Wall danger for condos as boardwalk narrows road

| 01/10/2018 | 158 Comments
Cayman News Service

Shore Club condos on South Sound Road

(CNS): The construction of two huge new houses on South Sound Road, opposite the new boardwalk, has left neighbouring residents at the Shore Club in fear of a major accident because the high wall built between them blocks the view for drivers turning into a now narrower road. With the $1.3 million boardwalk now close to completion, South Sound Road is not only much narrower, to accommodate the 1,500 foot deck, bike lane and jogging path, but it is also now some four feet closer to the properties on the opposite side of the road.

Because of the narrowed road, the high wall built between Shore Club and the two new properties now runs right to the fringe of the roadway, with no sidewalk, instead of the previous 4-foot setback. Local residents claim this wall is putting them in great danger and is in contravention of the 2005 Roads Law, which states no structure creating an obstruction of view to a road can be built above two feet high.

A spokesperson for the Shore Club strata said it is now extremely dangerous when exiting the Shore Club onto South Sound Road because the wall completely obscures visibility of traffic to the left, so residents are taking their lives into their hands when exiting right as vehicles stream into town from the east.

Where the problem could escalate into a potential traffic fatality, they said, is through motorists speeding and overtaking along that narrow section of the road.

Local businessman and the developer of the Shore Club, Stefan Baraud, said he has witnessed a number of near misses due to the obstructed visibility when exiting the condo development.

“When we exit Shore Club heading east we can’t see the traffic. People are constantly overtaking and it’s only a matter of time before an accident will occur, possibly resulting in a fatality,” Baraud said. “The planning department, NRA and the ministry will be negligent if something happens. It’s simply not a matter of ‘if’ but ‘when’ an accident will happen.”

According to the Shore Club strata, no notifications were received from the government about their intentions for the boardwalk. It was also stated that no notification was provided about the wall built between the Shore Club and the new houses, which stands some six feet high at the front and up to 12 feet further back.

The two new properties are being built on a joint lot by architect Derek Serpell and investment fund director Martin Byrne. According to Cayman Contemporary Construction, which is building the two
houses directly opposite the ‘flip flop tree’, the Serpell residence will be 6,021 square feet, over three
floors with 20-foot-high retaining walls, while the Byrne residence next door will be over 10,900 square
feet.

Serpell, who is named as project manager for both houses, declined to comment on either the plans for construction or the safety concerns raised by the Shore Club.

Baraud said that a simple solution would be for Serpell to reduce two rows of blocks from the wall,
reducing its height by 16 inches, which would then allow exiting drivers to have a clear view of the
road in front of them.

CNS reached out to officials at the Ministry for Commerce, Planning and Infrastructure to explain the notification process for neighbouring residents for the boardwalk project, however no response was forthcoming. There was also no explanation regarding how the boardwalk construction had reduced the setback from the road of the properties being constructed opposite, as that section of South Sound Road has shifted inland.

Further complicating matters for Shore Club residents is that they say the wall in question is now leaning dangerously towards their complex, with cracks appearing. Additionally, it does not extend all the way to the back boundary, they said, so rainwater runoff is now spilling into their property.

Click on the images of the condo exit below to enlarge.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags: , ,

Category: Business, Construction, Local News

Comments (158)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    yes, individually they are protected by bad faith clause in law…but the govt can be held liable for ordinary negligence on behalf of the individuals….so we all pay…

  2. Anonymous says:

    Boardwalk is an absolute waste of money. Once again , money spending on rubbish. There are a million worthwhile things the government could have spent that money on.

    14
    • Anonymous says:

      Actually, I think that The Boardwalk is a great idea. Because so many people walk and run on South Sound that it can actually be quite scary when there is no sidewalk, for both the walker/runner as well as the drivers.

      5
      7
      • Anonymous says:

        The boardwalk is a waste. They could have just paved a long section with concrete and used the rest of the million to inforce planning laws by hiring someone with a brain.

        7
        1
      • Anonymous says:

        You would think the boardwalk would make things safer.

        However it used to be the road was wider and there was always land where if you felt a car hadn’t seen you you could step off the road. Now the road is narrower and where these houses are if a car hasn’t seen you you have nowhere to go if you are running towards town.

