TagBurien Airport Committee(37)

Sea-Tac Airport greatly enhances our region and state by connecting business, trade and leisure travelers with the rest of the globe. At the same time, the Port of Seattle–as airport operator–strives to conduct business in a way that respects neighboring communities. We are committed to building programs that benefit our closest neighbors through matching grants, economic development and jobs, workforce development, green practices and safetp Port Grant Programs Economic Development Partnership Program More than $197,000 in matching funds for projects in six cities. Recipe nts: • Burien • Des Moines • Federal Way • Normandy Park • SeaTac • Tukwila Examples: • $48,000 for signage to create a wall<able Burien • $65,000 to recruit & retain business in Federal Way :@@B gm t©t;@E ©©®R©M%%© ;%©t @ w %%: # aSa,400 jobs $up@©Ft©d bV the 8%F}}©Ft Airport Community Ecology Fund Sm {§$F©©t %%i®g©$ ®Bd beBe{$f$Over $85,000 in small matching grants for projects such as: $$t2M + $B $t;%%&@ 39%d {©©®€ t®xe$ Marine education, beach etiquette and coast stewardship Volunteer-led habitat restoration work parties Community garden and healthy food access projects Plastics and litter reduction awareness programs Stormwater education for youth Invasive weed removal in Saltwater State Park @ © © • © ${}{iraQ: 2{}i? S88tig,8’'T3€ei!a $8€8f!};:{ian iii .&ifg31>?{ ££88883i€ 8rn?8£t: s, <law}mun!!V Aer{ !>Ii{e s inc. More JobsConstruction Hotels Hotels in cities around the airport are adding rooms to meet growing air traveler demand. The room inventory is expected to go from the current 8,000 to over 9,800 by late 2019.…

Recentlyr members of the Burien Quiet Skies coalition began questioning Sea-Tac Airport’s compliance with Part 150 regulations (14 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 150) and FAA’s oversight of delayed implementation of noise abatement and mitigation policies dating to 1985. Consequently, our organization decided to complete a matrix comparing FAA’s yune 2014 Record of Approval (ROA) of Sea-Tac’s 2013-2018 Part 150 Study with earlier examples of state and regional agencies’ direction regarding inadequate noise reduction measyres by the Port of Seattle (POS). This document was collaboratively compiled and is being shared with members of the coalition, elected officials, and public audiences to create meaningful oversight and prompt environmental justice action that has been–too long–denied to vulnerable populations within our South King County communitIes. , Historically, POS has regarded sound mitigation of homes within eligible contour boundaries a low priority; consequently, hundreds of homes have not been insulated by the POS. In addition, many homes received inferior sound insulation improvements as a result of the POS’ earliest sound insulation program. , why are there no noise modeling results for the period of 2007-2019; a twelve-year gap where POS is out-of-compliance with the FAA’s 2013-2018 Record of Approval for Sea-Tac’s Part 150 Study because decibel levels appear to have increased precipitously? , Many noise abatement procedures recommended as long ago as 1996 remain un-implemented despite high level discussions by publicly-supported “blue-ribbon" panels (i.e. Expert Arbitration Panel’s Review of Noise and Demand/System Management organized by Washington State Department of Transportation and Puget Sound Regional…

WAC 173-60-050 No agency filings affecting this section since 2003 APPENDIX C ---' Exemptions (1) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040 between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.: (a) Sounds originating from residential property relating to temporary projects for the maintenance or repair of homes, grounds and appurtenances. (b) Sounds created by the discharge of firearms on authorized shooting ranges. (c) Sounds created by blasting. (d) Sounds created by aircraft engine testing and maintenance not related to flight operations: Provided, That aircraft testing and maintenance shall be conducted at remote sites whenever possible. (e) Sounds created by the installation or repair of essential utility services. (2) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040 (2)(b): (a) Noise from electrical substations and existing stationary equipment used in the conveyance of water, waste water, and natural gas by a utility. (b) Noise from existing industrial installations which exceed the standards contained in these regulations and which, over the previous three years, have consistently operated in excess of 15 hours per day as a consequence of process necessity and/or demonstrated routine normal operation. Changes in working hours, which would affect exemptions under this regulation, require approval of the department. (3) The following shall be exempt from the provisions of WAC 173-60-040, except insofar as such provisions relate to the reception of noise within Class A EDNAs between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. (a) Sounds originating from temporary construction sites as…

