Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAppendix A - Garden Avenue Realignment garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 1 of 10 Appendix A Garden Ave. Realignment Project June 21, 2023 Hearing Transcript, Permit 22-0001 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. For those in need of an accurate rendition of the hearing testimony, a hearing recording can be acquired at the Auburn City Clerk’s Office. Examiner Olbrechts (00:00): I got my recorder going. Is yours up and running? Yes. Okay, perfect. Alright, for the record, it is, , June 21st, 2023, 5:30 PM I'm Phil alb, Brex Hearing Examiner for the City of Auburn. Um, this evening we have a, , holding a public hearing on, , an application for a critical areas permit and shoreline substantial development permit for a realignment project. One oh second Avenue Southeast. That's file number SHL 22 dash 0 0 0 1. , the hearing format for tonight is will start off with a presentation from staff and who's gonna be the our staff person for this evening? Dinah Reed (00:39): Myself, Examiner Olbrechts (00:40): <inaudible>. Okay. All right. And then, , after she's done, then we'll move on to public comments if there are any members of the public. We don't see any here in the meeting room right now. Do we have anybody, , attending remotely yet at this point? Do you know? Dinah Reed (00:52): , we do not have anybody participating remotely Examiner Olbrechts (00:55): Yet. Okay. All right. And well, when we get to the, , public, um, testimony portion of the hearing, of course we'll double check on that. If anybody wants to participate, of course they'll have a chance to do that. , once we're done with, um, , well, actually I should have said after um, staff comments, we move on to the applicant comments. Are you gonna be representing both staff and applicant in this case or, Dinah Reed (01:17): Um, partially, but we do have two other staff members here to my bell introduce. Examiner Olbrechts (01:21): Oh, okay. And they'll say a little bit too as the applicant. Okay, great. Then yeah, so it's, yeah. So then the applicant, which is also kind of it's public work staff will be making their comments. Then we'll move on to the public comments, which could include remote comments. After all that's finished, we'll move back to staff comments and then, , applicant gets final word. I get 10 business days to, , make a final decision, which is a couple weeks. So, um, with that, let's take a look at the exhibits that were presented garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 2 of 10 in the staff report. And I think that's at the last page there. Just gotta scroll down there real quick. It's a long staff report. It always is. When it's a shoreline permit, unfortunately <laugh>, you have to put all those shoreline policies and things. Okay. Almost. There we go. Okay, on page, Dinah Reed (02:10): Let's see, Examiner Olbrechts (02:12): 25, the staff report. The last page we have a list of 14 exhibits. These are documents that were, , sent to me by staff to review for this application. And it includes the, um, application and, and the JPA application, written statement from the city of Aborn, , shoreline policy memo from the city critical areas exemption memorandum. There's cultural resources analysis, done, a stormwater report, environmental review, and then, , the various, , notices of application and landscape plan, that kind of thing. Does anyone need to see any of these documents or have any objection to their entry in the record? Okay. Hearing none then exhibits one through 14, which includes the staff report itself, itself will be admitted. So at this point, let me swear in, just raise your right hand. Do you swear Affirm tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Yes, I do. Okay, great. Go ahead. Dinah Reed (03:02): Um, I would also like to add exhibit number 15, which is the PowerPoint presentation Examiner Olbrechts (03:06): For this hearing. Okay. Any objections over the PowerPoint presentation? Hearing none that's admitted as Exhibit 15. Okay, go ahead. Dinah Reed (03:14): Thank, good evening. I'm <inaudible> Senior Planner with City of Honor and Planning Department. I also have available this evening Jacob Sweet, who's the city engineer, assistant director engineering services with the city's public works department and the applicant, Kim project engineer, the city Public Works department. So this is all visible. Everyone. , the request for this proposal is for Shoreline Substantial development permit. I'll start with the project information and site characteristics. This map shows vicinity, map shows the vicinity of the area. This is a more of a closeup, um, showing the location of the project highlighted in yellow. It's just east of