Compilation of Noise Programs in Areas Outside DNL 65 (2009)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

94 AIRPORT BACKGROUND Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport (DFW) first opened to traffic on January 13, 1974. It is jointly owned by the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth and is operated by the DFW Airport Board. DFW covers more than 29.8 square mile (18,076 acres), and now has seven runways (Figure C1) (Much of the infor- mation in this case study came directly from DFW’s Noise Compatibility Office, specifically its memorandum entitled “Mission Relevance,” February 18, 2008.) DFW had 685,491 operations in 2007, making it the third busiest airport in the world based on operations; with 59,786,476 passengers in 2007, it was also the seventh busiest based on passengers [“Facts about DFW” http://www.dfwairport.com/visitor/index. php?ctnid=24254 (accessed Sep. 8, 2008)]. Aircraft noise was not a serious community issue prior to the launch of DFW’s Airport Development Plan in 1987. In 1990, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the build- ing of two new runways and redevelopment of terminals was released. Neighboring cities challenged DFW Airport on zon- ing authority; court tests ensued on the EIS. In 1992, the FAA issued a favorable Record of Decision (ROD), approving Runways 16/34 East and West. Three cities filed suit to chal- lenge DFW’s expansion in state and federal courts. In 1993, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 348 reaffirming that DFW is exempt from local zoning ordinances; the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled in favor of DFW on the EIS lawsuit, and DFW held the ground breaking for Runway 16/34 East. The ROD on the 1992 Final EIS tasked the Airport to “implement an extensive noise mitigation program . . . to mitigate for the increased noise levels to residences and other noise-sensitive uses.” In particular, the ROD required DFW to establish a noise and flight track monitoring system to assure communi- ties that noise would not exceed predicted levels. NOISE COMPATIBILITY PROGRAM DFW has never conducted a formal Part 150 study; neverthe- less, DFW has a comprehensive noise abatement program, which includes operational procedures [most notably prefer- ential runway use program and RNAV (area navigation) pro- cedures], land use measures (preventive land use planning as well as mitigation for limited areas), and outreach (a state-of- the-art noise and flight track monitoring system, and public outreach facilities). Arguably, the most important element of DFW’s noise pro- gram is the adoption of “noise policy contours” and diligence on the part of DFW Noise Compatibility Office (NCO) staff to meet its FAA Grant Assurances obligation to protect lands in the airport environs from incompatible development. DFW is currently under pressure from local municipalities to update its policy contours to reflect actual (current) noise conditions, and has committed good faith efforts to provide this noise con- tour update by January 2009. An important question remains whether local jurisdictions will adopt updated noise contours for land use planning purposes, which will no doubt result in noise-sensitive development closer to DFW. OPERATIONAL MEASURES DFW has two operational noise abatement measures: (1) a Preferential Runway Use Plan, and (2) Area Navigation Flight Procedures (RNAV). The DFW Runway Use Plan was developed following the 1992 Final EIS for two proposed runways and other capacity improvements (FEIS Section 4.5.1.1 and ROD Chapter 4). The Preferential Runway Use System identified in that plan “provides a hierarchical rating of runway use for arrivals and departures by aircraft type.” This system is used under typical operations conditions and during typical operating hours; addi- tional stipulations are applied during late night hours (10 p.m. to 7 a.m.) (Runway Use Plan 1996). The preferential runway use plan for turbojet aircraft is shown in Table C1. At DFW, the FAA has replaced conventional departure procedures, which rely on controller instructions and vector- ing, with RNAV departure procedures. RNAV relies on pre- programmed routing and satellite navigation. Deployment of RNAV at DFW contributed to FAA’s nationwide implemen- tation strategy to develop more precise and efficient arrival and departure procedures at U.S. airports enhancing airspace efficiency and safety, reducing air emissions, and reducing delays. DFW was one of the first airports in the nation to use this departure technology. According to the Air Transport Association, RNAV tech- nology increases the number of aircraft departures handled at DFW by approximately 14%. RNAV Departure Procedures can be accommodated generally within existing flight corri- dors and using existing approved headings. The use of RNAV reduces the overall number of population over-flown. RNAV departure corridors are compressed, which concentrates large volumes of aircraft activity over relatively small areas. RNAV effects on DFW’s departure patterns are illustrated in Figure C2. Ninety-five percent of DFW’s turbojet fleet was equipped to fly the RNAV procedures by 2007. The FAA estimates an $8.5 million annual savings with the new APPENDIX C Case Study: Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport

95 procedures, resulting from reduced delays and increased departure throughput (Marion Blakley, Aviation Today, May 11, 2007). Land Use Measures Built on a greenfield site, there was little noise-sensitive devel- opment surrounding DFW when it opened. At the time of DFW’s opening, the North Central Texas Council of Govern- ments (NCTCOG) developed a forecast set of DNL contours for future 1985 activity (Figure C3). These contours have been used over the years as “policy contours” and serve as an impor- tant factor in minimizing and preventing incompatible land use from developing around DFW. The NCTCOG contours established the following zones (see Table C2): DFW’s NCO takes a number of actions to implement its responsibilities to restrict the use of land adjacent to or in the immediate vicinity of the airport to activities and pur- poses compatible with normal airport operations. Specifi- cally, the NCO: • Reviews weekly the meeting agendas for ten local cities surrounding DFW for potential incompatible land use proposals and takes proactive measures to influ- ence local city decisions to ensure compatible land use development; • Recommends measures to convert incompatible land use(s) to a compatible land use by means of structure FIGURE C1 Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport and environs. FIGURE C2 Comparison of conventional departure flight tracks with RNAV departure flight tracks.Flow Type of Activity Rating East Airfield West Airfield 1st 17C 18R 2nd 17L 13R Arrivals 3rd 17R 18L 1st 17R 18L 2nd 17C 18R South Departures 3rd 17L 1st 35C 36L 2nd 35R 36R 3rd 31R Arrivals 4th 35L 1st 35L 36R 2nd 35C 36L North Departures 3rd 35R TABLE C1 DFW PREFERENTIAL RUNWAY USE SYSTEM FOR TURBOJET AIRCRAFT (6:00 A.M. TO 10:59 P.M.)

96 FIGURE C3 DNL contours for 1985 operations at DFW (as projected in 1971). Zone Noise Level (DNL) Comment C >75 Non-compatible development restricted B 65–75 Non-compatible development permitted, with modifications (acoustic treatment) A <65 No restrictions NCTCOG = North Central Texas Council of Governments. TABLE C2 NOISE–LAND USE PLANNING COMPATIBILITY GUIDELINES ESTABLISHED BY NCTCOG sound attenuation, avigation easements, and public dis- closure requirements. Nearly 4,600 residential units, 11 churches, and two schools have been made compat- ible with airport operations during the past ten years; 76% of which occurred in the past four years. • Commented on proposed incompatible developments over the first 5 years of the past decade involving an average of 173 units or parcels per year. In the last five years development pressures have increased by an esti- mated 300% to an average of 746 units per year. Devel- opments proposed in the Southlake area are shown in Figure C4; NCO commented on each of these. Monitoring and Outreach Measures Relationships with local communities became contentious during and following DFW’s 1992 Final EIS, and the con- struction of the eastern-most north/south runway. DFW man-

97 ested audiences, large and small. This graphic capabil- ity has proven, over time, to be a premier tool in further- ing community and stakeholder education, outreach, demonstrating transparency, and restoring credibility in the context of DFW meeting its Final EIS noise-related mandates. • DFW NCO staff often use noise and flight track data to inform communities about proposed modifications in flight track corridors and application of new technology [e.g., RNAV]. • DFW NCO tracks and responds to its Noise Complaint Hotline; since 1999, noise complaints have dropped an average of 20% per year (Figure C6). • DFW has developed a number of informational brochures and reports, including: Runway Use Plan, Noise Mon- itoring Brochure(s), and related informational take- away(s). SUMMARY OF PROGRAM MEASURES OUTSIDE DNL 65 The most recent DNL contours for DFW were prepared in 2002 for the Environmental Assessment of RNAV proce- dures. Those contours show that the 65 DNL noise contour of 2002 is almost entirely within the airport property boundary. Figure C7 presents a comparison of DNL 65 contours at DFW over time, including: NCTCOG contours prepared in 1971 FIGURE C4 Southlake land use proposals acted on by the DFW Noise Compatibility Office. FIGURE C5 DFW Noise Compatibility Center. agement designated the NCO the community liaison to restore trust and reestablish credibility. The following tools are respon- sive to this declared responsibility: • DFW instituted several community forums and out- reach programs pursuant to the above referenced legis- lation and responsive to the provisions embodied in the 1992 Final EIS. • DFW’s Noise Center (Figure C5) was established with aircraft noise and flight track displays. This NCO func- tion provides “real time” data presentations to inter-

98 FIGURE C6 DFW Noise Complaint Trends, 1995–2007. FIGURE C7 Comparison of historic DNL contours at DFW.

99 (for 1985 future operations—the policy contour); 1992 con- tours prepared for the Final EIS, and 2002 contours prepared for the RNAV Environmental Assessment. As a result, most of DFW’s noise program is focused on areas outside DNL 65, including: • Operational procedures to minimize noise in neighbor- hoods surrounding the airport: FAA has implemented precision navigation procedures for departure using RNAV; this is estimated to improve efficiency and reduce noise in some areas—all outside DNL 65. • Policy contours that limit noise-sensitive development in non-compatible areas. The DNL 65 noise contour as depicted on the policy contour is well outside the DNL 65 noise contour based on an acoustic contour of today; hence, DFW protects a substantial amount of land in its environs that is outside of the current 65 DNL. • A state-of-the-art monitoring system to track noise levels over time. One of the biggest challenges currently facing the airport is the continued application of policy contours for land use plan- ning that do not reflect acoustic reality. DFW has committed to update noise contours by 2009. An important question remains whether local jurisdictions will adopt updated noise contours for land use planning purposes, which will no doubt result in noise-sensitive development closer to DFW.