Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11 J.W. NOISE REPORT 01-05-98DATE: NO. 11 1-5-98 Intor-Com JANUAi~Y 5 , 1998 TO: FROM: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT NOISE ABATEMENT QUARTERLY REPORTS SUMMAR Y: '.This report transmits two John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for the first and second quarters of 1997. The average noise level measured at . monitoring station M- 7, located at Columbus Tustin Middle School remained the same during thefir~t quarter and the second quarter. Average noise levels during both quarters remained beloW the City, County and State criteria of 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) for residential uses. RECOMMENDATION Receive and file report. FISCAL IMPACT The City retains the acoustics consulting firm of J.J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc. to review JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports. The costs for such reviews are annually included in the Community Development Department budget. DISCUSSION Following the conclusion of each calendar quarter, John Wayne Airport prepares a Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report and transmits a copy of the report to the City of Tustin. Twice a year, the consultant prepares a report which summarizes two quarterly reports. Attachment 1 contains the quarterly .reports for the first and second quarters of 1997. Attachment 2 contains the summary report prepared by the noise consultant. A brief overview of the information contained within these attachments follows. City ~ouncil Report JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports January 5, 1998 Page 2 Measured Noise Levels During the first quarter of 1997, the average CNEL at Remote Monitoring Station (R/MS) #7, located at Columbus Tustin Middle School, was 56.8 dB. This is 0.1 dB less than the four previous quarters. Also, .for comparison, the CNEL was 0.3 higher (57.1) during the third quarter of 1996. During the second quarter of 1997, the average CNEL was 55.9. This is 0.1 less than the four previous quarters. For comparison, the CNEL was 0.7 higher (56.6) during the fourth quarter of 1995. Ail measured noise levels are below the City, County and State criteria of 65 dB CNEL for residential areas. Noise Complaints During the first quarter of 1997, there were 39 Tustin/Orange complaints compared with 41.for the same period during 1996. During the second quarter of 1997, there were 55 Tustin/Orange complaints compared with 73 for the same period during 1996. The decrease in Complaints may be related to the increase in the use of quieter aircraft. Type and Mix of Aircraft Related to Noise Levels During the first quarter of 1997, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft increased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft decreased compared with the same period in 1996. The average CNEL for the first quarter of 1997 was slightly lower than the same period during 1996. During the second quarter the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft decreased and the percentage of noisier Class A aircraft slightly increased compared with the same period in 1996. The average CNEL for the second quarter was slightly lower than the second quarter of 1996. City Council Report JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports January 5, 1998 Page 3 The variations in aircraft mix do not correlate with changes in the average quarterly CNEL. Therefore, an increase in the use of quieter Class E aircraft does not necessarily.result in a decrease in the average quarterly CNEL. Since noise issues are of considerable importance to the City of Tustin, the Community DeVelopment Department will continue to monitor operations at John Wayne Airport unless otherwise directed by the City Council. Minoo Ashabi Assistant Planner Community Development Director Attachments . John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Quarterly Reports for January 1, 1997 - March 31, 1997 and April 1, 1997 - June 30, 1997. . Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports, 1st and 2nd' Quarters 1997 (Van Houten and Associates, inc.) NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT For the period: January 1, 1997 through March 31, 1997 Prepared in accordance with: AIRPORT NOISE STANDARD STATE OF CALIFO~ California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards Submitted by: Airport Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County i RMS 3 JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 1996 ANNUAL 60, 65, 70 AND 75 CNEL NOISE CONTOURS JOltNWA¥1'~ FI GURE I BRISTOL STR'E=-T SOUTH RMS 1 , I ,. I t~i2::l ::ii,':".'!i2t I J \\\-,~ , i111 -- LEGEND Single Family Residential - Multi-Family Residential . (Number indi_~_ ~te~_ dwelling uni~) Incompatible I. amd Use Am: 21.6 acres or 0.035 square miles Number of Dwellings: 113 Number of People: 283 (Based on 2.5 people per D. U.) JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 65 dB CNEL IMPACT AREA APRIL 1996 - MARCH 1997 J OI-l~ WAYNE AIRPORT LNTRODUCTION This is the 97th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards). Effective January 1, 1986, the criteria for defining "Noise Impact Area" was changed from 70 dB to 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Under this criteria, John Wayne A/rport currently has a "Noise Impact Area." NOmE IMPACT SUMMARY Caltrans' Aeronautics Program has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard to control resident/al area noise levels produced by aircraft operations using the State's airports. Under those guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed to an average Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of more than 65 dB define the 'Noise Impact Area." John Wayne Airport uses ten permanent remote monitoring stations (RMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Ana, Tustin and Irvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS RMS-I: Golf Course, 3100 Irvine Ave., Newport Beach RMS-8- RMS-2:20152 S.W. Birch St., Santa Aha RMS-9: RMS-3:2139 AnnivemaryLane~ Newport Beach RMS-21' RMS-6: 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport Beach RMS-22: RMS-7: 17952 Beneta Way, Tustin RMS-24: · 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Ama 17372 Eastman Street, Irvine 223 Naa, Newport Beach 2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach 1918 Santiago, Newport Beach Figure 1 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (April 1, 1996 - March 31, 1997). The Figure 1 information was developed by Mestre-Greve Associates, Inc., in consultation with John Wayne Airport. CNEL values measured for the period and current digitized land use information were utilized to calculate the land area acreages, number of residences and estimated number of people within the 'Noise Impact Area". RG.jw Kllll0 