Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog270 ...IIIl Page 1 of2 1 " Michelle Farfan From: AI Scalf Sent: Wednesday, November 02, 20054:32 PM To: Michelle Farfan Subject: FW: PLA expansion A comment letter on the Resort AI -----Original Message----- From: Jack Manning [mailto:jackatm@cablespeed.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 02,20054:28 PM To: AI Scalf Subject: PLA expansion Jack Manning 25 Sea Vista Place Port Ludlow, WA 98103 jackatm@cablespeed.com November 2, 2005 Al Scalf Manager Jefferson County Dept. of Community Development 621 Sheridan Street Port Townsend, W A 98368 Dear Mr. Scalf: I am a three year resident of Port Ludlow, and I am writing to express my concern about recent discussion and the pending decision to allow Port Ludlow Associates to make major changes to the Port Ludlow Resort and Ludlow Bay Village. I have enjoyed a cabin at Mats Mats Bay since 1986 and appreciate the quality and design of the existing resort and village. I understand the need to keep the resort viable and I support the existing permit for expansion granted in 1993. The current proposal has several drawbacks that would severely damage the value of the resort. Adding a large number of condominiums would adversely affect the character and livability of the Village. It would not allow for adequate parking or sidewalks for residents and visitors. It would require moving the existing emergency helipad to a very undesirable location. Port Ludlow may have begun as a Planned Resort Community but it has developed into a valuable asset to Jefferson County. Building over wetlands, dividing the community with a third recreational facility and reducing the size ofthe restaurant does not enhance the pride residents have in their community. Sincerely, 11/3/2005 ITEM ~-zI2 J,^,~.of :2 ""IIIIIIl Page 2 of2 Jack Manning J However, I do not believe that the benefits of widening Main Street for more traffic compare favorably to the benefits of keeping the trees. Consider: Trees make for a more natural, less artificial, and therefore less stressful, environment. The sight and sound of traffic, on the other hand, are not pleasant, and can leave us feeling more stressed. Furthermore, it is well known that trees improve air quality; leaves filter the air we breathe, absorb pollution, and give off oxygen. It is also well known that traffic gives off myriad pollutants that decrease air quality. It would seem that widening our roads would bring increased growth, and thus a better economy, to our city. However, consider that trees bring energy savings by moderating heat in commercial areas, and that landscaping with trees increases property values. Traffic, on the other hand, will increase energy costs by increasing temperatures and air pollution, and will decrease surrounding property values. Are these tradeoffs that we really want to make? I am looking forward to your response. Sincerely, 11/3/2005 ;:G ITEM ~LQ ....~of+