TagKing County Council(21)

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…

A King County motion to adopt the King County International Airport’s Federal Aviation Regulation Part 150 Noise and Land Use Compatibility Study and to accept federal grants for implementing recommended programs. The motion outlines the airport’s economic importance and various noise mitigation strategies including sound insulation programs, flight restrictions, and a Ground Run-up enclosure.

Public Input Process Explained - Muni League Small Group Discussion Concluding Remarks TOTAL Residence: 9300- 42nd Avenue Northeast • Seattle, Washington 98115 • (206) 525-7484 ~ minutes mi!1utes minutes minutes minutes 110 minutes 1. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT GUIDE PRELIMINARY WORKSHOP AGENDA I. General Introduction - Planning & Community Development Corrmittee Chair A. Welcome B. Introduction of convener/moderator, P&CD Committee members, Planning and Council staff, and local officials C. Purpose of meeting D. Review overall s~hedule for Council review of the Guide E. General pro~ess this meeting will follow F. Role of Mu~i ~eague G. Identify location of ir1formation room H. Focus of this particular meeting I. Introduction of Planning Division staff who will provide a general informational briefing II. Presentation - Planning Division staff A. Overvi2w of Guide 8. Focus of the predetermined topics C. Reht~cnship to community plan D. Intoduce Muni League moderator 4023A/KU:at/ 5-11-84 pg 2 III. Public input process explained - Muni League A. Group discussions led by a convener B. Reporting results of group discussions C. Final comments by public IV. Small Group Discussions A. Muni League as moderators (County staff to supplement, if necessary) B. Introduction of participants ,.. .... Question: 11 What are your concerns about your community that the Co~ncil should be aware of?" D. Informal discussions and comments V. Concluding remarks A. Report back on small group discussions - Citizens selected from small grouos B. Final public comment (2 min. per speaker) C. Conclusions - Cynthia Sullivan 4023A/KU:at/5-11-84 pg 3 Councilwoman Cynthia Sullivan…

Enclosed for King County Council review and approval is the Executive Proposed General Development Guide, together with a proposed ordinance enacting the Guide . The Executive Proposed Guide is the result of years of work by the King County Co unci 1 , Executive Departments, cities, other public agencies, and hundr~ds of community organizations and ind~viduals. When enacted as King County•s new comprehensive land use plan, the General Deve 1 opment Guide wi 11 be the most important e 1 ement of our strategy for responsibly managing growth and development. As the new basis for future land use and public facility decisions in King County, the Guide will profoundly affect our qua 1 ity of 1 ife, as we 11 as the costs of pub 1 i c facilities and services for existing and new residents of King County. The process for preparing the Executive Propos.ed General Deve 1 opment Guide is noteworthy · in several respects. First, ttie process featured early and extensive involvement of the King County Council in setting overall policy direction . Second, it featured c 1 ose cooperation with the cities, towns, and other public agencies. Third, it brought to light a remarkable degree of consensus on land use goals for King County among such diverse interests as residents, deve 1 opers, and en vi ronmenta 1 i sts. Finally, from its very beginning the process emphasized a close relationship between policy and implementation. In setting Executive policy direction for the Proposed Guide, I gave…

Proposal to move Boeing headquarters to west side of airport noise buffer property from Sea-Tac Communities Plan