        The alternative is to cross the road to use the boardwalk and cross back at the end. Again less safe (assuming you run facing the traffic as people should).

        Don’t forget we are having these conversations before the parking laybys are in use and the inevitable opening of car doors into the path of cyclists becomes an issue as someone thinks painting a white line a bit further from the gutter makes a safe cycle lane.

        I don’t mean to be facitious to your post, however as someone who has been running that road for years. I know it feels a lot less safe now than it was pre boardwalk adn before that wall was put in.

        • Anonymous says:

          Totally agree. before if you were running or walking on the sound side, you had an exit if a car came too close ( dive for the water) . Now , vehicles can mount new board walk and the lay-by parking bays will act as a launch ramp , car goes airborne . A somewhat sad realization is that the roads ( not just South Sound) have largely become too dangerous to be out on running and cycling these days. South Sound Rd is a 30 mph speed zone , but I have regularly seen cars doing + 60 mph recently , past The ‘Derek Walls’ . RCIPS does have regular speed traps , kudos to them to keep enforcing the posted speed limits .

  3. Anonymous says:

    Just like an inept planning department to let these houses on SS road build right next to the road with no space for people to walk by without getting hit. See the new houses by Caribbean Paradise and now this.

    21
  4. Anonymous says:

    ha ha ha! tee gee hee! how how how and a bottle of rum….????

  5. Anonymous says:

    https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/court-seizes-fashion-mogul-nygards-opulent-bahamian-estate-over-illegal-dredging

    This type of enforcement would never happen in Cayman, Planning/DOE have no spine.
    In the Bahamas, the Govt has seized this multi million dollar estate for illegal dredging.

    25
    • Anonymous says:

      Some of These members of the planning board have been on there from time Adam cut his eye teeth, making the same stupid mess. Is it even practical to keep them on the board for such a long time? They are like the U.S. Supreme Court, on for life. That board really need some new blood and energy. Next thing they will be moving the shoe tree, probably don’t fit with they neighbours’ aesthetics. What A Country!!!!

      19
      • Anonymous says:

        The planning department are at fault here , you’d think the planning staff can’t read plans, or can’t be bothered , either way it is at the application level this should have been stopped.

        12
    • anonymous says:

      Someone needs play devils advocate at all CPA meetings.

      17
  6. Anonymous says:

    Nothing will be done until someone dies. RIP to the poor soul who will lose their life to this mess.

    33
    • Anonymous says:

      The bumb bells that sit on the Planning Board need to have their heads checked. They store so lost and out of touch with what’s happening around. Limited mentality, and no foresight. Should we be wondering where we will end up?

      15
      1
  7. Anonymous says:

    The side walks need to continue in front of these homes. Plain and simple, someone built the walls, someone can take them down.

    53
  8. Anonymous says:

    Would be nice to have a statement from Mr Chairman of the CPA justifying their decision- oh wait, what’s the point because they know best.

    35
  9. Anonymous says:

    Planning didn’t seem to have taken any notice to this development, there was some request of adjustments, but only yo move the homes ten feet back no concern was shown for the safety of the road users in vicinity of this project.

    https://www.planning.ky/wp-content/uploads/pdfs/CPA/CPA_Minutes_03_2017.pdf

    22
  10. Ron Ebanks says:

    I might be wrong , but I think that certain Laws are made with the intention to open them up for corruption in dealing with the issues that pertains , why we are seeing these kind of things happening .

    11
    2
  11. Anonymous says:

    you can try sue the govt….but it extremely hard to get through….they who own the courts….? it the same in every country…

    • Anonymous says:

      they have immunity from legal proceedings unless you can prove willfull negligience…very hard to do.

      6
      1
  12. Anonymous says:

    “Local residents claim this wall is putting them in great danger and is in contravention of the 2005 Roads Law, which states no structure creating an obstruction of view to a road can be built above two feet high.”

    “Local residents” when are we going to learn that we no longer have a say on our island? If you’re not a politician or someone with a minimum high 6 figure bank account or have a non-local accent, you’re cares and concerns don’t mean shit anymore! The quicker we realize we’ve been completely subjugated and only missing the sign around our neck saying “token local” the happier we will be.

