Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog058 Page 1 of 1 Stacie Hoskins From: Mike Asmundson [mike@asmundsongolf.com] Sent: Monday, October 31,20052:48 PM To: Stacie Hoskins Cc: Jerry Smith Subject: Disco Bay Stacie: I received your message on Thursday and I would only like to restate the importance of our being able to understand the potential impact on the golf course next year so that we can set rates for our customers since all annual passes expire at the end of the year. I had hoped that we could have received you're comments at or near the time that we received those from the other County Departments, agencies and public. Obviously, that is not going to happen but it would help me a great deal if you could give me an estimation of when you might expect to be complete with your review. Also, would it be possible to receive them incrementally, so that we can start preparing responses while you continue your review. I would also like to address a couple additional points, which are: 1} When we met we discussed the problems with the formatting of the site plans and that on several sheets there was little or no information. Unfortunately, this situation is attributable to the County's application requirements that do not efficiently deal with projects of this scale or type. One of Pat Perryman's comments specifically addresses this issue. I was wondering if it might not be possible for us to submit information at another scale and composition as long as the information is clearly legible in order to address this dilemma. 2} We provided overall parcel legal descriptions for the proposed built cabin product along with the density in proportion to the overall area for net area/unit. We only suggested a boundary line (no legal description) separating the units themselves. Being in the design business on large scale complicated projects my fear always is to read too much detail into the preliminary design stage. Someone will always interpret that information literally and then we will have to struggle to modify in order to adapt our project to the site itself which usually not only produces a better product but minimizes the extent of work and cost. We also provided a written description of the architectural methodology that was to be employed in the final site planning and design of these cabin units to moderate site impacts. Interior boundaries would then be produced hopefully once and in the correct location without 'guessing'. This is a shortcoming in the long plat application which depending upon one's interpretation contradicts the PRRD ordinance. It would be helpful if we could clarify what truly is required and what latitude one might have in the future during subsequent design development stages to improve our project. I will be in Port Townsend over the weekend and could be available to meet with you next Monday afternoon at 1 :00. Perhaps we could talk through the above issues, and discuss any other comments you may be putting together. I will be on Bainbridge in the morning and need to leave to Seattle 2:30. Thank you Mike Asmundson No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by A VG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.362/ Virus Database: 267.12.6/151 - Release Date: 10/28/2005 ... .JG p-EM . ._~_ LS ..~..+of ( 11/7/2005