In their Editorial entitled “Wetlands debate flips means and ends”, the author suggests doing just that.

As you all know by now…
The law of the Commonwealth, and the City Ordinance derived from that law, clearly states that projects that propose to fill wetlands:
1. must reduce impacts to wetlands to the minimum necessary,
2. must be water-dependent,
3. the public and private benefits of the project must outweigh the public and private detriments.

By Law, all three conditions mentioned above, must be met to grant a permit to destroy wetlands.

While much of the public debate centered on the latter, and there can be reasonable disagreement on these issues, the former two approval conditions can not be met by the Indigo Dunes proposal.

Read & comment on editorial in the Pilotonline.com.

Stay current with Pleasure House Point news.
Learn more about emailing City Council to encourage them to appeal the VMRC decision.

Photo of one area that would be destroyed if the existing wetlands law would be ignored.
[Note: this is an archive photo taken before it was illegal to walk on the private property called Pleasure House Point. Please respect their property rights, do not trespass.]