So you may have noticed I took a few weeks off from
writing serious posts and provided a couple ‘frill’ pieces for your
entertainment. After all, this is my
second favorite time of year and I love to roam. Those of you that read my articles on a
regular basis know that I absolutely love the fall and THAT is my favorite
season – but I don’t want to rush the summer!
Sometimes you just need to take a step back from social strife, take a
deep breath and live your life free from the thoughts of others. I really felt that I needed to let the
smoldering embers of the deer cull fracas cool a bit before diving back in with
my thoughts, musings and suggestions regarding CRR. This week I had a new revelation as I perused
www.coosawattee.net. I noticed a contiguous pair of RV lots for
sale and thought….hmmmm.
First, let me start by saying that I think we need
to move away from the term ‘campground’.
Let’s face it, staying in a modern recreational vehicle is far from ‘camping’. It really is the epitome of ‘glamping’. Typically overstuffed recliners, flat screen
TVs, air conditioning and modern appointments that rival those of some homes aren’t
usually associated with ‘camping’. We
also have many folks that have chosen the downsized lifestyle of RV living over
costly and often unneeded homesite living.
The river parks that provide rental lots are campgrounds - the privately
owned RV sites in CRR are really just that:
RV Lots. I prefer to use the terminology
‘RV section’ versus ‘Campground’. I also
feel that there is an elevated level of perception using ‘RV section’ over ‘Campground’….but
I digress.
I would also encourage any new readers to read my
other posts regarding the RV section of CRR.
I personally see the great potential and benefit of this resource within
our community and hope to continue to see the positive trends that have been occurring.
So, I’m always thinking about ways to improve CRR
as a whole and had a crazy thought about the RV area when I saw the adjoining
lots for sale. I think the board and
management really need to take a step back and think long horizon in regards to
the RV section. It often seems that our
knees keep jerking when it comes to policy making and developing solutions to
known troubles in the area. A key to
any well-defined and well-structured development is consistency – and this does
not happen overnight. For the purposes
of my thoughts today, let us say we are looking 5-10 years in the future. Without lighting any fuses, let’s just agree
that there are some areas within the RV section that need some ‘attention’. Most of these issues, by my observation,
linger from abandoned properties that didn’t have much value and were left by
their owners. And it is easy to
understand why when you behold some of them.
I also believe that people may have passed, left the property to a
family member and it has simply been forgotten.
Whatever the reason the condition of some of the properties is
unacceptable and not fair to the other owners.
I also think it’s important to note that there are
some really great properties in the RV section.
The removal of the building moratorium has truly made a huge difference
in the appearance of the area. The
attractive and well-constructed roof-overs have been a monstrous leap in the
right direction. The addition of a
roof-over on a lot screams UPSCALE. The
improving pride in ownership everywhere throughout the area is really
blossoming. Below I’ll detail some
bulleted points that are ideas for continuing on this path of re-development
and re-discovery of this hidden gem.
- CRR must expand its efforts to buy distressed lots. This includes lots with and without existing units. This was a point I made in my June 2, 2014 post: Revitalization of the Coosawattee Campgrounds. A post that, as of this writing, has had 921 visitors. Not to sound egotistical – but I put that idea forward over two years ago, and fortunately, someone was listening. CRR has begun buying these lots, and reselling them. This business plan serves the owners of the area by removing known blight and benefits CRR through additional lot sales, capital contribution, etc.
- CRR needs to keep the prices of available lots stable. We shouldn’t be giving fire sale prices on RV lots UNLESS – yes, a big UNLESS, the lot is to be replatted with another adjoining RV lot. (More on this later) I’m actually quite happy to see desirable lots priced upwards of $10K. While some may disagree, it is the only way to improve an aging and distressed area. Elevated prices bring elevated buyers who bring elevated development and elevated pride in ownership.
- Legal should be assisting CRR in tracking down owners of distressed lots and instead of putting them directly on a collections list, should have the authority to negotiate an offer and purchase of the lots. Most likely an owner of an abandoned property isn’t going to follow through by actually putting the check in the mail. We could focus on deed backs and balanced sale prices based on current owed dues. Again – win/win for the community. However, the board will need to grant authority to management and let management do what they do – manage the day to day business of CRR.
These are just a few basic steps we can be taking as a
community to continue on the current upward trend. Next, I’d like to talk more in depth about
the virtues of replatting. Replatting
was a hot button issue some four or five years ago. I’ll admit I was not the first person to jump
on board as I felt the financial impact during the recession could be
devastating for the community as a whole.
