To RCAA Home Page
To RCAA Library Page

 

A Chronology of Regional Air Transportation
Planning in Washington State 1942-1997

The following table provides a chronology of events related to regional aviation transportation planning in Washington State. The table indicates the date of the event, describes the event, lists the study, publication, or document reference related to the event, and indicates the RCAA Library Reference if available.

DateEvent Document/Source 
1942The Civil Aeronautics Administration (now FAA) selects an airport site near swampy Bow Lake in South King County, Washington. Since neither King County nor the City of Seattle have adequate funds for such a project, the Port of Seattle acquires the original 906 acre site and in conjunction with $100,000 grant from the city of Tacoma develops Bow Lake airport. Favro et al. v. Port of Seattle, U.S. District Court, No. C92-1634Z, Complaint, p.36  
1960'sJet aircraft introduced at Bow Lake airport. Port extends main North-South runway. Airport area expanded to 1500 acres, and then 2,200 acres. A total of 54,752 annual air carrier operations occur in 1963 Favro,p.36
1970Second runway located 800 feet West of existing runway at Sea-Tac airport begins operations Highline Dist. v. Port of Seattle, 87 Wn.2d 6, P.2d 1085 (1976) at p.7
1971A total of 114,372 annual air carrier operations occur at Sea-Tac airport during 1971 Favro, p. 36
6/29/73Highline School District files suit against Port of Seattle for damages allegedly caused by"noise, vibration, and smoke from aircraft landing and taking off at the airport". Highline at p.8
1973King County and the Port of Seattle issue the Sea-Tac Communities Plan. The plan discusses future expansion and concludes "the airport site has adequate capability to accommodate foreseeable air traffic demand. No major expansion of the site is required." Sea-Tac Communities Plan prepared by the Port of Seattle and King County - November 1973  
1975King County passes Ordinance No. 2883, adopting the Sea-Tac Communities Plan as "official County policy in determining future actions with the Port of Seattle on matters pertaining to SeaTac International Airport, the application of noise programs, development of acquisition areas and other action on the Airport in the vicinity." Ordinance No. 2883 
1976Port of Seattle Commission adopts Resolution No. 2626 which "accepts the SeaTac Communities Plan and endorses its recommendations in general terms as a guide for development of the SeaTac International Airport within its community." Port of Seattle Resolution No. 2626  
1983Airspace Study reveals conflicts between Sea-Tac and Boeing Field airport traffic. Study includes regional air traffic capacity forecasts. Study notes "Snohomish County Airport, Renton Municipal Airport, and Auburn Municipal Airport are designated Sea-Tac reliever airports in [FAA's] current National Airport System Plan." Seattle-Tacoma International Airport/King County International Airport Airspace Study prepared by the Port of Seattle and King County.  
1984 Sea-Tac airport accommodates 10,476,630 passengers and 223,828 aircraft operations (landings and takeoffs). Final Report Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Master Plan Update prepared for the Port of Seattle by Peat Marwick/TRA September 1985, p.2 
9/85 Port of Seattle issues Master Plan Update for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Final Report. Master Plan recommendations state "[t]he recommended airfield consists of the existing system of runways and taxiways with several improvements to the taxiway network." The study's policy guidelines and assumptions" are taken from the Sea-Tac Communities Plan adopted by the Port Commission in 1976. The Master Plan assumptions were specific directions to the Master Plan update team to guide the development of the Master Plan update document itself (e.g. , new runways will not be considered). These directions were consistent with both stated Port policy and existing institutional and environmental constraints." Final Report Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Master Plan Update prepared for the Port of Seattle by Peat Marwick/TRA September 1985, p.5-1, p.2-1-2 
11/24/85Highline Times reports Port of Seattle adoption of Master Plan Update for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. Article reports "[t]he long-term guide calls for no new land acquisitions aside from those under the noise program, and no new runways." Highline Times November 24, 1985  
12/87Puget Sound Council of Governments issues draft environmental impact statement (EIS) which recommends a range of alternative regional air transportation plans. Recommendations include a baseline program and alternatives with estimates of their respective costs (in 1986 dollars):

(Baseline Program): Maintain existing improvements at Sea-Tac airport and divert General Aviation Traffic from Boeing Field. (Cost estimate - $351 million.)

