POA Resistance To Improvements To Paradise Lake
 

The May 2013 Bulletin includes a letter to the Editor of the POA Bulletin by Jack Weber:

"Your recent article in the latest bulletin
concerning Lake Paradise said because of
possible flooding it is hard to determine
if this site can be updated. Yes, it would be
expensive, but in order to make it look like
all our other beautiful surroundings, I think it
would take some dredging and deep enough
so that people who live in the area would not
have a worry. As I remember, the biggest
rains that we have had over the years have
not actually gone into homes but just close. I
may be wrong, but this is the way I remember it.
If this lake was dredged and then liner
protection like they have done in other
places, then I feel this could be accomplished.
If you think about it, many new people, and even
people who live south of here sometime for one
reason or another pass this location. With all the
beautiful areas that we have here in The Villages,
it is a shame that we have this [a dry lake bed]
to look forward to each year. Thank you. Jack Weber"

The POA Bulletin editor responded:

"Editor’s Note: Your comments have been
raised and discussed at several AAC meetings. The net of
the discussions is that we would all like to see all of our
water features filled to the high water mark at all times.
Unfortunately, even if we had the water to do
that, (which we don’t), it would defeat their
function of storm water control. While Lake
Paradise has not had flooding in recent years,
we have not artificially raised the level of the
water in Lake Paradise during the dry season
either. It is important that there be capacity in
the lake so that when the rainy season arrives
the lake can handle whatever level of rainfall
we receive. Dredging the lake and lining the
dredged area would not affect the appearance
of the shoreline and the island around the
“waterfall”, they would still be dry during
the drought periods. These unlined areas
would still be needed if we are to have any
capacity for significant runoff during the
rainy season.

In Florida we must deal with a dry season
and a rainy season – that’s nature. Almost all
of the lined ponds here in The Villages have
substantial areas above the level of the liners
to assure sufficient percolation into the
ground to dispose of rain water to allow capacity
for future rain water runoff. Dredging
water features – making them deeper – and
lining them may increase the likelihood of
subsurface sinkhole activity as a result of less
groundcover over the lime rock and the increased
concentration of weight in that area.
In addition, such dredging activity would require
substantial deviation from the existing
storm water management plan and there are
indications that approval of such changes
would be highly unlikely from the Southwest
Florida Water Management District."

The Editor's response sounds very scientific and knowing with regard to a likely response by the Southwest Florida Water Management District.

I agree that the Southwest Florida Water Management District would not "likely approve" a change to the hydrology of Paradise Lake.

The following graphics taken from the St. Johns River Water Management District site reveal that St. Johns River Water Management District is responsible for Paradise Lake and not the Southwest Florida Water Management District.

This brings to question the credibility of the entire analysis by the POA Editor of the hydrological effects of dredging and lining the lake to improve its water retention.

This is the entire SJRWMD:
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...verWMD-All.jpg

This is the region including Paradise Lake:
http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...ntheSJRWMD.jpg

I realize that this post could be considered "political" and therefore, not allowed. I prefer to think of it as a comment on the bias of the POA. Note, I have not made any statement for or against making improvements to Paradise Lake.

Jerry Lester

I don't understand how this reflects bias. It appears that since the bulk of TV is under the SFWMD, the writer simply was confused about which entity would have final say. The concerns regarding capacity for storm water retention are logical. Do you think the St. Johns District has a different philosophy?

More On the POA Editorial Response to Improving Paradise Lake Hydrology
 

I don't pretend to know what the philosophy's of the water management districts are. I object to the implication that the AAC/POA has some inside information from the SWFWMD that indicates that they would not approve an application for modification of the Paradise Lake basin, especially since SWFWMD is not the approval agency. To imply is purely speculation to support an opinion held by some of the AAC board.

If the Developer can transfor Cherry Lake into Lake Sumter, then an engineering study could show how to transform Paradise Lake into something equally appealing. Both Cherry Lake and Paradise Lake were/are natural water basins subject to being wet or dry, depending on the season. (I have confirmed this by looking at historical aerial photographs of the two basins.)

But, just look at Lake Sumter, now: Beautiful!

The members of the AAC are not engineers trained in hydrology. They are simply lay persons with an opinion. An engineering study is required to define how to transform Paradise Lake. The AAC could fund this if there wasn't the bias against improving Paradise Lake.

(I recognize that that this thread should be in the General Forum. My mistake. I don't think I should cross-post?)

Jerry Lester

This post got my attention too.

https://www.talkofthevillages.com/fo...nderson-75294/

Two things come to my mind. First, do they drain water from the lake in the rainy season? If so why? Why not just let the lake deplete itself naturally so that there is water left in it during the dry season?
Second, why is it that this is the only lake that appears to go completely dry. It is a lake that is highly visible to all including outsiders who may be considering buying here. I would thing that we'd want this lake above all to look nice 365 days a year. When it is empty, not only is it an eyesore, but it smells awful as well.
Dredging would make the lake able to hold more water so that the water level would be lower but the bottom could be covered.

More On Paradise Lake Improvement
 

You make very appropriate observations. This lake was an existing natural basin. It was not constructed as a retention pond in the same sense that current retention ponds are. I think it was simply adopted and houses built around it and storm drains directed to it. I attempted to find out more by contacting St. Johns River WMD, but got no response. I think I was ignored because I did not have any official status. The dredging-and-lining proposal sounds reasonable to me, but I think an engineering study is required to determine effective changes to Lake Paradise. I so proposed in the most recent AAC Meeting, minutes of which are not on the website, yet.

I have not made up my mind on a fix for Paradise Lake. It depends on how much it would cost, but I think it deserves a real engineering study and cost estimate so that everyone would know what they are getting in to. Currently, there is only speculation by unqualified AAC Board Members and a cost estimate by the District Property Manager that he admits was done in a half hour on the "back of an envelope."

This is not a sound basis for rejecting improvements to Paradise Lake.

Jerry Lester

jandbrare: You are a brave soul for pursuing this issue. I appalud your research and find your rationale sound.

It is very disappointing to see that the POA and AAC have offered you no support and in fact appear very defensive. It makes one pause to wonder what is going on behind the scenes?

I hope you succeed here becaue it would be a win for all of us.

Help a newbie out here.

What standing/authority does the POA have, to initiate any changes to the lake?

The above posts insinuating that the "POA = Bad" aside, why is the POA being held as the entity unwilling to do anything?

I thought they were but a voice, to counteract the one-sided message we get from the developer/VHA?

.

Improving Paradise Lake Is a No Brainer - Let's Explore
 

I don't understand, either, why the AAC has adopted such a rigid stance for not pursuing improvements. They have convinced the POA that their position is correct. Paradise Lake, when dry, is such an obvious departure from the otherwise exceptional esthetics of The Villages that it is hard to understand why there would not be a more willing attitude on the part of the POA and ACC to bring it into conformance.

I have "no dog in this fight" except that I wish the best for the entire community and am especially sympathetic to those that live around Paradise Lake and the rest of Orange Blossom Hills. I live in Polo Ridge, well out of sight of Paradise Lake and own no property there.

Jerry Lester

It is a misunderstanding to gather that the POA is "...being held as the entity unwilling to do anything." I only intended that the POA be recognized as agreeing with the ACC as they illustrated by their response to the letter to the editor of the POA bulletin, which I quoted in the initial post.

Jerry Lester

Which means what exactly?

Is the ACC the entity that has to initiate any permits and/or mitigation?

Who would pay for the engineering study and/or any subsequent work?

And even if the POA agrees with the ACC and doesn't see the need....where is the developer and VHA on this issue?



In your original post, you said.... One can only conclude, that you must be biased against the POA. :shrug:


.

Response To OnTrack
 

1. Don't know how to clarify what I said.
2. An engineering firm, under contract to the AAC, would request any permits, I suspect, as this would be part of the engineering contract.
3. The ACC would pay for the engineering study and any subsequent work.
4. I don't know of any involvement by the Developer or VHA.
5. "...biased against the POA." I disagree with the stand the POA has taken on this issue. I think the AAC should place a contract for an engineering study to define the scope and cost of the transformation of Paradise Lake. I am a member of the POA and believe they serve a useful purpose.

Jerry Lester

OK, I think I'm now getting a clearer picture of what is really going on here.


Clarity comes from understanding the agenda (hidden or otherwise).

I believe you made yours pretty clear, when trying to dismiss the POA's position/opinion in your original post... In other words, your first post seemed to try and destroy any credibility the POA has....solely because they may have confused which Water District is involved.



My question is, who "controls" the AAC? As I understand it, they are a separate entity. Or are you saying that the POA has the ability to direct the AAC's actions?



Where does the AAC get its funding?



So you are saying that the POA, by not opposing the AAC's position, should get all the blame for nothing being done....and not the VHA or developer?

Help me out here and explain why you haven't taken the VHA to task....for not addressing it either?

