Community advocates and state lawmakers are raising concern over the Port of Seattle’s limited assessment of soundproofing equipment it installed in more than 9,000 homes near Seattle-Tacoma International Airport, many of which have since failed.
Since the mid-1980s, the Port of Seattle has installed soundproofing like triple-pane windows and special ceiling insulation into more than 9,400 single family homes to dampen the noise of roaring jets above.
But many of those installations failed, meaning some residents have suffered years of damaged walls and moldy windows on top of still dealing with loud planes overhead. Without a sense of how widespread the issue is — or how costly it would be to fix — Port officials have been reluctant to take full responsibility for the problem.
That appeared to change in February, when the Port of Seattle approved a pilot program that allocated $5 million to fix failed soundproofing installations. The Port also approved $1.5 million to assess how many homes have issues and how to begin repairing and replacing the so-called “port packages.”
That assessment would include “extensive outreach, collection of information from property owners and analysis of that information,” according to the order. The Port began sending out mailers with a link to an online survey in June.
Community advocates and state officials initially lauded the Port’s pilot program as a step in the right direction following decades of neglect.
But in recent weeks, community advocates and state officials have become alarmed that only about a third of homes with soundproofing received a survey from the Port of Seattle. Only households currently experiencing the federally-recognized threshold for significant aircraft noise exposure are included in the study.
Many fear homes with failed port packages outside of the assessment area will be excluded from future repair programs.
“We knew there would always be a fight over which homes would be prioritized,” said JC Harris, a Des Moines City Council member and longtime organizer with the community group Sea-Tac Noise.Info. But people expected all impacted homes to “at least get evaluated,” he said.
Rep. Tina Orwall, who helped secure $1 million in state funding this year to address the failed port packages, raised similar concerns about “sampling a very small portion” of the more than 9,400 homes.
The narrow approach could make it harder for the state to determine how much additional funding would be required to support repair and replacement efforts. Orwall said she, Harris and Sen. Karen Keiser will meet with Port of Seattle officials in the coming days to discuss the current assessment of port packages and future plans to address all failed soundproofing installations.
“When the people heard they were going to work on the failed port packages, people were really hopeful,” Orwall said. “I’m worried something very healing and hopeful [will] be very frustrating for homeowners.”
The pilot program to assess and repair soundproofing was always intended to be limited in scope, said Commission President Hamdi Mohamed, who sponsored the order establishing the program. She previously estimated the allocated $5 million might only fund repairs and replacements in about 30 to 50 homes.
“This is a pilot for a permanent program,” she said. “It’s to be able to better understand how to tackle this issue in a more strategic way.”
Mohamed said the reason for the limited scope boils down to money. Port officials insist fixing all failed port packages would require hefty state and federal assistance. State officials involved in the issue and local community advocates say the Port — now drawing in $1 billion in revenue annually — should shoulder more responsibility.
“I hope that everyone who needs a repair and replacement ends up getting it,” Mohamed said. “But where is the money coming from?”
The Port of Seattle has one of the oldest noise mitigation programs in the country, largely using federal funds.
The agency installed soundproofing equipment in homes that faced day-night average sound exposure levels at 65 decibels or above, also known as DNL 65. It’s a metric the Federal Aviation Administration uses as a threshold of significant noise exposure to determine where federal funding for noise mitigation can be spent.
Most of these port packages were installed between 1996 and 2008, when construction was underway on the third runway at Sea-Tac. The Port has spent about $300 million on the installations, with the specialized improvements for one house alone costing more than $100,000 in some cases.
Over the years, the federal boundary of DNL 65 noise contours around Sea-Tac has shrunk, as planes have become quieter and flight paths more narrow.
For example, the southern boundary of the 1998 DNL65 noise contour stretched to cover the south portions of Des Moines and southwest portions of Kent, while the current boundary ends near central Des Moines near Highway 516.
Only homes in the current DNL 65 boundary with port packages — about 3,200 single family homes — received a survey, said noise programs senior manager Ryan McMullan. As of early July, the Port has received about 800 responses, a response rate that will illuminate “statistically valid” trends, he said.
But Harris argued that the vast majority of people living in homes with port packages are located outside the current DNL 65 boundary. He added that excluded areas — disproportionately low-income communities with a high percentage of immigrant residents, older adults and people with health issues — still experience significant noise from jets.
“The truth is, the people most likely to be low income … people who are immigrants, people in homes in the poorest condition, are at the outer boundaries and not in the current 65DNL neighborhoods,” Harris said. “Two-thirds of homes are not even going to get looked at.”
The survey of port packages in the current noise exposure boundary is representative of all port packages installed, and reflects various contractors and manufacturers used over the decades, said Sarah Cox, Port of Seattle’s director of aviation, environment and sustainability. Common failure points or problem contractors identified in the current boundary will likely reflect similar issues outside the boundary, she said.
Homes in the current DNL 65 boundary would also be the ones most likely to become eligible for Federal Aviation Administration funding or reimbursement.
Currently, FAA regulations only allow federal funds for noise mitigation to be spent in the most recent DNL 65 boundary, and bans the use of federal dollars on the same home twice for certain soundproofing projects.
This year, Rep. Adam Smith and Sen. Patty Murray secured $3 million to go toward expanding the assessment of homes. Efforts by them, along with the Port, to loosen federal restrictions this year as part of the recently signed FAA reauthorization bill were unsuccessful.
Even if the FAA waived rules that prevent funding replacement port packages, repairs for homes outside the current DNL 65 would largely need to be done without federal support. The Port is “continuing to push” for funding at local, state and federal levels, said Port of Seattle spokesperson Perry Cooper.
Port officials said they won’t know what the cost of repairing failed port packages might be until after the survey and analysis. The $5 million greenlit for construction — which is set to begin in 2025 — may not even cover all the homes in the current boundary that need repairs.
“One home may just need a window seal repair and another home might need a full sound installation replacement,” Cox said. “This is a pilot. We’re trying to figure it out.”
The survey response window closes Aug. 9. After that, the Port will review photos and comments submitted, identify trends, and conduct acoustic testing at about 30 homes selected to represent different manufacturers and installation years — a requirement for FAA funding.
A full report on the assessment, as well as staff recommendations on how to proceed, will be released in January.