HomeMy WebLinkAboutOB 1 J.W. AIRPORT RPT 08-07-89DATE: AUGUST 7, 1989
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
AIRPORT STATUS REPORT: JOHN WAYNE AIRPORT (JWA), AIRPORT SITE
COALITION (ASC), COALITION FOR A RESPONSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTION (CRAS)
AND HELICOPTER OVERFLIGHTS TASK FORCE (HOTF) j
RECOI~ENDATION
It Is recommended that the City Council:
le
Authorize the expenditure of an additional $3,400.00 to complete the Data
Evaluation and Final Report for the Aircraft Noise Impact Study; and
2. Receive and file this report.
DISCUSSION
JWA - After reviewing the budget for Mr. Van Houten's services, it has been
i)~ermined that an additional $3,400.00 is needed to complete his work on the noise
monitoring program. This shortfall has resulted from performance of work outside of
the original scope of work in the contract agreement such as review of the Phase 2
Access Plan, attendance at Noise Abatement Committee meetings, and other
miscellaneous tasks, all requested by the City. The current contract agreement only
allows staff to grant expenditures beyond the contract amount ($16,910.00) to a
maximum of 10%, consequently, Council approval is required for the additional
$3,400.00. After reviewing the additional data provided by the County, Mr. Van
Houten has proposed the following program to conclude his work on the noise
monitoring program:
Task 1:
Evaluate the exterior to interior noise reduction of a typical home within the
City by application of computational procedures and previous noise measurements.
Task 2:
Compute the existing and future CNEL based upon an assessment of the existing
and future operational profiles for the Airport and by use of the County's
single event noise measurements.
Task 3:
Assess the probable precision of the computed CNEL's at the measurement
positions within the City.
Task 4:
Prepare existing and projected CNEL contour maps by application of the
computations of Task 2.
Task 5:
Based upon the data obtained by the County, and to the extent possible by
appllcatlon of published data, identify the single event nolse level for each
aircraft type as it impacts the City of Tustin.
Task 6:
Provide a discussion regardlng the slngle event and CNEL annoyance for the
exlsting and future aircraft noise exposures within the City.
Task 7:
Recommend a single event noise level limit for the City of Tustin.
Task 8:
Prepare a draft report of findings for each of the above tasks and submit a
final report, in reproducible form, after responding to staff review and
comment of the draft report.
Task 7 will lead to a standard which could be proposed to the County. This will be
similar to the single event noise level limit which is applied by the County in the
City of Newport Beach. If accepted and enforced by the County, such a standard could
assure some degree of protection for the noise-sensitive locations within the City of
Tustin. It is anticipated that all tasks could be completed within six weeks of
authorization to proceed.
As the Council may have read in recent articles in the Orange County Register,
release of the Phase 2 Access Plan for JWA has been delayed due to FAA review in
Washington, D.C. Staff is attempting to obtain a copy of the draft document so we
can get an early start on our review.
ASC - At the July 22nd meeting, the concensus teams made the following site
recommendations:
A. Dropped from further discussion (Round III):
MCAS E1 Toro (joint or full commerical use)-also see Attachment I
Lakeview Mountains
March AFB - Medium Haul facility
Signal Peak
Cristianitos Canyon - International facility
B. Consider as "Reserve" sites in Round II! discusslons'
March AFB - Long Haul facility
Cristianltos Canyon - Long and/or Medium Haul facility
Huntington Flats
Palomar Airport
C. Carried over to Round III discussions for full consideration'
South Camp Pendleton
Norton AFB
Potrero los Pinos - Long and/or Medium Haul facility
The elimination of MCAS E1 Toro from Round III discussions is good news; however, as
noted in Kathy Well's memo (Attachment I}, it could be raised in the future due to
inconsistent technical data. Staff will continue to monitor ASC activities.
CRAS - Attached to this report is a memo from Kathy Well reporting on the July 24th
'~ Board meeting (Attachment I).
