicial Review. I am not a planning lawyer so cannot advise.

As for approaching the MP, what support have you got from the local business community/ Chamber of Commerce - of course could be they are more concerned with looking after Bowness than Ambleside.

Sorry if I am going over old ground, but maybe some of it gives you some ideas.

Good Luck with your fight. Even from this distance in Poland I want you to stay open.

Geoff


----------



## 113016

I have sent an email to Graeme, explaining to the council about the loss of income to the local businesses, and pointing out what a good ambassador Graeme is for the local tourist industry
Maybe Graeme will be able to show the comments on here.


----------



## rickwiggans

Further to my above post - this is what I said to Graeme - it might prompt thoughts from others,

Cheers

Rick

Hi Graeme,
First, a couple of general points. I'm not sure I buy in to the relevance of the site being on a flood plain. So are tens of thousands of new build houses. How many of those can, at the turn of a key, be moved out of harm's way, as can a motorhome? The only time I have needed to evacuate from a flooding site in my motorhome has been from the Troutbeck Caravan Club site - hardly a flood plain! In addition, the Camping and Caravan club sites in Keswick are well known for flooding, and there are well established procedures in place for dealing with such eventualities.

I have wandered the fellsides of Loughrigg many times, and can't say I have EVER thought, my goodness look at all those motorhomes! The site, for goodness sake, is next to a huge carpark! 

As you will recall, my wife and I have just stayed on the site (I trust you found our payment in the honesty box!). This was to enable us to take part in the Cracker Cycling event based in Grasmere. Rather than overnight in Grasmere, we stayed in Ambleside, purely because of the existence of MFMC. Whilst there, we ate out in the evening at Lucy's, and spent, including pre-dinner drinks at the Sportsman's (or whatever it is now called), rather more than £100. Additionally, there were another 10 people who stayed B&B and ate with us at Lucy's, who were persuaded to stay in Ambleside rather than Grasmere, because we, as the only motorhomers, found it convenient. My estimate is that between us we spent in excess of £600 that night. This is in addition to whatever each couple spent in hotels and B&B's.

Next day my wife and I, rather than cook, because of the proximity of the town, ate breakfast in the town - another £20 or so. We then spent well in excess of £100 in the local shops, which had we not been staying in the town, we would almost certainly not have done.

So, in summary, the two of us spent well over £250, and consequential spending by friends was in the region of £1000.

We travel extensively in Europe, and make regular use of the Aires and stellplatz network there. Naturally, we pick places to stay because they fit our requirements - one key requirement being that there is an aire! It is most unusual for us to visit a town, stay on an aire, and NOT spend money in the town. The good people of the towns of France and Germany embrace, and see the quite clear benefits to the town, of the Aires network. As you will be aware, almost every town and village has some sort of facility,

I wish you the best of luck,


----------



## uncleswede

Support email sent to Graeme just now. Crazy short-sightedness :-(


----------



## larrywatters

Email sent to Graeme lets hope it will not happen, roll on wymouth if only 
more council were more on the ball.


----------



## aldra

Email Sent

Aldra


----------



## teemyob

Smacks of something.

Absolutely Gutted.

TM


----------



## Stanner

Please note this is NOT the action of a "Council" - it's the National Park Authority who appear to have no concern (or any need for concern) for the well being of local businesses


----------



## teemyob

National Park, what a load of bill hooks.

So what about the cars in the car park sat on a flood plain?
What about the visual impact of cars?
What about numerous other visual impacts?

TM


----------



## grandadbaza

It is obvious that this is not in the same area as Rowntree CC site , that will be perfect ly safe as unlike Ambleside Rowntree never floods ,thats why it never gets closed down :wink: :wink:


----------



## boringfrog

Simply seething :evil: :evil: :evil:


----------



## barryd

They do my nut in this lot. They bang on about stopping wild camping in the lake district and there have been several threads on the wildy forum about this. 

I cant find the thread now but recently they looked at stopping wilding at Wasdale head or charging £15 a night for parking when cars can park overnight free. 

Forestry lot, no better.

Then someone builds a very well run Aire. There is no trouble, its tucked away out of the way and they want to ban that now.

Having lived nextdoor to the lakes and had boats on both Ullswater and Windermere for years Im sick of the place being run by little Hitlers. 

One of them had a personal vendetta against Motorhomes on the wildy forum. Even joined as a member (Think he was foresty though) to go out of his way to tell people not to wild camp in Enderdale. 

And they wonder why we all bugger off to France.


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

Also just emailed Graham.

I don't know what all this is about a flood plain. But I have been camping on Millers Field / Ambleside Football Field (directly adjacent) for well over 10 years. It has never been a problem before so why now all of a sudden.

Idiots the lot of em.


----------



## IanA

Flood plains are normally Environment Agency,and they can only advise, not prohibit.


----------



## teemyob

barryd said:


> They do my nut in this lot. They bang on about stopping wild camping in the lake district and there have been several threads on the wildy forum about this.
> 
> I cant find the thread now but recently they looked at stopping wilding at Wasdale head or charging £15 a night for parking when cars can park overnight free.
> 
> Forestry lot, no better.
> 
> Then someone builds a very well run Aire. There is no trouble, its tucked away out of the way and they want to ban that now.
> 
> Having lived nextdoor to the lakes and had boats on both Ullswater and Windermere for years Im sick of the place being run by little Hitlers.
> 
> One of them had a personal vendetta against Motorhomes on the wildy forum. Even joined as a member (Think he was foresty though) to go out of his way to tell people not to wild camp in Enderdale.
> 
> And they wonder why we all bugger off to France.


My Thoughts too (France).

Trev


----------



## erneboy

Do they all wonder why we go to France Barry? I don't think they give a toss about anything other than their own power to dictate, obstruct and spoil the innicent, harmless enjoyment of others, especially motorhomers. 

I have met any number of French and German motorhomers who have said that they will never come to the UK because that is it's reputation, Alan.


----------



## nicholsong

IanA said:


> Flood plains are normally Environment Agency,and they can only advise, not prohibit.


Ian

Going back to my earlier post, did the Parks Authority take Environment Agency advice before issuing the prohibition?

If not, my bet is they would lose on Judicial Review.

I suspect a lot of local politics operating here without too much adherence to the Law.

Geoff


----------



## crusader

rickwiggans said:


> Further to my above post - this is what I said to Graeme - it might prompt thoughts from others,
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Rick
> 
> Hi Graeme,
> First, a couple of general points. I'm not sure I buy in to the relevance of the site being on a flood plain. So are tens of thousands of new build houses. How many of those can, at the turn of a key, be moved out of harm's way, as can a motorhome? The only time I have needed to evacuate from a flooding site in my motorhome has been from the Troutbeck Caravan Club site - hardly a flood plain! In addition, the Camping and Caravan club sites in Keswick are well known for flooding, and there are well established procedures in place for dealing with such eventualities.
> 
> I have wandered the fellsides of Loughrigg many times, and can't say I have EVER thought, my goodness look at all those motorhomes! The site, for goodness sake, is next to a huge carpark!
> 
> As you will recall, my wife and I have just stayed on the site (I trust you found our payment in the honesty box!). This was to enable us to take part in the Cracker Cycling event based in Grasmere. Rather than overnight in Grasmere, we stayed in Ambleside, purely because of the existence of MFMC. Whilst there, we ate out in the evening at Lucy's, and spent, including pre-dinner drinks at the Sportsman's (or whatever it is now called), rather more than £100. Additionally, there were another 10 people who stayed B&B and ate with us at Lucy's, who were persuaded to stay in Ambleside rather than Grasmere, because we, as the only motorhomers, found it convenient. My estimate is that between us we spent in excess of £600 that night. This is in addition to whatever each couple spent in hotels and B&B's.
> 
> Next day my wife and I, rather than cook, because of the proximity of the town, ate breakfast in the town - another £20 or so. We then spent well in excess of £100 in the local shops, which had we not been staying in the town, we would almost certainly not have done.
> 
> So, in summary, the two of us spent well over £250, and consequential spending by friends was in the region of £1000.
> 
> We travel extensively in Europe, and make regular use of the Aires and stellplatz network there. Naturally, we pick places to stay because they fit our requirements - one key requirement being that there is an aire! It is most unusual for us to visit a town, stay on an aire, and NOT spend money in the town. The good people of the towns of France and Germany embrace, and see the quite clear benefits to the town, of the Aires network. As you will be aware, almost every town and village has some sort of facility,
> 
> I wish you the best of luck,


 Rick , i was also on the site at the same time as you we spoke on the morning you were leaving , its a small world ? As others have said its a great aire type stop in the heart of the town , will be adding my email address to graemes list , jim


----------



## barryd

erneboy said:


> Do they all wonder why we go to France Barry? I don't think they give a toss about anything other than their own power to dictate, obstruct and spoil the innicent, harmless enjoyment of others, especially motorhomers.
> 
> I have met any number of French and German motorhomers who have said that they will never come to the UK because that is it's reputation, Alan.


No. They probably dont care. I dont suppose many of the National Parks, Councils, Tourism and other authorities are aware or care what they are turning away. Its two way traffic as you say. We bugger off and nobody comes here.

Just look at the motorhome traffic and nationalities you see in July and August in France, Germany and ITaly and they are widespread over a massive area.

The marine industry, top notch hotels and restaurants positively flurished on Windermere until 2005 when they put the 10mph speed limit in. Nobody listened or cared what the locals said. I was there before and after and had many friends with businesses and they suffered really badly.

No reasoning, back tracking on promises made over many years. The voice of a few power hungry "we know best" brigade. None of which from memory were even Cumbrians! Strange that.


----------



## coppo

Will it really matter to them if the aire closes.

The Lake District is a tourist hotspot, they can do what the hell they like, it will be like taking a penny piece from a well to them, no discernible difference.

Sometimes you wonder why you bother motorhoming in this country.

Paul.


----------



## samsung

*Closure of Ambleside Aire*

E Mail sent in support of Graham


----------



## Kaytutt

suggestion, start an e-petition

http://epetitions.net/

I've never been there and never used an aire so wouldn't know the right language but e-petitions can be quite successful

Interestingly most local authorities and all Government departments now offer an e-petition service, the lake district local authority doesn't :roll:


----------



## delawaredandy

You can understand why most of us bugger off abroad and spend our money in other countries, it's about time the likes of NT NP and all the other pisspot councils around this country deem fit not to follow the continentals way of dealing with the problem (let's make money out of it)

A couple of M/H parked in some beauty spot up north somewhere not exactly the same as a bunch of gyppos turning the place into a toxic wasteland is it, never been there but you have my support.

M


----------



## erneboy

Kaytutt said:


> suggestion, start an e-petition
> 
> http://epetitions.net/
> 
> I've never been there and never used an aire so wouldn't know the right language but e-petitions can be quite successful
> 
> Interestingly most local authorities and all Government departments now offer an e-petition service, the lake district local authority doesn't :roll:


Be very careful of that. If only a relative few support it that will damage the cause rather than help it. I think it would be lucky to attract a few hundred signatures which would consign us to the same realm as all the other fruitcakes who start these petitions. Pun intended, Alan.


----------



## barryd

coppo said:


> Will it really matter to them if the aire closes.
> 
> The Lake District is a tourist hotspot, they can do what the hell they like, it will be like taking a penny piece from a well to them, no discernible difference.
> 
> Sometimes you wonder why you bother motorhoming in this country.
> 
> Paul.


Yeah it will matter to the locals and the local businesses. This is the point Im trying to make! The people kicking up the fuss and making the rules do not have the regions economy or the feelings of local people as their first priority.

Believe it or not Cumbria is one of the poorest counties in England. It might not look like it to walk around Bowness or Ambleside but have a drive around the coast and the outer regions.


----------



## Kaytutt

erneboy said:


> Kaytutt said:
> 
> 
> 
> suggestion, start an e-petition
> 
> http://epetitions.net/
> 
> I've never been there and never used an aire so wouldn't know the right language but e-petitions can be quite successful
> 
> Interestingly most local authorities and all Government departments now offer an e-petition service, the lake district local authority doesn't :roll:
> 
> 
> 
> Be very careful of that. If only a relative few support it that will damage the cause rather than help it. I think it would be lucky to attract a few hundred signatures which would consign us to the same realm as all the other fruitcakes who start these petitions. Pun intended, Alan.
Click to expand...

Sorry I disagree 

Did you check the link? it isn't an official government e-petition so the results would/could only be published/shared by the person starting the petition.

