Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAC Agenda - December 14, 2015CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH AVIATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Civic Center Community Room, 100 Civic Center Drive, Newport Beach, CA 92660 Monday, December 14, 2015 - 4:00 PM Aviation Committee Members: The Aviation Committee meeting is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that the Aviation Committee agenda be posted at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that the public be allowed to comment on agenda items before the Committee and items not on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Aviation Committee. The Chair may limit public comments to a reasonable amount of time, generally three (3) minutes per person. The City of Newport Beach’s goal is to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in all respects. If, as an attendee or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, we will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. Please contact Shirley Oborny, Executive Assistant to the City Manager, at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible at (949) 644-3001 or soborny@newportbeachca.gov. NOTICE REGARDING PRESENTATIONS REQUIRING USE OF CITY EQUIPMENT Any presentation requiring the use of the City of Newport Beach’s equipment must be submitted to the City Manager’s Office 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting. CALL MEETING TO ORDER (Council Member Petros)1. SELF INTRODUCTIONS2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Approval of minutes from the September 28, 2015, meeting (all). 3. September 28, 2015, Minutes UPDATES/Current Business (a) Update on MagVar (JWA) (b) Approaching key JWA issues, forming recommendations for City Policy (Kiff, Edwards) 1. NextGen departure procedures - for HAYLO, FINNZ - GE/Naverus “two turns” in the Upper Bay. 2. Studying a “higher, faster” departure procedure a. Phase I - Evaluating current altitudes b. Phase II - Determining if higher, faster carries with it significant noise reductions and is feasible. c. Air quality, US EPA Rulemaking (c) Any other updates from John Wayne Airport staff and/or questions on Tom Edwards’ report 4. November 2015 Update December 14, 2015 Page 2 Aviation Committee Meeting PUBLIC COMMENTS ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Public comments are invited on non-agenda items generally considered to be within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Committee. Speakers must limit comments to three (3) minutes. Before speaking, we invite, but do not require, you to state your name for the record. The Committee chair has the discretion to extend or shorten the speakers' time limit on non-agenda items, provided the time limit adjustment is applied equally to all speakers. 5. ITEMS FOR THE NEXT/OTHER UPCOMING MEETING AGENDA6. SET THE NEXT MEETING Tentative: Monday, March 14, 2016, at 4 p.m. 7. ADJOURNMENT This Committee is subject to the Ralph M. Brown Act. Among other things, the Brown Act requires that the Committee's agenda be posted at least seventy-two (72) hours in advance of each regular meeting and that the public be allowed to comment on agenda items before the Committee and items not on the agenda but are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Committee. The Committee chair may limit public comments to a reasonable amount of time, generally three (3) minutes per person. It is the intention of the City of Newport Beach to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") in all respects. If, as an attendee or a participant at this meeting, you will need special assistance beyond what is normally provided, the City of Newport Beach will attempt to accommodate you in every reasonable manner. If requested, this agenda will be made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability, as required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 12132), and the federal rules and regulations adopted in implementation thereof. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting to inform us of your particular needs and to determine if accommodation is feasible at (949) 644-3005 or cityclerk@newportbeachca.gov. 8. MINUTES of the COUNCIL/CITIZENS AVIATION COMMITTEE (draft until approved by the Committee) MEETING DATE & LOCATION: Monday, September 28, 2015, at the Newport Beach Civic Center (100 Civic Center Drive, NB), Community Room. ATTENDANCE:  Committee membership: Tony Petros Council Representative present Kevin Muldoon Council Representative not present Duffy Duffield Council Representative present Kay Mortenson District #1 present Don Hecht District #1 (alt) not present Eleanor Todd District #2 present Gerald Scarboro District #2 (alt) present Tom Anderson District #3 not present Bonnie O’Neil District #3 (alt) not present Tom Meng District #4 not present Jock Marlo District #4 (alt) not present Vicki Frank District #5 present Walt Richardson District #5 (alt) not present Shirley Conger District #6 not present Bud Rasner District #6 (alt) present Jim Dunlap District #7 present Karen Rhyne District #7 (alt) present Dave Kiff City Manager present Aaron Harp City Attorney present Melinda Seely SPON/Air Fair Rep. Rep present Tom Naughton, Tony Khoury AWG Representative Reps present Roger Ham Newport Coast Rep present Vacant General Aviation Rep N/A  JWA Representatives present: Eric Freed  City representatives present: Mayor Pro Tem Dixon, Tom Edwards, Shirley Oborny  Others present: o Eric Auckerman o Ann Beale o Amy Balts o Edwina Broderick o Lynn Cathcart o Chelsea Crager o Thomas Damiani o David Devick o Win Fuller City of Newport Beach o Gret Goeser o Tabitha Hasin o Jim Jordan o Patti Jansen o Terry Janssen o Marion Jordan o Brynn Kelly o Louise Kistner o Lois Levine o Stanley Levine o Barbara Lichman o Aly Marei o Patsy Metcalf o Jim Mosher o Jan Neu o Lee Pearl o Darcy and Ned Post o Dan Rudd o Marion Smith o Nanci Stacey o Sherman Stacy o Lisa Stanson o Dr. Tom Staple o Gordon Wanlass o Sorrell Wayne o Ronnie Weinstein o Chris Wilkinson AGENDA ITEMS: 1. Call Meeting to Order. The meeting was called to order by Council Member Petros at 4 p.m. 2. Self-Introductions. Council Member Petros introduced the newest committee member, Vicki Frank. Ms. Frank said she was born and raised in Newport Beach and has been a pilot with a major airline for the last 20 years. 3. Approval of the Minutes. The minutes from the August 6, 2015, Aviation Committee meeting were approved. 4. Current Business (a) Noise Monitoring Equipment/Settlement Agreement Amendment Mr. Kiff said the County Board of Supervisors, following the action of the City, SPON and the Airport Working Group (AWG), signed the amendment to the Settlement Agreement which implements the new monitoring program that the City Council and Aviation Committee learned about in August. Mr. Mosher said he felt there was a lack of foresight by the City and the other groups agreeing to these changes. He expressed his concern that they relied on what they were told rather than looking at the documentation. (b) So Cal Metroplex effort by the FAA Mr. Kiff provided a PowerPoint Presentation (attached). Mr. Kiff said there are two concerns that the City expressed to the FAA in the letter (click here to view letter): 1) It appears that towing was removed and it needs to be put back. All the flights should be lining up so they fly over the big mound behind the Newport Dunes. They shouldn’t be flying over Westcliff, Dover Shores, or Eastbluff. 2) STREL should be a flyover instead of a flyby. More information is needed including more noise analysis and more detail in the maps shown in the PowerPoint Presentation. He said the City asked for a test period of 180 days for whatever is approved. Mr. Kiff said what we’re seeing today is a shift in flights to the west. That has to do with an error that the FAA made when it worked with JWA to change the runway designation of the big runway. It has to do with the gradual shift that occurs with the magnetic pole. As such, every so often the airports will change their airport heading even though the runway didn’t move. We think when this occurred, there was a mistake made in the flight patterns that are produced monthly. They should have replicated the previous month’s flight patterns. Mr. Freed, JWA, has been working with the FAA to get that changed back. It was supposed to be changed back on September 15 but so far it doesn’t appear that it was. We’re hoping by October 15 it will get changed back. Mr. Kiff said the runway issue is completely different from the Metroplex effort. If the City’s comments are successful and the flights go over towing, residents in the upper part of the bay will see the narrowing occur over towing, not over the other side of the bay. Council Member Petros asked what discretion the City has related to the departures at JWA. Mr. Kiff said neither the County nor the FAA controls the air space. The County only controls on the ground operations. This is a nationwide effort causing consternation in many communities that do not want the narrowing. They prefer the fanning; however, the FAA is marching forward. Council Member Petros said the FAA only consulted the airlines, their stakeholders. The City is taking its concerns and the concerns of the residents to the FAA. The City is also providing contact information for the residents to also voice their concerns to the FAA. Ms. Jansen, Balboa Island