RVs Are Fun!

RV   Can’t you just imagine 900 of these beauties coming east on Rt. 24 in August?    The Sussex County Council has on its agenda, for Tuesday the 9th of December, time to discuss, and vote on the proposed RV campgrounds for the Angola and Long Neck  areas.

Now I could come here and tell you about all of the people who live in the area who are opposed to this idea. They say that to have these RV campgrounds in the Angola and Long Neck areas, will ruin the nature of the community. Reeeeeeeeeeaaaly?

I wonder how many of those opposing these parks, are born and raised in Sussex County?  If not, then I wonder what the nature of the area was when they showed up?

They are talking about the nice quiet atmosphere in their trailer parks. But don’t let those nasty RVs come into the neighbor hood. Oh, they will cry for protection from the mean “LAND OWNER”, so that they keep their $2,000.00 mobile home on land that the owner could sell and make a fortune.

But don’t let anyone else get a foot hold here.

This is the worse kind of hypocrisy, many of those opposing the park, most likely moved here from a neighboring state. Many may have moved into the area  when there were but two trailer parks on Camp Arrowhead Rd. But they moved here, and someone had to sell them their ground, many live in some of the nicest developments in the area. Others have retired to their old summer trailer.

But they came here, and they spent money here, and they liked it, and moved here. They are citizens of the state of Delaware, and of Sussex County, and their voices deserve to be heard on this issue. They have every right to oppose this park.

And then tomorrow, during the County Council meeting, if it comes to a vote, the Council will vote in favor of this park.

Why? Because it is the law.

RV1   Because, if the developer has met all of the requirements under the current law, then the Council is bound to approve it. If the Council were to reject this proposal, they would be opening the County, and the citizens, up to yet another law suit.

But more importantly, this is a property rights issue. Some land owner has decided to either sell their land to a developer, or will develop it themselves, they have a right to sell, or do with their property as they see fit and which the law allows.

The people living in the Angola area who oppose this park should have started years ago to change the laws, further restrict the private land owner, along with rent control, controlled by the government.

However,  I don’t see how the Council can do anything but vote in favor of this park. Even Joan Deaver should be forced to vote in favor of this park, oh she will no doubt wax poetic about the environment, and how so many of her constituents contacted her asking her to stop this park.

Of course since the rest of the Council, Council President Mike Vincent, Sam Wilson, Vance Phillips, and George Cole will vote in favor of this park, Joan Deaver can cast her protest vote upon the iron breastplate of the BIG NASTY DEVELOPER!

Notice that I did not talk of infrastructure, nor the cost to the county citizens, what I did talk about is the law. This is what government is supposed to do, to exercise the law.  If you don’t like the law, then work to change the law, not merely interpret it.

I have not talked about how many acres, or how many dollars it will cost, or how many people will come here and spend money here, and decide they like it here, and move here, and become citizens of the state of Delaware and Sussex County. And some day, after some of those nine-hundred RVs have decided to retire here, or move here, they will put up hand painted signs saying, “JUST SAY NO TO, ANYTHING!”

RV2  So really, it matters not, be it 900, or 9,000 RVs, it is the law. We should be looking at it as a revenue for the County, that will keep our taxes lower. There will be jobs during the development stage. There will be venders and suppliers who will benefit. Area stores, both chains and local will benefit. Restaurants will benefit.

So to all the latest NIMBYs, someone had to put up with you moving into the area, so either make the best of it, or move, “again”!


37 Comments on "RVs Are Fun!"

  1. Wrong again says:

    I believe that Councilman Vance Phillips still sits on the Council thru the end of the calendar year. You could (and should) check this out for truth, a habit this site should, or could, use?

  2. Frank Knotts says:

    Thank you Wrong Again, I did get ahead of myself. My apologies and I have made the corrections.

  3. fightingbluehen says:

    The problem I have is with the zoning.
    You have people ,who in good faith, have bought $500,000 homes in an area that was zoned agricultural/residential.
    So what are we saying to prospective buyers or builders of fine properties in the area? Buy or build at your own risk because zoning actually means nothing in Sussex County?

  4. Frank Knotts says:

    FB, what about the people who in good faith were happy with their single wide trailers, but whose property tax went up because of the $500,000 homes that went in. Things change.

  5. waterpirate says:

    To mount a successfull blockage of a zoning change, it has to based on more than just I do not want it near my home. The plan faced several obstacles that te state and county placed before them. The obstacles were met with good planning and execution of a solution. Concerns met and addressed = zoning change granted.

    I find it botersome that ever since I can remember. The last person to immigrate to Sussex wants to shut the door behind them, just like all the others before them. It is naive of people to ASSUME that the woods or farm field near their homes will remain in that state forever.

  6. delacrat says:


    Are these 900 RVs moving in next to where you live ?

  7. Frank Knotts says:

    I’m sorry Delacrat are you only concerned with things that happen next to your home? As I said this is not about who lives next to it, it’s about the law.

