Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 1 J.W. AIRPORT RPT 05-15-89__ ~.~ ,,, · ~ ~ , OLD BUSINESS _ .. TO: WILLIAIq A. HUSTON, CITY NANAGER FROM: · -SUBJECT: CI~NIT~ DEVELOPIqENT DEPARTlqENT AIR~O~ STATUS P~PORT: JOHN WAYNE AI~O~T (JWA), AIRPORT .SITE COALITIOM (AS~), COALITION FOR A RESPOMSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTION RECOI~ENDATION · Receive and file. DISCUSSION JWA - A recent letter from County staff to interested parties noted a delay in pr6paring the Phase 2 Access Plan. No release date or hearing dates were provided; however, the letter stated that a minimum of two' weeks would be provided for review prior to a hearing before the Airport Commission. Staff will keep the Council informed on the status of this item. Attached to this report is a preliminary review from the City's consultant, John Van Houten, regarding the County's Noise Monitoring Report (see Attachment I). The review identifies a number of inconsistencies between the report and the test plan prepared by the County, and recommends certain additional information be obtained from the County. Mr. Van Houten is in the process of conducting an in-depth analysis of the County's report, which~is expected to take several months to complete. At the Council's direction, staff will forward Mr. Van Houten's preliminary comments to the County. ASC - The next meeting will be held on May 20, 1989. Staff will report on this meeting in our June 5th status report. CRAS - Staff will report on the May 22, 1989 Board meeting in our June 5th sta'~us report. Pursuant to the Council's request, staff is preparing a letter to the Board for the Mayor's signature regarding the appointment of a Tustin resident to the Board as a voting member. At their regular meeting on May 1st, the Council instructed staff to continue to attend the CRAS Board .meetings. As staff noted at that time, these meetings are held on the fourth Monday of each month which conflicts with the City's Planning Commission meeting schedule. Staff attendance at the CRAS meetings could, therefore be possibly impacted. While staff will make every attempt to have a representative present at each meeting, we believe that the attendence of these meetings by a Tustin Councilperson would provide a greater City of Tustin presence and support our position for appointment of a Tustin resident to the Board. City Counc11 Report Airport Status Report May 15, 1989 Page. two HOTF - At. the April 26th meeting, representatives of each subcommittee reported on the progress/findings of their respective subcommittees. As staff discussed in our April 17th status report, the Reservoir Route subcommittee decided to conduct a noise study on the existing Irvine Route, the ReserVoir Route and the cumulative impacts on the Tustin Ranch. At the April 26th meeting, the Task Force included the Reef Route in this study. Results of the study are expected towards the end of June, 1989. Colonel Wagner is arranging hel.icopter tours of various routes for the Task Force members. The next general meeting of the Task Force is scheduled for May 24, 1989. Assembly Bills - Attached to this report are copies of Assembly Bill No.'s 1471 ahd 1830"(A~achments II and III, respectively) regardlng the selection of additional airport sites in Southern Californla. AB 1471 (Moore) provides for the creation of the Southern California Regional Airport Special District, consisting of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura Counties. The District would be governed by a Board of Directors whose members would consist of one representative appointed by each County, plus the City of Los Angeles. The District would be required to make recommendations on additional airport sites 'to various entites, including the Legislature by January 31, 1991. As written, only a two-thirds vote by the Board of Directors of the District would be required to make a_ recommendation. Consequently, airport si res could be forced · upon- mi nori ty members/juri sdi ~ti on~. AB 1830 (Peace, Johnson, Bergeson) is a counter measure to AB 1471, allowing the Boards of Supervisors of San Diego, Riverside and Orange-Counties to enter into a joint powers agreement to establish the Tri-County International Airport Joint Authority, for the purpose of studying and establishing an international airport facility to serve the 3 County area. The bill would permit additional counties to enter into the joint powers agreement if approved by the Boards of Supervisors of the 3 original counties. The bill e. stablishes no deadline for identifying an airport site. As written, a simple majority vote would be required to select an airport site. As with AB 1471, this recommendation can occur over the objection of the minority county. The bill does not identify to whom the authority reports its findings (beyond the member counties) in order to implement i ts recommendation. The League of California Cities has placed AB 1471 and 1830 on a "Watch" status, neither supporing or opposing them. CRAS intends to seek the League's support to either amend the bills to eliminate their inadequacies related to the site selection (voting) process, or defeat-them altogether. Steve' Rubin Christine A. Shtngl~ton senior Planner Director of Community Development SR:CAS:ts Attachments: Attachments I, II and III Corn rnunity Development Department M J. J. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, Inc. JOHNJ. VAN HOUTEN, PE, Principal Consultant DAVID L. WIELAND, Principal Engineer ROBERT WOO, A.~ociate Engineer ALLEN.MASHOOF, Associate Engineer May 5, 1989 1260 EAST KATELLA AVENUE, ANAHEIM, CALIFOR~. IA 92805 HAY 0 8 1989 COMMUNITY OEVLEOPMENT Project File 1890-87 CITY OF TUSTIN Community Development Department 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92680 Attention: Mr. Steve Rubin, Senior Planner Subject: Review and Comment: "John Wayne Airport Aircraft Ar- rival Noise Levels in the Tustin Area, (John Wayne Airport, February 1989) Reference: "JWA Noise Monitoring and LDA Test Program," George A. Rebella, February 3, 1988 · Gentlemen: As requested, we have reviewed the subject report prepared by the Noise Abatement Office at John Wayne Airport regarding aircraft noise levels in the Tustin area. This review involved a com- parison of the report with the referenced test plan prepared by the County. Enclosure 1 provides the results of this comparison. Referring to the enclosure, there are a number of inconsistencies between the report and the test plan. In view of these inconsis- tencies, the following should be requested from the Noise Abate- ment Office: 1. The Noise Abatement Office should address the inconsistencies identified in Enclosure 1. 