TagRv(3131)

·occ HE T ____ c __ LA .- AND . ·., DIRECTOR HISTORY 1942-1962 •' TilE HISTORY OF B0·7 LAKE AIRPORT The first part of this article was furnished me by Chet Clausen, Port of Seattle (retired) Office Engineer who recorded the Informa- tion of the beginning of Bow Lake Airport in February, 1962-63. In the early forties, Seattle, like most of the nation's air-minded communities, who Here suffering. from an acute case of "Airportitis". Airliners carrying passengers and cargo eased carefully in~o Boeing Field, a landing strip built by Xing County in 1928 on drained land, close to sea level, where the Duwamish River flows into Puget Sound. If fog settled anywhere in the area, it could be counted on to sulk at the croHded Boeing Field. At that time, the ..ZI.irpo:ct ,.1as not con- sidered adaptable for instr~~ent landings because of meterological conditions and surrounding natural and man-made hazzards. The volume of co!:lmercial air traffic vas increasing. As airplanes grew faster, larger areas were needed to accommodate them. In view of the grm-;ing world tension, the Boeing Aircraft Factory was expanding rapidly and needed the :adjoining Boeing Field facilitie for its own use and for Army Air Force experimental and technical purposes. source: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport: Reports on operations, 1953-1960 Sundry newspapers and magazine reports and articles. Donald G. Shay: Seattle-Tacoma International Airport As early as January, 1941, the aviation committee of the Seattle Chamber of Cor.u-:1erce concei•ed the idea of another major airport, for Seattle, and ir:1mediatelv…

Many thanks for your kind letter of September 12, 1974 wherein you request our assistance in the development of legislation which would result in the closure of public schools when and if situated in F.A.A. cleared zones. In accordance with the suggestion of the Attorney General, we believe it would be better for you to work directly through your legislators in developing an act which would fill this void. In so doing, please be assured, that we will cooperate to the utmost in seeking passage of your proposal. LOG:iw Sincerely, -t~~().~ Llewell 0. Griff~ ~ V Consult an Administrative Services -·. j -) , ' ) ,. /

AN ACT Relating to port districts; authorizing port districts operating an airport to undertake programs to control and abate aircraft noise; and adding a new chapter to Title 53 RCW. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: NEW SECTION. Section 1. A port district operating an airport serving more than twenty scheduled jet aircraft flights per day may undertake any of the programs or combinations of such programs, as authorized by this chapter, for the purpose of alleviating and abating the impact of jet aircraft noise on areas surrounding such airport. NEW SECTION. 'Sec. 2. Prior to initiating programs as authorized in this chapter the port commission shall undertake the investigation and monitoring of aircraft noise impact to determine the nature and extent of the impact. The port commission shall adopt a program of noise impact abatement based upon the investigations and as amended periodically to conform to needs demonstrated by the monitoring programs: PROVIDED, That in no case may the port district undertake any of the programs of this chapter in an area which is more than three miles beyond the paved and of any runway or more than fifteen hundred feet from the centerline of any runway or from an imaginary runway centerline extending three miles from the paved end of such runway: PROVIDED FURTHER, That the area within 2500 feet of the center of the end point of any runway may be included. Such areas as determined above, shall be known as "impacted…

Thirteen different programs have been identified that could improve the aircraft noise environment in the vicinity of Sea-Tac International Airport. These programs range from outr~ght public acquisition and removal of all structures in certain areas to modification of zoning and other development control r~gulations as enforced by either King County or · municipalities located near the Airport • . ' All of the various improvement programs are generally de- ~cribed in the following section, together with a "pro and con" discussion in each instance. This review and analysis is intended to serve as a basic resource to individuals and . groups who participate or are interested in the determination of how best to improve the aircraft noise environment asso- '· ciated with the Sea-Tac facility • • . SEA-TAC/COMMUNITIES PLAN • NOISE IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ONE ; (ACQUISITION-OPEN SPACE), Page 1 of 3 -fr... . Program One: Characteristics (a) Designated unit of government acquires through purchase all properties in those areas subject to prescribed levels of noise generated as a result of aircraft op- erations at Sea-Tac International Airport. (b) Acquisition accomplished by negotiation if at all possible, or condemnation if necessary. (c) Removal of all existing buildings and structures from the properties so acquired. (d) Utilization of the cleared lands for new uses that require few (if any) buildings and involve a minimum concentration of human .activity, such as golf courses, farming, and outdoor storage. (e) Resultant land use pattern in character. open < . SEA-TAC/COHMUNITIES PI.lN NOISE IMPROVEMEN'I' PROGRAM…

