Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPOR Letter iniR Armondo Pavone Mayor ', City Clerk Jason A.Seth, MMC March 21, 2024 Gordon Bonne!! Greg Petrarca 1421 152nd Court NE 3301 Meadow Ave N Redmond, WA 98052 Renton, WA 98056 Lynn Livengood Joel Sbaa 5024 Lake WA Blvd NE 2504 Meadow Ave N Renton,WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Esther E. Maas 1406 Shattuck Ave S Renton,WA 98055 Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision RE: 1-405 Renton to Bellevue - Express Toll Lanes - LUA-24-000001 Dear Party of Records: Enclosed please find the Hearing Examiner's Final Decision dated March 20, 2024 and also a copy of the email I sent out on March 21, 2024. I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or jseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, .(,i,,,,,y,c45 Jason A. Seth, CMC City Clerk cc: Hearing Examiner 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,WA 98057 • 425-430-6510 • Fax 425-430-6516 • Cynthia Moya From: Cynthia Moya Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2024 2:46 PM To: 'thomasr@wsdot.wa.gov'; 'ekrutz@flatironlanejv.com'; 'jwolfork@gmail.com'; 'genoa@q.com'; 'mikecressy@earthlink.net; 'smileyc@consultant.wsdot.wa.gov'; 'simone.frassanito@gmail.com' Cc: Casaundra Sails;Alex Morganroth;Andrew Van Gordon; Angelea Weihs; Brianne Bannwarth; Clark Close; Jason Seth; Jennifer Cisneros;Jill Ding;Judith Subia; Margarette Bravo; Matthew Herrera; Nathan Janders; Patrice Kent; Robert Shuey; Shane Moloney Subject: Hearing Examiner's Final Decision - 1-405 Renton to Bellevue - Express Toll Lanes - LUA-24-000001 Attachments: 03-20-2024 - HEX Decision - Noise Variance 1-405 Widening - LUA-24-000001.pdf Parties of Record, Here is the Hearing Examiners Final Decision regarding the file 1-405 Renton to Bellevue—Express Toll Lanes Project— LUA-24-000001 dated 3/20/2024. You can also find all documents related to this folder at this CED's Folder link—LUA- 24-000001. Also here is the HEX folder with the Land Use link(LUA-24-000001) This email was sent to the following 7 Party of Records: A I 1Company Name Contact Name Title E-Mail Washington State !Department of r Transportation Rob Thomas Environmental Coordinator thomasr@wsdot.wa.gov 1 !Flatiron Lane JV Erin Krutz Technical Services Consultant ekrutz@flatironlaneiv.com John Wolfork jwolfork@gmail.com Gina Custer genoa@q.com Mike Cressy mikecressy@earthlink.net Craig Smiley smileyc@consultant.wsdot.wa.gov President Simone Frassanito Nautica By The Lake HOA simone.frassanito@gmail.com 0 And today(3/21/2024) I sent out by first class regular mail to the following 5 Party of Records: REGULAR MAIL: Company Name Contact Name Tide E-Mail Street Address Esther E.Maas 1406 Shattuck Ave S Lynn Livengood 5024 Lake WA Blvd NE Greg Petrarca 3301 Meadow Ave N Joel Sbaa 2504 Meadow Ave N Gordon Bonnell 1421 152nd Court NE 1 Thank you, Cindy Moya, City Clerk Specialist City of Renton—Office of the City Clerk cmoya p rentonwa.gov 425-430-6513 Work Schedule: Tues, Wed &Thurs: City Hall Mon & Friday: Work from Home 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 1 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: I-405 Renton to Bellevue – Express Toll Lanes Project Noise Variance PR17-000278 ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION Summary The Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) has applied for a noise variance from RMC 8-7-2 in order to widen I-405 through Renton by a single lane in each direction, make improvements at the NE 44th St interchange, replace the May Creek Bridge, and correct fish passage barriers across I-405 in the vicinity of Exit 7. Approximately 350 to 450 nights of non-consecutive nighttime work would be required between now and the completion of the project, anticipated to be December 31, 2026. The variance is approved subject to conditions. This variance approval is essentially a two-year extension of a four-year noise variance granted for the same project in 2020. The 2020 variance expires on December 31, 2024. Public comments suggest that noise impacts from the project have not been as innocuous as anticipated. One person noted the noise was “unbelievably loud” and that WSDOT was unresponsive to his complaints. Another commentator requested tempered glass. Ultimately, WSDOT does still appear to take all reasonable measures available to mitigate against noise impacts, up to hotel vouchers for persons unreasonably affected by the construction noise. Given the fairly long list of mitigation measures employed by WSDOT, tempered glass is not found to be a reasonable condition to require of WSDOT. Ultimately, WSDOT has a complaint line and it must notify the City of all the complaints it receives. If the City finds that WSDOT is not effectively addressing noise impacts as required by this decision, the City can revoke the noise variance approval. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 2 2 During the hearing there was a considerable amount of discussion about permanent noise walls as mitigation. WSDOT has a set of protocols it uses to determine when it is reasonable to install noise walls. WSDOT is currently working with one resident representing a condominium development who appeared at the hearing requesting a noise wall. Since the noise wall appears to be more geared towards permanent noise impacts as opposed to construction noise, that issue is left to resolve between WSDOT and the resident. The scope of this review is limited to construction noise and doesn’t include any permanent noise that results from that construction project. Permanent noise has already been addressed in the environmental review for the project. Testimony A computer-generated transcript of the hearing has been prepared to provide an overview of the hearing testimony. The transcript is provided for informational purposes only as Appendix A. Exhibits The ten exhibits identified at page 2 of the Staff Report were admitted into the record during the hearing. In addition, the staff power point was admitted as Exhibit 11, City of Renton COR maps of the site as Ex. 12 and Google Maps of the site as Ex. 13. March 2, 2024 email from Simone Frassanito is admitted as Exhibit 14, a March 7, 2024 response email from Erin Krutz is admitted as Exhibit 15 and a March 8, 2024 email response email from Calrk Close is admitted as Exhibit 16. Findings of Fact Procedural: 1. Applicant. WSDOT, Robert Thomas, 777 108th Avenue NE, St. 405, Bellevue, WA 98004 2. Hearing. A virtual hearing was held on the subject application on February 27, 2024 at 11:00 am in the City of Renton, Zoom Meeting ID No. 946 7233 4580. The record was left open through March 8, 2024 for additional public comment. Substantive: 3. Project Description. (“WSDOT”) has applied for a noise variance from RMC 8-7-2 RMC 8-7-2 (Noise Level Regulations, Maximum Environmental Noise Levels) to widen I-405 through Renton by a single lane in each direction, make improvements at the NE 44th St interchange, replace the May Creek Bridge, and correct fish passage barriers across I-405 in the vicinity of Exit 7. The I-405 Renton to Bellevue widening and Express Toll Lanes project seeks to address capacity and mobility improvements to the public and users. Approximately 350 to 450 nights of non-consecutive nighttime work would be required between now and the completion of the project, anticipated to be December 31, 2026. The primary reason for conducting nighttime work is to minimize daytime traffic congestion along the I-405 corridor. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 3 3 A variance from RMC 8-7-2 is necessary to conduct the nighttime work, as maximum permissible environmental noise levels (per WAC 173-60-040, incorporated by reference in RMC 8-7) limit extended periods of noise from 10:00 pm to 7:00 am to levels between 45 dBA and 60 dBA, with exceedances of 5 to 15 dBA permitted for periods of 1.5 to 15 minutes in any one-hour period (WAC 173-60-040). Some of the noisiest pieces of equipment that would be utilized include a forklift, jackhammer, excavator, concrete saw, milling machine, compactor, and concrete pump truck. Noise levels resulting from project construction activities are expected to generate peak noise levels of 61 to 98 dBA heard at 50 feet from the source of the noise. These sound levels are expected to diminish to a range of 45 to 83 decibels at a distance of 300 feet from the source of the noise and nighttime noise levels are not expected to be concentrated at one location for more than two (2) weeks at a time. Some of the noisiest pieces of equipment that would be utilized include a forklift, jackhammer, excavator, concrete saw, milling machine, compactor, and concrete pump truck (Exhibit 6). The requested noise variance is essentially a two year extension of a four year noise variance granted for the project in 2020. 3. Neighborhood Characteristics. The drilling will occur within hearing distances of areas abutting I-405 in Renton that are zoned residential, industrial and commercial. The most directly affected properties are identified in the aerial photograph admitted as Ex. 3. 5. Adverse Impacts. The noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated as much as reasonably practicable. Though the same area may experience multiple episodes of nighttime noise as the project progresses through phases, no one area is expected to be impacted for more than two consecutive weeks at a time. WSDOT will provide advance notice to affected property owners of the construction work along with a complaint number should the noise still be a problem. In a worst case, WSDOT will provide hotel accommodations if no other noise prevention mitigation proves effective. At hearing, WSDOT noted that it had received a handful of complaints per month for the on-going I-405 work. WSDOT will first try measures such as ear plugs and if that doesn’t work they ultimately can provide the hotel vouchers. WSDOT has not yet had to resort to hotel vouchers for the project. As previously identified, no work will occur for more than two continuous weeks in any one location. Notice is sent out to neighbors within a 500 foot radius of any specifically anticipated construction work. At hearing, WSDOT testified that WSDOT sent out notices about 50 times over the last four years of the construction project. The reason that WSDOT concluded that potentially affected residents should not perceive an appreciable increase in freeway background noise is because of distance from the proposed project activities to the residences and intervening structures and topography. WSDOT contends that the sound generated from the construction work will decrease by 6-dBA with every doubling of the distance from a stationary noise source. For example, a noise level of 70 dBA measured at 50 feet would be 64 dBA at 100 feet, 58 dBA at 200 feet and 52 dBA at 400 feet. In addition, noise also decreases if an obj ect interferes with the receiver’s line of sight to the noise source. Therefore, residents along the I -405 Corridor would perceive construction sounds at various decibel levels due to varying distances, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 4 4 topography (berms or elevations changes), and other features (noise wall) that break the line of sight. For example, sound attenuation for residents of Renton Hills and May Creek could perceive a lower level of noise due to homes being located behind an embankment or behind a structure that would not have a direct line of sight. Noise levels projected for this project have been estimated to generate peak noise levels of 61 to 98 dBA heard at 50 feet. Background traffic noise levels on I-405 reach approximate average noise levels up to 73 dBA during the daytime at 50 feet from the travel lane with a reduction to 68 dBA due to lower average traffic at night. The project will be conducted by Flatiron-Lane Joint Venture (FLJV), the design builder awarded the contract for the project. WSDOT has proposed several noise mitigation measures to lower the risk of any noise “spikes” that could be noticed by residents. WSDOT has proposed a series of mitigation measures. These measures are adopted as Conditions of Approval for this Decision as follows: 1. Provide a WSDOT/FLJV complaint number as well as a list of designated contact persons for the purpose of forwarding complaints. WSDOT/FLJV shall respond to any notified resident if during the notification process the residents requires special accommodations. WSDOT/FLJV shall implement nighttime noise monitoring in all other areas if confirmed complaints are received. 2. WSDOT/FLJV shall limit noise levels to the greatest extent practicable. Noise levels shall not exceed those described in the application materials. 3. WSDOT/FLJV shall utilize equipment as described in the noise variance application (Exhibit 6). Truck tailgate banging is prohibited. All trucks shall be secured to prevent excessive noise from banging. All trucks performing export haul shall have well maintained bed liners as inspected and approved by the Engineer. 4. All trucks shall be equipped with broadband back up alarms. 5. WSDOT/FLJV shall use temporary noise shields whenever feasible and when they are not a safety risk to I-405 users and workers. 6. WSDOT/FLJV shall adhere to specific times and days, as required by noise variance conditions. 7. WSDOT/FLJV personnel shall receive training and updates of the conditions under which this variance was granted. WSDOT/FLJV shall implement nighttime noise monitoring if complaints are received, and monitoring reports shall be made available to the City to demonstrate compliance. 8. WSDOT /FLJV shall notify, by US mail, residents within 300 feet of the sites ten (10) days prior the night work commencement. This notification shall include the type of work, as well as phone number or email to request more information including specific requests, concerns or complaints. Complaints shall be addressed within 24 hours or one business day. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 5 5 9. WSDOT/FLJV shall pay for inspection services as required. 10. WSDOT /FLJV shall grant access to the site to City staff as required. 11. WSDOT/FLJV shall provide hotel vouchers if earplugs and white noise machines are not sufficient, as requested by effected residents prior to commencement of excessively noisy nighttime work or within 24 hours of receiving a complaint. 12. WSDOT /FLJV shall provide written verification prior to the first nighttime activity associated with this variance. 13. WSDOT /FLJV is notified that the City may revoke the variance if conditions are violated. 14. A summary of any noise-related complaints received, and the response provided shall be provided to the City’s project manager within one week of receiving the complaint. 15. The applicant shall post nighttime work on the WSDOT Web/Internet site so residents have digital access to information that the City of Renton might see as appropriate. As addressed in Conclusion of Law No. 6, RMC 8-7-8(D)(4) includes some suggested mitigation measures that have not been recommended in the staff report. The omitted mitigation measures are code enforcement tools designed to facilitate staff oversight of compliance with noise mitigation measures, such as cash security for inspections, staff access to the project site and the right to revoke the variance upon noncompliance. The mitigation measures from RMC 8-7-8.D.4 omitted from the staff recommendation are not found necessary to further minimize impacts and therefore will not be imposed by this Decision. 