The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 02131990 - 2.6 a.6 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 13 , 1990 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Schroder, McPeak, Torlakson, Fanden NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: Buchanan Field Airport Annual Noise Report The Board received the attached report dated February 13 , 1990 from J. Michael Walford, Public Works Director, relating to noise management activity at Buchanan Field Airport. Supervisor Sunne McPeak noted that it is sometimes difficult to identify the airplane which generated a noise complaint. She recommended that a procedure be established to notify all pilots who filed flight plans when a specific plane cannot be identified. Board members being in agreement, IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the Annual Noise Management Program Report for the Buchanan Field Airport is ACCEPTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Public Works Director is DIRECTED to institute a procedure whereby all pilots having filed a flight plan will be notified of a complaint when positive identification of a specific airplane cannot be made. I hereby certify that this Is a true and correct copy of cc: Public Works Director an action taken Fnd entered on the minutes of the Airport Manager Board of Supervisors on the date shown. County Counsel ATTESTED: /vIf PO County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR,al rc of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator Deputy TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: J. MICHAEL WALFORD, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: FEBRURAY 13, 1990 SUBJECT: ANNUAL NOISE REPORT FROM BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT Specific Request(s) or Recommendation(s) & Background & Justification RECOMMENDED ACTION: ACCEPT the attached Annual Noise Report from the Public Works Director relating to noise management activity at Buchanan Field Airport. FINANCIAL IMPACT: NONE REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION/BACKGROUND: The attached report, ANNUAL NOISE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM REPORT FOR BUCHANAN FIELD AIRPORT, summarizes the noise complaint activity from January 1989 through December 1989 . It summarizes complaint type, location, number and type of aircraft. Cont'd on attachment: yes Signature: iG ^ � Recommendation of County Administrator Recommendation of Board Committee Approve Other: Sicmature(s) : ction of Board on: Ap oved as Recommended Other Vote of Superv" ors: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN Unanimous (Ab nt ) ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE Ayes: Noes: MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF Absent: Abstain. SUPERVISORS ON DATE SHOWN. Orig. Div. Public Works - Attested cc: County Administrator Phil Batchelor, Clerk of the County Counsel Board of Supervisors Aviation Advisory Com. and County Administrator B HEW:dg Deputy Clerk noiserpt.bo Buchanan Field Airport Annual Noise Management Program Report 1989 The Noise Management Program demonstrated remarkable progress toward its goal of producing a compatible aviation environmentto nearby residents.The Board of Supervisors enacted a County Noise Ordinance,formed a Pilot Noise Abatement Committee and initiated process to develop procedures to redirect helicopter training operations away from redsidential areas. The County Board of Supervisors passed several resolutions in an effort to ensure the noise generated by Buchanan Field Airport operations would not exceed current levels. In addition,the Aviation Advisory Committee(AAC) held eight public information meetings to educate the public of upcoming airport programs and changing policies. This report will provide a composite of the noise complaints as well as summarize progress made in,the noise management program. Airport Operations Calls Calls to the airport regarding airport operations decreased by eight and a half percent for 1989. This decline can be partially attributed to the new Noise Ordinancewhich prohibits 34.5 percent of the corporate aircraft fleet and to the increased cooperation of FAA Air Traffic Control Tower personnel.The graph below depicts total complaints by year. TOTAL COMPLAINTS (Buchanan Field Airport only) 750 700 — 650 — 600 — E 0 0 550 — 0 500 - Z 450 — 400 — 350 1986 1987 1988 1989 Complaints peaked during the month of May. During the summer the airport was conducting several construction projects which affected runway usage. In addition,the airport hired a full-time Noise Control Officer to supervise the noise management program. This staff addition furnished residents with a central contact person which may have resulted in elevated noise complaints. These two factors skewed the normal trend in noise complaints. Complaints by Month 130 7- 120 - 110 - 100 - 90 - 70 - E ;7\ 0 7`\ 60 - z 50 - 7\ 40 -7'\ X\ 7 30 20 10 1/\ "IN 0 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 1989 1988 Total airport operations increased by seven percent. The airport now ranks sixth in the state of California in terms of airport activity. This ranking includes such airports as San Francisco International and Los Angeles International. Annual operations for 1989 were the highest since 1981. However, these operations remain far below the peak activity year of 1978. Also noteworthy is the fact that the numbers of operations per complaitnt decreased for 1989, by seventeen percent. The table on the following page illustrates the number of annual operations for the past 12 years. (2) r ANNUAL OPERATIONS 360 350 — 340 — 330 — 320 — 310 — ,� 300 — C N C� 'a o 290 — W $LLO 280 — O F- v 270 — 260 — 250 — 240 — 230 — 220 — 210 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 Touch-and-go operations increased by ten percent in 1989. (See Table 1) These operations incude all types of aircraft, with the exception of jet aircraft. The Airport Ordinance prohibits touch-and-go training operations for any aircraft weighing over 12,500 pounds. It also restricts touch-and-go operations between the hours of 10 p.m. through 7 a.m. Monday through Friday. For Saturdays and holidays, this restriction is extended through 8 a.m. local. The FAA Tower personnel do not keep records of airport operations according to aircraft type, such as jet operations versus single-engine operations. However airport fueling records show a decrease in jet fuel sales of eleven percent may indicate a decrease in jet operations attributable to the County Noise Ordinance. Y-T-D Table 1 Y-T-D Y-T-D Percent 1989 1988 Change AIRCRAFT MOVEMENTS i;3:.....viiii:..........:::::::;.;;;r.»..; ..::•:':::::.::v,:;:: ::ii::.:..::i:::<L:;::::::>:vni'.:'{;: {i isii:�':<i'i':isii::i:i::j::y:.:;:•':I J' � -13. 7. Itinerant 126,395 121,435 4% Instrument 21,424 21,088 2% Actual Instrument 1,840 1,739 6% TOTAL 269,942 252,142 7% (3) USAir Operations USAir operations over Pleasant Hill totaled almost seven percent of their annual operations. This percentage exceeds the airport's goal of five percent for less commercial operations over Pleasant Hill. For.-Concord,the airport set a goal of twelve percent,and was successful in remaining below that limit 1989. During the summer months, Airport management observed an increase in the amount of overflights over the City of Pleasant Hill, partly due to construction activity. Staff met with USAir to discuss the problem of this increase and has since observed better conformance with airport policies. The graph below illustrates the percentage of USAir operations taking place over the cities of Pleasant Hill and Concord. The month of July showed an unusual amount of operations over the city of Concord. This increase in overflights was due to the construction activity at the airport. USAIR OPNS OVER RESIDENTIAL AREAS 40 35 ` 30 25 CL ` O 20 V 15 10 5 n n 0 JAN FES MAR APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOY DEC ® Pleasant Hill ® Concord Noise Ordinance Violations Eighteen violations to the Noise Ordinance occurred during 1989 and are summarized on Table 2. Each of the operators were notified of their violations and advised not to return. (4) The only return violator was Colombia Aviation Services on September 12 and 16. This company had not received its first notice of violation of September 12 when it returned on September 16. The airport contacted the operator and advised him of both violations and was assured that no further incidents would occur. To date, no operator has challenged the ordinance. Table 2 Noise Ordinance Violations Date A/C Type Noise Level (dBA) 05/17/89 Lear 25B 82.3 v:n..............:;:06/02/89".............:.. . Lear 25D :82.3:; :.. ........................................ 06/20/89 Lea ».................... Lear 24:.............,......... ,I I....R: . ................................,.........._ 07/23/89 61$.::::: ::: :::.:::..:.::::::: .:.:...........:......::..: :.:..::..:.::...............:...,::.:::::.:::::.:::....:.......:::...... 08/10/89 Lear 25B 82.3 No. S; .: ia(3 ..............:..... :....T.eax.......... . ,.......... ..... 09/03/89 Lear 25D 82.3 ............. .. :.:::.r.:::.. : ::: ................... 09/16/89 Lear 24 NR 10/21/89 Sabre 40 83.4 :iN. fli ....... 