Port of Seattle
In the past few weeks, the Highline Journal has published several articles about comments local governments have submitted to the Port of Seattle regarding the draft EIS plan. In this article, I provide links to these stories and a quick summary of each article.
Cities of Burien, Des Moines, and SeaTac
The longest set of comments, at 187 pages, is a joint letter from the cities of Burien, Des Moines, and SeaTac.
Before reading the letter, I thought I knew a lot about the airport. Nope. Their letter was incredibly informative.
My three-page story summarizes comments in the letter about impacts on traffic from the airport expansion, water quality in the nearby creeks, noise mitigation, and property tax income.
The overarching theme is: Port, stop ignoring the problems associated with the airport.
The letter starts with a reality check about the costs the airport sticks to neighbors, then has this key quote, which I include in the story:
“Despite this documented burden, the DEIS systematically minimizes impacts to these communities across every major resource category. As set forth in detail below, the DEIS must be corrected to address material deficiencies that prevent it from providing the ‘reasonably thorough discussion’ of environmental impacts that SEPA requires.”
Three Cities Say Port Downplays Noise, Air Pollution and Traffic from Airport Expansion
Cities of Burien, SeaTac and Des Moines submitted a 187-page response calling for better science, fuller disclosure and lasting protections for surrounding communities.
Stuart Jenner
Highline Water District
The Highline Water District wants protection for its wells. They’ve already had to close one well due to the Port’s PFAS pollution. They state the EIS ignores the risks and problems associated with the airport plans.
One Well Already Lost, Highline Water District Raises Concerns About Sea-Tac Expansion Plan
As Sea-Tac Airport grows, how will the Port make sure area drinking water supplies are protected?
Stuart Jenner
Mayor and City Council of Tukwila
The mayor and City Council of Tukwila submitted a letter in July. Their main point: The area included in the EIS’s “impacts” is way too small. It is just a bit bigger than the airport property, far different from reality.
Tukwila Says Airport Review Understates Impacts on Neighboring Communities
Tukwila leaders say the Port’s airport review overlooks broader environmental, financial and public health costs borne by neighboring communities.
Stuart Jenner
Federal Way
The main Federal Way concern is noise. As with Tukwila, they point out that the impacts of the airport extend beyond mathematically defined noise contours.
They ask for additional noise metrics. They have been asking for this for many years. Maybe this time the Port will listen.
Federal Way Challenges Airport Noise Analysis, Calls for Better Metrics
What will 19 additional airport gates mean for Federal Way? City leaders want clearer answers about noise, health impacts and mitigation.
Stuart Jenner
Highline School Board
The school board letter discusses noise mitigation and other impacts on children’s health and learning. They call for noise mitigation money. The Port responded and said funds are available under long-standing agreements.
The article details some of the back-and-forth between the Port and the school district. From the letter, I was VERY surprised to learn that there’s still mitigation money for noise.
Highline Says Port Must Deliver. Port Says Mitigation Money Is Waiting.
The Port says remaining school sound-insulation funding is available. Now it’s Highline’s move.
Katie Kresly
Closing Comment
To close, I also wrote my own comments: 43 pages of comments, plus an additional 34 pages of emails sent to the Port that the Port responded to only in part.
Putting together comments is very challenging. Residents of the area should be grateful for the work the city staff and consultants pulled together.
Members Discussion
Highline Journal Comment Guidelines
We believe thoughtful conversation helps communities flourish. We welcome respectful, on-topic comments that engage ideas, not individuals. Personal attacks, harassment, hateful comments, directed profanity, false claims, spam, or sharing private information aren't allowed. Comments aren't edited and may be removed if they violate these guidelines.