6/16/97 AIRCKAFT TRAFFIC S~Y The Airport traffic summary for this quarter is shown ia Table 1 and Figure 2 below. count histories and average daily depamne eotmts are illu.mat~ ia Tables 9 & 10. TABLE 1 LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS January- March 1997 Air Carder operational Jet Propeller Business (1) Total (2) Average Daily Month/Ouarter ~ &iZ.C, all:i~ ' ~ ~ Jet Operations · January 6,905 1,600 830 32,273 249 Febmaxy 6,323 1,482 894 35,949 257 March 7.021 1_611 996 40_626' 258 First Quarter 20,249 4,693 2,720 108,848 255 PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS: 80,643 21,633 10,737 451,605 250 04/01/96 - 3/31/97 (1) ~ Jet figure~ includ~ a 5% factor fo~ opean~ons not i&atifi~I by the JWA noise monitor statioa~ (2) Coums in this colmnn ar~ based upon ~ provided by th~ local FAA rep~ve~ FIGURE 2 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SUMMARY (LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS) Jet Carrier Military ;8 Prop Carrier 4693 Business Jet i 2720 GA Propeller 20249 0 20000 40000 60000 81168 80000 100000 NUMBER OF OPERATIONS RG:jw COM~[UNrTY NOISE EOUIVALENT LEVELS __ The monthly, quarterly and twelve month Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) average values for each monitor station are shown in Table 2, while daily CNEL values are shown in Tables 3 through 5. Insufficient data is indicated by "0.0" entries in each table. Average Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and Business Jet aircrar] are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For the twelve month period ending March 31, 1997, 113 dwelling units in Santa.&ua Heights were in the ~Noise Impacted Area" (within the 65 dB CNEL contour); this represents no change in the number of dwelling units in the '2qoise Impacted Area" fi.om the previous twelve month period ending December 31, 1996. The State has approved several remedies of aircratt noise levels for noise sensitive property in the "Noise Impact Area": homes can be acoustically insulated, purchased by the County, or rezoned for "other non-noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Arm Heights Land Use Compatibility Program, approximately 77 general agriculture (A-l) properties with residential land uses on Orchard, Aca~a and Birch Streets were re. zoned for Business ?ark Use in October, 1986. Each property'was individually sold and subsequently converted to compatible land use. Between 1986 and 1993, 124 residences have been · purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or Housing Relocation Program. In September 1993, the FAA approved a grant to fund a voluntary acoustical insulation program dried '~Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" ("SAH AI?"). An additional 16 residences have been made compatible through the County' s SAH AlP. A total of 172 residences in Santa Aha Heights have been purchased or otherwise made compatible. through the Counts Purchase Assurance Program, Housing Relocation Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or SAH AIP. TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CALLS (January- March 1997) The Airporfs Access and Noise Office receives and investigates noise calls and complaints fi.om.local citizens and all other sources. During the first quarter of 1997, the Office received a total of 224 complaints from local citizens, a 12.5% decrease fi.om the 256 complaints received during the previous quarter and a decrease of 3.16% from the 231 complaints received during the same quarter of 1996. Figure 3 shows the distribution of the quarterly telephone calls and complaints fi.om local communities. FIGURE 3 QUARTERLY TELEPHONE CALL AND coMpLAINT SUMMARY Tustin' ~ 3g *Tustin/Orange SantaAna ~m 6 **Balboa/Corona Del Mar S.A. Heights ~ 10 Costa Mesa _~ 6. Westcliff Eastbluff ~' 18 - - · Balboa" Other Areas ~ 17 · 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS R.G:jw KlllIO TABLE 2 LONG TERM M~4tSURED LEVELS Aircraft CNEL from 1/96 through 12/96 ~Jv~s ~J'~mER (~ C~.,) AP~L 1996 6~.6 6~.0 ~.4 ~ DAYS 30 30 30 ~Y 1~ 65.5 65.1 ~ DAY8 31 31 31 ~ 1~ 65.~ ~5.4 653 ~ DAY8 30 30 30 ~ DAYS ~1 ~1 ~Y 1~ ~.0 65.6 ~ DAYS 31 30 30 AUG. 1~ ~.1 65~ ~.1 ~ DAYS 31 31 31 SE~. 1~ ~.0 65~ 63.9 g DAYS 30 30 30 ~. 1~ ~.5 65~ ~.g ~DAYS 31 31 31 NOV. 1~ 65.7 ~.9 ~.6 ~ DAYS 30 30 30 D~. 1~ ~3 65.7 ~.6 ~ DAYS 31 31 5~. ~7 ~.1 65.6 ~ DAYS 31 30 30 ~- 1~ 65~ 65.1 ~.5 ~ DAYS ~ 2g 28 ~ 1~7 ~.0 65.4 63.9 g DAYS 31 31 ~ DAYS ~ ~ 5g.2 57.6 5g.g :28 :28 57.7 57.9 59.5 31 31 26 56.9 5g.0 59.6 26 30 30 57.7 57.8 59.3 56.3 57.4 59.1 2g 31 25 57.9 57.1 59.4 26 31 31 57.1 573 59.4 28 3O 30 $7.1 57.3 57.7 57.3 59.5 29 28 29 57.6 55.4 58.9 27 25 25 563 58.0 59.4 29 27 29 57.2 $7.1 $9.3 55.4 58.7 59.3 29 :24 29 54.9 5g.2 58.9. 27 27 27 31 31 31 54.8 58.1 59.0 56.6 29 56.4 3O 56.8 29 56.6 58.6 :27 58.9 29 59.0 30 57.3 57.3 29 56.6 57.1 $1 56.6 1! 56.1 21 57.1 3O 5~.7 56.3 29 56.8 31 56.6 29 .f,6.6 55.4 3O 56.0 31 56.9 29 57.9 26 56.7 28 57.0 31 57.4 56.3 25 56.6 3O 50.7 28 47.9 30 50.1 26 49.7 54.7 27 58.0 26 57.4 76 57.9 99 60.5 25 55.2 :27 $1 55.3 20 55.3 26 56.g 24 70 67.g 11 68.1 30 69.4 15 68.1 30 68.1 '31 6g.2 3O 91 6g.1 31 67.1 30 67.0 31 67.4 6g.l 28 67.3 28 67.7 31 (2-2 1996 THRU Q-I 199/: TOTAL 66.0 65.4 64.4 # DAYS 365 363 362 Q-1 1996 TRRU Q=4 1996 (l~vlou~ 4 Quar~rs): TOTAL 66.0 65 .5 64.4 # DAYS 366 365 364 CHANGE FROM PREVIOUS 4 QUARTERS: 0.0 -0.1 0.0 57.4 57.4 59.3 57.5 56.7 56.1 67.9 253 261 253 317 349 :511 326 57.8 57.5 59.3 57.5 56.8 55.3 67.9 338 351 343 342 354 32~ 327 -0.4 -0.1 0.0 0.0 -0.1 0.8 0.0 RG:jw KIlII0 Paves NU]VmER (~m CNEC) Dau~ 1 2 TABLE 3 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION JANUARY 1997 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 i 66.3 66.1 2 66.2 65.7 3 65.9 65.5 4 65.8 64.3 5 66.9 66.6 6 59.6 55.9 7 63.0 61.6 8 65.9 65.2 9 66.3 66.0 10 67.3 66.7 11 64.3 63.7 12 67.9 .67.8 13 65.7 66.3 14 66.4 65.7 15 66.7 66.2 16 68.2 66.6 17 64.6 63.1 18 64.1 63.6 19 66.7 65.3 20 67.5 67.0 21 66.7 65.8 22 66.6 65.7 23 66.9 66.7 24 68.8 68.2 25 64.5 64.8 26 65.6 65.3 27 66.7 ~ 66.6 28 66.8 66.6 29 61.8 60.2 30 64.5 0.0 * 31 65.8 65.1 Dpts -- 31 30 En.Avg= 66.1 65.6 = ~su~¢i~nt dala RG:jw KlllI0 6~12/97 64.3 55.9 0.0 * 59.6 58.2 58.0 56.8 62.9 55.7 0.0 * 59.6 56.0 58.2 52.1 62.0 56.0 0.0 * 59.7 55.6 58.0 50.5 62.1 54.5 0.0 * 59.4 55.8 56.6 0.0 · 60.9 56.3 0.0 * 59.9 56.6 56.0 50.6 59.7 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 58.3 53.0 0.0 61.7 51,9 0.0 * 53.8 0.0 * 58.3 60.4 64.4 55.7 59.4 60.0 56.5 55.6 51.8 64.4 55.2 59.1 58.8 54.5 58.2 55.9 65.3 56.9 60.4 6o.3 56.4 58.7 57.7 63.4 54.1 57.9 58.2 58.1 56.6 55.5 63.7 57.9 61.6 61.3 55.4 60.4 0.0 * 60.9 56.7 57.7 59.0 0.0 * 60.2 53.8 63.0 56.0 59.8 61.2 0.0 * 56.9 55.4 58.1 55.3 59.4 58.6 0.0 * 57.9 58.1 64.5 54.5 58.0 59.3 0.0 * 50.9 51.2 67.9 47.5' 50.6 51.7 0.0 * 52.1 53.3 61.7 53.1 54.4 56.1 0.0 * 50.5 0.0 * 64.0 55.2 58.0 58.4 0.0 '* 54.5 51.4 65.0 57.0 58.6 60.3 0.0 * 58.1 0.0 * 67.8 . 