P. 0. BOX 1209 SEATTLE , WASHING TO fl 98 III + • Ie a pl ROnIn.Z BranchJuly 19, 1974 ap 610 o+nanB Gla 613. -GIC:3 e 611 r di-3 t 14 al_ 5 + B Mr, George Buley Federal _via tion id:rinis traCtoR PldrrninR DoDO.rEcent FLA Regional Headquarters FAA Building Boe :inn Field tnt Jr national Seattle . I,’c.shi,r,£1 csn 98108 e T(; ; iTf) Info [ $ 1 + 1: e Dear Gaol:se : reference to th : concerns of che I)eDartTlent of Interior re£al-diaz the eilviTolILlcAl tal i...: CC : St= = ==it: ii : fc: ::le i:: :e ria land a : ali iS i : i. (.:I aC Sea– Tac Jnterr.at:ional liraore , I visIt to levi.31.7 Port of Seattle purposes and lntetr tia:IS , In A 41+ n the li:£hline Public Schools :Ie:er:tary and Sunset Junior hun=egotiati03s I..’! th 'ith both ::a',:food U qJ ,ill include property coil: cc : Hjgh schools . All educa Liar. It nlaannHOUM B struct:ores are t:o be Durc!..ased in fee for exCelId.3}!£_92£££): -rs tIf? 1–i-y £Htib cT–and re cr e3Cior, al -li–dizone la:', J use -Ill be deI O'. : e ’e l- )idF;FH=t:: i 'lP Project and treated as Chose properties held by King County Park Dep.aIL=en[ ill the proposed acquisition] + The general intel'.t 1las been that the 'recreational facilities provided '..’ill be a’ai]-able to tIre public re Raining in Elle vicinity . It is quite possible that t’i'.C =Icq County Pcr!: Depart cent can continue…

Our meeting on June 14, 1974, concerning the SeaTac/Communities Plan was helpful in clarifying some of the questions on the future progress of the study. One item of special concern to us is the determination of the most effective method of informing the citizens of the study conclusions and recommendations. During our meeting, differing views concerning this matter were expressed. We recommend that at least two or three public meetings be held at appropriate locations in the study area for purposes of providing the citizens with the study conclusions and recommendations prior to their presentations to the elected officials of the Port and King County. Perhaps the most effective format to use is to nave a panel involving both 8ppropri. ::~rp mAmh~'>r<:: nf tJ-"ll? u::~rj_ 0,JC::: t:itize!! CC'!!':!!!ittees ='.S ~·:e!.!. ='.S ~---- ____ _:: __ --- -~ ··-- ~- ---- - _-: ___ -: ••-.,/ - ---J ---••• .,.,•-•••--- ._. •••- ... .,- .._.4<..__ t""- _._._..,._.__ .... ..._.._,..,..,o.J ,_,_ ._.L.L- _.._o-.._41-.L.&.o.J. believe that it is also important that the citizens are afforded adequate opportunity to ask questions and provide comments at these meetings. Obviously, these public meetings should be well publicized prior to the meeting dates. The degree of the formality under which the meetings are conducted is a matter which should be thoroughly considered. We presume that a "dry run" of the presentations would be made prior to the actual meetings. Needless to say, we were disappointed that more citizens did not participate in the June 10-13 open house…

