WATERFORD ON FOREST LAKE
History
of Development
Several Waterford residents who
attended the 2005 FLHA Annual Meeting questioned “what benefit do we get as a member of the
Forest Lake Home-owners Association”
Some actually felt that the FLHA Board was ignoring the Waterford side
and thought they might need to start their own association.
Some historical background is given
here which hopefully shows a way to improve some of the negative feelings that
seem to have arisen recently. I believe that once the history is understood
people will see that certain issues and attitudes originated long ago when the
lake was created. Many of our FLHA Boards have failed to recognize this and
simply ignored the situation. This is an attempt to understand why.
The community we now know as
“Waterford” began in 1964 when the lake was created. This is the area on the east side of Knollwood Road The land was
divided by a stream called “Middle Swamp Branch”. The stream was actually the dividing line for
ownership of the land. Four or five
people owned land on the north side of the stream and one person (John Ratliff)
owned the land on the south side of the stream. The Ratliff portion equaled
about one-half of the new lake. Neither
he, nor any of the land-owners (on the north side) wanted to become part of a
new subdivision that was being proposed for the other side of Knollwood Road (by Ed Young and Foster
Jeffords). It seems that the only thing
they were willing to accept was the flooding of their lands,
and that the new lake would be called “Forest Lake”.
When a dam was built and the flooding
of the land occurred it, of course, created some “buried” land, land that was
no longer accessible (because it was now underwater). The accessible land became lakefront property and development
started. The lots were formed under the
direction of a different development company named “Waterford on Forest Lake,
Inc.” This was a name chosen the principal
landowners on the north side of the stream –Gassaway’s and Ward’s. The President of the development company was
Sandra Gassaway, and the Secretary was Folliine
Guilford. A sign was put up on the
property and it then began to be called “Waterford on Forest Lake”.
Ownership transferred to the new lot
buyers but the seller(s) maintained ownership of the lakebed portion, i.e., the
lakebed did not transfer with the lot(s).This is different than the other side
of the lake, where ownership of the lakebed was eventually turned over to a
homeowner association. It is not clear
if a homeowner association was formed for the Waterford development.
Owning the lakebed has proven to have
several important advantages for
the homeowner’s
association on the other side of the lake (FLHA). The primary one is that it gives you complete
control of anything over it, i.e.,
above the water. This applies mostly to
docks, piers or structures over the water.
Rules, for example, have been established on the west side restricting
docks to certain lengths –but, this does not apply to the Waterford
side. They did not follow the same
covenants and restrictions as were adopted for the west side. This is the root cause of many (FLHA)
management problems, i.e., that the different “communities” within Forest Lake
follow separate covenants and restrictions. It becomes hard, for example, to tell someone
they can’t built a dock or shed when they can look across the lake on the other
(Waterford) side and see one! This
exemplifies our management problems.
When everyone does not fall under the same rules it tends to cause
disharmony and a separatist attitude.
Several historical problems should be
mentioned here. One being that John
Ratliff, owner of all the land on the south side of the stream did not sell or
develop any of his land. As many of us
know, it remained a woods-like environment until it was sold in 2003. Many problems were created by Mr. Ratliff’s
interpretation of how the lake was to be used. For example, he allowed
outsiders to use his portion of the lake (to fish) He actually put up signs saying the
general public could fish on the lake for a fee. He even rented boats to them!
Needless to say, the general public
began to think they could use all of the lake and they began migrating to the
other side (west) of the lake. The Homeowner’s
association actually prosecuted several individuals who fished on it’s west side. This is a direct violation of the FLHA
covenants and restrictions. It was finally declared in the Courts that Forest
Lake was a private lake and an agreement was reached with Mr. Ratliff that
public fishing was not to be permitted. As part of that agreement he insisted
that FLHA members not fish within 100 feet of his property.
Mr. Ratliff, as well as landowners on
the other (north) side of the stream pay the property
taxes on the lakebed year-after-year until recently, when he sold the land (and
lakebed) to Phillip Lowe, a Forest Lake resident who created “Forest Lake
Shores”. Mr. Lowe now pays property tax
on approximately one-half of the lakebed (formerly Ratliff’s) which includes a
big part of the dam as well. He also honors the agreement with Mr. Ratliff to
provide access to the dam by the Association for maintenance purposes.
Purchasers of the Waterford lots pay
property taxes on the land abutting the lake and many of them have joined the Forest Lake
Homeowner’s Association (which was formed later). The original owners, however, have never
joined the homeowner association. Most
do not live in Forest Lake. This is very contrary to what occurred on the other
side, i.e., the lake area on the west side of Knollwood
Road. Here ownership of the lakebed was
transferred by the original landholders to a homeowner association. The Waterford developers apparently never
created its’ own homeowner association.
