TagCASE(182)

In a December 1998 ruling, King County Superior Court Judge Peter D. Jarvis denied the Port of Seattle's motion to dismiss a lawsuit filed by Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion, finding that the group had legal standing to challenge the Port's environmental decision regarding replacement wetlands in Auburn. The court determined that this decision was interrelated to the broader Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Master Plan Update, including the proposed Third Runway. While rejecting dismissal, the court stayed all proceedings until the Port completed all required environmental reviews under SEPA and Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act.

In this 1998 court declaration, Lawrence Corvari, Co-President of Citizens Against SeaTac Expansion (CASE), challenges the Port of Seattle's Auburn Mitigation Plan and its environmental review determination. Corvari argues that building replacement wetlands in Auburn rather than near the affected Miller Creek or Des Moines Creek watersheds leaves adverse environmental impacts unmitigated, harming CASE members' ability to enjoy local wildlife and a healthy environment. The declaration also corrects what Corvari describes as misrepresentations of his deposition testimony by the Port's attorneys in their Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing.

Helen Kludt, a Normandy Park resident who has lived near Miller Creek since 1956, submitted this 1998 court declaration supporting a legal challenge against the Port of Seattle's plans to expand Sea-Tac Airport with a third runway. She argues that the Port's proposal to destroy wetlands in the Miller Creek Basin and offset environmental impacts through out-of-basin mitigation in Auburn is inadequate and violates the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). Kludt contends the expansion will harm her property value, degrade local wildlife habitat, and worsen flooding along Miller Creek.

In October 1998, Lawrence Corvari, Co-President of Citizens Against Seatac Expansion (CASE), filed a declaration in King County Superior Court supporting a petition for a writ of review against the Port of Seattle. The declaration states that CASE directed its attorneys to appeal the Port's SEPA Determination of Non-Significance (DNS) related to the Auburn Mitigation Project, arguing that the Port's failure to comply with environmental review requirements harmed both the organization's members and the Miller Creek Basin environment.

This November/December 1997 newsletter from CASE (Citizens for an Accurate and Safe Environment) reports on environmental and noise concerns related to Port of Seattle airport expansion projects near Sea-Tac Airport. Key issues include the Port allegedly lacking required Army Corps of Engineers permits to destroy wetlands for a new parking lot, potential contamination threats to Seattle Water Department drinking water aquifers, and citizen complaints about early-morning aircraft engine run-ups disturbing nearby residents. The newsletter also highlights a legal victory in Burbank, California affirming local governments' rights to control land use decisions related to airport expansion.

A Normandy Park resident and aerospace engineering manager submitted detailed comments in November 1996 criticizing a draft impact study related to Sea-Tac Airport's proposed Third Runway, arguing that the analysis underestimated real estate value losses, air pollution risks, and traffic disruptions caused by the project. The letter contends that home values in Normandy Park stagnated or declined after the Third Runway was publicly announced, and that any valid property value assessment must use baseline figures from before negative publicity began. The author also challenges the study's air quality modeling assumptions and traffic analysis, warning that the Port of Seattle would selectively cite favorable findings while ignoring methodological flaws.

A technical review document from Debi DesMarais providing comments on a draft mitigation cost analysis for the City of Burien Impact Assistance Team. The review covers social impacts, property values, noise data, and various technical aspects of airport-related community impacts.

In August 1996, community groups CASE and RCAA formally appealed the Port of Seattle's Resolution No. 3212, which approved construction of a third runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. The appeal argued that newer navigation technologies such as Localizer Directional Aid (LDA) and GPS, combined with demand management strategies, could provide equivalent airport capacity at far lower cost and with less environmental harm. The groups requested a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement to evaluate these technology-based alternatives and reconsider the third runway decision.

This handwritten document appears to be notes from an early 1992 meeting (dated 3/2/92) concerning aircraft noise policy near Sea-Tac Airport, referencing a group opposed to further aircraft noise and seeking members from both inside and outside city limits, with a target population of 100,000. The notes outline several case studies of organizations and community colleges receiving donations ranging from $50,000 to $100,000, apparently as part of noise mitigation or community foundation funding efforts. Key concerns include growing a membership list beyond those already on a computer list and organizing inaugural meetings to advance the no-more-aircraft-noise agenda.

The CASE Group (Citizens' Alternatives to Sea-Tac Expansion) was formed in 1987 to oppose the Port of Seattle's plans to add a third runway at Sea-Tac Airport, gathering over 4,600 protest signatures and prompting the King County Council to pass a resolution against the expansion. The coalition organized public hearings, lobbied Port Commissioners, and circulated petitions urging state officials to reject expansion recommendations in favor of building a new regional airport away from densely populated areas. Their core argument was that alternatives to Sea-Tac expansion represented sounder economic and environmental choices for the Central and South Puget Sound region.