We have had many San Carlos airport pilots attend our community meetings and testify that they fly Pilatus and have NEVER received complaints on noise. Surf Air is the culprit and many of the pilots we've engaged resent the negative attention drawn to the airport by Surf Air. Join the protest!

Hopefully someone will wake up and realize the Federal preemption precludes almost anything that the County or the residents want to do.

But people don't seem to want to be bothered with the facts.

I only wish we had known about this protest sooner as we would have gladly joined. Though we will not be present we want to thank those who will attend and those who continue to organize us to show our growing, undying frustration with this change to our overall living environment through Surf Air's contribution to noise pollution. We live directly under their flight path and it has drastically altered our use of our outdoor space. It seems completely unfair that any commercial organization has the right to effect our quality of living through the introduction of constant noise. We have rules regarding noise abatement on the ground surrounding our homes. Why not in the air above our homes? Please continue to fight this issue. I promise we will as well.

The movement and sound levels of all aircraft when flying are controlled exclusively by the Federal government - its has been a massive con to encourage local residents to think that your local governments could do anything about this.

is anyone else bothered by the fact that 193 households have filed all the complaints? that they have filed an average of one complaint every 70 hours?

my assumption is that in actuality a handful of complainers (NIMBY) filed most of the 6400 complaints. Really people you think this is going to change San Carlos Airport?

You should talk to all of the people who tried that in San Jose and had the AOPA force them to put a noise disclosure declaration on their property deeds. when you go to sell that home that is SO SEVERELY impacted by aircraft noise, you WILL HAVE to disclose it.....be careful what you wish for.

I have changed the story to say: "The issue was muddied when the San Carlos Airport Association, representing some of the 25 businesses and the pilots operating out of the airport, issued a press release...
Carol Ford did not tell me that SCARPA represents all of the businesses and pilots at the airport, and I am sorry that I worded this sentence to make it appear that she had.

God bless Carol Ford and Rich Newman. As a pilot and long term friend of San Carlos Airport, I'm very glad that SCAPA (and Rich and Carol) are representing my interests.

Surf Air, on the other hand, is a different matter. The sooner they shut down and leave San Carlos the better. They caused all these difficulties and could care less about the folks who live near the airport.

According to the San Carlos Airport Association website, the organization has more than 300 members and was founded in 1986. It has a 9-member board of directors and members say that it includes many businesses not at the airport, but does not represent all businesses at the airport.

Web Link

There is a very simple solution to the Surf Air problem.

Take the six thousand complaints made to the airport and instead call Surf Airs office directly to file a complaint

Whoever answers the phone make the complaint to the highest level bereuacat that will take your call.

A thousand a day should do the job.

Surf Air has negotiated in bad faith from the beginning. I remember when one of the principals said they would cap their flights at 13,

While the airport would prefer you go online and file a complaint with public works, these complaints for all practical purposes go in the circular file. Surf Air has not negotiated in good faith. They lied about the number of flights, times of flights, noise etc.

Surf Air is a private co. making money off our public facilities, I think they have a responsibility to act in good faith. Even so any person affected by excessive coming from any business has the right to call and complain.

Call day and night, any time a flight disturbs you peace. If it's after hours leave a message. Summer is upon us and we look forward to some quiet time in the yard with friends, neighbors and kids,

1,000 a day would be nice but probably 500 a day would work. They have the right to make noise and you have the right to complain

Call today. It's your right

Is it NIMBYism when the Menlo-Atherton Little League Opening Day celebration at Burgess Park has its speakers interrupted every 5 minutes due to Surf Air overflights? is it NIMBYism when volunteer coaches for soccer and baseball at Encinal School's fields have to pause their instructions to the kids? How about when people gather at Courthouse Square in Redwood City to have their conversations interrupted by the Surf Air arriving overflights? Pay attention when you are out and about how these flights are impacting life under the Surf Air flights. It will surprise you and should concern you.

If NIMBYism is about the most frustrated neighbors taking action to decrease the noise disturbances that impact us all (even subtly) then fine, call it NIMBYism.

@NIMBY Lookout, careful on spreading FUD. A very large densely populated area of San Mateo County (Hillsborough to Menlo Park, east side of 280) is considered an impacted noise area because of San Carlos airport (KSQL). This is clearly communicated in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan For the Environs of San Carlos Airport.

A Real Estate Agent should include the language below for impacted homes.

State law says: Effective as of January 1, 2004, California state statutes (Business and Professional Code Section 11010 and Civil Code Sections 1102.6, 1103.4, and 1353) mandate that sellers or lessors of real property must disclose information regarding whether their property is situated within an airport influence area.

Language to be included:

NOTICE OF AIRPORT IN VICINITY
This property is presently located in the vicinity of an airport, within what is known as an airport influence area. For that reason, the property may be subject to some of the annoyances or inconveniences associated with proximity to airport operations (for example: noise, vibration, or odors). Individual sensitivities to those annoyances can vary from person to person. You may wish to consider what airport annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your purchase and determine whether they are acceptable to you.

@Aiden

your comment is far from factual.

1. surf air doesn't have flight going over burgess park every 5 minutes. maybe 1 or 2 an hour at most
2. most surf air flight don't even fly over burgess park
3. they fly over is at most 30 seconds
4. never has ANY aircraft flying over head so been so loud that i couldn't hear the person i was speaking with
5. beyond large jets I find the private turbo props flying in circles on a weekend afternoon way louder and more annoying then surf air.

There has been a lot of effort by our local elected officials wasted on a problem that impacts very few people and for which those local elected officials have no statutory authority.

