HomeMy WebLinkAbout008Michelle Farfan
Garth Mann <Garth.Mann@statesmangroup.com >
Monday, January 20,20L410:08 AM
'Swenson, Karen';'Natalie Proft-Carlson';'Aaron Goforth'
Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.ne| Paul Hospelhorn - USA; Schipanski, Rich; David
W. Johnson (djohnson@cojefferson.wa.us)
RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS - New Tables
This is not overly complicated for us to amend at this time. .
The Wright Johnson Report is referencing information that is old in their report , so lets fix it right and submit
Garth
M. Garth Mann
President & C.E.O
P: 403-256-4151
M:403-899-9222
F:403-256-6100
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. S.W
Calgary, Alberta
T3H 4H9
www. statesmanqroup.ca
From: Swenson, Karen [mailto:kswenson@eaest.com]
Sent: Monday, January 20,20L4 9:53 AM
To: Gath Mann; 'Natalie Proft-Carlson'
Cc: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.ne[ Paul Hospelhorn - USA; Schipanski, Rich; David W, Johnson
(djoh nson @co.jefferson,wa. us)
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS - New Tables
Garth - the SEIS is intended to analyze the full spectrum of impacts of the development alternatives, including the
greatest impact. Rather than revisit the site plan at this time, the SEIS can be completed with the data currently
available. lf the final development ends up with shorter buildings or less parking, at least the SEIS has analyzed the
potential impact of the current site plan. The SEIS does not commit you to one particular alternative or site plan - it
simply provides information for decision-makers. This approach, proceeding with the current data, provides you with the
flexibility to build to the currently proposed heights and parking stall count, if needed.
Kare*wSvn*gw
E[r
Karen Swenson, AICP
Senior Planner
2200 SiXh Avenue, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121
206.452.5350 x 1716
kswenson@eaest.com
1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Karen:
From : Garth Ma n n [mailto: Gaft h. Ma n n@statesmang roup.com]
Sent: Sunday, January L9,2074 9:37 PM
To: 'Natalie Proft-Carlson'; Swenson, Karen
Cc: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.net; Paul Hospelhorn - USA
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS - New Tables
Natalie
Since Karen is submitting this document as the SEIS and it is the recorded instrument for the DP, we
need to
properly assess the Terrace Buildings since the short-term unit sizes have been reduced (especially
700-1447 sf with large kitchens),
similar to the 1 and 2 bedroom units at the Maritime Village with smaller kitchenettes. (a20-927 sf)
All the units will have the Garden Doors opening inward with the 10 inch extended Romeo-Juliette
decks..
The new vinyl hardwoods are great for maintenance and meet the criteria where we are directed by
Jefferson County that the Terraces
be for short-term use.
This probably means that the buildings can be reduced by 1 floor, and the parking count might be
reduced by the number of bedrooms?
Please advise.?
Garth
From : Nata I ie Proft -Ca rlson [ma i lto : N Proft -Ca rlson @g m ha rch itects,com]
Sent: Friday, January L7,2014 11:44 AM
To: Swenson, Karen
Cc: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.neU Garth Mann
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS - New Tables
Hello Everyone,
As per Karen's email below, I had some incorrect numbers for the surface parking count in Alt 1 so I have redone them
and attached the new ones to this email. Sorry for the confusion.
Thanks.
Natalie
From: Swenson, Karen Imailto:kswenson@eaest.com]
Sent: January-17-14 11:05 AM
2
M. Garth Mann
President & C.E.O
P: 403-256-4151
M'.403-899-9222
F:403-256-6100
7370 Sierra Morena Blvd. S.W.
Calgary, Alberta
T3H 4H9
www. statesmanq roup.ca
To: Natalie Proft-Carlson
Cc: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.neU Garth Mann
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Also, I didn't not find on the site plan the additional 48 parking spaces you have listed for the Maritime Village (in the
lower part of your Alt 1 table). On the site plan for Alt L, I count 88 parking spaces adjacent to the Maritime Village
building, 20 next to the Harborview House, and 12 next to the Reunion House, allof which you have listed in the upper
part of your table for Alt 1. l'm not sure where the additional 48 parking spaces are that you have included in your table
Could you clarify, or amend the table?
