HomeMy WebLinkAboutSouthport Entry Road, 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: Southport Entry Road
Noise Variance
LUA16-000453, V-H
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
FINAL DECISION
Summary
The applicant requests a variance from RMC 8-7-2 (Noise Regulations, Maximum Environmental
Noise Levels) in order to conduct construction work at night in an area with residential uses. The
construction work would occur continuously from 10:00 PM on Thursday, September 8, 2016
through to 11:59 PM on Sunday, September 11, 2016. The project consists of the installation of a
bridge located to the west of the Lake Washington Boulevard and Houser Way intersection. Noise
levels resulting from project construction activity would generate peak noise levels of 106 dBA as
perceived at a distance of 50 feet from the proposed bridge location. The project consists of the
installation of a bridge located to the west of the Lake Washington Boulevard and Houser Way
intersection. The variance is approved subject to conditions.
Testimony
Vicki Grover, City of Renton Civil Engineer III, summarized the staff report. In response to examiner
questions Ms. Grover identified the surrounding uses and noted that the Bristol Apartments to the
west would be the only nearby use affected by the noise variance. The examiner asked why the
project wasn’t conditioned to require hotel reimbursement for noisy evenings. Ms. Grover agreed
that should be a condition of 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
Scott Rosenstock, applicant representative, clarified in response to examiner questions that if the
variance isn’t granted the work would take eight weeks longer. The night work avoids the need to
work in phases.
Exhibits
Exhibits 1-4 identified at page 3 of the July 19, 2016 Staff Report were admitted into the record
during the hearing. In addition, the staff power point presentation was admitted as Exhibit 5.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Procedural:
1. Applicant. SECO Development, Inc.
2. Hearing. A hearing was held on the subject application on July 26, 2016 in the City of Renton
Council Chambers.
Substantive:
3. Project Description. The applicant requests a variance from RMC 8-7-2 (Noise Regulations,
Maximum Environmental Noise Levels) in order to conduct construction work at night in an area
with residential uses. The construction work would occur continuously from 10:00 PM on Th ursday,
September 8, 2016 through to 11:59 PM on Sunday, September 11, 2016. The project consists of the
installation of a bridge located to the west of the Lake Washington Boulevard and Houser Way
intersection. The bridge will be used for pedestrian and vehicular access to the Southport Mixed-Use
Development, Puget Sound Energy yard and Gene Coulon Park. The applicant proposes to widen the
road to improve traffic flow entering and exiting the site. The work will be conducted within
property owned by SECO Development.
Noise levels resulting from project construction activity would generate peak noise levels of 73 to
106 dBA as perceived at a distance of 50 feet from the proposed bridge location. 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. To the north is Gene Coulon Park, to the west are the Bristol
Apartments, to the south and east are parking lots for Puget Sound Energy.
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
5. Adverse Impacts. The noise generated by the proposal will be mitigated as much as
reasonably practicable. As shown in Exhibit 3 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 of up to 106 dBA as perceived at a distance of 50 feet from the construction
equipment that generates the noise. These noise levels are high, but the alternative would be weeks
of road closures and traffic revisions that would adversely affect affected nearby residents and
persons accessing Gene Coulon Park instead. The noise impacts are limited to four nights and
ultimately residents can be reimbursed for hotel stays if the noise is too much.
Noise impacts are limited as much as reasonably practicable, with mitigation including the following
measures:
• Lining the beds of trucks with soil that will be receiving Asphalt Concrete Pavement and
Portland Concrete.
• Encase light plants and small generator.
• Do not allow equipment to sit idling when not being used.
• Puget Sound Energy will be compensated for charges associated with the closure.
• Create and utilize a noise mitigation training program, which shall be implemented for all
field-worker supervisory personnel including sub-contractor supervisors.
• Take noise level readings. At a minimum, the contractor will be required to take a base noise
level reading before the start of construction activities, and after noise mitigation measures
have been installed.
• Equip all vehicles with ambient sensitive backup warning devices. The Contractor may use
back-up observers in lieu of back-up warning devices for all equipment except dump trucks in
compliance with WAC Chapter 296-155-610 and 296-155-615. The Contractor shall use
back-up observers and back-up warning devices for dump trucks in compliance with WAC
Chapter 296-155-640.
• An after-hours noise complaint phone number will be provided to the local residents to
register complaints to be mitigated.
• Use of acoustical blankets, pads, and/or boards to control metal-on-metal clanging noise or
other banging noises that can occur during construction.
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 variance to RMC 8-7-2 governed by RMC 8-7-8(D).
All 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 hardship and the
variance is necessary because of special circumstances applicable to the applicant’s property or
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
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 fact that, as agreed by staff, the proposal would take eight
weeks longer to complete without the variance due to the need to phase bridge construction if the
variance isn’t approved. Denial of the project would deny the applicant the opportunity to avoid
unreasonable delay in construction and an unreasonable delay in construction would adversely affect
the Bristol Apartment residents and Gene Coulon park users. Other contractors would be able to
avoid the additional eight weeks in construction delay by working evenings. The granting of the
noise variance is necessary for the applicant to enjoy the same privilege.
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 reasonable practicable under the circumstances. Ultimately, the mitigation
measures imposed by this decision 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.
5. The applicant has taken the measures it reasonably can to reduce noise impacts and to limit
the night work to only four evenings. For these reasons the variance is considered to be the minimum
to accomplish the desired purpose, i.e. avoid eight weeks of construction delay.
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;
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
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 of the requirements above are made a condition of approval.
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 short duration closure will allow for an expedited schedule to install the bridge over
Johns Creek for access to the Southport Mixed-Use Development. Without the variance, there may
be traffic and access impacts for up to an additional 8 weeks to adjacent residents and businesses to
complete the bridge installation in phases.
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 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 106 dBA and
the work will occur continuously over a four day period.
DECISION
As conditioned below, the noise variance is approved subject to the following conditions:
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. The
complaint number shall also be provided to surrounding residents in the proposed 24-
48 hour notice to residents in Exhibit 3. The 24-48 hour notice shall be provided to
the residents specified by City staff. Any complaints from within the Renton city
limits will be summarized and reported to the City’s project manager within 2 days of
the complaint.
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
2. The mitigation measures identified in Finding of Fact No. 5 shall be implemented by
the applicant.
3. In addition to the mitigation measures imposed by Finding of Fact No. 5, the
following conditions shall also apply as listed in RMC 8-7-8(D)(4)::
A. The applicant shall provide a cash security in an amount set by staff to pay
for inspection services to verify compliance;
B. The applicant shall grant access to the project by the City to verify
compliance with the noise variance conditions;
C. The applicant shall provide hotel vouchers to effected residents when
noise impacts cannot be reasonably mitigated to levels that enable them to
reasonably sleep at their homes;
D. The applicant shall provide written verification to staff that all workers
understand the noise variance conditions for the project; and
E. The hearing examiner may immediately revoke this variance approval if
staff establish that the variance conditions are violated after giving the
applicant a reasonable opportunity to respond.
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. Implementation of a noise monitoring program will be conducted nightly by the
contractor and the results provided to the City’s project manager;
6. Maximum noise level readings will be included in the noise monitoring program that
will be conducted nightly and these results with the type of work being conducted
during the noise level readings are to be provided to the City’s project manager.
DATED this 9th day of August, 2016.
City of Renton Hearing Examiner
Appeal Right and Valuation Notices
RMC 8-7-8(F) provide that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the
Renton City Council. RMC 8-7-8(F) 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.
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
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.