resident, Ruby Ave., feels the FAA lacked disclosure to the residents and they should be more responsible to surroundings areas being negatively affected by the proposed route changes. She prefers the fanning out of the flight paths. Mr. Stacey, Balboa Island resident, Ruby Ave., reported that Collins Ave., Ruby Ave. and Diamond Ave. are specifically affected by the departures. The echo from the planes is enormous and constant from 7 to 7:45 a.m. In addition, the altitudes of the planes are lower. The adverse effects are significant and need to be addressed. Mr. Weinstein, a Dover Shores resident, feels it’s the City’s job to protect the community. He’s been told the FAA cannot arbitrarily narrow the path and affect the inhabitants of an area. He’s been talking to airport directors in Phoenix and LAX and was told the fuel mixture is taking place at 10,000 feet and subsequently affects the environment. He feels the City should take the lead, not the community. Ms. Kelley, a school teacher, complained about the planes flying over the schools yards and exposing the children. She feels it’s not going to get better and we need to focus on the future. Mr. Wanglass, a Dover Shores resident, thinks a simulation of the different flights should be done to allow the residents hear what they sound like. He feels the air pollution is killing us and the City should sue the FAA. Ms. Post, a Dover Shores resident and non-smoker, had a portion of her lung removed last year. She was told it was cause by an inhalant. Mr. Selby, Balboa Island, Ruby Ave., feels the City should advocate for the residents. He supports fanning. Mr. Marei said he talked to a pilot recently and was told that starting about six months ago, the planes are no longer taking off with full thrust. They are back to the old, lower altitude takeoff procedures. Mr. Kiff said the thrust-up, level-off procedure is not required. What is required is that the planes meet a certain decibel over each of the seven decibel monitors. Over time, planes have become more quiet so they don’t need to thrust up as they did in the past. Another Santiago Drive resident said the planes have been going straight over his house. He feels that the FAA is government and so is the City so they should be able to do something. As a physician, he’s aware of many studies that show the fine particulates cause lung cancer. Mr. Pearl, Balboa Island resident, said he thinks the City should be doing what is in the best interest of the majority of the residents. He feels the City’s position hasn’t been stated to the FAA. He said those directly under the flight pattern are being bombarded with particulates. Mr. Shar, a Dover Shores resident, feels there should be a collaborate effort from the City and all the HOAs. They are sending a letter to the FAA and the City will receive a copy. The letter focused on noise and jet fuel pollution and supported a fanning out flight pattern. Council Member Petros said the City is corroborating with the County. He has also brought back to the City Council all the comments made at the Aviation Committee meetings. In addition, he called the Mayor in Phoenix and will follow through to learn from Phoenix. He encouraged the community to continue to contact the FAA to voice their concerns. Council Member Duffy, who also lives under the flight path, also encouraged the community to make their voices heard. He will ask the City Council to make funds available to allow the City to go visit other cities that have been faced with the same issues and learn from them. (c) Other updates from John Wayne Airport staff 1. Pending correction of departure path documents following new runway designations Mr. Freed said JWA is monitoring the flight departures to see if any changes have occurred since September 17. They will also provide the flight tracks to the City to compare that to what the City is seeing. Discussion ensued. 5. Public Comments on Non-Agenda items Mr. Mosher suggested the City encourage the County to add single event noise exposure levels as they’re registered by the individual noise monitors. He feels it would be helpful for the public to see the information in real time, instead of an average of three months. 6. Items for the next/other upcoming meeting agenda  Continued follow-up on the Metroplex project 7. Set the next meeting The next meeting was tentatively set for November 24, 2015. 8. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 5.22 p.m. # # # November 2015 Update- All things Aviation: If you’d like additional information, please contact Newport Beach City Manager Dave Kiff at dkiff@newportbeachca.gov. JWA –October Airline passenger traffic at John Wayne Airport increased in October 2015 as compared with October 2014. In October 2015, the Airport served 913,321 passengers, an increase of +12.4% when compared with the October 2014 passenger traffic count of 812,298. Moreover with 8.4 MAP through the first ten months of the year, the airport is +7.7% ahead of the same period last year. ADDs for October were 119.76 vs. 112.37 for 2014. Altitude A number of questions have been raised concerning the altitude of commercial carriers departing JWA as part of the City’s ongoing analysis, with the cooperation of JWA, of departure paths being too far to the west upon departure from the airport. Accordingly, it is appropriate to provide not only a breakdown of altitudes but also the noise monitors and other factors which affect noise. What follows is a response to the repeated questions from the community: 2 The Following are the readings of Altitude For one day of departures at NMS 1-6 Altitude Readings NMS1-2 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 Number of Flights 10/7/15Altitude in Feet Altitude (ft) NMS 4-5 Altitude Readings 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 Number of Flights 10/7/15Altitude in FeetAltitude (ft) Altitude Readings NMS 6 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 1 4 7 10 13 16 19 22 25 28 31 34 37 40 43 46 49 52 55 58 61 64 67 70 73 76 79 82 85 88 91 94 Number of Flights 10/7/15Altitude in Feet Altitude (ft) 3 The average altitudes were: 950.22 feet at NMS1-2; 1555.01 feet at NMS 4-5 and 1836.17 feet at NMS 6. On the next page you will also find the respective distances of the monitors from the airport as well as their locations. Finally here is a week of data on Balboa Island: 4 NOISE Monitor Locations Because of repeated questions below is the layout of the locations of the Noise Monitors as well as their specific address: Here are the locations of the various noise monitors shown above. NMS 1-7 measure noise upon departure. NMS 8-10 are for arrivals. Noise Monitoring Station Locations: NMS-1S Golf Course, 3100 Irvine Avenue, Newport Beach NMS-2S 20152 Birch Street, Newport Beach NMS-3S 2139 Anniversary Lane, Newport Beach NMS-4S 2338 Tustin Avenue, Newport Beach NMS-5S 324 ½ Vista Madera, Newport Beach NMS-6S 1912 Santiago, Newport Beach NMS-7S 1311 Back Bay Drive, Newport Beach NMS-8N 17372 Eastman Street, Irvine NMS-9N 1300 S Grand Avenue, Santa Ana NMS-10N 17952 Beneta Way, Tustin. 5 It is the Noise Monitor Stations which measure the single event noise level requirements for the specific class of aircraft and which follow: Maximum Single Event Noise Equivalent Level (SENEL) Values – Commercial Airline Operations: Noise Monitoring Station SENEL - Class A SENEL - Class E Distance** NMS 1S 102.5 dB 94.1 dB .4 NM NMS 2S 101.8 dB 93.5 dB .4 NM NMS 3S 101.1 dB 90.3 dB .7 NM NMS 4S 94.8 dB 86.6 dB 1.3 NM NMS 5S 95.3 dB 87.2 dB 1.3 NM NMS 6S 96.8 dB 87.2 dB 1.8 NM NMS 7S 93.7 dB 86.6 dB 2.9 NM *Generally speaking so long as the Carrier meets the above described noise levels at the particular Noise Monitoring Station they can depart from JWA. **Approximate DME distance measured from ISNA localizer, located south of Runway 20R. Human Response to Noise Questions have also been raised recently about the different noise levels from aircraft departing the airport. The human response to single-event jet aircraft noise is best represented in terms of Effective Perceived Noise Level, expressed in units of EPNdB. This unit of perceived noise takes into account the actual sound energy received by a listener, the ear's response to that sound energy, the added annoyance of any pure tones or "screeches" in the noise, and the duration of the noise. In any discussion of aircraft noise abatement, a key consideration is the difference in noise level which a listener is able to perceive and find meaningful, in terms of both the single event and the cumulative exposure. Few humans can detect differences between single events of aircraft noise of less than about 5 EPNdB. However, an increase of 10 EPNDS is usually perceived as a doubling in loudness. The fact that people's perception of noise varies logarithmically with sound intensity results in some interesting relations. Note that as intensity is reduced 6 by 50% the SPL changes by 10 log I1/I2 = -3db. This is why noise reduction is a challenge. To make something seem about half as noisy requires a reduction in the Sound Intensity Level (SPL) by about 10 db. This is a reduction in intensity of about 90%. You will occasionally see representations that a certain event creates 50% less noise. Technically the party is correct, however, the human can not detect that change, i.e. 3db unless the actual reduction is closer to 10db. Factors which affect Noise There are a number of factors which affect noise from