A few hundred signatures will probably outweigh the number of supportive emails, I wouldn't write an email, I don't know enough about the Aire but I'd put my name on a petition


----------



## erneboy

My point is that once you start a petition it's necessary to publicise it widely to attract significant support. I don't think we can do that and producing an online petition with a low number of signatures will give the impression that there is little support. What would you consider a reasonable number supporting an online petition to be, surely it would have to be thousands for anyone to take it seriously?

I am content to agree to differ and if one was started I would feel obliged to sign it in the hope that it would eventually reach a credible number, Alan.


----------



## 113016

To be quite honest, and I hate to say this, but I think that possibly, Graeme might have given them some ammunition  About a year ago, there were a couple of boats stored on site, and at least a couple of caravans have been there, week in and week out.
I did hear through the grapevine (hearsay only) that the authorities were not too happy  
Maybe, they would accept M/Hs, but not the boats caravans 
I just hope it can be sorted out as it is a great location at a reasonable price

Regarding the petition, I agree with Alan, and I also don't think there would be time to get enough to make any difference.


----------



## Annsman

The thing is it's already been decided and gone to planning appeal and lost! The only thing that could change it is a judicial review and those cost tens of thousands, would that be worth it? 

As for petitions, well no matter how many names appear on a planning app petition, from either side, it only carries the weight of one person. A letter or e-mail campaign is better because they count as one each. I was told that a long time ago at a planning appeal meeting by the independant chairman. He told me it's better to run off a letter from a copier and distribute them to people to sign rather than mess about going from door to door getting signatures.

Just don't bother going and take your van and cash to mainland Europe where we are appreciated.


----------



## 113016

Just found this

http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.u...J=COO.2036.300.12.5990537&NAME=/Decision..pdf


----------



## barryd

Grath said:


> Just found this
> 
> http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.u...J=COO.2036.300.12.5990537&NAME=/Decision..pdf


Is that game over then?

Sounds like it.

Ok then. When it shuts lets all go and park in Ambleside, anywhere where there are no TRO signs banning motorhomes.

Couple of hundred vans parked at 4am in the morning should do it.

Actions speak louder than words. Whos with me?


----------



## 100127

On it boss. :lol: :lol:


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> Just found this
> 
> http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.u...J=COO.2036.300.12.5990537&NAME=/Decision..pdf


Yes it's residential caravans that have caused the problem and the impact on motorhomes is just "collateral damage". 
Note the reference to "......use the land for the stationing of caravans (including motor caravans)"!

If it had just been just motorhomes "parking" overnight in "Aire" style, (no awnings, no tables and chairs, etc.) the appeal might have succeeded.


----------



## wbafc

We have sent e-mail to Graeme supporting his case to stay opened stayed for 2 nights last year and enjoyed every minute.

Also spent money in Ambleside in local shops because of the location, how idiotic words fail me

Mal


----------



## johnthompson

This whole issue of Aire needs the real support of Motorhome users, Clubs, Forums and the trade (Dealers and constructors).

This is the way it was done in France. The Motorhome Association in NI has had success following the same model.

We need a united group. At present everything is too fragmented and disunited.

Millers Field has been established without planning permission. The system would not have granted PP but they will now make sure nothing like it will happen on this land now.

The only way forward in my opinion is pressure on government to change the rules and separate towable caravans from Motor Caravans in legislation and follow the Spanish model. ie. (Eric Pickles his role as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government please email him at [email protected] )

Motorhome users are permitted to carry out manoeuvres of stopping and parking in the same conditions and with the same limitations as any other vehicle. 
It is indisputable that the exclusion of certain users must be necessarily motivated and based on reasonable objections such as the external dimensions of the vehicle or the maximum permissible weight (MMA) of the vehicle but not by use of subjective reasons such as: possible uncivilised behaviour by some users such as noise at night, dumping of garbage or waste water onto the public road, monopolization of public space by erecting structures and furnishings or other situations of abuse against which local authorities have effective legal tools to be used in a non-discriminatory manner against all violators, whether users of motorhomes or any other type of vehicle. 
In car parks if a vehicle is parked properly, without exceeding markings on the delimitation of the parking space, nor exceeds the time permitted, if any, it is irrelevant whether the occupants are inside the vehicle, and the motorhome is no exception, being sufficient that the activity in the interior does not transcend to the exterior by the setting up of elements which surpass the perimeter of the vehicle such as stalls, awnings, levelling devices, stabilizing devices, etc.


----------



## 113016

Stanner said:


> Grath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Just found this
> 
> http://www.pcs.planningportal.gov.u...J=COO.2036.300.12.5990537&NAME=/Decision..pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Yes it's residential caravans that have caused the problem and the impact on motorhomes is just "collateral damage".
> Note the reference to "......use the land for the stationing of caravans (including motor caravans)"!
> 
> If it had just been just motorhomes "parking" overnight in "Aire" style, (no awnings, no tables and chairs, etc.) the appeal might have succeeded.
Click to expand...

Yes, everytime we visited, we always thought that the caravans might be it's downfall, and I understand the couple of boats, caused a problem a little while ago.
However, I do think it is an excuse!
I don't know if many know, but there is a rugby club just down the road, towards the lake, and caravans do park there. Not sure if it is for rally's, or for anytime camping, but they can easily be viewed from the hill tops. I wonder if that was mentioned at the appeal?


----------



## Stanner

Having read the appeal decision it looks to me like a text book example of how NOT to go about setting up an "aire".

Just about every mistake was made and just about every rule broken.

Concern was first raised at the local parish council in 2009.

Item 82
http://www.amblesideonline.co.uk/parish/pdf2009/minutes230909.pdf


----------



## erneboy

Stanner is correct. It's not possible to implement schemes without the relevant permissions and expect no come backs. Unfortunately when it reaches this stage it's as good as impossible to have retrospective permission granted. No amount of public support will change that.

It seems to have been a good idea inexpertly and illegally implemented. We can't really object to the planning laws being applied correctly, Alan.


----------



## 113016

It is a shame as Graeme is well connected in the local area, particularly within the Lakeland Trust Tourist environment.
Maybe someone got a little jealous


----------



## Bubblehead

The only way to overturn the planning inspectors decision is to get the sectary of sate via the district council to do so. This would cost £10's which would be prohibitive, therefore not supported by the DC.

This is therefore a done deal.

I read the minutes of the Parish Council with interest as it was they who raised the issue to start with. If I was the owner of the Aire I would write to the local press stating that the Aire was closing due to the PC reporting it to the authority and detail the number of vans that stayed and therefore the subsequent loss of income for local businesses (we spent about £400 in Ambleside last year). This may get locals thinking about the consequences of the actions of the PC and how it has failed to support the local economy, jobs and businesses. 

As already said, we don't want to go to a hotel or a large caravan site, so we will simply go somewhere else where they do welcome motorhomes like Weymouth or Canterbury.

The thing I find most annoying is the stupidity of the local councils at their fear of allowing Aires when they are constantly complaining about local businesses closing.

Andy


----------



## barryd

Bubblehead said:


> The only way to overturn the planning inspectors decision is to get the sectary of sate via the district council to do so. This would cost £10's which would be prohibitive, therefore not supported by the DC.
> 
> This is therefore a done deal.
> 
> I read the minutes of the Parish Council with interest as it was they who raised the issue to start with. If I was the owner of the Aire I would write to the local press stating that the Aire was closing due to the PC reporting it to the authority and detail the number of vans that stayed and therefore the subsequent loss of income for local businesses (we spent about £400 in Ambleside last year). This may get locals thinking about the consequences of the actions of the PC and how it has failed to support the local economy, jobs and businesses.
> 
> As already said, we don't want to go to a hotel or a large caravan site, so we will simply go somewhere else where they do welcome motorhomes like Weymouth or Canterbury.
> 
> The thing I find most annoying is the stupidity of the local councils at their fear of allowing Aires when they are constantly complaining about local businesses closing.
> 
> Andy


When you think about it. Ambleside, Keswick, Kendal, Penrith, Grasmere, Bowness all should have an Aire or even just a few 24 hour motorhome parking slots.

All these places mentioned are all about tourism. Ok Penrith and Kendal less so but they are little concentrated urban pockets that are there to capture the cash. Most of us go and walk, sail or just look at the views but at some point we might want to get into the towns, spend money in the myriad of outdoor shops, overpriced food outlets etc etc.

If we cant get our vans near will we bother? Probably not.

Parking is pretty poor even for cars in these places.

Perhaps a way forward would be to approach these towns collectively for a cumbria wide scheme.


----------



## trevorf

Also received the same Email from Graeme and replied with our support. Have stayed there 3 times in the past couple of years, will be a great shame if it closes.


Trevor


----------



## nicholsong

As far as I could discern the Prohibition Notice did not require the removal of 'boats' so presumably 'Kontiki' owners will be OK :wink:   

I think I will re-name the Arto as 'RA' :lol: 

Geoff


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> It is a shame as Graeme is well connected in the local area, particularly within the Lakeland Trust Tourist environment.
> Maybe someone got a little jealous


More like got fed up with someone continually taking the p!ss :wink:

PS
After that experience the chances of anyone getting anywhere with the LDNPA for any sort of motorhome facility is now less than zero.

Whatever his good intentions - he has really screwed it up for himself and anybody else.


----------



## 113016

If any member of the Ambleside Council read this, then I can confirm that if, as it appears, that this is a done deal, I will not visit or spend any of my hard earned money, ever again in Ambleside.
If other M/Hers follow, then this could be £thousands of loss to the community.
Their loss, not mine!


----------



## barryd

nicholsong said:


> As far as I could discern the Prohibition Notice did not require the removal of 'boats' so presumably 'Kontiki' owners will be OK :wink:
> 
> I think I will re-name the Arto as 'RA' :lol:
> 
> Geoff


[fullalbumimg:ee1db4eca9]641[/fullalbumimg:ee1db4eca9]


----------



## barryd

Grath said:


> If any member of the Ambleside Council read this, then I can confirm that if, as it appears, that this is a done deal, I will not visit or spend any of my hard earned money, ever again in Ambleside.
> If other M/Hers follow, then this could be £thousands of loss to the community.
> Their loss, not mine!


I wasnt really joking when I said actions speak louder than words.

Aires came about in France because motorhomes were parking all over the place and causing a problem.

So lets go and carve up the place with our vans. The problem is we are easily herded onto campsites and we are not very good at rebelious behaviour unlike the French.

The locals wont give a stuff about Millers field. The local businesses will miss it. You can gaurentee that who ever made the fuss or complained about the view etc will be from Surrey or somewhere (sorry if your from Surrey)


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> If any member of the Ambleside Council read this, then I can confirm that if, as it appears, that this is a done deal, I will not visit or spend any of my hard earned money, ever again in Ambleside.
> If other M/Hers follow, then this could be £thousands of loss to the community.
> Their loss, not mine!


What have "Ambleside Council" got to do with a decision of the Lake District National Park Authority, backed up by a decision of the Planning Inspectorate?


----------



## nicholsong

I wonder whether in areas like the Lakes, where there are severe restrictions for MH parking near town centres, it might be worth lobbying the regional managers of the supermarket chains to permit overnight parking.

I am sure that in a week the average MH owner spends more in supermarkets than in restaurants. If we decide to desert the area they would be the bigger losers. Even before the Ambleside problem I was having serious reservations about returning to the Lakes because of parking problems.

The overnighting could be limited to hours from 1800-0900 to avoid clogging up space when they are busy, but would also avoid travellers setting up.

It could be linked in to displaying a receipt in the windscreen for a minimum spend, of say 20 pounds.

I am not sure whether planning restrictions would be a problem, but there are often cars left overnight. If it is only parking without any other facilities it may not breach any restrictions.

Geoff


----------



## 113016

nicholsong said:


> I wonder whether in areas like the Lakes, where there are severe restrictions for MH parking near town centres, it might be worth lobbying the regional managers of the supermarket chains to permit overnight parking.
> 
> I am sure that in a week the average MH owner spends more in supermarkets than in restaurants. If we decide to desert the area they would be the bigger losers. Even before the Ambleside problem I was having serious reservations about returning to the Lakes because of parking problems.
> 
> The overnighting could be limited to hours from 1800-0900 to avoid clogging up space when they are busy, but would also avoid travellers setting up.
> 
> It could be linked in to displaying a receipt in the windscreen for a minimum spend, of say 20 pounds.
> 
> I am not sure whether planning restrictions would be a problem, but there are often cars left overnight. If it is only parking without any other facilities it may not breach any restrictions.
> 
> Geoff


Geoff, there are no large supermarkets in the area, but there is a large car park right outside the aire. With overnight restrictions!