Thank you,
Karen
From: Swenson, Karen
Sent: Friday, January t7,2014 9:57 AM
To:'Natalie Proft-Carlson'
Cc: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.neU Garth Mann
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Natalie - I was focusing on Alt 2 in my recent response, but ljust looked again at the parking for the maritime village in
Alt 1. Your table lists 148 surface parking spaces for the Maritime Village for Alt 1. I just counted the parking spaces on
the site plan that are adjacent to the Maritime Village building (west and south parking areas, north of Black Point Rd)
and I count 88 surface parking spaces. You might have inadvertently added the 50 spaces for the transit stop into the
Maritime Village count. The parking spaces for the transit stop are listed separately in your table.
Sorry I didn't catch this before now. I had taken these tables and face value and didn't physically count them on the site
plan until we started this recent conversation. lf this double-counting did occur, can you update your tables please?
Thanks,
Karen
Fro m : Nata I ie Proft -Ca rlson [ma i lto : N Proft -Ca rlson @g m ha rch itects,com ]
Sent: Friday, January 77,2014 9:16 AM
To: Michael Read; peckassoc@comcast.neU Swenson, Karen; Garth Mann
Subject: RE: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Hello Team,
The 77 parking stalls down in the marin a arca are not counted in my Alternative 2 SEIS table because the marina area
has been removed from the SEIS and we are developing it as per the binding site plan and Shorewater Management
plan. That is what my tables show. Alternative 1 did include the marina lands but Alternative 2 does not. When I look at
my Alternative 1 table though, it does not include any parking stalls that were down in the marina arca and this should
probably be updated. Let me know what you think. Thanks.
I hope this helps
Natalie
From: Michael Read [mailto:mikeread@tenw.com]
Sent: January-16-14 3:30 PM
To: Natalie Proft-Carlson
Subject: Fwd: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
3
Notolie:
Could you pleose confirm this below? Thonks I
Original Message
Subject:RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Date:Thu, l6 Jan 201417:22:;51 -0500
From:Swenson, Karen <kswenson@eaest.com>
To:Michael Read <mikeread@tenw.com>
CC : Don Coleman <don@pleasantharbormarina.com>, "peckassoc@comcast.net"
<peckassoc@comcast.net>
Mike - Natalie's tables do not include the existing parking spaces for the marina centre (she just lists EXISTING), so your
table will include 77 parking spaces more than her tables. Am I correct, Don and Craig?
-Karen
From: Swenson, Karen
Sent: Thursday, January L6,20L4 2:16 PM
To:'Michael Read'
Cc: Don Coleman; peckassoc@comcast.net
Subject: RE: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
ln your tables, the marina parking supply should be 77 according to Don's count. Natalie's table for Alternative 2
indicates that the 38 spaces you currently have listed for the marina in your table is actually for the Maritime Village and
thus should be combined with the Condos/Restaurant/Shopping Center parking number, for a total of 775 parking
spaces (137 + 38). A similar change should be applied to your table for Alternative 1.
Craig or Don - please correct me if l'm wrong...
Thanks,
Koruw Stxp*r+owt[I
Karen Swenson, AICP
Senior Planner
2200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121
206.452.5350 x 1716
ks\ryenson@eaest.com
From: Michael Read [mailto:mikeread@tenw.com]
Sent: Thursday, January L6,2014 2:10 PM
To: Swenson, Karen
Cc: Don Coleman; oeckassoc@comcast.net
Subject: Re: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Koren:
I sent on inquiry to Croig on I l1l2013 obout how the "existing" updotes from Don modified the orchitects tobles,
but hodn't received onything bock yet. As our porking onolysis is bosed on the proposed supply under the
vorious olternotives for the site os o whole, it wos uncleor os to whot numbers in Notolie's tobles octuolly would
chonge os o result of Don's informotion.
