HomeMy WebLinkAbout(2015, 05/12) - A-17 - AmendedA-17
NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL AIRPORT POLICY
A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City Council's primary objective is to protect Newport Beach residents from
the impacts of commercial aircraft operations at and from John Wayne Airport
(JWA). The City Council believes that the impacts related to JWA are now, and
will continue to be, the most significant threat to the quality of life of Newport
Beach residents. For the last 30 years, the City, and community groups
concerned about adverse airport impacts, have developed and implemented
strategies to control those impacts and these efforts, which have been supported
by the County for the last 30 years, have made JWA one of the most "community
friendly' airports in the nation.
The City and community groups have achieved some success in controlling
airport impacts by understanding, and working within, the complex legal,
economic and political factors that are relevant to adverse airport impacts such
as the type and level of aircraft operations. The purpose of this Policy, which is
admittedly long and somewhat complex, is to provide elected and appointed
officials with information and guidelines that will help ensure that decisions
related to JWA serve the best interests of Newport Beach residents and enable
residents to better understand and provide input regarding those decisions.
Recognizing that the City has no legal ability to directly regulate JWA
operations, the City Council and community groups approved (in 1985),
aggressively protected (in 1990), and then extended (in 2002 and 2014) the term
of the JWA Settlement Agreement. The JWA Settlement Agreement is the single
most important vehicle for controlling adverse airport impacts. The City Council
should pursue future Settlement Agreement amendments but only if the terms
and conditions of the amendments dont facilitate any physical expansion of the
airport, don't modify the curfew, don't adversely impact our resident's quality of
life and are in the best long-term interests of Newport Beach residents most
adversely impacted by airport operations.
The City will continue to aggressively oppose any proposal or plan that could
lead to development of a second air carrier runway or runway extension and any
plan or proposal that could lead to any modification of the existing noise -based
curfew. The City will continue to work with, and support the efforts of,
community groups and other cities impacted by JWA when those efforts are
consistent or compatible with the airport strategies approved by the City
Council. The City will also actively support any program or proposal that would
help serve Orange County's air transportation demand at facilities other than
JWA.
1
A-17
This Policy has been developed with input from the Aviation Committee that
was established by the City Council in 1979. Aviation Committee members have
volunteered thousands of hours in developing and implementing City airport
policies and strategies. The Aviation Committee is comprised of residents of
each Council District, many of whom are pilots or otherwise knowledgeable
about airport or aviation issues, and the diversity of membership ensures
relevant input from all geographic segments of the City. The City Council
appreciates the good work of the Aviation Committee and will continue to rely
on the Aviation Committee in developing and implementing airport policy.
B. HISTORY
Many residential communities in Newport Beach are located under or near the
departure pattern of commercial, and some general aviation, aircraft operating
out of JWA. The City has, since the mid -1970's, developed and implemented
strategies designed to minimize the adverse impacts - such as noise and traffic -
of JWA on its residents and their quality of life. The City's initial efforts focused
on involvement in "route authority" proceedings conducted by the Civil
Aviation Board and litigation challenging County decisions that could increase
the level or frequency of aircraft noise events. However, the City and
community groups concerned about JWA such as the Airport Working Group
(AWG) and Stop Polluting Our Newport (SPON) re-evaluated the litigation
strategy after the Board of Supervisors (Board) approved the 1985 JWA Master
Plan (Master Plan) because of changes in State and Federal law as well as the
factors that impact air transportation demand in Orange County and the region.
In 1985, the City, County, SPON and AWG entered into a stipulation and
agreement (1985 Settlement Agreement) to resolve Federal Court litigation
initiated by the County seeking judicial approval of the Master Plan. The 1985
Settlement Agreement required the Board to modify resolutions approving the
Master Plan to reduce the size of the terminal and limit the number of parking
spaces. The 1985 Settlement Agreement also: (a) established three "classes" of
commercial aircraft (Class A, AA, and E) based on the noise generated by the
aircraft (operating with known gross takeoff weights) at the departure noise
monitoring stations; (b) limited the number of "average daily departures" (ADD)
of Class A and AA departures before and after construction of a new terminal to
73 ADD; (c) limited the number of passengers served each year at JWA
(expressed in terms of "million annual passengers" or "MAP") to 8.4 MAP after
construction of the new terminal; and (d) required the County to maintain the
curfew then effect at JWA and enforce the General Aviation Noise Ordinance.
