TagNoise Remedy Update(34)

A January 1984 Port of Seattle memo from Project Manager Jody Yamanaka to the Technical Working Committee announces the completion of a Community Attitude Survey related to the Airport Noise Remedy Program at Henry M. Jackson International Airport. The survey, conducted by McClure Research Company, included a self-administered survey of neighborhood workshop attendees and two telephone surveys. The findings were to be used to evaluate specific noise remedies, improve community involvement, and ensure the Noise Remedy Program reflected local community attitudes.

In December 1983, the Port of Seattle invited community members to review preliminary boundaries for three proposed noise remedy programs near Seattle-Tacoma (Jackson) International Airport: land acquisition, purchase assurance, and sound insulation. Consultant firm Peat Marwick recommended eligibility criteria for sound insulation, targeting single-family homes exposed to noise levels of Ldn 70 or above in 1980, or Ldn 65 or above projected for the year 2000. Residents were encouraged to submit comments on the proposed boundaries and criteria by January 31, 1984.

In a November 1983 letter to the FAA's Northwest Mountain Region Director, Port of Seattle Executive Director Richard D. Ford requested clarification on federal funding eligibility for a purchase assurance program under Henry M. Jackson International Airport's Noise Remedy Program. The Port sought guidance on several key issues, including the level of federal financial assistance available, which types of residential properties and program costs would qualify, and compliance requirements with federal relocation law. The letter noted that while outright property acquisitions had consumed most available noise remedy funds to date, the Port was now ready to consider a purchase assurance program for less noise-impacted areas if additional federal funding could be secured.

In September 1983, the Port of Seattle sent a follow-up letter to residents who attended Noise Remedy Workshops held August 29–31, 1983, regarding aircraft noise impacts near Henry M. Jackson International Airport (Sea-Tac). The workshops, which drew approximately 350 community members, focused on a proposed 'purchase guarantee' program that would allow residential property owners in high-noise areas to sell their homes at fair market value to the airport operator. Attendees provided input on guidelines for determining the order in which properties would be bought out under such a program.

Minutes from the September 28, 1983 Policy Advisory Committee meeting at Sea-Tac Airport cover updates on noise reduction efforts, including new aircraft departure procedures, expanded noise monitoring stations, and a study on noise insulation and building codes. The committee also reviewed the 20-year Airport Master Plan, which will identify surplus Port-owned land that could be repurposed for commercial development or parks, and received updates on facilities improvements such as a new taxi holding area, completed runway safety zones, and the expanded South Satellite International Terminal.

In May 1983, the Port of Seattle held three community workshops to gather resident input on noise remedies for Sea-Tac International Airport, drawing over 120 attendees from surrounding neighborhoods. Common concerns included faster program implementation, expanded land acquisition boundaries, stricter FAA noise abatement procedures, and a preference for quieter aircraft. The feedback was compiled into a summary forwarded to decision-makers in agencies and local governments with the authority to implement future noise remedies.

In this April 1983 letter to Port of Seattle Commissioners, a community representative reminds officials of their commitment to 'Maximum Compatibility' between Sea-Tac Airport and surrounding neighborhoods, as established through the Sea-Tac Communities Plan (STCP) begun in 1972. The letter emphasizes that citizens were promised a direct, continuing role in planning decisions—including land acquisition for safety zones and noise reduction programs—through a formal Community Involvement Process. The author calls on the commission to honor that commitment as they enter a new noise remedy program update that will reassess density guidelines near the airport.

In 1983, the Port of Seattle launched an update to its Sea-Tac International Airport Noise Remedy Program, originally established in the 1976 Sea-Tac/Communities Plan, to address changes in aircraft noise patterns, finances, and community needs. The update aimed to reassess and revise noise reduction measures after noise levels shifted unexpectedly—decreasing in some areas northeast and southeast of the airport while increasing to the east and west. Public workshops and community involvement were central to the process, with a recommended updated program targeted for presentation to the Port Commission by mid-1985.

This 1983 work program outlines a study to evaluate and update Sea-Tac International Airport's aircraft noise remedy program, originally established in the 1970 Sea-Tac/Communities Plan. The study, conducted by the Port of Seattle alongside Peat Marwick Mitchell & Co. and McClure Research Company, addresses updated noise projections, progress on existing remedies, and current financial conditions. Key tasks include study design, federal funding coordination, and a Community Involvement Program to keep the public informed and engaged in noise abatement planning.

These are the meeting minutes from a March 23, 1982 Policy Advisory Committee session at Sea-Tac International Airport, focused on updating the Sea-Tac/Communities Plan Noise Remedy Program. The committee discussed how to engage affected residents between South 128th and South 135th Streets through direct mailings and community outreach, debated whether to address noise impact areas individually or as a whole, and reviewed the status of ongoing housing acquisitions, with the Port having already spent $28–$29 million on housing acquisition and relocation. Key concerns included funding limitations, construction in potential acquisition zones, hardship cases for vulnerable residents, and the timeline for completing the program.