Or is it because there is still animosity, that the AAC was formed as a result of the Lawsuit Settlement in early 2008 (in which the developer obviously lost)?



Once again, I'm confused as to the authority the POA has over the AAC...and why the other owners association isn't commenting on it either.



Since we haven't heard any comments about the VHA's role in this....how do you feel about them?



You mentioned above that you "don't have a dog in this fight," but it really seems that your intention is to lay the blame of the AAC's inaction...solely on the shoulders of the POA.

Please explain how I am wrong on that. :shrug:


.

Response To OnTrack 2
 

1. "In other words, your first post seemed to try and destroy any credibility the POA has....solely because they may have confused which Water District is involved." Not at all. It was because their statement implied that they had insight as to how the Water District would respond, but they didn't even know which Water district was cognizant. They were implying that they had insight which they couldn't have had.
   
2. "My question is, who "controls" the AAC? As I understand it, they are a separate entity. Or are you saying that the POA has the ability to direct the AAC's actions?" Not at all. The POA is a separate organization.
   
3. "Where does the AAC get its funding?" As you probably know, the AAC gets its funding from the lawsuit the POA raised.
   
4. "So you are saying that the POA, by not opposing the AAC's position, should get all the blame for nothing being done....and not the VHA or developer?" How on earth did you deduce that? The VHA or Developer has not been involved, to my knowledge.
   
5. "Help me out here and explain why you haven't taken the VHA to task....for not addressing it either?" My post was directed to the POA response in their newsletter. I have no issue with the VHA or the Developer. My post was specifically directed to the POA Editorial response.
   
6. "Or is it because there is still animosity, that the AAC was formed as a result of the Lawsuit Settlement in early 2008 (in which the developer obviously lost)?" There, I was pretty sure you were asking questions to which you already knew the answer. Why?
   
7. "Since we haven't heard any comments about the VHA's role in this....how do you feel about them?" The VHA? They serve a purpose, too.
   
8. "You mentioned above that you "don't have a dog in this fight," but it really seems that your intention is to lay the blame of the AAC's inaction...solely on the shoulders of the POA." How could you possibly conclude that from what I've said. I think the POA has been duped, but the inaction is that of the AAC.

Thanks for your post. I hope my response has cleared up my purpose for posting.

Jerry Lester

I'm curious as to what this post has to do with the topic of the thread, except maybe to pile on the POA.

.

Yes, your answers certainly validated my original observations. :thumbup:

May I suggest that in the future, you make the effort to put the other persons responses in quotes (like I did) or even put yours in a different color if you don't know how to quote...so that it is easier for other folks to follow?

Thanks.

.

Bottom Line -

Lake Paradise doesn't look like Paradise some of the time and is clearly visible from six lanes of traffic on US 441/27. It needs to be fixed to the benefit of all of TV.

Water Oak's lake has the same problem. Muddy Paradise Lake puts TV in the same position as Water Oak to those potential buyers on the heavily traveled US 441/27.

.

Response to Chuckinca
 

It's really simple, a no-brainer, isn't it? It's just a matter of money, as is most everything. So, I proposed an engineering study to the AAC to see what it would cost and go from there. They were unresponsive.

Jerry Lester

How long has Paradise Lake had this problem?

Isn't the AAC composed of elected officials?

It seems to me, that a petition or group going to the AAC would be the proper procedure..... if the majority feels it is an issue. :shrug:


.

With all the money spent in the Villages making things pretty I would think that money could be found to repair this eyesore. It is the first impression that many people have of the Villages

Wonder if this lake would be allowed to stay in this condition if it was on, oh, let's say 466a and Buena Vista?

There are many lakes/ponds/retention ponds which have become unsightly due to problems with liners that need replacing or with faulty irrigation connection pipes. Or due to lack of rain. Many of them are on golf courses and are often viewed by many people. I'm assuming The Villages has limited funds to deal with these problems, and that each pond will receive attention in due time.

I think it's probably fair to assume that the appearance of ponds in the vicinity of new homes for sale is important to TV's marketing strategy.

I believe a lot of the problem dates back when the villages north of 27 voted down the monthly fee to pay for this and other landscaping that most of us now pay....It was then turned over to Lake County ....

I think you may be correct on this.

I think, from reading this forum for a long time that JandBrare was attempting to tell us about the way the problem is being portrayed and I felt his assessment was fair.It has been in the past. I cringe to think what will happen to this place when the decision making is turned over to the residents. Any of you who have observed home owners organizations over time will know of what I speak. We need a GOOD watchdog organization for sure and well...sometimes I think both homeowners groups leave a little to be desired.