54.8 59.9 59.5 0.0 * 57.5 0.0 * 64.6 55.4 60.9 60.2 0.0 * 58.5 0.0 = 65.0 56.3 59.2 59.6 0.0 * 59.0 0.0 * 66.4 56.6 60.9 61.4 0.0 * 58.3 53.6 61.8 53.3 58.4 57.2 0.0 * 58.1 0.0 * 63.4 55.1 58.0 58.2 0.0 * 58.5 0.0 * 64.5 55.8 56.8 59.9 0.0 * 55.9 55.7 65.5 55.3 ' 59.0 59.6 0.0 * 55.5 55.7 67.4 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 57.4 56.9 0.0 * 54.3 54.3 59.3 0.0 * 57.7 0.0 * 64.1 54.5 57.9 58.3 0.0.* 0.0 * 53.6 68.4 0.0 * 69.4 67.4 67.2 0.0 * 67.2 68.1 69.0 68.6 66.9 6922 69.6 69.4 64.6 65.8 64.4 68.3 69.3 66.7 69.8 0.0 * 69.2 67.4 69.8 68.5 67.8 64.5 66.2 68.4 30 29 24 29 11 30 20 28 64.2 55.4 58.7 59.3 56.6 57.4 55.3 68.1 R~ ~ER (dB CNEL) - Dat~ 1 2 TABLE 4 DALLY' CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION FEBRUARY 1997 3 21 22 24 6 7 8 9 1 63.2 62.3 2 67.3 66.4 3 65.9 65.5 4 66.1 65.6 5 66.O 65.3 6 66.5 66.2 7 67.0 66.4 8 63.9 63.7 9 ' 66.4 65.6 10 65.3 65.2 11 65.4 64.9 12 66.4 65.6 13 65.3 64.5 14 65.9 65.4 15 64.2 63.2 16 64.6 64.0 17 67.4 66.7 18 66.1 65.6 19 66.2 65.6 20 66.9 66.2 21 66.5 65.8 22 63.7 62.7 23 67.4 64.9 24 59.5 56.7 25 64.8 63.9 26 67.1 65.7 27 66.3 66.3 28 0.0 * 0.0 * DPts = 28 28 En.Avg= 65.9 '65.1 * ~su~ci~t data KllllO 61.3 51.4 55.9 55.6 0.0 * 55.8 51.2 66.3 65.3 55.8 59.3 60.4 0.0 * 57.4 53.9 67.9 64.3 55.3 58.0 58.8 0.0 * 57.9 54.2 68.0 64.5 55.1 59.9 59.9 0.0 * 56.7 50.4 68.2 64.2 55.3 59.7 59.6 53.6 57.4 56.7 68.2 64.7 56.0 59.2 59.9 57.7 56.6 57.2 68.1 64.0 55.0 57.5 58.3 55.9 56.7 54.9 67.0 62.5 53.4 57.1 57.3 53.6 55.5 53.6 65.6 63.9 50.6 59.0 59.6 56.8 57.5 53.9 68.8 63.8 52.5 57.1 58.9 0.0 * 57.9 54.3 68.1 64.1 55.0 59.9 59.9 58.0 57.5 50.2 68.4 64.5 56.1 60.7 60.3 57.9 58.2 50.8. 68.6 62.4 52.4 53.9 55.4 54.7 0.0 * 60.9 66.0 66.4 55.1 55.7 57.4 54.6 49.1 56.5 64.7 61.4 51.5 56.8 56.0 54.9 50.6 53.5 64.0 62.6 54.4 56.0 57.0 54.2 53.4 52.2 66.9 64.4 56.7 59.1 60.1 56.0 56.5 48.4 68.8 64.0 55.5 57.6 58.9 51.5 53.9 53.5 67.3 64.1 54.5 56.1 58.7 56.0 56.0 48.8 67.9 64.5 55.4 58.5 59.8 56.1 55.0 55.4 67.8 63.8 55.7 57.1 58.4 53.3 54.9 59.6 67.2 61.5 52.9 55.4 56.3 54.5 53.0 51.1 65.3 68.4 54.4 57.3 59.1 56.6 0.0 * 49.6 63.7 66.4 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 56.5 0.0 * 0.0 * 62.1 62.7 55.3 57.6 58.0 0.0 * 55.1 0.0 * 67.4 65.1 56.2 61.7 61.2 56.8 58.5 57.5 68.8 64.5 57.2 59.9 60.6 59.7 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 54.8 56.5 58.1 0.0 * 59.3 58.2 68.8 28 27 27 27 21 26 26 28 64.5 54.9 58.2 58.9 56.1 56.5 55.3 673 ~v~s NT. TiVm]~R (~ CrrSL) Date 1 2 TABLE 5 DAILY CNE:L VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION MARCHI~7 3 21 22 24 6 7 8. 9 ' 1 63.2 62.9 61.5 2 66.1 65.1 63.9 3 66.4 65.7 64.3 4 64.7 63.8 0.0 5 65.4 65.1 63.2 6 66.8 65.8' 63.8 7 66.0 65.5 63.8 8 63.9 63.3 61.6 9 67.1 66.4 64.2 10 65.7 65.0 63.2 11 65.1 64.7 62.6 12 66.4 65.6 64.2 13 66.3 65.5 64.2 14 66.4 65.8 64.6 15 64.6 63.6 62.3 16 66.8 65.9 64.4 17 65.7 65.4 63.8 18 66.9 66.4 66.1 19 66.8 65.9 63.5 20 67.6 66.8 64.5 21 66.6 66.4 ' 65.3 22 63.9 63.3 62.0 23 66.3 65.7 64.1 2~ 66.4 65.8 65.0 25 66.8 66.3 64.8 26 65.7 65.2 63.7 27 66.6 66. 64.7 28 . 66.1 65.6 63.9 29 64.1 63.6 62.1 3O 66.4 65.8 64.1 31 66.5 65.6 65.1 Dpts ~ 31 31 30 En. Avg= 66.0 65.4 63.9 Insufficient data RO-.jw KlllI0 54.7 56.1 56.1 53.1 55.8 58.7 59.3 56.4 56.2 59.4 60.2 56.6 54.3 56.8 57.6 57.8 54.4 56.4 57.1 50.4 53.8 56.6 57.3 57.4 55.9 58.1 58.8 0.0 52.3 56.1 56.8 53.6 53.2 56.2 58.1 56.8 53.0 53.3 56.5 55.2 54.0 56.8' 57.4 57.5 54.7 59.2 58.8 58.0 54.8 58.8 59.7 58.8 55.4 59.6 59.9 58.0 52.7 58.7 58.5 55.7 55.3 59.9 60.4 57.0 55.3 59.2 59.9 60.0 54.1 55.0 58.1 54.7 53.3 55.1 52.8 56.8 53.4 56.6 58.4 58.0 55.2 58.7 59.6 56.6 52.6 56.9 57.3 55.9 56.1 59.7 60.7 59.2 56.8 58.4 60.4 60.4~ 54.9 58.4 59.5 57.5 54.7 59.0 59.2 55.7 55.8 59.9 60.7 57.9 55.3 59.7 60.2 58.3 52.9 56.7 57.9 55.2 55.6 60.1 60.4 56.8 56.0 59.0 60.6 57.1 53.5 56.8 59.4 52.9 51.3 52.0 55.0 54.2 53.6 52.3 56.4 56.2 56.8 0.0 56.8 57.9 56.6 54.7 52.9 54.2 58.0 56.7 57.2 58.5 58.6 59.4 59.2 58.6 53.9 58.3 57.2 0.0 56.2 56.9 0.0 52.4 57.3 56.4 57.1 51:7 59.2 52.9 59.2 0.0 * 58.5 54.7 49.5 59.0 58.1 57.9 57.8 57.0 58.7 51.3 51.5 58.7 0.0 * 0.0 * 0.0 * 58.6 54.5 0.0 * 65.0 67.8 68.5 64.7 66.2 67.6 68.1 65.3 67.1 66.5 68.1 68.3 68.3 69.4 66.3 69.0 67.9 67.5 67.0 67.9 68.8 66.4 68.4 68.6 67.5 68.7 68.8 68.5 65.9 68.4 68.6 31 31 31 . 30 30 24 31 54.8 58.1 59.0 57.1 56.6 56.8 67.7 COMMI~RCIAL C]_*~ .4. TABLE 6 lvI~_.ASUR.I~ AVEXAGE SINGLE EVE2~ NOISE IEXPOSURE LEVELS January - March 1997 Departure lq°isc Monitor Station - Car6er AC T.vpc # Dc~* RM~I RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-21 RMS-22 RMS-24 Alaska B7374 335 Average 95.7 94.6 92.6 84.5 86.7 87.9 84.6 Count 034) 025) 017) 020) (279) 029) (217) MDg0 1 Avewage 95.7 95.0 92.7 84.0 89.9 88.4 Cou~t (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (~) ( ) American B757 327 Area-age 91.1 91.0 g9.3 82.0 85.1 g5.6 83.7 Count C325) 017) 015) (266) (241) 002) (181) M:DS0 62 Average 100.1 99.6 98.9 90.0 92.0 93.7 90.5 cou~ (62) (~9) (96) (60) (93) (61) (~3) Amexka W~st B7373 164 Average 93.4 93.0 89.9 g2.g g5.7 86.5 83.3 Co~ 064) 035) (LS4) (z~s) (139) 06o) 005) contin,~,-~ ~r373 31o A,,~ 933 94.2 93.3 94.7 ss.o 97.6 s~. Cou~ 009) 0o0 (2~ (29s) (2~s) 0o2) B757 80 Av~age 95.4 95.2 91.9 83.7 88.3 87.7 84.7 Coma (so) (80) (77) (79) (60 (so) (46) Delta B757 81 Area'age 95.2 94.0 92.9 82.8 86.0 86.4 82.9 Count (gl) (78) (78) (78) (67) (78) (47) MDg0 163 Average 90.9 89.9 88.0 79.5 81.6 83.4 gl.4 Co~a 062) (i~s) 057) (?]) 02~) 059) (73) r~.x ~00 4 A~ 93.S 93.~ 9Z6 95.5 ~.~ ag.3 Co, mt (4) (4) (3) (3) (2) (3) ( ,,al0 33 A,~S, 99.0 97.2 ~.~ ~7.? 9t.~ 9L? ~-~ Co~ (53) (53) (46) (33) (52) (~) (39) Noahw~ ~0 394 Av=ag~ .95.1 94.0 92.4 ~.l 97.7 ~.0 co~ 076) 0~) 064) 062) 020 O6g) Cz~2) ~ ~o 4~ n~-~ 97.6 972 ~6.3 ~.l 9L~ 92a ~.9 Count (452) (437) (423) (438) (412) (450) ' (285) MDg0 94 Average 88.2 g'7.9 86.6 79.0 g2.1 81.6 SO.8 com~ (94) (94) (s~) (43) (79) (90 ( Southwest B7373 16'3 Average 93.9 93.6 90.1 82.1 85.8 R5.6 82.0 ~ 063) 060 0sa) 057) 042) 060 00~) TWA B~37 ~35 Av~r~Se 9L~ 9O.S 883 SO3 93.0 93.6 SO.7 C,o~t (~3~) O~) (~23) 0 ~ 0 007) OaS) MI)gO 100 Average 97.7 97.2 95.6 g7.0 88.2 91.5 89.7 Co~ 0oo) ( ~ (93) (9s) (~g) 000). (6~) ~ ~r373 ~ Av~g~ 95.3 942 92.7 g4.3 ~ ~.0 Cou~ (~) (~) (SO) (~) ( 6'0 (~) (4~) B757 65 Average 92.8 92.1 90.3 81.3 85.7 86.1 ~3.6 Count (65) (62) (63) (58) (53) (62) (42) ~res ~57 57 nven~ 93.5 95.5 9O.7 g2.0 g6.? g6.6 ~.