Sudden Valley committee hears engineers: Barn 6 structurally unsound, subcommittee to propose phased redevelopment

The Sudden Valley Long Range Planning Committee on March 6 received repeated technical assessments that described Barn 6 as structurally unsafe and discussed options to remove, replace or repurpose the site along with nearby clubhouse spaces.

Committee members said the structure, originally built for agricultural use, has multiple reports showing rot, missing footings, and load-bearing members that fail current snow, wind and seismic standards. Mitch, a committee member who summarized the engineering findings, said engineers concluded the building was “not structurally sound” and “not recoverable.”

The discussion matters because Barn 6 sits on association property and the committee has been asked by the board to return a plan in 90 days. Committee members described short-term fixes as unlikely to be sufficient and explored phased approaches, revenue-generating uses for new space and modifications to nearby parking and clubhouse facilities.

Mitch told the committee that engineering reports dating to 2013 and a follow-up in 2017 documented serious problems: the first story is about 13,000 square feet, many support posts are rotted and driven directly into the ground without proper footings, and some members were overstressed “by factors raised in the 3.67 times standard,” according to the reports he cited. He said earlier work recommended demolition after materials were moved to a new storage facility at Area Z rather than investing in remediation.

Committee members described a range of redevelopment ideas: a year-round multiuse facility with a commercial-grade floor that could host sports, events and rentals; enclosed seasonal “bubble” covers or other solutions to allow a pool or rink to operate year round; office cubicles or small rentable offices in existing lower-level spaces; and event facilities for weddings or corporate rentals to generate revenue. Kyle, the recreation manager, was identified as the staff member the subcommittee will consult to assess current space utilization and staffing implications for any year-round operations.

The group reviewed older cost estimates for systems such as sprinklers and HVAC; one number cited for a sprinkler addition was roughly $2,250 but members noted that figure is several years old and would be significantly higher now. The committee discussed inflation at roughly 3 percent in normal years and 6 percent during the COVID era as context for updating cost projections.

Members raised operational constraints for year-round pool use, including lifeguard staffing and state code requirements. The transcript includes a reference to Washington Administrative Code (WAC) guidance on pool operation and lifeguard standards; the committee said it would consult regulatory guidance and local practice to scope a year-round pool proposal.

No formal motions or votes were recorded during the discussion. Instead, the committee agreed to continue refining recommendations, gather updated quotes and structural evaluations, interview commercial real-estate advisors about leasing dead or underused spaces, and present a phased plan and cost estimates to the board in the requested timeframe.

The committee also discussed short-term tactical steps: documenting “dead spaces” in clubhouse facilities for possible rental or repurposing, pursuing permeable engineered parking between buildings to increase parking supply, and exploring how retrofit staging could spread costs over several years while acknowledging higher future costs for delayed stages.

Members said prior documentation and decisions matter for budgeting: earlier materials and the association’s revitalization package already include assessments and proposals, and the subcommittees will compile those documents and updated engineering input before the next board meeting. The committee expects to bring a draft plan to its April meeting for further refinement.

Ending: The committee did not make a final decision on Barn 6’s disposition at the March 6 meeting; members directed subcommittees and staff to gather updated structural, cost and utilization data and to prepare a phased redevelopment proposal for the board within the board’s requested 90-day timeline.