    The island that time forgot, not anymore.

    28
    2
  13. Anonymous says:

    The bigger issue is how planning has allowed South Sound to be redeveloped at the rate it has been since Hurricane Ivan….of all the places in Cayman that you don’t want to be in a serious storm, it’s South Sound …and yet, wow, the whole place has gone nuts….do people enter a twilight zone when they get close to the flip flop tree?! all these developments are going to be inundated with water the next time a strong storm hits…and it will, it’s just when…..as to the 10,000ft house and the wall, my heart bleeds, hopefully they’ll pull thru this no doubt devastating situation for them…

    24
    2
    • Anonymous says:

      Memories of Ivan for lots of folks were relatively short ones, unless you had your home destroyed & lost everything you had . You have newcomers to the island since 2005 & following years , most of which have no knowledge of what happened in 2004, even to this day. Excluding these newcomers ,lots of local residents and citizens don’t want the memory of Ivan , nor being scared of storm consequences , affecting their decisions to go on with their lives , raise families and to live here doing so , including for some, building their dream home in South Sound. Also , a very good majority of people building large homes we are seeing are very, very affluent and heavily insured. They also own homes in other countries, & not just one home. So if another storm does strike and damage everything , they have the buoyancy of affluence to float them through the recovery phase, most likely while living in one of the other homes. Its just a significant hiccup for them , but one that money will just make go away ( after a few years of rebuilding).

      • Anonymous says:

        I lost everything I had in Ivan having grown up in South Sound and still live there and can say that this is the shared mindset about Ivan, well put.

  14. Ron Ebanks says:

    I wonder if the Attorney General has looked at the consequences of the decision off the CPA has made in allowing the CPA to make and approved , by letting the man put that wall where it is .

    16
    2
  15. Anonymous says:

    I can’t wait for the first car to end up in the Shore Club pool. Who the hell wants to swim in that thing while soaking up exhaust fumes? Lets not kid ourselves, all of them, Including Stefan, thought the road was going to be moved behind them.

    30
    3
  16. Anonymous says:

    The cost of fixing the wall would be like buying a round of drinks for these homeowners. Good luck with that!

    17
  17. Anonymous says:

    The issue is that condo developments and businesses are required to add a side walk and a private home do not. Not sure what the purpose of this is as a side walk is meant for someone to walk on but it seems you can only safely walk on a side walk in front of a condo development or business but not in front of a private home ?!

    The consequence is many chopped up mini side walks and many blind corners such as outlined in this case. Totally idiotic!

    27
    1
  18. Anonymous says:

    if we don’t soon get rid of this government that allows everybody to do everything they want, especially with regards to our environment, without fear of the laws and ordinances we are going to be in a big mess.
    We are a small country and we don’t have much more than our natural resources to depend on. Pleas stop making us into a concrete jungle that will only drive away visitors when our natural resources are destroyed. What are we to do then?
    Please read the stanzas of the God inspired National song and respect our Land of Soft Fresh Breezes and verdant trees so fair.
    there is more to life than riches

    19
    2
  19. Anonymous says:

    Mark my words a fatal car accident will happen there.

    10
  20. Anonymous says:

    ever notice how road widening is claiming person’s land in poor areas…yet in the rich area’s, walls and even houses are almost on rhe road???

    35
  21. Anonymous says:

    It should be plainly obvious to anyone by now that in terms of planning in Cayman money talks. Dart has shown that in the extra height at the Kimpton and that bridge expansion. Cayman will become another Cancun in time. How on earth anyone got permission to build a three phase concrete jungle that is Vela is anyone’s guess.Seven mile beach is lost to developers. Just look at the eye sore private house that is on seven mile beach and the huge complex starting beside Harbour Heights.

    22
    3
  22. Ron Ebanks says:

    I don’t understand why the people at CNS of the Cayman islands can voice their opinion on this and other subjects and other concerning issues . But over at Cayman Compass online no one will write a comment to say a word about such issues like the cruise ship pier , one comment on about 4 articles . Are the people over there not concerned about what happening on the Islands ?

    35
    7
    • Anonymous says:

      Simple answer:

      We live in a society gripped by fear of retribution and victimization upon the speaker and their families.