~ Gou~ (57) (57) (49) (35) (36) (37) (39) us~ ~-r373 ~33 A,,~'m~ 97.6 ~6.0 97.0 S~.9 9O.? 9t.S SS.0 cou~ 0~0) 047) 043) 044) (~24) 043) (88) KllllO COMMER~L Class AA TABLE 7 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Jauuar? - Mar~b 1997 Dep~e Noise Monitor Station dB SEN~. Can'i~r AC Type # l~ RMS-1 RMS-2 RMS--3 RMS-21 RMS-22 RMS-24 RMS-6 Alaska B7374 132 Average 93.7 93.2 90.0 83.0 85.5 86.1 82.g Cou,a 030) 031) (12o) (126) (lO9) 15757 662 Avia'age 90.7 90.5 g9.2 gl.7 85.0 85.4 82.9 c. omt (658) (642) (630 (567) (544) (636) C3~) B7373 647 Av~a, ag~ 92.2 91.8 89.2 82.0 85.5 85.7 823 c. ouat (644) (azs) (602) (6~-0) (5~1) (634) 098) B757 212 Ava'ag~ 91.6 92.0 88.5 81.1 843 83.6 82.0 co~ (212) (208) (202) 0~6) 077) (ls~3 (63) B'757 g3 Av~'age 91.4 91.5 89.0 81.2 84.5 83.7 80.4 count (~) (80) (77) (81) (75) (g2) (44) IdlY90 248 nvorag¢ 89.8 89.2 87.2 79.6 81.5 83.1 81.5 ~ (248) (238) (232) (102) 096) (237) (los) MZ~90 g0 Average 87.6 87.5 85.7 79.2 80.4 80.9 80.2 cou~ (80) (78) (~) (1~ (663 (76) (~.9) B7373 16g Av,,-~,~ ~ 92.7 g9.2 gev 85.8 ~ 068) 063) (155) 060 044) 06:3) 0o03 .4320 153 Ava"ag~ 91.4 91.1 8'9.6 81.6 85.8 862 84.0 couta (153) (l~) (138) (ins) (lZS) (151) (lO3) B757 232 Av~'ag~ 91.7 913 8'9.1 81.0 84.1 84.5 81.9 c.o~t (230 (224) (216) 097) 098) (224) (lZS) Amea-im W~st COMMERCLA, L Class E Dep~ Noise Monitor StaIion dB SENEL Cartia' AC Typ~ # ~ RMg-I RMg-2 RMg-3 ~21 ~22 ~24 ~ ~74 419 A~ ~.9 91.0 ~2 ~0 g.7 ~.8 ~6 ~ (41~ (~g) O~ (~ ~ 474 A~ .~2 ~.g ~.1 78.0 81.0 gl.1 ~ ~ A~ 91.6 91.6 ~.I gl3 ~.6 ~.6 81.7 ~20 1 A~ 91.4 ~.9 ~.0 ~ ~.6 ~.g ~.I ~ (~) (i) (i) (l) ( ~7 7~ A~ m0.0 89.~ ,.~ 79.7 ~ ~) ' ~6) ~ (613) (6~) ~) (4~) Aum, im W,,~t * # Deps equals the number of aircraft departure operation SENEL values measured at one or more departure noise monitor stations. Not every departure is measured at every monitor. RO:jw KllllO 6/16/97 -10- TABLE 8 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOS~ LEVELS January - March 1997 COMM'UTER Class E Departure Noise Monitor Station dB SENEL Carrier AC Type # Dcps* RMS-1 RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-6 skyw~ (D¢lm Conaeet) we~ Air CL60 150 Average 84.9 83.2 85.2 79.6 Count (150) (147) (133) (4) El20 615. Average 80.9 82.1 8Z0 82.7 Count (614) (499) (392) (25) BA31 338 Average 82.5 81.9 82.6 80.8 Count (33g) (164) (141) (18) El20 1 Average Count 81.9 83.7 81.9 (]) (1) (1) SF34 241 Average 82.3 83.9 83.7 80.6 Count (241) 097) (186) (8) ~3~N]ZRAL Departure Noise Monitor Station dB SENEL # Dc'ps* RMS-1 RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-6 Private Jets 1319 Average 90.6 89.7 91.5 85.8 Couat (1308) (1236) (1174) (377) * # Deps equals the number of airera~ depa,nm'e operation SENEL values m~ m one or more departm~ noise monitor stations. Not every depaxmre is measured at every monitor. RO.-jw K~n0 -11- 6/11/97 z NO/SE ABATEMEi~I' COM2V~I-rEE MEETING DATE: March 27, 1997 TIME: 2:00 p.m. PLACE: Terminal Conference Room #1 AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED: o John Leyerle discussed the 1997-98 Plan Year Commercial Carder and Commuter Carrier capacity allocations starting April 1, 1997. He explained that the Airport Director has recommended and the Orange County Board of Supervisors have allocated 13.6 million seats among the 11 Commercial passenger Carders to be utiliText during the 1997-98 Plan Year. This seat capacity together with the Commuter Carrier allocated passenger capacity of 235,000 are estimated to serve 8.1 million passengers, which is fore. cam to be the highest one-year passenger capacity served at John Wayne Airport. (The passenger cap for any one-year period is 8.4 million.) The allocated Commercial Carrier capacity Will accommodate an average of approximately 130 daily departures. . In January 1997, the Board of Supervisors awarded a contract to Tracor Applied Sciences, Inc. of Austin Texas to replace the John Wayne Airport aircrait operations and noise monitoring system. The new systemis expected to be completed over an 18-month period and will include new microphones and electronics at the 10 existing field Remote Monitor Stations, as well as new computers and software in the Access and Noise Office. The new system will complete a number of performance tests before it is accepted by John Wayne Airport. There will also be a one-year-long side-by-side noise measurement test comparing the measured noise levels from the existing monitoring system with measured noise levels from the new systen~ . Carl Braatz with John Wayne Airport Facilities Division provided an update on the Santa Aha Heights Ar, ou~cal Insulation Program (SAH An>). Carl explained that current construction contracts are acou~cally insulating a 32-unit apartment building and approximately 10 single family homes. There are approximately 450 dwelling units (half are single family homes and half are multi-family apartments or condominiums) that remain eligl'ble to voluntarily participate in the SAH AIP. The John Wayne Airport goal is to complete the acoustical insulation of all eligible units that voluntarily participate within the next three to five years. Tentative next meeting date: May 22, 1997, at 2:00 p.m. Kllll0 6/16197 -14- NOISE ABATEMENT PROGRAM QUARTERLY REPORT For the period: April 1, 1997 through June 30, 1997 Prepared in accordance with: AIRPORT NOISE STANDARD STATE OF CALIFORNIA California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards Submitted by: O.B. Sehooley ~ Airport Director John Wayne Airport, Orange County INTRODUCTION This is the 98th Quarterly Report submitted by the County of Orange in accordance with the requirements of the California Airport Noise Standards (California Administrative Code Title 21, Chapter 2.5, SubChapter 6: Division of Aeronautics Noise Standards). Effective January 1, 1986, the criteria for defining "Noise Impact Area" was changed from 70 dB to 65 dB Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). Under this criteria, John Wayne Airport currently has a "Noise Impact Area." NOISE IMPACT SUMMARY Caltrans' Aeronautics Program has established guidelines in the California State Noise Standard to control residential area noise levels produced by aircraft operations using the State's airports. Under those guidelines, residential noise sensitive areas exposed to an average Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of more than 65 dB define the "Noise Impact Area." John Wayne Airport uses ten permanent remote monitoring stations (RMS) located in Newport Beach, Santa Ana, Tuslin and Irvine to measure noise levels, at the following locations: MONITOR STATIONS RMS-I: Golf Course, 3100 IrvincAv¢.,N~rtBeach RMS-8: RMS-2:20152 S.W. Birch St., Santa Aaa RMS-9: RMS-3: 213 9 Anniversary Lane, Nvwport Beach RMS-21: RMS-6: 1131 Back Bay Drive, Newport Be, ach RMS-22: RMS-7: 17952 Bencta Way, Tustin RMS-24: 1300 S. Grand Avenue, Santa Aha 17372 Eastman Street, Irvin¢ 223 Nata, Nc-wport Beach 2338 Tustin Ave., Newport Beach 1918 Santiago, Newport Beach Figure 1 shows the Airport's "Noise Impact Area" for the previous year (July 1, 1996 - June 30, 1997). The Figure 1 information was developed bY Mestre-Greve Associates, Inc., in consultation with John Wayne Airport. CNFJ. values measured for the period and current digitizxxt land use information were utilized to calculate the land area acreages, number of residences and estimated number of people within the "Noise Impact Area". RG:jw Kl1411 9/5/97 -1- FIGURE I BRISTOL STREET SOUTH RMS 1 C)~HARD 111!1111 -- IIII l/ _ LEGEND Sinfflc Family Rcsidcnti~ M_ulti-FamiIy Residential JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT 65 dB CNEL IMPACT AREA JULY 1996 - JUNE 1997 (Number indir..