the bridge that goes over the Green River River and north of the T intersection of eighth Street, Northeast and Southeast 20th Street, which runs East, west and Garden Avenue, which runs north south. The applicant tron applied for a development permit to construct and modify the two roads that are shown, highlighted in yellow. (04:29): The project will complete the East west, Southeast three 18th Street, which is the street on the north with a roadway, previous pavement, sidewalk, curb, and gutter connecting Garden Avenue to 11 fourth Avenue Southeast also has street improvements consisting of sidewalk and utilities will be constructed along the North South Garden Avenue remaining in a cul-de-sac at the south. Vehicular access will be illuminated to eighth Street, Northeast Southeast <inaudible> Street. The area south of the cul-de-sac will be converted and restored to native mitigation planting. And the project site is within the Urban conservancy shoreline environment. The Green River slide. Next slide explains the CIPA and public notice procedures, a find notice of application determination of significance. And the notice of hearing garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 3 of 10 was issued under city file number CPA 2021 on May 16th, 2023. It's also Exhibit 10. The comment period ended juneteenth 2023 and the appeal period June 30th. Copy of the CFA environmental checklist prepared by the city is included as Exhibit nine. Um, we received just two public comments in response to the noticing the entirety of these comments and staff responses are included as Exhibit 13 and 14. They have that comment and the staff response in those exhibits. (06:07): The neighbor comments addressed, um, in general increased traffic in area in the area. They felt sidewalk along Garden Avenue is not necessary for the project. And they had comments about the urban separator overlay, which is, , an overlay of the zoning. Staff responded to the comments in summary explaining how the Garden Avenue intersection with eighth Street does not meet separation standards from the bridge. And our response was also provided, explaining Complete Streets requirements for sidewalks and the connections and provide walking public to transit stops in commercial areas. , further expeditions given about the King County origins of the Urban Separator overlay policy document and that it's implemented in the city of Auburn comprehensive plan by designating those areas of the urban separator overlay as low density, the sidewalk of policies of the Auburn Shoreline Master programs, public access to the shoreline. (07:16): Next slide. Again, an aerial of the area of the project. This slide shows the comprehensive land use designation of the subject site showing that it is single family. And this slide shows the zoning classification map. The project site is within the R one Wondering unit per acre zoning district. The surrounding area is also characterized by single family. This slide shows the site plan for the project. With with details you can see the build out of 318th Street, east West, connecting hundred fourth Garden Avenue to the north. Also, the project will have a right of way acquisition phase from the two parcels north of Southeast three 18th Street. Based on the topography of the area. Stormwater flows from the southeast corner where the cul-de-sac is located toward the Northeast, where bio retention cells and rain gardens will be constructed on the north side of Southeast 18th Street to absorb the stormwater. The half street improvements along the east side of Garden Avenue include two new parallel water mains installed to replace the six inch water main new ous pavement sidewalk. As was already mentioned, the existing pavement of the Southern Garden Avenue will be removed and a revegetation and restoration of that area, which is showing green, will be created with a walking path from the south end of the culdesac, the roadway at eighth Street, Northeast, Southeast 20th Street. (09:05): This slide focuses a little bit of a blow up of the restoration area. The restoration area is within 100 foot critical area buffer of the green river, which will be planted with a variety of plants made to the Pacific Northwest. And restoration will also occur east of the walking plantings. (09:28): So my shoreline findings of fact. So the city's critical areas ordinance, the Green River is classified as a stream and it's identified as shorelines of the state member State law Chapter 98 rcw. In the city of Auburn Shoreline Master Program, the shoreline of the Green River extends 200 feet from the ordinary high watermark, which is shown as the green area. The project site will occur within 200 feet of the Green River shoreline jurisdiction, specifically the Urban