HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog280
Page 1 of 1
Michelle Farfan
From: AI Scalf
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 20052:54 PM
To: Michelle Farfan
Subject: FW: Development of Ludlow Bay Village
A comment letter
AI
-----Original Message-----
From: Phil Otness [mailto:otness@cablespeed.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 2:49 PM
To: AI Scalf
Subject: Development of Ludlow Bay Village
Dear Mr. Scalf,
We are not opposed to PLA as owner, developing their properties and believe in the most part they are doing
a reasonable job. However, we have great concerns over their request to change from the current county approved
residential limits, in the Ludlow Bay Village.
Density: We object strongly to the requested new limits of residential units from County approved 58 town homes (25
already built) to 191 units. This small area can not safely handle this increase since the proposed roads and traffic pattern
will not handle this load. Likewise parking for this many units is not adequate. PLA bought the properties from ORM
knowing the approved limits and the County should continue to enforce them. They were negotiated with the community
back in the 90's and they should not be re-opened again.
Recreation facility: PLA is welcome to build such a facility for their Inn & Marina guests. However, residential units
should continue to participate in the Beach Club. The current CC & R's require membership from existing townhomes.
Our community already suffers from the development of two recreation clubs. To add a third for residence is to further
divide the community. It is the hope of many of us that some day we can join the community into one club organization.
This third club for residence would add decades to that goal.
Freshwater lagoon: We do not believe PLA should be allowed to build over the pond water. It was required to be a
wildlife refuge in earlier Co. permits which has never been enforced, nor have the previous owner or current owner made
any steps to fulfill that obligation.
Bonding: Due to the history of the owners not fulfilling their promises to the community for the many obligations they
incurred as a part of previous permits, we believe the owners should be required to post a bond for completion of all
facilities, including roads, parking, and landscaping, as required by any permit.
Thank you for your attention to these concerns.
Sincerely,
Anette & Phil Otness
135 W. Ludlow Point Rd.
Port Ludlow
11/3/2005
LOG ITENl
#d,W
Page-1_~-,_.o(L"