SUB18840 HEX Exhibit 17Deborah Rose
From: Bob Conoley [bobthelawyer@gwestoffice.net]
nt: Sunday, August 17, 2014 9:43 AM
j: 'Friends of Rolling Bay'
Cc: Deborah Rose
Subject: RE: August 15. Comment deadline/ Note late- arriving official correction -- our public
comments will continue to be received until or made at 9 a.m. hearing on Thursday, August
21, 2014 by hearing examiner. in person or via Deb Rose
Ola, Kristin- I believe our deadline longer for public comments if made by or at hearing examiner's hearing on " Rolling
Sunrise" (# SUB 18840) at city hall, 9 a.m. Thursday, August 21, 2014 in city hall council chambers.
Ms. Rose–Please forward TO THE HEARING EXAMINER by 9 a.m. Thursday, August 21, 2014:
1 wish to commend Mr Smith for continuing his study & his size -up perceptiveness about unresolved BGH site
problems. The 7 -dwelling plan doesn't fit. It falls short and creates real neighborhood hardships. BGH states it will build
out one lot at a time. More like 4-5 dwellings maximum density matches better our surrounding meager infrastructure
emands on its 3.5 acres. This means streets, routine services listed below, & emergency access, or lack of. I hope he
recommends Mr. Girard/BGH return to their original proposal of 3 homes access from Hyla Ln and the rest access this
site from Sunrise dr,South. Here's why:
1.)--- TRASH/RECYCLE— a windshield glimpse @ Sunrise South fails to take cue from trash & recycle demand
placements currently followed for existing 6-7 dwellings. Some folks leave containers on Sunrise Dr. shoulders all week.
Imagine refuse impacts then from 7 more dwellings accessing on Sunrise. These 30.40 containers of all kinds ( 3 types of
recycle) will clog the 45 ft. dirt patch available. Dragging distance from BGH site to public ROW is for pick-up only on
Sunrise South is some 3-400 ft.
2) MAIL--- Same problem. No delivery made off of public ROW. Some 10-12 more mail & newspaper box clusters
added. This a neighborhood of historic mail vandalism & delay in overnight drops.
3)--- DEVELOPER CONTRACTED AMENITIES BY LAW ARE WARRANTED W/ H.E./ CITY APPROVAL.
(a) Duncan Ln., a connecting private road, serves up to 12 homes currently accessed by Falk Rd. & this Sunrise
,uth junction. On foot it serves walkers, joggers and dogs from the R.B. road ends (5).
(b) It will be used de facto in reality & due to lack of city resources is currently only access to this neighborhood of
many seniors in snow, rain storm, power line drops, usual Sunrise flooding, & tree falls. The contract must require BGH
dwellers provide co -shared gravel, earthen edges & erosion control measures as needed & as done by volunteers now at
$180 a dwelling.
Sunrise South is only access going north (besides Duncan Ln) to the Red Cross- sponsored city disaster shelter
located @ Bay Hay & Feed premises & it's designated generators, for warmth.
4)--- TRAFFIC. These routine demands are not readily apparent but are windshield apparent if it's clean. No black box
counters needed. ( One latte & a shortbread cookie) .Besides two turn -outs on Sunrise and one of Duncan, BGH must
provide an unfettered sight line for 2/10's mi. now warranted by removing overhanging limbs both sides Sunrise South/
BGH junction to Albertson Dr (Valley Rd.).
CURRENT MV DEMANDS ANECDOTALLY. Daily users of Sunrise Dr. South going south from Valley Rd. for
parking or access towards BGH site include these: 4-5 home offices or businesses; two art studios; daily double-parked
off-loading by 18 wheelers for three different commercial businesses; and the employee vehicles servicing these; as well
as the giftl produce/ farm/nursery complex at Bay Hay & Feed( dis- allowed use of church parking lot); the postal office of
600 -boxes; an auto repair facility, Music Guild meeting hall; the municipal court house; a new restaurant plan; three
existing snack, fast food or take-out businesses; a marital arts and frame shop facility; storage locker facilities; a church
congregation what likes pageants; a new Woodworkers crafts Guild retail sales facility; Life Span counseling center; a 2
ac. animal shelter; & a new church -sponsored Montessorial school facility in the works.
These as listed are all within 2/10's mile of the BGH subdivision, now claimed to have no appreciable or
recognizable impact on each other. Wow!
5)---- PUBLIC TRAIL. BGH has seemingly reconfigured the current public trail across its site from Sunrise South
junction it promised to maintain. Its current design problematic & off-putting. Not using its current route of one o'clock to 7
o'clock in north -south direction down steep incline, it projects re-routing the trail to follow a collapsed east -west "w" -like
route. Thus kirting the 7 homes along lot edges? No CCR's provisions offered currently by BGH per developer contract.
