Category : Correspondence(303)

A February 9, 1982 letter from Port of Seattle Director of Aviation Oris D. Dunham to Bill Bowlin addresses density guidelines for the North Sea-Tac Park, located under flight paths at Sea-Tac International Airport. The letter clarifies that the gymnasium and meeting areas of the former Sunset Junior High School complex are subject to a recommended 60-person limit to reduce noise impacts on gatherings beneath the flight paths. However, the Port and FAA indicated they would consider granting special permission for the Greater Highline Community Parks Board to exceed that limit for one-time fundraising events benefiting long-term park development.

In January 1982, members of the Technical Advisory Committee for the Sea-Tac International Airport Noise Exposure Update wrote to the Port of Seattle's Director of Planning and Research to raise concerns about the final draft of the noise study. The letter argues that the report fails to clearly define the problem of aircraft noise impacts on surrounding communities, relies on optimistic assumptions about airlines adopting quieter aircraft, and uses an average noise level methodology that does not capture how residents actually experience flight disruptions. The committee also expressed frustration that their technical input and unanswered questions were largely ignored, despite their role being cited in the report as evidence of public participation.

A December 29, 1981 letter from Port of Seattle Chairman Oris W. Dunham, Jr. notifies Policy Advisory Committee members that their upcoming meeting has been rescheduled from January 13 to January 14, 1982 at 2:00 p.m. in Sea-Tac's auditorium due to a scheduling conflict. The primary focus of the meeting remains the Noise Exposure Update, with additional agenda items also planned for discussion. Members were advised that the final agenda would be mailed during the first week of 1982.

This 1981 Memorandum of Understanding between the Port of Seattle and King County outlines terms for reclassifying approximately 30 acres of land on the west side of Sea-Tac International Airport to allow Boeing to develop a Corporate Headquarters Facility. The agreement includes provisions for the Port to lease 5 acres to King County for a neighborhood park at $1 per year, and restricts development on an adjacent 55-acre greenbelt buffer zone for at least 10 years. The document also affirms King County's zoning authority over non-airport-related land use at Sea-Tac and establishes a dispute resolution process between the two agencies.

Letter from Jean Pihlman, Coordinator of Zone III Committee, accepting invitation to participate in the Port of Seattle’s Airspace Study Advisory Committee. The committee designates Jean Pihlman as representative and Virginia Dana as alternate, offering cooperation for the study completion.

A letter to the editor of Highline Times from Sea-Tac Communities Plan member Virginia Dana discussing the Port of Seattle’s acquisition of land north of Sea-Tac Airport for safety purposes and defending FAA density guidelines for the proposed North SeaTac Park. The author argues that the land was purchased to remove residents from an environmentally

In a June 1981 letter to the FAA's Northwest Regional Director, Zone 3 citizen group representative Virginia E. Dana expresses qualified support for the FAA's recommended people-per-acre density guidelines for recreational use of North Sea-Tac Park, while raising concerns about safety and population exposure under flight paths. The letter highlights that the proposed recreational density of 40 people per acre across 53 acres could allow up to 2,120 people in an area from which only roughly 1,000 residents were displaced through the airport's land buyout program. Dana urges continued attention to airport safety criteria and environmental protection for communities living adjacent to Sea-Tac Airport.

A June 9, 1981 letter from King County's Building & Land Development division acknowledges receipt of a complaint filed by Mrs. Virginia Dana of Seattle, assigning it case number 81-456. The letter explains the county's process for handling code violations, which may include contacting the property owner by phone or letter, and potentially conducting a field inspection if a serious hazard exists. The division pledges to make every effort to bring the property into compliance with King County Codes.