departing aircraft, much of which is as a result of factors well beyond the control of the person on the ground. Such factors are: Departure Climb1 Profiles: Each airline has devised a departure procedure consistent with the aircraft departing the airport. As long as an airline can meet the Single Event Noise Limits at the Noise Monitors at departure, they can depart as such; Aircraft Performance/Climb Rates- The climb rate and flight profile of departing aircraft will vary considerably based on aircraft type; Meteorological Conditions-The propagation of aircraft noise is dependent on meteorological conditions including temperature, humidity, and wind. Will Technology Improve the Situation? And for those of you who may be interested in potential changes in the future, see the video at2 : https://www.youtube.com/user/purepowerengine 1 It would appear that the Flight Management System on board of each aircraft is also becoming most important. 2 Forwarded by Mr. Bob Pastore. 7 JWA Carrier Shares for August 2014 - July 2015 Carrier *Passengers Share Southwest 3,970 43.16% American 1,316 14.31% United 1,295 14.08% Alaska 881 9.58% Delta 752 8.17% Other 984 10.70% *Based on enplaned passengers (000) both arriving and departing. Meanwhile as most recently reported by the Department of Transportation through July 2015, load factors at JWA are reported to be at near record highs of 87.76%, with the predominant carrier at the airport- Southwest reporting a load factor of 86.74% and American at 86.31%. Alaska Airlines Offers New Service to Sonoma County and Reno/Tahoe Alaska Airlines will add new service from Orange County, California to Santa Rosa/Sonoma County, California and Reno/Tahoe, Nevada starting March 16, 2016. "These new routes will bring low fares and an elevated flight experience to our valued Los Angeles area customers," said John Kirby, Alaska Airlines' vice president of capacity planning. "With the addition of Santa Rosa and Reno, Alaska will offer 13 peak daily departures to six destinations, including Los Cabos and Puerto Vallarta, from Orange County's John Wayne Airport." 8 Airports in the Region LAX- October 2015 LAX again saw an increase in October of +8.67% in overall passengers versus the same period last year. Year to date, through October the airport passenger levels are up +5.35% for the year, with total passenger volume of 62.5 MAP. ONT- October 2015 Passenger traffic at Ontario International Airport continues to improve. Traffic rose +5.64% in October over the same period last year. Both domestic and international flights show improved numbers. For the year the airport passenger levels are +2.26% for the first ten months of the year with a total MAP of 3.5+. Long Beach Long Beach continues its struggles. October again showed a decline in total passengers served. In October the decline was -7.3%. _For the year, Long Beach has served 2.13 MAP an overall decrease of -12.0% in total passenger traffic versus the same ten month period in 2014. Bob Hope Passenger numbers at Bob Hope Airport Show Slight Improvement For the second month in a row, the number of passengers traveling through Bob Hope Airport was flat in September compared to the same month a year ago. There were 318,769 passengers in September, compared to 317,060 in September 2014, missing airport projections for the month by more than 5,500 passengers. However, for the first nine months of the year, there were more than 2.92 million passengers, compared to roughly 2.87 million passengers during the first nine months of last year, about a 2% 9 increase. WSJ Weighs In On MetroPlex/NextGen A recent article in the Wall Street Journal reported on the benefits and burdens of the FAA’s NextGen and specifically the MetroPlex projects, similar to the current SoCal MetroPlex which seeks to redesign airspace in Southern California. The article reports what many of you already understand, and has been repeatedly reported by the City that: “Part of the problem is the precision of satellite-based navigation. Planes used to tune in radio frequencies and flew toward beacons or simply were assigned directional headings by controllers. Flight paths ran across a range of airspace. Many houses got some noise each day; now fewer houses get more noise. Today planes can follow prescribed routes with exacting precision. They are getting out of urban areas faster, which reduces overall noise.”(emphasis added) Meanwhile the airlines have a different view as also noted in the article: ‘“The objectives are the right ones: significant track-mile cost savings, lower fuel burn and greenhouse gases,” says Southwest Airlines chief executive Gary Kelly. “There’s no easy answer. We have to continue to work with local communities and the FAA.”’