Strangely, the car park fee is more expensive for an all day ticket than the aire.


----------



## nicholsong

barryd said:


> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> As far as I could discern the Prohibition Notice did not require the removal of 'boats' so presumably 'Kontiki' owners will be OK :wink:
> 
> I think I will re-name the Arto as 'RA' :lol:
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> [fullalbumimg:2700e316c0]641[/fullalbumimg:2700e316c0]
Click to expand...

Barry

What brought on that 'raft' of anger - or did you press the wrong emoticon?

I thought you might be amused :roll: :lol:

Geoff


----------



## nicholsong

Grath said:


> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder whether in areas like the Lakes, where there are severe restrictions for MH parking near town centres, it might be worth lobbying the regional managers of the supermarket chains to permit overnight parking.
> 
> I am sure that in a week the average MH owner spends more in supermarkets than in restaurants. If we decide to desert the area they would be the bigger losers. Even before the Ambleside problem I was having serious reservations about returning to the Lakes because of parking problems.
> 
> The overnighting could be limited to hours from 1800-0900 to avoid clogging up space when they are busy, but would also avoid travellers setting up.
> 
> It could be linked in to displaying a receipt in the windscreen for a minimum spend, of say 20 pounds.
> 
> I am not sure whether planning restrictions would be a problem, but there are often cars left overnight. If it is only parking without any other facilities it may not breach any restrictions.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> Geoff, there are no large supermarkets in the area, but there is a large car park right outside the aire. With overnight restrictions!
> 
> Strangely, the car park fee is more expensive for an all day ticket than the aire.
Click to expand...

Graham

We parked in that CP for lunch.

I was referring to the whole of the Lakes, not just Ambleside, and there are supermarkets in Kendal, Windermere, Keswick etc.

Geoff


----------



## 113016

nicholsong said:


> Grath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder whether in areas like the Lakes, where there are severe restrictions for MH parking near town centres, it might be worth lobbying the regional managers of the supermarket chains to permit overnight parking.
> 
> I am sure that in a week the average MH owner spends more in supermarkets than in restaurants. If we decide to desert the area they would be the bigger losers. Even before the Ambleside problem I was having serious reservations about returning to the Lakes because of parking problems.
> 
> The overnighting could be limited to hours from 1800-0900 to avoid clogging up space when they are busy, but would also avoid travellers setting up.
> 
> It could be linked in to displaying a receipt in the windscreen for a minimum spend, of say 20 pounds.
> 
> I am not sure whether planning restrictions would be a problem, but there are often cars left overnight. If it is only parking without any other facilities it may not breach any restrictions.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> Geoff, there are no large supermarkets in the area, but there is a large car park right outside the aire. With overnight restrictions!
> 
> Strangely, the car park fee is more expensive for an all day ticket than the aire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Graham
> 
> We parked in that CP for lunch.
> 
> I was referring to the whole of the Lakes, not just Ambleside, and there are supermarkets in Kendal, Windermere, Keswick etc.
> 
> Geoff
Click to expand...

Geoff.
I can't remember seeing any Tesco or the likes, but that does not say they are not there, but there is one in Wndemere and Keswick called, I think Booths, or something like that.
The Keswick one is pay and display and has night time restrictions.
Possibly council run!


----------



## nicholsong

Grath said:


> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Grath said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wonder whether in areas like the Lakes, where there are severe restrictions for MH parking near town centres, it might be worth lobbying the regional managers of the supermarket chains to permit overnight parking.
> 
> I am sure that in a week the average MH owner spends more in supermarkets than in restaurants. If we decide to desert the area they would be the bigger losers. Even before the Ambleside problem I was having serious reservations about returning to the Lakes because of parking problems.
> 
> The overnighting could be limited to hours from 1800-0900 to avoid clogging up space when they are busy, but would also avoid travellers setting up.
> 
> It could be linked in to displaying a receipt in the windscreen for a minimum spend, of say 20 pounds.
> 
> I am not sure whether planning restrictions would be a problem, but there are often cars left overnight. If it is only parking without any other facilities it may not breach any restrictions.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> Geoff, there are no large supermarkets in the area, but there is a large car park right outside the aire. With overnight restrictions!
> 
> Strangely, the car park fee is more expensive for an all day ticket than the aire.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Graham
> 
> We parked in that CP for lunch.
> 
> I was referring to the whole of the Lakes, not just Ambleside, and there are supermarkets in Kendal, Windermere, Keswick etc.
> 
> Geoff
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Geoff.
> I can't remember seeing any Tesco or the likes, but that does not say they are not there, but there is one in Wndemere and Keswick called, I think Booths, or something like that.
> The Keswick one is pay and display and has night time restrictions.
> Possibly council run!
Click to expand...

Yes, a Booths in Windermere - have used it.. The North-West is Booths country, also CO-OP, but much smaller. I am a fan of Booths as they are more like Waitrose than Tesco or Asda. I think it may still be a family business.

Geoff


----------



## urbanracer

The large car park next to Millerfield aire is owned by the person who owns the aire.
The carpark is jointly run by the owner and Cumria CC.
The hardstanding next to the access lane to the football club was the original car park.
Sainsburys will soon start building a store on land owned by the large garden centre that continues to grow all over Ambleside and this will also mean major road works for access to the store and delivery trucks.
We stay at Millerfield often,
I the middle of August it rained extremely hard for over 2 days on the the local streams,rivers and waterfalls were a site to see them in full flow. On the day the rain had stopped we were walking through the area outside the YMCA the jetty was under water the lower seating area with normally has tables and benches was under water and it looked like the lake had risen about 5-6 foot,about an hour later I tested the large field at the aire and all the rain water must have drained away it would have been able to drive on and some members of the Motorcaravvaner club and their motorhomes where on the field.


----------



## 113016

I wonder, if it has closed with immediate effect or if and when :?:


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> I wonder, if it has closed with immediate effect or if and when :?:


The appeal decision said "period for compliance of one month" and that will be from the date of the decision.


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

Grath said:


> To be quite honest, and I hate to say this, but I think that possibly, Graeme might have given them some ammunition  About a year ago, there were a couple of boats stored on site, and at least a couple of caravans have been there, week in and week out.
> I did hear through the grapevine (hearsay only) that the authorities were not too happy
> Maybe, they would accept M/Hs, but not the boats caravans
> I just hope it can be sorted out as it is a great location at a reasonable price
> 
> Regarding the petition, I agree with Alan, and I also don't think there would be time to get enough to make any difference.


Hi m8, I too recall seeing these caravans and at least one boat and saying to Suzy "if they don't watch out this will F*** it up".

With regards to the Booths at Keswick, I personally don't mind paying to go on the Derwent Water / Oval / Walker Park CCC Sites which are within throwing distance of Booths.

The problem with Ambleside (which is a place I really adore), is that there really isn't an alternative campsite on which to stay. The last time we did this was at Wray Castle which is a good few miles away.


----------



## Stanner

Ian_n_Suzy said:


> "if they don't watch out this will F*** it up".


Exactly and from what I can see he never ever submitted an application for the use.

It has therefore gone straight to Enforcement Action which he has then appealed against - NOT the most sensible course of action.

So he has screwed up (big time), but the Authority is getting all the flak.

It appears that some people are their own worst enemy.


----------



## Solwaybuggier

Grath said:


> The Keswick one is pay and display and has night time restrictions.
> Possibly council run!


Yes, the Keswick car park by Booths is run by Allerdale District Council. (And I think the car park by the aire is run by S Lakeland District Council, not Cumbria CC, as someone suggested - not very important, probably.)


----------



## urbanracer

I did not remember which DC it is ,its all on the payment board to the car park ,the owners of the land are a M Roberts who lives at Wrea Green Nr Kirkham,and its operated by the local DC

It is south Lakeland DC.


----------



## barryd

Booths (penrith and keswick) have a fantastic French cheese counter! 

Just sayin!


The problem with the supermarket car parks is they get really packed.

Morrisons in Penrith you struggle to get a car in. Motorhomes are right out! 

I'm not bothered as I like to wild up on the mountains or off the beaten track but I do think they are missing a trick here. I bet a lot of vans are put off coming as they struggle to park for. Coffee and a bag of chips let alone an overnight.

The shame with millers is That it was so popular and a real success.

I wonder if it was done without permission because they thought they would get it retro or that they knew there would be no chance.


----------



## Stanner

barryd said:


> I wonder if it was done without permission because they thought they would get it retro or that they knew there would be no chance.


As it was an enforcement appeal I doubt if any application was ever made. If a retrospective application had been made and it had been refused, it would have been an appeal against the refusal.

It seems to have been rumbling round for 4 years (concern was first expressed about signs and a "tariff" being put up in 2009) and to push it for that long without even trying to get a consent (retospective or otherwise) is not likely to get you a sympathetic hearing.

Text book example (in my eyes) of how not to make friends and influence anybody...................... :roll:


----------



## aldra

I really hope it stays open

Although Ambleside is not really our thing apart from a quick visit. Appreciate some people enjoy being close to towns and the fish and chips are really good

And I have sent an E mail

A short way on is the NT Langdales campsite

Close to to climbers Bar, a bit of an icon 

More expensive, but what a view

But the walk up Mikledon Priceless

And if your kness are still good, Esk pike, Gt End, Scarfell 

And say hallo from me to old friends

Aldra


----------



## Annsman

It's really surprised me that no one else has said this, so I'll say it for them.

SERVES YOU RIGHT YOU LOT! WHAT WITH YOUR USING AIRES, WILD CAMPING AND GOING TO FRANCE A LOT. YOU SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON A MOTORHOME AND THEM WANT TO PARK UP FOR NEXT TO NOTHING IN A CAR PARK. GET TO A PROPER SITE AND PAY THE GOING RATE. YOU DRIVE ROUND THINKING YOU OWN THE ROADS AND STUFF. NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE AN EMPIRE ANY MORE. 

IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT TOO BARRY d. OH YES I DO MEAN YOU. NO DOUBT YOU DRINK THAT BEER TOO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR VAN, PARKED UP ON ONE OF THOSE AIRES. WELL I'M NOT PUTTING UP WITH IT A MOMENT LONGER. TOMORROW I'M BUYING A CARAVAN AND NEVER POSTING ON HERE AGAIN! THAT WILL SERVE YOU RIGHT.

Gosh, that felt weirdly good! :lol:


----------



## aldra

whatever you are on

I want some :lol: :lol: 

PS leave my Toy boy out of this

I think caravans can park on the Ambleside aire 8O 

So meet up there???

Aldra 8O


----------



## 100127

I'll be there this Sunday for a couple of nights. :lol: :lol:


----------



## dally1

I'm going up on Saturday (hopefully) I used to deliver to a lot of outlets that would have benefited in the past from motorhomes so I'm thinking of getting into their ribs about this. Ours is important business to these people particularly this time of year where every pound is hard fought for.

If this closure comes off (most likely) then that's us done in the lakes. Very few sites with in easy town centre walking distance and of the ones that are, you can expect to pay a hefty premium. I won't be robbed.

On the point of supermarket parking. Lots of vans overnight in Morrison's car park in Kendal (don't tell them I said). 10 minute walk to train station and it's £4.20 return to Windermere. Might help someone.


----------



## barryd

Annsman said:


> It's really surprised me that no one else has said this, so I'll say it for them.
> 
> SERVES YOU RIGHT YOU LOT! WHAT WITH YOUR USING AIRES, WILD CAMPING AND GOING TO FRANCE A LOT. YOU SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON A MOTORHOME AND THEM WANT TO PARK UP FOR NEXT TO NOTHING IN A CAR PARK. GET TO A PROPER SITE AND PAY THE GOING RATE. YOU DRIVE ROUND THINKING YOU OWN THE ROADS AND STUFF. NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE AN EMPIRE ANY MORE.
> 
> IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT TOO BARRY d. OH YES I DO MEAN YOU. NO DOUBT YOU DRINK THAT BEER TOO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR VAN, PARKED UP ON ONE OF THOSE AIRES. WELL I'M NOT PUTTING UP WITH IT A MOMENT LONGER. TOMORROW I'M BUYING A CARAVAN AND NEVER POSTING ON HERE AGAIN! THAT WILL SERVE YOU RIGHT.
> 
> Gosh, that felt weirdly good! :lol:


I knew as soon as I started reading this it would be directed at me! I never stayed on the Millers field Aire. I pulled up a few times and had a look but it was sadly way out of my price bracket at ten quid a night! As you say. Thats a whole case of 20 bottles of Leffe in France!