These should be added by H.E. requirement. They to assure width protection, no unlawful encroachments. trail surfaces,
on -obstruction by trash receptacles, vehicles & fences, signage, plantings, maintenance & animal control. These
acommended based on historic island antics for such trails. Offering this trail to BIPRD to maintain properly has 1 -in 6 -
chances of happening in the manner to enhance value for BGH. Neighborhood pets, raccoon, & deer abound. Due to this
BGH project w/o some CCR's like these, Rolling Sunrise may dwarf "the twilight howl" made by critters & famously used in
movie "1001 Dalmations."
Thx, Bob Conoley @ 10781 Sunrise Dr (immediate) adjacent owner.
-----Original Message -----
From: Friends of Rolling Bay [mailto:friendsofrollingbay@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2014 7:12 AM
To: Kristin Easterbrook
Subject: August 15. Comment deadline
Hi Friends and Neighbors,
For those of you who would like to submit comment regarding alternative routes, and/or strategies for
providing road access to the 7 home Rolling Sunrise Development (south end of Sunrise), the comment
deadline is this Friday, August 15.
One of the concerns we have is maintaining the pedestrian nature, and historical charm of the local, one
lane roads ---which is one of the defining assets of this'Old Bainbridge' neighborhood. Maintaining the
walkability, and preserving the trail that connects and extends through the site, south towards the beach,
is a Rolling Bay asset we'd like to see kept and maintained for the public to enjoy. (Attached is the
notice with more detail).
Thanks for taking a moment to send your comments to Hearing Examiner Stafford Smith's office by
Friday. The email is:
(
drose@.bainbridgewa.gov
Sincerely,
Friends of Rolling Bay,
Bob Conoley, Kristin Easterbrook, Jeri Myer, Russ Hamlet, Gerald Stevenson
Deborah Rose
From: Marylee Skelly (maryleeskelly@gmail.com]
nt: Tuesday, August 19, 201412:08 PM
to: Deborah Rose; Sean Conrad
Subject: 'Rolling Sunrise" (#SUB18840)
Ms Rose, Please forward this letter to the HEARING EXAMINER by 9 am Thursday, Aug 21, 2014 in city hall
council chambers.
The plan for 7 dwellings at the end of Sunrise Dr does NOT fit the neighborhood,the roads or the existing
runoff problems. It would create real hardships for the existing residents. 4 dwellings MAXIMUM density
better matches our surrounding infrastructure -No more than 4 dwellings should access Sunrise Dr and Duncan
Lane.
I live at 11030 Sunrise Dr just across from Albertson Rd. My property is directly across from two tall lovely old
pine trees. My bank at the street gets steeper as the road goes downhill. The salal covering this bank prevents
runoff problems on my side of the road. If the bank is cut into to widen the road it will cause erosion of my
property and consequent runoff. It would be a real loss to take down the old trees.
I sincerely hope that BGH/Mr Girard will return to the original plan of 3 homes access from Hyla Ln and the
rest from Sunrise Dr. and that he provide the promised public trail through his site.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
arylee Skelly
8/19/14
10432 Duncan Lane NE
Bainbridge Island WA 98110
August 20, 2014
Hon. Stafford L. Smith
Hearing Examiner
City of Bainbridge Island
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
RE: Comments on August 15 Staff Memo Re. Rolling Sunrise Subdivision,
SUB 18840
Dear Judge Smith:
This letter responds to the August 15, 2014 Memorandum of Sean
Conrad regarding access to the proposed "Rolling Sunrise" development, for
the upcoming August 21 hearing. Our home on the private Duncan Lane has
the longest Duncan Lane frontage of any home dependent on Duncan Lane
for access, and we are acutely interested in any development that increases
its traffic and thus changes the nature of our neighborhood.
While we agree with Mr. Conrad that no more than four homes should
use Sunrise for access, we have several concerns with his August 15
recommendations to you. They are as follows:
1) Need for a traffic study. The City still resists conducting a traffic
study, saying that it would be required only if a development increases
traffic on a road by 50 vehicle trips a day. He implicitly agrees that if all
seven houses are accessed from Sunrises, traffic would increase by at least
50 trips a day (stating that "the current preliminary plat would split the
traffic between Hyla Avenue and Sunrise Drive, not requiring a traffic
impact study"). We think, however, that a traffic study needs to be
conducted in any event, due to safety concerns --particularly stopping sight
distances.
Table 7.1, "Street Requirements" under the City's Design and
�) Construction Standards and Specifications, which has been provided by Mr.
Conrad, shows that a suburban residential street should have a minimum
i 6. Impacts to Duncan Lane. Mr. Conrad continues to ignore the
impacts to Duncan Lane, stating that it is "not known" whether residents of
Rolling Sunrise would use it. They clearly would. Duncan Lane is a private
road whose maintenance costs are borne entirely by the homeowners there.
We do not agree to allow any Rolling Sunrise traffic (including construction
traffic and future subdivision homeowner traffic) on Duncan Lane.
