Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2000-03-20 City Council (21)City of Palo Alto City Manager’s, Report TO:HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL FROM:CITY MANAGER DEPARTMENT:ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DATE:MARCH 20, 2000 CMR: 187:00 SUBJECT:ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE JOINT COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE FOR THE PALO ALTO AIRPORT This is an informational report and no Council action is required. BACKGROUND The Joint Community Relations Committee for the Palo Alto Airport was established in 1987 for the purpose of improving and maintaining communication between the airport and the community. Responsibility for appointing members to the Committee is shared by the City and the County to assure a broad representation of interests on the Committee. The Committee has established the practice of preparing an annual report which sums up the accomplishments of the prior year and identifies areas where it will concentrate its efforts during the coming year. The annual report is presented as an informational document to the Santa Clara County Airports Commission and the Palo Alto City Council. Attached to this staff report is the Committee’s 1999 Annual Report. The chair of the Committee, Peter Carpenter, will be present at the Council rneeting to present the report and respond to any Council comments or questions. CMR:187:00 Page 1 of 2 PREPARED BY: William F. Fellman, Manager of Real Property Services Attachment: JCRC1999 Palo Alto Airport Annual Report cc:Peter Carpenter, Chair, Joint Community Relations Committee for the Palo Alto Airport Jerry Bennett, Director of Aviation, Santa Clara County CMR:187:00 Page 2 of 2 Periodic Report to the Palo Alto City Council from the Joint Community Relations COmmittee for the Palo Alto Airport March 2000 The Joint Community Relations Committee for the Palo Alto Airport was established by Santa Clara County Airports Commission and the City of Palo Alto to provide advice and recommendations to those bodies on the subject of aviation issues related to the airport. Specifically, the JCRC "initiates discussions, observations and investigations in order to make recommendations on aviation or airport matters to the County and the City ". It also ." hears comments on airport or aviation matters from the public or other agencies or interest groups for consideration and possible recommendation to the County and City". The JCRC also is tasked to "advance and promote the interests of aviation and to protect the general welfare of the people living and working near the airport". The purpose of this report is to update the City Council on the recent activities of the JCRC. The JCRC consists of 12 members of whom the County of Santa Clara appoints 6 and the City of Palo Alto appoints 6. We currently meet on the second Tuesday of each of each month at the Palo Alto Airport (usually at facilities provided by West Valley Flying Club.) These meetings are open to the public, however public attendance is infrequent (perhaps because we do not have the funds to notice the meetings). The priorities of the JCRC are First, safety Second, ensure that the airport is a good neighbor Third, ensure that the airport provides services to the community. It is important to recognize that the Palo Alto Airport is both a commercial and recreational facility. As a commercial (both airport-.based businesses and airport based business pilots) facility the airport provides important tax revenues and commercial activities for the city of Palo Alto. The airport is also an important link in the Bay Area transportation system, particularly in the event of a major earthquake, which may seriously disrupt surface transportation. As a recreational site, the airport provides recreational opportunities for a large number of private pilots. Over last five years the general level of activity at the airport, as measured by takeoffs and landings, has remained relatively constant (205,674 in 94, 184,285 in 95, 196,091 in 96, 208,086 in 97, 189,626 in 98 and 205,594 in 99). The activity level did decline during the El Nino years due to the adverse weather and the impact of that weather on flying conditions. There has also been a slight downward trend over the last couple of years due to the deteriorating conditions of the airport surface. Over the same time period the number of noise complaints from citizens has also remained at relatively low levels. (8 in 95, 8 in 96, 23 in 97, 14 in 98 and 25 in 99 and of all of these 14 were from one individual and 4 from a second individual.) The role of JCRC with regards to noise complaints exemplifies the manner in which we attempt to carry out our mandate. The very capable Santa Clara County Airports Division staff first processes each noise complaint and the majority of these noise complaints are resolved at that level. The airport staff frequently receive complaints of low level flights, by aircraft that are flying through the area but not taking off or landing at Palo Alto airport such as traffic helicopters and military aircraft enroute to or from the Moffett Federal Air Facility. The airport staff will frequently go to the neighborhood in question and monitor sound levels on the ground while