  8. fightingbluehen says:

    To get from the Love Creek park to rt.1 you have to either go on Robinsonville Rd. to Plantation Rd, or Cedar Grove road to Plantation road, or you could take a right on Mullberry Rd from Cedar grove road to rt. 24.
    Getting on rt 24 from mulberry rd is sketchy even in a car. Getting on Plantation Rd from either road is not much better.
    Is the work they are currently doing at the junction of Cedar Grove an Plantation Rd being done to accommodate the RV park?

  9. fightingbluehen says:

    I have a feeling that the RV park was a step back and punt plan because the real-estate market was in the crapper at the time, and who knew when it would rebound.
    It’s a different story now. I would imagine that it would be more profitable to develop the land into upscale single family homes at this point.

  10. mouse says:

    Rezoning is not an entitlement. One would think that the rich white trash owning the land might want to leave a legacy behind besides campground trailer parks for 2nd homes that don’t pay property taxes. Rt 24 is a very dangerous road now in the winter. The “law” was made by cabals in wester Sussex county who don’t give a damn about quality of life for anyone but themselves

  11. mouse says:

    And what of the property rights of the existing people not to have their quality of life and property value diminished? And what of Love creek? A regional resource that will be adversely impacted to profit 1 person. How does one make a left onto Rt 24? No impact fees from the parasitic wealthy interests who create the need for infrastructure making maillions but not paying a dime? Why do property right obsessors want socialism for the wealthy having everyone pick up the price of the profits of the developers?

  12. delacrat says:

    “As I said this is not about who lives next to it, it’s about the law.” – Frank

    “If the law supposes that,” said Mr. Bumble,… “the law is a ass—a idiot. If that’s the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is that his eye may be opened by experience—by experience.” – CHARLES DICKENS, Oliver Twist, chapter 51, p. 489 (1970).

  13. mouse says:

    The law is written by a cabal of crooked western sussex councilmen who have no interests in the state’s regional resources in East Sussex

  14. mouse says:


    Dear Mr. Representative/Senator:

    It should be obvious to everyone that development in easter Sussex County, particularly in the Rt 24 corrador has over whelmed the roads and safety of our residents. Rt 24 is a 2 lane road with no left turn lanes nor the ability of thousands of new lot owners to be able to safely turn on Rt 24. In addition, it is obvious to anyone who doesn’t reject emperical science that our inland bays are in embarassing shape denying residents the ability to recreation to swim or eat shellfish from our bays. All of this with untold new development lots in the works where no impact fee is changed nor are there any means to provide infrastructure. I would ask that you please take the transfer tax away from the Sussex Council and put it directly to land aquisition. The transfer tax is a perverse incentive for the County Council to allow irresponsible development and forever damage our quality of life so a few may enrich themselves and the cabal that vote for all this.


  15. Cynic Acid says:

    Forget about Route 24.

    Better yet :

    Imaging 900 RV’s parked in and around the Circle on a Tuesday morning in August during a County Council meeting.

  16. Frank Knotts says:

    FBH, did they close Rt. 24? Because I am sure they could get to Rt. 1 using 24. Which brings me to Mouse’s question about left turns onto 24. Well Mouse there are lights at Camp Arrowhead, and Connley’s Chapel Rd. For left turns. As for your letter, you show your lack of knowledge, land use issues are a county issue that Reps. And Sens. Have no control of. And Mouse, did you move here? Are you as worried about the peoe already living on Love Creek who piped the sewer directly into Love Creek?
    Or is this all about you? And does anyone really think that 900 RVs will be showing up all at the same time?

  17. mouse says:

    I’m well aware that the county is not responsible for funding and building roads but that doesn’t mean they don’t have some responsibility with coordination of the same as well as a responsibility not to overwhelm the infrastructure to make a few rich people richer and let the rest of us pay for the mess because of some obsession over property rights. I’ve been here for 1/2 my life so I am 1/2 native. That gives me rights to preserve what I have. There are several miles of Rt 24 where there are many developments without traffic lights to turn left on 24. BTW I do not believe there are any direct sewer connections to Love Creek. Ofuscation..

  18. Frank Knotts says:

    So Mouse is the area the same as it was when you moved here? Or did you and others moving here impact the area.

  19. Honi Soit says:

    Frank, I’m sure you know that each county must develop and submit to the state a 5-year comprehensive plan for its approval. The plan serves as a road map for how development will proceed and how land use will be governed. So the state does indeed have a role in land use issues…albeit a broad role.

    Now, the state certified Sussex’s last plan in 2008 and it calls for strengthening agriculture, protecting open space, fostering more affordable housing, and encouraging green construction. The problem is twofold: 1] Council thumbs it nose at the Plan by not updating its ordinances (laws) to bring them in keeping with its own plan, and 2] that state has no teeth to force Council to implement the plan.

    BTW, Council voted down Love Creek by 3-2. Sam and Vance voted yes of course. This is the same Sam who complained last month that the roads are so clogged he can’t get his farm machinery on them. His solution was to put up signs at the county line saying we’re full up, at capacity.

  20. fightingbluehen says:

    “FBH, did they close Rt. 24? Because I am sure they could get to Rt. 1 using 24.”

