HomeMy WebLinkAboutWSDOT -- Noise - Final Decision Upon Reconsideration - LUA-15-000036 - 9-28-2015 Denis
Mayoaw _ City Of
- .
Y
t
i
City Clerk -Jason A.Seth,CMC
September 29, 2015
Ramin Pazooki
WSDOT
P.O. Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133
Subject: Hearing Examiner's Decision—Final Decision upon Reconsideration on
Request for Extension
RE: WSDOT(Noise Variance), LUA-15-000036, VAR
Dear Mr. Pazooki:
I have attached the City of Renton's Hearing Examiner's Final Decision upon
Reconsideration on Request for Extension dated September 28, 2015. This document is
immediately available:
• Electronically on line at the City of Renton website
(www.rentonwa.gov/business); go to Current Land Use Applications and then
scroll down to find your case;
• To be viewed at the City Clerk's office on the 7th floor or Renton City Hall, 1055
South Grady Way, between 8 am and 4 pm. Ask for the project file by the
project number LUA15-000036; and
I can be reached at (425) 430-6510 or iseth@rentonwa.gov. Thank you.
Sincerely,
IIf 0
Jason A. Seth
City Clerk
cc: Hearing Examiner
Vicki Grover,Civil Engineer II—Plan Review Engineer
Jennifer Henning, Planning Director
Vanessa Dolbee,Current Planning Manager
Craig Burnell, Building Official
Brianne Bannwarth, Development Engineering Manager
Sabrina Mirante,Secretary, Planning Division
Ed Prince,City Councilmember
Julia Medzegian,City Council Liaison
5 rtiesh�f R�cf-d(4�
105 out ra y ay 9 enton,Washington 98057• (425)430-6510/Fax(425)430-6516• rentonwa.gov
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8 BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON
9 )
10 RE: WA State Dept. of Transportation
FINAL DECISION UPON
I 1 Noise Variance ) RECONSIDERATION ON REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION
12 LUA15-000036, VAR )
13
14
Request for reconsideration is denied. An additional hearing is still required to entertain an
15 extension of the noise variance expiration as outlined in the September 17, 2015 final decision on
16 the applicant's Request for Extension.
17 As background, by decision dated March 10, 2015, the applicant was issued approval of the above-
captioned case for a variance to the City's noise standards in order to make improvements to SR 900
18 between mile post 6.66 and mile post 9.87 over 34 nonconsecutive nights from June 1, 2015 to
December 31, 2015. By letter dated September 14, 2015, the applicant requested that the dates be
19 changed to January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016. That request was denied by decision
20 issued September 17, 2015. By email dated September 21, 2015, Vicki Grover, a civil engineer
working for the Plan Review Section of the City of Renton, requested reconsideration based upon
21 RMC 4-9-250(18), which had not been raised in the original request for extension of the approved
variance dates.
22
23 The noise variance approved by the decision issued on March 10, 2015 was based upon noise
variances governed by RMC 8-7-8. In her request for reconsideration, Ms. Grover requested that
24 the examiner consider applying RMC 4-9-250(18), which authorizes extensions of the expiration
period for variances set by RMC 4-9-250(17). The expiration periods identified in RCW 4-9-
25 250(17) apply to the variances issued under RMC 4-9-250. The noise variance approved on March
26 10, 2015 was governed by RMC 8-7-8 and its expiration period was not set by RMC 4-9-250(17).
Consequently, RMC 4-9-250(18) cannot be used to extend the expiration periods of RMC 8-78-8.
CONDITIONAL USE
1
I
This result should not be too surprising. Variances governed by RMC 4-9-250 primarily deal with
2 modifications to construction standards. The expiration periods for those types of variances simply
set the date upon which construction must commence. Of course, once construction is completed
3 the impacts upon other properties are permanent. Extension of the construction deadline merely
4 delays the date that those permanent impacts commence. In contrast, a noise variance sets a narrow
window upon which noise impacts will occur. Changing the date of the window can potentially
5 have significant impacts upon the use of adjoining properties. Given this potential, the public
should have an opportunity to comment on the change in the expiration period.
6
7 DATED this 28th day of September, 2015.
8
9
10 Wif A.Olbwhts
11 City of Renton Hearing Examiner
12
13 Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
14 RMC 4-8-110(E)(9) provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to
15 the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(9) 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
16 request for reconsideration to the hearing e examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal
period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(8) and RMC 4-8-100(G)(4). A new fourteen (14) day
17 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 — 7 1
18 floor, (425) 430-6510.
19
Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes
20 notwithstanding any program of revaluation.
21
22
23
24
25
26
CONDITIONAL USE
2