HOUSE BILL REPORT

                  HB 1915

             As Reported By House Committee On:

                      Local Government

Title:  An act relating to aircraft noise abatement.

Brief Description:  Allowing less restrictive easements concerning aircraft noise.

Sponsors:  Representatives Patterson, H. Myers, Brough and Valle.

Brief History:

  Reported by House Committee on:

Local Government, February 25, 1993, DPS.

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  Signed by 12 members:  Representatives H. Myers, Chair; Bray, Vice Chair; Edmondson, Ranking Minority Member; Reams, Assistant Ranking Minority Member; Dunshee; R. Fisher; Horn; Rayburn; Romero; Springer; Van Luven; and Zellinsky.

Staff:  Steve Lundin (786-7127).

Background:  A port district that operates an airport serving more than 20 scheduled jet aircraft flights per day may establish a program of aircraft noise abatement.  Among other items, the aircraft noise abatement program may include the purchasing of property and soundproofing structures.  A property owner must waive all damages and convey a full and unrestricted easement to the port district for the operation of aircraft and associated aircraft noise when a port district soundproofs a structure under this program.

Summary of Substitute Bill:  A property owner whose structure is soundproofed under a port district airport noise abatement program would only have to waive damages, instead of all damages, and convey an easement, instead of a full and unrestricted easement, to the port district.

A property owner may be provided benefits more than once under each separate noise abatement program, if the property is subjected to increased aircraft noise or differing aircraft noise impacts that would have afforded different levels of mitigation, even if the property owner had waived all damages and conveyed a full and unrestricted easement.

Substitute Bill Compared to Original Bill:  The possibility of a property owner receiving benefits from a single noise abatement program more than once was added.

Fiscal Note:  Not requested.

Effective Date of Substitute Bill:  Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Testimony For:  All sides agree on this bill.  Impacts could change and soundproofing that was provided on one side of the home will no longer be adequate.  This is a fairness issue.

Testimony Against:  None.

Witnesses:  (pro):  Elizabeth Cairns, citizen; Rita Brown, SeaTac resident; Minnie Brasher, Southwest King County Group; Tanya Engeset, Burien resident; Jeanne Moeller, CASE; and Henry Yates and Earl Munday, Port of Seattle.