As it turns out, it really hasn’t affected the community in a negative
way at all. In turn, I believe it has
helped the community. I am a believer in
the practice of replatting and have been preaching the message loud and clear. I know that many have joined me and are spreading
the good word of replatting. One of my
readers who I will only refer to as ‘Tizzy’ (as they wish to remain anonymous)
communicates frequently with me and was partly responsible for spurning the
idea of this article. Now….on with the
show……
- CRR should be communicating CRR owned lot availability to owners with contiguous lots. This should be in the form of direct mailers, phone calls and/or e-mails. I watch property availability because it is interesting to me, but part time RV owners may not visit CRR frequently enough to know a lot is available, or whether it is considered ‘contiguous’ for the purpose of replatting.
- CRR should seriously negotiate with contiguous owners to sell the lots under an agreement that they will be replatted within 120 days. With this, we also need to make sure that owners understand the costs of the septic systems. Take for instance that Lot A shares a tank with two other owners and Lot B shares a tank with four other owners. They would now be responsible for the repair costs of 50% of one tank and 25% of another tank should an issue arise with one of them. I can only guess this is a something that most people don’t think about.
Now I’m going to wander into some new territory and will be
interested to hear what my readers think.
- We should re-address the building rules in the RV section to approve larger storage on replatted lots that consist of two or more lots. And, when I say storage I actually mean single car garages. OK, so now you’re thinking I’m off my meds and have wandered too far off track…..but not really. Remember what I said earlier about consistency and higher end buyers. Many people look to downsize, but without proper storage you end up with messy properties. Furthermore, consistently constructed garages would create a re-occurring theme through the RV section just as the roof-overs have. Additionally, each garage (should the owner choose to construct) would have to adhere to identical building plans which could be scaled smaller (not larger) if required due to available space and setbacks since the RV lots can be quite irregular at times. The garages would have to be built on a concrete pad with no floor penetrations and nothing additional could be added to the structure beyond the approved plans. My recommended maximum size would be 20X20 with 8’ sidewalls. Siding and color options are at the owner’s discretion so long as they meet ARC guidelines, but the architecture would remain IDENTICAL. Think of the type of buyer and elevated appearance we would begin developing if we tried this one idea? Many owners would appreciate the ability to store their ‘toys’ for their weekend trips and not have to haul everything with them. It would also provide plenty of storage to keep a tidy and well manicured property.
So, there are some ideas for you to think about. I’d be interested in hearing your
thoughts. You can post in the comments
section below or e-mail me directly. My
address is listed in the upper left of the screen. I’m going to head back out to enjoy the
splendor of summer along the Coosawattee River.
Till next time,
Chris
10 comments:
I don't know that much about the re-platting process, to be honest, so I won't comment on that part of your blog. But I also agree that it's time to stop referring to this section as "the campground" and maybe start calling it the "RV Park" for a few reasons.
One, more and more people are now living here full-time..."camping" seems more like a week-end trip, or vacation getaway spot.
Two, we have two other areas that are actual 'campgrounds', specifically set up for tent camping, as well as week-end (or vacation) RV campers. There's no long-term connection to CRRA at these sites at all, other than possibly the campground manager's sites at each campground. But there's a community campground bathroom and shower building, picnic areas, etc., and many visitors get confused when told to come to THE campground and residents of CRRA usually mean the RV area because we're used to it, but those unfamiliar with the resort aren't.
Three, as you said in your blog, many of the RV's here that have really nice roof-overs, and some with nice additions (which I'll address in a bit), no longer even resemble a 'camper' but instead, look more like HOMES, or tiny houses, which adds to the confusion for many on WHY this is called a 'campground'.
I'd love to see Coosawattee start referring to this area as the RV Park, or better yet, the RV Area (so that it's not referred to as a 'trailer park' by some), or even the 'Recreational Living Area' since the Riverside Pool is in this vicinity, as well.
There are many reasons for 'upgrading' the name as we continue to 'upgrade' and improve the appearance of the RV Neighborhood. :)
Now about the 'additions' to RV's, which your point about garages brought to mind, only my concern is only about members that own single lots, no replatting involved, but desperately need more storage as well....
