There is a plan to modify our most precious amenity by dumping massive amounts of debris and calling it a berm at the beach edge of our spring. The berm will be covered with grassy plants and four footbridges. While dredging the spring may be a great thing to do, the debris should be removed and trucked away, not dumped at the edge of the water to create a berm, plants, and bridges.
Further, there is no height limit in the permit, and in addition to the berm there is a plan for more dumping to be spread out and raise the elevation on the open field play area. The plan will increase flooding in the backyards of the river homes. Rocks on the banks will help with erosion, but the rocks will not stop an increase in water volume pushed. Also, a berm will take valuable recreation space where residents enjoy grilling, canopy tents, games, and lounge chairs. Vision will be blocked and hindered to monitor kids swimming from the recreation and lounge area and the only access to see or feel the water will be over four little footbridges.
We have been told by the board that the berm is a requirement by St. Johns. Although the berm is allowed by St. Johns as part of our permit request, they have made clear that it is not a requirement. We also do not have a required county permit, just one from SJWMD. Your signature is asking for a permit change to remove the berm and extra dumping on the land in the plan. Your signature is also asking for a rendering image to see what it will look like before it's started.
We just voted to keep our rights for a say in amenity modifications and the board plans alone to modify this amenity anyway. This is about a blocking berm, but it's also about the board listening to and respecting that the residents made clear the intent to have a vote for any amenity modifications. Let's keep the access and view open! Let's avoid encroaching flood waters pushed! Let's keep our voice and vote for amenity modifications! Thank you!
(note: donation link to follow signature is not for this effort, all donations solely go to the website platform hosting the petition).
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
October 9, 2025
45 Comments
Please do not add a berm. If this is an effort of adding beach sand, that is unnecessary. The sand probably should never been added over the one hundred year history of our spring. It looks beautiful for a few weeks and then that is it. It gets grown over or lifted by floods and redistributed. The natural look of grass is fine and our spring is gorgeous as it is. The berm would be unsightly and a needless expense. If there is a desire to dredge out the sand, then have it hauled away. Also, I hope we can have differences of opinion without tearing into each other! We can work through this. Chris
I oppose the berm as it will create increased liability, and will likely be damaged by the next large storm, adding further liability to resident$$$.
I oppose the berm because it means loss of recreational space and also potential heat gain (dirt/sand versus vegetation).
The visibility in watching the children swimming will be greatly impeded for the parents. A true safety issue.
I’m all for dredging the spring but not blocking the view from the recreation area where we gather, grill, play cornhole and just relax looking out at our spring.
We will like transparency in the costs.
We need a petition to recall this board. It is going way too far infringing on our personal Liberty.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via . Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Copy link or share directly
There is a plan to modify our most precious amenity by dumping massive amounts of debris and calling it a berm at the beach edge of our spring. The berm will be covered with grassy plants and four footbridges. While dredging the spring may be a great thing to do, the debris should be removed and trucked away, not dumped at the edge of the water to create a berm, plants, and bridges.
Further, there is no height limit in the permit, and in addition to the berm there is a plan for more dumping to be spread out and raise the elevation on the open field play area. The plan will increase flooding in the backyards of the river homes. Rocks on the banks will help with erosion, but the rocks will not stop an increase in water volume pushed. Also, a berm will take valuable recreation space where residents enjoy grilling, canopy tents, games, and lounge chairs. Vision will be blocked and hindered to monitor kids swimming from the recreation and lounge area and the only access to see or feel the water will be over four little footbridges.
We have been told by the board that the berm is a requirement by St. Johns. Although the berm is allowed by St. Johns as part of our permit request, they have made clear that it is not a requirement. We also do not have a required county permit, just one from SJWMD. Your signature is asking for a permit change to remove the berm and extra dumping on the land in the plan. Your signature is also asking for a rendering image to see what it will look like before it's started.
We just voted to keep our rights for a say in amenity modifications and the board plans alone to modify this amenity anyway. This is about a blocking berm, but it's also about the board listening to and respecting that the residents made clear the intent to have a vote for any amenity modifications. Let's keep the access and view open! Let's avoid encroaching flood waters pushed! Let's keep our voice and vote for amenity modifications! Thank you!
(note: donation link to follow signature is not for this effort, all donations solely go to the website platform hosting the petition).
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
October 9, 2025
45 Comments
The dredging project should have included removal and disposal of imported material to a more suitable location. If cost was prohibitive, shouldn't that have been part of the problem solving? Was selling the material to an adjacent property owner to fill nearby sinkhole(s) ever considered? That might actually add value to the other property. Perhaps some sort of deal could be made for the value of the material...let's get creative!
Please do not add a berm. If this is an effort of adding beach sand, that is unnecessary. The sand probably should never been added over the one hundred year history of our spring. It looks beautiful for a few weeks and then that is it. It gets grown over or lifted by floods and redistributed. The natural look of grass is fine and our spring is gorgeous as it is. The berm would be unsightly and a needless expense. If there is a desire to dredge out the sand, then have it hauled away. Also, I hope we can have differences of opinion without tearing into each other! We can work through this. Chris
I oppose the berm as it will create increased liability, and will likely be damaged by the next large storm, adding further liability to resident$$$.
I oppose the berm because it means loss of recreational space and also potential heat gain (dirt/sand versus vegetation).
The visibility in watching the children swimming will be greatly impeded for the parents. A true safety issue.
I’m all for dredging the spring but not blocking the view from the recreation area where we gather, grill, play cornhole and just relax looking out at our spring.
We will like transparency in the costs.
We need a petition to recall this board. It is going way too far infringing on our personal Liberty.
Help this petition grow
Share it with friends to help reach 250 signatures.
Sign Petition
We never post to your account. Social sign-in is used only to verify your signature.
Add a comment?
Your signature will be added via .
Tell others why you're signing — it's optional.
Signing with Google or Facebook verifies your signature instantly — no email needed.
By signing, you accept iPetitions Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Share Petition
Don't stop at signing, share the petition link with friends to multiply our impact
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
The dredging project should have included removal and disposal of imported material to a more suitable location. If cost was prohibitive, shouldn't that have been part of the problem solving? Was selling the material to an adjacent property owner to fill nearby sinkhole(s) ever considered? That might actually add value to the other property. Perhaps some sort of deal could be made for the value of the material...let's get creative!