Alternative No. 1: Provide two (2) new satellite airports (Cost Estimate - $1,080 million)

Alternative No. 2: Expand existing general aviation airports as satellite airports (Cost Estimate - $1,018 million)

Alternative No. 3: Expand Sea-Tac (Cost Estimate - $2,400 million)

Alternative No. 4: A new International airport. (Cost Estimate - $1,600 million)

Regional Transportation Plan Airport System Amendment Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) prepared by Puget Sound Council of Governments
3/20/1988 Port of Seattle Executive Director Jim Dwyer states that talk about a third runway has hurt the Port's credibility and that talk of a third runway should stop until ""we have 'left no stone unturned' in our study of what our aviation needs are." Highline Times March 20, 1988 
3/21/1988King County Council unanimously passes Motion No. 7138 which calls for the elimination of the Sea-Tac 3rd runway alternative in PSCOG's Draft Regional Airport System Plan Reported in Highline Times March 27, 1988 
3/24/1988Puget Sound Council of Governments' (PSCOG) Air Transportation Advisory Committee votes to recommend no major expansion at Sea-Tac airport and that other ways to increase service at Sea-Tac be considered. Port of Seattle planner Burr Stewart is quoted stating "Let's just say we made a mistake and we want to fix the mistake." Article reports Don Secrist, who managed research for the draft report, admitted the $2.75 billion thir". Air Transportation Association representative Neil Bennett is quoted stating "Environmentally unfeasible is a 7euphemism for 'they won't let us do it." Highline Times March 27, 1988 
1988Port of Seattle conducts 10 month "Comprehensive Planning Review". Purpose of this review is to evaluate "the 1985 Master Plan as well as several other planning studies" Authority: Technical Report No. 7A, Terminal Options Evaluation, Airport Master Plan Update for Seattle-Tacoma International Airport prepared for Port of Seattle by P&D Aviation, November 14, 1994 revised February 17, 1995, p.1-1 
1988"Puget Sound Regional Council's 1988 Regional Airport System Plan, le[ads] the Port of Seattle Commissioners to formally acknowledge that Sea-Tac would reach runway saturation near the end of the century.& Technical Report 7A, p.1-1  
3/14/89City of Federal Way is formed through a special election held March 14, 1989 King County Ordinance No 8779
3/14/89City of SeaTac is formed through a special election held March 14, 1989 King County Ordinance No 8820
1990The Washington State Legislature passes the Growth Management Act (GMA) RCW 36.70A
1990345,000 annual air carrier operations occur at Sea-Tac airport  
1990Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG) establishes the Puget Sound Air Transportation Committee (PSATC) to conduct a two year study of regional air transportation planning issues. The program designated 'Flightplan'. Funding for 1989-90 portion of study (75% paid by FAA grant) amounts to $341,000 PDC 1630-3
6/91Puget Sound Air Transportation Committee (PSATC) issues Final Report which finds that "no configuration of Sea-Tac could, by itself, provide sufficient capacity to meet the region's commercial air transportation needs through the [year] 2020". PSATC Options Subcommittee concludes that "all" of the Sea-Tac options should not be studied further." Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and Petition for Statutory Writs of Review, ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996
10/1/91Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG) disbands. Flight Plan Final EIS, p.1-22
3/1/92City of Burien is formed through a special election held March 10, 1992 King County Ordinance No 10236
1992PSATC issues 'Flightplan' Final EIS recommendations "calling for the phased implementation of a Multiple Airport System including the addition of a dependent air carrier runway at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport before the year 2000, and the introduction of scheduled air carrier service to Paine Field before the year 2000, and the identification of a two-runway supplemental airport site in Pierce County for development by the year 2010 in collaboration with the military, and failing that, the identification of a suitable site in Thurston County." The Flight Plan Project Final EIS Oct. 1992, p.1-22.
1992A new regional planning organization, the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) is formed from the remnants of PSCOG. PSRC appoints itself as the regional transportation planning organization (RTPO) for the four county area consisting of King, Pierce, Snohomish, and Kitsap County. PSRC then expands its voting membership to include the Port's of Seattle, Everett, and Tacoma, as well as non-elected officials from various transportation bureaucracies including the Department of Transportation and the State Transportation Commission. Reference No.
1992The State legislature creates the Washington State Air Transportation Commission (AIRTRAC). AIRTRAC is charged with determining policy recommendations for meeting Washington State's air transportation capacity needs. Final Report and Policy Recommendations to Legislative Transportation Committee November 1993 prepared by Washington State Air Transportation Commission
4/29/93The Puget Sound Regional Council's (PSRC) General Assembly adopts Resolution A-93-03 which provides ". . . that the region should vigorously pursue, as the preferred alternative, a major supplemental airport and a third runway at Sea-Tac.