6. Practical Difficulties and Special Circumstances. The variance is necessary to avoid daytime I-405 closures that would cause significant traffic congestion that would likely spill over onto City streets. According to the WSDOT, I-405 is a major part of the Puget Sound Transportation system. The I-405 Renton to Bellevue widening and Express Toll Lanes project will reduce severe congestion. The project represents road widening and intersection improvements along the entire length of I-405 in the City of Renton. No alternative locations are possible. WSDOT maintains that daytime closures, full or partial, to perform this work would have the potential to worsen the already congested I-405 corridor. Furthermore if frustrated I-405 users encounter daytime closures, there is a high risk that traffic would overflow onto city arterials and local streets increasing travel time of local residents, business and transit, and school bus drivers. In addition, WSDOT has indicated that safety for drivers and construction workers improves when work is conducted at night. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 6 6 The requested variance would enable the project to be completed without exacerbating existing day time congestion. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. Variances to RMC 8-7-2 in excess of two days in duration are subject to a public hearing and Hearing Examiner review (RMC 8-7-8(A) and (C)). 2. Review Criteria. Variance criteria for variances to RMC 8-7-2 are governed by RMC 8-7-8(D). RMC 8-7-8(D)(1): That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary hardship and the variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to the applicant’s property or project, and that the strict application of this Chapter will deprive the subject property owner or applicant of rights and privileges enjoyed by others. 3. The special circumstances are the proximity of I-405 to adjoining homes and the critical need for night-time work to complete I-405 expansion. City and WSDOT staff have concluded that closing off sections of I-405 during daytime hours would severely and unacceptably increase congestion both in the I-405 corridor and surrounding City streets. The project is required to reduce the severe congestion on I-405 during daytime hours. Strict application of the City’s noise regulations would deprive WSDOT of the ability to construct its development in a manner that is compatible with the interests of the surrounding community. In this regard, strict adherence would deprive WSDOT of the rights other developers have to construct their projects in an environmentally responsible manner. RMC 8-7-8(D)(2): That the granting of the variance will not be materially detrimental to the public health, welfare or safety, or unduly injurious to the property or improvements in the vicinity of the location for which this variance is sought. 4. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, as conditioned and mitigated, the noise impacts are mitigated to the extent reasonably practicable under the circumstances and will be of relatively short duration by project phase. It is recognized that each residence may experience multiple periods of nighttime noise over the course of the project as it progresses by phase. However, the duration of each of these periods is short and should be spread out over the nearly four years of the project life. Ultimately, the mitigation measures require the applicant to provide hotel accommodations if the noise proves too much for adjoining property owners. In this regard, beyond the temporary inconvenience of relocation, the noise impacts are completely mitigated and as a result, the granting of the variance would not be considered materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to surrounding properties or improvements. RMC 8-7-8(D)(3): That the variance sought is the minimum variance which will accomplish the desired purpose. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 7 7 5. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5 and Conclusion of Law No. 4, the applicant has taken all measures it reasonably can to reduce noise impacts. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 6, the proposed work must be done in night to avoid significant congestion impacts during the day on both I-405 and City streets. Since the Applicant has done everything it reasonably can to reduce noise impacts and there is no feasible alternative to do the work during daytime hours, the variance is considered to be the minimum variance that accomplishes WSDOT’s objective of reducing I-405 congestion, RMC 8-7-8(D)(4): That the variance contains such conditions deemed to be necessary to limit the impact of the variance on the residence or property owners impacted by the variance. The variance approval may be subject to conditions including, but not limited to, the following: a. Implementation of a noise monitoring program; b. Maximum noise levels; c. Limitation on types of equipment and use of particular equipment; d. Limitation on back-up beepers for equipment; e. Required use of noise shields or barriers; f. Restrictions to specific times and days; g. Specific requirements for documentation of compliance with the noise variance conditions; h. Specific requirements for notification to nearby residents; i. Required cash security to pay for inspection services to verify compliance; j. Required access to the project by the City to verify compliance with the noise variance conditions; k. Specific program to allow for temporary hotel vouchers to effected residents; l. Requirements for written verification that all workers understand the noise variance conditions for the project; and m. Provision allowing the City to immediately revoke the variance approval if the variance conditions are violated. 6. All mitigation measures identified above have been incorporated into the conditions imposed upon the variance request by this Decision except for g, i, j and m. The mitigation measures that have not been adopted by this decision are code enforcement and inspection tools designed to facilitate staff oversight of the project. Deference is given to staff on this issue and the measures are not imposed. RMC 8-7-8(D)(5): The importance of the services provided by the facility creating the noise and the other impacts caused to the public safety, health and welfare balanced against the harm to be suffered by residents or property owners receiving the increased noise permitted under this variance. 7. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 6, the need for the variance is critical to helping WSDOT alleviate congestion in a significant transportation corridor and as outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5 the impacts to affected residences are temporary and have been fully mitigated. On balance, the noise impacts to affected residents cannot be avoided given the need for the project. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 8 8 RMC 8-7-8(D)(6): The availability of practicable alternative locations or methods for the proposed use which will generate the noise. 8. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 6, the roadway widening and ramp improvements are necessary to reduce severe congestion on I-405. There is no other alternative location these structures could be constructed. RMC 8-7-8(D)(7): The extent by which the prescribed noise limitations will be exceeded by the variance and the extent and duration of the variance. 