To: Doug Schoettle[████████████████████████]
Cc: J Epstein[jeevacation@gmail.com]; Darren Indyke[████████████████████████]
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: LSJBath 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.

<table><tr><th>Addition to bathroom</th><th>680 sq.ft.</th></tr><tr><td>addition to verandah</td><td>355 sq.ft.</td></tr><tr><td>Existing bathroom remodeled</td><td>330 sq.ft.</td></tr><tr><td>Existing bedroom and entry</td><td>635 sq.ft.</td></tr><tr><td>Existing verandah</td><td>755 sq.ft.</td></tr><tr><td>Total under roof</td><td>2755 sq.ft.</td></tr></table>

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

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