do not have an e-mail list for City Council members of other cities, but would guess they are available on each city’s website. I do have the following e-mails for City Managers/Administrators /Mayors of the various cities: th li ': $'} + ):' b ::-} { Michael Matthias, Des Moines City Manager mmatthias@desmoineswa.gW f ) { .U,,/h+ }} li ;!)gB ; I+ r ! ! !f Matt Pina, Des Moines Mayor mpina@dcsmoineswa.gov , r + + + i f +;• h t + 9 s / t ’ / ':.); -' i : Sh ! in '+ +b ' ; -+J : i$ Jim Ferrell, Federal Way Mayor Jim.Ferrell@cityoffederalwaY.com f Mark Hoppen, Normandy Park City Manager r > H+ H : • } H iS { p nn•{ B {}{ mhoQpen@normandyParkwa.gg/ Td’:=T;> ”“’O”_-N-_ A AntZWh©t,L P& gad 4/' AqA Mr&'##~ A &?#a### (;) A&/ A% &WLdu„vdLd./ lof4 d4 5/11/20, 4: 12 PM&a-.-. b4'bae/w'"vW @- Mwe ',._ .__*-*a' ?’”- &IIIIIdIi1111:F # # # p &q & PII!##1+E=!111FF fbIfdA 2 y~a -- a /a'b /„taJPv aL&L_ Allnlty Lonnect KE_ QlstrIDutlorl IISt Ol n, mps://connect XIIIUW.coln/appsute/ v= / t +IN f subject to disclosure pursuant to RCW 42.56, regardless of any claim of confidentiality or privilege asserted by an external party. From: SHARYN PARKER [mailtogparkerward@comcast .netl Sent: Monday, May 11, 2020 2:24 PM To: Lori Fleming <LORIF@burienwa.gw> Subject: distribution list of notable local elected officials CAUTION: This email originated from M@ of the City of BuRen. Do not click links or open attachments…

Dear Mr. Met:ruck, Commissioners Bowman, Calkins, Cho, Felleman, and Steint>ruck: On behalf of two loeal citizen coalitions concerned with Port of Seattle transparency and accountability, the undersigned are responding to the Port Commission’s Motion 202CF06 “to provide guidance for Port leadership in prioritizing Port investments to assist local, regional, and statewide economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. While this motion may be the Pods attempt to demonstrate its economic development prowess to prop up the loc:aI economy, this effort should not be built upon the shifting sands of what are now outdated and faulty assumptions about priorities and expenditures. Unfortunately, the Pods strategic use of key “social justice” phrases as a veneer for “business-as- usual," does not withstand scrutiny and fiscal exarnination of some infrastructure priorities included in development projects, such as the Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) for example. This point is exemplified in the following paragraph found on page 3, following Capital Project Investments: “The Port plans to make $3.4 billion of capital facility investments over the next five years. The over $ 1 billion of scheduled construction work in 2028 and 2021 will provide a significant stimulus to the regional economy.” b Nowhere in this Recovery Plan does the Port adjust its pre-2020 assumptions that–according to all aviation industry leaders–will change the “demand" side of the infrastructure projections model for the foreseeable future. For instance, a quote from a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) article on April 30, 2020, entitled "Aerospace Industry Forced to Retrench,” 'me once-booming aerospace…

JetBlue, Spirit want to suspend nights to US airports, including Seattle JetBlue argued that some recent flights from Boston to Minneapolis had only two customers for an entire 162-seat aircraft. Author: TEGNA Published: 8:48 AM PDT April 30, 2020 Updated: 8:48 AM PDT April 30, 2020 WASHINGTON – Delta, JetBlue and Spirit Airlines have submitted requests this week asking the U.S. Transportation Department for peanission to suspend flights to several airports around the country. Airlines are required to continue providing minimum service levels as part of a condition of taking some of the money available through the CARES Act. But with travel demands faIling to historic lows due to the coronavirus pandemic, airlines are sometimes flying planes with very few passengers. JetBlue asked to suspend flights to 16 airports, including Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Seattle, Minneapolis, Phoenix, Portland, San Diego and Tampa through Sept. 30. As part of its request, JetBlue noted that certain flights from Boston to Minneapolis recently had only two customers on an entire 162-seat A320 aircraft. "Unfortunately, such flights are operating with similar passenger loads to and from large hubs out of Boston, New York and throughout the JetBhre network," the airline's request stated. Delta asked to suspend flights to nine airports including Hilton Head, Brunswick, Georgia, Kalamazoo and Flint in Michigan, and Melbourne, Florida. The airline argued each of those nine airports were within an hour's driving distance of another Delta airport. Delta stated that between April 1 and April 22, just one to…