9. The extent and duration of noise impacts do not appear to be significant. As noted in Finding of Fact No. 5, noise levels produced by construction equipment is expected to range from 61 to 98 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source of the noise. These sound levels are expected to diminish to a range of 45 to 83 dBA at a distance of 300 feet from the source of the noise. The applicant is proposing a total of up to 450 non-consecutive nights to complete the work (up to December 31, 2024). The greatest number of nights that any one residence will be exposed to noise exceeding nighttime standards will be fourteen nights per project phase. The same residence may experience multiple periods of increased noise beyond the noise standard. WSDOT contends that with its proposed mitigation the noise levels will not be perceived as significantly more than the existing background noise of I-405. However, noise levels should be reduced or mitigated by the proposed mitigation measures (Ex. 7) and additional condition of approval as described in FOF No. 5. DECISION The proposed variance is justified for the reasons identified in the Conclusions of Law above and is thereby approved subject to the 15 conditions listed in Finding of Fact No. 5. ORDERED this 20th day of March 2024. Phil A. Olbrechts City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 8-7-8(F) provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 8-7-8(F) further requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner’s decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Hearing Examiner’s decision. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, Renton City Hall – 7th floor, (425) 430-6510. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Noise Variance CAO VARIANCE - 9 9 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. Transcript by Rev.com Page 1 of 15 Appendix A February 27, 2024 Hearing Transcript I-405 Noise Variance -- LUA23-000241 Note: This is a computer generated transcript provided for informational purposes only. The reader should not take this document as 100% accurate or take offense at errors created by the limitations of the programming in transcribing speech. A recording of the hearing is available from the City should anyone need an accurate rendition of the hearing testimony. Examiner Olbrechts (00:00): There it goes. Okay, for the record, it is February 27th, 2024, 11:00 AM I'm Phil Olbrechts Hearing Examiner for the City of Renton. This morning we are holding a hearing on a noise variance application from the Washington State Department of Transportation for some work on I 4 0 5. The hearing format will be, we will start off with a presentation from staff. Mr. Clark Close will give us an overview of the project. He's the one that wrote the staff report for this application. After he's finished, then we'll let the Washington State present their side of the case. Then after that we'll move on to public comments. That's the purpose of the hearing today and we'll make sure that everyone who wants to say something today has an opportunity to do so. And after that testimony is finished, both Mr. Close and Washington State will be able to answer questions that were raised or respond to comments and concerns. (00:49): So now all information that's used to evaluate this application has to be in the record accessible to everybody. So you all are entitled to know exactly what information I've considered. Of course, that includes the testimony today as well as Mr. Close's staff report. And he also included an exhibit list with a bunch of exhibits he wanted me to look at. And it looks like that's been put up on the screen there you'll see 10 items, 10 documents minus Mr. Close's staff report to is the site plan that shows where the work's going to be done. We have some neighborhood detail maps, drainage plans, utility plans, construction equipment and how that's going to generate the noise that may affect people. And then the applicant's variance justification. We also have a public comment from Mike Cressey and a staff response to that. So at this point, I just want to ask if there are any objections to entry of these documents in the record. If there are, just press on the virtual raise hand button at the bottom of your screen, little yellow hand or if you're not muted, just say I object. Okay. Hearing, seeing no concerns over the documents, we'll put those in the records. Exhibits one through 10. So let's see. Mr. SRO said you want to, oh, there it is. Okay. I was just going to ask the staff PowerPoint to the additional Mr. Close (02:06): Added to the record as well please. Examiner Olbrechts (02:07): Right. Yeah, staff PowerPoint, city of Renton Maps that that would show the zoning and any environmentally sensitive area resources in the area. Then Google Earth maps of the project side as well. Any objections over those? Again, just push on your raise hand button. Seeing none. So we will Transcript by Rev.com Page 2 of 15 admit 11 through 13 as well. Alright, so Mr. Close, let me swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Mr. Close (02:34): I do. Examiner Olbrechts (02:34): Okay, great. Go ahead. Mr. Close (02:37): Okay, thank you. Hearing Examiner Ulbrich, we also have a couple of folks from Wash Dot just went into the council chamber, so they're trying to join on Zoom, so they will hopefully be here shortly. So just going to kind of take my time here, setting this up, but Examiner Olbrechts (02:56): Do you want to take a little break for a couple minutes? Mr. Close (03:02): Well, we have Rob Thomas who's the applicant. So I think we're represented from wash, but just a few more from WashDOT are going to be joining us. Okay. (03:30): Got your notes on it. All right. Okay, there we go. It's good. Is this one good? Okay. All right, perfect. Yeah, for the record, Clark Close current planning manager in the current planning division. Thanks for entering those exhibits into the record. And again, this is for the I 4 0 5 written Bellevue Express to Lane Project noise variance. And I'll go ahead and move on to the next slide. So wash.here is requesting a noise variance from RMC eight dash seven dash two to widen I 4 0 5 through written by a single lane in each direction. This would make improvements at the Northeast 44th Street interchange. It would place May Creek Bridge and correct fist pass barriers near Exit seven. If you recall, we did do a noise variance for wash off back in 2020, and that was for through approximately five to 600 nights through the end of 2024. (04:37): And so this is essentially an extension of that. And between now and the end of December of 2026, they're asking for 350 to 450 nights of non-consecutive nighttime work to complete the project. And the purpose or the reason why they need to be operating at night is primarily to minimize daytime traffic congestion along I 4 0 5 corridor and to protect public safety, the work would be conducted within the state's limited access right away along I 4 0 5 work activities would include the continuation of clearing and grading, paving relocation of guardrails and jersey barriers, fish patchable, culvert installations, bridge demolition and construction, drainage installation, construction of new stormwater facilities, seeding, planting, and restoration of disturbed areas. (05:42): Major item of works are listed there on the screen, but they would include rent and hill area. That's the South third Street, RI Avenue Street Bridge, retrofits I 4 0 5 and SR 1 69. Interchange ramp improvements I 4 0 5 and Parkway Interchange ramp improvements as well I 4 0 5 and North 30th Street interchange ramp improvements. You also have some ramp improvements at Northeast 44th, adding Transcript by Rev.com Page 3 of 15 some through lanes, building retaining walls and noise walls, upgrade