      Only a relatively few people are in a position to speak freely.

      On CNS all people can freely express their views without fear of the government and big business.

      On the Compass they demand personal identification.

      Some people e.g. Civil Servants are not free to make comments.

      CNS provides the only safe place for the free expression of opinion.

      36
    • Anonymous says:

      People are still scared to use their name, I’m not sure if that will ever change with the small politics here. Also, it seems you have to jump through some loops to register a name there, it is so much easier here.

      16
    • Anonymous says:

      Because the Compass requires you to log in and such.

      10
    • Anonymous says:

      Anonymity

      10
    • Ron Ebanks says:

      Does anyone care over at the Compass online about the issues of the Islands that pertains to us all . I think the more people that voice their opinion, the better chance we would get a sound decision . So people over at C C online wake up and stop sleeping .

      3
      1
      • Ron Ebanks says:

        Correction , I am adding to my above comment , people wake up and come over to CNS and voice your opinion , because you are not serving society over there .

        5
        2
    • Anonymous says:

      Ron,

      There’s a simple answer to your question. “Anonymity”. Because their management don’t understand the importance of this word (particularly in the”online world”) they will never receive increased online traffic, and vast opinions on their articles. I for one, find it very ironic that a Newspaper’s management don’t grasp the importance of this.

      Good job CNS.You get it!

      Sincerely,
      -Anonymous

      13
      1
      • Ron Ebanks says:

        Anonymous 9:27 and 9:28 an , I have to disagree with both of you . There are people who are registered and do use their name and comment on bullshit articles of no significance , so Anonymous is not the reason why they aren’t commenting . So it has to be that they don’t care to , or that they aren’t getting their comments published after using their name .

        1
        4
    • Anonymous says:

      Obviously Ron its because over at the Compass people cannot comment anonymously like they can at CNS as most people prefer. Hence, very few comments are ever posted at the Compass. Its not that their readers don’t care. I read both and never comment on the Compass website.

    • Anonymous says:

      On the compass site you have to give your name, that’s the only difference.

      • Ron Ebanks says:

        Anonymous 9:51 am , no that’s not the reason because there are some people that are registered to comment and they are not commenting .

        1
        1
        • Anonymous says:

          Having your name registered on the site is not the issue. Having your name directly attributed to a comment is the issue, especially when it comes to politically sensitive matters. Civil Servants have restrictions on what political views they can express, so obviously this is an issue for them. But it’s not just Civil Servants that will face consequences for simply expressing opinions…

          4
          1
        • Anonymous says:

          Ron,
          “There are none so blind than those who will not see”.

  23. Anonymous says:

    You can’t blame the two home owners solely. Generally roads require a 3-4′ shoulder in small neighbourhoods. In a large carriage way like South Sound road, it should be 6’+ which would give cars a bit more space to get a line of site and also allow people to walk across.

    The problem here is that Government shifted the carriage ways to the North, effectively getting rid of any shoulders, so the issue not only causes a problem with Shore club, but the two large homes, the Boulevard and any other new projects that come online here.

    It’s very likely the reason this was done was for Government to avoid having to gain planning permission as the new “boardwalk” is on NRA land, so it was just treated as part of the road versus something that would need to be approved by the CPA.

    29
    5
    • Anonymous says:

      Surely in this case the property owners can be blame!! Derek Serpell is named as project manager for both houses, which suggest he’s also the architect who designed both properties

      • Anonymous says:

        If I’m reading the article correctly, the wall was there before the road was moved, but it was not an issue because there was four feet clearance between the wall and the road. Now that the road has been shifted, there is no longer that clearance and so the wall is obstructing the road.

        So in this case it’s not the homeowners’ fault.

        8
        5
    • Anonymous says:

      Surely in this case the property owners can be blame!! Derek Serpell is named as project manager for both houses, which suggest he’s also the architect who designed both properties

  24. Anonymous says:

    10,000sqft house…they can do what they want to.

    19
    5
  25. Anonymous says:

    I believe Planning regulations only require multi family and commercial development to provide sidewalks along the roadway. Houses do not. Normally houses are not required to go to the CPA. Although the islands Development plan has not been updated in about 30 years. Apparently the architect and Planning are just following the current laws and regulations.

