HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog194
~
.,
Page 1 of2
""
Michelle Farfan
From: AI Scalf
Sent: Thursday, June 17,20048:51 AM
To: Michelle Farfan
Subject: FW: Permit
for our files
AI
-----Original Message-----
From: Powers & Therrien [mailto:powers_therrien@yvn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 10:56 AM
To: AI Scalf
Cc: SchmitzSr@aol.com; carolsaber@olympus.net
Subject: Re: Permit
AI:
I appreciate the response. I assume that the issuance of a shoreline permit after notice and a hearing and subject to
modifications, if any, requisred thereby, is a condition among others, of the issuance of a building permit. I also assume that
the revised building permit application will have to be posted in the same fashion as the initial April 9, 2004 application for
comment. I finally assume that PLA will not conduct or be permitted to conduct construction activities on the four lots on
which building 600 would be placed before obtaining both the SMA permit and the building permit against the revised
application. If this is not the case, please advise me. I would also like to address with the permit examiner the safety issues
that I addressed briefly with you by prior email. My neighbor has already had a problem with young children of guests and
the dangerous roadway. I have three grandchildren four years old and under that I want protected. Hence. we, at our cost put
in gates to our front porch. This does not resolve the roadway issue. It is simply not safe for pedestrians and will be rendered
less safe if the property on its west side to the roadway is developed particularly in the narrow isthmus where our unit is
located and the building immediately to the south. This is the case if any improvements are built at or near the roadway on
the west side. I hope you understand my safety concern.
Les
----- Original Message -----
From: AI Scalf
To: Powers & Therrien
Cc: Michelle Farfan; SchmitzSr@aol.com ; carolsaber@olympus.net
Sent: Wednesday, June 16,200410:48 AM
Subject: RE: Permit
Les
PLA has verbally indicated they will revise the building application from six to four units. The shoreline permit
will have public notice and you can comment on the application at that time.
AI
-----Original Message-----
From: Powers & Therrien [mailto:powers_therrien@yvn.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 10:17 AM
To: AI Scalf
Cc: Powers & Therrien; Michelle Farfan; SchmitzSr@aol.com; carolsaber@olympus.net
Subject: Permit
Dear Mr. Scalf:
I havo a 'OP:OI m aftliEMu 10' building 600 at Port Ludlow dawd April 9 ,2004. [am und"", aboot i~
6/17/2004 Page ..'.~ ._O(L~
,w
..
.>>'
.. -A
Page 2 of2
...
disposition. However, I note that the description of the project as six townhouses is misleading. PLA represented
in the SEIS and in meetings with the townhouse owners that the subject building would be six units organized as
stacked condominiums and that such configuration would replace the 4 townhouse units that are provided in the
1994 plat. I understand from, I believe, Ms. Farfan, that you rejected the permit application on the basis of change
in density and in nature of ownership and because of questions arising from the application of the Jefferson County
Shorelines Management Program to proposed construction over the lagoon. That program forbids construction over
water and provides additionally for a 30 foot setback from highwater edge. I would understand the rejection further
to be supported by PLA's lack of compliance with RCW 58.17.215's requirements for consent by a majority of
persons with ownership interests in the plat ansd by unanimous consent of persons with property subject to the CC
& Rs. These provide for an associastion of 53 platted townhouse owners and not a mix of townhouse owners and
condominium owners or a number thereof in excess of 53 that would result under the proposed SEIS ifbuilt out. I
also draw your attention to safety issues relating to Heron Dr. that are described in the engineering report attached
to my comments to the draft SEIS. The proposed construction, whether as a six plex or as a four plex would
increase the risks and potential liability to Jefferson County for approving an unsafe design of Heron Dr.. These
matters should all be considered with applicable uniform codes in connection with any review of any permit
application for building 600. I intend to provide by subsequent correspondence my analysis of the roadway
problems and liability that flows therefrom. I understand from Ms. Farfan that the revised permit application will
be submitted to a permit examiner and that interested parties will be given notice before any permit is approved with
the opportunity to be heard on the matter.
Your assistance on this matter is appreciated.
Les Powers
Powers & Therrien, P.S.
3502 Tieton Drive
Yakima, WA 98902
Phone: 509-453-8906
Fax: 509-453-0745
This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 2510-2521 and is
legally privileged. This message and any attachments hereto may contain confidential information
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient(s),
or the employee or agent responsible for delivery of this message to the intended recipient(s), you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this email message is strictly prohibited.
If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and delete this email
from your computer.
LOG ITEM
#~
Page 2- of ~
6/1712004