I hope you will be happy with your Caravan. It will suit you down to the ground. You can get together with your fellow CC Tuggers at any one of the overpriced and overbooked sites in the Lakes, miles from the pub and discuss how you can rebuild the British Empire.

Me? Im not taking this lying down! No! Im going to join Sysinfo (I still think he is Blobsta) on the Aire and we are going to form a circle with our van (mine will be outside as I cant afford the tenner) and refuse to move. Could be there for weeks.

You lot might come on here and flap your gums a bit (well keyboards) but me and Sysinfo are hardcore motorhome activists! Oh yes. Direct action is the only way.

Sysinfo. Can you stop off at that booths and get me some Morbier, Brie de Meux and a few crates of Leffe. It could be a long sit in. Ill pay you back as soon as that Gnome pays his rent for his Gnome burrows on my land.


----------



## aldra

Barry you are such a cheapskate

blobby star 

take care and only trust him a bit at a time

Just when will you learn??

NEVER publish your destination

You never know who might turn up :lol: 

aldra


----------



## nicholsong

Annsman said:


> It's really surprised me that no one else has said this, so I'll say it for them.
> 
> SERVES YOU RIGHT YOU LOT! WHAT WITH YOUR USING AIRES, WILD CAMPING AND GOING TO FRANCE A LOT. YOU SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON A MOTORHOME AND THEM WANT TO PARK UP FOR NEXT TO NOTHING IN A CAR PARK. GET TO A PROPER SITE AND PAY THE GOING RATE. YOU DRIVE ROUND THINKING YOU OWN THE ROADS AND STUFF. NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE AN EMPIRE ANY MORE.
> 
> IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT TOO BARRY d. OH YES I DO MEAN YOU. NO DOUBT YOU DRINK THAT BEER TOO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR VAN, PARKED UP ON ONE OF THOSE AIRES. WELL I'M NOT PUTTING UP WITH IT A MOMENT LONGER. TOMORROW I'M BUYING A CARAVAN AND NEVER POSTING ON HERE AGAIN! THAT WILL SERVE YOU RIGHT.
> 
> Gosh, that felt weirdly good! :lol:


Annsman

I started off thinking you post was tongue in cheek THEN I had my doubts :roll:

If you are serious my response is :-

I DO NOT LIKE CAMPSITES - AND NO AMOUNT OF BULLYING WILL GET ME TO USE THEM - UNLESS I WISH, THROUGH SOME ABERRATION.

(Except maybe a small CL when Barryd is there- even then I had earlier in the day found a beautiful spot on the moors with much better views, but we had booked in and paid)

AS FOR NOT SPENDING THE MONEY, IT COST ME DIESEL FOR A 3,000 MILE ROUND-TRIP TO VISIT THE LAKES AND SCOTLAND.

Scotland was excellent for wildcamping but for the Lakes I think I could suggest they stick the lakes up their tarns 

How much are you selling the MH for?

Geoff


----------



## aldra

Geoff

how could you

the lakes remain magnificent

And there are still places to wildcamp

" a small CL when Barry is there""

Now I have my doubts :lol: :lol: 

aldra


----------



## Sideways86

Annsman said:


> It's really surprised me that no one else has said this, so I'll say it for them.
> 
> SERVES YOU RIGHT YOU LOT! WHAT WITH YOUR USING AIRES, WILD CAMPING AND GOING TO FRANCE A LOT. YOU SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON A MOTORHOME AND THEM WANT TO PARK UP FOR NEXT TO NOTHING IN A CAR PARK. GET TO A PROPER SITE AND PAY THE GOING RATE. YOU DRIVE ROUND THINKING YOU OWN THE ROADS AND STUFF. NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE AN EMPIRE ANY MORE.
> 
> IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT TOO BARRY d. OH YES I DO MEAN YOU. NO DOUBT YOU DRINK THAT BEER TOO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR VAN, PARKED UP ON ONE OF THOSE AIRES. WELL I'M NOT PUTTING UP WITH IT A MOMENT LONGER. TOMORROW I'M BUYING A CARAVAN AND NEVER POSTING ON HERE AGAIN! THAT WILL SERVE YOU RIGHT.
> 
> Gosh, that felt weirdly good! :lol:


You are clearly deranged and do not begin to understand motorhomes, bye bye you tugger now go do one!


----------



## nicholsong

aldra said:


> Geoff
> 
> how could you
> 
> the lakes remain magnificent
> 
> And there are still places to wildcamp
> 
> " a small CL when Barry is there""
> 
> Now I have my doubts :lol: :lol:
> 
> aldra


Sandra

No 'doubts' needed - I ensured I was well 'chaperoned' :wink:

Yes there are still wild spots, but it was a bit of a hassle compared with the Forest of Bowland, Yorkshire, Dales and Moors, Nothumberland and Highlands of Scotland.

I wanted to walk Langdale Pikes(for sentimental reasons) but the CP at the bottom could hardly accommodate a VW camper, and anyway was full. We ended overnighting up on that steep/winding road over to Little Langdale -deer in the morning -Great!

We ended up in another wild spot that even your hero, our 'Intrepid' Barry, said he had only attempted on his scooter 

Geoff


----------



## alitone

*Lake Dist Nat Park "Serve Notice" on Miller Field*

Good afternoon... COPY of Email Ref Miller Field Ambleside . sad news

Miller Field Motorhome Camping is under threat of imminent, permanent closure. The Lake District National Parks Authority served an Enforcement notice on the site, we appealed against the notice but an inspector appointed by the Planning Inspectorate has upheld the Enforcement Notice following a visit to the site on November 7th 2013.

The two major reasons given for the Enforcement Notice are a) that the site is located on a functional floodplain and b) the site has a visual impact when viewed from Loughrigg Fell.

We do not, and never have, disputed either of the above issues but our stance on point a) that the functionality of the floodplain has been improved as a result of works carried out by MFMC and b) the judicious planting of indigenous trees/shrubs/hedges will in time soften the visual impact, have both been pretty much ignored.

Even during the severe wet weather conditions of October 2009 not a single motorhome was put under any risk; the option to temporarily close the site due to conditions has always been available.

Our next step is to present our case to our local MP, Mr Tim Farron, and to this end we have a meeting with him on the afternoon of Friday 29th November. We aim to discuss the options available to oppose the Enforcement Notice and we are looking to take as much ammunition as we can to this meeting in order to support our case.

Consequently we would appreciate your comments, in the form of a reply to this email, stating your past experiences of staying on the site and the benefits your stay has had on the economy of the local area etc.....

Please do not contact the LDNPA directly as we do not wish to antagonise them further, likewise we do not wish to bombard Mr Farron with correspondence prior to our meeting with him.

Thank you for taking the time to read this email. Should you feel strongly enough to respond we would request that you do so at your earliest opportunity, we look forward to hearing from you.

Yours faithfully

Graeme Drylie

............Dear All MHF subscribers....... HELP NEEDED

If you have stayed at Miller Field at Ambleside please email your support to Graeme ASAP at .... [email protected] 
It would be a shame to loose such a great site in the heart of the Lake District .... Please also send any comments on the subject which I will forward to Graeme...


----------



## Sideways86

We lend our full support to the continued use of this facility, it is a sure-fire way of introducing people to the area and encouraging them to spend money with local business etc.



This is a very common and highly successful practice all over Europe and benefits all concerned. We would be devastated is this was forced to cease, we implore the various powers and bodies to treat this fairly, all motor homers are people with disposable income who are supporting local communities and business's.



These facilities of this type have to be expanded to support what is an expanding past time



Please Support Miller Field



Yours sincerely


John Walker


----------



## alitone

*ref Miller Field*

High Nightrambler ,

Sorry I have just read this post but have already just sent a new posting on the subject ... sorry about that ?

do you want me to delete ?


----------



## barryd

nicholsong said:


> (Except maybe a small CL when Barryd is there- even then I had earlier in the day found a beautiful spot on the moors with much better views, but we had booked in and paid)
> 
> Geoff


Booked in and paid huh? I feel I should shed some light on this. I seem to think it was me who booked in and paid! Geoff was on a mission to fleece his way around the UK without spending a cent and I think he actually achieved this goal.

I do though have to give him credit as a campsite dodger for getting his van up the most impossible roads and hills just to avoid paying for camping. Respect! 

EDIT. I just remembered. I should also add that he brought me some Leffe, allowed me to flirt with his HOT girlfriend who also cooked me a superb dinner and laughed at my jokes. She definately fancies me though. Sorry Geoff. Happens all the time.


----------



## nicholsong

barryd said:


> nicholsong said:
> 
> 
> 
> (Except maybe a small CL when Barryd is there- even then I had earlier in the day found a beautiful spot on the moors with much better views, but we had booked in and paid)
> 
> Geoff
> 
> 
> 
> Booked in and paid huh? I feel I should shed some light on this. I seem to think it was me who booked in and paid! Geoff was on a mission to fleece his way around the UK without spending a cent and I think he actually achieved this goal.
> 
> I do though have to give him credit as a campsite dodger for getting his van up the most impossible roads and hills just to avoid paying for camping. Respect!
> 
> EDIT. I just remembered. I should also add that he brought me some Leffe, allowed me to flirt with his HOT girlfriend who also cooked me a superb dinner and laughed at my jokes. She definately fancies me though. Sorry Geoff. Happens all the time.
Click to expand...

A fiver on pitch fees - in exchange for a bottle of Leffe, as you say, a good dinner(but you left out the bottles...s of wine), flirting with Basia- I did not notice, nor did she :roll: , laughing at your jokes OR ...?

Next time we go wild! and forget the Pitch Fees - spend it on the Leffe/Wine.

See you soon

Geoff

P.S I will not breath a word to Sandra about you flirting with Basia-

NOT A WORD!


----------



## 100127

barryd said:


> Annsman said:
> 
> 
> 
> It's really surprised me that no one else has said this, so I'll say it for them.
> 
> SERVES YOU RIGHT YOU LOT! WHAT WITH YOUR USING AIRES, WILD CAMPING AND GOING TO FRANCE A LOT. YOU SPEND ALL THAT MONEY ON A MOTORHOME AND THEM WANT TO PARK UP FOR NEXT TO NOTHING IN A CAR PARK. GET TO A PROPER SITE AND PAY THE GOING RATE. YOU DRIVE ROUND THINKING YOU OWN THE ROADS AND STUFF. NO WONDER WE DON'T HAVE AN EMPIRE ANY MORE.
> 
> IT'S ALL YOUR FAULT TOO BARRY d. OH YES I DO MEAN YOU. NO DOUBT YOU DRINK THAT BEER TOO WHEN YOU'RE IN YOUR VAN, PARKED UP ON ONE OF THOSE AIRES. WELL I'M NOT PUTTING UP WITH IT A MOMENT LONGER. TOMORROW I'M BUYING A CARAVAN AND NEVER POSTING ON HERE AGAIN! THAT WILL SERVE YOU RIGHT.
> 
> Gosh, that felt weirdly good! :lol:
> 
> 
> 
> I knew as soon as I started reading this it would be directed at me! I never stayed on the Millers field Aire. I pulled up a few times and had a look but it was sadly way out of my price bracket at ten quid a night! As you say. Thats a whole case of 20 bottles of Leffe in France!
> 
> I hope you will be happy with your Caravan. It will suit you down to the ground. You can get together with your fellow CC Tuggers at any one of the overpriced and overbooked sites in the Lakes, miles from the pub and discuss how you can rebuild the British Empire.
> 
> Me? Im not taking this lying down! No! Im going to join Sysinfo (I still think he is Blobsta) on the Aire and we are going to form a circle with our van (mine will be outside as I cant afford the tenner) and refuse to move. Could be there for weeks.
> 
> You lot might come on here and flap your gums a bit (well keyboards) but me and Sysinfo are hardcore motorhome activists! Oh yes. Direct action is the only way.
> 
> Sysinfo. Can you stop off at that booths and get me some Morbier, Brie de Meux and a few crates of Leffe. It could be a long sit in. Ill pay you back as soon as that Gnome pays his rent for his Gnome burrows on my land.
Click to expand...

