Evidence of meeting #117 for Transport, Infrastructure and Communities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was airports.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Mr. Bagg, I want to thank you. We've met in the past on this issue. I'm going to go into it right away.
One of the effects of aviation noise is that the airways have impacts on smaller operations. It's not only the airplanes coming into major airports. For example, St-Jérôme Airport, CSN3, where there's a dirt strip and a parachute jumping school, is constrained by airway T709 to the west; Mirabel to the south; airway T636 to the north; and St-Esprit, also a parachute school, CES2, to the east. It gives a very narrow box of operations.
The result of this is that the planes in the parachute school, which are very frequent and very noisy, fly over the same community 20, 30 or 40 times a day.
You mentioned that Dorval changed its approaches in 2012, and T709 is one of the victims of that approach. It now goes just west of CSN3. All these aircraft from the Parachutisme Adrénaline flying school are going over the same lake in Sainte-Anne-des-Lacs every day, all day long.
What can we do as a community, working with you, to allow those aircraft to cross the airway and do their climb-outs on the other side? Is there anything we can do together?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
I'm definitely familiar with that airspace, and there are a lot of constraints around it. There are IFR operations, and how we design an airspace is certainly in a manner in which we want to keep different types of operations away from each other. That ensures safety.
With regard to next steps and what can be done, I think that we're kind of on that path, in the sense that it starts with dialogue. I know that we intend to meet with you and some of our regional operations managers to look at options and see what is a possibility. However, it is challenging when you have a very dense airspace and a lot of operations to either side of that airspace.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Solutions are possible and we should be able to find them.
October 30th, 2018 / 9:40 a.m.
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
We should certainly discuss them and see what operations.... If there are opportunities, we should look at them.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
What prevents us? Right now there's an agreement between Nav Canada and the airport not to have their operations cross the airway. Why would that be?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
That goes back to the point that we try to keep different types of operations systematically separated. If you look at parachute operations, they're flying using something called VFR navigation, so the pilot is responsible for their manner of operation. As a pilot, they're not on a specific route.
Then, if you look at approaching Montreal, they're on IFR routes. They're on a set of very specific, published routes. It's always safer for us to keep those types of operations away from each other.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
On that topic, you talked about continuous descent. In the final few thousand feet, you're still at a three-degree approach angle. Nothing changes there. Is that correct?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
That's correct. On final approach, you're usually using an ILS—instrument landing system—and three degrees is the descent rate.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
In the continuous approach, nothing is really changing that close to the ground toward the end. It's an efficiency.
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
That's correct. It stays the same for final approach.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Is there any circumstance where we ask departing aircraft to use the best angle, rather than the best rate, to get out of the airspace faster?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
There are noise abatement departure procedures—NADP 1 and NADP 2. They target different areas. One targets the area close to the airport and tries to provide some abatement nearby. The other operation looks at providing some abatement a little further away. Either way, both of those procedures have aircraft climbing. At that phase of departure, planes tend to be the loudest—at full throttle.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I noticed that in CFS, the Canada Flight Supplement, there's a whole section on noise abatement procedures for Pearson. I didn't see it for most of the other airports, but there is one for Pearson. They refer to ICAO annex 16, volume 1, chapter 2 and chapter 3—types of aircraft. What does that mean?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
This goes to answering one of Mr. Liepert's questions as well, in terms of the noise standards around aircraft. ICAO sets standards in terms of noise at the source. It's regulation for noise at the source, and maybe Transport Canada can best speak to it. We accept those standards. As time goes by, chapters of aircraft—older aircraft—get retired and are not permitted in airspace. Over time, we are seeing aircraft getting significantly quieter.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
Are there a lot of aircraft still in chapter 2 and chapter 3?
Senior Manager, Public Affairs, NAV CANADA
There are not a lot anymore. There are very few that are still.... Maybe there are some aircraft operators that need special equipment to operate to the north, like gravel kits for gravel runways, and some cargo operators that sometimes have older fleets.
Liberal
David Graham Liberal Laurentides—Labelle, QC
I have a few quick seconds, and I want to give a few seconds to Vance. Oh, I can't do both.
I have one question, but I'll give it to Vance.
Thank you, guys.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
Thank you for being here today.
I want to dig a bit deeper on the municipal official plans. Obviously, a lack of discipline to date has put us in the position we're at right now with respect to sprawl around airports.
That being said, official planned amendments and rezoning have allowed that growth to happen around you. My first question is, has the air sector appealed through those processes of official planned amendments and rezoning?
My second question is, do you have the ability to keep that discipline in place to actually appeal to, for example, the Ontario Municipal Board and get favourable decisions so that the sprawl doesn't happen and these complaints aren't as abundant as they are now? Moving forward, is the ability in place for you to do that, so that, although the problem exists, it won't continue to expand well into the future?
Director General, Air Policy, Department of Transport
I could answer your question generally from the perspective of Transport Canada and the airport authorities. Our regional offices are always available to meet and discuss this with municipal boards as they do their planning.
Liberal
Vance Badawey Liberal Niagara Centre, ON
That's not my question.
My question is, has the air sector had the ability to appeal when a municipality actually allows growth to happen in an area it shouldn't happen in? I'm sure there are setbacks and things of that nature. Is there an opportunity for you to appeal to, for example, the Ontario Municipal Board to get a favourable decision based on provincial policies, municipal OPs and zoning, so that this problem doesn't grow in the future?
Director General, Air Policy, Department of Transport
I'm looking at my colleague from civil aviation. I think there are certainly requirements in our regulations with regard to the type of construction that can happen within a certain distance of the airport. I think that's in a very specific sense.
Nick, do you want to speak a bit about that?
Director General, Civil Aviation, Department of Transport
Yes. There are specific parameters that can and cannot happen in and around aerodromes. These are set to ensure the safety and security of those aerodromes and the aircraft landing within them. That's where our regulation sets forth....
For a municipal appeal or appellate process, I wouldn't be certain whether there are any cases where a municipality has appealed against those specific regulations.