12/06/89 Lear 25D ...........:...v......:<>:82.3:;..........................................,...._ NR-Aircraft not rated by AC36-3E. Noise Complaint Database Complaints by Location Aircraft flying over the city of Pleasant Hill generated the majority of complaints with 415 calls, an increase of 4.3 percent. from 1988. Concord residents contributed 152 complaints,a decrease of 28.6 percent. Calls from the Pacheco area totaled 87; Martinez,60 and Other, 51. The "Other"category includes calls regarding aircraft operations from other airports such as Byron or Oakland. The graph on the following page shows complaints by location. Complaints by Aircraft Type The graph on the following page depicts complaints according to the type of aircraft and compares 1988 figures with 1989. The highest number of calls were directed toward single-engine type aircraft. This corresponds to the airport's actual fleet mix of primarily (5) Complaints by Location 450 4}15 400 — 350 — 300 — • 250 — 200 — 152 150 100 — 87 so 51 so - 0 0 —O Concord Pleasant:HE Pacheco Martinez Other single-engine aircraft. The 1989 figures were lower in every aircraft categorybut"Helicopters" and "All aircraft." Helicopter complaints increased 34.9 percent during 1989. 53 percent of these complaints were directed toward non-based helicopters. The "All aircraft" category of aircraft type cannot be broken into individual aircraft types. This category indicates callers are complaining of the activity at the airport rather than individual events. Calls of this type were generated almost exclusively by Pleasant Hill residents. Complaints by Aircraft Type 350 344 300 /X, zas aso -� zo � 143 10 6 100 —� 58 50 50 40 49 40 31 0 Jet Mufti engine Slagle-eo&e Helkwpter Nl Types Unknown (6) Complaints by Time of Day Eighty percent of noise events which generated calls took place during the daytime hours of 6 a.m. through 7 p.m. This reflects the actual activity of the airport during which most operations take place. Complaints in all time categories decreased in 1989 with the exception of"Night"and "All Times." Thirty percent of"Night"category calls were generated by two Noise Ordinance Violators. Complaints by Time of Day 700 617 600 — 586 500 — N a.r 0 400 — a E O U 300 0 — Z 200 — 132 100 98 74 46 7 6 0 Day Evening Night AU Times The "All Times" category increased by only one call and reflects objection to the activity of the airport. These types of complaints cannot be dealt with singularly but will be better controlled and assessed with the implementation of the noise monitoring system. Type of Complaints Complaints due to excessive noise generated the majority of complaints with almost forty percent of calls. The second highest complaint category was the combined category of "Noise and Low-flying"which generated almost 33 percent of complaints. This was followed by "Low-flying"calls which accounted for 21 percent of calls, "Other"with five percent;"Too Many Aircraft"with 4 percent and "Alleged Reckless Flying" with almost two percent. (7) The"Alleged Reckless Flying"calls are referred to the Federal Aviation Administration Flight Standards District Office(FSDO). FSDO is the investigative branch of the FAA with the authority to enforce the Federal Aviation Regulations. The FAA is the proper agency for investigating Alleged Reckless Flying and Low-flying types of calls. Type of Complaints 300 --- 280 / 260 239 240 — 220 200 // lll 0 180 /� 152 J 0160 140 Z' 120 f 100 80 //� 40 � 30 20 � � 12 0 Noise LF NLF ARF TMA Other LF -Low-Flying Aircraft ARF - Alleged Reckless Flying NLF- Noise&Low-Flying Aircraft TMA -Too Many Aircraft Noise ManagementProgress During 1989, the airport established a Pilot Noise Abatement Committe made up of representatives of several pilot groups and based tenants. This committee meets monthly to discuss the noise management program and identify areas of improvement. The committee has identified a need to demonstrate altitudes during normal phases of flights and to conduct noise tests on different aircraft types.. They will be holding such an event in early Spring and will invite the public to participate. The group has also worked with airport management and developed a noise abatement brochure directed toward pilots. This brochure summarizes noise abatement procedures and also provides safety tips. The.finalized version has been completed and will be distributed in February. (8) Recently, Airport management submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration an application package for funding for its Noise Monitoring System. The total cost of this system is estimated to be $320,700. This project will include up to nine noise monitors, computer and software, voice-activated tape recorder, installation and consulting costs as well as easements. The airport hopes to have the system fully operational in early 1991. (9)