As you may know, there's an election going on for the Board of Directors and I'm blessed to be unopposed in my quest for the upcoming vacant campground seat (there's that word again! LOL!). Anyway, while going around and meeting and talking to many people in the RV area, one thing that I heard repeated very often was that people didn't understand why there are so many RV's in here that have been able to add rooms to their RV's but it's no longer allowed. While trying to find answers, I heard several versions of what happened, but the most consistent answer I got was that the covenants do NOT allow this but at one point a few years ago, we had a board that didn't enforce the covenants and allowed people to add rooms. Then another board was elected and they DID start enforcing the covenants and put a stop to it. Something about adding a room no longer makes them 'movable' RV's. Now an owner may add a screened in porch with specific guidelines that is, essentially, a full-length room, but has screened in windows. However, this screened in porch ALSO no longer makes the RV 'movable'.
So, the question I was asked multiple times was "Why can my neighbor have a REAL room added to THEIR RV and make it look like a house and give them more room, but I can only have a screened-in room that's the same size that I can't use for the whole year?"
Any ideas on how to answer their question, Chris? Or how to better explain to them how it happened in the first place? I'd greatly appreciate any information you have, and would love to hear your thoughts and opinion on the whole thing.
Thank you so much! Have a great weekend!
Good morning, Amie. First, I'd like to say thank you for taking such a proactive stance regarding the RV area and your willingness to serve on the BOD. As you know, you will be subject to unnecessary scrutiny, but stay the course and stand by your ideals.
Second, you will also have to overcome old mindsets and 'ghosts of the past'. Unfortunately, construction issues have always plagued the RV area and still do to this day. Some people play by the rules and other don't. From my interpretation of the building rules in the RV area you are not permitted to have a four-season room as solid windows are not permitted, but must be screened. There are also attachment requirements (how the addition attaches to the RV). As I said, some play by the rules and other don't.
The rapscallions that don't follow the rules were the reason for the building moratorium several years ago (I want to say that started around 2007/2008, but I could be mistaken). And, honestly, are usually the major contributors to blight since much of what is built was done so under cover and typically does not adhere to ARC guidelines or other applicable building codes.
If there has been recent building that is out of compliance and WAS approved by the ARC then your neighbors should make mention to management or at a board meeting. Any construction issues are tough since CRR is so massive and there really is no way to police everyone all the time. It would be nice if all people had the respect for others to police themselves!
Another issue is that some construction was allowed years ago that was not monitored as no rules were in place. Most often, these are the structures that folks refer to, but are no longer permitted. Let's just say that the building requirements in the RV section were haphazard and unregulated at best. That isn't an excuse, but much of what is not liked about the area now is the cause.
My best recommendation would be to tell people that the RV section is a work in progress and that the work you do on the BOD will help to level the playing field and (over time) correct the wrongs that were permitted in the past. Also assure your constituents that despite past indiscretions of building, ALL owners will be held to the current standards and that doing the 'right thing' is the best thing for all owners in the area.
As a sidebar - I'd like to bring the RV on 12th Street with the collapsed roof to your attention:) Really needs to go and is probably a health and safety issue.
Best wishes,
Chris
Amie, I should also mention that I don't believe the rules state how many or how big the screen windows have to be.......just saying:)
No need to mention the camper on 12th...been on my radar even before the roof collapsed. :(
My wife and I bought in CRR July of last year. We like to think of it as we rescued a property. When we purchased this property, the camper on it looked horrible. But with a little TLC, and a few hundred bucks, it actually is quite nice for a weekend in the mountains. I believe this might be a question for Annie, so our camper is older than 15 years old before we attempt to put a roof over on our place with screen porch, will we be required to remove our camper? With me on disability, we don't have a huge amount of funds. ( Our prayer is to buy a cabin in CRR, when our kids move out, and she can retire. Lol. )
As long as your camper stays inside CRRA you are fine with it being over fifteen years old. IF you were to take it out the gates to go camping somewhere, you wouldn't be able to bring it back in.
Sorry Amie about your name, I'm blind as as a bat and on a iPad (lol). Thank you for your quick response!
Not a problem, Wade. Most people actually know me by Annette. I should probably change my Google profile to show that. Amie was a high school nickname that stuck with me for years, but now I'm more around family than high school friends so Annette is what I hear most nowadays! LOL!
BTW, Chris, I did find this information regarding the window sizes of screen rooms being built on RV's:
E. Roof-Overs may be open or screened. Roof-Overs may also have walls, railings, bannisters and spindles ( up to 42 inches high from the inside floor or ground) as long as the open or screened area above the lower wall is greater than 50% of the total area of the entire wall.
Very good!
Post a Comment