0J
A-17
Between 1985 and 2002, the County, City, SPON and AWG each collectively
agreed, on seven separate occasions, to amend the 1985 Settlement Agreement.
These amendments responded, among other things, to: (a) a new FAA Advisory
Circular (AC 91-53A) that established specific criteria for close -in and distant
noise abatement departure procedures; (b) changes in the location and/or type of
equipment used to monitor commercial air carrier noise levels on departure;
(c) air cargo carrier requests for access; and (d) changes in passenger, facility and
baggage security requirements brought about by the events of September 11,
2001.
1n 1990, Congress adopted the Airport Noise and Capacity Act (ANCA) which,
in relevant part, requires FAA "review and approval of proposed noise or access
restrictions" on Stage 3 aircraft. The City and County successfully lobbied
Congress to "grandfather" (exempt from the FAA "review and approval"
requirements of ANCA): (a) the 1985 Settlement Agreement; (b) amendments to
the 1985 Settlement Agreement that do not adversely impact airport capacity or
airport safety; and (c) the then current County noise "curfew" ordinance
In December of 2002, the City, County, SPON and AWG approved amendments
to the 1985 Settlement Agreement (2002 Amendments) that: (a) eliminated the
"AA" class of aircraft; (b) increased the maximum number of noise regulated air
carrier ADD from 73 to 85; (c) increased the maximum number of air cargo ADD
from 2 to 4 (the County is authorized to allocate two air cargo ADD to air carriers
pending requests for use of those ADD by air cargo carriers); (d) increased the
service level limit from 8.4 to 10.3 MAP until January 1, 2011 and to 10.8 MAP on
and after January 1, 2011 (with 500,000 seats allocated to regional jets); and
(e) increased the maximum number of passenger loading bridges from 14 to 20.
The 2002 Amendments also eliminated the floor area restrictions on the size of
the terminal and the "cap" on public parking spaces.
In January 2003, the Honorable Terry Hatter (the Federal District Court Judge
who entered the stipulated judgment implementing the 1985 Settlement
Agreement stipulation) also approved the stipulation of the parties
implementing the 2002 Amendments.
The 2002 Amendments allowed the County to offer additional air transportation
service without any significant increase in noise impacts on Newport Beach
residents. The flight and service level restrictions under the 2002 Amendments
were effective until January 1, 2016 and provisions related to the curfew remain
in effect until at least January 1, 2021. The FAA confirmed the validity of the
2002 Amendments, thus establishing a precedent for future amendments that do
not adversely impact airport capacity or airport safety.
Q
A-17
In 2012, recognizing that the 1985 Settlement Agreement (as amended) would
expire in 2015, the City Council asked the County to consider a further extension
of the 1985 Settlement Agreement. In April 2013, the County, City, AWG, and
SPON entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (2013 MOU) outlining the
terms for the extension of the 1985 Settlement Agreement and to define their
respective roles and responsibilities in the preparation of an environmental
impact report (EIR) for the extension of the 1985 Settlement Agreement.
In September and October of 2014, the City, County, SPON, and AWG approved
amendments to the 1985 Settlement Agreement (2014 Amendments - Exhibit A)
that: (a) extended the term of the 1985 Settlement Agreement until at least
December 31, 2030; (b) requires that there be no change to the curfew until at
least December 31, 2035; (c) maintains the 10.8 MAP limit through December 31,
2020 and increases the MAP level for departing and arriving passengers at JWA
to 11.8 MAP, beginning on January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2025, and
increasing the MAP level from 11.8 MAP to 12.2 or 12.5 MAP , beginning on
January 1, 2026, through December 31, 2030; (d) maintains the 85 Class A ADD
limit through December 31, 2020 and increases the limits on said flights from
January 1, 2021, through December 31, 2030 to 95 ADDS; (e) maintains the
number of ADDS allocated to air cargo service at four ADDs, two of which can
be used for commercial air passenger flights, through December 31, 2030; and (f)
prohibits additional passenger loading bridges through December 31, 2020, at
which time the restriction on the number of passenger loading bridges would be
lifted.
In September of 2014, the FAA made a favorable determination that the 2014
Amendments do not have an adverse impact on airport capacity or airport safety
and that the 2014 Amendments comply with other relevant federal laws and
regulation (Exhibit B).
In October of 2014, the Honorable Terry J. Hatter, Jr. (the Federal District Court
Judge who entered the stipulated judgment implementing the 1985 Settlement
Agreement stipulation) also approved the stipulation of the parties
implementing the 2014 Amendments.
4
A-17
C. LEGAL FRAMEWORK
The strategies, actions and decisions of the City Council and community groups
concerned about airport impacts must consider and respect the complex
statutory and decisional law related to aircraft operations and airport
regulations. The failure of the City Council or community groups to accurately
inform Newport Beach residents about the legal framework could lead to
unreasonable expectations and ill-advised decisions and/or strategies. The
following is a brief summary of some of the more important laws applicable to
the control of aircraft operations and airports.
1. Noise Control.
The U.S. Supreme Court has decided that the owner of an airport - the
proprietor - is the only non-federal entity that can adopt regulations
restricting the amount of noise that is generated by aircraft operations. A
non -proprietor such as the City of Newport Beach has no authority to
adopt ordinances or resolutions that regulate airport noise. In fact, ANCA
severely constrains the right of the proprietor to regulate Stage 3 aircraft
operations. ANCA states that any "noise or access" restriction on
commercial aircraft operating today must be "reviewed and approved" by
the FAA. The FAA review is based on an extensive proprietor funded
study of the impacts of the proposed restriction. As of this date, the FAA
has not approved any proposed Stage 3 aircraft noise or access restriction
and the consensus of aviation attorneys is that the FAA would be hostile
to any such a restriction. The 1985 Settlement Agreement predated ANCA
and was "grandfathered" from its provisions. The 2002 and 2014
Amendments were not subject to FAA review and approval, as confirmed
by the FAA letter, because they did not adversely impact airport capacity
or airport safety.
2. Aircraft Operations & Airport Facilities.
The FAA has exclusive jurisdiction over aircraft after takeoff and
extensive authority over airport facilities. The FAA approves standard
instrument and noise abatement departure procedures and has done so
with respect to aircraft operations at JWA. The FAA also approves
"airport layout plans" for each airport and has the authority to enforce
regulations that promote and/or pertain to airfield and airport safety.
While the proprietor retains the authority to decide the number and
nature of certain facilities such as passenger loading bridges and aircraft
tie -downs, the FAA has adopted, and has the discretion to enforce,
61
A-17
numerous regulations governing airport facilities. Federal law preempts
any local law purporting to regulate aircraft operations or airfield safety.
3. Interstate Commerce Clause.
Commercial air carrier operations are considered interstate commerce and
the Interstate Commerce Clause can be invoked to invalidate local laws or
regulations that purport to control certain aspects of those operations. The
courts will invalidate laws or agreements that are found to be
"unreasonable restraints" on Interstate Commerce.
D. POLICY - SUMMARY
The following components comprise the City's airport policy:
1. Primary Objective
2. Considerations
3. JWA Settlement Agreement
4. JWA Facilities & Operations
5. Alternative Transportation Service
6. Public Agency Support and Participation
7. Community Involvement
8. Monitoring/ Recommendations
E. POLICY
1. Primary Objective
The City Council's primary objective is to protect Newport Beach
residents from the adverse impacts of commercial aircraft operations at
and from JWA. The City Council believes that airport impacts are now,
and will continue to be, the most significant threat to the quality of life of
Newport Beach residents. Accordingly, the City should develop, modify
as necessary and aggressively implement strategies and action plans that
are designed to achieve the primary objective. The strategies and plans
must consider and respect the complex legal, political and economic
factors relevant to airport operations and impacts.
31
A-17
2. Considerations
The City's airport policy has, historically, been based on a thorough
understanding and consideration of a wide range of factors that are
relevant to airport operations and impacts. Factors relevant to airport
operations and impacts include:
a. State and Federal law;
b. The attitudes, philosophy and regulations of the FAA;
C. The state of the economy - national and regional;
d. The economic condition of the air carrier industry;
e. The regional demand for air transportation;
f. Regional and sub -regional planning and transportation programs
and policies;
g. The decisions, philosophy and opinions of the Board of Supervisors
and, to a lesser extent, other local, State and Federal representatives
and officials; and
h. The opinions and concerns of Orange County residents and
business owners.
The number of relevant factors and the complexity of the issues related to
adverse airport impacts mean that no single approach or simple strategy
will be successful in achieving the City's primary objective. The City will
be able to achieve its primary objective only if its strategies and action
plans reflect a thorough understanding and consideration of these factors
- especially the legal framework applicable to airport and aircraft
operations - and if its residents understand the inherent limitations on the
City's legal authority to regulate aircraft operations or airport service
levels.
3. JWA Settlement Agreement
The JWA Settlement Agreement is the primary vehicle by which the City
exercises control over airport impacts. The operational and service level
restrictions in the JWA Settlement Agreement remain in effect at least
until January 1, 2031 and provisions related to the curfew remain in effect
until at least January 1, 2036. FAA letters confirming the validity of the
2002 and 2014 Amendments is a precedent for future amendments that,
like the 2002 and 2014 Amendments, increase air transportation service
without impacting airport capacity, airport safety or the quality of life of
Newport Beach residents. The City Council shall pursue further
amendments to adhere to the following fundamental principles with
rA
A-17
respect to the JWA Settlement Agreement and any modification or
amendment under consideration:
a. The City Council shall not consider or approve any agreement
(including any amendment of the 2002 and 2014 Amendments) that
would or could result in any modification to the County's airport
curfew ordinances.
b. The City Council shall not consider or approve any agreement
(including any amendment of the 2002 and 2014 Amendments) that
would or could lead to the construction of a second air carrier
runway.
C. The City Council should consider modifications to the Settlement
Agreement only upon a determination, based on appropriate
environmental documentation, that the modifications will not
materially alter the quality of life, and are in the best long term
interests, of Newport Beach residents most impacted by JWA.
d. As a condition to any amendment of the 2002 and 2014
Amendments or successor agreements, the City Council should
obtain a favorable FAA determination that the proposed
amendment or agreement is exempt from FAA review and
approval on the basis that there is no adverse impact on airport
capacity or airport safety and complies with other relevant federal
laws and regulations.
4. JWA Facilities & Operations
JWA has a single air carrier runway with air carrier, air cargo and general
aviation facilities sharing approximately 500 acres. The City Council shall
take any action necessary to ensure that no additional air carrier runway is
constructed. The City Council shall also take any action necessary to
prevent any modification of the existing noise curfew that, generally
speaking, prohibits certain departures from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (8:00
a.m. Sunday morning). The City should also support any plan or
proposal that maintains, and oppose any plan or project that proposes any
significant change to, the existing level of general aviation operations, the
current level of general aviation support facilities or the General Aviation
Noise Ordinance. Finally, the City shall take all steps necessary to
preserve or enhance the existing remote monitoring system (RMS) and
public disclosure of RMS readings and information.
E:3
A-17
The City, through the Aviation Committee, will also continuously
evaluate means and methods by which JWA impacts can be minimized
including the analysis of changes in airport procedures and aviation
related technological advancements to determine if feasible alternatives
exist. In the event the City identifies feasible alternatives that could
reduce adverse airport impacts the City shall take all reasonable actions
necessary to implement the alternative(s).
5. Alternative Transportation Service
The City Council recognizes that there is presently no feasible site for a
second air carrier airport in Orange County and that residential and
commercial development is likely to result in increased air transportation
demand over time. Accordingly, the City Council should support
opportunities to serve some Orange County air transportation demand at
airports other than JWA including:
a. Promoting circulation and transportation improvements from
Orange County residential and business communities to outlying
airports with capacity in excess of current operations levels such as
Ontario Airport and San Bernardino International Airport.
b. Supporting development of new or expanded air carrier facilities in
locations that are, or could be with appropriate transportation
links, convenient to Orange County residents.
C. Supporting the development of new or expanded air cargo service
and facilities that could increase the airfield or airspace capacity of
existing passenger serving airports.
d. Supporting regional and sub -regional plans and programs that are
consistent with then current JWA operational and passenger
service levels and provide potentially feasible means or
mechanisms to serve some Orange County air transportation
demand at facilities other than JWA.
6. Public Agency Support and Participation
The City Council should continuously pursue support for each component
of this Policy from other public agencies, especially those concerned about
JWA impacts. A key component of any such initiative is the Corridor City
coalition. The Corridor City coalition was a major force in Board approval
of the 2002 and 2014 Amendments. The Corridor City coalition was built
on a foundation of mutual interest in JWA operations and regular
meetings between members of the respective City Councils supported by
interaction between city managers and/or city attorneys. The City should
X
A-17
continue to arrange regular meetings of the Corridor City coalition to
update members on any activity that could be relevant to Orange County
air transportation or JWA operations.