drainage, utility relocation and detention. Pond rebuilt the ITS system and add additional safety items. So much of this work has been ongoing and it would essentially be a continuation of the work that's already been started. The zoning along the corridor ranges from your low residential zones like RC and R one all the way up to the higher commercial zones that being COR. And so the zones listed along the corridor are all listed in this slide. (06:55): The WAC 1 7 3 6 0 dash 0 4 0 sets the maximum possible permissible noise levels based on the environmental designation for the noise and abatement. And those nighttime hours or the hours that they're limited or would be considered nighttime hours are 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM And as we just mentioned in the last slide, the I 4 0 5 corridor does about properties that are in all three of these classes that are listed classes. A being the residential uses Class B more in the neighborhood of light industrial and Class C as well. So they're getting the whole gamut. Hence the reason for the noise variance. Some of the construction equipment that would continue to be used moving forward would be from a variety of construction equipment including excavation, grading, vegetation clearing, all of this stuff requires heavy equipment like cleaning grinders, vacuum trucks, forklifts, jackhammers, et cetera, and listed what the decimal levels would be for the DBA at 5100, 200 and 300 feet. And the ranges for these would be roughly 61 DBA to 98 DBA at a distance of 50 feet from the source. And then that would drop down to 45 to 83 decibels levels at 300 feet. So that's the range of the equipment that would be used. And the applicant here is not proposing or is expecting to concentrate at any one location. (08:50): The I 4 0 5 length is over eight miles. And so a lot of work to do. And essentially they wouldn't be concentrating at any one particular point during this noise or nighttime request for longer than two weeks at a time. It is anticipated that residents along the corridor would perceive construction sounds at various decibel levels due to varying distances. So the closer you are to the work that's being performed, obviously the louder the decibel level. And then as I mentioned, it is a long corridor, so you're going to have some topography changes, berms, elevation changes, noise walls, lines of sight, maybe there's a building between you and the work. So at the end of the day, everybody's going to have a different perceived noise level depending on the work that's being performed. (09:56): And so the applicant is proposing several different mitigation measures that would be going along with this noise variance. We did receive one public comment email on February 15th of this year, and these comments pertain to lighting noise, traffic monitoring, and providing alternative housing during the period of the requested noise variance. And as mentioned, WashDOT has proposed several noise mitigation measures, not similar to the ones that they proposed during the 2020 noise variance request. And this would include providing hotel vouchers if earplugs and white noise machines are not sufficient as requested by the applicant. The full list of proposed mitigation measures can be found under the variance analysis that the staff report in finding a fact nine. (11:00): So staff is recommending approval of the I 4 0 5 Bellevue expressed toll aim project noise variance as depicted in the site plan subject to two conditions. Number one, that the applicant and the design build contractor shall implement those noise mitigation measures to diminish or eliminate noise during the project as described in that project, narrative and summary of any noise related complaints received and responses shall be provided to the city and the project manager within one week of receiving the complaint. And number two, the applicant should post nighttime work on Wash Dots website or Transcript by Rev.com Page 4 of 15 internet so that residents would have digital access to information that the city might deem appropriate. And with that, I'll be happy to answer any questions. Sure. Examiner Olbrechts (11:52): I remember in past variance applications from WashDOT, the condition usually was a complaint line. I can't remember, was the city involved with the complaint hotline or was that just directly to WashDOT? Mr. Close (12:07): Just to WashDOT? Oh it Examiner Olbrechts (12:08): Was. Okay. I mean, has the city received any complaints about noise in the construction project so far? You said this is ongoing? Mr. Close (12:16): We have, yeah, so we've had a couple of complaints that we've been able to mitigate for, and the applicant has full-time public outreach group that is in constant communication with those that are interested in voicing their opinions. Examiner Olbrechts (12:37): Oh, okay. I mean, do you know, will the destruction of the May Creek Bridge be maybe the noisiest part of all this? Do you know? Or how's that going to be done? Mr. Close (12:45): That has, yeah, the pile driving in and around May Creek Bridge has been a particular place or work that has received complaints. And yes, that is, as far as I know, the source of the noisiest portion of this project, but largely a lot of that work has already been completed. Examiner Olbrechts (13:15): Okay. Alright. Yeah, well I think I've got more questions for the applicant actually, so save it for that. Thank you Mr. Close. Let's move on to the applicant. Now at this point, do we have anyone here who wants to speak behalf of Wash Dock? Any takers out there? Speaker 3 (13:36): Is it possible to let Rob Thomas into the panelists portion? I did invite him. I don't know if he had issues or not, but I can ask him again. Examiner Olbrechts (13:54): Yeah, we have somebody, Craig Smiley from Washita has a raised hand as well. Speaker 3 (13:58): Okay. I'll bring him in as well. Yeah. Mr. Close (14:08): Transcript by Rev.com Page 5 of 15 Good afternoon, this is Greg Smiley from washau. Examiner Olbrechts (14:10): Okay. Mr. Smiley, let me swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear Affirm tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Mr. Close (14:16): I Examiner Olbrechts (14:16): Do. Okay. And just so you know, your video's off, it doesn't have to be on, but I didn't know if that was in your tent or not. Mr. Close (14:23): I'm Joni for my phone, so trying to find the video here. Examiner Olbrechts (14:26): Alright, there we go. There we go. Mr. Close (14:32): Yeah, if you have any questions, I'm the program's construction communication manager. I shouldn't be able to help you. Examiner Olbrechts (14:39): Oh, okay. Well kind of the question I usually ask in these noise variance applications is I kind of like to see which residences are going to be affected the most, what the loudest noises are going to be for people over the next couple of years. I mean probably you don't have access to your maps or anything there, do you? Mr. Close (14:57): I don't, but I would say primarily the Northeast 44th Street area is going to be the biggest one. That's kind of our critical path area. We also do have some construction coming up around Renton Hill, but we've done some outreach to the residents there and have an open house to discuss that work. Basically be extending a bridge, lengthening a bridge up to the Renton Hill neighborhood. Examiner Olbrechts (15:20): Oh, okay. Is that the May Creek bridge that we were talking about earlier? Mr. Close (15:24): No, that's forth. I see the Renton Hill one is right by a Cedar River. Examiner Olbrechts (15:30): Oh, okay. Okay. And so I mean for the residents that are most adversely impacted, what kind of noise levels