Prohibition of Motor Caravans in Scarborough area.

[M & M]

Done!

 

[laurieash]

[QUOmany="Hotelman, post: 1296474, member: 28535"]It seems so naive, why can't they be leaders in the motor home concept and then reap the financial rewards.
I will be in touch tomorrow with my local contacts, business and council.[/QUOTE]
How many councillors are linked to Hotels/ Campsites etc?

 

[pappajohn]

Thought that was what i said.

 

[32143]

If I had paid many thousands of pounds for a house with a sea view in Scarborough or Filey I do not think I would take kindly to having a campsite on my front door.

Would you like a row of motorhomes parked outside your home, I know I wouldn't, if I had one.

Personally I can see nothing wrong in the ban but agree that proper facilities should be provided at reasonable cost.

I can imagine this is exactly why the locals (or not so local but second home owners) are upset.
We live in Scarborough and park our MH on the street in front of our building paying for a residents permit. The normally nice lady who lives above us does not like our MH parked outside, she complains it blocks the view from her bedroom window. So we have to try and park so the van is in front of the communal doors so not to block anyone's view. Out of 8 flats in our building only 3 of us live there permanently, the other 5 are second homes. There isn't even a view to block as the front of the building just looks across to the houses on the other side (where incidentally there is another MH parked). All our views are to the rear over Valley Road, which is the reason all the bedrooms are to the front. But who's going to argue with the tiny lady upstairs, not us

 

[CWH]

Someone's "view" doesn't have to be the pretty view - it's whether or not they can see out of the window, see who's coming and going. When we take the van to my dad's we park it outside his house for security reasons, he hates it because he doesn't know who's going up and down the street.
Good on you @Milliemobile for trying to accommodate your neighbour.

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

 

[32143]

Someone's "view" doesn't have to be the pretty view - it's whether or not they can see out of the window, see who's coming and going. When we take the van to my dad's we park it outside his house for security reasons, he hates it because he doesn't know who's going up and down the street.
Good on you @Milliemobile for trying to accommodate your neighbour.

We try our best, and to be honest other than the MH issue she is great, she collects our post out of our box when we are away to stop it getting clogged up. Pretty certain she wouldn't be able to see over the hedge regardless of our MH being on other side though, she is tiny about 4ft. . Ps we even let her plant her own flowers in the rockery in front of our garden flat, we are lower basement, at the front so as its above our window level she gets more benefit from it that we do and very nice it looks too.

 

[GJH]

Thought that was what i said.

Sorry John, must be me misreading it

 

[GJH]

How many councillors are linked to Hotels/ Campsites etc?

I don't know. Why should there be any?
I am certain, though, that implying, without evidence, that personal considerations might influence the NYCC decision would be counter-productive.

 

[CWH]

Pretty certain she wouldn't be able to see over the hedge regardless of our MH being on other side though, she is tiny about 4ft.

 

[Carolyn and Kev]

Completed !

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

 

[jezport]

If I had paid many thousands of pounds for a house with a sea view in Scarborough or Filey I do not think I would take kindly to having a campsite on my front door.

Would you like a row of motorhomes parked outside your home, I know I wouldn't, if I had one.

Personally I can see nothing wrong in the ban but agree that proper facilities should be provided at reasonable cost.

The area at Scarborough where motorhome parking happens is below a cliff were no properties are near, no view is ruined for anyone. I've parked there many times and the local people I spoke to are quite happy with vans there. They appreciate the trade.

 

[2657]

The area at Scarborough where motorhome parking happens is below a cliff were no properties are near, no view is ruined for anyone. I've parked there many times and the local people I spoke to are quite happy with vans there. They appreciate the trade.

I don't know the area well and didn't say that this was happening, I was replying to and stating my view on this comment from another member;
"My guess is; it is founded on a few folk that think ... " We bought this seafront/view property for £x... Why should [they] get it for free.... It's ours!" mentality..."
The local people you spoke to appreciate the trade, then they are presumably tradesmen of some sort and as such represent a small minority of the population of the area.

 

[UK Pete]

WTF is happening to this country we are so anti everything except immigration

 

[Jimbost]

Completed with full contact details. Also asked for information regarding matters tabled during council meetings relevant to the parking of motor homes within the areas notified.

Nothing will happen but tempted to ask for it under the freedom of information act. Need to check if it applies in this scenario.

Jimbo

 

[Spud]

Done.
As will we all if we per chance end up in such an unwelcoming place!
Spud.

