Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWA State Dept. of Transportation, Noise Variance1 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 - 1 CAO VARIANCE - 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: WA State Dept. of Transportation Noise Variance LUA15-000437, V ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION Summary The applicant has applied for a variance to the City’s noise standards in order to make required improvements to SR 167 between mile post 24.41 and mile post 24.80 over 20 nonconsecutive nights from April 1, 2016 to December 31, 201 7. The variance is approved subject to conditions. Testimony Vicki Grover, City of Renton Civil Engineer, summarized the proposal. The nearest residence is located at the end of the project (milepost 24.80) on the south side of the proposal and will be separated from the proposal by at least 300 feet. The 300 foot separation includes a buffer of trees. Mohammad Hasan, WSDOT project manager, noted that the proposal is part of a larger project that extends into the City of Kent. The project involves resurfacing SR 167, which is necessary for continued use. Project duration will not be two years, but the two year period is requested in order to cover any delays in the commencement of the project. 20 days is a conservative estimate and it’s very likely the project will take less than 20 days. The closest home is actually 450 feet from the work zone. Maria Laura Musso-Escude, WSDOT representative, stated that ambient night dBA is around 64-66 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 - 2 CAO VARIANCE - 2 dBA. 75 dBA are anticipated to be the highest noises generated by the project. dBA levels go down at the rate of 6 dBA per 200 feet. In addition, the trees separating the residence from SR 167 would further reduce dBA. 60 dBA is conversational level. Exhibits The January 13, 2015 staff report (amended February 19, 2015) and its five attachments were admitted into the record during the hearing as Ex. 1. The staff power point was admitted as Ex. 2. Findings of Fact Procedural: 1. Applicant. Washington State Department of Transportation. 2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the subject application on February 19, 2016 in the City of Renton City Council Chambers. 3. Project Description. The applicant has applied for a variance to the City’s noise standards in order to make required improvements to SR 167 between mile post 24.41 and mile post 24.80 over 20 nonconsecutive nights from April 1, 2016 to December 31, 2017. The portion of the project located within the City of Renton limits includes work and improvements within the State Right of Way limits only. Noise levels resulting from project construction activities will generate peak noise levels of 68 to 84 dBA as perceived at a distance of 50 feet from within WSDOT ’s property lines. A variance from RMC 8-7-2 is necessary in order 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). The project would consist of planning asphalt lanes, some pavement repair, and placement of new asphalt, pavement marking and installation of traffic loops. Construction equipment used during the nighttime operations will include, but is not limited to: dump trucks, flatbed trucks, generators, portable lighting (light plants), paving machines, planning grinders, compaction rollers & hand compactors, air compressors, sweepers, cement mixer trucks, painting vehicles and saw cutters for asphalt. When feasible, temporary noise shields will be placed around construction equipment. In addition, the proponent proposes to implement other measures to mitigate noise impacts. One-ton pick-up trucks will not be allowed to park or idle near residences. An after-hours noise complaint phone number will be provided to all residents affected by the project. Use of backup alarms will be minimized; and “approved” bed liners shall be installed into dump trucks to help mitigate the sound of material being placed into or dumped out of dump trucks. 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 - 3 CAO VARIANCE - 3 4. Surrounding Uses. Surrounding land uses are primarily commercial. The closest home is more than 300 feet away from the project site and is separated by trees. 5. Adverse Impacts. The noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated as much as can be reasonably required of WSDOT. Noise impacts overall appear to be very marginal since the closest home is located more than 300 feet from the project and is shielded by a strand of trees. The dBA levels at the closest home may be as low as conversational level at 60 dBA. Given these factors, the impacts of the requested variance are not considered significant. Conclusions of Law 1. Authority. RMC 8-7-8(A) authorizes the hearing examiner to hear requests to variances of the noise standards set by Chapter 7 RMC. 2. Review Criteria. Noise variances are governed by RMC 8-7-8(D). Applicable criteria are quoted below in italics and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. RMC 8-7-8(D)(1): That the applicant suffers practical difficulties and unnecessary h ardship 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 criterion is met. The work must be done during night time hours when noise limits are strictest in order to minimize disruption of the transportation system. The work is unavoidable as SR 167 is in serious need of repair as testified by Mr. Hassan in order to continue functioning properly. 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, the proposal will not create any significant adverse impacts. Consequently, it will not be materially detrimental to public health, welfare or safety or injurious to any property or improvements. RMC 8-7-8(D)(3): That the variance sought is the minimum variance which will accomplish the desired purpose. 5. The applicant demonstrated during the hearing that the work is unavoidable and that the mitigation imposed is the most that could be reasonably required. For these reasons the variance is the minimum necessary. 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 - 4 CAO VARIANCE - 4 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 lev els; 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 wi th 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 varian ce 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 rev oke the variance approval if the variance conditions are violated. 6. Most of the measures identified above have been either proposed or required for the project. The measures taken to mitigate impacts have been found adequate by staff and it doesn’t appea r that any additional measures from the list above would materially help to mitigate noise impacts. 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. The need for improvements to SR 167 are of critical importance and that has been balanced into the assessment of impacts (FOF No. 5) as required by the criterion above. RMC 8-7-8(D)(6): The availability of practicable alternative locations or methods for the proposed use which will generate the noise. 8. There are no practicable alternative locations or methods available. 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. WSDOT testified that noise levels would not exceed 75 dBA and the staff reports identifies noise levels as high as 84 dBA. These noise levels are reasonably necessary to complete necessary maintenance/repairs to SR 167, noise levels have been reduced to the maximum extent reasonably 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 - 5 CAO VARIANCE - 5 possible, impacts are not considered significant and work is limited to a maximum of 20 days. Given these factors it is determined that the proposal has been adequately mitigated and should be approved as conditioned. DECISION As conditioned, the variance meets all applicable criteria as outlined in this decision. The conditions of approval are as follows: 1. The applicant shall provide the City of Renton project manager with the phone number for after-hours noise complaints prior to commencement of construction. Any complaints within the Renton city limits will be summarized and reported to the City’s project manager within 5 days of the complaint. In response to complaints, the applicant will take all reasonable measures to minimize disturbance, including the provision of ear plugs or hotel accommodations as testified during the hearing. 2. The applicant shall implement all proposed mitigation measures to diminish or eliminate noise during construction. 3. The applicant shall notify the City of Renton project manager with the date and areas of expected night work prior to commencement of night work, a minimum of 24 hours in advance of the work. DATED this 1st day of February, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-080 provides that the final decision of the hearing examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) 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. A request for reconsideration to the hearing examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13) and RMC 4 -8-100(G)(9). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. 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 - 6 CAO VARIANCE - 6 Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.