TagPort Of Seattle(2609)

King County Superior Court Memorandum Ruling by Judge Robert H. Alsdorf on Application of WAC Chapter 365-195 (Procedural Criteria for Adopting Comprehensive Plans and Development Regulations) in consolidated cases No. 96-2-20357-2 KNT, No. 97-2-13908-2 KNT, No. 97-2-22276-1 KNT, No. 98-2-04911-1 KNT. City of Des Moines, Airport Communities Coalition, and other plaintiff-petitioners argued against the Port

A 1998 internal email exchange between Ken Ludwa and Kerry Ritland discusses edits to Section 4.3 of a stormwater management report related to Sea-Tac Airport. The section covers water quality facilities, explaining that new stormwater detention facilities would follow state Ecology guidelines using biofiltration and permanent water quality storage, while also complying with the Port's NPDES permit and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Ken Ludwa agreed to edit the section to reference Appendix F – Water Quality BMP Analysis once that appendix was further developed.

This Port of Seattle glossary defines key acoustic and air traffic control terms used in airport noise policy discussions. It explains measurements like decibels (dB), A-weighted decibels (dBA), and the Day-Night Noise Level (DNL), which is a 24-hour average used to map noise exposure around Sea-Tac Airport. It also covers Federal Aviation Regulations (Parts 36, 91, and 161) that govern aircraft noise standards, phase-out schedules for older noisy aircraft, and the process for airports to adopt new noise rules.

Draft Stormwater Quality Management Plan (Appendix F) prepared by Parametrix, Inc. for Port Of Seattle, July 1998, as part of the Preliminary Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan for Sea-Tac Airport Master Plan Improvements. Covers existing drainage conditions including Storm Drain System (SDS) and Industrial Waste System (IWS), Miller Creek and Des Moines Creek receiving systems, existing

Draft Working Paper One of the Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (Sea-Tac) FAR Part 150 Study, dated July 1998, prepared by Port Of Seattle. This inventory chapter updates the 1994 Part 150 program and covers airport physical facilities, air traffic operations activity, airspace/air traffic control, ANOMS radar data, current noise abatement program, noise complaint history, airport environs,

King County Superior Court Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Final Order by Judge Robert H. Alsdorf in consolidated cases No. 96-2-20357-2 KNT, No. 97-2-13908-2 KNT, No. 97-2-22276-1 KNT, No. 98-2-04911-1 KNT. Challenges Port Of Seattle Resolutions 3212 and 3245 approving the Sea-Tac Master Plan Update including construction of a third runway at Seattle-Tacoma

This is a library catalog listing documents from 1995 related to Sea-Tac International Airport's planned expansion, including a third runway proposal. The documents cover environmental impact statements, noise studies, community group objections, legal appeals, and financial analyses from sources such as the FAA, Port of Seattle, and local community associations. The catalog was compiled to track public records and research materials relevant to airport noise policy and development decisions in the Seattle region.

This catalog lists documents received in 1992 related to aviation planning and noise policy in the Puget Sound region, with a focus on Sea-Tac International Airport (STIA). It includes environmental impact statements, noise exposure maps, community association comments, budget documents, and FAA regulatory guides, many connected to the 'Flight Plan Project' — a regional air transportation study. Several items were donated by attorney J. Richard Aramburu and other community stakeholders involved in airport noise and development issues.

In a June 1998 letter to a Seattle Times reporter, Washington State legislators Karen Keiser and Julia Patterson urged media coverage of the Port of Seattle's violations of federal grant rules governing its noise remedy programs near Sea-Tac Airport. The State Auditor's Office confirmed the Port failed to obtain required written support from surrounding local jurisdictions, while auditors at Deloitte and Touche had repeatedly flagged the same violations without the Port taking corrective action. Over $130 million in federal funds had already been spent insulating and assisting homeowners, with an additional $11 million needed to redo 1,141 homes due to building-code violations that local consultation might have prevented.