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

 

[Granjan]

Completed.

 

[Minxy]

Interesting reading the link provided to the reason for the proposed bans in Scarborough et al and I have also looked at the location of the roads themselves which would be the subject of the bans.

Taking first the roads where the properties would be DIRECTLY affected due to a load of MH being parked outside them for days on end and preventing them from seeing the view they have paid for (which they will have as the property prices will have been quite a bit higher than those without the view) I can understand the planned restrictions and to a great extend don't have a problem subject to it being to ALL large vehicles and not just MHs.

Then there are those without a view but again who don't necessarily want to have a 'large vehicle' parked a few feet from their front room etc for days on end, yes I can understand that too, but to lesser extent, as large vehicles have to be able to park somewhere!

The ones that I take exception to, though, are the roads where there is no direct effect on properties mainly because there aren't properties there! The bans for these areas are to some extent just for the hell of it.

However, I can also see the council's view (no pun intended!) that they don't want people clogging up the parking on roads for days, or even weeks, on end but this could easily be controlled by giving a maximum length of stay surely? Its a difficult one really, parking in these areas is very limited at the best of times and add to that mix some inconsiderate MH owners and guess who gets blamed!

As an aside to this, Bridlington, which isn't mentioned, already has some parking bans for MHs along their promenade however despite this being made VERY clear on the signs it didn't stop at least 2 MH owners ignoring it and parking directly in front of properties for hours on end. The only 'revenge' was that they had paid to park there, whereas if they'd just gone across the road and a bit further on they'd have been able to park for free which is what we did and where we didn't affect anyone at all!

I think what a lot of the council don't appreciate is that a MH/camper is NOT just a vehicle and therefore people like to be able to use them to sit in and enjoy the view as well as use as a base to explore within locality, returning every now and then - it's not the same as a car which is often just parked up all day and not used again for a long time, so the view and/location isn't so important. Using Bridlington as an example, it has a park and ride scheme but the problem is that MHers don't want have their MH stuck in a car park out of town due to wanting to visit it during the day for various reasons.

Unfortunately I can't see how this can be easily resolved unless suitable areas are opened up for MHers/large vehicles to use, but then that could easily cost a lot of money and no doubt the parking charges would reflect this.

 

[GJH]

The area at Scarborough where motorhome parking happens is below a cliff were no properties are near, no view is ruined for anyone. I've parked there many times and the local people I spoke to are quite happy with vans there. They appreciate the trade.

The ones that I take exception to, though, are the roads where there is no direct effect on properties mainly because there aren't properties there! The bans for these areas are to some extent just for the hell of it.

However, I can also see the council's view (no pun intended!) that they don't want people clogging up the parking on roads for days, or even weeks, on end but this could easily be controlled by giving a maximum length of stay surely? Its a difficult one really, parking in these areas is very limited at the best of times and add to that mix some inconsiderate MH owners and guess who gets blamed!

That's what the consultation is about isn't it? It gives people the chance to provide this sort of evidence so that any restrictions can be imposed where needed.

 

[GJH]

As an aside to this, Bridlington, which isn't mentioned, already has some parking bans for MHs along their promenade however despite this being made VERY clear on the signs it didn't stop at least 2 MH owners ignoring it and parking directly in front of properties for hours on end. The only 'revenge' was that they had paid to park there, whereas if they'd just gone across the road and a bit further on they'd have been able to park for free which is what we did and where we didn't affect anyone at all!

Bridlington is East Riding of Yorkshire council, Mel, not North Yorkshire.

 

[Minxy]

Bridlington is East Riding of Yorkshire council, Mel, not North Yorkshire.

When I said it "isn't mentioned" I didn't claim it WAS part of the same council. The point I was making is that it is another SEASIDE resort in the same area of the country which HAS got restrictions but even then some idiots choose to ignore the regs which won't do the reputation of MH owners any good, nothing to do with the actual council ... if one area can make restrictions then another one can and more than likely will.

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

 

[GJH]

When I said it "isn't mentioned" I didn't claim it WAS part of the same council. The point I was making is that it is another SEASIDE resort in the same area of the country which HAS got restrictions but even then some idiots choose to ignore the regs which won't do the reputation of MH owners any good, nothing to do with the actual council ... if one area can make restrictions then another one can and more than likely will.

Right, my misreading

 

[maison]

Lodge your views here:
https://consult.northyorks.gov.uk/snapwebhost/s.asp?k=142315541185

It takes two minutes.

