|STUDY GROUP COMMITTEES
Meeting Notes : Navigation Committee
Committee notes reflect the views and opinions of the committee members and not necessarily those of the Noise Compatibility Study Group, Coordinating Council, Regional Airport Authority of Louisville and Jefferson County, or the Consultant Team.
|back to NOTES||September 19, 2001
Attendees: Dorn Crawford, Mike Clancey, Teresa Cusick, Mary Rose Evans, Ron Haga, George Hudson, Aaron Lucas, Bob Slattery
The committee meeting was called to order at 7:10 PM. Having heard consultants presentation of noise contour maps in Study Group Meeting #5, members aimed to review the effects of the main noise abatement alternatives and model excursions, study impact statistics, and evaluate remaining questions. The original goal of the meeting, to develop final committee recommendations for a Louisville noise abatement strategy, was deferred, along with the full Study Group meeting scheduled for September 20 for the same purpose. New analytical concerns raised by the consultants could not be promptly addressed by the airport staff in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks and their impact on airport operations, so the Study Group meeting was rescheduled for October 18.
The committee approved notes of its July 30 meeting, then began by reviewing a graphic showing the disparity between the noise exposure map approved under the previous noise study for 1997 with the actual exposure for 1998, as assessed by the current study. This graphic, whose noise contours appeared originally at Study Group Meeting #3, serves a number of key purposes in guiding current and future study efforts. In particular, it underscores the importance of:
documenting noise abatement measures carefully, so that whats modeled is whats actually implemented
The committee then turned to a review of the noise contours presented at Study Group Meeting #5. The discussion was guided by a series of food-for-thought papers circulated before the meeting. The first paper, a discussion of the contour maps, compares refinements expected in the final runs with results actually observed. The paper then summarizes what the runs seem to be showing about the effects of alternative measures north and south of the airport. It then discusses additional runs presented by the consultants that attempt to isolate the effects of some of the core individual measures proposed. Finally, it reprises key questions still unaddressed in the modeling effort.
plotting extended recommended flight tracks to guide air traffic for minimal impact throughout the Louisville airspace
The third paper is a discussion of grid/point maps representing preliminary work on the last point above. Committee members briefly acknowledged the need for additional work, as outlined in the paper, to:
acquire specific demographics for affected areas
Finally, the committee needed to take account of uncertainties raised by the consultants about the model runs on the abatement alternatives. These included questions about
weather minima that should apply to the offset approach
While noting that these appeared to be questions to resolve in the initial formulation of such a measure, rather than after record model runs, committee members agreed that they needed closure before proceeding to a final recommendation on the preferred abatement alternative. The chair therefore proposed to call another meeting once the situation could be clarified and appropriate options developed. The meeting adjourned at 9:10 PM.