![[BACK TO WELCOME/HOME]](buthome.gif")
Third Runway Stalls at the Gate ** Does Noise in Your Neighborhood Look Like This? **Case Hits Port Ad Campaign ** Preliminary Figures Reveal Huge Costs to Mitigate Sea-Tac Expansion** GPS Picks Up Steam ** 1995-96 Two Hectic Years in Review ** UPDATES: Petitions Seek Boeing Field Night-Time Restrictions, Carbon Monoxide Monitoring, EPA Grant To Study Boeing Field Pollution in Seattle Neighborhood, Personnel changes at ACC, RCAA ** Port of Seattle / Highline School Controversy ** Did you Notice? ** Port Fact ** RCAA Needs You **January 15 C.A.S.E. Meeting
Despite all the talk, the Port of Seattle, facing a host of problems, has not begun work on its proposed expansion at Sea-Tac Airport, including the controversial third runway. The Port is not even close to setting a possible target date for any action to move the project along.
Federal approval of the expansion has been held up by the Federal Aviation Administration, which is re-evaluating the economic usefulness of the project, in light of new, unexpectedly-high, figures for Sea-Tac passenger traffic. It appears that FAA's concern is that air-travel into the region is increasing so rapidly that Sea-Tac with a third runway will be at full capacity before the project can be completed. Under such a scenario, it would be more economical to put FAA's money into development of greater capacity (at some other location), facing the capacity crisis head-on, rather than funding an already-inadequate project. FAA is mandated by Congress to conduct a complete cost-benefit-ratio analysis of the Port's proposal.
The Port has yet to find funds for any aspect of the project from any possible source. No Federal funds, and none of the Port-imposed passenger-facility charges, can be committed until and unless the FAA approves the project. The Port has no money of its own at present. Its gate charges and terminal rents negotiated with scheduled airlines are committed to other uses to the year 2002. A draft financing plan has been prepared for consideration by the Port Commission in December 1996.
On October 3, the Port contracted with a consultant (O.R. Colan Associates, of Charleston, West Virginia) "to administer the purchase of property needed for construction" of the third runway, for a fee, with expenses, of $4,969,792.96, for four years' work. However, statements in Port news releases that third-runway property acquisition is about to begin conflict with the fact that there is no money for such purchases. The consultants, instead, are apparently to work on a plan to convince prospective sellers to accept the Port's buy-out offers, rather than securing independent advice. The Port also appears to be desirous that the consultant prevent property-owners in the buy-out zone from working with one another or meeting with the consultant jointly. The first stage of the plan is to induce owners to divulge sensitive personal information (such as age, income, and employment) through a Port questionnaire, now being delivered. That information will then be used by the Port negotiators, in private meetings with individual owners. Skeptical residents in the potential buy-out area have already begun to meet informally and are planning to secure their own appraisals, and to decline to provide irrelevant personal information to the Port.
Port personnel told the SeaTac City Council on Nov. 26 that owners who voluntarily accept the Port's first offer (touted as being at fair-market value) will receive assistance in moving, in hooking up utilities, and so forth, to the extent that owners will have no costs to relocate to comparable property elsewhere.
Airport neighbors have noticed earth-moving trucks hard at work around the Airport, but this activity has nothing to do with the third runway. Rather, this is work to extend the south safety area of the east runway. FAA environmental specialist Dennis Ossenkop has said that "not one shovelful of dirt will be moved" for the third runway until the EIS receives FAA approval (given by a so-called Record of Decision). Even after that (if it ever happens), the Port will need building permits from the City of SeaTac and surrounding cities, and massive amounts of construction money from several sources, as yet uncommitted. Then would come the call for bids, bid evaluation and award, environmental permits, and so on. And hovering all of this is the first ACC (Airport Communities Coalition) lawsuit and other litigation sure to come.
Check the RCAA website library at http://www.rcaanews.org/rcaa for a map showing noise readings, such as the one above, taken with RCAA's digital noise monitor at various locations around King County.
C.A.S.E. has responded to a $42,000 Port of Seattle advertising campaign with its own advertisement in the Nov. 21 issue of the Seattle Times. The Port's ads claim astonishing economic benefits from Port activity. In response, C.A.S.E. sardonically noted that the Port operates with the highest tax subsidy of any port in North America -- $35.6 million in property taxes last year. Ad texts are on our Web site.