will they get? Basically from this project? Transcript by Rev.com Page 6 of 15 Mr. Close (15:39): It kind of goes back to that chart that we had that really depends on the work. The noisiest kind of equipment that we see is pile driving and vac trucks. So I know we can do that work during the day. We obviously prioritize that if we do have heavier than expected night work, we do outreach. I believe the radius is 500 feet from the freeway to let people know ahead of that. And we do update our website every week with upcoming night work. Examiner Olbrechts (16:06): And so if I understood Mr. Close correctly, the longest period of time anyone would be subject to the really high noise levels would be a couple of weeks. Is that correct? Mr. Close (16:15): Continuously correct. Examiner Olbrechts (16:16): Okay. What was that last comment you made? Mr. Close (16:20): Continuously. Examiner Olbrechts (16:21): Oh, continuously. Okay. Yeah. So they might get two weeks at one time and they could still get some additional work at a subsequent time, is that right? Mr. Close (16:29): Yeah, depending on if work or there might be a period where there's work that's happening that's not noisy to get to a next phase of construction for that scope or it could potentially be noisy. Oh, Examiner Olbrechts (16:38): Okay. And how many complaints did you guys get so far on this project? Mr. Close (16:45): I'd say relatively standard for most of our projects. We get a handful a month. We're pretty responsive. Our goal is to get any type of response out within 24 hours. Examiner Olbrechts (16:54): And the public comment was tempered glass. Is that something that washed out has ever done or needed to do? Mr. Close (17:02): No, that's not really within our scope of what we're allowed to spend money on, unfortunately. Obviously our funds are legislative directives legislatively directed. We kind of try to solve at the lowest level and kind keep at elevating. And if it's really, really noisy and it's really, really impacting somebody would be the hotel vouchers for temporary Transcript by Rev.com Page 7 of 15 Examiner Olbrechts (17:24): Say. Yeah, I was going to ask, have you had to do that yet for this project? Mr. Close (17:29): We have not had one Examiner Olbrechts (17:30): Yet. Okay. Okay. Well I guess that's reassuring unless you guys should have given one out and didn't, but I doubt that's the case. Yeah, Mr. Close (17:37): We definitely tried to take care of the residents. They're our neighbors for a long period of time and we want to be good neighbors. Examiner Olbrechts (17:43): Okay. Alright, thanks Mr. Smiley, appreciate your comments. Alright, let's move on to public comments now. And I see we have one raised hand so far. If you want to say something, just click it on the raise hand button at the bottom of your screen. You've got a couple at this point. Let's start off with Daire and Ms. Stare. I may swear you in real quick. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Speaker 3 (18:10): Yes. Okay. I just had a question actually. Examiner Olbrechts (18:12): Oh, okay. Yeah, sure, go ahead. Speaker 3 (18:15): So in regards to, I know you guys talked about zones of areas that construction will be being performed and so is there a schedule of when night work construction will be done that we can see so we can plan our lives around around or something similar to that? Examiner Olbrechts (18:40): Okay. Mr. S Smiley, can you respond to that right now? Just, I mean is there some kind of a schedule posted at a website that people could access or I know you guys do outreach, how do you do that? Mr. Close (18:50): Yeah, we do. So we get basically a three week look ahead schedule, so it really depends on what we can get done. It's a lot of different variables there with weather availability, materials and just a lot of different variables. So our project website, like I said, does list the upcoming noise work for a week. If we know that there is a bigger milestone thing that isn't going to move, then we'll also post that on there. Examiner Olbrechts (19:17): Transcript by Rev.com Page 8 of 15 Okay. And do you send notices to the neighbors, I mean door hangers or anything in the mail in addition to that? Mr. Close (19:24): Yeah, within about 500 foot radius if we have something that we know is going to be particularly impactful, we do send out notices, flyers, hand delivered flyers. Examiner Olbrechts (19:33): Okay. Mr. Close (19:34): Interested parties list. So if people go to the website and sign up for interested parties lists, we have updates that way as well. Examiner Olbrechts (19:39): Okay. And in the last four years, how many times have you guys sent out flyers for that project? Mr. Close (19:48): Ballpark, plus or minus 50, Examiner Olbrechts (19:50): 50 times. Wow. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Alright, any other questions, Ms. Snare? Speaker 3 (19:57): No, that's it. Thank you. Examiner Olbrechts (19:58): Okay. Alright, let's move on to Simone at this point. Simone, let me swear in too real quick. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Mr. Close (20:08): Yes, I do. Examiner Olbrechts (20:09): Okay. And sir, what's your last name for the record? Mr. Close (20:14): It's fto. Examiner Olbrechts (20:16): And how do you spell that? Mr. Frassanito (20:19): Transcript by Rev.com Page 9 of 15 F-R-A-S-S-A-N-I-T-O. Examiner Olbrechts (20:24): Okay, great. Thank you very much for that. Alright, go ahead. Mr. Frassanito (20:28): So I'm here as president of Natika by the Lake HOA, situated in just north of Exit seven. And we are 82 condo units. I have two comments. One is that the noise states that comments should have submitted by February five, but the notice was delivered in the mailbox on February 12th. So I personally didn't have time to review the application and I felt that there was no opportunity to submit any content. The second comment is on the third floor in the complex today, there was a noise average of 68 decibel DBA, which is the measure using the RCW and I measured that today with a five minute sample with a minimum of 65 and a maximum of 71. In general, the noise remain around 65 DBA throughout the day and the night. So not only the variance request should account for proper sound barriers, I believe also the project should ensure noise abatement. Barriers are plan permanent solution to ensure that the communities who live close to four or five at proper noise level. I had to check the projects a while ago and I did not see any noise barrier plan for construction. Examiner Olbrechts (22:08): Okay, thank you. Oh, sorry. Okay, thank you sir. Mr. Close (22:12): Yeah. Examiner Olbrechts (22:13): Okay. And Mr. Smiley, maybe can you respond to that? Now I'm curious, this was, are there going to be noise barriers put up in this particular area? Is there going to be a lot more work in this particular area that was just commented on? Mr. Close (22:26): I need a little bit more specifics as far as the location. There are definitely several noise walls that are being built with this project. As part of any wash off project, we take part in environmental review to make sure that we're following federal and state laws, NEPA and cipa when it comes to Noah's abatement. So with this project we did conduct environmental assessment, which is one of the highest levels of environmental review. Noise wall policy is a little bit challenging to explain and follow, but the commenter is correct that it's 66 decibels when it is sampled is above what we would call impact. Basically follow the three step process. So number one, are you being impacted? So the first step is yes. Number two, is it reasonable and feasible? Basically, would a