To the editor:

City residents living near Rotary Park have voiced their opposition to the proposed Redfish Pointe development. One of our chief concerns is the heightened risk of flooding due to the loss of wetlands. Another is the negative impact on wildlife for which these hundreds of acres of wetlands and uplands are a haven. Newly acquired public records reveal that after years of project planning, it appears insufficient thought has been given to either of these two issues.

I am thankful to city staff who are protecting our community’s well-being by ensuring the proposed project meets the goals and objectives of the city’s comprehensive plan.

Objective 4.5 of that plan is about the “Peril of Flood,” and states that the “City shall take extra precautions… to reduce the community’s flood vulnerability in accordance with the State Peril of Flood Act.”

City staff states, “The applicant should address this point.” Especially after Ian, the fact that this point has yet to be addressed is astonishing.

Regarding the hundreds of acres of wetlands that provide significant storm and flood protection, city staff notes that the property owner’s application to amend the city future land use map “does not allow for sound evaluation… The wetlands exhibit is not field based but aerial based and is not adequate given the scope and sensitivity of this project. City staff recommends regulatory agencies (DEP, SFWMD) which are the only entities allowed to do so, perform a field inspection and flagging for wetlands delineation and wetlands quality.” In short, they haven’t determined exactly where these wetlands begin and end, nor their quality, and this, of course, is of great concern to residents.

Regarding the proposed project’s impact on wildlife and the ecological health of the area, city staff write, “Given the extent and sensitivity of this project, staff recommend providing a more thorough assessment. The only field-based survey pertains to Gopher Tortoises… Impact to the shoreline by boardwalks should incorporate a field-based survey for sea turtle nesting potential. The removal of available uplands from a currently complete ecosystem encompassing complementary functions from uplands to salt marshes, to wetlands to surface waters (both fresh and saltwater) must be evaluated and discussed…” This is a great point raised by city staff. We can’t talk about uplands and wetlands in isolation. This and the impact wildlife other than Gopher Tortoises have not yet been adequately assessed.

Staff is direct in telling the owner to “provide an alternate site study for the placement of the dock. The current location does not meet the 4 ft or greater requirement. This is especially true given the location in the federally critically endangered smalltooth sawfish nursery habitat exclusion zone.”

Evidently, the property owner has given the same insufficient attention to wildlife and ecological concerns as they have to the increase of flood and storm risk to the nearby community. Residents are justified in their deep concerns about this proposed development.

I urge residents to read and learn more at ProtectOurWetlandsInCapeCoral.org.

Joseph Bonasia

Cape Coral