Category : Litigation(34)
-
-
2004-05-14
PORT OF SEATTLE v. Airport Communities Coalition; Citizens Against Seatac Expansion; and State of Washington, Department of Ecology, an agency of the State of Washington, Respondents/Cross-Petitioners. (2004)
Supreme Court of Washington,En Banc. PORT OF SEATTLE, a port district of the State of Washington, Petitioner, v. The POLLUTION CONTROL HEARINGS BOARD, an agency of the State of Washington, Respondent, Airport Communities Coalition; Citizens Against Seatac Expansion; and State of Washington, Department of Ecology, an agency of the State of Washington, Respondents/Cross-Petitioners. No. 73419-4. Decided: -
2002-06-03Legal Analysis of King County’s Role in Des Moines Beach Park Conveyor Belt Proposal
Legal counsel James L. Brewer analyzes King County’s jurisdictional authority regarding a proposed fill material conveyor belt operation at Des Moines Beach Park. The memo examines property interests, covenants requiring park use only, and concludes the proposed 30-month project would be inconsistent with park purposes due to significant disruption. -
2002-06-03Des Moines Beach Park Legal Analysis and Department of Ecology Letter on Third Runway Fill Material
Legal memorandum analyzing King County’s role in proposed Des Moines Beach Park conveyor belt operation, including property rights and park use restrictions. Includes Department of Ecology letter clarifying fill material certification requirements for Port of Seattle’s third runway construction. -
2002-06-03
Des Moines Beach Park Legal Analysis and Department of Ecology Letter on Third Runway Fill Material
Legal memorandum analyzing King County’s role in proposed Des Moines Beach Park conveyor belt operation, including property rights and park use restrictions. Includes Department of Ecology letter clarifying fill material certification requirements for Port of Seattle’s third runway construction. -
2000-02-25Letter to U.S. Senators Gorton and Murray Regarding Sea-Tac Airport Safety Issues
RCAA requests federal investigation of aviation safety issues at Sea-Tac Airport following KIRO-TV expose revealing hundreds of unreported near misses and close incursions. Letter calls for moratorium on airport expansion permits until safety investigation is completed. -
City Of Des Moines 401 v. Puget Sound Regional Council
Court of Appeals of Washington,Division 1. The CITY OF DES MOINES, The City of Burien, The City of Federal Way, The City of Normandy Park, The City of Tukwila, Highline School District No. 401, and The Airport Communities Coalition, Appellants, v. The PUGET SOUND REGIONAL COUNCIL, The Executive Board of the Puget Sound Regional Council, -
1996-03-27Final Decision on Noise Issues – Expert Arbitration Panel’s Review of Sea-Tac International Airport
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. -
1996-03-27
Final Decision on Noise Issues – Expert Arbitration Panel’s Review of Noise and Demand/System Management Issues at Sea-Tac International Airport
This is the final decision by the Expert Arbitration Panel on Noise and Demand/System Management Issues regarding Sea-Tac International Airport. The majority of the panel concluded that while the Port of Seattle has implemented noise abatement and mitigation programs, they have not shown sufficient reduction in real on-the-ground noise impacts to satisfy the requirements of -
Seattle Community Council Federation v. FAA 961 F.2d 929
961 F.2d 829 SEATTLE COMMUNITY COUNCIL FEDERATION, a Washington nonprofit corporation, Petitioner, v. FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION; Samuel Skinner, Respondents. No. 90-70253. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Jan. 8, 1991. Decided April 9, 1992. Peter J. Eglick and Henryk J. Hiller, Seattle, Washington, for petitioner. Peter R. Steenland, Jr., and J.