TagBoeing(80)

WHEREAS, the Highline Communities P l a n designates the Subject Property as "Airport Open Space"; and WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2626 expresses a concern f o r the compatible development on the west s i d e of t he Airport and reques ts add i t iona l program recommendations from the Por t s t a f f toward t h i s ob jec t ive ; and WHEREAS, a Westside Landscaping Plan has subsequently be.en prepared, approved, and i s i n the process of implementation; and WHEREAS, considerable discussion and dialogue has occurred involving the community, King County, t he FAA and t h e Por t , and some concerns and opposing views regarding compat ib i l i ty appear t o remain, e spec ia l ly regarding a v i a t i o n a c t i v i t y on the west s i d e of the Airport; and WHEREAS, the i s s u e of av ia t ion a c t i v i t y genera l ly on the west s i d e of the Airport w i l l be t h e sub jec t of a comprehensive Environmental Impact Statement t o be prepared i n accordance with the National Environmental Pol icy Act (NEPA); and WHEREAS, the Boeing headquarters f a c i l i t y w i l l be a non-aviation RESOLUTION NO.…

OLYMPIA - Washington's Supreme Court has upheld King County's approval of The Boeing Company's proposal to build corporate headquarters near Seattle-Tacoma Airport. Although the opinion was unanimous in rejecting challenges to the plart to build an office on a :ID-acre site west of the airport, two justices differed sharply over an appearance-of-fairness issue in the case. The court ruled that the appearance-of-fairness doctrine it has · established through cases since 1969 was not violated by two King County Council members who accepted campaign contributions from Boeing Co. employees, then voted for the construction plan. In a series of cases developing the doctrine, the court has held that local government bodies, in quasi-judicial actions such as rezones, not only should act fa'rly 'but should appear to act fairly by avoiding contacts and pressur~ :rom advocates for specific projects. Yesterday's <'t>inion upholds judgments of the King County Superior Court, whicL held that . despite the Boeing employees' contributions, the ~0P11ty Council acted properly in approving the company's project. The Westside Hilltop Survival Committee, a Highline-area citizens' group, had challenged the project and said the Council had illegally re- zoned the comprehensive plan it had approved earlier for the area. But the court said the action wasn't a rezone because the issue of the airport building was recognized in the original adoption of the comprehensive plan and was deliberately deferred for public hearings. Thus, the court said, the approval was only a continuation of the process of adopting the plan. It was- a…

228-78-R

Boeing Headquarters rezone Westside