noise wall provide a benefit? So depending on your distance away from a noise wall, they become less effective, the farther away you get from 'em, trained topography also makes a difference. (23:30): So at that point, if a noise wall would actually reduce the noise, we will on to a reasonability test. And that's basically each house that is impacted, each residence that's impacted is allowed a square footage per the wall. You add up all that square footage and that square footage has to be more equal to what the actual wall would have to be to provide, excuse me, provide a benefit. The density kind of comes Transcript by Rev.com Page 10 of 15 into play here. So if you have a few houses that are very spread out and it would require a massive mile long wall to be able to provide abatement for them, that does not pass the reasonable test. So we can't base off the FHWA regulations, recommend that to be constructed. So it would really depend, again, very specifically on that particular location. Examiner Olbrechts (24:22): So is there, on your website, can people find out where noise walls are going to be built? Is that kind of information available at all? Mr. Close (24:28): Yeah, all of our environmental documents and noise analysis and everything is available on our website. Examiner Olbrechts (24:34): Okay. And so has the decision on where noise walls are going to be built, already been made, is that already pretty set in stone? Okay. And sorry Simone, I'm just going by what you wrote on your phone. Could you clarify what location again you were speaking from? Mr. Close (24:50): Yes, of course. We are 5,000 Lake Washington Boulevard Northeast. Examiner Olbrechts (24:56): Okay. And you said you're a homeowner's association for, is it condo units? Was that what it was? Mr. Close (25:01): Yes, 82 condo Examiner Olbrechts (25:03): Unit. Oh, okay. What's the name of the condo development again? Mr. Close (25:07): Nica by the lake. Examiner Olbrechts (25:08): Oh, okay. Alright. Mr. Smiley, can you tell right now if there are noise balls that are going to be built there or not? Mr. Close (25:14): I am looking at it. It does not appear out. And I think that one is challenged by terrain. So that is an area that is elevated, it looks like from the freeway. So a noise wall, in order to really provide protection there would've to be hundreds of feet tall, which is kind of not super feasible engineering wise. Examiner Olbrechts (25:33): I mean, is there anything that can be done to mitigate noise impacts at that location or considering Simone has said that he's done some noise readings and they're a bit high, what can W do do there from Transcript by Rev.com Page 11 of 15 Mr. Close (25:45): The state's perspective? As far as what we are required to follow by law, there isn't a whole lot. I would say for a condo's perspective, doing double or triple paned windows and installation and stuff like that can definitely help with perceived sound levels. Examiner Olbrechts (26:01): Right, right. But Wash DOT's not doing that. So there's nothing that can be used as a substitute for noise walls here from Wash DOT's perspective. Okay. Correct. Mr. Close (26:09): Yeah. Examiner Olbrechts (26:11): Okay. Alright, thank you Mr. Smiley, let's move on to Mr. Cressy. Mr. Cressy, let me swear you in. Do you swear affirm to tell the truth, nothing about the truth in this proceeding? Yes. Okay, great. Go ahead. Mr. Close (26:26): So obviously I'm not going to state everything I put out my statement on the site, but I'm curious considering that the last person just mentioned about the decibel, one of the DBAs. I have a monitor as well, and I try to check that every once in a while because we have loud traffic over here a lot of time. And so since the trees and bushes along the property edge of the property where I live have been taken down for that extra lane, the noises gone up 40% from the traffic since then. And I wonder how these noise levels are going to be monitored if they're going to be coming inside of our house so that they can actually hear what we hear or coming to the back of our porch and hear what we hear when we're outside on our porch. Because if you're standing up on the street in front of the complex I'm in, which is crystal lights, you can't hear all the noise that's happening over there at all. So if they're standing over there, they can't hear. They have to come inside of our houses in the back porches to actually hear that noise and I want to understand how they're monitoring this. Examiner Olbrechts (27:50): Okay. And Mr. Kressley, I just had a quick question for you too. I could quite tell from your written submission if the current wash work has been a source of noise for you or you're just worried about what's going to happen in the future? Mr. Frassanito (28:02): I'm worried mostly about what's going to happen in the future based off of the past. So in the past I've experienced several occasions where prior to the construction down here or taking down the trees and bushes over the last couple of years, there's been a couple of things that WashDOT has done on the freeway that went all night and it was unbelievably loud. And when I tried to call them about it, they denied that there was work happening, but you could clearly see it happening from my porch. I could see the work happening and I got in my car and drove down there to actually verify. And yes, they were doing some actual work. So from that I'm kind of a disbeliever in a lot of ways. I don't trust what is being said as opposed to what we're experiencing up here. Examiner Olbrechts (28:55): Transcript by Rev.com Page 12 of 15 Okay, understood. And where's your house located? Mr. Close (28:59): Okay, so I'm in the Crystal Heights townhouse complex that's located directly above where the landing is, particularly where Target is and Frys. Those are the ones I could see directly from my windows. And so in back of our houses there is a strip of land that's owned by PSE and that land, I assume you guys can do anything you want with that or talk to PSE and negotiate whatever can be done. But that's not a very big strip of land. It's very minimally wide. I guess that's the right term. It's probably around 25 yards maybe at the most, I would think it's not very far from the freeway. Examiner Olbrechts (29:53): Oh, you're saying that's what separates your house basically from the freeway or, yes. Okay. Okay, gotcha. Alright, Mr. Smiley, maybe answer questions about post-construction monitoring and also maybe if you could clarify what work WashDOT's going to do near Mr. Cressey's house, what kind of noises he can expect in the future? Mr. Close (30:13): Yeah, so I think important distinction here between construction impacts and ongoing. So for construction impacts, we're continuously monitoring or the contractor is continuously monitoring as the work is going on out there. So if they're reaching levels that would be above the noise variance levels, they would've a stand down and looking for ways that either changing out equipment or providing some abatements during that process to continue work. Examiner Olbrechts (30:40): So where's the monitoring equipment put though? Is it put up actually where the homes are located or are you just extrapolating from the construction site what the noise levels will be? Mr. Close (30:49): It would be within the washout right of way. So it'd be doing some extrapolation there. (30:56): As far as ongoing, we try not to remove trees. We don't like to remove trees. We incentivize the contractors to keep as many as possible for a number of different reasons. And when the project is done for one of the reasons we incentivize it is we have to plant many more trees for each