Aqua by the Bay seems legally, scientifically wrong. Am I wrong?

So. Let’s see if I understand this correctly. The comp plan requires a buffer to be in place, adjacent to, and with the purpose of protecting an existing wetland area.

Are you going to allow the Aqua by the Bay developer to destroy the existing buffer on the shore side of the mangroves, and then dig a ditch behind the existing wetland, the mangroves, and then place a buffer adjacent to that ditch? But against the wall instead of adjacent to the mangroves?

Are your experts now claiming that this action will meet the comp plan requirement by creating a new wetland area, the ditch, and putting the buffer adjacent to this new wetland thereby not having to have it adjacent to the existing wetland, the mangroves. So the buffer is now protecting, not the mangroves, but the manmade ditch.

Is this not wrong legally and scientifically? Will not this action kill the mangroves? The developer will then be able to turn this “estuary enhancement area” into a boat basin with the intention of eventually getting/ probably buying the OK to dig a channel to the ICW.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

This story was originally published August 22, 2017 at 2:46 PM with the headline "Aqua by the Bay seems legally, scientifically wrong. Am I wrong?."