1) Online community survey
2) City’s airport visioning process

************************************************************************
 
1) COMMUNITY ONLINE SURVEY:
 
The FOSP Board encourages you to participate in a quick online survey sponsored by the “Community Against Santa Monica Airport Traffic.” (CASMAT.org)
 
CASMAT and its study are not connected to the City of Santa Monica. Rather, it is an independent group of Santa Monica residents who conduct their own studies related to the airport. They will report the results of the survey to the Airport Commission in February.
 
Take CASMAT’s survey at http://www.casmat.org/p/survey.html
 
********************************************************************************
 
2) AIRPORT VISIONING PROCESS:
 
The City of Santa Monica’s Airport Visioning process regarding the future of Santa Monica Airport (SMO) continues into Phase II.
 
For those of you interested in the future of Santa Monica Airport, be sure to sign up for a 2-hour “Community Discussion Group”  at http://SMOvisioning.org/discussions or call 310-458-8221  in order to participate in the city’s SMO Visioning Process.
 
The focus groups will consist of 8-12 people each. This is your opportunity to let the city know how you feel about the airport.
 
Do you want the airport to stay open or to close in 2015? Do you want more flights or fewer flights? Are you concerned about safety issues, the lack of Runway Safety Areas (no buffer zones at the ends of the runway), the 900% increase in jet traffic over the last 25 years (from 1,300 to 13,000 jet landings and takeoffs per year), the flight schools, prop planes using leaded fuel, the 250-heading, helicopters, air pollution, soot from partially burned fuel, noise?
 
Are you concerned about preserving the history of the airport? Do you want more playing fields? More artist studios? More restaurants? Housing? A business park? How would various options affect traffic congestion in Sunset Park? Let your voice be heard.   
 
The 2-hour focus groups will take place:
 
– On various dates between January 21st and March 14th
– On various days (Tuesday through Saturday)
– At various times (10 AM, 2 PM, 3 PM, 6 PM, 7 PM)
– At various locations (Sunset Park, Ocean Park, downtown Santa Monica,
   Pico neighborhood, Wishire/Montana neighborhood, and on PCH at the
   Annenberg Community Beach House.
 
Sign up at http://smovisioning.org/discussions or call 310-458-8221.
 
(If you can’t find a date, time, and location that works for you, please let FOSP know at FriendsofSP@yahoo.com.)

about neighborhood projects, the economy, and the future.

 
…about how we are doing…
How does the economy look from a local perspective? Rod will discuss our fiscal outlook and talk about the city’s strategies for difficult times.

……and what we are doing!
What did we do last year? How will we build on that? Talk with Rod about what we accomplished last year, upcoming City initiatives and outreach projects, and what is going on in your neighborhood.

MEETING TIMES:  Click here to download the flyer

Thursday, November 3rd at  7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Friends of Sunset Park
Grant Elementary School Auditorium
2368 Pearl Street

Monday, November 7th at 7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Ocean Park Association
Neighborhood meeting begins at 5:30 p.m.
SMASH/Muir Elementary
School Auditorium
2526 6th Street

Monday, November 21st  at 7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Wilshire Montana
Neighborhood Coalition
Civic Center East Wing
1855 Main Street

Monday, December 12th at  7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Pico Neighborhood Association
Virginia Avenue Park
Thelma Terry Community Room
2200 Virginia Avenue

Wednesday, January 4th at  7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Northeast Neighbors
Montana Branch Library, Community Room
1704 Montana Avenue

Thursday, January 19th at 7 p.m.
Cosponsored by Mid-City Neighbors
Neighborhood meeting begins at 6:30 p.m.
McKinley Elementary School
2401 Santa Monica Blvd.

Date To Be Determined:
Cosponsored by North of Montana Association
Montana Branch Library, Community Room
1704 Montana Avenue

All locations are wheelchair accessible. For additional disability-related accommodations or for more information about these meetings, please call (310) 458-8281 or visit www.smgov.net/neighborhoods

Tuesday, October 4, 2011  

The following item will be heard no earlier than 6:30 p.m.

4-A:    Proposed Phase II Public Process regarding the Santa Monica Airport — recommendation that Council review and comment on the Santa Monica Airport Campus Phase I Public Process findings and direct staff to proceed with the proposed Phase II Public Process concept.

