Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutWSDOT Pavement Rehabilitation Project for SR 169, 140th Ave SE to Cedar River Park Vicinity, 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 CAO VARIANCE - 1 1 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON RE: WSDOT Pavement Rehabilitation Project for SR169, 140th Ave SE to Cedar River Park Vicinity Noise Variance LUA16-000616, V-H ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) FINAL DECISION Summary The Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) has applied for a variance from RMC 8-7-2 (noise regulations) in order to conduct construction work outside of restricted hours in residential areas located along State Route 169 in both the northbound and southbound lanes for approximately 2 miles between Mile Post 22.86 to Mile Post 24.84 during 40 non-consecutive nights from March 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018. The variance is approved with conditions. Testimony Robin Nair, City of Renton Civil Engineer III, summarized the proposal. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Nair clarified that the proposed noise mitigation measures identified in the recommended conditions of approval are those identified in Slide No. 5 of the staff power point and those measures identified in Exhibit 6. Laura Musso-Escude, WSDOT representative, noted that some work will be done behind existing noise walls. Temporary noise shields will be used to reduce noise by up to 7 decibels. The pavement cutter will create the most noticeable noise. Work on traffic signals will involve conduit work and use 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 of power tools. Since work on the signals will be on an elevated structure, residents who are outside will notice the noise. One home is as close as 80 feet to the signal work. David Wilkinson, project manager, clarified that at most, work will be a total of three nights at any one intersection. The intersection work will involve a maximum of 75-87 dba. Ms. Musso-Escude noted that temporary shields cannot always be used because passing semi-trucks can blow them off their foundation, which causes a danger to workers. Ms. Musso-Escude also noted that workers only have seven hours to do night time work in order to open up the lanes for morning 5:00 am traffic and setting up noise shields takes some of that limited time away. The ambient noise levels at SR 169 as measured by Ms. Musso-Escude have a peak level of 73 dba at 50 feet. Traffic is heavy in the project area and there are several noise walls. 90% of the time the noise level is 62 dba. Ms. Musso-Escude noted that requiring the contractor to do the monitoring work will be very expensive for such a long project. She requested that monitoring only be required if complaints are made. Ms. Musso-Escude noted that WSDOT has found earplugs and white noise machines to be effective mitigation for persons who have noise complaints and if that does not work WSDOT also provides hotel vouchers. In response to a request from the examiner, Ms. Musso-Escude stated that WSDOT could make clear in its notice to property owners that more specific dates and other details can be provided to persons who call WSDOT. In response to examiner questions, Ms. Musso-Escude acknowledged that WSDOT has had to provide hotel vouchers on a couple occasions for other projects, but she has found that the white noise machines and earplugs usually work well. David Wilkinson, project manager, noted that the road area was last rehabilitated in 1990. The state proposes to mill and inlay approximately two miles of SR 169. There are three signalized intersections and three unsignalized intersections in the project area. The project involves converting the signalized intersections to video detection, which will require five nonconsecutive nights of work and the closure of one to two lanes. Crews will bring in utility trucks, bucket trucks and tools to do the work. Following the signal work, crews will do mill work on the road for 15 nonconsecutive nights, but the operation is mobile and any one location will not be worked upon for more than five nights. The project will involve street sweeping. Pavement repair will take eight nights and will involve excavation and pavement cutting. Asphalt will be delivered by dump truck and spread by an asphalt spreading machine. All night work is done for the safety of workers and travelling public and to minimize traffic back-ups and disruption to bus service. In response to examiner questions, Mr. Wilkinson noted that notice of construction work will be provided by one mailed notice in advance of the work as opposed to segregated notice for each portion of the work. WSDOT has a website that also provides information on the project timeline, but this information will probably not be detailed to the level where neighbors can know precisely when work will be done in front of their homes. Mr. Wilkinson also noted that contact information will be provided to neighbors and that they will be able to call someone to get more details as to when work will be done near their homes. Ms. Musso-Escude noted that the work is weather dependent, so it’s not possible to identify all specific work dates and locations ahead of time. Mr. Wilkinson emphasized that the SR 169 pavement has reached the end of its design life and needs to be rehabilitated to prevent safety problems. If the work is done during the day, the higher traffic 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 volumes could result to harm to workers and the public and would result in significant traffic disruption. Marylin Whitley, neighbor in the Maplewood neighborhood, noted she will be greatly affected by the construction noise since she lives adjacent to the proposed work. She wanted to know what notice she would receive for work in front of her home. Mr. Wilkinson confirmed that there would be some minor pavement repair conducted close to her home involving work on a catch basin near a retaining wall on her property. In response to examiner questions he noted that the work would be done in one night. Ms. Musso-Escude said that she would have WSDOT contact Ms. Whitley about when the work would be done. Ms. Musso-Escude also noted that a temporary noise shield can be placed at the work site. Ms. Whitley noted that the Maplewood residents have been concerned about the project and have had trouble with inconsistencies in WSDOT documents describing the project. Ms. Nair noted that complaint driven monitoring is acceptable so long as there are not repeated complaints. Exhibits The October 4, 2016 Staff Report Exhibits 1-8 identified at page 2 of the Staff Report were admitted into the record during the hearing. In addition, the following exhibits were admitted during the hearing. Exhibit 9 Updated Ex. 3. Exhibit 10 Map of Maplewood neighborhood FINDINGS OF FACT Procedural: 1. Applicant. WSDOT 2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the subject application on October 11, 2016 at 12:00 pm in the City of Renton Council Chambers. Substantive: 3. Project Description. The Washington State Department of Transportation (“WSDOT”) has applied for a variance from RMC 8-7-2 (noise regulations) in order to conduct construction work outside of restricted hours in residential areas located along State Route 169 in both the northbound and southbound lanes, for approximately 2 miles between Mile Post 22.86 to Mile Post 24.84 during 40 non-consecutive nights from March 1, 2017 to December 31, 2018. The portion of the project located within the City of Renton limits includes work and improvements within the State right of 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 way limits only. Noise levels resulting from the project's construction activities will generate peak noise levels of 64 to 90 dBA as perceived at 50 feet from the WSDOT property line. 