From:            laura gibbons
To:                Commission-Public-Records
Subject:           [EXTERNAL] written comment for 11/16 Port Commissioners meeting
Date:              Saturday, November 13, 2021 1:41:36 PM

WARNING: External email. Links or attachments may be unsafe.
Commissioners,
I am pleased that you will be adopting Resolution No. 3792: A Resolution to Adopt Charting the Course to
Zero: Port of Seattle's Maritime Climate and Air Action Plan, insofar as it plans for net-zero emissions by
2040. That is excellent.
By now you may have heard me often enough to know that I'd like you also to have plans for
implementing your Scope 3 goals, beyond what can be achieved with a limited supply of alternative fuels.
Sincerely,
Laura Gibbons
Seattle



From:            Noemie Maxwell
To:                Commission-Public-Records
Subject:           [EXTERNAL] Request for inclusion of document to accompany public comments at today"s Port meeting
Date:              Tuesday, November 16, 2021 10:07:56 AM
Attachments:      NoToAirportParkingPetitionDeliveryCoverMemo.pdf

WARNING: External email. Links or attachments may be unsafe.
Hello,
Thank you for sending me the link to join today's meeting of the Port Commission. I look forward to
presenting my comments.
I'm signed up to comment on delivery of a community petition to the Port.
If it is not too late to do so, please include in the public record for this meeting the attached document as
written supplement to my comments. It is the cover letter to the petition.
Many thanks!
Noemie

Delivery to the Port of Seattle
No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park Petition
November 16, 2021

To: Port of Seattle Commission President Fred Felleman; Commissioners
Stephanie  Bowman,  Ryan  Calkins,  Sam  Cho,  and  Peter  Steinbrueck;
Commissioners Elect Toshiko Hasegawa and Hamdi Mohamed; Port of Seattle
Executive Director Stephen Metruck and Senior Director of External Relations
Pearse Edwards
From: Petition organizer Noemie Maxwell Vassilakis, Burien, WA
Form of delivery: A full list of signers is provided by email to Senior Director
Pearse Edwards. Signatures including first and partial last names of public
signers, along with hundreds of their comments addressed to Port officials, is
available at KCTreeEquity.org

I.       Introduction
Between May and August 2021, approximately 2,400 community members
signed the No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park petition, calling on the
Port of Seattle to:
1. Remove from its Sustainable Airport Master Plan the proposal for
parking lot L06, which would have destroyed an estimated 11 acres of
mature forest and mountain bike trails within North SeaTac Park.
2. Re-evaluate the additional proposals in the SAMP that would result in
the removal of large numbers of trees from land near this park for other
airport structures.
Signers include fourteen City Councilmembers and Deputy Mayors from
SeaTac, Burien, Des Moines, Tukwila, and Normandy Park; two King County
Councilmembers; and Port Commission candidates Toshiko Hasegawa and
Hamdi Mohamed.
Although the Port responded to the first call-for-action in the petition by
removing the proposal for Lot L06 and beginning the process of an inventory of
P a g e | 1      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21

the ecological, and recreational attributes of 55 acres within North SeaTac Park
that are most at risk from Port development plans, it has not publicly responded
to the second call to action in the petition.
Documents related to the Port's Sustainable Airport Master Plan (SAMP) and
Real Estate Strategic Plan (RESP) indicate that the Port has identified for
potential destruction in the near to mid-range future more than 100 acres of
forest inside and immediately surrounding North SeaTac Park - all within
approximately one mile of SeaTac Airport. (1)
The forested areas in and around North SeaTac Park at risk from Port
development contain high numbers of mature coniferous trees.
In a 2020 report delivered to the state legislature pursuant to House Bill 1109,
Seattle - King County Public Health specifically recommended  increasing
coniferous tree coverage, in the neighborhoods within 10 miles of SeaTac
Airport to capture particulate matter, thereby reducing people's exposure which
now contributes to shorter life spans, higher rates of death and hospitalization
from a wide range of maladies, and  a greater percentage of infants born
prematurely or with low birthweight within this 10-mile area and, most
intensively, within 1 mile of SeaTac Airport. (2)