HOTF - At the task force meeting held on August 2nd, Irvine City staff presented a
dra----~t report and recommendation for the task force's review and acceptance to send to
the Irvine City Council. The draft recommendation maintains the Irvine Blvd. route
.as it presently exists, with no proposal to implement the Reservoir Route or alter
existing flights. This recommendation is supported by the noise study conducted by
Mestre Greeve Associates, which clearly showed that the Marine Helicopter overflights
are responsible for a ver~y small portion of the noise experienced by residents along
Irvine Blvd., and that elimination of Visual Flight Rules (VFR) operations would not
result in a noticeable improvement. Implementation of the Reservoir Route would
merely expose future residents to helicopter noise. Staff will continue to attend
and monitor task force activities.
~s~e~e RUben
Associate Planner
~hr~stine A. Shin~leton y/~
Director of Community Devel~fpment
CAS'SR-kbc
Attachments' Attachment I
7/24/89
MEMO TO CITY COUNCIL
FROM: KATHY WElL
RE: COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE AIRPORT SOLUTIONS
· '- RECEIVEJ ..
JUL 3 1 1989
CIMMUNITY IEVLEOPMENT
1) On 7/20/89 I attended a committee briefing by Col. Jack Wagner of El Toro Marine Base, concerning the Airport
Consensus Meeting on 7/21/89. The subject of the briefing was to educate the members, who would be attending the
Consensus Meeting, about the flaws in the technical data on El Toro. Col. Wagner pointed out the inequities used to
compare one airport site to another. Different criteria were used to rate such areas as airport capacity, traffic analysis, noise,
cost, etc. The research work that Col. Wagner did was some of the finest I've ever seen. His line of reasoning was that if
El Toro were rated consistently by the same criteria that the rest of the sites were, El Toro would be at the bottom of the
desireable locations. At the close of the briefing, it was determined that most of the consensus tables would be covered, and
everyone went away with a sense of embarking on a mission.
2) I did not attend the Consensus Meeting because of my late entry into this whole exercise, my relative lack of background
knowledge, and my understanding that my role as the Council's representative is more of a watchdog than a participant.
3) At the regular CRAS Board meeting on 7/24/89 it was revealed that though Col. Wagner and crew were not as successful
as they would have liked, the Consensus committee did rule out El Toro as being unsuitable. They will recommend that
the Refinement Committee look into some of Col. Wagner's allegations. In the meantime El Toro is out of the running,
but until the technical data is cleaned up, it could be considered again sometime in the future (based on the same misleading
data). San Clemente is now trying to get El Toro reconsidered as a full civilian airport, using George Airbase for a relocation
of marines. The Committee feels that it is just a smoke screen because the Christianitos site near San Onofre is still in the
running. A little lobbying to convince them to do the level of homework that Col. Wagner did, should quiet them down.
Christianitos is not a good site either.
4) A little news! The committee very sadly (for us) accepted the resignation of Eve Somjen, the City of Irvine planner who
has done the bulk of the work for the Committee. She's accepted a planning position in Northern California. Her
replacement will be Sam Rake. Eve's parting comments to me, as Tustin's rep was that she wished Tustin would get more
involved with the workload.
5) More news! Rumor has it that Ken Delano quit because El Toro didn't come out in the Top 4 sites.
6) Marion Berguson is planning a "re-go" of her Senate version of AB1830 (she had withdrawn it). The amended bill
recognizes thework of the Airport Site Consensus Committee. CRAS will continue to oppose the bill because of its method
of site selection. CRAS will attempt to have a member of M. Berguson's staff at the August meeting to explain the bill.
7) Last, but definitely not least, Chris Cox, a few weeks ago, tacked an amendment onto an Congressional appropriations
bill to eliminate El Toro from consideration as a multi-use airport. The only problem with this is that the bill is only good
for one year. So you can see why Col. Wagner's fight to clean up the technical data on El Toro is so important.
If you have any questions I have more notes on the inequities of the data. Just give me a call.
ATTACHMENT I