These sorts of things we need to know and we need to know them from people who have The Villages best interest at heart and sometimes I don't think that is the POA or the VHA. Each has it's issues and it's agenda.

I would not have known the back story if it wasn't for this forum.

You can see all of the work of replacement of underground watering systems along Morse north of 466. I have only observed good maintenance of properties since I have moved here. Barefoot has a valid point about the new areas but I think that the way things are handled in the very old areas north of 466 are different possibly due to their vote and the fact they are in Lake County. I am interested in what BKCunningham and NJbchbum have to say because they live there.

I know that I am unabashedly a fan of how things work here, and nothing I have read or observed has changed my mind in six years. Rose colored glasses or maybe cataracts. I don't know.

You bring up a good point.

Our big fear before we moved here is that the amenities fee is being somehow subsidized by the developer (to increase the attractiveness of selling new homes) and doesn't actually represent the true costs of what it takes to currently maintain the amenities.

Much less what it will take in the future.

Human nature being what it is, there will be a huge outcry and resistance...should it be determined that the amenities fee needs to be substantially increased at some point in the future.


I disagree.

In the big scheme of things, I will go with the residents every time on who "has The Villages best interests at heart"...over an entity whose primary function is to make money on every little piece of the action.

It is analogous to...."just letting big business police themselves, because they would never let profit override the safety and well being of the public."

I think we've seen many times...how that works out. :oops:


.

"especially since SWFWMD is not the approval agency"

Based on this statement by the OP and his stance that the POA mistakenly writing that SWFWMD had jurisdiction and not SJRWMD made the POA "analysis" null and void ..... every thing that the OP said is null and void as well. All of the water management districts in Florida are most certainly "approval agency's" and they would certainly have to sign off on any project such as this.

For those new to the forum here is the SJRWMD
http://www.sjrwmd.com/

And I still maintain that both the VOA and the VHA aren't good enough.

The VHA is clearly the tool of the developers.

I wish the POA had better journalists writing the bulletin just for starters. I struggled to understand the tone and the information this month. It was far clearer about six months ago. One of the headers was inflammatory I thought.

Watchdog to me doesn't mean rabid dog.

So you think the POA......is a "rabid dog?" :oops:

As to the writing, I agree it could be better.

But if you can read and comprehend post #14 in this thread....you can certainly figure out the POA newsletter.

.

WOW ... I just noticed that I mistakenly typed STRWMD ... instead of the correct acronym of SJRWMD.

Guess that makes my posting null and void as well. :laugh:

:1rotfl:



.

Historical Aerial Photographs of Paradise Lake
 

One poster asked "How long has Paradise Lake been this way?" As I've said, Paradise Lake is a natural basin that was adopted as a storm drainage/retention pond/lake during the early development of The Villages. The following series of photos shows the basin wet and dry over the years. The photos were passed to me after being obtained from Lake County Files.

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...seLake1941.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...seLake1947.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...seLake1958.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...seLake1972.jpg

http://i26.photobucket.com/albums/c1...seLake1979.jpg

Thought you readers would like to see them.

Jerry Lester

Thanks for the pic's. :thumbup:

It looks like the lake has had the same issues for many years.

Interesting that the AAC/POA is now being blamed by some, for what the developer could/should have taken care of...... long ago.

.

Fix it
 

I agree ---why blame the POA? However, I also agree that a major effort should be made to attempt to make the situation whole. Mistakes are human----to fix a mistake takes action. ;)

Excellent point! :thumbup:

.

It still isn't clear to me who is responsible for this problem and who has the authority to fix it? Dredging apparently adds danger to causing sinkholes. "Mother may I" has to go to the proper water district. I am pretty sure they own their own golf courses on that side and they don't look quite as spif as others south of there.

I hope the developer isn't to blame. I think so well of him. I worry when things are put in the hands of the residents entirely.

I think that the area north of 441/27 is governed differently than the rest of us, but I don't know exactly how, or why?

BKCUNNINGHAM? Where are you girl?????? I bet you know the answers..

The photos are a great resource. Thank you for adding them as they make very clear that this lake has been empty or nearly empty many times prior to the appearance of The villages. Nature is nature and shouldn't always be seen as requiring human intervention which so often makes things worse. Perhaps the area could instead be hidden with a substantial berm or dense plantings. My reading is that the POA took absolutely no position on this issue and merely reported the information given at several AAC meetings.

Do any of those that favor "doing something" to this former seasonally dry "Lake" that is now a seasonally low "retention pond" (for all practical purposes), all in the name of esthetics, have any idea of the cost involved??

