The Van Nuys Airport Citizens Advisory Committee rejected this month two resolutions backing a ban on certain types of jet aircraft used at the airfield. At its Aug. 7 meeting, members rejected supporting an measure proposed by New Jersey Sen. Frank Lautenberg prohibiting Stage 2 aircraft under 75,000 pounds from operating at any airport in the country. Lautenberg tacked his proposal onto a pending bill to reauthorize the funding of the Federal Aviation Administration. The council membership also gave the thumbs down to a resolution seeking enforcement of a ban supported by the city and Board of Airport Commissioners since 1990. What the votes mean differs among those on the two sides of the airport noise debate. Council member Gerald Silver characterized the rejection as consistent with past actions that are decidedly anti-homeowner. But Bob Rodine, a council member who is a consultant with clients in the aviation industry, said the vote was significant because it showed more sensitivity to the business aviation community at the airport than has been shown previously. “These types of things normally prevail,” Rodine said. The citizens advisory council is made up of 18 members appointed by the Board of Airport Commissioners, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and city council members with districts affected by flights from Van Nuys Airport. The council currently has five vacancies. The airport noise issue has long been a contentious one, pitting residents who complain about a loss of quality of life against the charter, and jet aircraft management firms, who fear loss of business if a Stage 2 ban goes through. Stage 2 is a designation by the FAA for aircraft with a certain noise level when operating. Stage 1 aircraft are banned in the United States while Stage 3 aircraft are the quietest. Manufacturers stopped making Stage 2 aircraft in 1986. Van Nuys is home to 32 Stage 2 aircraft, according to an airport official. Advisory Council Chairman Bob Jackson said the aircraft were “a non-issue” because their number decreases annually, they are not in high demand and are expensive to maintain. “They are museum pieces,” said Jackson, who is semi-retired from a long career in aviation. Jackson did not cast a vote on the motions. Last summer, the airport commissioners directed LAWA staff to study a jet aircraft ban under two scenarios: a phase-out under the resolution approved by the city in 1990; and a ban needing approval from the FAA and an economic analysis known as a Part 161 study. The matter considered by the advisory council supporting the council-backed ban also asked that an analysis be done of the economic impacts. In arguing against that motion, Rodine said that it made no sense to do a second economic analysis of a ban when the Part 161 study was already moving forward. That the advisory council votes went the way they did was regrettable, Silver said. He also disagreed that a ban would harm the aviation businesses at the airport. If a charter company owns a Stage 2 jet costing $3.5 million, for instance, Silver said, the value can be increased by spending, say, another $1.5 million to have it meet Stage 3 noise standards. While conceding the airport brings economic benefits to the community, what is not considered is the loss in property values that should be subtracted from the benefits, Silver said. A study of the airport’s impact on property values is being done by California State University, Northridge but the results haven’t been released to the public, Silver said. “You need to have a balanced and honest picture at the airport,” Silver said. The advisory council’s votes are forwarded to the airport commissioners, who meet again on Aug. 20.
