Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Marjorie Clapprood (Yes) <br />Erin Copeland (Yes) <br />Sandra Godfrey (Yes) <br />Paul Colombo (Yes) <br /> <br />6 – 0 (unanimous) <br /> <br /> <br />Admin. <br />6:18 11 Taffrail Way. Gregory R. and Hillery Lee. Request for minor change to previously <br />Approval <br />approved sea wall on OOC 43-3133. Representative: Cape & Islands Engineering, Inc. <br /> <br /> <br />The applicant went through the history noting that “soft solution” had failed, and the sea wall <br />was accepted and approved by the Commission (The applicant also went through Ch. 91). <br />The applicant’s revision is based on construction protocols and believes it has less of an <br />impact on the area. The major improvement is all construction would be completed from the <br />land – no barge. The change proposed is to increase the sea wall’s elevation from 3.6’ to 5’ <br />causing a slope decrease lessening runoff. This will require fill in a “triangle.” In response <br />to Mr. Colombo, the fill would create more level area obviating the need for a barge for <br />construction. The amount of fill was based on the applicant’s estimate and does not affect <br />the existing pier. In response to Ms. Clapprood, the applicant’s original height request was <br />based on the height of the “soft solution.” Ms. Zollo asked about trees in the triangle – (“Are <br />those eight trees gone?”). The applicant claimed that the trees will be saved despite the fill <br />being added to the area – the tie backs are placed to attempt to save every tree. Although <br />Ms. Zollo liked the no-barge change, Ms. Zollo was concerned about the trees and wanted <br />them to be replaced in kind – the applicant is open to such a condition and meeting with the <br />Agent. Mr. Colombo polled the Commissioners to see if any had done a site visit – none <br />had. Based on this and the potential tree damage, Mr. Colombo thought there should be a <br />site visit. Regarding the process – administrative approval – Ms. Zollo thought the request <br />was really an Amended Order of Conditions and questioned the request’s appropriateness. <br />Mr. Colombo concurred noting that the current Administrative Approval request was <br />borderline possibly requiring an Amended Order of Conditions. (Also showing the need for <br />the Commission’s review of Administrative Approvals). The Commissioners’ conclusion was <br />for a continuance to allow site visits. Mr. Cook noted that construction wise the proposal <br />was good to eliminate the barge but agreed with the concern for the trees. Mr. Colombo <br />proposed sending out the original Order of Condition and site visits by the Commissioners. <br /> <br />st <br />September 21 @ 6:15 <br /> <br />Mr. Cook made a motion for a continuance which was seconded by Ms. Zollo <br /> <br />Roll Call Vote: <br /> <br />Alexandra Zollo (Yes) <br />Steven Cook (Yes) <br />Marjorie Clapprood (Yes) <br />Erin Copeland (Yes) <br />Sandra Godfrey (Yes) <br />Paul Colombo (Yes) <br /> <br />6 – 0 (unanimous) <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />