Washington House Bill 1293 (1995) amended state law governing how port districts can address aircraft noise impacts on nearby properties, expanding soundproofing programs and removing a prior requirement that property owners waive damages and convey easements in exchange for noise mitigation. The bill declared such damage-waiver agreements void as against public policy, meaning residents near airports like Sea-Tac could receive soundproofing benefits without giving up their legal rights. The act was designated an emergency measure, intended to take effect immediately upon passage.

Notes

Washington State House Bill 1293 amends RCW 53.54.030 to modify port commission remedial programs for aircraft noise-impacted areas. The bill removes a prior provision allowing soundproofing programs conditioned on property owners waiving damages and conveying easements. A new section declares such damage waiver and easement conveyance agreements void as against public policy.

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