~c~ dwclling units) Incompatible Land Use Area: 26.9 acres or 0.043 square miles Number of Dwellings: 117 Number of People: 293 (Based on 2.5 people per D. U.) jOI4~ WAYNE AIRPORT '-2- ~JRCRAFT TRAFFIC ~. -.MMARY ~... Th~ Airport traffic summary for this quart~/s shown in Table 1 and Figure 2 below. count histories and average daffy departure counts arc illustrated in Tables 9 & 10. Air Carrier ol~rafional TABLE 1 LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS April - June 1997 Jet Propeller Business (1) Total (2) Average Daily Month/Ouarter &k_C. attri~ /~r_Carfi~ ~ ~ Jet Operation~ April 6,876 1,604 924 39,2.64 260 May 7,014 1,636 1,100 43,730 261 June ~ 1.56_4 ~ 42.378 Second Quarter 20,521 4,804 3,13 0 125,372 260 PREVIOUS 12 MONTHS: 80,486 21,139 10,916 450,133 07/01/96 - 06/30/97 250 (1) Business Jet figures include a 5% factor for operations not identified by the JWA noise monitor stations. (2) Counts in this column .are based upon records provided by the local FAA representatives. FIGURE 2 QUARTERLY AIRPORT TRAFFIC SUMMARY (LANDING AND TAKEOFF OPERATIONS) Jet Carrier Military Prop Carrier Business Jet GA Propeller 43 48O4 3130 20521 0 20000 I I I 40000 60000 80000 96917 I 100000 RG:~w Kll411 9/I 8/97 -3- COMMUNITY NOISE Eie_ .., VALENT LEVELS The monthly, quarterly and twelve month Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) average values for each monitor station are shown in Table 2, while daily CNEL values are shown in Tables 3 lhrough $. Insufficient data is indicated by "0.0" entries in each table. Average Single Event Noise Exposure Level (SENEL) values for Air Carrier and Business Jet aircraft are shown in Tables 6 through 8. For the twelve month period ending June 30, 1997, 117 dwelling units in Santa Aha Heights were in the '~qoise Impacted Area" (within the 65 dB CNEL contour); this represents an increase of 4 units in the number of dwelling units in the '`Noise Impacted Area" from the previous twelve month period ending March 31, 1997. The State has approved several remedies of aircraft noise levels for noise sensitive property in the "Noise Impact Area": homes can be acoustically insulated, purchased by the County, or rezoned for "other non-noise sensitive uses." As part of the County's Santa Aha Heights Land Use Compatibility Program, approximately 77 general agriculture (A-l) properties w/th residential land uses on Orchard, Acacia and Birch Streets were rezoned for Business Park Use in October, 1986. Each property was individually sold and subsequently converted to compatible land use. Between 1986 and 1993, 124 residences have been purchased or otherwise made compatible through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or Housing Relocation Program. In September 1993, the FAA approved a grant to fund a voluntary acoustical insulation program tiffed "Santa Aha Heights Acoustical Insulation Program" ("SAH AIP"). An additional 48 residences have been made compatible through the County's SAH AlP. A total of 204 residences in Santa Ana Heights have been purchased or otherwise made compatible ' through the County's Purchase Assurance Program, Housing Relocation Program, Acoustical Insulation Program or SAIl AI~. TELEPHONE COMPLAINT CAI,IS (April - ,~une 1997) The Airport's Access mad Noise Office receives and investigates noise calls and complaints from local citizens and all other sources. During the second quarter of 1997, the Office received a total of 1,002 compla/nts from local citizens, a 347% increase from the 224 complaints received during the previous quarter and an increase of 106% from the 486 complaints received dur~g the same quarter of 1996. Figure 3 shows the di.~hufion of the quarterly telephone calls and complaints from local communities. RO:j~ Kl1411 9/30/97 FIGURE 3 QUARTERLY TELEPHONE CALL AND COMPLAINT SUMMARY Tustirt * Sants Ana SJ~ Heights Costa Mesa Westcliff Eastbluff Balboa ** Other Areas 8 10 *Tustin/Orange **Balboa/Corona Del Mar 10 ~ 115 . 722. I I I I 0 200 400 600 800 NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS ' **One caller was responsible for 66~ of the calls. JULY 1996 //DAYS AUG. 1996 #DAYS SEPT. 1996 # DAYS Q-3 1996 # DAYS 66.0 65.6 31 30 66.1 65.5 31 31 66.0 65.5 30 30 6~0 6.~I 92 91 66.5 65.9 31 31 65.7 . 64.9 30 30 663 65.7 31 31 66.1 65.6 31 30 65.9 65.1 28 28 66.0 65.4 31 31 66.0 6~.4 65.6 65.6 28 23 65.8 66.0 31 28 65.9 67.2 30 22 73 OCT. 1996 #DAYS NOV. 1996 . #DAYS DEC. 1996 # DAYS # DAYS JAN. 1997 #DAYS FEB. 1997 # DAYS MAR. 1997 # DAYS (}1 199~ #DAYS APR. 1997 # DAYS MAY 1997 #DAYS JUNE 1997 #DAYS (}21997 #DAYS Q-3 1996 THRU Q-2 1997: TABLE 2 LONG TERM MEAS~D LEVELS ~ircraft CNEL from 7/96 through 6/97~ 64.3 56.3 57.4 59.1 30 28 31 25 64.1 57.9 57.1 59.4 31 26 31 31 63.9 57.1 57.3 59.4 30 28 30 30 643 57.1 57_t 593 92 82 92 86 64.8 57.7 57.3 59.5 31 29 28 29 64.6 57.6 55.4 58.9 30 27 25 25 64.6 563 58.0 59.4 31 29 27 29 64.6 S7.2 57.1 59.:3 64.2 55.4 58.7 59.3 30 29 24 29 64.5 54.9 58.2 58.9 28 27 27 27 63.9 54.8 58.1 59.0 30 31 31 31 64.2 57.2 57.1 59.3 64.0 56.5 58.3 59.4 29 30 30 30 64.2 55.5 58.4 59.2 31 26 31 31 64.6 58.7 59.2 60.2 30 30 30 30 64~ 57.2 58.7 59.6 90 K 91 91 58.6 27 58.9 29 59.0 30 57,8 57.3 29 57.3 :29 56.6 23 S?,l 81 56.6 11 56.1 21 57.1 30 ~6.7 62 61.2 23 56.9 28 56.6 30 81 55.4 30 56.0 31 56.9 29 55.7 57.9 26 56.7 28 57.0 31 57.4 30 56.3 25 56.6 30 56.4 22 56.6 29 54.6 3O 81 54.7 27 58.0 26 57.4 23 76 57.9 29 60.5 25 55.2 27 55_3 20 55_3 26 56.8 24 ~9 70 53.5 18 55.2 24 50.7 27 S3.4 69 67. I 30 67.1 31 67.2 30 91 68.1 31 67.1 3O 67.0 31 67.4 67.1 28 67_3 28 67.7 31 67.7 67.8 28 68.4 31 69.4 27 TOTAL 66,0 65.7 64.3 # DAYS 363 345 361 Q-2 1996 THRU Q-1 1997 (Previous 4 Quarters): TOTAL 66.0 65.4 64.4 # DAYS 365 363 362 CBANGE FROM PREVIOUS 4 QUARTERS: 0.0 0.3 -0.1 RG:jw Kll411 9/18/97 56.7 57.9 59.3 58.0 56.6 56.6 68.0 340 345 347 310 341 296 356 57.4 57.4 59.3 57.5 56.7 56.1 67.9 253 261 253 317 349 311 326 -0.7 0.5 0.0 -5- 0.5 0.5 0.1 m~s ~¢trM~m~ (dS C~'F.L) TABLE 3 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION APRIL 1997 3 21 22 24 6 7 1 64.7 63.2 2 63.9 62.8 3 65.2 65.2 4 66.0 65.1 5 64.1 63.5 6 66.2 65.0 7 6S.S 65.0 8 65.4 64.9 9 65.2 65.1 10 66.4 65.6 11 66.8 66.2 12 63.8 62.9 13 66.4 · 65.7 14 66.2 65.7 15 66.0 0.0' 16 66.7 66.1 17 66.5 0.0' 18 0.0' 0.0' 19 63.8 66.2 20 66.7 66.8 21 65.9 66.4 22 65.5 66.9 23 65.6 66.8 24 65.8 0.0' 25 0.0' 0.0' 26 62.9 0.0' 27 65.4 66.7 28 66.2 0.0' 29 65.8 66.5 30 66.2 66.3 Dpts -- 28 23 En.Avg-- 65.6 65.6 0.0' 53.6 52.5 57.2 54.6 53.8 0.0' 65.2 63.6 55.9 56.5 57.4 56.0 0.0' 57.5 66.5 63.4 58.2 58.5 59.3 55.4 57.9 50.7 0.0' 64.1 57.2 60.9 60.4 56.8 0.0'. 0.0' 0.0' 62.3 54.9 57.2 58.4 57.7 56.6 49.7 66.5 64.6 57.2 58.4 60.0 57.4 56.3 55.8 68.1 63.8 55.8 59.3 59.8 59.9 56.3 0.0' 68.0 63.5 56.1 59.3 59.8 57.9 0.0' 0.0' 68.0 63.2. 59.4 58.3 59.0 57.3 57.2 56.4 68.0 64.2 57.8 60.3 60.2 56.6 0.0' 0.0' 68.9 64.8 57.5 59.0 60.1 0.0' 57.5 0.0' 68.7 61.4 53.2 55.8 56.6 0.0' 54.6 51.1 65.4 64.5 56.5 57.9 59.4 0.0' 54.8 52.4 67.4 64.0 56.0 54.9 59.4 0.0' 56.0 0.0' 67.5 64.0 55.8 58.6 59.0 66.9 56.0 57.0 68.0 65.1 57.5 59.2 59.8 60.8 0.0' 50.6 68.3 64.7 56.0 59.0 59.1 66.4 0.0' 52.1 68.9 65.5 57.5 60.6 60.9 58.2 57.8 52.9. 68.8 61.7 53.6 57.7 57.6 58.5 57.0 0.0' 66.3 64.5 56.1 59.0 60.1 63.9 56.5 53.1 68.1 65.2 55.7 54.9 59.0 60.2 55.8 0.0' 67.9 64.2 57.4 58.2 59.6 55.9 '56.9 0.0' 68.1 64.7 58.0 58.7 59.8 0.0' 57.2 0.0' 68.7 64.0 56.9 58.1 59.6 0.0' 56.0 52.8 68.3 65.4 56.0 58.1 59.8 59.1 54.9 55.3 67.8 60.5 52.0 55.1 55.3 67.7 53.3 51.8 64.5 63.1 54.8 58.6 58.9 0.0' 57.9 41.9 68.4 64.4 56.7 57.7 60.8 61.0 0.0' 0.0' 68.8 64.2 56.8 59.3 60.'5 56.8 0.0' 54.0 68.5 64.5 56.1 59.6 60.8 58.8 57.4 47.6 67.9 29 30 30 30 23 22 18 28 64.0 56.5 58.3 59.4 61.2 56.4 ,53.5 67.8 * Insufficient data RG:jw Kl1411 915197 ~ ~vIBER (aB CNEL) Date 1 2 TABLE 4 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION MAY 1997 3 21 22 24 6 7 1 65.7 66.9 2 66.9 0.0' 3 63.2 . 66.1 4 66.3 65.7 5 66.2 67.9 6 66.1 66,5 7 66.4 65.7 8 66.1 65.9 9 66.1 65.8 10 64.0 63.2 11 66.5 65.8 12 66.5 66.0 13 66.1 65.8 14 63.6 66.2 15 66.9 66.6 16 67.1 66.2 17 64.2 64.3 18 66.3 65.6 19 65.9 65.7 20 66.0 66.4 21 66.6 66.0 22 67.2 66.9 23 66.9 66.9 24 63.7 0.0' 25 63.1 63.2 26 65.5 0.0' 27 65.8 66.0 28 65.4 65.0 29' 66.0 65.6 30 66.0 67.3 31 63.7 63.8 Dpts - 31 28 En.Avg-- 65.8 66.0 * Insufficient data 63.8 55.4 58.5 59.7 55.8 64.8 56.4 59.6 60.6 0.0' 61.0 51.9 55.6 56.0 57.5 64.2 55.5 57.8 59.5 60.5 64.2 55.5 56.3 59.7 57.0 63.8 55.7 57.9 59.1 0.0' 63.8 55.6 58.6 59.8 58.5 64.5 56.8 59.0 60.2 56.5 64.0 56.1 59.4 60.0 55.9 62.2 54.7 57.3 56.9 53.6 64.3 56.1 59.1 60.3 58.3 64.6 56.3 57.5 60.0 55.2 63.8 54.9 58.9 58.2 54.1 64.4 53.1 55.5 56.9 0.0' 64.9 55.8 57.9 59.1 57.5 64.8 55.4 59.1 59.2 56.2 62.5 54.3 58.9 57.8 57.7 64.5 55.8 60.0 59.6 57.4 64.7 56.2 57.7 60.0 56.5 64.4 56.3 59.5 59.6 56.2 64.7 56.8 59.6 60.3 58.1 65.9 57.3 60.5 61.1 58.2 65.5 0.0' 60.3 60.7 57.6 62.5 0.0' 57.2 57.1 54.5 61.9 0.0' 56.9 56.9 56.0 63.9 58.7 59.4 55.6 57.0 64.6 0.0' 57.6 58.6 55.1 63.4 52.1 54.9 58.6 55.4 64.7 54.8 58.2 58.8 55.9 65.6 56.1 59.9 59.9 57.5 63.8 53.5 56.5 56.7 55.6 56.5 55.2 53.4 54.1 55.9 55.6 57.2 57.3 58.0 55.9 58.4 60.4 59.6 59.6 56.8 59.7 55.7 59.5 59.4 52.8 0.0- 0.0' 55.8 53.2 52.7 53.9 52.4 51.3 53.4 54.7 51.5 51.5 55.3' 56.7 0.0' 59.8 57.7 60.0 55.6 55.2 48.0 53.9 0.0' 55.1 56.5 0.0' 54.5 52.4 32.3 0.0' 54.1 53.2 49.9 51.7 47.4 45.3 50.4 57.5 59.2 0.0' 0.0' 0.0' 68.2 68.2 64.9 67.5 67.7 67.8 '68.1 68.7 68.5 65.8 68.6 69.4 69.0 69.5 68.8 69.5 66.3 69.5 69.0 68.8 69.7 69.2 69.6 67.2 67.7 68.3 68.0 67.9 68.1 69.2 66.9 31 26 31 31 28 29 24 31 64.2 55.5 58.4 59.2 56.9 56.6 55.2 68.4 RG:jw Kll411 9/5/97 -7- m,~is NtrM~m~ (,m C~'~t.) TABI~ 5 DAILY CNEL VALUES AT EACH MONITOR STATION JUNE 1997 3 21 22 24 6 1 65.8 65.8 63.4 2 65.7 68.2 65.2 3 65.5 65.8 64.3 4 65.1 69.0 65.9 5 65.9 69.3 64.6 6 66.0 68.9 65.7 7 64.4 0.0' 63.3 8 65.8 65.7 64.1 9 66.5 0.0' 65.1 10 66.0 68.2 63.9 11 66.5 0.0' 65.2 12 66'.6 68.9 64.6 13 66.1 66.9 64.O 14 64.1 0.0' 62.4 15 65.9 0.0' 64.0 i6 ~.0 0.0' 64.3 17 65.7 0.0' 63.8 18 66.4 0.0' 64.5 19 66.8 66.7 65.7 20 66.5 66.9 65.6 21 64.5 64.6 62.8 22 66.6 66.6 65.0 23 66.4 69.7 65.3 24' 65.8 65.9 64.4 25 66.2 65.3 65.0 26 66.5 66.6 65.2 27 66.6 66.9 66.6 28 64.5 64.5 62.5 29 65.8 65.6 64.2 30 65.6 65.3 64.0 54.7 57.8 55.8 59.6 55.5 58.6 60.2 56.9 58.8 60.1 58.5 60.3 57.3 60.0 58.5 58.8 59.5 60.1 · 59.0 59.1 59.9 60.6 60.3 59.0 60.8 59.9 56.8 57.6 59.0 57.9 58.8 59.2 58.0 59.3 58.2 58.4 58.7 60.7 58.6 61.2 57.2 57.6 58.8 58.9 60.1 60.0 58.8 58.6 59.1 59.6 59.2 58.0 60.1 60.3 56.9 58.6 58.5 57.3 58.8 58.6 58.3 56.5 54.0 60.0 58.6 53.6 58.8 58.5 56.3 59.0 57.6 54.4 60.3 56.5 55.0 60.0 56.7 54.9 58.9 52.7 54.2 60.1 57.7 55.1 61.0 56.6 54.7 60.1 55.5 55.3 61.6 56.6 54.8 61.4 57.4 57.2 60.6 56.2 54.4 58.6 55.6 51.6 59.7 56.9 52.7 60.3 56.4 54.2 59.6 54.6 53.3 59.3 54.3 55.6 62.9 50.9 55.3 60.7 57.8 55.6 58.6 48.5 53.0 60.5 58.9 53.9 61.3 57.4 54.1 59.9 57.8 56.1 60.5 55.5 54.2 6O.5 56.3 56.1 61.9 57.9 55.4 58.3 54.5 52.4 59.2 56.7 53.6 60.0 57.8 52.3 55.9 55.6 0.0' 0.0' 0.0' 57.7 43.7 47.5 51.8 51.7 53.9 44.4 47.1 41.3 42.7 45.0 48.9 41.3 42.5 46.7 41.1 51.4 51.5 41.4 53.9 44.1 41.1 46.4 49.5 52.2 69.8 69.2 68.6 69.4 70.1 70.0 69.6 69.4 0.0' 0.0' 0.0' 69.7 69.4 66.4 68,7 69.6 68.9 '69.2 69.9 70.1 67.0 68.9 71.2 70.8 69.5 69.7 70.7 67.3 69.3 68.9 Dpts = 30 22 30 30 30 30 30 '30 27. 27 En.Avg'~ 65.9 67.2 64.6 58.7 59.2 60.2 56.6 54.6 50.7 69.4 * Insufficient data ~O:~RO:~w KlI41Kl1411 9/18/9~/1g/97 -8- COMMERCIAL_ Class A TABLE 6 MEAS~ AVF_XAGE SINGLE EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS Aoril - June 1997_ AC T~* RMS-I R.MS-2 Departure Noisc/vfonitor Station dB SENEL RMS-3 RMS-21 RMS-22 RMS-24 Alaska 87374 356 Average 95.7 95.0 Count (352) 040) MDB0 ' 1 Average 94.3 93.3 ~ (1) ( American B757 427 Average 91.2 91.4 Count (420 001) MDB0 3 2 Average 100.4 100. I Count (32) (32) Americ~ West A320 I Average 89.9 90.2 cou~ (1) (I) B73 73 169 Average 93.4 93.1 Count (167) (157) Continental 87373 324 Average 95.4 94.6 eo~ 017) 00~ B757 90 Average 96.5 96.5 Co~ (ss) ( Delta 8787 171 Awr~ge 94.6 94.0 ~ (167) (165) MDg0 92 Aw-~ge 91.0 90.0 Co~ (91) (SS) FedEx A300 2 Av~'age 95.5 95.8 ~ (2) (2) A310 61 Average 97.8 97.2 Co~ (60) (59) Northw~;t A320 400 Average 95.2 94.1 ~ 09:) Rmo MDg0 $39 Average 97.0 96.8 Co~ (530) (515) Southwest 87373 180 Avenge 93.8 93.5 Co~ (176) (175) TWA 8757 167 Av~ge 91.8 91.3 Co~ (165) (155) MDB0 101 Av~'age 96.5 96.3 Co.~ (99) (97) United 87373 142 Avenge 95.2 94.3 Co~ (138) (132) 8787 34 Av~ge 92.3 92.7 Co~ (33) (31) UP~ 8757 63 Aver~g~ 92.2 92.5 Co~ (62) (61) USAir 87373 i77 Avenge 97.5 96.0 Co~ (171) (166) 92.7 86.1 8'7.1 88.6 056) 022) 015) (348) 93.9 85.4 87.2 90.9 (1) (i) (1) (1) 90.0 83.1 86.1 86.5 (427) 076) 066) (410) 99.0 91.0 92.4 95.0 (32) (29) (29) (32) 88.6 79.0 . 