HomeMy WebLinkAboutLog216
< ,
i~'
ell
e
e
Russ Michel
234 Crestview Drive
Port Ludlow, W A 98365
/- /6
(
f2-.
November 3, 2006
Statement in opposition to Trendwest specifically as a single-family residential zoning
designation.
Point #1:
W orldmark Trendwest Resorts is owned by Wyndam Vacation Ownership and boasts
over 750,000 members with 140 resort properties throughout North America and the
South Pacific.
Here are a few quotes directly from their website:
"W orldmark credits are a vacation currency that you own, The number of credits you
purchase is deposited annually into a Worldmark account to spend as you choose."
"You don't own a particular season, or allotted time in a particular unit or at a single
resort. You own all of them,"
"W orldmark Trendwest Resorts pioneered the drive-to resort concept that was designed
to make 2 - 3 day getaways easy."
You can see from the above quotations that W orldmark Trendwest Resorts is not a
traditional "timeshare," The property ownership remains with Worldmark Trendwest
Resorts, They would pay the property taxes and the utility bills. I could easily make the
argument that there is no~ride in perso~ership as other Port Ludlow residents.
.",cl,ud"c.J ~
Every Trendwest resort offers its owners the concept of bonus time if there are vacancies
more than 14 days out. Bonus time can be reserved by a Trendwest member who pays a
nightly fee. This very much sounds like a hotel to me and to my knowledge, hotels are
not allowed on residential zoned properties. Furthermore, Trendwest resorts offer the
ability to purchase gifts, movie rentals, and limited snacks in their offices. This sounds to
me like a commercial enterprise,
Point#2:
The number of units described for this proposal is, in my opinion, out of character with/ -t4v~Q
Port Ludlow. Like other Trendwest resorts, there would likely be a swimming pool, $hot
tu~and a kiddie pool. Has anyone looked carefully at the impact of such a development
8-( f;;
/ 2..
...
~GIcY"'
IV Pi ((
~Jbl w,.
-r€-()J.
e
e
on the water supply and sewer treatment? I'm not an engineer, but my understanding is
that the Port Ludlow MPR limits the number of residences to 2,250 based on water and
sewer treatment capacity. I would venture to say that such a proposed Trendwest resort
with 120 units with associated pools would have far more demand on the infrastructure
than 120 single family dwellings
,-.F"int ~
~
I don't agree with the County giving a mitigated statement of Non-Significance for a
project of this magnitude especially along the shoreline and situated alongside Paradise
Bay Road - a major transportation arterial. There would, most likely, be increased traffic
issues, shoreline preservation issues, and adverse visual effects like night light' g.
In summary, I would request that the County and the Hearing Examiner not approve the
Trendwest proposal from PLA. I object to the term "residential" for this project proposal
and I would like some level of confidence that such a development would not adversely
impact water and sewer capacity and preserve the Port Ludlow values and neighborhood
characteristics that brought me and my family here.
Thank you.
~ _1
, .,('
.~LJe.
'7-.....~