F .A Building, Boe in!! Field Interna tiona! Seattle V/a 98108 ph 767- 2740 COUNTY EXECUTIVE John D. Spellman ph 344-4040 King County Court House Seattle Wa 98104 KING COUNTY COUNCIL District Council Representative Phone No Tracy J Owens 344-3493 Scott Blair 344-3483 Bill Reams 344-343~ Lois North 344-3475 Ruby Chow 344-4033 Bruce Laing 344-3457 Paul Barden 344-4044 19907 4th SW Seattle Wa ilomt: ph 824-1 ;,'7? Bob Grei.ve 344-3447 5116 SW Hudson Seattle Wa home ph 932-9443 Gary Grant 344-3465 MAILING ADDRESS King County Council King County Court House Seattle Wa 98104 BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT Edward-B . Sand ,Mctnager . . 450- Administration Bui lding Seattle , Wa 98104 ph 344--7900 DEPARTMENT OF FLANKING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPME NT John P . Lynch , Director ph 344-7503 King County Court House Seattle Wa 98104 LET THESE PEOPLE HEAR ABOUT YOUR GRIEVANCES AGAINST THE' PORT OF SEATTLE !!'!!! '·

This is in response to your letter of ' April 1, 197h, to ME. George Saito of our office conceali-ng the_TnaMa alnsura–-of Sunset Junior_ High School . We trust that the Board Members of the High:Line School D>ist;riot will give due consideration to your views for closing Sunset wrior High School at the end of this school year. • anar_ As you know, Sunset Junior High School is within the area which the Port of Seattle has proposed for acquisition under our Airport Devel- opment Aid Program. We have been working with the Port of Seatit;le in the environmental impact statement review procegs on this proposed action+ Please be assured that we are giving cazeful consideration to the inclusion of both Sunset Junior High School and Maywood Elementary School in the proposed action with regard to the required environmental impact statement . )' Sir)1 /erely , GEORGE L. BUtIEr Chief , Airports Planning Branch, ANW-610 eG : :Ed Parks Donovan Tracy Robert Sealey

PUbIIShed WeekIY by The AiRPORT OPERATe,ihu)UNC! L i „; rER&ATIONAL, Inc ~.a!'l!::)/ b3 g G :q biG NT$ MARCH 25 , 1974 VOL. X, NO, 1 1 FAA' S PROPOSED RETROFIT RULE DUE THIS WEEK At hearings Friday by the Senate Public Works Subcommittee on b /' Environmental Pollution , FAA revealed that a NPIW on retrofit/fleet noise }/ reduction will be published this wee x in the Federal Register requiring , .f all airline jet aircraft to meet FAR 36 levels by mid-1978 , costs for : /I the program, if adopted , would approximate §600-800 mIllion for the 1880 ' j jets in the aes , airline fleet not p::esently meeting FAR 36 standards . g EPA , testifying at the one-day hearing on implementation of the Noise Control Act of 1972 , indicated its "Noise Levels Document" will ptobabIY be released by April 2 . ThIs report , required by the Congress , viII suggest what levels of noise are thought by EPA to be harmful to the public health and welfare . Both EPA and FAA witnesses expressed concern lest the public perceive the ce levels as standards for local regulatory purposes . The levels in ':he document , according to the testimonY , were chosen without regar;3 to economic impact or technological feasib alt=y in their implementation, As to its recommendation for 1’AA to certificate airports for noise purposes , EPA maintains that the Sup -eme Court 1 s Burbank decision does I,; not preclude…

This document has been approved for general availability. It doas not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. Ftw Ale bJ tbe Baperlntendent of Doeamenta, U.S. OOTernment Prlntlnc OIBce, WubJncton, D.C. 21M02 ·Price *1.96 FOREWORD The Noise Control Act of 1972 requires that the Administrator of The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) develop and publish criteria with respect to noise. These criteria are to "reflect the scientific kno~ledge most useful in indicating the kind and extent of all identi- fiable effects of noise on the public health and welfare which may be expected from differing quantities and qualities of noise." This document meets that requirement. The terms "criteria and standards" are generally used interchangeably in the scientific communities concerned with noise and its control. However, in accordance with the intent of the U.S. Congress, criteria for environmental pollutants are to reflect an honest appraisal of available knowledge relating to health and welfare effects of pollutants, (in this case, noise). The criteria are descriptions of cause and effect relationships. Standards and regulations must take into account not only the health and welfare considerations described in the criteria, but also, as called for in the Noise Control Act of 1972, technology, and cost of control. This criteria document, therefore, serves as a basis for the establishment of the recommended envir- onmental noise level goals to be related to the "Effects Document" called for by Section 5(a)(2) of the Noise Control Act. That document, along with this criteria document, will become the basis for standards…