Barry, Blobsta speaking, Booths have run out of Leffe, but I have a few cans of Cidra we can demolish. We shall stand tall on this. Well 5 foot 10 anyway, and take on all comers, provided of course it does not interfere with the drinking part of camping. :lol: :lol:


----------



## 100127

aldra said:


> Barry you are such a cheapskate
> 
> blobby star
> 
> take care and only trust him a bit at a time
> 
> Just when will you learn??
> 
> NEVER publish your destination
> 
> You never know who might turn up :lol:
> 
> aldra


Oh poo, have published my destination... Could be in big doo doos. :lol: :lol:


----------



## barryd

Geoff. Wine doesnt count. We all know you have your own Polish Vinyards where you exploit Dwarfs, Gnomes and young polish girls.

Sysinfo (Blobsta).

Your offer of cider is not a good one. Cidre is for girls. Get a grip man!


----------



## Bobmarley3

I understand everyone's angst that Miller's Field is to be no more, but all these letters of support should have been done months ago when the initial enforcement notice was slapped on.

Once a planning inspector has ruled, there really is very little which can be done. Perhaps if people were to read the decision notice on the planning inspectorate's website link here they would understand the reasoning behind the Inspector's decision. I don't say you'll agree with it, but short of a judicial review, Miller's Field is stumped. It could apply for planning permission, but it probably won't be approved
MrsBob


----------



## Stanner

Bobmarley3 said:


> It could apply for planning permission, but it probably won't be approved


Not 4 years, an enforcement notice and a lost appeal too late it won't. :roll:


----------



## LisaB

*Miller field*

Don't shoot the messenger, but if it's been in use for ten years or so as so keen has said doesn't so etching called delegated rights come into this ? As long as Graeme could prove it's been used for ten years.......

Excuse predictive text lol


----------



## Stanner

*Re: Miller field*



LisaB said:


> Don't shoot the messenger, but if it's been in use for ten years or so as so keen has said doesn't so etching called delegated rights come into this ? As long as Graeme could prove it's been used for ten years.......


It's called "established use" and I think that if it could have been proved, it would have been in the last four years.


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

The Ambleside Football Club field adjacent to Miller Field has been used by ourselves for 10 years plus. But it was only ever allowed xx amount of days per year, usually at holidays such as Easter, Whit, etc.

Certainly don't think the 10 years rule would be applicable to either.


----------



## 113016

Having used Millers Aire on many occasions, irrespective of the rights and wrongs, I do believe that Graeme is deserving of our support, and I am sure that most, if not all who have used the facilities were happy and satisfied.
It is such a shame that we seem to pick on the rights and wrongs, letter of the law instead of trying to help a Guy who has for quite a few years been very welcoming to the M/H community.
OK, he may have stuck his neck out and done it on a wing and a prayer, but at least he did something.
Well done Graeme!


----------



## Midnightrambler

We absolutely agree wholeheartedly with Grath.


----------



## grandadbaza

Grath said:


> Having used Millers Aire on many occasions, irrespective of the rights and wrongs, I do believe that Graeme is deserving of our support, and I am sure that most, if not all who have used the facilities were happy and satisfied.
> It is such a shame that we seem to pick on the rights and wrongs, letter of the law instead of trying to help a Guy who has for quite a few years been very welcoming to the M/H community.
> OK, he may have stuck his neck out and done it on a wing and a prayer, but at least he did something.
> Well done Graeme!


Thats whats wrong with this country , somebody tries their best to give people what they want , and then has to face the firing line of officialdom and the know alls and the ffff ing PC brigade

Rant over

By the way that is probably the best location I have been on that is so close to such a fabulous location , and I have spent a lot of money in that community


----------



## erneboy

I agree it's sad it's going to have to close. I am sorry for the owner, he did a lot of work and put in investment.

But planning law, like any other law, does not recognise "a wing and a prayer". What would the countryside look like if it did? Alan.


----------



## Jezport

I got the message also and have replied.

Half the lake district is floodplain and there's a clue in the name "Lake District"

All car parks especially the one next to the Aire cause the same visual impact, so why are they allowed to stay open.

Next thing they will want to knock down the bloody church.


----------



## LisaB

Have sent an email of support to Graeme 

He has replied to say he is overwhelmed and humbled with the support he has received.


----------



## alitone

*Miller Field*

Having looked at the Planning Decision the officer refers to "CARAVANS" and as far as im aware this is a MOTORHOME site. If you go to France you will find about 3000 Motorhome / Camping car Ayres / sites located in some of the most spectacular sceanery in France . Some right on river banks and next to and in locations of national parks in France.
Wake up LDNP or you will find us motorhomers taking you off our must visit list. The decision is just a case of snobbery.

If someone arrived in a caravan ata Franch Ayre they would be moved on.

Thank you Graeme for being a great host over the years.


----------



## alitone

Stanner said:


> Having read the appeal decision it looks to me like a text book example of how NOT to go about setting up an "aire".
> 
> Just about every mistake was made and just about every rule broken.
> 
> Concern was first raised at the local parish council in 2009.
> 
> Item 82
> http://www.amblesideonline.co.uk/parish/pdf2009/minutes230909.pdf


STANNER
I think the above refers to some of the field being used by the Water Treatment Company . ( Works temp depot was set up on a small area of Land which had been covered in gravel ) . At the time it was completed G was asked if he wanted it reinstated to grass. ) This is NOT a note be the council questioning the use of his main motorhome parking area. Surely It would be impossible just to set up such a business without permission .


----------



## 113016

It seems very strange that if the council did not want the aire there, why has it taken so long to issue a closure notice, or along those lines. 
The council must have been on side to allow it for so long!

Just look at amount of M/H in the above photo and think of the loss of income to Ambleside. OK that is probably high summer and probably a meet involved, but still money! Even wintertime there are always M/H on site.
Maybe a case of sad green eyed little old person


----------



## grandadbaza

Today is the day of Graeme's meeting lets all hope something positive comes out of it


----------



## teemyob

*Re: Miller Field*



alitone said:


> Having looked at the Planning Decision the officer refers to "CARAVANS" and as far as im aware this is a MOTORHOME site. If you go to France you will find about 3000 Motorhome / Camping car Ayres / sites located in some of the most spectacular sceanery in France . Some right on river banks and next to and in locations of national parks in France.
> Wake up LDNP or you will find us motorhomers taking you off our must visit list. The decision is just a case of snobbery.
> 
> If someone arrived in a caravan ata Franch Ayre they would be moved on.
> 
> Thank you Graeme for being a great host over the years.


"If someone arrived in a caravan ata Franch Ayre they would be moved on."

I think might over "would". Been to many Aires, including the Calais one and found caravans and even a trailer tent staying. We stopped at Calais in 2007 en-route to Anncey, there was a Caravan on the Aire. When we came back some 10 days later. It was still there.

Good luck with the Site Graeme.

When we stayed, we spent a lot of money in the town. From Boats trips to Booze and even bits from the hardware store.

Still, if they do not need us there due to their massive tourist footfall. That is up to them to decide. But look how many other tourist traps have gone, Blackpool and Rhyl being prime examples.

If Graeme has just 20 vans a week staying and each one spends just £50 in that visit. Thats £52,000 turnover for the region. If they spend the £250+ we did !?. And you only have to visit lakeland, buy a coat and some shoes, polished off with a meal and you can be into serious money. Most of us would welcome such custom.

We are Off To France, Belgium, Holland and Germany next week !

TM


----------



## clayton9

Gob smacked about the short sightedness of the council!!
Have emailed Graham and have my fingers that crossed common sense prevails!!


----------



## Stanner

alitone said:


> Stanner said:
> 
> 
> 
> Having read the appeal decision it looks to me like a text book example of how NOT to go about setting up an "aire".
> 
> Just about every mistake was made and just about every rule broken.
> 
> Concern was first raised at the local parish council in 2009.
> 
> Item 82
> http://www.amblesideonline.co.uk/parish/pdf2009/minutes230909.pdf
> 
> 
> 
> STANNER
> I think the above refers to some of the field being used by the Water Treatment Company . ( Works temp depot was set up on a small area of Land which had been covered in gravel ) . At the time it was completed G was asked if he wanted it reinstated to grass. ) This is NOT a note be the council questioning the use of his main motorhome parking area. Surely It would be impossible just to set up such a business without permission .
Click to expand...

ALITONE
NO it isn't "impossible" to set up a business without permission - if only it were it would save planning authorities a lot of grief and taxpayers a lot of money.

Whoever constructed the hardstanding is irrelevant, it is that it was not reinstated as (apparently) required that matters.
If the land should have been reinstated to grass after the works were completed Graeme should not have been asked what "he" wanted, as it wasn't up to him to decide.

Could we also get the "COUNCIL" out of people's heads - it is not a "COUNCIL" it is the Lake District National Park Authority who have taken action.

So - Just read the decision (again) and please take time to understand it.

Concern was raised about the situation 4 years ago and so far as I can see Graeme (nice guy as everyone thinks he is) seemingly buried his head in the sand and did nothing about it until he received an Enforcement Notice, which I can assure you is a very last resort only issued when all other attempts to resolve the matter have failed.

As I said a classic text book example of how NOT to go about it.


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

I am not so sure it is Graeme that actually owns the land or the Aire, I think he works for the owner.


----------



## 100127

Going there on Sunday, maybe find out more from Graeme. Will post when I get back Wednesday.


----------



## Stanner

Sysinfo said:


> Going there on Sunday, maybe find out more from Graeme. Will post when I get back Wednesday.


It would be interesting to know why it was an enforcement appeal, not an appeal against refusal of permission.


----------



## LisaB

*Ambleside*

Will wear flack jacket after posting!

We have a CC CL here at home and have ONE recently moved in resident objecting to it 
Giving the CC grief (sometimes they deserve it lol) and our local DC, this has been going on for in excess of twelve months

We have as a family lived here for in excess of 60 years horses, storage vans etc and it takes one man !

Our CL is popular in summer, but nowhere near like Graeme's only five vans, green field etc etc and poorly occupied maybe two or three on a bank hol
But it only takes one small minded person, who incidentally was a townie and now considers all he surveys to be his, he will have a job as the neighbouring hedges will NEVER be cut again whilst he is in residence or I am in residence. I also agree that people can't run rough shod over planning

I would agree with others that at times Graeme's has had storage or semi residential van and the odd bit of tat - sorry boat and would seemingly been a tad unkempt at times. Maybe it's been his "protest" or downfall

But it's precious resource, that I would feel the retail and hostelries of Ambleside would value.

We have never ever been "judged" your off the "campsite" as we have been in other places and situations, far better welcomed.

It's nothing special, but it has been well valued by most of those who use, we sadly have only latterly discovered it, but have been several times and I like Graeme, who lets you get on with it - again this may have been his downfall.

We try not to run our CL like Hitleresque wardens, rules is rules etc, but the whole value of leisure vehicle seems to be lost somehow

We wish Graeme the best and have sent our support


----------



## nicholsong

There has been mention by several posters of the 'council'.

The enforcement notice was issued by the Lake District Parks Authority.

I am confused as to who has jurisdiction inside what must be Ambleside Town?

Would the Parks authority have the power to close the CP just over the road from the pier?

Could Graeme apply to re-open the site as a 'Car Park'? After all Ambleside needs more parking space and the need will increase if we MHomers have to take up spaces in the existing CP, even for a day visit.

Geoff


----------



## Stanner

If your CL has been there that long and was correctly established following the required procedure your new neighbour doesn't have much of a hope of changing anything.


----------



## LisaB

Stanner said:


> If your CL has been there that long and was correctly established following the required procedure your new neighbour doesn't have much of a hope of changing anything.


For your info stanner it has been and in order with CC rules - lets face it they are really rule observant! was sanctioned a few years ago in accordance and it's now down to the fat townie plonker that had more money than sense to renovate (badly) a semi depilated property opposite our entrance gate - not main access gate!

The few spoilt it for the many ! As per norm


----------



## Stanner

LisaB said:


> Stanner said:
> 
> 
> 
> If your CL has been there that long and was correctly established following the required procedure your new neighbour doesn't have much of a hope of changing anything.
> 
> 
> 
> For your info stanner it has been and in order with CC rules - lets face it they are really rule observant! was sanctioned a few years ago in accordance and it's now down to the fat townie plonker that had more money than sense to renovate (badly) a semi depilated property opposite our entrance gate - not main access gate!
> 
> The few spoilt it for the many ! As per norm
Click to expand...

So he has complained, but what has happened? :?


----------



## teemyob

Can we elaborate ?

LisaB's post is a bit difficult for me to decipher. Though I get her general opinion.

"We have a CC CL here at home and have ONE recently moved in resident objecting to it 
Giving the CC grief (sometimes they deserve it lol) and our local DC, this has been going on for in excess of twelve months "

So...

You have a CC or CS? and a Certified Location?