1. The Major supplemental airport should be located in the four-county area within a reasonable travel time from significant markets in the region.

2. The third runway shall be authorized by April 1, 1996:

a. Unless shown through and environmental assessment, which will include financial and market feasibility studies, that a supplemental site is feasible and can eliminate the need for the third runway; and

b. After demand management and system management programs are pursued and achieved or determined to be infeasible, based on independent evaluation; and

c. When noise reduction performance objectives are scheduled, purchased and achieved based on independent evaluation, and based on measurement of real noise impacts."

Resolution No. A-93-03 
11/1993Washington State Air Transportation Commission issues "AIRTRAC" study's "Policy Recommendations". Recommendations state "adding the third [Sea-Tac] runway alone does not solve the region's long-term capacity problem. Forecasted growth in the demand for air transportation, based upon regional population, employment, and economic projections, suggests a demand for capacity beyond what the third runway alone would provide. The design capacity of Seattle-Tacoma International Airport with the third runway could be reached between the years 2005 and 2010." Final Report and Policy Recommendations to Legislative Transportation Committee November 1993, p.21
5/27/94PSRC issues press release stating that its consultants "have identified 12 sites which, through preliminary analysis, seem to have some potential as possible areas where a major supplemental airport could be feasible." PSRC Press Release dated May 27, 1994 
6/30/94Major Supplemental Airport (MSA) Working Group announces six sites that have been identified as viable locations for a supplemental airport. Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and Petition for Statutory Writs of Review, ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.11) and PSRC Report prepared by TAMS dated July 1994 
9/94PSRC Transportation and growth Management Policy Boards jointly determine that three of the six sites - Arlington and Marysville in Snohomish County, and Tanwax Lake in Pierce County - meet the guidelines set forth in PSRC Resolution A-93-03. The Boards therefore recommend that these three sites be evaluated further and in more detail in Phase II of the MSA study. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.12)  
10/94PSRC adopts Resolution 94-01 which abandons further studies of supplement sites for new regional airport PSRC Resolution 94-01 
1/27/95Federal District Court invalidates portions of Port of Seattle "Avigation Easement" imposed on homeowners participating in federally funded noise insulation program administered by Port of Seattle Minute Order, Favro et al. vs. Port of Seattle , Federal District Court, Case no. C92-1634Z, Docket no. 311
2/95Boeing Field starts Master Plan Update Report titled
2/95Late-night cargo flights move from Sea-Tac to KCIA (Boeing Field); Seattle and Tukwila residents from Citizens fed up with airport noise (CFAN) Reference No.
4/3/95King County Council creates advisory council for King County (Boeing Field) Airport (Motion No. 95-23) Report titled
5/19/95City of SeaTac files litigation with Port over zoning & other powers. Port claims right to override all City policies in conflict with Port wishes. Amended Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and Declarative Relief City of Sea-Tac v. Port of Seattle, King Co. Superior Ct., No. 95-2-03901-4, filed May 19, 1995 
5/95Washington State Legislature adopts Bill sponsored by Senator Mike Heavey et al. and secures $500,000 to study impacts of 3rd runway on cities of Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, and Tukwila. City of SeaTac declines to participate in study. Report titled 
5/95Draft EIS for 3rd runway issued; RCAA and others file voluminous comments. Master Plan Update Draft Environmental Impact Statement prepared by Port of Seattle dated May 1995 
12/8/95PSRC Expert Panel reluctantly rules that State DOT's lack of commitment to high speed rail rules out rail alternative. Final Order dated July 27, 1995 prepared by PSRC Expert Panel on Systems and Demand Management
12/95Washington State's Department of Transportation (DOT) releases study touting massive investment in improving rail travel along I-5 corridor. Options for Passenger Rail in the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor prepared by Washington State Department of Transportation. (Reported in Seattle Times 1/4/96)
1/96According to FAA magnetic North Pole moves 3 degrees east. Complaints of Sea-Tac airport overflight noise from Rainier Valley residents explode. Report titled 