STAFF REPORT: 
http://www01.smgov.net/cityclerk/council/agendas/2011/20111004/s2011100404-A.htm

As the operating agreement between the FAA and the City of Santa Monica regarding the Santa Monica Airport approaches its expiration in 2015, the City has begun a process to determine the options available for the airport’s future. The airport consists of 227 acres located at the south east corner of the City’s borders. The 5000ft runway is imbedded in a residential area and the environmental and safety impacts have been a long time concern for airport neighbors. In addition to the runway itself, the airport property hosts aviation related businesses, non-aviation business, airport staff offices, aircraft tie-downs (parking spaces), aircraft hangers, restaurants, artist studios, sports playing fields, dog park , a theatre, and some SMC classrooms.

The City has engaged the services of three consultant firms to conduct an airport visioning process. The
Rand Corporation will produce a study of potential development concepts and applications for the aviation and non-aviation land. HR&A will analyze the airport’s economic impacts of the airport. Point C will formulate and manage an extensive community process regarding the range of possibilities for the Airport’s future. This public outreach process will include all stakeholders including residents, business owners, aviation and non-aviation interests.

Phase I of the process will involve information gathering. Phase II will consist of a comprehensive public input process. After a full range of options are identified with the associated costs and benefits, the City will then undertake Phase III, a deliberative planning process for the future of the Airport.

Phase I – February to September 2011 — HR&A will prepare a study of Airport’s economic impact. — RAND will prepare a report and analysis on general aviation airport best practices, potential alternative layouts, operational configurations and uses. — Point C’s will identify stakeholders, formulate a public process plan that will include all the stakeholders, design presentations and formats to disseminate the information collected and produced by HR & A and RAND.

Phase II- October 2011 to January 2012 — A program of public workshops would be conducted. These meetings will be designed to include a broad range of participants. — Meetings will be scheduled throughout this period to ensure all interested members of the public would have the opportunity to participate. — Recommendations will become part of the public dialogue report.

Phase III – February to June 2012– City Council would begin the deliberative phase with presentations from RAND and HR&A on their reports and a full review and discussion of the comments and recommendations from the Phase II public input process. — City Council will consider appropriate policies and actions. Friends of Sunset Park encourages all residents to participate in the public input process so their voices are heard in determining the Santa Monica Airport’s future.

New Airport Commission Appointment

Santa Monica City Council has appointed Sunset Park resident David Godard as the new Airport Commissioner to fill a vacancy left by Jean Gebman’s recent resignation. Welcome Commissioner Godard.

Web Traking Now Available for SMO

Santa Monica Airport’s WebTrak system is now up and running. The WebTrak allows the public to access the movement of aircraft over our neighborhood. It not only includes aircraft arriving and departing from SMO but any aircraft in our neighborhood space. Aircraft are color coded to determine type and origin. Information shown includes the aircraft’s type, altitude, origin/destination airports, and flight identification. Access to current air traffic is delayed approximately 20 minutes for security reasons and for system processing. Historical data can be viewed in the Replay Mode and is available up to 90 days in the past. The system also allows you to file a complaint about a particular aircraft.

For more info about the web tracking see the Airport web site page:
http://www.smgov.net/Departments/Airport/For_Our_Neighbors/WebTrak.aspx

To access the web track see:
http://webtrak.bksv.com/smo

LA City Council Votes to Support SMO Flight Path Alteration and Closing of Flight Schools

On April 20, 2011, the LA City Council passed a resolution that would support lobbying “for legislation or administrative action that would alter the departure path at the Santa Monica Airport (SMO) to enhance safety and reduce air pollution that results from jets idling on the runway, as well as closing flight schools at SMO.”

There are concerns in the Sunset Park and Ocean Park neighborhoods that the City of LA will lobby for the implementation of the FAA’s recently tested 250 degree heading that sent departure aircraft over residential areas instead over the Penmar golf course. During the test period hundreds of noise complaints were registered by residents to the airport staff.

Prior to the passage of this resolution, the City Manager responded to residents’ complaints regarding flight schools by denying operating permits to two new flight schools, but City Staff doubts there are legal grounds to rescind operating permits for existing flight schools

Phase I: February to September 2011

• HR&A will prepare a study of Airport’s economic impact.
• RAND will prepare a report and analysis of general aviation airport best practices, potential alternative layouts, operational configurations and uses.
• Point C will identify stakeholders, formulate a public process plan that will include all the stakeholders, and design presentations and formats to disseminate the information collected and produced by HR&A and RAND.

Phase II: October 2011 to January 2012

• A program of public workshops will be conducted. These meetings will be designed to include a broad range of participants.
• Meetings will be scheduled throughout this period to ensure all interested members of the public have the opportunity to participate.
• Recommendations will become part of the public dialogue report.

Phase III: February to June 2012

• City Council will begin the deliberative phase with presentations from RAND and HR&A on their reports and with a full review and discussion of the comments and recommendations from the Phase II public input process.
• City Council will consider appropriate policies and actions.

Jan. 21, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia issued a ruling denying the City of Santa Monica’s appeal of a 2009 FAA decision and subsequent court injunction preventing Santa Monica from implementing a City ordinance enacted on March 25, 2008. This ordinance banned larger, faster Category C and D aircraft from using the Santa Monica Airport because the runway was not designed to accommodate these aircraft, lacked runway safety areas, and therefore posed a risk to the surrounding residential areas where homes are located within 250 feet of the runway ends.

The FAA argued successfully that the ordinance violated Santa Monica’s obligations under Grant Assurance 22. The City of Santa Monica had received federal grant funds for Airport improvements. Acceptance of grant funds come with obligations including keeping the airport “for public use on fair and reasonable terms and without unjust discrimination to all types, kinds, and classes of aeronautical uses with the exception that the Petitioner (Santa Monica) may prohibit certain types of aircraft if such action is necessary for the safe operation for the airport.”

The court did not agree with the argument put forth by the City of Santa Monica that the Category C and D aircraft posed a safety risk. Even though Category C and D aircraft regularly use the Santa Monica Airport, the airport is classified by the FAA’s own design standards as Category B designed only to accommodate up to Category B aircraft. The Santa Monica Airport also lacks runway safety areas. Current requirements for airports designed to accommodate Category C and D aircraft is 1000ft runway safety area on each runway end. For design category B, the runway safety area requirement is 300ft. Santa Monica airport has none.

The Court also agreed with the FAA’s argument that runway overruns by Category C and D aircraft were “extremely rare” and that accidents were more likely to be caused by the slower, smaller Category A and B aircraft. The FAA presented statistics that the most recent accidents at the Santa Monica airport involved single engine propeller planes not the larger, faster turbo driven aircraft.

City cited runway overrun incidents at other airports involving the proposed banned aircraft. If similar accidents occurred at SMO, the path of destruction would be well into residential areas. These arguments fell on deaf court ears.

In the language of the ruling, it became apparent the cards were stacked against the City. The court stated there is a “highly deferential standard of review” in cases where a federal agency’s administrative finding is at issue. The court further noted that “this court presumes agency actions to be valid.”

The Court did not rule on the dispute of the Grant Assurance expiration date. The City of Santa Monica claims it is 2015, twenty years after the last grant was implemented. The FAA argues that it is 2023, twenty years after the last installment of funds from the last grant was accepted by the City.

The City could ask for a review of the decision or appeal it to the Supreme Court.

Airport Neighbors experienced an unusual event recently—a reprieve from the buzzing of aircraft over their homes. The Santa Monica Airport (SMO) was closed for four days, Sept. 20-23, to complete runway maintenance. The City of Santa Monica took advantage of this time to conduct baseline measurements of air quality to enable more accurate assessment of aircraft emissions.

Residents in close proximity to SMO have voiced their concerns about aircraft emission impacts, particularly jet fumes, on their family’s health. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) conducted an emission study at SMO in 2006 and 2007. The baseline measurements in the absence of aircraft will allow comparison to data collected from previous air quality studies to fully assess aircraft emission impacts on the surrounding neighborhoods.

Results of the newest study are expected early next year.

Sunset Park and Ocean Park Residents Up in Arms about Proposed Flight Path Changes

From Dec. 2009-June 2010 the FAA conducted a trial of diverting Instrument Flight Rules (IFR-aircraft that fly with instrument navigation aids) piston powered (propeller) planes at a 250 degree heading placing them over dense residential areas of Sunset Park and Ocean Park. The FAA claims this test heading will increase a safety margin between LAX flight paths and reduce aircraft idling times at both LAX and SMO by diverting slower aircraft IVR aircraft (prop planes) out of the way of faster IVR aircraft (jets and turbo props). Residents in the impacted areas have complained to the City officials and Congressional representatives of significant noise impacts during the test period. In response, the City conducted a Noise Modeling analysis and has engaged the services of an aviation consultant to study alternatives.

The FAA has stated only an average of 8 aircraft a day were being diverted, but residents have claim there were significantly more aircraft flying over their neighborhoods. The noise modeling results, presented at the September Airport Commission Meeting, were calculated using the FAA’s reported 8 aircraft per day. The results showed an increase of 3dB CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) in the affected areas. CNEL decibel measurements are in a logarithmic averaging scale. Although, a 3dB difference is fairly significant, residents fear the manner in which the FAA gages noise impacts will lead the FAA to issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and therefore would not be required to do an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The noise analysis also did a sampling of fight tracks over the impacted areas. These flight track grids definitely appear to verify residents’ claims that more than 8 aircraft were flying over their homes. Residents are now demanding additional noise studies to take into account which appears to be more aircraft than the FAA reported.

Court Case to be heard on C and D Aircraft Ban

Both east and west SMO runway ends are situated within 300ft of residential homes, creating heightened safety risks in the neighborhoods directly adjacent to the runway. In response to residents’ concerns, the City of Santa Monica attempted to diminish this safety risk to airport neighbors by negotiating with the FAA for installation of 300ft runway safety areas (the airport currently has none) and the elimination of faster, larger, Category C and D aircraft that SMO was not designed to accommodate. These accommodations would have basically brought the airport into compliance with the FAA’s recommended safety standards.

Even so, after many years of negotiations, the FAA would only offer the City substandard EMAS (Engineered Materials Arresting System). [EMAS is a collapsible concrete material designed to "capture" aircraft in the event of a runway overrun.] City Council voted in March 2008, using their proprietary power as operator of the airport, to approve a City ordinance eliminating the unsafe C and D aircraft. The City ordinance was challenged by the FAA. A ruling was handed down in the FAA’s favor. Oral arguments in the appellate case were scheduled to begin October 14 in the Washington, D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. Stay tuned.

Have you noticed more prop planes flying over your neighborhood in the last few months?
Are the noise impacts disrupting your life? Are you concerned about the low altitude of these aircraft?
Friends of Sunset Park and the Santa Monica Airport Noise Management Office are seeking public comments on recent flight path changes.

In December 2009, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) altered the departure flight path of propeller planes flying under Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) aircraft (as opposed to Visual Flight Rules). This flight path change was implemented to facilitate departures of jet and turbo-prop aircraft from both SM Airport and LAX. It is being conducted on a trial basis for six months.

The new departure flight path toward Santa Monica Pier brings IFR propeller airplanes over homes in Sunset Park, whereas in the past they flew over PenMar Golf Course after taking off.

Public Input Needed
 
FOSP and the SM Airport Noise Office are encouraging residents to submit complaints about noise impacts and safety concerns caused by these low-flying aircraft. This data is being collected to measure the impacts of the flight path change. Data collected before June 8th will determine whether the FAA has to conduct an Environmental Impact Review (EIR) before making the new flight path permanent.
 
Residents can file a complaint by either calling the Airport Noise Hotline at (310) 458-8692 or sending email to noise@smgov.net
 
Your complaint must include the date and time when you heard and/or saw the airplane, your name, and your address.
 
For more information, the staff report from the November 2009 Airport Commission meeting is posted at:
http://www.smgov.net/Departments/Airport/Commission_Meetings/2009/20091123/FAA_Test_of_Piston-powered_IFR_Procedure.aspx
 
If you have questions, you can contact Stelios Makrides, SM Airport Noise Management Supervisor, at (310) 434-2693, or Cathy Larson, FOSP Airport Committee Chair, at (310) 358-7117.

Beginning approximately Dec. 1, the FAA is starting a 180 day trial period relocating the instrument (radar not visual) departure path of piston powered aircraft. According to Airport staff this new procedure will affect around 20 departures a day during limited visibility weather (i.e. clouds, rain, etc.).

The FAA said the current SMO departure flight path has an intersecting trajectory with the LAX departure path.  Because the piston powered aircraft’s slower speed, there is concern regarding the ability to maintain compliance with the minimum 3 mile horizontal separation that is required between aircraft without causing delays of up to 15-20 minutes of jet departures from both SMO and LAX. The flight path of jets departing SMO will not be altered because of their similarity in speed to departing aircraft from LAX they are more easily integrated into LAX flight departures.

At reaching 400 feet elevation from mean sea level (approximately midway down the Penmar golf course), the piston powered IFR (instrument flight rules) aircraft will be directed to turn right on a 250 degree heading toward the Santa Monica Pier.

The FAA had agreed to make an informative presentation at the Oct. 26th Airport Commission Meeting for discussion and public comment.  They canceled at the 11th hour and replaced the public meeting with a private meeting (no public allowed) on Nov. 6 with airport staff and FAA representatives.  In other words NO public record, NO public comment.

A FOSP Airport Committee representative has voiced concerns to the City that the altered flight path will have significant noise impacts on the Sunset Park neighborhood.  As the aircraft make their way along the new flight path toward the Pier, the rising topography of the neighborhood north of Dewey and Marine would actually position the aircraft closer to the elevated ground level (and homes) than when they initiate their right turn over the golf course.

According to Airport Staff, any permanent change in flight paths will require the FAA to conduct an environmental review under the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA).  Staff plans on requesting that the FAA establish a dedicated phone line to field residents’ noise complaints.