Burien, Washington -- On 21 October, Burien City Manager Frederick C. Stouder released preliminary findings of the Burien - South King County Impact Assistance and Studies Team, showing that more then $3 billion will be required to mitigate just some of the adverse impacts of Sea-Tac expansion.
On the basis of extensive studies, the team estimates that property values in the cities of Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, and Tukwila will be $500 million less in the year 2020 than they would be without Sea-Tac expansion. This will lead the five cities to lose $22 million in revenues based on real-property taxes.Similar studies for the Highline School District are not yet complete, but are expected to show tax losses in the millions. Other socio-economic impacts are still being costed out.
Cost of environmental mitigation is estimated by the consultants at $2.6 billion by the year 2020. Local transportation systems will be adversely effected to the extent of $450 million over the same period.
In presenting their preliminary findings to local governments and other interested groups in the last 10 days of October, the consultants stressed that their findings are both incomplete and preliminary and numerous agencies have been asked to review and evaluate the preliminary work. Thus, the team says, dollar figures for any particular cost could increase or decrease as the final version of the study is prepared for release (by mid-January 1996). However, the total for mitigation costs will almost certainly well exceed the preliminary figure when studies of impacts on Highline School District and neighborhood-by-neighborhood socio-economic impacts are completed.
Under the terms of the Legislature's $500,000 grant for the project, impacts on the City of SeaTac (known to have most of the same sorts of impacts as the five cities in the study area) are not included. Likewise, impacted areas in unincorporated King County and South-East Seattle are not covered by the present study.
Depression of property values was studied by comparing in detail the single-family housing in 10 census tracts in Northwest King County and in the recognized neighborhoods of the study area. The consultants chose Northwest King County (Shoreline) as a comparison area because of the close similarities of the two areas, their housing stock, their topography, land-use policies, and patterns of development. The comparison area receives far less noise from Sea-Tac flights. Both areas are bounded by Puget Sound on the West, Lake Washington on the East. Both are bisected by I-5 and SR-99. The base study area contains 11,526 single-family housing units, and the comparison area, 12,683. Each area is about two-thirds single-family.
To ensure comparability, only units rated as being in "Very Good" condition by the Assessor's office were included, while all units with views were excluded. Only homes with above-ground structure of 1000 square feet or more were included. All lots have between 10,000 and 15,000 square feet, and all units have three or more bedrooms and two or more baths. These criteria excluded the most and least expensive housing units, to provide more representative comparisons.
After these and other standard statistical techniques were used to develop two highly comparable, representative groups of houses, the study showed that "a housing unit selling for $141,000 in the immediate vicinity of the airport would sell for $155,700 -- or $14,300 (10.1 percent) more --if it were located elsewhere". The study forecasts the expected average amount of depression of future single-family property values after (if) the proposed third runway goes into full operation. In the year 2020, the average value, for example, of a home in Normandy Park would be $58,677 less (in constant, 1995 dollars) than a comparable home in the Shoreline area.
It should be noted that the property-value studies released this month do not include anything but stand-alone single-family homes. Depression of the values of (and tax revenues from) duplex/triplex properties, apartment complexes, and residential institutions have not been reported. Nor have any numbers been reported for value depression for commercial properties.
The consultants note that substantial depression in property values will likely mean that many owners will be unable to recover the true fair-market value of their property by sale and will therefore resort to renting out. There is a clear correlation between depressed property values and a shift in the owner/renter occupancy ratio, as well as other demographic changes (depressed literacy rates, increased numbers of recent immigrants, increased proportions of elderly and pre-school children). Increased numbers of renters usually reflects a downward trend in per-capita income and a rising demand for public services (police, fire, emergency medical, and many others). As tax revenues for cities and the school district are depressed by depressed property values, demand for public expenditures will increase.
While it is argued that there are socio-economic benefits from airport expansion, including increased financial activity, and that these benefits outweigh adverse impacts, the study shows that the benefits are not distributed as the adverse impacts are. Detailed analysis of the points of origin of departing Sea-Tac passengers show that most passengers (57.2%) come from areas of King County outside the five-city study area, while only 5.9% are residents of the five-city area. Noise impacts, of course, are concentrated in the area within a few miles of the Airport. On a straight numerical basis, Seattle provided most of the passengers (35%) (and most of them from the North End), while on a per-capita basis, Issasquah (with 41 passengers per 10,000 population) and Kirkland (35 per 10,000) were the leading points of departure from home.