1/96Report issued revealing costs for 3rd runway and associated improvements in Port's Master Plan update of $2.2 billion dollars. Report also acknowledges that construction of a 3rd Sea-Tac runway cannot be completed by its previous target date of the year 2000 and would instead be constructed during the period from the year 2000 to the year 2005. Technical Report No. 8 prepared by Port of Seattle January 1996 
3/18/96Congressional hearing on Sea-Tac expansion at Des Moines Field house arranged by Congressman Randy Tate (R-9); Port refuses no new tax pledge; Spokesman for Sea-Tac's major scheduled carriers backs away from airline commitment to 3rd Sea-Tac runway. Prepared Testimony of Congressman Randy Tate before the House Appropriations Committee 
3/27/96PSRC's Expert Arbitration Panel rules that Port has not provided "meaningful and significant" reductions in noise, vetoing a 3rd Sea-Tac runway. Report titled 
4/15/96 Port of Seattle enters into consent decree with Waste Action Project (WAP) in partial settlement of environmental lawsuit alleging violations of the Clean Water Act Consent Decree Waste Action Project v. Port of Seattle, U.S. District Court, Case No. C95-1251R, dated April 15, 1996  
4/25/96 Noting, at its April 25, 1996 meeting, that Resolution A-93-03 provided that "[t]he third runway shall be authorized by April 1, 1996", and that the PSRC has failed to authorize the third runway by the April 1 date, PSRC's Executive Board directs its staff to begin work amending resolution A-93-03 to "remove the deadline of April 1, 1996". PSRC staff begin planning a new process for authorizing a third runway and related expansion projects at Sea-Tac airport. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.14)  
4/30/96 PSRC's staff send a two (2) page memorandum to municipal governments and state agencies concerning the Noise Expert Panel's (March 7, 1996) Final Decision, requesting that they review, evaluate and assess twenty eight (28) recommendations which the Port of Seattle had previously agreed to adopt or implement concerning reduction of noise impacts. PSRC memo requests that the affected municipalities and state agencies respond by May 17, 1996 (less than three (3) weeks after the request) by undertaking an extensive evaluation addressing cost, implementation schedules, analysis of benefiits, identification of obtacles, and compliance monitoring associated with construction of a 3rd Sea-Tac runway. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.15)  
5/10/96 Prior to receiving the information and responses by the May 17 deadline indicated in its April 30 request, PSRC issues a statement on May 10, 1996 announcing that it intendx to adopt an amendment to the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) to include a third runway at Sea-Tac Airport. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.15)  
5/28/96 PSRC's staff issues an Addendum describing the proposed action as an "amend[ment] to the Aviation Program and . . . Resolution A-93-03 of the MTP to include a third runway at Sea-Tac with specific noise reduction measures." Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.16)  
6/12/96 The Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) consisting of the City of Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, and Tukwila, file separate motions with PSRC's Responsible Official under the State Environmental Policy Act, ("SEPA") requesting that the PSRC prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement ("SEIS") to address the proposed MTP amendment and the new information which had come to light since the issuance of the EIS's. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.17)  
6/27/96Sea-Tac area residents storm out of rigged PSRC "workshop" in Bellevue chaired by PSRC President Pierce County Executive/PSRC Chairman Doug Sutherland and Snohomish County Executive Bob Drewel. Executive Board votes to recommend to the PSRC General Assembly that the agency adopt PSRC Resolution A-96-02 which purports to amend previous PSRC Resolution A-93-03 Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.17) 
6/27/96 PSRC's Responsible Official issues its Response to Requests for Supplemental Environmental Review which concludes that the proeviously issued EISs were adequate for purposes of the porposed Metropolitan Transportation Plan amendment and asserts that the PSRC did not need to conduct any additional review in response to requests for supplmental analyses. Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.17) 
7/11/96PSRC General Assembly meeting is held at Seattle Center Flag Pavilion. PSRC members rubber stamp overturn of Resolution A-93-03, negating ruling of its own Expert Panel Complaint ACC Cities v. PSRC, Executive Board of the PSRC, the Port of Seattle, and the Commissioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 (p.17)  
8/2/96Airport Communities Coalition (ACC) files 17 count suit against the Port of Seattle, Port of Seattle Commission, Puget Sound Regional Council and PSRC Executive Board. Causes of Action in the Complaint include the following Counts:

COUNT 1 - Claim aginst the PSRC for Noncompliance with the GMA Consistency Requirements

COUNT 2 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With the GMA Regional Transportation Plan

COUNT 3 - Claim Against the Port for Growth Management Act Noncompliance

COUNT 4 - Statutory and Constitutional Writs of Review of PSRC Action

COUNT 5 - Claim against the PSRC for Breach of Contract

COUNT 6 - Claim Against the PSRC for Breach of Agreement to Arbitrate

COUNT 7 - Claim Against the PSRC for Promissory Estoppel

COUNT 8 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With SEPA By Relying on an EIS That Fails to Define the Project Adequately

COUNT 9 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With SEPA By Relying on an EIS That Fails to Identify and Describe Adequately the Potential Impacts of the Third Runway

COUNT 10 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With SEPA By Failing to Identify, Describe and Obtain Commitments to Mitigation of construction Related Impacts

COUNT 11 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With SEPA By Failing to Acknowledge or Analyze the Significant Land Use Impacts of the Proposed Third Runway

COUNT 12 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance with SEPA By Relying on an EIS that Fails to Identify or Analyze Significant Information Regarding the Noise-Related Impacts of the Project

COUNT 13 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance with SEPA By Relying on an EIS that Fails to Identify or Analyze Significant Information Regarding the Air Quality Impacts of the Project

COUNT 14 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance with SEPA By Relying on an EIS that Fails to Identify or Analyze Significant Information Regarding the Impacts of the Project on Vehicular Traffic

COUNT 15 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance with SEPA by Relying on an EIS That Fails to Consider a Reasonable Range of Alternatives or to Analyze Alternatives in Sufficient Detail

COUNT 16 - Claim Against the PSRC for Noncompliance With SEPA By Relying on an Nonproject EIS that Fails to Consider a Reasonable Range of Alternatives or to Analyze Alternatives in Sufficient Detail

COUNT 17- Claim Against the PSRC for SEPA Noncompliance By Failing to Prepare a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement

Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, and Petition for Statutory Writs of Review The City of Des Moines, The city of Burien, The City of Federal Way, The City of Normandy Park, The City of Tukwila, Highline School District No. 401, and the Airport Communities Coalition v. The Puget Sound Regional Council, The Executive Board of the Puget Sound Regional Council, The Port of Seattle, and The Commisioners of the Port of Seattle, King County Superior Court No. 96-2-20357-2, filed Aug. 2, 1996 
8/13/96Airport Communities Coalition (ACC), City of SeaTac and others begin separate State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) appeals of 3rd runway EIS Appeal of Decision on the Legal Adequacy of the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Master Plan Update Development Actions at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport 
9/96Port of Seattle Commissioners accept advice of its legal staff and appoints friend of Port staffer as hearings examiner in matter of SEPA appeal of 3rd runway EIS Report titled 
9/96Congress passes House Bill 3539 requiring cost-benefit analysis for federally funded airport transportation projects, disclosure of financing plans by airports seeking federal assistance and investigation of the effects of proposed airport projects on national air transportation system. H.B. 3539 
9/96Port appointed hearings examiner steps down after demand by ACC and citizens. Report titled 
10/96Burien Impact Study team releases preliminary data; costs to mitigate impacts of 3rd runway estimated at over $3 billion dollars, with additional impacts still left to analyze. Report titled 
1/8/97FAA withholds record of decision on 3rd runway EIS, announces forthcoming issuance of supplmental EIS due to recently revised air capacity forecasts indicating Sea-Tac airport with a 3rd runway unable to accommodate region's air capacity needs. Public Notice published in Federal Register,Highline News and Des Moines NewsJanuary 8, 1997 
2/6/97FAA issues supplemental EIS for public review and comment. Seattle-Tacoma International Airport Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, February 1997  
2/26/97Port of Seattle announces 30% increase in projected cost of 3rd Sea-Tac runway. Total cost of runway alone estimated at $587 million dollars Seattle Port Intelligencer, February 26 1997, p.A1