You have A CS/CL here in The Lakes. Recently, you have ONE resident who recently moved in........

What/Who are/is DC?.

To Many DP, CC, CL and CP's for me!

:? 

TM or for tonight FF

(Forest Flumped)


----------



## LisaB

Sorry it was difficult to decipher, it was a Friday tea time and a long week! Just trying to draw a small comparison 

Basically just trying to say we run a small Caravan Club CL certified location under rules, very strict and it is objected to by one small minded person who objects to his view being interfered with. He lives the other side of a main road and the field is behind a very large established hedge. His garden is bordered with council house conifers and he has a large rusty old JCB parked in the garden. Th CL is used very rarely too. And I was under the impression the view doesn't get included in a house sale!? 

He has given our District council the run around now for 12 months and the caravan club, saying he is going to go legal, to whom we have no idea, both parties and us are brassed off with him, but he won't go away. Seemingly he's nuts........

Ie Graeme has been running his "aire" style parking with, dependent on where you see it advertised 10-25 vans, albeit without planning that hasn't really got any impact except perhaps to one house at the entrance and the poor souls asleep in the graveyard lol
In fact it's next to a large heavily used car park and coach park 

It according to most brings a positive impact to local economy and we have never received any negative vibes.

Perhaps on this occasion also it has been one, jealous?, bored, pedantic person, who has stirred all this up ?


----------



## 100127

Tell us where your CL is LisaB and we will all come down and stay, and brass your neighbor off. :lol: :lol:


----------



## barryd

Sysinfo said:


> Tell us where your CL is LisaB and we will all come down and stay, and brass your neighbor off. :lol: :lol:


Yeah. After we have staged the sit in at Millers field. Up the rebels!

Ill bring the balaclavas and chains. 

Funny how it usually takes just one person to complain to ban something but probably hundreds of us campaigning to actually "get" something in this country.


----------



## Sideways86

Come the revolution, 200 motorhomes cruise at 2mph around the one way system at Bowness should get them to listen!


----------



## dally1

On our way to Miller Field in about 10 minutes. Of course what we should have done is to have organised a mass rally there and informed the Westmorland Gazette but I guess we're out of time now.


----------



## erneboy

Do you think that if a rally could be organised the public or the media would appreciate and report the distinction between us, generally law abiding motorhomers, and travellers/new age travellers/camping protestors? 

I think not. I think any such move would be counterproductive and would damage our cause. Most especially in an instance such as this where it's really a very simple matter. Unfortunately the site owner is, and has been for quite some time, in breach of planning law which will be enforced no matter what we might want.

We would inevitably garner some very bad publicity which is exactly what is not needed in the UK at a time when there is the beginning of some understanding and willingness to accommodate us.

It is wise to pick your battles carefully and right now this is a lost cause. The best thing the owner can do now is to comply and, in time, investigate trying again while complying with all necessary requirements.

Just my view of course, Alan.


----------



## Westkirby01

There was a similar case a few years ago. A site was closed as locals complained, so the owner made application to have it made to a 'Gypsy' site. No one could complain as it would appear to be discriminatory. He made quite a bit of money running the site as the government paid the costs.

Hmmmm?


----------



## Stanner

I'm increasingly puzzled by all this.

From what I've read this started at least 4 years ago - enforcement action will have been under way for a fair proportion of that time - it is NOT a quick process.

Yet we only get to hear of the "problem" after the enforcement appeal has been heard AND determined, this is waaaaay too late.

Sorry, but if that had been me I would have been leaping up and down to stir up support years ago, not when it is way too late for support to do anything to help.

I'm afraid it just looks like too much sand and not enough head.


----------



## 113016

How about an update from you Guys who were going there last weekend!


----------



## dally1

I think there was around 10 vans there on Saturday night and I had a chat with Graham. I can assure people that Graham and his team believe that the fight to continue goes on. He has had in the region of 800 emails of support so far and do not consider this a lost cause at all.


----------



## 113016

dally1 said:


> I think there was around 10 vans there on Saturday night and I had a chat with Graham. I can assure people that Graham and his team believe that the fight to continue goes on. He has had in the region of 800 emails of support so far and do not consider this a lost cause at all.


Thanks Dally1.
Graeme also told me by text that he would be open until at least January 5th.
Lets hope he can continue.
Fingers, toes, arms and legs crossed


----------



## nicholsong

I just wonder what the legal position would be for any MHs that arrive before 5th January and stay as long as they want?

Presumably the enforcement notice is against the company, and maybe Graeme in person. But what action legal or physical can the Parks Authority take against anyone currently parked there at the time the Notice takes effect?

Maybe it would take as long to evict those MHs as it does to evict 'travellers'. Whilst the eviction of travellers might be quite popular with locals in areas where that has occurred, the locals of Ambleside might a bit shocked to see the same tactics being used against law-abiding respectable citizens like themselves. Some might say that the MHs should not be there, but unless notices have been served on the owners/drivers they are not breaking the law.

It could all be a legal minefield - instead of Miller's Field :roll: :roll: 

Just a thought are there any ancient rights for 'Millers' to operate there - all we would need would be a few grains of wheat and a mortar and pestle :lol: :lol: :lol: 

Geoff


----------



## 100127

dally1 said:


> I think there was around 10 vans there on Saturday night and I had a chat with Graham. I can assure people that Graham and his team believe that the fight to continue goes on. He has had in the region of 800 emails of support so far and do not consider this a lost cause at all.


I think we spoke on Sunday as I turned up with a tracker and you were leaving, but your van was left at the end of the field. Correct me if wrong.

Bob


----------



## Stanner

nicholsong said:


> Presumably the enforcement notice is against the company, and maybe Graeme in person. But what action legal or physical can the Parks Authority take against anyone currently parked there at the time the Notice takes effect?


The action would be taken against the owner unless they could prove they had taken all reasonable steps to prevent the use taking place. That action is likely to be a daily fine for every day the breach of planning control continues.

The planning authority couldn't care less who is "using" land, as that can change quicker than the Lakeland weather - ownership doesn't.

As I have said earlier, for whatever reason (right or wrong) this has been allowed to go too far in the wrong direction, the chances of clawing anything back now is slim. It has also adversely affected the chances of anyone else doing anything similar in the National Park area.

I would still like to know why it was allowed to go to an Enforcement Appeal, instead of making a retrospective application for consent and then appealing against refusal, should that be the decision.


----------



## dally1

Sysinfo said:


> dally1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> I think there was around 10 vans there on Saturday night and I had a chat with Graham. I can assure people that Graham and his team believe that the fight to continue goes on. He has had in the region of 800 emails of support so far and do not consider this a lost cause at all.
> 
> 
> 
> I think we spoke on Sunday as I turned up with a tracker and you were leaving, but your van was left at the end of the field. Correct me if wrong.
> 
> Bob
Click to expand...

Hi Bob,
no, that was'nt me I'm afraid. We did leave Sunday but we were parked 2 along from Greame with our rear facing the cemetery. Hope you enjoyed your stay as much as we did. 
We spent nearly all day Saturday going round all my old customers (pubs) trying to point out the benefitscof the aire between drinks. A couple of them were aware that they had already benefitted from trade from the aire so I'm sure they wouldnt want to lose the custom. Fingers crossed for a good outcome.


----------



## urbanracer

Hi dally1 are you the chap who used to work for Hayes?


----------



## Stanner

dally1 said:


> . Fingers crossed for a good outcome.


The current situation IS the outcome.

A decision on an Enforcement Appeal is final, there is no further appeal, the train has hit the buffers.

The only option is to start again and do things properly this time - I for one will not be holding my breath.

If someone can find out why Graeme chose to allow it to take the Enforcement route, instead of making an application, I would love to know.


----------



## georgiemac

*Ambleside aire*

Anyone know if Miller Field in Ambleside closes today as previously mentioned? 

site helper note - moved to Uk touring and merged with original thread...


----------



## Fatalhud

I wonder if It could be turned into a 5 van site. CS/CL

Alan H


----------



## johnthompson

I very much doubt if a 5 van site could be established on this site now.

It would need an exempted organisation (club) to be willing to grant an exemption.
That organisation would need to discus and agree its proposals with the local planners before granting the exemption.

It is plain the planners do not want Caravans on this land. That includes Motor Caravans.

I base this on years of working as a clubs exemption certificate holder dealing with such authorities in trying to establish 5 van sites throughout the UK.


----------



## 113016

Unfortunately, we have been reliably informed that it will close and most probably for good (or not so good as the case may be) on this coming Sunday 12th January


----------



## aldra

IM sad

We would not use it so much as it is a bit close to civilisation for us

We prefer the site at Langdale 

More expensive but in the heart of the rural lakes

Walk up Mickleden even we can manage it, magnificent

Visit the climbers bar, so basic you wouldn't believe it

Mind you the beer and food is not cheap in spite of the "rustic" surroundings

For us brings back memories of many, many years ago

Aldra


----------



## Stanner

johnthompson said:


> It is plain the planners do not want Caravans on this land. That includes Motor Caravans.


We have still not yet heard anything to explain why (so it seems) a planning application, even a retrospective one, was never made and therefore why it ended up as an "Enforcement" appeal - a position that is far more difficult to defend.

You can only take the P*** for so long before someone else tells you to ........... err...... "go away".


----------



## Jezport

What a stupid short sighted council. Another town to cross off the list


----------



## Stanner

Jezport said:


> What a stupid short sighted council. Another town to cross off the list


You haven't read the whole thread have you?

The Lake District National Park Authority refused permission after taking enforcement action because a planning application (for whatever reason) was not made for the change of use of the land.

"Ambleside Council" (actually Lakes Parish Council) do not have any planning powers.

PS It looks like they took action because as well as the parking of a few motorhomes the land was being used to store a variety of assorted crap.


----------



## 113016

Stanner said:


> Jezport said:
> 
> 
> 
> PS It looks like they took action because as well as the parking of a few motorhomes the land was being used to store a variety of assorted crap.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you have used the facilities, or you would know it was not that bad. Apart from the M/Hs, the most we have ever seen stored was a couple of caravans, one possibly a workman and two boats and one boat trailer.
> Not forgetting it is a fenced off part of the car park, and I believe both have the same owner, and seriously tidied up over the last few years.
> The strange thing for me is that Graeme is very well connected in Lakeland and I wonder if there is more to the story.
> Maybe he had been given the wink, that all would be OK and then a little green envy set in!
> No matter what happens, I can say thank you to Graeme for offering the facilities that enabled me to overnight there!
> I am sure local businesses will suffer, but probably not enough to make any serious difference!
> The planning authorities are certainly been short sighted
Click to expand...


----------



## aldra

It didn't strike me as untidy or messy when we stayed there

I thought it well laid out and in an attractive position and Graeme is a really nice guy

It was great occasionally to be so close to a town although I only ever stayed there off season, I guess in season it would be crowded as Ambleside is

Sorry to see it go but as Grath says during the season Ambleside is packed to capacity with tourists but maybe the local businesses benefited off season from the site

Aldra


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> Stanner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Jezport said:
> 
> 
> 
> PS It looks like they took action because as well as the parking of a few motorhomes the land was being used to store a variety of assorted crap.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think you have used the facilities, or you would know it was not that bad. Apart from the M/Hs, the most we have ever seen stored was a couple of caravans, one possibly a workman and two boats and one boat trailer.
> Not forgetting it is a fenced off part of the car park, and I believe both have the same owner, and seriously tidied up over the last few years.
> The strange thing for me is that Graeme is very well connected in Lakeland and I wonder if there is more to the story.
> Maybe he had been given the wink, that all would be OK and then a little green envy set in!
> No matter what happens, I can say thank you to Graeme for offering the facilities that enabled me to overnight there!
> I am sure local businesses will suffer, but probably not enough to make any serious difference!
> The planning authorities are certainly been short sighted
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> No you are right I am going solely on the Planning Inspectors report.
> 
> They are not usually given to making things up and it is clear that his report refers mainly to the caravans and boats - the motorhomes appear to have been caught in the crossfire and become collateral damage.
> 
> BUT it still doesn't explain why the matter was allowed (for whatever reason) to go to an enforcement appeal which is many times harder to win than an appeal against refusal.
> 
> I ask again WHY?
> 
> As I said much earlier in the thread, sometimes people make many times more difficult for themselves than they need to and no one has yet explained this.
> 
> Good connections and being "tipped the wink" are no substitute for doing things the right way in the first place.
> 
> Can someone who knows him find out the answer?????????????????
Click to expand...