Conservancy Shoreline Environmental designation as outlined in our Shoreline Master Program, 4.5 table one of permitted uses the minimum setback from the ordinary high water mark is 100 feet of the urban Conserv environment and within the hundred critical area setback for the line master program. Since the river is also regulated critical area garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 4 of 10 by the city, the setback functions asho buffer to provide riparian habitat, protect water quality. So the critical area finding of facts, (10:45): Um, in accordance with Auburn City Code 16 point 10 and the critical areas associated with the project project. Um, in addition to the Green River being the Type S stream, the project is also within the type one for recharge area and zone two groundwater protection area established for special protection. Pursuant to the groundwater management program, the applicant had submitted a critical area's exemption memor, which is Exhibit six, to request with the applicant that the project be exempt from the city's critical area requirements consistent with Auburn City Code 16.04084 for minor utility and street projects. However, the critical area's exemption cannot be considered this project based on the Shortline master program pursuant to regulation 4 4 4 F, which states activities that are exempt from the provisions of critical areas. Ordinance for city code 16 exemptions and non perform usually shall not within the jurisdiction determine which are exempt shall be given by this master program in WAC 1 73. (12:05): So the staff report includes, um, the criteria for critical areas and according to, , 1610, and I can, I'm going to go through these cause we have a staff analysis for each of them. Um, the first one, mitigation standards, adverse impact function values shall, shall be mitigated. The staff analysis for this criteria under existing conditions, the portion of the project that is within the 100 foot buffer of the Green River mainly consists of roadway, compacted gravel, shoulders and driveways. And a vacant lot that's 50% covered compacted gravel. There will be no in water work performed for this project. Project proposes to reconfigure and reconstruct a portion of the existing roadway to include a culdesac and install underground watering. More than 50% of the existing impervious surface area will be located farther away from the river water project and more than 2,500 square feet of the area buffer will be replanted with native plantings. Sorry. Overall, no net loss and functions occur. On the next one, long term protection of regulated. , there's no wetlands areas in any associated buffers. Um, the civil plan submitted to the development shall show that critical area buffer of the Green River, any conservation document will be reported. Restoration area located at the cul, the standards for the streams, the landscape plan was submitted for the restoration area. Planting that included current Oregon that are all perennial in nature. (14:08): ReSTOR area protected fencing and critical signage. The performance standards for recharge areas protective majors will be implemented as part of the project via implementation of the stormwater pollution prevention plan. Existing infrastructure includes ditches on east side of hundred fourth Avenue. That storm water to the municipal storm drain new and replaced previous roadway surfaces will berated such that one off in these areas will the retention with the use of drainage piping during construction. The spill prevention control and plan will outline the best management practices employed to reduce water discharge from site. And finally, , , requiring a monitoring plan. The monitoring program, the New river, the restoration shall be submitted by the applicant review and approved by the city implementation. And these are all conditions as well. (15:17): So up to the Shoreline Management program, the city of Auburn uses its 2020 City of Auburn Shoreline Master Program to regulate development and management of the city shorelines. The slide shows the applicant the applicable portion of the permitted use table or the strong line master program. Based on the strong line designation, sho line modifications are permitted and then key conditional use or not permitted, you know, roads are permitted within the Urban Conservancy. Shoreline environment garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 5 of 10 designation, shoreline's substantial development permit is required for the utilities. Such storm drain outlets, primary conveyance and distribution facilities such as pipe station and accessory utility facilities to serve lab development of water lines are considered permitted use. Also, this slide shows how the Shoreline substantial