83.9 83.4 (1) (I) (1) (i) 90.5 83.3 85.6 87.0 (169) (153) (148) (162) 93.9 85.8 88.1 88.2 (324) (287) (277) 006) 93.4 85.2 88.7 88.4 (90) (81) (73) ( · 92.5 83.9 86.3 86.8 (170) (154) (146) (1~) 8:8.0 80.2 81.9 83.6 ' (92) (39) (76) (88') 91.7 82.8 88.6 86.9 (2) ( 2)' (2) ( 2), 96.0 88.s 91.2 92.1 (61) (57) (~) (58) 92.6 83.8 88.1 87.3 (~o) 06o) 051) 087) 96.2 88.4 90.9 92.1 (537) (491) (483) (523) 90.4 82.9 86.4 86.1 (179) (158) (155) (171) 8~L2 81.1 83.8 84.3 (166) (145) (141) (165) 94.9 86.9 88.2 91.4 (101) (89) (90) (98) 92.7 84.4 88.5 8S.l (141) (126) (117) (139) 90.3 83.6 85.1 86.4 (33) (32) (28) (33) 90.6 83.2 86.6 87.2 (63) (56) (59) (61) 97.0 88.6 90.9 ·91.8 (177) (154) (152) (1~) 85.0 (332) 87.6 (I) 82.8 059) 91.4 (27) 0.0 (O) 83.2 (153) 84.3 (297) 85.0 (82) 82.4 (150) 81.0 (59) 81.9 (2) 88.2 (61) 83.1 061) 88.9 (505) 82.3 (162) 80.7 (130) 88.9 (93) 84.2 (134) 82.8 (28) 82.4 (60) 88.0 (160) RG.~w K11411 9/18/97 -9- COMMERCIAL Clas~ AA TABLE 7 MEASURED AVERAGE, Sn~GLE EVENT NOmE ExPosuRE LEVELS - Avril - June 199-/ . - Departure Noise Monitor Station dB SENEL AC Type #Dq~* RMS-1 RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-21 RMS-22 RMS-24 RMS-6 Alaska B7374 American B757 America West B7373 B757 Dolt& B757 Rlmo MDg0 Southwest B7373 Unit~ A320 B757 191 Av~¢ 93.~ 92.9 90.0 s~.o 85.4 ~.5 83.1 Count 086) 0a~) (191) 073) 065) 083) ~7 A~e ~.6 91.0 89.6 83.0 85.8 86.1 82.5 721 A~e 91.9 91.g ~.2 ~ 85.4 86.1 823 ~ ~) (~) ~) (6~I) (~3 ~01) (~) 218 Av~e 91.7 92.4 ~ 82~ 85.0 84.7 g 1 87 A~ ~.7 91.0 88.9 83.1 84.6 ~.I 81.1 ~ ( ~ (~) ( 8~ (7~) (gl) (~5) ( 265 A~ SZ.8 S8.8 ~.7 79.7 SI.2 g2.9 SI.0 ~ (2~) ~2) (263) (103) (215) (252) (123) 85 A~e ~ ~.9 85.7 ~6 80.5 81.6 79.1 ~ (aS) (~) (~) ( 3~ (7~) (~2) (3O) lgl A~ 92.g ~.9 ~.2 ~.7 85.4 85.7 81.9 ~ 078) 074) 079) 060 060 072) 250 A~e /~.9' ~.9 ~.7 ~.7 86.4 ~3 ~.7 194 A~e 92.9 ~.6 ~.6 ~.1 853 86.2 82.8 ~ 0~Z) (]S~) 094) (]6~) 060) 0SS) 07~) COMMER~L Class E Departure Noise Monitor Station dBSEN Carrier AC Type # Deln* RMg-I RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-21 RMS-22 RMg-24 RMg-6 Alaska B7374 415 Average 90.5 91.0 88.5 82.5 84.8 85.2 gl.g Count (408) (400) (415) 076') 070) (40.3) 0117) America West B7373 951 Average 91.2 91.2 8g.7 82.1 85.3 85.4 SI.7 Cou~t (936) (ffi)9) (948) (845) (853) (923) (841) Rmo MI)90 615 A~'agc $8.2 88.3 86.2 79.1 81.5 82.0 79.6 Count (611) (586) (615) (280) (537) (597) (229) Southwest B7373 854 Average 91.6 91.g gg.5 g2.4 85.3 gS.l 81.2 Count (843) (~1) (85O) Crn) crTo) (82,) cr~2) ~ ~20 I A~ 88.8 ~..a ,'/.8 ~..? 82.8 84.5 83.6 Count (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) (1) B757 759 Average 903 90.4 gg3 81.3 83.9 84.7 81.7 Count (750) cr~2) (755) (614) (677) Ct37) (654) # Dcps equals the number of aircraft departure operation SENEL values measured at one or more depamn-e noise monitor stations. Not every departure is measured at every monitor. RO:~ Kl1411 9/18/97 MEASURED AVERAGE SINGI.R EVENT NOISE EXPOSURE LEVELS April - June ~!997 CO~~ER Class E Departure Noise Monitor Station aB SENEL Carrier AC Type # Deps* RMS-1 RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-6 Skywest 'CL60 162 Average 84.8 84.1 85.4 90.6 (Delta Connect.) Count (160) (158) (162) (3) El20 674 Average 80.6 81.9 82.3 80.9 Count (636) (527) (408) (23) W~st Air BA31. 360 Average 82.4 83:8 83.1 80.0 (United Express) '~" Count (242) (155) (135) (23) Wings West SF34 272 Average 81.0 83.5 83.3 79.0 (American Eagle) Count (239) (222) (236) (11) GENERAL AVIATION Departure Noise Monitor Station aB sENEL # Deps* RMS- 1 RMS-2 RMS-3 RMS-6 Private Jets 1398 Average 90.5 89.7 91.3 86.4 Count (1358) (1267) (1318) (513) # Deps equals the number of aircraft dep~aire operation SENEL values meaism-ed at one or more departure noise ':monitor sta~0~.:' Not every depmmre is measured at every monitor. .. RG:jw Kll411 9/18/97 -11- NOISE ABA~EMENT COMMITTEE MEETING DATE: June 18, 1997 PLACE: 2:00 p.m. Terminal conference Room #1 AGENDA ITEMS AND ITEMS DISCUSSED: 1. Airoort Statistics for 1997 Airport statistic for counts of passengers and number of aircraft operations were reviewed and discussed for the calendar-year-to-date from January through May for 1996 and 1997. The statistics show a 1997 increase in the number of passengers. While the 1996 total passenger count was 7.3 million, we estimate an increase to approximately 7.9 million passengers for 1997. John Leyerle explained the John Wayne Airport Settlement Agreement cap on annual passengers of 8.4 million and mentioned that the actual passengers served will be closely monitored as we approach that cap. 2. Replacement Monitoring System Pro~ess and Up-Coming Milestones In February 1997, the Board of Supervisors approved an upgrade of the current noise operations monitoring system. The contract was awarded to Tracor Applied Sciences Inc. from Austin, Texas. All new hardware and soRware will be installed as part of the contract. An initial installation of new field hardware and partial office hardware delivery is expected during August 1997. John explained that the new aircraR operations and noise monitoring system will provide the same reliable accuracy provided by the current system, with the added benefits of more automated data processing to facilitate faster communication of information to the Air Carriers and the community. 'As a part of the new system design, there will be a one-year, side-by-side measurement of noise levels from the existing and new monitoring systems to document comparable results from the two .systems. Qo Why has noise increased in North Tustin? h. John explained that review of the noise level data from Remote Monitor Station 7 in the Tustin area, located directly under the Instrument Landing System approach to John Wayne Airport, indicates no significant change in the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) values over the last several years. A review of the monthly CNEL Values indicates a consistent level of approximately 56 dB CNEL to 58 dB CNEL. John also explained that while the CNEL has not changed significantly, there has been a steady increase over the years in the number of RG:jw Kl1411 9/26/97 -14- 3, · Commercial Air Carrier operations. In particular, during the 1996-97 Plan Year the average number of d~y Air Cartier arrivals was 120 to 125. This count has increase to an average of 125 to 130 daily arrivals for the current 1997-98 Plan Year that began April l, 1997. Status of the Santa Ana Heights Acoustical Insulation Program Carl Braatz with John Wayne Airport Facilities Management discussed the progress of acoustical insulation for eligible homes in Santa Aha Heights. Carl explained that we have recently completed acoustical insulation on a 32-unit apartment complex. He plans to begin the next acoustical insulation bid process in July 1997. He estimates that approximately 22 homes on the current waiting list may be improved through this next contract. Qo Are there plans to increase the current acoustical insulation cost limit of $38,500 for each single family dwelling? No. Carl explained this cost limit is among the highest in the country. Our current competitive bidding process is expected to result in typical costs-per-unit within this limit. Tentative next meeting date: August 19, 1997. RG.jwRG:jw KI141Kl1411 9,"26/9~F26/97 -15- NAC ROSTER