What exists in
Waterford now is twenty-nine (29) homes in a community named “Waterford on
Forest Lake”. Thirteen (13) of these homes are on the water. Six other homes
touch the water but are considered part of Mallard Pointe (5 pay dues). A total of seventeen (17) of the Waterford
homeowners are members of the Forest Lake Homeowner’s Association. Two lot owners have joined as well. The dam
is physically located on this side and a thirty year agreement for access to it
exists. A portion of the dam however, sits on other people’s property (Mallard Pointe)
and the association does not have any agreement with them. An easement is maintained for access to the
lake by Tony Hall –developer of Mallard Pointe, for the Mallard Pointe
residents.
As the history shows, Waterford became a community on it’s own. It never
was a part of the overall Forest Lake development. The original landowners simply did not want
to be a part of the “other” Forest Lake.
To this day, they (or their heirs) just routinely pay the tax bills
without ever questioning it –thereby perpetuating the management problem in my
opinion. In contrast, the “other” Forest
Lake pays the taxes on the lakebed through their homeowner’s association –the
original owners are completely out of the picture.
How to straighten this out should become a
“project” for a future FLHA Board of Directors.
I think it just hasn’t gotten much of our attention. We generally wind up just saying “let them do
their own thing –we do not have any jurisdiction on that side”. That’s the easy way out. However, what do we do when the homeowners in
Waterford want to join the homeowner’s association? –take their money and tell
them we have no jurisdiction on their side of the lake? This seems to be the feeling that came up at
the 2005 Annual Meeting.
I think the value of ending the
management confusion would be well worth it.
For the record, the property taxes on
the west side of Knollwood are approxi-mately
$700 per year (for about 150 acres). It
is likely to be in the neighbor-hood of $200 per year on the Waterford side
–and this would be split among 3 or 4 owners.
(needs to be verified).
By conscious choice, Waterford never
followed the 1964 Forest Lake covenants and restrictions. It was never covered in the “Grant of
Authority” given by Ed Young and Foster Jeffords to the homeowner
association. Each side of the lake
developed separately and had it’s own rules. Every new Association Board member soon
realizes this and, rightly or wrongly, believes it has no jurisdiction on the
Waterford side of the lake. This is the
root of the problem. Having a large lake
divided in two with limited management of one side just doesn’t work.
The situation is further complicated by
ownership by multiple parties of the Waterford lakebed. What this means, is that any discussions or
negotiations will need to be done with three or four separate entities. Obviously, this adds another dimension to the
problem. It means, for example, that everyone would need to transfer their
ownership of the lakebed to allow the association to manage it in the same way
as the “other” side. As I see it, it
should be either all-or-nothing. The Association needs to have authority over all the lakebed to manage effectively.
There should be no sections where the rules don’t apply.
Despite the differing rules for
managing each side of the lake, the Forest Lake Homeowners Association has “gotten involved” in the Waterford
community. This is likely to have occurred due to several Waterford residents joining
the FLHA and becoming
Board members. I believe
that the fact that several residents did
join, indicates a willingness to become a part of the greater Forest Lake
community. This is probably a good point
to start with, i.e., working on unifying the community. The Association we did things in Waterford
because residents wanted to become part of the community. We just need to follow through and make it
official.
Some of the things that have been done are: a boat ramp was constructed by the
association , log jams blocking the spillway are removed, the lake is lowered
when needed, sterile carp were added for vegetation control, weeds are sprayed, trees are planted and
maintained on the causeway, etc. –things that we all benefit from (east and
west).
A final thought has to do with our
“sanctuary” status. All of Forest Lake
was declared a wildlife sanctuary in 1980.
This is a South Carolina Public Law (Act No. 328). It helps protect the wildlife population in
the entire community (both sides of the lake) and prevents firearms from being
used. This was accomplished through the efforts of Verdie
Jeffords, wife of Foster Jeffords, a founding father. I believe it is another one of those
“benefits” that we all
enjoy.
I think the real bottom line is that
benefit does come everyone’s way because of the beauty we all share in our
surroundings. There is no less benefit
for those on the Waterford side –they are not excluded from the Sanctuary. The homeowner’s association does keep the
lake up for everyone! In this respect it
is not two separate lakes, but rather, one lake. The Waterford side is very
much a part of Forest Lake and should not feel neglected. It is the lack of management authority that
confuses things.
Unfortunately, each FLHA Board seems to
have dealt with Waterford differently. The many FLHA rules and regulations
adopted over the years have never applied to the Waterford side. This creates a real dilemma trying to manage
things.
How to correct
the situation is the food-for-thought” provided here. It will take some creative thinking and a lot
of work to straighten things out. I
believe the end result will be a much more manageable homeowner’s association
–one that has a clear plan for the future of Forest Lake.
Frank
M. McIntyre,
FLHA
Historian, February
2005 (revised July, 2005)