March Noise Report

City of Chandler — Regular Meeting (2023-04-12)

View PDF Meeting page

Extracted text (via pymupdf) 6605 characters
Chandler Municipal Airport      
Noise Report
       
AIRCRAFT TYPE
CALL LOCATION
Households
Contacts
Households
Contacts
Propeller
11
Chandler
12
Noise  
3
3
4
4
Helicopter
4
Gilbert
1
Low Flying
9
9
4
4
Jet
0
Sun Lakes
0
Traffic
2
2
0
0
Other
0
Other
2
Other
1
1
0
0
March 2023
March 2023
March 2022
 
In March 2023, fifteen (15) households made fifteen (15) reports regarding aircraft activity. Three (3) 
reports were for aircraft noise. Nine (9) reports were for low-flying aircraft. Two (2) reports were for 
aircraft traffic. One (1) report was for other aircraft activity. Eight (8) households were repeat 
complainants. (Cont’d) 
 
     Previous Caller                                           New Caller                     
Meeting Date: 
April 12, 2023

Chandler Municipal Airport      
Noise Report
       
 
➢ First complainant reported a low flying helicopter passed over the residence and rattled the 
house. Flight tracking revealed that the offending aircraft was a Robinson R22 helicopter at 500 
feet AGL. 
➢ Second complainant reported early morning traffic on the weekends. Flight tracking indicated 
all aircraft at or above regulatory altitudes. Resident also filed complaint with the FAA. Virtual 
geo-fence set up in flight tracking to collect aircraft data. Periodic follow-up with complainant 
being conducted. 
➢ Third complainant reported several aircraft doing pattern work late at night. Flight tracking 
indicated four (4) aircraft in the traffic pattern but landed or left the airspace just prior to 10PM. 
Three aircraft are CHD based and one is based at Falcon Field. Airport management discourages 
pattern work after 10PM or before 6AM. Contacted the managers and chief flight instructors of 
all four flight schools about their aircraft being the subject of a noise report. 
➢ Fourth complainant reported many airplanes fly below 400 feet above the residence. Reviewed 
flight tracking data for the proceeding two weeks, which revealed all aircraft were above 
regulatory altitudes with the regard to the distance from the airport. 
➢ Fifth complainant reported the same aircraft passing over the residence seem rather low. 
Residence is directly under the crosswind of the north traffic pattern for RWY 22L. Flight tracking 
revealed the aircraft at 700 to 900 feet AGL and climbing to pattern altitude when passing over. 
➢ Sixth complainant lives in downtown Phoenix and reported safety concerns over banner-towing 
aircraft in proximity to the residence, which is a 14-story apartment building. Flight tracking 
data revealed the CHD based banner-tow aircraft at +1000 feet above the height of the building. 
Also addressed complainant’s safety concerns with regards to an aircraft emergency when 
towing a banner.  
➢ Seventh complainant reported an aircraft doing pattern work at 11:45PM on a Saturday night. 
Flight tracking data was consistent with the aircraft traffic report and revealed the airplane 
belonging to a CHD based flying club. Spoke to the flying club manager that agreed that late 
night pattern work is not appropriate and is also regulated by the flying club’s rules. Apparently, 
the pilot was a new member, and the incident was handled by the flying club.    
➢ Eighth complainant reported a “very low and fast” airplane that “buzzed” the neighborhood. 
Flight tracking data revealed the CHD based aircraft inbound for landing at approximately 450 
feet AGL and traveling at approximately 160 knots. Contacted the owner and advised that the 
aircraft was the subject of a low-flying report. Complainant demanded contact information for 
the FAA Flight Standards District Office in Scottsdale. 
➢ Ninth complainant resides directly south of the airport and reported concerns about helicopters 
always flying south over the neighborhoods, never east, west, or even north for their training 
flights. Advised the complainant of the international standard for established traffic patterns 
and the airport’s “Fly Friendly” program. Also provided the complainant with a copy of the CHD 
traffic pattern diagram and a link to the FAA FAR 91.119 regarding the standards for minimum 
safe altitudes.    
Meeting Date: 
April 12, 2023

➢ Tenth complainant is a resident of the Gila River Indian Community and reported a low-flying 
aircraft. Complainant was riding horses with his family along the river when an aircraft passed 
over extremely low. This spooked the horse his 10-year-old son was riding and got thrown off, 
but not injured. Flight tracking data revealed that the aircraft in question, which is CHD based 
was below 100 feet AGL while flying along the river. Complainant was advised by tribal 
leadership to make an official report and was provided the contact information for the FAA 
Flight Standards District Office in Scottsdale. 
➢ Eleventh complainant reported an aircraft doing “stunts” over the neighborhood and flying 
upside-down like in an air show. Flight tracking revealed the CHD based aircraft departing from 
and returning to the airport. However, the flight tracking data was missing for the area over the 
complainant’s residence. The pilot/owner of the aircraft disputed the complainant’s report. 
➢ Twelfth complainant resides in the Town of Gilbert and reported a low-flying aircraft. Flight 
tracking data revealed that the CHD based aircraft was in the base-leg to final and was 
descending for landing. Prior to passing over the residence, this aircraft was being sequenced 
into the traffic pattern for landing and was given ATC instructions to enter a wide and extended 
downwind. Thus, how the aircraft was outside of the standard traffic pattern. 
➢ Thirteenth complainant resides immediately south of the airport and reported a low-flying 
helicopter was distracting students on horseback. Additionally, the complainant stated that as 
agricultural property owners they also own the airspace above and requested the helicopter fly 
over the open fields instead of their horse arena. Provided case-law regarding airspace 
ownership and notified the helicopter flight school of the complainant’s request. 
➢ Fourteenth complainant reported repeated and excessive helicopter noise directly over the 
residence. Flight tracking data for the proceeding three weeks revealed aircraft at or above 
regulatory altitudes. 
➢ Fifteenth Complainant reported that a helicopter is constantly flying low overhead in the middle 
of the night and there is not an airport nearby. Flight tracking data for the night in question 
revealed the only aircraft in proximity to the residence was a medical and DPS helicopter.