II.      Call for The Port of Seattle to Develop a Comprehensive Plan to Halt
Deforestation and Increase Healthy Tree Canopy on Land it Owns in
and around North SeaTac Park and Within 10 Miles of SeaTac
Airport
If the Port has not already developed alternative plans to the intensive urban
deforestation of our community reflected in the SAMP and RESP, it should
begin to do so now. Current Port Commissioners and those who have just been
elected should work together to ensure that this is done.
Specifically, Port officials are urged to convene a task force to inventory all
forested land in the communities within ten miles of SeaTac Airport that are at
risk of destruction from Port development plans and to survey and act to secure
all potential sources of funds and technical assistance from federal and state
jurisdictions that would enable this deforestation to be halted and for restoration
and reforestation to take its place.

P a g e | 2      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21

Large amounts of such resources are now newly being made available from
multiple federal and state sources specifically for the purposes of mitigating
climate impacts and restoring and expanding urban forests and tree canopy
cover in communities, like those immediately surrounding North SeaTac Park,
where residents are burdened by high levels of disproportionate environmental
health impacts, including historical cumulative impacts.
Such resources may include funds from the recent federal infrastructure law,
Evergreen Communities Act, Washington's HEAL Act, and the Washington
Department of Ecology Climate Commitment Act.
As part of this work, the Port should coordinate with the City of SeaTac to enable
the zoning of North SeaTac Park to be changed from Aviation Commercial to
Park, and to coordinate with all appropriate partners in order to legally protect
the park's 200+ acres as a "park in perpetuity", and to restore the health of its
forests and waterways.
Port officials have a moral obligation to act with all due haste to take advantage
of such resources to save human lives on land owned by the Port within ten
miles of SeaTac Airport. The Port must halt its intensive deforestation plans in
our vulnerable communities and honor the commitment it made as a partner in
the King County  Cities Climate Collaboration to "protect and restore the health
of urban and community trees and forests".
III.     Partial Description of the Public Health, Ethical, and Legal Basis of
the Port's Responsibility to Protect, Restore, and Expand the
Forests on Land it Owns in Communities Near SeaTac Airport
Trees protect human health against particulates and other pollutants deposited
on the communities around North SeaTac Park by the Port's aviation
operations. Coniferous trees, specifically, are protective against the ultrafine
particle pollution that Port operations generate in our neighborhoods. (2)
The forested areas in and around North SeaTac Park at risk from Port
development contain high numbers of mature coniferous trees.
In a 2020 report delivered to the state legislature pursuant to House Bill 1109,
Seattle - King County Public Health recommended increasing specifically 
coniferous tree coverage, in the neighborhoods near the SeaTac Airport to
capture particulate matter, thereby reducing people's exposure." (2)

P a g e | 3      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21

That report details specific health impacts found for those living within 10 miles
of SeaTac airport, and especially those within a mile, including shorter life
spans, higher rates of death and hospitalization from a wide range of maladies,
and a greater percentage of infants born prematurely or with low birthweight.
All  the  neighborhoods  surrounding  North  SeaTac  Park  appear  on  the
Washington Department of Health Environmental Health Disparities as highly
impacted by environmental health disparities due to high environmental
exposures, sensitive populations, and socioeconomic factors. (3)
The Port has, over decades, destroyed large numbers of coniferous and other
trees  in  these  neighborhoods,  replacing  them  with  parking  lots,  cargo
warehouses, and the like, thus intensifying the harmful impacts on nearby
residents of the pollutants, heat, and noise from its airport operations. In large
part due to Port actions, SeaTac's tree canopy, estimated in 2019, at 21% (4) -
is considerably lower than the national average of approximately 30%, (5)
leaving this community more vulnerable than it should be to airport impacts.
In addition, the Port has allowed invasive weeds to dominate the forested land
that it owns in and around North SeaTac Park. These weeds are killing the trees
that are so important for protecting this community's health.
Presidential Executive Order 12898 promotes the principles of environmental
justice in all Departmental programs, policies, and activities.
US Department of Transportation Order 5610.2 requires that, pursuant to
Executive Order 12,898, the FAA must analyze impacts  including cumulative
effects - on low income and minority populations, and "determine if any lowincome
or minority populations experience a disproportionately high level of
cumulative effects."
All these neighborhoods around the park meet the description of populations
requiring protection under Order 5610.2.
In addition to these compelling human health and environmental justice reasons
to refrain from intensive deforestation in our community, other circumstances
applicable to this community and its natural areas make the Port's deforestation
plans inappropriate and injurious:
Tub Lake, understood to be the last true bog in the Seattle area (6), is
situated very close to the areas that the Port proposes to remove large
P a g e | 4      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21