2. The .existing and future operational profiles for the airport (number of daytime, evening, and nighttime arrivals) by aircraft type and air carrier Should be obtained. 3. Viable alternatives in the aircraft operational profile (aircraft type, number of operations, time of day, flight tracks, etc.) that may reduce the noise exposure within the City should be provided by the Noise Abatement Office. ATTACHMENT I CITY OF TUSTIN PROJECT FILE 1890-87 If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 714/635-9520. Very truly yours, J~. VAN HOUTEN & ASSOCIATES, INC. //onsulti,..~ JJVH/DLW~r~ngineer In ACoUstics C: ~WS2000\REPORTS\lB 50-99\18905-5 Enclosure i Review of the JWA Noise Study 1. There is no discussion of wind, cloud coverage or humidity, and their effects on the measured noise levels as compared to annual average day conditions. 2. Microphones were at a height of 20' at all sites. Were they also 10' from reflective surfaces? (Roofs, patio covers, etc. ) 3. Did all sites have clear line of sight to the aircraft flight pathS? 4. There are no interior measurements, or analysis of noise r. eduction provided by typical construction. 5. Two flight tracks are identified in Apbendix B, R-.ILS and ILS. The County's test plan indicates that the energy average SENEL and MNL will be calculated for each type of aircraft on each flight track. All tracks have been com- bined. 6. What threshold was used at each position? 7. The test plan indicates that measurements should continue at each position for a minimum of 7 days until the energy average SENEL for each type of aircraft has been measured to within a 90% confidence limit of'~ 1 dB(A). The report indi- cates that the measurements were actually performed for 7 days at most sites, but that the 90% confidence limit of ~ 1 dB(A) has not been achieved at a number of positions for a variety of aircraft types. At positions for which measure- ments extended for more than 1 week, the data has not beeH combined to establish a data base for the site with one average SENEL and confidence level value for the entire measurement period. 8. There is no certification that the field measurements are true and correct. '9. What operational profile was used to calculate the CNEL values cited in Table 17 Enclosure 1, continued. 10. The basis for concluding that no corrections to the measured SENELs is necessary is not clear. It would be helpful if the threshold level at each site was identified and the' analysis provided 'at each site for each aircraft type.. 11. There is no indication of the formula used to calculate the 90% confidence limits. CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE--1989-90 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL ' ' No~ 1471 Introduced by Assembly Member Moore March 7, 1989 An act to add Part 3 (commencing with Section 24001) to Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to the Southern California Regional Airport Special District, and making an appropriation therefor. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1471, as introduced, Moore. Southern California Regional Airport Special District. (1) Existing law, the California Airport District Act, provides for the formation of airpOrt districts having the responsibility for the development of airports and air navigation facilities. Existing law also provides for airport land use commissions with the du~y, among other things, of assisting local agencies in ensuring compatible land ~es in the vicinity of all new airports. This bill would provide for the creation of the Southern California Regional Airport Special District consisting of all of ghe territories within the Counties of Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, and Ventura. The district would have the sole authority for identifying additional commercial air carrier airport sites in southern California, and reeommelnding plans for the development and construction of facilities at those sites. The district would be governed by a board of directors consisting of one member from each of the counties in the district, and one member appointed by the City of Los Angeles. This bill would require the board of directors of the district to report its findings on additional airport sites necessary to meet airport capacity needs in the member areas to various ATTACHMENT II CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE,--1989-90 REGULAR SESSION ASSEMBLY BILL No. 1830 Introduced by Assembly Member Peace (Principal coauthor: Assembly Member Johnson) (Coauthor: Senator Bergeson) March 9, 1989 -- RECEIVED .- APR 2 7 1989 An act to add Part 3 (commencing with Section 24001) to Division 9 of the Public Utilities Code, relating to aviation. LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 1830, as introduced, Peace. Airports: Counties of San Diego,, Orange, and Riverside: joint powers agreement. Existing law provides for the formation of airport districts having responsibility for the development of airports and air navigation facilities pursuant to the California Airport District Act. This bill would permit the Boards of Supervisors of San Diego, Orange, and Riverside Counties to enter into a joint powers agreement to establish the Tri-County International Airport Joint Authority for the purpose of jointly studying, investigating, and establishing an international airport facility to serve the 3 county area. Once 2 or more of these counties have' entered into the agreement, the authority would have the powers given a public entity under the provisions governing these agreements and any common power specified,in the agreement. The bill would permit additional counties to enter into the joint powers agreement if their participation is approved by the boards of supervisors of the named counties. The bill would permit the parties to the agreement to provide money from their treasuries for the support of the authority, and to make personnel, equipment, and property available for its use. The bill would also authorize the Department of Commerce to provide matching :. 99 40 ATTACHMENT III