Michael Read, PE I Principol
TENW Po Box 65254, Seaule, wA 98155
mikeread@tenw.com I Office: 206-361-7333 (x l0l ) | Cell:206-999-4145
On 111612014 2:02 PM, Swenson, Karen wrote:
4
Mike - do you have an ETA on updating these parking demand tables to reflect Don's parking count at the marina (see
below) and Natalie's updated data tables (attached)?
Thanks,
Karen SwensonElt
Karen Swenson, AICP
Senior Planner
2200 Si\4h Avenue, Suite 707 | Seattle, WA 98121
206.452.5350 x 1716
kswenson@eaest.com.
From: Michael Read [mailto:mikeread@tenw.com]
Sent: Monday, January 06,20L4 6:27 PM
To: peckassoc@comcast. net
Cc: Swenson, Karen; Don Coleman
Subject: Re: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Sure, will do.
Sentfrom TENW Remote Email
Mike Read, (206) 999-4145
peckassoc@comcast.net wrote :
Mike,
The number of existing parking spaces currently being used at the marina total TT according to Don's
count.
Would you please revise your table to that number.
Thank you.
Craig
From : "Michael Read" <mikeread@terrwcom>
To: peckassoc@comcast. net
Gc : "Natalie Proft-Carlson" < N Proft-Carlson@qm harch itects.com>, "Pau l Hospelhorn"
<pau l@statesman usa. com >, "Ga rth Man n" <Garth @statesma ncorporation. com >
Sent: Sunday, December 1,2013 10:00:43 AM
Subject: Re: Pleasant Harbor SEIS
Craig:
Here are the updated parking demand analysis tables of Alts I and 2 given the latest program/site plans we received before the
holidays. As shown, overall supply meets demand, but is very tight under Alt 2 (meanings lots of parking management would be
required, valet, etc.). We don't have a separate memo on parking demand itsell it was integrated into a larger study document. If we
need to prepare a "memo" to companion these tables, please advise. I would not want to "reissue" our early 2012 document as an
update, as that addressed a multitude of other items not related to parking.
As for your question below, the SR 101 construction can be defened to occur simultaneously with completion of traffic being
generated by the first phase of development or when the Maritime Village is constructed. If we need to conduct an initial phase on in
the lower site first, the County/WSDOT would likely require a preliminary analysis of turn lane warrants with that phase only if the
intersection improvement itself is delayed until a later phase. However, it appears that Alt 2 still has the Maritime Village at the first
phase. Let me know ifyou have further questions.
Thanks !
5
Michael Read, PE lrrincipat
TENW PO Box 65254, Seattle, WA 98155
mikeread@tenw.com I Offi"", 206-361-7333 (x l0l)lCell: 206-999-4145
On 1111312013 7:13 AM, peckassoc@comcast.net wrote:
Mike,
We have changed the configuration of the t\Iaritime area at Pleasant Harbor and the construction
phasing of the MPR.
The Harbor View House 12 unit building and the Reunion House 12 unit building have been
eliminated and those units added to the short term units in the Maritime Building north of Black Point
Road.
The intersection of Black Point Road will be realigned as previously shown.
A new site plan will be sent to you later today.
I am revising the description of construction phasing now in text and graphic forms.
QUESTION: Can reconstruction of U.S. Hwy 101 be deferred to a later construction phase if traffic
from the Maritime Building is added at the realigned intersection with U.S. Hwy 101 at the time of that
build ing construction.
That would mean that Black Point Road is realigned and constructed along with the new boat launch
road at the same time (or similar) that the Maritime building is constructed.
We also need your parking analysis memo to be updated.
Thank you.
Craig
6