----------



## 113016

Stanner"[quote="Stanner said:


> Can someone who knows him find out the answer?????????????????


We were going to go up for the last few days, and we would have asked the question, but Mrs G, has not been too well, and the weather is not exactly enticing  
However???


----------



## 113016

For those who don't know the Ambleside Aire






Watching this video, has prompted us to go, so we are now booked


----------



## 113016

Anybody else coming :?:


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

Grath said:


> Anybody else coming :?:


Hi Graham,

Is it this weekend (that it closes)?


----------



## 113016

Ian_n_Suzy said:


> Grath said:
> 
> 
> 
> Anybody else coming :?:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi Graham,
> 
> Is it this weekend (that it closes)?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is, Ian, or is it Suzy :lol: I posted the date a few posts above.


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

We would have stopped there had we known, but we have booked into a Club site in the Lakes this weekend already (an annual pilgrimage). It is quite sad that it is closing, we have spent many an happy weekend up there with the kids over many years. Alas, no more.

Ian


----------



## 113016

Oh well,just had the last night here at Millers field, before it closes and possibly for good. The planning refusal was in the owners name and not Graems. The owner is certainly not popular up here. Graeme is considering buying and applying in his own name, maybe for a smaller site. Uphill struggle we know, and against all odds, but just maybe, he will succeed.


----------



## Stanner

That helps (but does not entirely) explain what seems to have happened.

Enforcement action is not taken against the user of the land, but against the owner.

So in this instance it would appear to be that the owner of the land is at least partly to blame for the loss of your amenity, rather than simply the nasty old planning authority or "the council".


----------



## 113016

Yes, but they are kicking themselves in the teeth :lol: 
I was talking to an ex Councillor up there, and she told me that the shops are really struggling. The hotels and guest houses are doing OK, but tourists are just not spending in the shops, and are buying cheap meals.
But Motorhomers, are generally older people with a higher disposable spending power, and do spend. Most of us eat out sometime and we buy provisions and nick knacks, from the shops. Some spend much more!
I put our case (motorhomers) to the ex Councillor, I pointed out that motorhomers needs are far different from caravanner and we need to be pretty central to amenities. I think I won her over as she said she would send a letter to the people concerned. 
There is more to the case, but this is not the place to mention the nitty gritty.
Footnote 
I think we as motorhomers do have a problem getting aire like facilities, because the general public, and people in the planning and council authorities, just don't know, or understand, how our usage differs from caravan users!


----------



## barryd

Grath said:


> Yes, but they are kicking themselves in the teeth :lol:
> I was talking to an ex Councillor up there, and she told me that the shops are really struggling. The hotels and guest houses are doing OK, but tourists are just not spending in the shops, and are buying cheap meals.
> But Motorhomers, are generally older people with a higher disposable spending power, and do spend. Most of us eat out sometime and we buy provisions and nick knacks, from the shops. Some spend much more!
> I put our case (motorhomers) to the ex Councillor, I pointed out that motorhomers needs are far different from caravanner and we need to be pretty central to amenities. I think I won her over as she said she would send a letter to the people concerned.
> There is more to the case, but this is not the place to mention the nitty gritty.
> Footnote
> I think we as motorhomers do have a problem getting aire like facilities, because the general public, and people in the planning and council authorities, just don't know, or understand, how our usage differs from caravan users!


They wont give a stuff Grath. I think I mentioned it earlier in the thread but it was the same when they imposed the 10mph speed limit on Windermere. I had a cruiser on the lake then and getting a birth on the marinas on the lake was nigh on impossible pre ban. Post ban they couldnt give em away.

I used to birth there all winter and Ullswater in the summer and it was a hive of activity. Loads of people spending money in the shops bars and eateries. Many of my friends were local shop owners. When the ban came in business went down 30%. It was a disaster for many.

Nobody wanted it. Its probably the same at the Aire. As Stanner says though it just wasnt done properly.

The place is run by people who just love to make rules and enforce them. They dont care about the economy. Im surprised knowing what I know now that it was allowed to stay open as long as it did.


----------



## erneboy

Grath said:


> .............................. and people in the planning and council authorities, just don't know, or understand, how our usage differs from caravan users!


That is an interesting observation Graham.

I know we seem to prefer being either on our own or close to the amenities of a own but it seems to me that the requirements for a motorhome are almost exactly the same as those for a caravan. I can't see any difference other than the personal preferences of some motorhomers, me included, and I imagine that's exactly how others see it.

Would you care to elaborate for me? Alan.


----------



## 113016

Alan, many of us don't have a car or a motorcycle with us, therefore, if we are camped in the middle of no where, we need to be well stocked up.
Obviously, the caravaner has the car, and if he is camped 8 miles from town, and fancies a meal, it is not a problem, unlike for the M/H er.
A small town location, can sometimes be quite nice!


----------



## erneboy

Grath said:


> Alan, many of us don't have a car or a motorcycle with us, therefore, if we are camped in the middle of no where, we need to be well stocked up.
> Obviously, the caravaner has the car, and if he is camped 8 miles from town, and fancies a meal, it is not a problem, unlike for the M/H er.
> A small town location, can sometimes be quite nice!


Thanks Graham. I see what you mean, but I think caravanners might like to be close to towns too so that they could walk to a restaurant and maybe have a drink. Sorry but I don't find their having access to a car to be a persuasive difference.

For myself it boils down to not liking the regimentation or formality of camp sites. I quite simply prefer aires or wild camping. The proximity of a town can be a bonus but some camp sites are near or in towns.

It would be good to find a way to explain the difference to people who can't see it but as the difference is small and can be and is often interpreted as trying to save money I think it's an uphill struggle.

Thanks for trying, Alan.


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> There is more to the case, but this is not the place to mention the nitty gritty.


Why not?
If there is more and it is such that the actions of the Planning Authority (not "the council") are more understandable - then why shouldn't we know?



> Footnote
> I think we as motorhomers do have a problem getting aire like facilities, because the general public, and people in the planning and council authorities, just don't know, or understand, how our usage differs from caravan users!


The problem is in law there is NO difference - unless it is accepted that parking a fully self-contained motor vehicle and sleeping in it overnight is NOT the same as stationing a caravan and setting it up for the night.

However for that to be accepted by those who wish to do just that - that it means JUST THAT and nothing more. 
No awnings, no chairs and tables, no barbecues - in other words "No Camping".

How long would it be before someone decided they didn't like "stupid rules" like that and that it didn't apply to them?


----------



## 113016

Stanner said:


> Grath said:
> 
> 
> 
> There is more to the case, but this is not the place to mention the nitty gritty.
> 
> 
> 
> Quote
> Why not?
> If there is more and it is such that the actions of the Planning Authority (not "the council") are more understandable - then why shouldn't we know?
> 
> Answer.
> Because, it,s not my place to tell you, I might know more than I am saying, not much, just a little and a little intuition, and there is certainly more to this, but at the end of the day, unless the people concerned can sort out their differences, we as motorhomers have lost out
> If you want more, I suggest, you contact the people concerned!
Click to expand...


----------



## Midnightrambler

Well done Grath. Hopefully a worthwhile conversation with the ex-councillor.
Seems to me that there are too many negative comments on this thread. Lets be optimistic & press for a satisfactory conclusion for all concerned.
Thanks again Grath
Alan


----------



## rosalan

How did the French turn the government round?
What are the virtues of Aires as seen through the eyes of French / German / Italians / etc . One thing in addition to the commercial advantages to local shops used to be the nuisance caused by Italian motorhomes who would seemingly park up for the night, anywhere.
Someone or something however managed to reach government policies from which point the Aires regime became a flood rather than the hesitant trickle we are admiring.


Alan ever hopeful


----------



## erneboy

rosalan said:


> How did the French turn the government round?
> What are the virtues of Aires as seen through the eyes of French / German / Italians / etc . One thing in addition to the commercial advantages to local shops used to be the nuisance caused by Italian motorhomes who would seemingly park up for the night, anywhere.
> Someone or something however managed to reach government policies from which point the Aires regime became a flood rather than the hesitant trickle we are admiring.
> 
> Alan ever hopeful


It seems to a frame of mind. The willingness to provide what tourists want, rather than trying to bend tourism to be what you think it ought to be. The influence of camp site owners and accommodation providers seems strong in the UK, they would like things to stay as they are obviously, Alan.


----------



## 113016

Midnightrambler said:


> Well done Grath. Hopefully a worthwhile conversation with the ex-councillor.
> Seems to me that there are too many negative comments on this thread. Lets be optimistic & press for a satisfactory conclusion for all concerned.
> Thanks again Grath
> Alan


No need to thank me Midnightrambler, I did no more than any other M/Her would have done. I was talking to the owner of an eating establishment, explaining that his custom may reduce, through less motorhomes, when the ex Councillor was listening to our conversation and eventually joined in.
Initially, she was against the Motorhome community, but after our conversation, she and her husband turned 180 degree and could see the benefits of our contribution to the local economy. 
I doubt that anything will change, but a little here and a little there, and maybe eventually the local councils may appreciate us!
For, myself, I will no longer spend any of my money in Ambleside, untill they are M/H friendly.
I have moved on and found a nice alternative!
I agree about the negative comments, if we can't stick together, all is lost!


----------



## erneboy

It looks as though a couple of us telling the truth about how the planning system works has been construed as us making negative comments.

Nothing could be further from the truth. 

You can only work the system if you know how the system works. Without exception the comments about the approach this sites owner/operator took to planning was intended to enlighten, to point out why the site had been closed, and to explain how it could have been done and might have succeeded.

Surely you all understand that nobody can approach the law in an ad hoc manner, Alan.


----------



## 113016

Alan, I agree, and I am sure the owner was trying to take the piddle.  From what I hear, allegedly, he is locally, well known for trying to bend a few things, but I do note that the negativity seems to came from people who have never been to the location.
It would be nice to hear what could be done to help change the planners mind, not to me, but to the owner or Graeme (site Manager)


----------



## erneboy

Graham, the point all along has been that by the time it was posted on here an enforcement notice had been issued. Letting it get that far practically ensured it's closure. Appealing the enforcement notice wasn't really an option due to the cost of an appeal.

An ad hoc approach to the planning laws was taken and failed, Alan.


----------



## 113016

Alan, I know that, and I do understand, but I am sure that none of us known the full facts.
The same person owns the very large adjoining car park.(which has got planning permission) which the aire was part of. I think he was trying to blur the edges  And maybe still is


----------



## barryd

rosalan said:


> How did the French turn the government round?
> What are the virtues of Aires as seen through the eyes of French / German / Italians / etc . One thing in addition to the commercial advantages to local shops used to be the nuisance caused by Italian motorhomes who would seemingly park up for the night, anywhere.
> Someone or something however managed to reach government policies from which point the Aires regime became a flood rather than the hesitant trickle we are admiring.
> 
> Alan ever hopeful


From what I have gleemed form forums and general opinion the French had a problem with le Camping Cars parking all over the place so instead of banning them and suggesting the either Feck off or go to a campsite they started introducing Aires.

I am not sure when it snowballed or where it started. Maybe if we got one or two up and running here then the same may happen. I doubt it though. Should we be making more of a nucance of ourseleves then?


----------



## Boff

rosalan said:


> How did the French turn the government round?


Well, they didn't need to. In France, apart from a few exceptions like nature reserves and listed sites, wild camping is legal! French local councils simply do not have, and never did have, the authority to completely ban wild camping on their territory. They only have the authority to _regulate_ it. Means they can ban it on certain places only as long as they provide alternatives. Hence the vast network of such alternative places like aires, camping municipals etc.

Best Regards,
Gerhard


----------



## alitone

*Miller Field Ambleside*



Boff said:


> rosalan said:
> 
> 
> 
> How did the French turn the government round?
> 
> 
> 
> Well, they didn't need to. In France, apart from a few exceptions like nature reserves and listed sites, wild camping is legal! French local councils simply do not have, and never did have, the authority to completely ban wild camping on their territory. They only have the authority to _regulate_ it. Means they can ban it on certain places only as long as they provide alternatives. Hence the vast network of such alternative places like aires, camping municipals etc.
> 
> Best Regards,
> Gerhard
Click to expand...

Has anyone got the latest news from Cumbria ( Ambleside) about the Miller Field Motorhome campsite.... is Graeme still taking vans on site or have the LDNP closed it down completely. If so were going to Scotland to spend our money !