It would be nice if our local elected officials better understood their statutory authority and stopped wasting our tax dollars on things over which they have no control.

Peter,

Over 1,000 people have gone through the trouble to sign a petition.

As you and I both know for every thousand that sign up there are probably 5 times that many that are bothered but don't wish to have their private information disclosed.

That is not a "very few people"

@David

Seeing that statement on a real estate disclosure would certainly make me rethink an investment in a home.

is that currently required? i had not heard that.

Roy Thiele-Sardina
SEL, MEL, Instrument Pilot

Even 5000 people in an area that has a population of over 500,000 is a very small number.

Not sure where you are getting the 500,000 number, it has nothing to do with anything, it's total arbitrary, I'm using actual numbers,

You could use 40 million, the population of ca. please use numbers in context


as for those on the petition

it is not your position to speak for them,

I enjoy living here because it's a vibrant urban area with opportunities for every facet of life from family to professional to recreational. Yes, I don't like loud noises either but I'm not so hypocritical that I would say that the sources of those noises should be outlawed. After all, I enjoy the fact that I can easily go to San Francisco airport or hop on Caltrain anytime I want, yet I hear train whistles at night and see planes fly over my house. Any responsible adult should realize that these are the prices we must pay for living in a major metropolitan area.

500,000 is the approximate number of people living under the AMBEY approach to San Carlos - of whom about a 1000 have signed a petition.

I agree with Peggy. All this noise is annoying but we must all realize we don't live in a bubble. Jeez, my neighbor was cutting his grass at 8am a few days ago. What the heck???

After thinking about this whole mess, it occurs to me that many of us are being taken for stooges by rich folks in Atherton who can afford to be home during the day lounging by their pools while the rest of us are out there working hard trying to make a living. Personally, I'm not bothered by airplanes. They help make America great!!!

Bring it on Surf Air!!! Your noise is the sound of jobs being created for the working man!!!

This is the same nonsense that went on when the residents of Redwood Shores decided they didn't want aircraft flying over their homes even though they knew there was an airport there when they purchased their homes. Same hew and cry. Same gnashing of teeth by a small minority of people. Same posturing and pandering by politicians. And what happened? Zero. Because the FAA has the say over what happens with the airport and air traffic, NOT the politicians. ZERO is exactly what will come from this.

A whole 1000 people signed a petition? So what? 1000 people out of 500,000 people affected by Surfair flights. Meaning 499,000 people didn't. Even if there are 10,000 that agree with the 1000 that is a ridiculously tiny minority trying to dictate what happens over the heads of 500,000 people, MOST of whom couldn't care less.

@peter carpenter, you are referencing 500K for what purpose? 500K is irrelevant - there is little or no data from those residents that suggest anything about their preferences regarding this topic. Put another way, how many of those 500K have signed a petition in favor of KSQL or Surf Air? I suspect zero. Therefore, using your logic, it would be easy to conclude that of the 500K persons, nobody supports KSQL or Surf AIr. That certainly would be a flawed conclusion and points out why 500K is irrelevant.

It is significantly more relevant to say 1,108 have signed a petition against Surf Air vs zero that have signed a petition in favor.

And it’s AMEBY, not AMBEY.

David:

no one is circulating a petition in favor of Surfair. It's your logic that is flawed.

"It is significantly more relevant to say 1,108 have signed a petition against Surf Air vs zero that have signed a petition in favor. "

Surf Air has probably served 10,000 customers who voted with both their feet and their dollars for SurfAir.

The 1,108 people who signed a petition spent zero.

Menlo Voter: you talk a lot of sense. All this fuss and tons of money spent to satisfy a handful of crybabies. Give me a break.

@menlo voter. Thanks for the helpful clarification. You are right, there is no known document or petition from our communities that supports Surf Air. There is only a petition that measures who doesn't support them.

@peter carpenter, are you saying 10K Surf Customers live in the impacted area?

" there is no known document or petition from our communities that supports Surf Air."

Wrong. Surf Air has probably served 10,000 customers who voted with both their feet and their dollars for SurfAir.

@peter carpenter I stand by my statement. There is no known document or petition from our community that supports Surf Air.

" There is no known document or petition from our community that supports Surf Air."

There are probably 10,000 plus tickets purchased by SurfAir customers = 10, 000 plus "documents".

@peter carpenter, you are thrashing. First you said 10K customers. Now you say 10K tickets. Which is it, customers or tickets?

"There is only a petition that measures who doesn't support them."

In an area of 500,000 what does that tell you? Given that people are far more likely to complain than they are to complement or support.

Gwen,

on Jun 6, 2017 at 12:24 pm
"We have had many San Carlos airport pilots attend our community meetings and testify that they fly Pilatus and have NEVER received complaints on noise. Surf Air is the culprit and many of the pilots we've engaged resent the negative attention drawn to the airport by Surf Air. Join the protest!"

Thank you Gwen for including the GA pilots in this conversation, It speaks volumes,

I am a GA pilot and never complained about any GA Airport, charter co. or any other Airport business, locally, or otherwise. Surf Air is causing havoc and bringing undue attention to SQL and hence the Airport businesses. Most people didn't even know SQL was there until a scheduled airline showed up. As it stands there is no limit to the number of flights SA can bring in and that goes for any other Airlines using the same type of aircraft. It appears their business model is successful, so why not another dozen companies flying in hundreds of flights.

As to Peter your random numbers are all over the place, and again it is not Your position to tell other people how they should feel about SA.

Again I suggest people call SA directly to complain.

"it is not Your position to tell other people how they should feel about SA. "

By that standard neither is it your position to tell other people how they should feel about SA.

Andt note - the "Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion"