AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

NOISE ABATEMENT STRATEGIES

Alternatives and Results

New Zion Baptist Church

Neighborhood Orientation and Discussion

November 12, 2001

Area the previous noise program was approved to leave above Federal noise standards by 1997.

Area actually exceeding Federal noise standards in 1998, as measured in the current noise study.

FORECAST 1997 CONDITIONS, VERSUS ACTUAL 1998 CONDITIONSan object lesson

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

KEY PROBLEMS

· first look at hard data on new runway operations

· non-attainment of approved noise exposure

· impact above Federal standards in neighborhoods near the airport

FLIGHT TRACKSfour days of arrivals from the

north

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

KEY PROBLEMS

· first look at hard data on new runway operations

· non-attainment of approved noise exposure

· impact above Federal standards in neighborhoods near the airport

· no standardized flight routes (“spaghetti”)

· liberal use of visual flight rules

· frequent exceptions to approach altitudes

Area the previous noise program was approved to leave above Federal noise standards by 1997.DNL 60 contour estimated for perspective.

Area actually exceeding Federal noise standards in 1998, as measured in the current noise study.DNL 60 contour added for perspective.

FORECAST 1997 CONDITIONS, VERSUS ACTUAL 1998 CONDITIONSan object lesson

no easy cure...

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

CHALLENGES

· find near-in corridors where people don’t live

· avoid sensitive facilities as much as possible

· prescribe standard flight routes

· displaced arrival thresholds

· noise abatement flight procedures

· limit uncontrolled visual approaches

· eliminate exceptions for standard approach altitudes

and, most of all,

· CHECK!

AN OFFSET PATH

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

STRATEGIES

· big package of common measures

· different mixes of runway use to find best results north of the airport· prefer 17L/35R· prefer 17L/35R only daytime· no preference· prefer 17R/35L

· different departure routes to find best results south of the airport· divergence by destination· maximum divergence· minimum divergence

· careful implementation and oversight

· mechanism for review and enhancement; “living program”

RANGE OF OUTCOMES

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

RESULTS

· Federal critical contour trades yellow for white

· Extended contour trades mostly yellow for white

· Overexposed people and households differ by factor of four

· Overexposed sensitive facilities differ by factor of three

· Peak noise levels drop almost everywhere away from flight paths

Worst CaseDNL 70+ DNL 65+ DNL 60+

Population 235 2,883 13,346Housing Units 128 1,407 6,362Sensitive Facilities 0 5 41

Best CaseDNL 70+ DNL 65+ DNL 60+

Population 38 708 8,280Housing Units 18 355 3,817Sensitive Facilities 0 3 12

North

North

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

RESULTS

Key Statistics

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

OBSERVATIONS

· potential reduction in noise exposure is dramatic

· Louisville’s own program

· A grassroots effort that can show real results

· but - what else can we do?

· action beyond the contours

· mitigation

· oversight, and enhancement - make this a living program

AirportNoise Compatibility

Study Group

NEXT STEPS

· flight track management to depth of Louisville airspace

· enhanced standard arrival and departure specs

· evaluate prospects for ‘reverse flow’ at selected times

· displaced arrival thresholds

· noise abatement flight procedures

… etc. And then there’s mitigation, implementation, and documentation.

Much work remains. Let’s get to it!