    6
    5
    • Anonymous says:

      The Cayman Islands foes not have a real Development Plan, not even a Zoning Plan.

      The first Draft Development Plan was rejected by the Jim Bodden government in 1975.

      The second Draft Development Plan led by Kurt Tibbetts was rejected by the
      McKeeva Bush / Lindford Pierson govrrnmrnt after their 2001 Coup to oust Tibbetts from ExCo.

      Since then corruption reigns in development.

    • Anonymous says:

      You are wrong just like Serpell.

    • Anonymous says:

      Planning insisted that I put in a sidewalk in front of my house.
      There should be a 20ft. setback per regulation, from the road boundary for any structure above 4ft.
      There is a sidewalk in place either side of this encroachment which planning should have demanded as a continuation of the sidewalks in place.
      Lazy indifference to a selfish development is on display endangering the public using that area.
      An enforcement notice should be imposed to make the developers to move their wall back to obey the regulations .They have the room, and clearly the money to do so.

      17
    • Anonymous says:

      How about common sense, professional integrity, and courtesy to other road users.

      17
      • Right ya so says:

        Ha! Good luck getting that! You saw how long those huge boulders and then the parking cones were out there, didn’t you?!

    • Chris Johnson says:

      The CPA insisted I build a sidewalk on my property and incur any liability with it!! Otherwise I would not get planning permission.

      Also when I built the sidewalk by the fish market for saretly puposes CPA wanted it eight inches high. So I agreed. Then along came the folk in the purple building and they were granted a flat sidewalk and a very dangerous car park. Where is the consistency. I guess it is all about who you know. The NRA should have done something about it.

      31
  26. Unbelievable says:

    In 2018, are we requiring one property owner to build a sidewalk along and inside his property boundary? And are we allowing the adjacent property owner to build a 4ft high wall perpendicular to the same boundary line and across the end of the sidewalk forcing pedestrians to step into the street?
    Come on Planning, CPA, Ministry of Planning – somebody say we are not this daft I beg you. It’s 2018 for heaven’s sake. Where is the simple, plain, common sense?

    51
    1
  27. Anonymous says:

    I’ve been saying this from the wall went up on the road. What is so distasteful, the guy placed boulders up on the road to protect his wall. Why is it that I had to give 5 feet of my property in a residential development for future road planning yet this dude can build a 6 foot wall right on the main road, then placed boulders and now cones. Shame on him, his partner and CPA for allowing this. One last thing, in a storm surge guess where all the water is going to go, Cayman Crossing. All these peoples homes and investments ruined.

    55
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      To be fair, Cayman Crossing was built below sea level, why they were allowed to and anyone would buy there is beyond me.

      10
      4
  28. Anonymous says:

    Can’t wait to see Chris Johnson weigh in with his thoughts on this.

    28
    5
  29. Anonymous says:

    I know the architect. this cant be his fault. I know he will do the right thing and move the wall. If not I’m sure NRA will make him move it otherwise.

    16
    9
  30. Jojit says:

    We need to be fair to everyone, is this the only building or structure that blinds a path, c’mon, look at south church street, its so dangerous from north to south, property owners there created walls up to the last millimeter of their property line. I believe the structure in south sound if you measure it, its already setback by more than 2 feet. Mr. Stephan has a point but he should have discussed this to his new neighbors and have not used media to show his concern. What are neighbors for?

    9
    37
    • Anonymous says:

      Every new development or house must have a 6ft pedestrian walkway. Serpell knows that.

      30
      3
    • Anonymous says:

      Which building on South church street was built under the present modern planning regime?

      14
      4
    • Ron Ebanks says:

      Leave the rich man alone , he thinks that he is protecting his house and being selfish from hurricane, but no man has ever got that smart or rich yet . Especially where he is located . If his Cadillac can get in so can the water and there’s lots of in south sound .

      17
      6
      • Anonymous says:

        Don’t think so, Ron. Caymans maximum forecastable storm surge in a worse-case scenario is only 12 feet, if we had a stronger storm than we did in 2004. These houses are so far above that level ,to make any threat from a storm surge virtually impossible. There is a reason they were built on a raised elevation.

