EFTA02443246.pdf
PDF Source (No Download)
Extracted Text (OCR)
To:
Doug Schoettle
Cc:
J Epstein[jeevacation@gmail.com); Darren lndyke
From:
Brice Gordon
Sent:
Sat 5/30/2009 10:01:44 AM
Subject: Re: LSJ Bath addition and mechanical building budget and designs
Title: Re: LSJ Bath addition and mechanical building budget and designs
My comments and recommendations Below
On 5/29/09 4:01 PM, "daschoettle@yahoo.com" <daschoettle@yahoo.com> wrote:
Darren, I have reviewed the documents you sent me, I don't understand the budget
numbers, most seem to be high. The following is a basic break down of the square
footage of the various components of the master bath addition.
Addition to bathroom
addition to verandah
Existing bathroom remodeled
Existing bedroom and entry
Existing verandah
680 sq.ft.
355 sq.ft.
330 sq.ft.
635 sq.ft.
755 sq.ft.
Total under roof
2755 sq.ft.
The proposed scope is incomplete and undefined. I don't understand most of the budget
dollars. This is a simple addition to a simple building in the USVI, the exterior
matches the existing, the interior may have fancy marble but thats just a finish. ThIs
cannot be a million dollar project. Agree not a million dollar project, exterior material
is the same but the look is different, i.e. stone veneer columns and no arches to
match office pavilion.
With regard to the Mechanical Building fit out and possible extension, I do not have a real
plan or specification upon which to base my review, just a stick drawing without
engineering. At the same point as a year ago.
1. The existing, approved CZM drawings indicate a location for fuel truck delivery that
complies with DPNR. Why change the location? Doug, we discussed this situation
and you agreed to proposed location change. The existing approved site, as you
explained to me is where the construction trailer, a container, toilet trailer are
presently located. Darren, I believe we need to show compliance (DPNR) in regard to
fuel truck storage and waste oil containment within the very near future, not 3 plus
years later when construction has been completed, hence the need to change
location.
2. Why construct expensive retaining walls? The lower level of the electrical building is to be
completely backfilled and the fill is to extend toward the water for some distance
before it slopes down to meet existing grade. The island has no shortage of
excavated fill to get rid of or to be repositioned. Doug how do you propose to back fill
between Aarons workshop and the new Mechanical building to grade, when the wall
that supports the metal structure of Aaron's workshop has not been designed as a
retaining wall. Excavated Fill - 1/3 road material, 1/3 landscape/rock walls, 1/3 fill, a
rough estimate, there maybe just enough fill. That is also taking Into account the
proposed excavation for the Gensler theater which will also require back filling and
final grade to bury it.
3. A new cistern at the mechanical area should take into account the proposed additions to
EFTA_R1_01518564
EFTA02443246
the existing house. The addition will require a large cistern which is better located
away from the additions and gardens, preferably at the mechanical area. Agree
4. The fire supression system will require a fire reserve storage of water. If a large cistern
has not been constructed in time then temporary plastic storage tanks can be used.
The temporary tanks should be placed outside the building in the landscape above
the building. The lower level of the building is constructed to hold fuel tanks and to
contain any oil leaks. No drains are permitted. Water tanks should not be located at
this level. Disagree, Water proofing and a thing called a sump pump with alarm,
Obliviously it needs to meet with code/engineering approval.
5. The budget estimate seems expensive to extend the mechanical building by such a small
amount, perhaps an extension twice the size would be more economical and useful.
Useful yes, economic ? More excavation, forming, rebar, concrete and engineering
6. Another consideration should be to construct a large concrete cistern tank seperatly from
the electrical building and put a metal structure on top. Consider modular RO units in
containers similer to the existing unit. Agree with 2 RO units, no to containers. Skid
mounted RO's and pre treatment need to be properly mounted, pumps and
controllers need to be cooled, otherwise premature failures will occur.
7. If alternate sources of energy are to be considered the engineering of the electrical fit out
will need to be reengineered.
Regards, Douglas
I. NEWMAN AND MOLL ARE DEMOBLIZING NEXT WEEK
2. GLIDDEN NEEDS DIRECTION FOR FINAL GRADE FOR TRANSFORMER AND
CONDUIT PLACEMENT
TAKING INTO ACCOUNT PRESENT AND FUTURE BUILD OUT, SUPPORT NEEDS i.e. storage,
power/water and ECOMONIC'S, I WOULD RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING.
NO TO: EXTENISION
YES TO: 2 GENERATORS, FUEL TANKS , SWITCHING GEAR .
RO'S IN EXISTING STRUCTURE WITH POLY TANKS FOR FIRE SUPPRESSION IF CODE
ALLOWS.
RETAINING WALLS FORMED, NEW METAL STRUCTURE TO HOUSE ENGINEERING AND
STORAGE CONTAINERS.
POLY TANKS ADJACENT TO MECHANICAL STRUCTURE AS CISTERNS (DECREASED AND
ADDED AS REQUIRED)
BACK FILL AND TERRACE AREA PARALLEL WITH HELIPAD.
OBIVIOUSLY BUDGETS AND ENGINEERING NEED REVIEW.
DOUG HOW WOULD YOU PROCEED
Brice M Gordon
EFTA_R1_01518565
EFTA02443247
EFTA_R1_01518566
EFTA02443248
Document Preview
PDF source document
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
This document was extracted from a PDF. No image preview is available. The OCR text is shown on the left.
Extracted Information
Email Addresses
Document Details
| Filename | EFTA02443246.pdf |
| File Size | 268.1 KB |
| OCR Confidence | 85.0% |
| Has Readable Text | Yes |
| Text Length | 5,395 characters |
| Indexed | 2026-02-12T17:09:22.023436 |