development permit is consistent with Shoreline Master Program, which is required to be consistent with the State Shoreline Management Act and meeting the criteria established within the City of Shoreline master program, which was most by the Washington State Department on May 7th, 2020. The project will be consistent with the Shoreline Management Act On the right, I've listed the RN Shoreline Master Program, different chapters where it shows that it's consistent. (17:02): Um, the purpose, the intention of the city council, that the provisions of this chapter will promulgate an adoptive program for the administration enforcement permit system that shall implement the hearing shall public hearing and the director shall 30 days prior hearing the project complies with Urban Conservancy Environmental Designation program section and staff report. The staff report outlined that the project complies with master program golden policies related to the circulation element. Use element drug prevention in critical areas, shortline vegetation conservation, water quality, storm water, transportation and utility. Section number two, the consistency with the Auburn Comprehensive plan and municipal code. The, um, it's supported by the capital facilities element, mostly the comprehensive plan. And, um, number three, consistent the policies, guidelines, regulations of the State Management Act meet criteria of the City of Operational master program. Therefore be consistent. State Management Act staff finds that the proposal is consistent criteria for development permit and the criteria outlined in 1 73. Additionally, it needs to be consistent with 1 73 7. The first one consistent with the control master plan that is address the previous slide. Number two, cannot obstruct the view of substantial number of resident on areas. Adho project will not obstruct the view of I have discussed the findings of fact and conclusions for the substantial development permit and State Management Act criteria. Based on the information contained in report, exhibit staff recommends substantial development permit subject to the seven recommended conditions. <inaudible>, would you let me read them for the record? Examiner Olbrechts (19:52): No, that's fine. I, yeah, no, what they're, thank you. Um, just some quick questions. Um, so who came up with the, the biological opinion that the proposal would result in no net loss of ecological function as condition was, was that you, or did you like consult with a, you know, a, um, stream biologist or something to come up with that? Or how did you arrive at that conclusion in the staff report? Dinah Reed (20:16): Um, I did not consult with the biologist mm-hmm. <affirmative>. Examiner Olbrechts (20:20): Okay. That was just based on the mitigation then and, and the proposal. So, and, and how did you come up with the, um, the, the condition requiring, , re-vegetation, you know, kind of the cul-de-sac area? I mean, how did you come up with that amount of re-vegetation? Is that based on any like, um, , what do they call it, ratio that's specified in the code or, or where did that come from? Dinah Reed (20:45): garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 6 of 10 Um, I don't believe there's facial specified in the code. Mm-hmm. <affirmative>, um, the revegetation area was basically proposed in their site plan as the area that they were, they were removing so much of the pavement in that area. And so the plan was to just revegetate whatever was being removed. Oh, okay. As, um, as impervious surface with a planting plan to make it, you know, more aesthetic, but also to improve functions along the river. Okay. And then the, um, it will be re-vegetated also to the east of walking path as Examiner Olbrechts (21:22): Well. Okay. And then now I understand that that, , the realignment will result in most, more than 50% of the road being pushed further away from the shoreline, which is obviously a good thing, although I wasn't quite sure, is, is the amount of impervious surface though in the shoreline jurisdiction gonna increase as a result of the realignment project? I, from looking at the diagrams that looked like maybe a little bit, but I wasn't, like I said, I wasn't quite sure about that. Dinah Reed (21:47): Well, I dunno if, um, there weren't civil plans submitted with this application mm-hmm. <affirmative>, so I didn't have, um, um, the, the area to the North Southeast Street and 18th Street is outside of the Examiner Olbrechts (22:09): Right Dinah Reed (22:10): Shoreline and the area within on Garden Avenue that is in the shoreline. I don't know. I can't really answer that question. Examiner Olbrechts (22:21): Okay. All right. And then finally, I think the staff report mentioned that the amount of impervious surface in the