being in radio contact with the Palo Alto tower in order to further pin down the nature of the problem. Those infrequent noise complaints that are not resolved to the satisfaction of the complainant at the airport staff level or which reoccur are generally referred to the JCRC for our action. In my role as Chair, I have elected to take the primary responsibility for responding to such complaints rather than letting them sit until the next JCRC meeting. My response is generally to contact the individual who submitted the complaint and to try to better understand the specific nature of their complaint. I also inform them of the general operating practices of the airport (approach and departure patterns, impact of low cloud ceilings etc.) so that they might better understand the reasons for the flying activity that may be causing them some concern. If we are able to identify specific airplanes or pilot that are c&using the particular problem, then I will meet with the pilot and attempt to understand the reasons for that pilot’s particular flight paths. Usually we can then devise an alternative pattern that causes less noise impact on the surrounding area. In some cases we will work with the very professional and helpful representatives of the FAA tower operation at Palo Alto Airport to revise their standard operating procedures in order to minimize noise impacts - subject always to safety considerations. I provide individuals who have noise concerns with my home phone number and welcome phone calls from them at any time - including 2 o’clock in the morning on more than one occasion. In addition, I have met with individuals at their homes and in some cases with their neighbors to further explore the nature of their concerns and to try to be responsive to the issues that they have raised. In general, the number of noise complaints involving movements to or from the Palo Alto Airport is substantially lower than that which occurs with most similarly situated airports adjacent to or surrounded by residential areas. This is due to three factors: First, the airport (having been relocated twice) is in a very fortunate location immediately adjacent to the Baylands which allows us to conduct a majority of our operations over unpopulated areas, Second, the cooperation of the pilots operating from the Palo Alto Airport by engaging in both noise avoidance flight patterns and engine operations, and Third, the very effective work of the airport, FAA staff, and the JCRC. This situation does not in any way minimize the importance of continued ’vigilance in this area and our responsibility to ensure that the airport continues to be a good neighbor. Over the last six months a significant change to the airport has been the partial completion of the FAA and County funded capital improvement program which involved repaving significant areas of the taxi way, the forthcoming repaving of the runway and the addition of security lighting throughout the parking area. Due to the close cooperation between the airport community, the County and the City of Palo Alto this capital improvement program was designed, approved and is being implemented in a way which is responsive to the concerns not only of the aviation community but also to the environmental community. This effort addressed the concerns for the sensitive areas adjacent to the airport. These Baylands areas are ones that we all enjoy and they are a very rich environmental treasure that must not and will not be jeopardized by inappropriate activity and/or construction at the airport. We are currently working with the Baylands Naturalist to monitor the impact of the new lighting during the forthcoming breeding season; should any problems be discovered, we will work with the appropriate parties to minimize or eliminate those problems. We are also working with the Baylands Naturalist to reduce or eliminate any use of poisons/pesticides on the airport in order to eliminate this hazard to the Baylands wildlife. Looking forward, the JCRC has one important recommendation for both the County of Santa Clara and the City of Palo Alto. Just as Palo Alto felt it important to be included in the San Francisco Airport Roundtable and found it difficult to do so because of the county boundary between Palo Alto and the San Francisco Airport, the JCRC feels it is important that our neighbors to the north in San Mateo County, specifically East Palo Alto and Menlo Park be invited to participate in the activities of the JCRC. Palo Alto Airport’s flight patterns overlay both East Palo Alto and Menlo Park to the same or even greater degree than they do the City of Palo Alto. Therefore, we recommend that the City and the County invite the City of Menlo Park and the City of East Palo Alto to each appoint one citizen member to the JCRC. While we have in the past encouraged attendance at our meetings by the staff from East Palo Alto, this does not perform the same function as having a full-time member. We would be pleased to work with the City and the County on revising the charter for the JCRC to accommodate such appointments. We would also welcome your suggestions as to any other modifications that we might make in either our membership or procedures to better carry out the functions of this committee. Peter F. Carpenter, Chair