    I gave the 24 option. I said it was sketchy even in a car.
    That intersection of Mullbery Knoll rd and 24 backs up traffic every time someone makes a left there off of 24. They probably will need a left turn lane there at some point.
    I can only imagine what it would look like if you threw RV’s trying to get on to 24 in the mix.
    Glad they voted it down.
    Now hopefully they will build some nice houses with big lawns that I can take care of.

  21. Frank Knotts says:

    FBH, sorry missed that. Still not sure why everyone imagines all 900 RVs coming in convoy.
    Honi yes, but the submission of that plan is intended as a heads up not as a veto power. It is intended to allow the state to also plan for the growth.
    This split decision would seem to open the county up to a suit. They better have a good reason for approving one and denying the other.

  22. mouse says:

    I moved into a neighborhood that was not rezoned. I built a house and left every tree outside where the house stands and build a house that isn’t some generic abomination to the landscape. The wealthy land raping cabal lost the approval at council a little while ago. YAY

  23. mouse says:

    The (Edited for content. Frank Knotts)is off the council in a few months. The hayseed cabal is next

  24. mouse says:

    We need a new land use plan that includes forest preservation. The parasitic cabals who want to plaster their ugly brown high density houses everywhere are threatening my drinking water. I have propertery right and I demand my drinking water be protected and not ruined to make some POS developer richer

  25. Frank Knotts says:

    So mouse, only your water is important? And how many trees were cut down for the development you live in and does your waste not impact the environment? But don’t bother answering direct questions, just say cabal one more time it sounds so scary.

  26. mouse says:

    What’s the point except to create apologists diversions for land raping developers? . My point is that ground water is an improtant drinking water source for all of us. I thought you may better relate if it was only the selfish individual’s property rights that mattered. The development I live has more trees than any development in the area and was built long ago before this endless paving and deforestation started overcrowding eveything that’s here. Have you no sense of decency?

  27. waterpirate says:


    So Mice, tell me about your vast knowledge of the hydrology and availability of groundwater. I will make it easier on you and limit your answer to Eastern sussex only. Note to mice, quoting the crap online from the 1950’s DGS survey is out of date, so do not bother. Insert foot in mouth in 5,4,3,2,1, GO!

  28. Honi Soit says:

    @Frank: “The comprehensive] plan is intended as a heads up not as a veto power. It is intended to allow the state to also plan for the growth.”

    I think it’s intended as more than a heads-up to the State of what the County has in mind to do. It’s also intended to make planning among all players (the state, counties and municipalities) compatible and consistent. At the end of day though the County can do what it wants. And by and large it does.

  29. Frank Knotts says:

    WP don’t expect an answer, the opposers usually only have the most basic rhetoric.
    Honi I think we are in agreement. The infrastructure failure is because the state fails to keep up with the progress of the county. Choosing rather to try and obstruct through regulations.

  30. Frank Knotts says:

    Mouse has now gone to the “my development has been here a long time ” argument. Mouse to say your development was there before the endless development only shows your hypocrisy since even if it were he first ever development it is a part of it.

  31. mouse says:

    Well, I can tell you that all of of our drinking water comes from ground water in Sussex and all of the surface aquifer is comtaminated with nitrates and much with MTBE, benzene and agricultural chemicals. The lot my home is on didn’t have to be rezoned so some millionaire could rip out all the trees, pollute the bay and put in mobile 2nd homes that don’t pay property tax.Nor did it single handedly create a traffic safety issue. Big difference

  32. mouse says:

    So the conservative republican argument is that nothing can be denied or limited?

  33. Frank Knotts says:

    First of all Mouse, no the conservative answer is, that you have to follow the law, if you don’t like the law, then convince enough people to change the law.
    Now let me address your first comment about drinking water. Since all of the people get their water from the same place, then they are polluting their water as well.
    I can almost guarantee you that at some point the lot your home sets on had to be zoned.
    As for your jealousy of millionaires, well that seems a bit petty, but hey, it’s your business.
    You do show a total lack of knowledge however when you say, ” and put in mobile 2nd homes that don’t pay property tax.” Really you should do some homework before passing around your class warfare tripe. Do you really think that there is no property tax paid on those lots? WOW! The park owners pay the property tax, and you can bet that that is factored into the lot rent, well at least before they cried for rent control.
    As for whether or not your home single handedly created a safety hazard? Well no, but if said hazard does exist, then your home along with every other home is a part of it.
    Personally I don’t feel that it is the volume of traffic that creates the safety hazard, it is the lack of driving skills of those on the road, most likely people to busy complaining about the traffic to pay attention to their driving.

  34. waterpirate says:

    Your educated and informed response to my question is the above? Your ignorance of the topic and issues you brought up are as bright as the North Star. Do some research before you make broad sweeping comments.

  35. Frank Knotts says:

    Is this what George Cole meant when he was talking about affordable housing.

  36. mouse says:

    Perhaps you could specifically show where I am wrong? Or is attacking all you got?

Got something to say? Go for it!