numbers of trees from. In the last 15 years, the Port has removed large
amounts of forested land all around this lake, leaving it vulnerable to
incursions from invasive weeds and other impacts that could harm or
even destroy it.
The forested land that the Port proposes to destroy is part of an
ecosystem filled with an intricate system of waterways - some with
salmon - that are within and near the park. These include the headwaters
and numerous tributaries of Miller Creek, multiple wetlands, and Tub
Lake. These trees are part of a much larger forest system spanning
multiple jurisdictions, the entirety of which is weakened each time any
part of it is removed.
Mature trees in a forest setting provide health protection and climate
stabilizing benefits that newly planted trees in dispersed locations don't
approach.
The FAA acknowledged in a 2016 Compliance Review of SeaTac
International Airport, that the park "is the culmination of a long term and
very open planning process to compensate the area's residents for
cumulative airport impacts" and is "the best compatible use of a severely
airport-impacted area." (7)
IV.   Conclusion
Port of Seattle officials are commended for effective and timely action on the
first call-for-action in the No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park petition.
You are urged to address the second call to action in this petition.
If the Port has not already developed alternative plans to the intensive urban
deforestation of our community reflected in its Sustainable Airport Master Plan
and Real Estate Strategic Plan, an estimated greater than 100 acres of
deforestation in highly impacted communities within a mile of SeaTac Airport, it
should begin to do so now. It should take advantage of the considerable
resources being made available through federal, state, and other sources that
are specifically designed to protect communities, such as ours, that are highly
impacted by environmental health disparities and in which adequate tree cover
will save lives.
Port officials, including current Port Commissioners and those who have just
been elected should work together to ensure that this is done.

P a g e | 5      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21

V.    Sources
(1) Port of Seattle Sustainable Airport Master Plan Scoping Information, July
2018, p. 14 and Port of Seattle Real Estate Strategic Plan, 7/26/2016 p. 17-23. 







(2) Community Health and Airport Operations Related Air and Noise Pollution:
Report to the Legislature in Response to Washington State House Bill 1109,
December 1, 2020
(3) Washington Environmental Health Disparities Map, www.doh.wa.gov/ibl
select Environmental Health Disparities
(4) Green SeaTac Partnership Urban Forest Enhancement Guide, Forterra, City of
SeaTac, Port of Seattle, 2019, p. 14. Accessed on 5/20/21 at
https://forterra.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/GC_Seatacguide
_032621_WEB.pdf 
(5) Declining urban and community tree cover in the United States David J.
Nowak, Eric J. Greenfield, Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. V. 32, May 2018,
Pages 32-55 https://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/pubs/jrnl/2018/nrs_2018_nowak_005.pdf 
(6) PNW Nature Scavenger Hunt Post, David B. Williams, March 16, 2015 Street-
Smart Naturalist https://geologywriter.com/blog/pnw-nature-scavenger-hunt-post/
(7) FAA Compliance Reviews of Airport Noise Land Use & Financial Operations:
SeaTac Intl Airport, 2016

P a g e | 6      Delivery of community petition: No to Airport Parking in North SeaTac Park, 11/16/21



From:            Earnest Thompson
To:                Commission-Public-Records
Subject:           [EXTERNAL] Landscape plan
Date:              Thursday, November 11, 2021 7:33:05 PM

WARNING: External email. Links or attachments may be unsafe.

What percent of the master landscaping plan is certified as native plants ?
Regards ,
Earnest Thompson
Sent from my iPad