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). 4. Neighborhood Characteristics. Surrounding areas that will be potentially affected by the noise of the proposal are primarily residential with a mix of commercial and industrial uses as well. The surrounding zoning includes R-4, R-8, R-10 and R-14, as well as Commercial Office/Residential (COR) and Commercial Neighborhood (CN). 5. Adverse Impacts. The noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated as much as reasonably practicable. Overall, it appears that night time construction noise will be noticeable to some residents, but that any one resident is not likely to hear a significant amount of noise for more than a total of three nights given the mobile nature of the construction work over the two mile stretch of SR 169. Several mitigation measures will be imposed to reduce noise impacts as much as reasonably possible, including the provision of ear plugs and white noise machines. Ultimately, WSDOT will provide hotel vouchers if other mitigation isn’t effective. As shown in Exhibit 9 and from the list of proposed equipment identified in Finding of Fact No. 3, noise levels resulting from the project construction activity would generate peak noise levels up to 90 dBA as perceived at a distance of 50 feet from the construction equipment that generates the noise. The closest homes to project work would be 80 feet away. As testified by Ms. Musso-Escude, the night time ambient noise levels reach a maximum of 73 dBA. As she noted, the signal work in particular may be noticeable to residents who are outside since that work is from an elevated structure. The project area is already mitigated by a significant number of existing noise walls. The project is mitigated as much as can be reasonably required, including ultimately requiring hotel vouchers if measures such as ear plugs and white noise machines aren’t sufficient. In order to mitigate against these noise impacts, the applicant has proposed a list of mitigation measures, some of which include: • Temporary noise shields when safe to install around construction equipment. • Providing advance notice to residents via door hanger or equivalent with complaint and contact phone numbers. • Temporary relocation/compensation during the peak noise periods for local residents. (after receiving complaints). • Ambient sensitive backup alarms required and tailgate banging prohibited. 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 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 SR 169 to the adjoining homes and the critical need for night-time work to complete SR 169 rehabilitation. In uncontested and plausible testimony from Dave Wilkinson, the pavement at the project site has reached its useful life and must be rehabilitated in order to maintain a safe driving surface. Work must be done at night in order to protect the safety of workers and travelers from accidents that may occur due to high day time traffic volumes. The night time work is also necessary to prevent disruption of day time SR 169 traffic. Since the night time work is necessary to prevent major traffic disruptions and to protect public and worker safety, the variance requested by the applicant would likely be approved for any other project of a similar nature and therefore denial of the variance should be considered to deprive WSDOT of rights and privileges enjoyed by others. 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. 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. 6. As outlined in Finding of Fact No. 5 and concluded in Conclusion of Law No. 3, the applicant has taken all measures it reasonably can to reduce noise impacts. 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 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. 7. Many of the mitigation measures identified above are proposed and/or incorporated i nto the conditions of approval. Noise shields will be used when safe and feasible. Ambient sensitive backup alarms are required and tailgate banging is prohibited. Equipment and noise levels are limited to that identified in Ex. 9. Notice of project work is required for neighboring residents within 300 feet along with a contact and complaint phone number. Hotel vouchers are required if ear plugs and white noise machines prove ineffective. 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. 8. As outlined in Conclusion of Law No. 4, the proposed SR 169 night time work is necessary and unavoidable for both safety and traffic circulation reasons. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, the mitigation required of and proposed by WSDOT is as much as can reasonably be required under the circumstances. Some residents may notice and/or may be adversely affected by nighttime noise for what appears to be a maximum of three nights. On balance, the variance must be approved to facilitate significant and necessary improvements to SR 169. RMC 8-7-8(D)(6): The availability of practicable alternative locations or methods for the proposed use which will generate the noise. 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 9. As noted in the staff report, there are no alternative locations 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. 10. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5, noise levels will reach levels of up to 90 dBA and the work will occur over a 22 month period on 40 nonconsecutive nights. DECISION As conditioned below, the noise variance is approved: 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 2 days of the complaint. 2. The applicant shall implement proposed noise mitigation measures to diminish or eliminate noise during construction as outlined in Ex. 9. Additional mitigation measures to diminish or eliminate noise during construction are to be provided by the applicant as necessary. 3. Written notice of the project will be mailed to all adjoining residents within 300 feet at least 14 days in advance of construction work. The notice shall contain a complaint number as well as a contact number for more information. The notice shall state that more detailed information on the dates and location of project work can be obtained by calling the contact number. More detailed information on project dates affecting the Maplewood neighborhood will be provided to Ms. Whitley so she can forward that information to Maplewood residents. 4. 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. 5. Noise monitoring shall be implemented pursuant to a schedule set by City staff and based upon noise complaints. City staff may require daily monitoring if the project results in repeated noise complaints. 6. The applicant shall provide temporary hotel vouchers to affected residents for the nights of the proposed noise variance work when noise impacts cannot be reasonably mitigated (by ear plugs or white noise generators) to levels that enable the residents to reasonably sleep at their homes. 7. Equipment and noise levels are limited to what is identified in Ex. 9. 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 8. Truck tailgate banging is prohibited. 9. Unwanted material is to be removed by sweeping. No scraping type of equipment shall be used during nighttime work. DATED this 26th day of October, 2016. City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 8-7-8(F) and RMC 4-8-080 provide that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 8-7-8(F) and 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. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk’s Office, Renton City Hall – 7th floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation.