Back to Squawk list

Lawmakers Re-Introduce Bill To Limit Overnight Airport Noise

eklendi
 
BURBANK (CBSLA.com) — Two San Fernando Valley lawmakers want to bring residents some relief from noise by limiting the number of flights into and out of local airports. Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) and Brad Sherman (D-Sherman Oaks) first introduced the Valley-Wide Noise Relief Act in 2011 to allow Bob Hope and Van Nuys Airports to adopt curfews and minimize airport noise. (losangeles.cbslocal.com) Daha Fazlası...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


Moviela
Ric Wernicke 9
Someone needs to point out that Lockheed built the airport miles from urban areas, and the original neighbors were walnuts, strawberries, and oranges. Wieners in Congress chased Lockheed away. Now they want to impair safety by concentrating flights into fewer hours. It will also prevent later shipment times for interstate commerce that is so important to the area.

I remember a time when the three cities of Burbank, Pasadena, and Glendale advertised for airlines to come to BUR and expand their schedules. That was in the days of the 727 without silencer kits that caused conversations to stop when they flew over. The 737's of today don't even raise an eyebrow a half mile from the runway.

The voters in the Valley should wise up and vote for the Valley-wide Democrat relief act of 2014 and vote for anyone except Reps. Schiff and Sherman. Those two can fly a balloon without a burner, they generate enough hot air on their own.
joelwiley
joel wiley 3
So, time has added nuts to the fruits in residence in the valley. It *is* just North of the city known as LA-LA land.

In fairness to the legislators tho'. They have to dance to the tune of the folks who leased them for the current term. OTOH on must ask, " is this the best money can buy?"
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 1
Democracy is predicated on the assumption that the smart people are in the majority. That's not always the case.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
Not to mention responsible, conscientious, and a raft of other virtues that if not missing from swaths of the population, remain well hidden. Perhaps I overgeneralize.
bovineone
Jeff Lawson 8
Those residents shouldn't have bought a house near the airport if they don't like noise.
RECOR10
RECOR10 1
I used to live next to a quarry - within "rumble distance"...every year like clockwork a petition would come around to close the over 70 year old quarry...my house was ten years. Every year I told the ignorant woman with the petition that she should not have moved near a quarry if she did not like it...every year she claimed that I "hate the earth" and the quarry needs to be stopped...I do not miss that neighborhood.
jetlagged
Martin Weaver 6
I'm sick of aviation bending over for these spoiled little jerks. The loud boombox cars and mufflers going by my house bother me a hell of a lot more than a 747 flying over on the Dawn-One departure. We'll continue to have it stuck to us as long as we keep bending over. We've let AOPA and others make wimps of us.
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 2
The same Nimby mentality exists at KSMO, near which I live.

The airport existed long before any of the current complainers built or bought homes nearby, and once was the site where Donald Douglas built DC-3s and other iconic aircraft by the thousands. Those same aircraft have been banned from the airport for years due to noise abatement ordinances, and now the neighborhood associations are gunning for the small jets and even the piston aircraft as used by the flight schools.

One of the Nimbys who lives in the traffic pattern was arrested for vandalism last year after he was caught throwing nails onto the property of one of the flight schools.

[This poster has been suspended.]

RECOR10
RECOR10 2
I have been in and out of that airport for years...it is an AIRPORT..airplanes make noise. When I first started to go in there the 80's in my families Citation it was in the middle of nothing. Last time I was there - there are signs on the fences about noise blah blah blah. If someone built a home near an airport and complains about noise...they are fools.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
Thanks for the post. Plenty of food for thought. As one under KMHR 22L for closing on 30 years, I appreciate your perspective. I've watched similar issues here. After Mather AFB closed, gradual infill under the flight path leading to new residents complaining of the noise. Some questioned the sanity of putting the airport there in the way of their house, with much, as you put it, "my way or the highway attitude". I don't know nor have listened to the 2am traffic at Burbank. It seems to me most issues lately are very polarized with compromise and common interest in short supply.
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 1
I never said that DC-3s were built in Burbank.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
What is wrong with these Liberal Idiots.... If you buy a house near and airport.. That is what you expect when you buy. Tough Luck, and tough anything else. the airport was there before you were.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 0
I have had the honour of being part of law making against noise pollution in India . And noise due to aircraft has been a part of consideration for prevention/control. In many cities/countries the number of landings/take offs are restricted , especially during nights . In certain cases, the local government went on to subsidize the cost of modifications to make residences sound proof !
Needless to say that noise is not only a nuisance but a source to cause irreversible permanent hearing loss and many other diseases including hypertension, loss of sleep , behavioral disorders and so on . Medical journals are full of information on the subject . Even the fetus is prone to adverse effects ! For example, research and development of QSST is substantially based on this premise.
Hence , we all must respect the approach and efforts to control noise due to aircrafts.
Let me hasten to add , that every where laws are in place even to regulate the sound/noise made by onroad vehicles. But sadly the main problem , all over , is of implementing it effectively !
RECOR10
RECOR10 1
Then dont move near an airport idiot.
akayemm
Er.A.K. Mittal 2
ThanX for the words of praise , my friend.
preacher1
preacher1 2
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
Just proves that there are liberals outside of our country... If you don't like the noise.. MOVE... the airport was there before you were... I cannot stand to hear these RAP BOXES driving down the road booming for the world to hear, but then these same people complain about a loud jet engine.... What idiots.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
A Great idea... Why do not not move away from the airport... It is amazing that so many people complain about noise, and yet they stand around smoking... LOL. Idiots born every day, and sorry to say, they are allowed to vote.
FLYUTHERE
BRIAN KENWOOD 0
Or maybe their real agenda is to limit flight numbers in and out of those airports, and then after a year of lower flight numbers they can say "do to low flight numbers we will sequester these airports and close control towers"
genethemarine
Gene spanos -4
Good luck with any form of noise abatement.
The Congress just threw more money at the FAA - $ 213 Billion.
They can buy what ever they need to operate.
Same here with the two proposed side by side
Group Six r/ways at ORD......10 Center coming on line
this fall and 9 center [ TBA ] .
With well over 70,000 flights a day
and 2 million passengers wheels up...
it's no wonder that the carbon calculator
is never mentioned in the aviation press.
One heavy rail train loaded down with the
53' foot containers...does relieve the nation's
highways of 150 trucks. Then you have the
cargo flight reduction as well that can get up
to 40 flights per train too.
The back bone of this country is....Rail!
Let's support them. As for those who flew
overseas...thanks again for the close air support
back then. Yet today.....we can use a higher take
off AGL over our community after 10 pm hour.
Take care. Fly Quiet !!!
preacher1
preacher1 2
Well, it takes forward thinking on all sides. Homeowners probably wouldn't have built so close if they would've had an inkling of what the future held. Railroads, while maybe the backbone, face the same situation. They literally made most of the communities that they pass thru, but, there isn't a soul that won't gripe having to wait on a train to cross a major thouroughfare. In some places, they have opted for a reroute, but as with the Airports, it may be way out in the country and within 10 years is populated on all sides. There is no easy answer but without the Airports and rail tracks, you will have no commerce; no commerce, no jobs; no jobs, no homeowners. Who wins.
bovineone
Jeff Lawson 2
Perhaps there needs to be a concerted effort to rezone a certain radius around all airports for industrial, park space, or non-residential use only. This would prevent future encroachment. Employ eminent domain or require indemnification of all claims from the airport of current occupants. Discourage residential use by enacting higher mandatory levels of insurance (similar to how flood insurance is mandatory in flood plains).

Ideally space around airports would be park space to allow space for safer emergency landings or runway overruns. This would also provide a noise buffer, and mitigate some risk from other aviation hazards like fuel fires, soil contamination, and parts/debris/stowaways falling off of planes.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Good thinking, but you do that 1 time, then the Airport has to expand and all of a sudden, there is no buffer but houses are there. Vicious cycle.LOL

Giriş

Hesabınız yok mu? Kişiselleştirilmiş özellikler, uçuş uyarıları ve daha fazlası için şimdi (ücretsiz) üye olun!