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
Clerkâs 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.