July 12, 2001August 2, 2026

EXH AR050671: Transmittal Form — STIA Natural Resource Mitigation Plan Tables and Wetland Photographs, Parametrix to Ecology

Notes

Transmittal form dated July 12, 2001 from Jim Kelley at Parametrix, Inc. (Kirkland, WA) to Ann Kenny at Washington Department of Ecology NW Regional Office (Bellevue, WA), project number 556-2912-001 (03), transmitting materials for the Sea-Tac International Airport Master Plan Update Improvements. Materials include three copies of STIA Wetland Photographs and Maps report, and four tables from the STIA Natural Resource Mitigation Plan: Table 7.7-1 (Auburn wetland mitigation project final performance standards, evaluation approach, contingency measures), Table 5.1-7 (Vacca Farm mitigation projects), Table 5.2-12 (replacement drainage channels including Miller Creek, Wetlands A13, 18, 37a, R14a, A14b, A44a, R9), and Table 5.3-6 (borrow area wetlands monitoring). Sent via courier; cc to Katie Walter at Shannon & Wilson.

Sidebar On/Off

As the source for federal transportation grants, the Puget Sound Regional Council was charged with developing a system to meet the growing need for commercial aviation. When the search for a second airport failed, they authorized the Port of Seattle to build the Third Runway, with a mandate to develop a noise abatement and mitigation program. In their effort to stop the Third Runway, the ACC argued over every detail of the Port's efforts--including property buyouts and sound insulation. The dispute was meant to be settled by a three member Expert Arbitration Panel. This is their final report. It finds 2-1, that the Port's program was insufficient in several respects. Despite that, funding for the Third Runway was approved by the PSRC, and the 'Port Package' program, proceeded largely unchanged. Expert Arbitration Panel's final decision finding that the Port of Seattle had not shown sufficient reduction in real on-the-ground noise impacts to satisfy noise reduction conditions required for approval of a third runway at Sea-Tac International Airport. The majority decision concluded the Port's noise abatement programs were insufficient despite being impressive in scope.

continue...

V V

Notes

Message