HomeMy WebLinkAbout088Michelle Farfan
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
ns$ N. Sslr street $ s*8ftls, &l,A g8r{13
JOHl,t ?. {JJ.l COOKI
ATTCIRNHV
ffi HGULTHAN LAw
David W. Johnson < djoh nson @co jefferson.wa.us >
Thursday, May 19, 20L67:02 AM
Cynthia Koan; Gary Felder; Kevin Coker; Lorna Smith; Mark Jochems; Matt Sircely;
Richard Hull;Tom Giske
David W. Johnson
FW: Pleasant Harbor Dev Regs
PC members,
Sorry I missed last night's meeting. Below are answers to some of the questions we had about the regulations.
From: JT Cooke Imailto:JT@houlihan-law.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2016 1:33 PM
To: David W. Johnson <djohnson@co.jefferson.wa.us>
Subject: RE: Pleasant Harbor Dev Regs
David-
The 80' height limit is for the "Terrace" building that is currently located in approximately the middle of the MPR. lf it
helps, we could add language that increase the setback to 40' for buildings over 60' in height.
With respect to 17.80.070, we can add that a change will be considered minor even if it does not meet conditions a-d if
it does not otherwise qualify as a major revision in 17.80.080.
Let me know if you need anything else
Thanks,
JT
206"5421075
?ofi"s4?,Is58
?s3.?t2.8267
DiRECT
FAX
M0B$rfr
www"houtihan-law.com
NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. lf you have received it in error, please advise
the sender by reply email and immediately delete the message and any attachments without copying or disclosing the contents.
Thank you.
From: David W. Johnson Imailto:d iohnson @co.iefferson.wa. us]
Sent: Tuesday, May 17,20761:43 PM
1
To: JT Cooke <JT@houlihan-law.com>
Cc: David W. Johnson <diohnson@co.iefferson.wa. us>
Subject: Pleasant Harbor Dev Regs
JT,
Per our discussion today
17.65.030 references a max building height of 80 feet. We are wondering where that height came from and if that is still
the case. 17.65.040 references a 20 foot setback from resort boundary lines, which means an 80 foot building could be
built 20 feet from a boundary line. Could there be setback that accounts for increased distances based on height?
17.80.7O says a change to the Resort Plan may still qualify as a minor revision even if it fails to satisfy conditions a - d,
but doesn't say how. Could language be added to allow Administrative discretion?
Thanks !
David Wayne Johnson - LEED AP - Neighborhood Development
Associate Planner - Port Ludlow Lead Planner
Department of Community Development
Jefferson County
360.379.4465
Mission: To preserve and enhance the quality of life in Jefferson County by promoting a vibrant economy,
sound communities and a healthy environment.
$ Slve PAPER - Pleose do not print this e-moil unless obsolutely necessory
All e-mail may be constdered subject to the Public Records Act and as such may be drsclosed to a third-party requestor,
Jgffurssri County Oopartment oI Csmmunlly P€uelopm*nl
ffi swu4.*H,m,ff,.H
ttl lti..td.{ ril. fre.t b{Bnd. ${lSil4 I taaLi.?*-aajp I doClpo,j.ltrts.rr"ur
2
I.EE$
AP
NO