child migration zone is gonna be increased by some nominal amount, like three square feet. I mean, does the code require some kind of offset for that? Because I know that if you reduce, , flood plain capacity in the flood plain, you have to comp, you have to increase at someplace else. I don't know if there's anything like that for channel migration zones. So Dinah Reed (22:45): The project does extend into the channel migration zone, um, and there was a flood plain exemption permit with this project. I didn't really mention it, but, um, that it met the non-development criteria for an exemption from the flood plan permit. And based on criteria that the underground and aboveground utility were located in previously disturbed areas with significant vegetation impactable maintenance and preservation of public and private streets or parking lots with approval plan administrator including but not crack sealing, installing signs, traffic signs, traffic control devices, generalization, sidewalk, motor guard areas, and public street improvement with no significant vegetation, all official change. Examiner Olbrechts (23:52): Okay. Speaker 4 (23:53): garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 7 of 10 So Dinah Reed (23:54): Approved based on that criteria. Examiner Olbrechts (23:58): Okay. Makes sense. Great, thank you. Alright, well let's, , move on to applicants. Do the applicants wanna add anything at this point? I have to swear you in for that, but, um, and maybe you can answer the question about whether there's any increase in impervious surface in the shoreline jurisdiction, you know, the 200 feet from the ordinary high watermark. Like I say, I just couldn't tell from the drawings quite if that was the case or not. So Kim Truong (24:21): Yes, I Examiner Olbrechts (24:21): Can answer that. Okay. First, let's, , swear you in. Just raise your right hand. Do you swear affirm and tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Yes. Okay. And then if you give us your name and spelling for the record. Kim Truong (24:31): My name is Kim Truong. Examiner Olbrechts (24:33): Okay. U g. Okay, great. Thank you. Kim Truong (24:37): Um, so g answer your question is about the increase in employee area. So, um, there is a small increase, um, the existing impervious area that are within the 200 foot buffer. Mm-hmm. <affirmative> is a little bit less than, um, thousand square feet. Okay. And the new and or replace impervious within the two foot buffer is, um, about 11,500 square feet or Examiner Olbrechts (25:04): So. So 1500 square feet difference then? Kim Truong (25:07): Yes. Yeah. But, um, like, , Diane mentioned before, the IMP area after the project's complete is actually gonna be a bit further away from the river Examiner Olbrechts (25:17): <affirmative> now. Okay. Kim Truong (25:20): garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 8 of 10 And there is a slight, um, change to the design that, um, do you wanna bring out, actually gonna go over that slight change, um, to Examiner Olbrechts (25:32): Maam. Okay. Sir, let me swear. Are you in, you swear affirm and tell the truth, nothing but the truth in this proceeding? Yes. Okay. And if you could, , spell your last name for the record as well. Sure. Speaker 4 (25:41): My name's Jacob Sweeping, S w e E T I N Examiner Olbrechts (25:44): G. Okay, great. Thank you. Speaker 4 (25:47): , so on exhibit 12, , that shows the complete site plan, , there is a portion of the site plan that's actually without the shoreline, , just jurisdiction that the design has changed slightly. I just wanted to make you aware of, and that is, , along parcel 33 3 94 0 0 6 5 5, which is along Southeast three Street. , it is, , fronted on the east by hundred fourth Avenue, Southeast and South by Creek Street. , the, the sidewalk that is shown and the curb and gutter that is shown on that property, , will not be included in this project. , those, those improvements are, , part of typical frontage improvements that are included with the development mm-hmm. <affirmative> of that project. , so there's actually a anticipated development, , proposal that we think is coming on that project mm-hmm. <affirmative> and, , that, that proposal would be then required to build out the sidewalk along that frontage. So the project itself still includes, , the roadway and a temporary curb and the storm facility, , to accommodate the project, but the actual sidewalks front. Examiner Olbrechts (27:06): Oh, okay. Okay. And of course the, but the city still is doing the sidewalks on Garden Avenue, is that correct? Speaker 4 (27:11): Yes. Garden Avenue will still have sidewalks and then the south side of Southeast three 18th Street will still have sidewalks, so will be full pedestrian connectivity as well as the north