The City will participate, to the maximum extent possible, in local and
regional planning processes that have a bearing on decisions regarding
airport capacity, airport service and other relevant issues. Of particular
importance is participation in the Southern California Association of
Governments' (SCAG) development of the Regional Transportation Plan.
The City Council and staff will also regularly meet and communicate with
County, State and Federal elected or appointed officials regarding the
actions that the officials can take (or oppose) that will help the City
achieve its primary objective.
7. Community Involvement
The City Council recognizes that any plan or strategy to control JWA
impacts requires support and assistance from community-based groups
concerned about airport impacts. These groups, such as the AWG, have
volunteered thousands of hours pursuing strategies and plans designed to
minimize airport impacts and were instrumental in past successes. The
City Council welcomes, and will support, the efforts of any group or
individual that is striving to achieve the City's primary objective,
understands the legal, political and economic factors that are relevant to
the control of airport impacts and seeks to achieve the City's primary
objective in a manner that reflects full consideration and understanding of
those factors.
The City will communicate regularly with its residents relative to the key
provisions of this Policy as well as local and regional activities that are
relevant to this Policy. As part of this communication, Council members
and staff will regularly meet with the leaders and/or members of citizen -
based organizations concerned about airport impacts.
8. Monitoring/ Recommendations
The City Council is ultimately responsible to achieve the primary objective
of this policy - to minimize the impact of JWA operations on the quality of
life of Newport Beach residents. The City Council shall designate the City
Manager as the employee primarily responsible for coordinating the
implementation of this Policy. The City Manager, personally or through
one or more designees, shall implement this Policy including regular
communications with residents, the leaders of community organizations
10
A-17
and the Corridor Cities. The City Manager shall periodically report the
status of implementation to the City Council and shall perform the
following:
a. Monitoring Settlement Agreement Compliance. The City Manager
shall carefully and thoroughly monitor those aspects of airport
operation relevant to the Settlement Agreement, including County
enforcement of the General Aviation Noise Ordinance and provide
the Aviation Committee and the City Council with periodic reports.
b. Monitoring Regional Airport Plans/Programs. The City Manager
should continuously monitor efforts or plans by any agency or
entity to develop new airports, expand existing facilities or
otherwise provide additional air or ground transportation service
that could serve Orange County air transportation demand.
C. Monitoring Regional Planning Agencies. Agencies such as SCAG
have the authority to, and do, adopt plans and programs that
materially impact airport planning, airport usage, airport
development and access to airports. The City Manager should
ensure that a City representative routinely attends all SCAG
meetings that pertain to aviation and report all relevant activities to
the City Council and the Aviation Committee.
d. Monitoring State & Federal Legislative Sessions. State and Federal
legislation - such as ANCA - have the potential to impact JWA and
Orange County air transportation issues in a variety of ways. The
City Manager should routinely monitor all proposed State
legislation and, to the extent feasible, potentially relevant Federal
legislation and notify the City Council and the Aviation Committee
of any legislation that is relevant to the City's ability to protect its
residents from impacts related to JWA operations.
e. Recommendations. The City Manager should continuously advise
the City Council on actions that should be taken to implement this
Policy in a manner consistent with the Fundamental Principles.
The City Manager shall prepare and submit to the City Council for
consideration at a noticed public meeting reports that explain the
rationale for any recommendation.
11
History
A-17
Adopted B-1 - 2-14-1972 ("Airport Land Use Commission')
Reaffirmed B-1 -12-10-1973
Reaffirmed B-1 -11-11-1974
Amended B-1 -10-14-1975 (renaming "Orange County Airport Policy")
Amended B-1 -11-27-1978
Created B-2 -11-27-1978 (returned to "Airport Land Use Commission')
Amended B-1 -10-14-1980
Amended B-1 - 7-27-1981
Amended B-1 - 9-27-1982
Created B-2 - 09-27-1982 (renaming to "Limitations of John Wayne Airport")
Amended B-1 -3-14-1983
Amended B-1 - 5-23-1983
Amended B-1 & B-2 -12-9-1985
Amended B-1 & B-2 -10-22-1990
Amended B-2 - 7-13-1992
Amended B-1 -12-13-1993 (incorporating B-2)
Amended B-1 - 2-27-1995
Amended B-1 - 3-22-1999 (changed to A-17)
Amended A-17 - 7-25-2006
Amended A-17 - 5-12-2015
IM
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit A
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
Exhibit B
Exhibit B