Requiring that Rolling Sunrise residents pay towards the maintenance of
Duncan Lane is not an acceptable solution, particularly given the difficulty
of collecting for maintenance (which occurred when a collection was taken
for grading this year).
Preventing increased use of Duncan Lane is necessary to the safety of
residents and pedestrians, as well as to our tranquil enjoyment of the Lane,
as described further in our August 14 letter to you. We request that you
include in any subdivision decision a requirement that the developer (and its
contractors and subcontractors) not use the private Duncan Lane in any
regard during construction and pre -construction activities. We also request
that your decision reflect that Duncan Lane is a private road and should not
be used by residents of any new Rolling Sunrise development.
Sind
Kath Kennedy
Megan Kennedy
206-201-3614
206-842-4644
Deborah Rose
_3om: Sean Conrad
nt: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 11:46 AM
ro: Deborah Rose
Subject: FW: Possible Wet land infringement with proposed upgrading on Sunrise Drive for new
development
Sean Conrad, AICP
Planner
City of Bainbridge Island
280 Madison Ave. N.
(206) 780-3761
From: Kathy Cook
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:47 AM
To: Sean Conrad; Janelle Hitch
Cc: Josh Machen; Nan Gladstein
Subject: FW: Possible Wet land infringement with proposed upgrading on Sunrise Drive for new development
I assume this refers to Rolling Sunrise.
Kathy Cook
Director, Planning and Community Development
}� of Bainbridge Island
c80 Madison Avenue No.
Bainbridge Island, WA. 98110
206-842-2552
From Maradel Gale [ma iIto:maradel.galeCdcobicommittee.emaill
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:13 AM
To: Kathy Cook
Subject: FW: Possible Wet land infringement with proposed upgrading on Sunrise Drive for new development
From: Ken@Lassesen.com [mailto:ken.lassesen@amail.coml
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:10 AM
To: Michael Lewars; Mack Pearl; Maradel Gale; Jon Quitslund; kate.kelly@cobicommitttee.email: John Thomas; Julie
Kriegh; help@kitsapl.com
Subject: Possible Wet land infringement with proposed upgrading on Sunrise Drive for new development
Gentle folks,
I will like to call to your attention that Sunrise south of Valley has a hollow which periodically floods across
the road with a pond/lake to one side. I believe that the existing road technically crosses a wetland/ Not an issue
because it would be grandfathered in. I do not believe that it was listed in the June 2007 survey, although an
adjacent wet land is shown
htty://www.kitsanaov.com/dcd/2is/mans/Standard Mans/EnviromnentalBuildine%20Limitations%20Man%
20June%202007.pdf Increased rainfall over the last decade has caused the wetland area to expand (since there
is no natural water outage from this valley).
I understand that there are plans to double the width of the road with the intent of supporting a significant
increase of traffic (with the resulting increase of polluting runoff into these wetlands).
Ilieve that a full environmental impact study needs to be done before any change of this road should be
considered under the Growth Management Act of 1990
(Chapter 17, Laws of 1990)
Ken Lassesen
To: Hearing Examiner Stafford Smith
Date: August 20, 2014
Re: Project: Rolling Sunrise Subdivision
File Number: Sub18840
We live at 10870 Sunrise Dr., Bainbridge Island, WA with our five children. We are submitting
this letter in response to the proposed Rolling Sunrise Subdivision. We are very concerned about the
impact that the proposed development will have on the road and neighborhood. As was stated in your
Notice of Continuance, "the purpose of the continuance is to foster a process of creative analysis about
whether and how an at least minimally adequate road access can be provided to the Rolling Sunrise site
in a way that does not unduly add to the burden of the neighborhood residents ...... We would like to
note on the record that we believe widening Sunrise Dr. into a two-lane road would be unduly
burdensome on the existing neighborhood residents and would require the city to incur significant costs
in building the road and compensating landowners. Widening the road would result in cutting down
large, historic trees, destroying yards and addressing drainage and infrastructure deficiencies. We fear
that widening the road is likely to have a disproportionate impact on our property because there is a
pond on the opposite side of the street and there may only be limited space to expand in that direction.
The high cost to the city and the residents on this section of Sunrise Drive (as a result of the loss
of property value) far outweighs the private benefit to BGH Development, LLC, a development company
located in Seattle. It does not seem equitable to devalue the property of a large group of landowners in
order to benefit a single landowner. Although the bulk of the burden will fall on the local residents,
including us, the entire island will be sharing in the cost because of the use of city funds that will be
required. Why should the people of Bainbridge Island pay to sacrifice the public good of a local
community for the private benefit of a development company? This doesn't make any sense.
Please note that in writing this letter we are not waiving any rights and we are reserving all of
our rights.
Thank you for your careful consideration of this matter.
Sincerely,
Matt and Rhonda Topham