An analysis of direct Airport jobs was performed by the study team. Only 21% of these jobs are held by residents of the five impacted cities. Considering jobs created indirectly by Airport activity, the consultants concluded that between 80 and 97 per cent of the job-related benefits go to persons residing outside the study area. (RCAA news staff comment: It should be noted that the City of SeaTac, which receives massive negative impacts from the Airport, is not included in the study area. No doubt, numerous SeaTac residents have Airport-related employment. Had the City of SeaTac chosen to be included in the present study, the employment benefit would be surely be somewhat less disproportionate.) Curiously, almost half the residents of the five-city area holding airport-related jobs live in Federal Way. Not yet studied is possible disparity between income from Airport-related jobs received by residents inside and outside the study area.
The study's authors conclude that, "[o]verall, residents of the communities immediately surrounding the airport get disproportionately small benefits (both in total and per capita terms) from their use of the airport while suffering disproportionately large costs. Business activity generated by the airport appears to generate significant benefit for the City of SeaTac but little benefit [for the other five cities]."
Another significant element of the study is its analysis of the impacts on home-property values in neighborhoods exposed to new flight tracks. The third runway at Sea-Tac, lying half a mile West of the existing western runway, will inevitably cause new flight tracks - at least 19, by one estimate -- to occur over neighborhoods not previously receiving such high noise levels. The study examined the depressions in property value caused by closeness to a flight track, and found that "the value of a house and lot increases by about 3.4 percent ($4,450 on the average value of $129,900) for every quarter of a mile the house is farther away from being directly under the flight track of departing/approaching [commercial passenger] jet aircraft". Not taking into account properties that will be acquired by the Port, the affected cities will lose just under $300,000 a year in real-property tax revenues just as the result of the new flight tracks.
It should be noted that the Environmental Impact Statement for the expansion project does not indicate how lost property values will be restored to the owners or how the cities and special-purpose districts will be compensated for lost tax revenues.
Sea-Tac expansion, including construction-related traffic, will create various problems for local transportation systems, including increased congestion and accelerated deterioration of road surfaces and bridges. Final figures for mitigation will depend on which methods and routes the Port chooses for bringing fill to the site, and on original destination studies on selected routes. But preliminary work shows that the bulk of the damage to road surfaces and bridges (including overpasses) will occur on the 31 miles of State highways in the study area. Work to improve signal systems and to re-configure intersections will be needed primarily on streets maintained by local jurisdictions. As rising traffic volumes, and construction dump trucks, clog the Interstate and State-numbered highways, traffic will spill over to other arterials, and eventually into neighborhood streets, causing impacts throughout the surface-transportation network.
The transportation subconsultants summarize their preliminary findings of impacts on both State and local systems by city, to the nearest million, as follows:
Tukwila 148 million Federal Way 107 million Burien 91 million Des Moines 61 million Normandy Park 42 million
The total exceeds $450 million. The Tukwila portion is very large because the largest portion of the impacted stretches of the State system are within that city. Federal Way's figures are disproportionately high because that city has a very large number of arterials and intersections that may need major upgrading. The transportation subconsultant advises that the Federal Way number may diminish if detailed traffic studies street by street show less actual traffic than what has been projected on the basis of over-all volumes.
Expansion impacts are being evaluated with the aid of an innovative analytical tool, a neighborhood-by-neighborhood matrix, showing for each neighborhood the projected impacts in each of several sub-categories within the major categories of environment, transportation, and socio-economic. The consultants believe that neighborhood impact is a more realistic way of evaluating mitigation needs than a lot-by-lot or block-by-block method. Recommended mitigation measures will be based on mitigation work done or planned at other major airports in the U.S., including Colorado Springs, Colo.; Dallas/Fort Worth, Texas; Lambert Field (St. Louis) Missouri; Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota; San Francisco International; San Diego. Three mitigation programs in the State of Washington were also studied: expansion of the Boeing facility at Everett; Satsop power plant; I-90 expansion from Factoria into Seattle (third floating bridge).
The consultants are recommending that a mitigation agreement be negotiated with the affected cities and districts, citizen groups, the Port, and other concerned governmental bodies, and that a working group or oversight committee of representatives from those groups be assembled to oversee implementation of the agreement both during and after construction. The oversight group would have permanent staff with technical expertise in airport construction, airport operation, and environmental matters, with funding to be provided by the mitigation agreement. Significant mitigation measures will depend in part on the following:
All these activities would be carried out under the committee's supervision.
The international firm Hellmuth, Obata + Kassbaum, Inc. (H-O-K) of Dallas, Texas, is the lead consultant on the study. Raytheon Infrastructure Services, Inc., is subconsultant, concentrating on transportation issues. Thomas/Lane Associates, Inc., of Seattle, provides socio-economic analysis and mitigation measures. Michael J. McCormick, AICP, of Olympia, provides inter-governmental affairs consulting. The City of Burien provides local co-ordination and management services. The other cities involved in the study are Burien, Federal Way, Normandy Park, and Tukwila. The Highline School District is also included in the study.
Alaska Airlines has announced that it will install Global Positioning System (GPS) avionics on all its Boeing 737-300 aircraft by the end of 1997. The carrier is also adding Enhanced Ground Proximity Warning (EGPW) equipment. Alaska Airlines' President, John F.Kelly, said that this new equipment would enable the carrier "to fly approaches and departures previously unavailable".
The announcement was made at Juneau, Alaska, a notoriously difficult airport, owing to frequent low-to-no visibility weather. Alaska and its sister line, Horizon, make up the largest commuter operation at Sea-Tac. GPS technology potentially would permit use of both existing Sea-Tac runways in times of low visibility, thus obviating the need for a third runway. Alaska joins Southwest, United, and other major carriers in acquiring GPS technology.
GPS technology also got a boost at a recent at a recent NASA symposium on GPS attended by RCAA president Clark Dodge. Pilots tested the technology in a simulator and were enthusiastic. The simulations show that jets can land in bad weather on parallel runways as close as 1500 feet apart. San Francisco International Airport is studying use of the GPS system on two of its runways which are 750 feet apart. Sea-Tac's two runways are 800 feet apart.
[PAGE 2]
The years 1995 and 1996 were hectic times for those involved in Airport affairs. The following review covers the high and low points.
Petitions now being circulated by C-FAN (Citizens Fed-up with Airport Noise) call for closing of King County International Airport (Boeing Field) to all flight operations between 11 p.m. and 6 a.m., except in the case of emergencies. The proposed curfew would exempt cerain corporate aircraft in non-scheduled operations. Copies of the petition for circulating in your neighborhood are available at the RCAA Office and on the Exchange Page of the RCAA website.
Carbon Monoxide MonitoringStarting Dec. 2, the Department of Ecology will monitor carbon-monoxide concentrations at selected sites near Sea-Tac Airport. Ecology was one of three air-pollution agencies critical of the environmental analyses published by the Port and the FAA for Sea-Tac expansion. The Port, Ecology, USEPA, and Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency have agreed that a series of air-quality monitoring projects will be done to supplement the EIS. Further details: Ecology, at (206) 649-7000.
EPA Grant To Study Boeing Field Pollution in Seattle Neighborhood (Internet Edition Only)The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has made a $20,000 grant to a Seattle neighborhood group, Georgetown Crime Prevention and Community Council, to study air pollution and noise impacts on Georgetown residences from King County International Airport (Boeing Field). Lorna Dove, long-time Georgetown resident and project manager for the community council, says that ambient air sampling will be done for the group by a local testing firm in December and probably again in March 1997, with another consultant performing noise measurements.
The community group is particularly concerned about jet-fuel contamination of air and soil, air-borne particulates, noise impacts from cargo aircraft, and ground vibration from engine testing at the facility.
Final results, including risk analysis by the principal consultant, are to be reported to EPA by Aug. 31, 1997.
Ms Dove and her committee were assisted in obtaining the grant by State Senator Velma Veloria (D-11).
Personnel changes at ACC, RCAAAirport Communities Coalition staffer Chester Beattie has resigned, with plans to return to his home state of Texas. Ms Kristin Hanson has been appointed as his successor; Ms Hanson was formerly the Administrative Director of RCAA.
The RCAA Board of Directors will advertise for candidates to fill Ms Hanson's post. Debbie Des Marais has been hired by the Board as a temporary, part-time replacement. At present, Ms Des Marais will have the RCAA office from 9:10 a.m. to 2:10 p.m.
The RCAA Board, members, and staff congratulate Ms Hanson on her new appointment, thank her for outstanding service while at RCAA, and look forward to working with her in her new post.
[PAGE 3]
The long-simmering quarrel between the Port of Seattle and the Highline School District abruptly became the subject of mutual public recriminations as October became November. A Port spokesman was quoted in the Highline Times as conceding that the Port could not do much about overflight noise in the Highline Schools, because the Port's "hands were tied". This disclaimer came despite long-standing Port promises to provide effective school insulation.
Highline School District Superintendent Joseph R. McGeehan responded vigorously, declaring that the schools' insulation needs surpass by several times the $43 million for insulation promised by the Port, and accusing the Port of turning "deaf ears on the education needs of the children of Highline". McGeehan pointed out that the Port is making a conscious choice not to provide sufficient mitigation to Highline schools because of a Port policy of not using its general revenues for airport purposes. The Port in fact will only spend other people's money for noise mitigation -- Federal money.
The Port's response, delivered by Sea-Tac aviation director Gina Marie Lindsey, charged McGeehan and the Highline School Board with not being "serious about using available resources to improve the learning environment". Ms Lindsey pointed to a host of Port staff volunteer activities, such as classroom visits and the Airport Holiday Chorus program, as evidence of the Port's sincere desire to mitigate noise impacts. She was sharply critical of the District's refusal to accept the Port's insulation offers (presented, we note, on a take-it-or-leave-it basis, and all found by the District to be inadequate). She did not respond to Mr McGeehan's central point -- the need far exceeds the Port's bottom-line offer. She called the District's position political posturing.
Did you notice that many of the issues in the annual review and most of the major items in this newsletter were not covered in the Seattle Times and P.I.? We are soliciting creative ideas from our readers on how to improve the quantity, quality, and balance of coverage of these issues in the region’s major dailies and other media. Call or write the RCAA office at 824-3120 and let us know. Thanks!
According to a 1994 study of North American port districts by Booz-Allen & Hamilton Associates, the Port of Seattle has the lowest return on assets (0.3% per year) of all major port districts on the West Coast.
If we had the space, we would thank you each personally for the dollars you sent and the thousands of hours you volunteered to RCAA’s work this past year. With the end of the PSRC process, the RCAA can finally devote more time to critical community organizing and public education processes. We plan to have a community organizer to help our volunteers, more extensive town hall meetings, community noise monitoring, and more. Critical issues will come in 1997 as well, as they have in the past. In 1996 the cost estimates of Sea-Tac expansion have quietly, but spectacularly, jumped from $500 million for a spare foul-weather runway to $2.2 billion, including the cost of inflation. Prelimary mitigation estimates predict $3+ billion in mitigation on the horizon, and the interest on bonds and other financing costs have not yet been estimated. Who knows what the final bill will be or who will write the checks. But the public and public officials need to know the facts. Your contributions are vital.
NAME (Please Print)____________________________________________________________ ADDRESS:____________________________________________________________________ CITY:________________________________________________________ZIP______________ Home Phone:____________________Work Phone:__________________FAX:_____________ E-mail:__________________________ Please send me_____ “No Third Runway” Bumper Strips. (No contribution required.)
[PAGE 4]
The January 15 C.A.S.E. meeting will be held at 7 p.m. at the usual meeting place, the Educational Resources Activity Center (ERAC), 15675 Ambaum S.W., Burien. For more information, call the RCAA office, 824-3120, 9.10 a.m. to 2.10 p.m.
Truth in Aviation is published by the Regional Commission on Airport Affairs, a coalition of citizens groups concerned with airport expansion & air
transportation issues. Closing Date this issue: 11/26/96.
RCAA
19900 4th Ave. S.W.
Normandy Park, WA 98166
(206)824-3120 FAX: 824-3451
http://www.rcaanews.org/rcaa E-mail: rcaa@accessone.com
Clarke Dodge, President
Jeanne Moeller, Vice-President