HomeMy WebLinkAbout14 - John Wayne Airport General Aviation Improvement Program Update - CorrespondenceReceived After Agenda Printed
May 28, 2019
Item No. 14
Subject: FW: GAIP Letter Edits
From: Susan Dvorak [mailto:susan dvorak@hotmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2019 2:23 PM
To: Finnigan, Tara <TFinnigan@newportbeachca.gov>
Cc: Leung, Grace <gleung@newportbeachca.gov>; DIANEBDIXON <dianebdixon@gmail.com>; Muldoon, Kevin
<kmuldoon@newportbeachca.gov>; Herdman, Jeff <*herdman@newportbeachca.gov>; Avery, Brad
<bavery@newportbeachca.gov>; Duffield, Duffy <dduffield@newportbeachca.gov>; Brenner, Joy
<ioy@newportbeachca.gov>; O'Neill, William <woneill@newportbeachca.gov>; Julie Johnson
<iuliestewartlohnson@gmail.com>; Beverly Blais <bblaisesq@gmail.com>
Subject: Fw: GAIP Letter Edits
Dear Tara:
Thank you for your summary of the meeting. We appreciate the City's interest in hearing the community
groups' perspectives.
CAANP understands that the city staff is recommending that city council change their previously stated
support of GAIP Alternative #3 to an Alternative that was first proposed by Supervisor Do during the May 7th
Board of Supervisors meeting. We are hesitant to unconditionally support this yet to be determined
Aternative due to the complexity of the issues and their importance to the future of Newport Beach residents
and other JWA-impacted communities. We support a resolution that best protects the residents and limits the
flights, operations and facilities for the GAIP. It is our position that the city should retain the guidance of an
expert with established expertise in airport infrastructure, planning and design given the intricacies of the
GAIP which includes, but is not limited to: allocating parcel layouts, limiting slots and ramp space for transient
planes, determining the actual square footage of the facilities, assessing whether flights or aircraft can be
legally capped, and determining hangar sizes.
We have reviewed the five bullet points, which accurately describe what was discussed in the meeting;
however, following are additional observations that we believe would be advantageous to the City:
Bullet Point #1: ("Full Service FBOs — No more than two (2)"). If the City promotes two FBOs, as
opposed to three, there is still the potential for ACI or some other FBO to gain control of the entire
parcel on the Campus Drive side of the airport, which would place ACI or another FBO in a position of
power to build its jet aviation business, including ample space for the large, intrusive jets that we are
attempting to avoid. Mel Beale has indicated that Barbara Lichman will work with Tom Edwards to
prepare and/or review an Addendum/Appendix to the County's eventual RFP that will pertain to the
appropriate "parcel language" and should hopefully limit the takeover of the entire Campus Drive side
by one FBO to the detriment of light GA, but at this point, there is no assurance of this.
Bullet Point #6: ("Maintain the current "GA mix"). To be more consistent with Supervisor Do's
proposal, perhaps this point should read, "Maintain the EIR-specified 'GA mix' baseline." As you may
recall, through using the EIR baseline, proposed by Supervisor Do, the "current" JWA home-based jets
will be reduced by approximately 50%. Logic dictates, fewer home-based jets = fewer jet flights, less
noise and less pollution.
As acknowledged in your email, it is critical that the square footage of GA jet facilities is constrained, which
may also be an important component in limiting transient jet usage. Although we are under the impression
that the limiting the use of JWA by transient jets can be partially achieved through the eventual configuration
of the airport's FBOs, hangars, ramps and slots, this is clearly a consideration that is well outside of our
knowledge base and requires the evaluation by an expert with experience in airport infrastructure, planning
and design.
Lastly, CAANP requests that when meeting with County representatives, the City consider the points made in
our May 20th letter to the Board of Supervisors. We feel strongly that when negotiating with the FBO's, the
County should propose the following:
• That the County, when renewing or establishing new contracts with FBO's, establish hours of operation
that are consistent with those of the commercial airlines;
• That the County enforce a lower maximum departure and arrival noise level of 79 dB SENEL for any GA
jets arriving or departing from JWA outside of established hours of operation;
• That the County require GA aircraft owners flying outside of established FBO hours of operation to pay
significantly higher landing and departure fees;
• That the County maintain control and management of JWA GA and retain oversight of FBO operations;
• That the County maintain control and management of JWA land use and allocation, including
preservation of space for future electric aircraft services; and
• That the County explore increasing GA northerly departures, as suggested by both the City's
consultant, David Wilson, and others.
Again, thank you for meeting with us last week and we look forward to working with you regarding these
issues. We hope you will continue to include the community groups in the upcoming meetings with the airport
staff so we can have a better understanding of the proposed plan.
Sincerely,
CAANP