----------



## LisaB

*Ambleside closure*

Only sent Graeme a text last night to ask for an update, not only for ourselves, although we do need an Ambleside fix ;-( But also as we have a lot of overseas motorhome hirers coming for vans over next couple of months, most destined for bonny ecosse and a lot had adored Ambleside in the past

To now have received no response, the local TI website still shows open and contact details so have no idea.

will update if I hear


----------



## Ian_n_Suzy

*Re: Ambleside closure*



> Only sent Graeme a text last night to ask for an update, not only for ourselves, although we do need an Ambleside fix ;-( But also as we have a lot of overseas motorhome hirers coming for vans over next couple of months, most destined for bonny ecosse and a lot had adored Ambleside in the past
> 
> To now have received no response, the local TI website still shows open and contact details so have no idea.
> 
> will update if I hear


Did you get any response to your text? (been trying to contact Graeme ourselves).


----------



## alitone

*Re: Ambleside closure*



Ian_n_Suzy said:


> Only sent Graeme a text last night to ask for an update, not only for ourselves, although we do need an Ambleside fix ;-( But also as we have a lot of overseas motorhome hirers coming for vans over next couple of months, most destined for bonny ecosse and a lot had adored Ambleside in the past
> 
> To now have received no response, the local TI website still shows open and contact details so have no idea.
> 
> will update if I hear
> 
> 
> 
> Did you get any response to your text? (been trying to contact Graeme ourselves).
Click to expand...

I received a text message from Graham 21st May saying they are closed as LDNP will take court action if they allow anyone onto the site., What a shame Goodbye Ambleside you will miss all the trade.


----------



## Stanner

*Re: Ambleside closure*



> Goodbye Ambleside you will miss all the trade.


In that case why didn't Ambleside offer any assistance to get the planning application (which was NOT apparently made) made.

You need to remember that this was an ENFORCEMENT appeal to the Lake District NP Planning Authority and that normally is the result of someone sticking 2 fingers up to the Planning Authority - NOT a sensible way of getting a sympathetic hearing.

If our custom meant as much as you seem to think, then surely the Ambleside traders would have leant on the Parish Council to help sort the mess out.

I'm still waiting for an explanation as to why/how Graeme got into such a mess in the first place.


----------



## LisaB

Not sure its Graeme at fault here, he doesnt own the land and never has he only made the suggestion of an aire as a keen motorhomer himself and administered it so to speak. I believe its owned by an acquaintance.

It was formerly the car park before the larger bit adjacent took up its mantle.

So it was ok for cars to park there all day viewable from Loughrigg and floodable, but not seemingly motorhomes :roll:


----------



## Stanner

LisaB said:


> Not sure its Graeme at fault here, he doesnt own the land and never has he only made the suggestion of an aire as a keen motorhomer himself and administered it so to speak. I believe its owned by an acquaintance.
> 
> It was formerly the car park before the larger bit adjacent took up its mantle.
> 
> So it was ok for cars to park there all day viewable from Loughrigg and floodable, but not seemingly motorhomes :roll:


Unfortunately if you want to use land it is up to you to make sure you can use it for that use.

You do not need to own it - just have legal use of it.


----------



## urbanracer

It is also OK for motorhomes to park on the pay car park all day but not to stay in at night.
So one of the objections of being visible from loughrigg fell has no credibility.
As if you could see a few motorhomes you certainly would be able to see a large car park and another part of the objection is motorhomes are white well that's currently a popular colour for all vehicles.
We stayed at Millerfield at the start of this month with the Motorcaravvaners club, that was OK as it is a club and it was planned last year.

As an aside a Travel Lodge and a new Sainsburys have permission to develop in Ambleside and both are not wanted by local Hotels/B+B and shops in Ambleside.


----------



## tude

*Aire*

Stayed at the aire this weekend it's finished as from the last van leaving today very sad lovely spot but I'm not suprised .about 3 caravans there and I'm sure the deal was motorhomes only .there was a skip there for rubbish with a blue tarpaulin rapped over it didn't look tidy.if you was a council chapp and turned up to have a look around its shabby and dosnt fit in with the area.a lot more could have been done for very little money

Tude


----------



## LisaB

Stanner said:


> LisaB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure its Graeme at fault here, he doesnt own the land and never has he only made the suggestion of an aire as a keen motorhomer himself and administered it so to speak. I believe its owned by an acquaintance.
> 
> It was formerly the car park before the larger bit adjacent took up its mantle.
> 
> So it was ok for cars to park there all day viewable from Loughrigg and floodable, but not seemingly motorhomes :roll:
> 
> 
> 
> Unfortunately if you want to use land it is up to you to make sure you can use it for that use.
> 
> You do not need to own it - just have legal use of it.
Click to expand...

Then I guess it would have maybe only needed a change of use perhaps as it was already a council car park


----------



## LisaB

*Re: Aire*



tude said:


> Stayed at the aire this weekend it's finished as from the last van leaving today very sad lovely spot but I'm not suprised .about 3 caravans there and I'm sure the deal was motorhomes only .there was a skip there for rubbish with a blue tarpaulin rapped over it didn't look tidy.if you was a council chapp and turned up to have a look around its shabby and dosnt fit in with the area.a lot more could have been done for very little money
> 
> Tude


We agree it had started to look shabby when we were there a month ago but I guess they've given up on it

We also agree that some on the caravans that were there lately looked unkempt too which would have no doubt contributed.

I guess it's the laid back attitude of the place that's caused its demise, shame as it had lots of followers


----------



## Stanner

LisaB said:


> Then I guess it would have maybe only needed a change of use perhaps as it was already a council car park


In that case why wasn't an application made?

If you read the Planning Inspectors decision he talks mainly about scruffy caravans and stored boats on trailers, but then includes "motorcaravans".

Graeme was clearly either totally uninformed or very badly misinformed as to what he needed to do to carry on the use.


----------



## LisaB

Stanner said:


> LisaB said:
> 
> 
> 
> Then I guess it would have maybe only needed a change of use perhaps as it was already a council car park
> 
> 
> 
> In that case why wasn't an application made?
> 
> If you read the Planning Inspectors decision he talks mainly about scruffy caravans and stored boats on trailers, but then includes "motorcaravans".
> 
> Graeme was clearly either totally uninformed or very badly misinformed as to what he needed to do to carry on the use.
Click to expand...

Stanner I wouldnt have a clue mate !
We have only used the place dont run it! Shame to lose a facility for short sightedness on ANYONES count

Will be missed and another place for Brits in MHs to be not using in favour of the continent


----------



## Stanner

LisaB said:


> Stanner I wouldnt have a clue mate !
> We have only used the place dont run it! Shame to lose a facility for short sightedness on ANYONES count
> 
> Will be missed and another place for Brits in MHs to be not using in favour of the continent


As I've clearly asked right from the beginning.......

Why was the matter of the use of the site allowed to get into such a mess? 
Why wasn't an application made?
Why didn't user of the facility and/or anyone on here know anything about an enforcement action that seems to have been underway for over 4 years until it was too late?

We can moan all we like about the loss, but sorry, the blame can only be placed at either Graeme's (or the landowners) door for not going about things in a sensible way for so long.


----------



## 91502

Personally I suspect they never expected the Aire to be a long running thing.
Maybe like a lot of businesses they decided that the cost of getting permission as they knew it would end up going to appeals etc. etc. was not worth it so they would go for quick cash and carry on until the inevitable closure order came.
Just like someone in our village set up a car sales yard in front of a house on the main road, they would never get permission as it's right on two junctions and a school crossing patrol.
They have now been going for 8 months and even after a final order they are still trading while awaiting their final appeal which they won't attend. 
In the mean time they keep selling cars and the house owner keeps getting rent.
James


----------



## Fatalhud

Sat on Miller field, and Graeme has just has just put up notice that it is finally closing
Its been a good run while it lasted and thanks to Graeme for providing us with our favourite spot since it opened

Alan H


----------



## 113016

How many times can a place close :wink: 
We were there for the last night in January, and we did have to vacate  
But we have also returned as a friend :wink: not a paying customer.
I spoke to Graeme just a couple of weeks ago, and we are, or were intending to go again and soon.
So going by our experience, maybe we still will  
I do hope so  
But, I do think it is on well over borrowed time, a person can only push the boundaries so many times.
It would maybe stand a better chance of gaining permission, if Graeme applied in his own name and not the unpopular land owners name. :idea:


----------



## 113016

Update.
I have just received a text from Graeme informing me that the Aire is now closed to everybody, including those of us who have since the January official closure, have carried on attending as friends.
What a shame, but not unexpected!


----------



## alitone

*Millers Field motorhome site Ambleside Cumbria*

MILLER FIELD CLOSED. CUMBRIA

Havnt been on the site for a while but tried to contact Millers Field Motorhome site at Ambleside Lake District . Understand its really closed down now . According to message .

Would it help if supporters and Motorhome facts members contacted the LDNP website to complain ?? has anyone tried to establish the real reason

Site helper note - originally posted separately, now merged with long running thread for continuity.


----------



## philoaks

19 pages of explanation here http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-153729.html&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=miller&start=0


----------



## Stanner

philoaks said:


> 19 pages of explanation here http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-153729.html&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=miller&start=0


More like 19 pages of conjecture, because no one either will or can explain why a planning application was not submitted either by Graeme or by the owner of the land.


----------



## 113016

Stanner said:


> philoaks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 19 pages of explanation here http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-153729.html&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=miller&start=0
> 
> 
> 
> More like 19 pages of conjecture, because no one either will or can explain why a planning application was not submitted either by Graeme or by the owner of the land.
Click to expand...

Stanner, I think I may have posted somewhere in the long thread why (in my opinion) :wink: 
I don't think you have be.en there and know the immediate location, and it would help understand.
The aire is adjacent to the large car park, both owned by the same person (not Graeme) and I was told by an ex local councillor, that when the owner applied for planning for the car park, all was not as it seemed. I will not post details on a forum as I have no proof, just the word of the ex councillor!
I think he knew that it would not be forth coming, and carried on regardless. The aire is and was on the mentioned car park, in a corner and fenced off, and would have permission for vehicles.
Pushing boundaries comes to mind!
I thought that Graeme might have applied in his own name, but it seems maybe not, and probably well too late by now.
But it is such a shame and the local economy WILL suffer
The local councillor may have told a fairy tail, but who knows, not me
:wink:


----------



## Stanner

Grath said:


> Stanner said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> philoaks said:
> 
> 
> 
> 19 pages of explanation here http://www.motorhomefacts.com/ftopic-153729.html&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=miller&start=0
> 
> 
> 
> More like 19 pages of conjecture, because no one either will or can explain why a planning application was not submitted either by Graeme or by the owner of the land.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Stanner, I think I may have posted somewhere in the long thread why (in my opinion) :wink:
> I don't think you have be.en there and know the immediate location, and it would help understand.
> The aire is adjacent to the large car park, both owned by the same person (not Graeme) and I was told by an ex local councillor, that when the owner applied for planning for the car park, all was not as it seemed. I will not post details on a forum as I have no proof, just the word of the ex councillor!
> I think he knew that it would not be forth coming, and carried on regardless. The aire is and was on the mentioned car park, in a corner and fenced off, and would have permission for vehicles.
> Pushing boundaries comes to mind!
> I thought that Graeme might have applied in his own name, but it seems maybe not, and probably well too late by now.
> But it is such a shame and the local economy WILL suffer
> The local councillor may have told a fairy tail, but who knows, not me
> :wink:
Click to expand...

I tried to find it once just for a look round but that was several years ago before the enforcement problem became public BUT after it apparently started in 2008/9. If Graeme was under action from the Planning Board then, why didn't he ask for support then?

As I have said before for WHATEVER REASON the whole affair seems to have been handled in the worst possible way. I can assure you that an Enforcement Appeal really is a last resort action when a planning authority is constantly and repeatedly ignored in it's attempts to resolve a problem. The one sure upshot of this is that anybody else (let alone Graeme) who tries to set up and Aire within the LDNPPB's area will have a much much harder time of it from now on.

It has repeatedly been described as an "Aire" but how many users regularly put out awnings, chairs, tables, barbeques etc.?

If it is a bona fide car park and the only use is parking - albeit with the vehicle occupied overnight - that is not a change of use. BUT if that use extends to what can be construed as "camping" then it is a "Change of Use" that requires planning permission. 
I do not need to know the area or the immediate location to give you that advise, that would be the case anywhere. It is why I cannot understand exactly what Weymouth are applying for. The upside is that IF Weymouth do grant themselves consent for motorhomes to use an existing car park for more than just "parking" it should be possible to use awnings, chairs tables etc. there.


----------