side of three 18 will have sidewalk up to the property line of the parcel I referenced. And it will still have an accessible pedestrian pathway. It just won't be a sidewalk. It'll be Examiner Olbrechts (27:30): After service. Okay, great. Thank you. All right, well, I think guess we're ready to move on to public comments now, if any, do we have anyone attending remotely? For the record? There's, , nobody here in the audience yet and the door is unlocked, right? I think it <laugh>. I just wanna confirm that. Okay. And, and no one remote, I, Speaker 6 (27:47): I, I do have, I do have a remote participant. Oh, garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 9 of 10 Examiner Olbrechts (27:52): Okay. Speaker 6 (27:53): First initial C Murphy participating. I don't know if that person wishes to provide any testimony or not. Examiner Olbrechts (28:00): Okay. They Speaker 6 (28:00): Do, they could unmute or they could use the reactions available, , on their phone to, , signal that and then we Examiner Olbrechts (28:09): Okay. Speaker 6 (28:10): Hear if they have any testimony to Examiner Olbrechts (28:12): Provide how Now, so do you know how they can unmute themselves on the phone? Speaker 6 (28:16): , I think it was, it used to be, , hit Examiner Olbrechts (28:22): Nine. Okay. Yeah, that sounds familiar. Yeah. If the person on the phone wants to, , participate, just hit star nine and we're not getting anything like that. Alright. And if that doesn't work and, and you're trying to, , connect with us, you can go ahead and email the city by 5:00 PM tomorrow if you weren't able to, , um, connect today and you really wanted to. And what, what email address should that person send their comments to? Speaker 6 (28:49): They should send their, , any comments to planning at auburn wa gov. Speaker 4 (29:01): They should send Examiner Olbrechts (29:01): Their Speaker 4 (29:03): Comments to planning at auburn wa gov. garden avenue (Completed 07/03/23) Transcript by Rev.com Page 10 of 10 Examiner Olbrechts (29:09): Okay, perfect. Alright, thank you. And, , and also just to clarify, I mean, these are shoreline permits. We did get a couple, , comments, , concerned about, , I think it was basically a late comers agreement or some kind of obligation to pay for street fees, which is, um, very likely, , not within the scope of this hearing. As far as I understand it. I haven't seen any criteria that, let me address that kind of thing. We're really concerned about the ecological, , resources of the shoreline, whether it has any impact on the shoreline and, and, , any other critical area, environmentally sensitive areas of the project site. So, um, I guess with that, unless staff has any further comments, I can, Jeff, Mr. Dixon, Speaker 6 (29:49): I wanted to just add one clarification mm-hmm. <affirmative>, that, that was based upon the map that was exhibit 12 that dyna was showing a moment ago. There was a line for the 100 foot critical areas, buffer or stream or river buffer to the Green River h. And then there's a separate line that is the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction. The shoreline jurisdiction is the area that is invoked and, and triggers the shoreline permitting requirements. Mm-hmm. <affirmative>, but it's not the same as a buffer that has the requirements for repairing restoration and all of that that is necessary for appropriate protection of the shoreline requirements. Examiner Olbrechts (30:34): Well, I mean, I think a, any project that needs mitigation anywhere in, in the shoreline jurisdiction often involves restoration mitigation. I mean, in this case, what's going on is since it's, I believe, a road project, right, that you can build in a buffer through an exemption or something. But if it was like building a house, they'd have to get a variance to build in there. I mean, that, that's where the buffer really makes Right. A difference. Speaker 6 (30:55): I'm just saying that the, the 200 foot shoreline jurisdiction is not necessarily a, it's not a, it's Examiner Olbrechts (31:00): Not a, a buffer. Right? Yeah. Oh yeah, definitely. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Good. All right. Thanks Mr. Dixon. Okay with that. Any other comments from anybody else? All right. I think we're, , we're done for the, this evening except for maybe that one email comment from the person who's attending remote leave if they wanted to try to get, , , their comments in and couldn't today. But beyond that, and of course, if, if that email is submitted, I'll give a chance for staff to respond to that within a couple days or something, depending on how, , you know, how complex the, the comments are. So, but, , beyond the po potential email exchanges were adjourned for this evening. So thanks all for participating.