        2
        2
    • Anonymous says:

      You try coming out of The Shore Club and you might understand the problem and I don’t ever live there. I saw an Range Rover trying to get out and ever he was struggling to see. People coming out of Selkirk can’t see around the 3’ wall there either. No one should have to take their lives into their own hands to pull out into traffic. Even Tommy Bodden, who is on the CPA, couldn’t get his colleagues to enforce the set back on these houses and that is outrageous. No surprise there I suppose, it is happening more often.

      32
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      Oh it’s fair alright, the more money you have the fairer things are for you. Like the golden rule, the man with the gold makes the rules.

  31. Anonymous says:

    But who cut the trees down and did they have permission and if not make them replant trees of the same height !!!!!’!!!!!!
    But sorry I suppose money talks in the Banana Republic of Cayman

    37
    2
  32. Anonymous says:

    A suggestion might be to reverse the entry and exit points (regardless of whether the wall height is reduced? I notice there is a car entry to the left of the property, with the separate exit on the right side of the property. If this is reversed, exiting from the left side of the property will give a clear view.

    21
    12
  33. Anonymous says:

    South sound was once the jewell of Cayman. Now look at it. We should be ashamed of ourselves. Yes i said it.

    73
    4
  34. Anonymous says:

    Another gaudy, dangerous invention. South Sound going to pots with the rest of the island.

    59
    3
  35. Wow says:

    Money talks – plain and simple. The fact that planning has allowed homes to be built so close to a main road and a wall which clearly has narrowed the road is absolutely despicable.

    75
  36. Anonymous says:

    Im a very similar position, when I built my modest house next to a condo complex, I was told my fence could only be 3′ 6″ high so the road view would not be blocked. Anything higher required planning permission, but then again I am a nobody with no money.

    61
    • Anonymous says:

      Oh yes, we were putting a fence on south sound road, a chain linked fence at that and it took 5 seconds for someone from planning to come over (they lived across the street not far from this ridiculous wall) and informed us it was only supposed to be so high. I guess they couldn’t push us around but were afraid of these people.

      12
    • Anonymous says:

      I don’t know who you are, but to me you sound like a caring person who follow the laws. The nobodies are the greedy, selfish ones who apparently has more money than common sense, and cares not what happen outside their houses. It wouldn’t matter how many accidents or deaths occur out there, they think they are insulated from everyone and everything. Only time will tell.

  37. Anonymous says:

    I’m interested to know how a 1,500ft ‘path’ costs $1.3m. If that’s the government definition of value for money (even though the board walk is a good idea), we should be very, very scared about the piers.

    68
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      Whatever happened to the North Church Street boardwalk which was much more necessary to protect pedestrians from traffic. Only Chris Johnson who built the boardwalk by the fish market seems to have done anything at all. No surprise there, he does get things done.

      45
      4
    • Anonymous says:

      $866 per foot. HOW.

    • Anonymous says:

      We are that is why we are signing the referendum. They need to come back to us with the truth. No more shenanigans !!

    • Anonymous says:

      its not finished yet…this pavement needs a railing on the ocean side to stop people falling off it….
      please make it be better than the/boardwalk’ railing in gt

      1
      1
  38. Anonymous says:

    can someone say lawsuit!

    23
  39. Anonymous says:

    the problem is one large part the board walk project, one large part planning permission and the lack of consideration or thought from Derek. Shameful how he just puts up a wall and blocks off the sidewalk.

    51
    2
  40. Anonymous says:

    looks like Mr. Serpell is trying to wall himself off from the rest of society building his ivory tower.

    58
    2
  41. Anonymous says:

    Can’t the residents ask their butlers to check for oncoming traffic?

    32
    9
  42. Anonymous says:

    The wall needs to come down all together and be moved back 5′! Lowering the height of the wall is not enough! There isn’t room for cyclists to pass when heading east!

    53
    • Anonymous says:

      And the sidewalk needs to continue rather than ending straight into a wall! Who at planning approved a sidewalk ending in a vertical wall. It is now impossible to walk safely on the north side of south sound road. Vela and the Shore Club both put in sidewalks. Why didn’t Serpel, and if not voluntarily, why was he not forced to? Planning???