You are talking a multi million dollar project. The engineering study alone into this boondoggle would cost prob $100K+. Who do you think should fund this???

Then it would be an excellent idea to get that same funding source to see if they can do something about the root cause of the seasonal fluctuation of water height ...... rain fall or the lack thereof.

graciegirl - you asked how i feel about this...well...lemme tell ya!

as a villages snowbird for but 5 yrs, i do not know the history that goes with what seems to be an ancient topic - about which nothing has been done, nor apparently resolved. but i do know that it is a shame to watch the birds, ducks, and white pelicans try to frolic, get a drink or take a bath in a mud puddle when there is no water level to speak of.

and i do know that the failure of the acc, the developer, lady lake, lake county, the water mgmt authority, and any other party/parties that could do something about the water level [or lack of water] is a serious disappointment to me. the excerpt from the minutes of the 3/13/13 acc budget committee meeting below is just one published article re the various attitudes toward adressing the issue. everything is personal opinion and an unwillingness to even consider steps to obtain a professional opinion, much less a professional review and report.

and lndlocked's post is yet another! to lndlocked i reply that i pay my amenities fees like every other resident; and those dollars go to support MANY villages facilities and activities in which i do not take part - golf, pools and rec centers come to mind real quickly. i may not agree with how my amenity fees are spent - but i appreciate the things they support because they will be there when and if i choose to use what the money has been spent on. and to lndlocked - you make me feel that you believe the residents in the historic do not deserve more than personal opinion...opinion is free and a review/report would cost money; a lot of money!

statements made by the acc comm members and the post by ldnlocked contribute to the feelings that are sometimes felt which make me think that the historic district is the wicked stepchild of the villages that has been written off by residents to our south and supervisors who think that they and their districts are better than we and our neighborhoods are!

but ya know what - i wouldn't live in any other villages neighborhood!

from the 3/13/13 acc budget comm mtg:

“EIGHTH ORDER OF BUSINESS: Paradise Lake
Chairman Wilcox advised the Committee that he requested this item be placed on the agenda following requests to address the water level within Paradise Lake and the maintenance condition from some residents. Chairman Wilcox stated this Committee addressed these same issues pertaining to Paradise Lake approximately one year ago but requested Staff provide an overview of the issue. Ms. Tutt stated the Committee previously addressed this topic of excavating and lining Paradise Lake and
chose not to proceed due to the proposed cost which Staff anticipates could increase substantially due to the unknown issues that could occur; such as permitting. The lack of water is not an issue only at Paradise Lake as many preserves and Water Retention Areas (WRA) within The Villages are greatly lacking in water. Ms. Tutt stated she appreciates the suggestions to excavate only a few feet of Paradise Lake but stated a few feet could have unintentional consequences. Staff is not recommending proceeding with any changes to Paradise Lake.

“Chairman Wilcox inquired if this Committee would like to re-address the topic of Paradise Lake.

“Mr. Bell stated an offer was made by the Developer many years ago to dredge Paradise Lake, at no cost to the residents, which was refused by the residents. At this time Mr. Bell stated he does not believe the thoughts of the majority of the residents in the area have changed and would be opposed to proceeding with any excavation/lining of Paradise Lake.

“Mr. Lambrecht stated he has reviewed a study a resident wanted to present to the Committee which basically addressed evaporation of water level; however, the study did not occur in this portion of the State and was conducted many years prior. Mr. Lambrecht stated he is totally against proceeding with any type of excavation and/or lining of Paradise Lake and stated there is no viable solution to address the level of Paradise Lake until regular rainfall is received.

“Ms. Forrester stated she is concerned that the Committee is making a decision about Paradise Lake at a Workshop where it was previously stated audience comments were not to be permitted and believes the Committee should defer a decision until the next meeting. Mr. Bell and Mr. Lambrecht both referred to several occasions when the Committee received public comment pertaining to this topic many times previously.
Following further discussion the Committee reached a consensus not to proceed with excavation and/or lining of Paradise Lake.”

ps - does mr bell not think that in the amount of time between today and ‘…many years ago...’ that ‘...the thoughts of the majority of the residents in the area have changed…’? sheesh! Who the he** do messrs bell and lambrecht think they are?

Gracie, of course the developer isn't to blame. But, you don't think for a moment if new homes could be built there he wouldn't use the power he has to remedy this. I don't blame him, he is a business man. However, I would think out of respect for Mr. Schwartz who lived in the historical section, he would do his best for the residents living there.