one that we put down. So if it's one tree that's 10 inches in diameter, they have to basically plant 10 new trees. There's kind of some math in there that they can plant fewer if they plant larger trees. But long story short, they have to plant a lot more trees when they take them down. Examiner Olbrechts (31:32): I mean, since you're widening the highway, there are going to be some areas where there are just not going to be as many trees right? Once the project's Mr. Close (31:39): Done? Absolutely. And that's part of our environmental process recognizes the aesthetic impacts of a project like this. And we work with quarter stakeholders, including the city of Renton on what those aesthetics will be. In the end. We work with different community groups as well back when we put Transcript by Rev.com Page 13 of 15 together our quarter aesthetic plan. So we do a lot of replanting, obviously those aren't as mature trees and take time to grow, but we just don't want people to think we cut down. We like cutting down trees. We definitely do not. The noise impacts, again, kind of come back to whenever we have to build a noise ball or when we look at doing a project, the laws were kind of set up to make sure that we are applying them equitably. And there are definitely areas that are at or above impacts that don't fall within that three step requirement. (32:33): So when we do that, as far as the actual noise studies goes, the noise is basically modeled in a computer. It's fairly conservative. The model basically takes traffic, puts it bumper to bumper, it's 60 miles an hour condition that we wouldn't see in real life. And for your benefit, kind of the noise, most of the noise that comes from a freeway is the interaction with the tire and the pavement. So the faster the car removing, the more noise is produced. So that's how we get our noise numbers. We then go out and actually take physical readings to verify that noise model. So if there are certain locations that people would like us to come take noise readings, we're happy to do. So just knowing that if we do have a higher reading, there's a potential that even with that higher reading, a noise wall wouldn't necessarily qualify for that particular area. Examiner Olbrechts (33:25): And so when you're talking about the noise wall mitigation, I mean, do you also look at post- construction impacts? Kind of like I mentioned before, not just for the We do. Mr. Close (33:34): Yeah. No, we look at basically existing conditions. We look at conditions and a build with the project, and then we look at actually a 2045 projection. So based off of what Puget Sound Regional Council's projections for growth are, what would that look like? Examiner Olbrechts (33:49): So in terms of circumstances where it's unavoidable and you can't replant and maybe you're moving some terrain that served as a noise barrier before that, that could possibly qualify for a noise wall and you go through that three-step process. Is that how that works? Mr. Close (34:05): Correct. Examiner Olbrechts (34:06): Okay. And then again, for Mr. Cressey's location, is there going to be a lot of 4 0 5 work in that area? Near the landing? Mr. Close (34:15): There's going to be some widening. We don't have anything significant like interchange. We were doing some seismic retrofitting and bridge widening, but we're not replacing an entire interchange like a Northeast 44 if there 112 up in Bellevue. Examiner Olbrechts (34:30): Transcript by Rev.com Page 14 of 15 Okay. So unlikely it'd be any more than two weeks of construction work, you think, maybe in that spot? Correct. Yeah. Okay. Okay, good. Alright, anyone else out there want to say anything at this point? Again, raise your virtual hand and for whatever reason you could figure out how to make yourself heard today. That's been known to happen. Go ahead and email Ms. Cisneros there. She's got her email address right behind her head. If you can see that on the screen. It's Jay Ciro, C-I-S-N-E-R-O-S, at renton wa.gov. So if you could comment today, just get those comments in by 5:00 PM tomorrow, and then I'll let staff in the applicant respond to those comments as well. So Mr. Close, any final comments from the city side? Mr. Close (35:13): Yeah, just a couple of comments on the public notification. So the applicant did send 964 pieces of mail out to on February 7th of this year. Two addresses within three to 500 feet of the property, or basically the entire corridor and publication was made in the paper on February 15th. And additionally, the applicant posted the public notice at the Ri Highlands Library, the Fairwood Library Senior Center, Renton Transit Center, the Renton Library on Mill Avenue, Renton City Hall, and Renton Community Center. So it's based on Mr. Simone's comments. It sounds like he got it on the 12th, which would've been 15 days prior. And the code window is 10 to 45 days prior to the public hearing. Okay. So just mention that the public notification requirements were met by the Examiner Olbrechts (36:25): Applicant and has the 2020 permit expired already or what's, I'm just curious about if there's urgency in getting this decision out or what's going on there? Mr. Close (36:34): It not, no. So it's still active through the end of this year. This is anticipation of the additional work that would run through Examiner Olbrechts (36:44): 2026. Okay, good to know. So for Simone then, and again, I know I don't have your correct name there, but since you're saying you didn't have time to review the materials, I'll give you till Friday to look at those over and submit some comments to Ms. Cisneros at her email address. And again, I'll let staff and applicant respond to that since it looks like we have a little time to get this decision out. Anything else, Mr. Close? Mr. Close (37:09): Nope, that's it. Examiner Olbrechts (37:10): Okay. Alright. And finally, Mr. Smiley, any final words? Mr. Close (37:15): Nothing additional, thank you. Examiner Olbrechts (37:16): Transcript by Rev.com Page 15 of 15 Okay, thanks. I'll go ahead and close the hearing. Well, this has been an educational hearing for me. We've held a lot of variance applications for washed out and other public construction projects, and this is the first time we've gotten some feedback as to how that noise has affected people in the past. And I'm sorry to hear that it has been causing problems for people. And so that's something that I'll take into serious consideration when I look at that, maybe put the city in the loop on the complaints so the city has better information on what's going on out there and that kind of thing. But I know Wash Dot has a pretty good extensive list of mitigation measures. This kind of work is, I think, pretty unavoidable. I think all of us, even those living close would agree that work needs to be done on 4 0 5 in that area. (38:02): And it looks like it may be the only way to do it. Ultimately, I think that since Washout is willing to put people up in a hotel, that's probably the most, that could be reasonably expected of them. But like I said, I'll look at the conditions and that kind of thing, see what's going on as far as the noise walls go, I mean, kind's more of an issue I think between the neighbors and wash.to kind of work that out. Wash Dot Seal appears to have some pretty good objective standards as to when those things have to be installed. And I think, as Mr. Smiley said, if you want the watch doc to go out there and do some monitoring, they're willing to do that. And that's a good first step in seeing if a noise wall is reasonable in that particular location. So anyway, I appreciate everyone's participation today and we're adjourned for this morning. Thank you. Speaker 4 (38:53): Recall.