June 18, 1997 Name Doris Mays Ramey Gonzalez Rita Jones Carl Braatz Martin South Roland Ruegg Nancy Payne Toni M. Callaway Shirley Le~kowitz Bonnie Streeter John Escobedo Eric Freed Jacque Kemp Sara Gerrick Jeff Thorstenson Prisilla Hall, M.D. John Leyerle Address JWA JWA 20401 Cypress JWA PAC, 20332 Riverside Dr. Delta Air Lines Alaska Airlines North Tustin Foothill. Comm., FCA Assoc. JWA JWA JWA FCA FCA FAA JWA Phone Number (714) 252-5185 (714) 252-5185 (714) 576-9126 (714) 852-4033 (714) 545-3830 (714) 252-5911 (714) 252-6203 (714) 731-1803 (714) 544-7638 (714) 252-5185 (714) 252-5185 (714) 252-5170 (714) 633-4554 (714) 730-0510 (714) 665-0141 (714) 573-1401 (714) 252-5043 RG:jw Kl1411 9/18/97 J.J. VA N HOUTEN I CEIVED ' 4- 1997 COMMUNITY DEVEL O? ,iENT ASSOCIATES, INC. John J. Van Houten, P.E. Consulting Engineer in Acoustics David L. Wieland Principal Consuhant 2691 Richter Avenue Suite 108 Irvine, CA 92606 714/476-0932 FAX 714/476-1023 October 30, 1997 Project File 2306-91 CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attention: Ms. Elizabeth Binsack Subject: Review of John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Reports, l st and 2nd Quarters 1997 References: 1. "Data Evaluation and Aircraft Noise Impact Study for the City ofTustin," J. J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc., January 8, 1990 2. "Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period: January 1, 1997 through March 31, 1997," John Wayne Airport 3. "Noise Abatement Program Quarterly Report for the Period' April 1, 1997 through June 30, 1997," John Wayne Airport Dear Ms. Binsack, As requested, we have reviewed the r- ........... · noise abatement program at John Wayne Airport. The following provides our findings with regard to airport operations and their impact on the City of Tustin: 1. Referring to Figures 1 and 2, the average annual CNEL at station M7 will be 56.4 dB for 1997 based upon data for the first and second quarters. ThiSis 0.4 dB lower than the average annual CNEL of 56.8 dB for 1996. (NOTE: The noise contours for John Wayne Airport are based on average annual CNEL values measured at each remote monitoring station.) 2. Referring to Figure 2, the number of noise complaints increased in the second quarter of 1997 despite a slight decrease in average CITY OF TUSTIN Project File 2306-91 quarterly CNEL. However, the increase in complaints does correspond with the increase in average quarterly jet operations during the same time period. 3. As indicated in Item 1, above, the annual average CNEL measured at station M7 is 56.4 dB based on information through the second quarter of 1.997. This is slightly less' than the 58 dB that was estimated for the station in the referenced aircra~ noise impact study for the Phase 2 Access Plan (Reference 1). AIRCRAFT NOISE CONTOURS In 1988, an exterior aircraft noise monitoring effort was conducted throughout the City of Tustin by the John Wayne Airport Noise Abatement Office and by J. J. Van Houten and Associates, Inc. (Reference 1). Aircrait-generated single event noise exposure levels (SENEL's) were measured at twelve locations in Tustin over a five month :period. AS a result of this effort, noise contours were developed for John Wayne Airport as they impact the City of Tustin. Although the shape of the contours does not change (since flight tracks are fixed), the value of the noise contours does change with different levels of operations at the airport and different mixes of aircraft. Figure 3 provides the approximate location of the John Wayne Airport noise contours for 1990 based on measurements obtained at monitoring station M7 throughout the year.. Referring to the figure, the community noise equivalent level (CNEL) ranged from 53 to 59 dB in the City of Tustin, with a C/X/EL of about 55 dB at station M7. Based on data through the second quarter, the annual average CNEL at station M7 is 56.4 dB in 1997. The existing and future Phase 2 contours (based on 1997 data) are provided in Figure 4. Referring to the figure, it is estimated that in 1997 the aircraft-generated CNEL ranges from 54 to 60 dB. This is well below the City, County, and State criteria of 65 dB for residential areas. USE OF QUIETER AIRCRAFT AT JWA AS requested, we have analyzed the correlation between the increasing use of quieter aircraft at JWA and the change in CNEL within the City of Tustin. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) classifies aircraft into three categories based on noise levels. In order of decreasing noise levels, there are Stage I, Stage II, and Stage III aircraft. John Wayne Airport has only permitted Stage I11 aircraft since the early 1970's. The airport has its own classification scheme for passenger aircraft. In order of decreasing noise level, these are Class A, Class AA, and Class E aircraft. Table 1 provides the estimated number of each class of aircraft that used the airport between the first quarter of 1996 and the second quarter of 1997. Also provided is the measured average quarterly CNEL at monitoring station M7. Table 2 provides the same information, but the values have been normalized to 17,000 aircraft operations (takeoffs and landings) per quarter. In this way, a correlation can be established between the quarterly CNEL and the mix of aircraft types. 2 J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. CITY OF TUSTIN Project Fil~ 2306-91 Referring to Table 2 and Figure 5, the percentage of quieter Class E aircraft using John Wayne Airport has remained fairly consistent since the 4th quarter of 1996 (about 36%). The slight variations in aircratt mix do not seem to correlate with changes in the average quarterly CNEL. That is, an increase in the use of quieter Class E aircraft does not always mean that the average quarterly CNEL will decrease. If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 714/476-0932. Very truly yours, p~na~d. L. Wieland al Consultant mj s:C Aloms\work\wordpro~PROJECTSL2300-24~2306rg.lwp 3 J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC.. <C z o o 0 0 o 0 o F- CO Z 0 0 <C 0 o 0 <C 0 z I I I (BP) 93N3 c 121.' >. 7O I ,Average Quarterly Aircraft CNEL, M,- 60 _j- z 50 --c 40 ~o 30 ~ 20 o 10 1Qtr96 2Qtr96 3Qtr96 4Qtr96 1Qtr97 2Qtr97 3Qtr97 4Qtr97 Quader/Year 25 ITotal Quarterly Jet Operations, M7 I C ~ 20 0-815_ ~10 0 5 0 100 1Qtr96 2Qtr96 3Qtr96 4Qtr96 1Qtr97 2Qtr97 3Qtr97 4Qtr97 QuadedYear I Average Quarterly Noise Complaints I E o 80 . 70 '6 60 Z >, 50 ~ 40 ~ 30 0 2O m 10 > 0 I 1Qtr96 2Qtr96 3Qtr96 4Qtr96 1Qtr97 2Qtr97 3Qtr97 4Qtr97 QuartedYear Figure 2. M-7 II .~' / / // / // / // / /x../ // // 59~ , 53 Figure 3. Approximate Location of John Wayne Airport Noise Contours, 1990 M-7 i / / /. 59 58 57 1"27- ,55' Figure 4. Approximate LOcation of John ~ayne Airport Noise Contour, 1997 Z r.)roE) 0 ~3 0 ~3 spuesnoql SNOIIVM::::IclO I--IVMO~liV =10 MaE]lAIr'IN Figure 5.