October 21, 2002August 2, 2026

ACC’s Second Supplemental Response to Respondent Port Of Seattle’s Request for Production No. 2 Directed to Appellant Airport Communities Coalition

Notes

This document is Airport Communities Coalition’s (ACC) second supplemental response to the Port of Seattle’s Request for Production No. 2 in PCHB Case No. 01-160 before the Pollution Control Hearings Board. It lists documents relied upon by ACC’s expert witnesses, including Dr. Patrick Lucia of GeoSyntec Consultants and Dr. Peter Willing of Water Resources Consulting, Inc. The referenced materials cover topics such as retaining wall evaluations for Miller Creek, seismic analysis, stormwater management, and water quality.

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