Its a disgraceful plan.

Done!

 

[Jackspeak]

Done! Let's stop the rot going too far!

 

[Jackspeak]

Done,let's stop the rot!

 

[PeteH]

Completed:- Comments-

As someone who has in the past come to Scarborough. on a Regular basis. Whilst I take it that the REGULAR and INDISCRIMINATE parking long term can be a nuisance. The Blanket DISCRIMINATION against this type of vehicle would be In My Opinion in breach of the right to enjoy the same social life as NON Motor-home owners. and in all probably a breach of "discrimination" Laws? If there is an issue. then your authority has sufficient powers to deal with abuse under existing road traffic acts, which apply to ALL road users.

The other aspect of this is that Users of this type of vehicle generally bring to an area REVENUE, which they would not otherwise bring, eg; IF you own such a vehicle you would not stay in Hotels etc; anyway! but some extra revenue will inevitably find its way into local coffers, a ban would encourage people to stay away.

Also to be considered is the fact that, as in my own case, Disability is one of the prime reasons for owning such a vehicle. (INSTANT access to toilet facilities being a necessary part of our lives, To be crude "when you gotta go you GOTTA go") No searching for an open public Toilet here no time!! thereby such a blanket ban would be disability discriminatory too!.

I think that this proposal is "BAD LAW" and should be dropped. there are as stated earlier already law to deal with abuse.
Ends

Pete

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

 

[vin0114]

Lost revenue? Is that so? How much exactly?

I tried to find out Broken Link Removed and Broken Link Removed last year. Very variable answers.

We spend our well earned money wherever we stay whether its on Aires, sites or CL's. Even when wild camping in Scotland as anywhere we still have to eat, drink and buy fuel thus supporting these areas. Its pretty obvious that areas that ban my vehicle will lose revenue as I will not buy there. I would like to make it clear that I am totally against parking at any time anywhere that could cause annoyance to people living nearby unless its at the back of a pub.

 

[GJH]

We spend our well earned money wherever we stay whether its on Aires, sites or CL's. Even when wild camping in Scotland as anywhere we still have to eat, drink and buy fuel thus supporting these areas. Its pretty obvious that areas that ban my vehicle will lose revenue as I will not buy there. I would like to make it clear that I am totally against parking at any time anywhere that could cause annoyance to people living nearby unless its at the back of a pub.

Pretty much like some of the people who responded to the two other threads then, but that is not the case with everyone. Some motorhomers, especially when only going somewhere for a couple of nights, leave home fully stocked with food and drink and spend little, if anything, in the local economy.

 

[Rapido925M]

Lodge your views here:
https://consult.northyorks.gov.uk/snapwebhost/s.asp?k=142315541185

It takes two minutes.

It took me 45 minutes to compile a response which fitted within the 2000 characters allowed (I had 3 left after #7).

I even left them my ex-directory phone number but I bet I don't hear a thing.

It's not as if I have even overnighted there, but could I possibly resist being a grumpy old man? - Gordon

 

[jezport]

Bare in mind that the council started this ban as they had complaints that waste was being thrown into the sea. When Andy Strangeway sent an FOI request to the council asking for information on the complaints he was told "there were no actual complaints officially registered the complaints were anecdotal." Now in my opinion the council have ulterior motives why they are trying to stop us parking overnight. If it was due to waste then there is already legislation to deal with this, and lets be honest who is likely to pi$$ or Poop in a public area? Is it a motorhomer with a toilet or a car or van owner without? I rest my case.

 

[GJH]

Bare in mind that the council started this ban as they had complaints that waste was being thrown into the sea. When Andy Strangeway sent an FOI request to the council asking for information on the complaints he was told "there were no actual complaints officially registered the complaints were anecdotal." Now in my opinion the council have ulterior motives why they are trying to stop us parking overnight. If it was due to waste then there is already legislation to deal with this, and lets be honest who is likely to pi$$ or Poop in a public area? Is it a motorhomer with a toilet or a car or van owner without? I rest my case.

They appear to have taken that point on board and now say

However, we received comments suggesting that the statement of reasons given, which is the fundamental basis for the proposed order, was not detailed enough to allow those affected to give a definitive response.

As a result, we are now re-opening the consultation with a Broken Link Removed more detailed statement [38kb], to allow a better informed response.

The consultation enables people to challenge a number of different points.

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