Airport Consultant Says, ‘Be Happy'

An overnight curfew on takeoffs and landings enacted at East Hampton Airport last summer had the hoped-for effect, consultants told the town board on Friday, not only quieting the hours during the curfew but curtailing the use of the airport by aircraft defined as noisy and reducing complaints about them.

A curfew from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. went into effect on July 2, along with an extended curfew, from 8 p.m. to 9 a.m., for planes that meet the industry standard as noisy.

While the total number of takeoffs and landings, a.k.a. operations, in the period studied, from July 2 until Sept. 30, increased by 4 percent, the number of noisy aircraft flying in or out went down by 11 percent. Complaints about noisy aircraft decreased by 25 percent, but complaints about other planes, including seaplanes, went up considerably, by 61 percent.

Nevertheless, the town board “should be happy,” Peter Kirsch, an aviation attorney who helped the town develop the restrictions, said last week. “The nighttime curfew was extremely successful. The extended curfew was also extremely successful,” he said, and “the restrictions did not have significant financial impact to the town.” A complete review of what happened is “very important,” he said, so that the town can say, “Okay, did we do it right?”

 “We’re in pretty good financial shape right now at the airport,” Len Bernard, the town’s budget officer, told the board. By adding about $400,000 from surplus funds to the revenue side of the annual budget, he said, the airport was able to break even on  operating expenses. Once accounting is complete, he added, the airport fund would show a 2015 year-end surplus of $1.2 million.

A number of capital projects are funded and under way, Mr. Bernard said, including the installation of an automated weather observation system, the removal of runway obstructions, and pavement examination and repairs.

 Mr. Kirsch also reviewed the status of seven pending lawsuits related to the airport, including those against the three  restrictions, which were initiated by the Friends of East Hampton Airport, a coalition of aviation interests. The implementation of one of those restrictions, which would have limited noisy planes to one round-trip per week into and out of the airport during the summer season, was suspended after an injunction was issued. All three cases, against both the town and the F.A.A., over the regulations are on hold pending an appeal on the injunction. Arguments are to take place in the fall, Mr. Kirsch said, with a decision perhaps in early 2017.

Mr. Kirsch recommended against making any  significant changes in airport use laws since the injunction has been appealed. “When the Court of Appeals rules on whether the district court was correct in issuing one injunction and not issuing another,” he said, “we will have greater certainty.”

Key, though, the lawyer said, is that the judge “affirmed the town’s  for adopting the restrictions. The court found that the two curfews were reasonable under the circumstances.”

Decisions by the Federal Aviation Administration are expected at any time, he said, in an administrative case challenging the curfews and restricted uses filed by the National Business Aviation Administration, as well as in lawsuits by the Friends of East Hampton Airport over maintenance and fee increases and an action initiated by Sound Aircraft, regarding those increases.

  Mr. Kirsch also outlined what he called significant developments since last spring: the establishment of an airport management committee, and  the development, in coordination with the Eastern Region Helicopter Council and the air traffic controllers who are on duty during the summer season, of flight procedures designed to limit helicopter noise, which pilots are asked to follow voluntarily. He also cited Representative Lee Zeldin’s effort on legislation that would prevent the F.A.A. from blocking local regulation of the airport.

 Citations and Complaints

Michael Sendlenski, the town attorney, also made a presentation on Friday. During the time the two curfews were in effect, he reported 65 citations were issued for violations, most of which occurred within the hour before or after one of the curfews. Court actions are pending.

Sixty-five violations is a “remarkably small number,” Mr. Kirsch said, especially because the curfew information was disseminated by the town rather than by the F.A.A. The effort to educate aviators was “an enormous success,” he said, noting that there would likely be even fewer curfew violations “going forward as more pilots understand the restrictions in place.”  

Ted Baldwin of Harris Miller Miller & Hanson, the firm that analyzed the season’s data, also spoke. “The operators responded exactly the way we wanted them to respond,” he said. Takeoffs and landings by noisy aircraft were shifted outside of the restricted hours. In the first few hours after the extended curfew expired each day at 9 a.m., “there was a rush to take off,” Mr. Baldwin said, with “a big jump in operations” between 9 and 10 a.m.

The 4-percent increase in takeoffs and landings in 2015 over the previous year, represented 14,750 operations compared to 14,240 operations in 2014, Mr. Baldwin said.That complaints about noisy helicopters went down was undoubtedly due to the fact that helicopter companies substituted quieter craft last summer, with 22 percent fewer takeoffs and landings by those deemed noisy.

The number of operations by “non-regulated helicopters” — those not subject to the extended curfew because they are quieter than others — rose from 300 in 2014 to 601 in 2015, or 202 percent, and complaints about them shot up as well, by 250 percent.

Overall, however, there were 6 percent fewer operations by all helicopters last summer, and the total complaints about them dropped by 6 percent as well.

The complete report and analysis have been posted online on the town’s website and at an airport planning site, at HTOplanning.com.

Several speakers at last week’s meeting described “complaint fatigue,” which, they said, may have resulted in a skewed picture of how many people remain negatively affected by aircraft noise. Others questioned how many separate households called in the complaints, which could also affect the overall picture.

“Whatever the number of households calling in complaints,” Town Supervisor Larry  Cantwell said, “25,000 or 27,000 is a lot of complaints.” He agreed that the tally of complaints didn’t necessarily represent everyone who is impacted.