      54
      1
  43. Anonymous says:

    I was wondering when someone would notice this. When you look at any development along a major roadway in the last 10-15 years there has been a requirement to put in a sidewalk. You can see sidewalks in front of the Shore Club, Cayman Crossing, Vela, the houses the other side of the South Sound road, the new condos on Linford Pearson. Every development except this one. Makes you wonder why.

    62
    1
  44. Anonymous says:

    I think they should have to move the whole wall back the 4 feet required by the law. Nobody could possibly walk or cycle past these houses. The wall is right on the road.

    50
    1
  45. Anonymous says:

    Someone at the planning board needs to be held accountable for this!! What a royal screw-up this is!

    It’s only a matter of time before someone parks their car in that wall.

    62
  46. Anonymous says:

    In the meantime maybe put one of those convex mirrors on the electric pole?

    13
    8
  47. Anonymous says:

    It doesn’t look that bad in the pictures but I’m sure a mirror could easily fix this.

    6
    25
  48. Anonymous says:

    Derek Serpell is the owner of Kariba architecture firm yet does he allege that he doesn’t know the planning laws and regulations? The Planning Department needs to step in and insist that the dangerous walls are demolished and the pedestrian pathway is installed. Disgraceful.

    57
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      Traffic cones indicate a safety hazard for motorists, to use caution , pedestrians and cyclists also , other road users. There are several traffic cones there up against the illegally placed boulders , that further infringe on the carriageway width , which is used by the public . Therefore , based on that assumption ( that traffic cones indicate a safety hazard , to road users and the public ), the walls & general location are clearly dangerous & a safety hazard , no ? Or is it the boulders that are the hazard and the walls are not a hazard? Either way you slice & dice this to make the walls justified , they clearly pose a dangerous impediment to the condominium traffic negotiating the road entrance/exit and to people attempting to use the road , whether that be in a vehicle or otherwise. Placing mirrors on poles and changing driveway conditions do not dispel the fact the walls are infringing on the roadway and are posing a safety hazard. Further , why was the issue not demonstrated as a hazard at the planning and approval stage , with adjustments then implemented by the owners in their planning applications?

      36
      2
      • Anonymous says:

        I wonder if those cones are privately owned or if they are the NRA/government. If so he should return them to NRA ASAP. We cannot afford to give away the cones. They cost money.

  49. Anonymous says:

    Serpell is an architect by profession for crying out loud, this is a blatant and utter disregard for the law, he knows exactly what he is doing. Selfish and disgusting!!

    74
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      Blame Serpel/Byrne for proposing something so unreasonable but ultimately blame the CPA for approving something so patently unreasonable and unsafe!

      56
      1
  50. Anonymous says:

    mega money causes problems most of the time….the boardwalk was needed for the rich…you poor people cantunderstand that….kudos to joey…vote for him next time…hip hip horray!????????

    19
    4
    • Anonymous says:

      The problem is even though we all know it is wrong no action will be taken. The owners still have to sleep at night. Selfish but eventually what goes around comes around.

      13
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        when will our illustrious leaders take an interest in our natural resources and stop destroying everything we hold dear and cannot replace once it is gone?

    • Anonymous says:

      boardwalk?…looks like a sidewalk to me….a poorly thought-out sidewalk to nowhere.

      • Anonymous says:

        It is not only poor, but also poor value for money. I feel sad when I look at it. We have a million dollar sidewalk almost no one asked for. I say almost no one, because it’s no coincidence they did it and did it the way they did at the same time as large houses and luxury condos were being built. They did this project exactly the way you would do it if you were asked by rich people to improve their view and wanted to do that without the public catching on. When this was under construction I thought we would be getting a turning lane that would speed up traffic in the evenings by allowing South Sound residents to go into the middle before reaching their destination and quickly pull in at the right moment. But no, they put unnecessary parking next to the sidewalk instead when there was already parking at the boat ramp and the whole point of a “boardwalk” is to “walk” along it. There isn’t even any beach and now there is no shade either so why would you even want to go there? And so why do we need parking spots right next to the sidewalk? Very poorly thought out, a waste of money, and more concrete in what used to be a leafy green suburb.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.