Town Square

Post a New Topic

County approves spending $1 million to search for airport noise solutions

Original post made on Jun 29, 2017

San Mateo County supervisors have authorized spending more than $1 million in response to the wave of complaints made about noisy aircraft at the San Carlos Airport since Surf Air arrived in 2013.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, June 29, 2017, 12:02 AM

Comments (40)

Posted by Richard Arrigo
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Jun 29, 2017 at 8:23 am

What a waste of money. These entitled people in Atherton make me sick.


Posted by pvrez
a resident of Portola Valley: Central Portola Valley
on Jun 29, 2017 at 9:21 am

$1.03 million down the tubes to placate a-town whiners - sweet


Posted by Jetman
a resident of another community
on Jun 29, 2017 at 10:38 am

Political jujitsu. This is how politicians pretend to do something while accomplishing nothing practical except turning the public against the people they are supposed to be helping by wasting money.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 29, 2017 at 10:56 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 24, 2017 at 7:02 pm
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.
There are three stupid things being done by local governments with out tax dollars:
1 - This effort by the County to count something that it cannot control
2 - The PA Council's decision to install post mortem cameras on the CalTrans right of way
3 -The Atherton Town Council's pursuit of it own tiny fire department in a vain attempt to replace the best fire agency in the country.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Jun 29, 2017 at 12:33 pm

AGILE AIRPORT COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST at $150,000 per year.

That sounds like Mike Brosnan's position. Human Trafficking Coordinator 1st year $140,000 2nd year Carlos Bolanos and Supervisors bumped him to $280,000. Nobody knows what he does.


Posted by AircraftUser
a resident of another community
on Jun 29, 2017 at 12:34 pm

Measure/monitor noise level of all aircraft takeoffs/landings. Institute stiff landing fees which which pay in full for mitigation studies and other work. Adjust fees: more noise from specific aircraft means higher fee. Reward quiet operation and quiet aircraft. Electric/hybrid aircraft under development should eliminate most takeoff/landing noise.


Posted by Lydia
a resident of Woodside: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 1:01 pm

Consider moving Surf Air to the Pali Alto airport. There are fewer residential neighborhoods there on the takeoff an landing patterns!


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 1:17 pm

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

"Consider moving Surf Air to the Pali Alto airport. There are fewer residential neighborhoods there on the takeoff an landing patterns!"

The runway isn't long enough.


Posted by Peter F Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 29, 2017 at 1:23 pm

"Consider moving Surf Air to the Pali Alto airport. There are fewer residential neighborhoods there on the takeoff an landing patterns!"

Of course, just dump your noise over East Palo Alto!!


Posted by Candra
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Jun 29, 2017 at 2:00 pm

Has anyone actually measured the sound and disturbance from this? Why are we just told there is a noise problem when I don't hear any? Motorcycles, trains, lawnmowers, leaf blowers, and noisy cars are a problem but not airplanes.

What proof does anyone have or is this just subjective? If my dog barks or my neighbor plays drums at midnight and police show up, there is proof. Why don't we have proof these airplanes are really a disturbance beyond the cars, motorcycles, leaf blowers or anything else?

And exactly how many pepole are really complaining? Is it half of all the thirty some thousand that live in MP? 90% of us? 1000 people is not very many.


Posted by A wise guy
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Jun 29, 2017 at 2:14 pm

Hey Candra, you are so right. I was just wondering that myself, but it was about aircraft noise flying into and out of Palo Alto, Hayward, Moffett and OAK. I don't hear it, never bothers me, so not clear why they keep complaining. Same with freeway noise. Never hear it, never disturbs me. What's the problem? I even occasionally read about people in Woodside and Los Gatos complaining about barking dogs. I never hear those either. It's kinda weird, but I think noise doesn't exist if I can't hear it. And I'm with Peter C, if it doesn't bother me, it shouldn't bother anyone else. So I wish everyone else would just stop complaining. What I think is what counts, and should form the basis of all public policy. 'cause I'm right and everyone else is just plain wrong.


Posted by SA Noise
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 3:14 pm

SA Noise is a registered user.


A big

Thank You to the Supe's for taking action.




Posted by SA Noise
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 3:19 pm

SA Noise is a registered user.


As I have said 100 calls a day to Surf Air offices directly and they will work with the county and the residents post haste.

500 would be better.

Every citizen has the right to complain about every flight that bothers them.

It wouldn't take long to get to 500.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jun 29, 2017 at 3:22 pm

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

"Has anyone actually measured the sound and disturbance from this?"

Yes - and it was hard work and not done with an iPhone.

IF you really want to know here is the excellent report:


Web Link -- my home is the one identified as "Deodora".


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 6:08 pm

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

"What I think is what counts, and should form the basis of all public policy. 'cause I'm right and everyone else is just plain wrong."

Which is EXACTLY what the few complainers are asking to happen. Let's destroy a business and set public policy because 1000 people are bothered by noise. Brilliant.


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jun 29, 2017 at 6:13 pm

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

SA Noise:

if you honestly think repeated phone calls from a few disgruntled people is going to make any difference you are sadly mistaken. Everyone knows that the 30,000 complaints are from the same 1000 people. 1000 out of hundreds of thousands that couldn't care less. Just another example of how our society has become consumed by entitled people that think their opinions, wants, desires, etc. are more important than everyone else's. You don't want noise? Move to a place in the country where there isn't traffic, overflying aircraft and all of the other attendant noise that comes from living in a large urban area.


Posted by casual observer
a resident of another community
on Jun 30, 2017 at 3:50 pm

Maybe convince the customers to not spend their dollars on SurfAir? If there is less demand, the airline will provide fewer flights. If there is no demand, the airline will go out of business or sell to another company.

As long as people are willing to pay (and I'm guessing these customers live very close to San Carlos Airport), the airline will continue to operate and maybe even grow.


Posted by gb
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Jun 30, 2017 at 4:21 pm

Interesting that Surf Air now has fake ads on Facebook- if they aren't concerned about being shut out- why lie and post FAKE ads- to the supervisors- advertising: Oppose the county proposal that would shut down air service at San Carlos Airport...The San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, which oversees airport operations, is considering a proposal that would restrict aircrafts from operating at the San Carlos Airport, due to a small group of residents near the airport have complained about aircraft noise.

The proposed ban would force San Mateo residents to use SFO or travel across the bay to other airports, forcing residents to endure more traffic and unnecessary travel delays, while also restricting the use of necessary aircraft during specific hours. Despite the flaws in the proposed ordinance, the San Mateo Board of Supervisors is considering restricting Surf Air’s aircraft operations at the San Carlos Airport.
Judging by the lies they've fed the County, Atherton and locals it shouldn't be surprising that the post FAKE ADS- lying has been their forte for 4 years.


Posted by SA Noise
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 1, 2017 at 12:45 am

SA Noise is a registered user.

MV,

It doesn't matter how many people complain, or are bothered, or sigh petitions, or attend meetings, or propose solutions, or what the noise level is, or what the curfew is, or what the FAA says, or how many customers SA has, or where the people who complain live, or how much money the county puts into studies and consultants, or that the county takes money from the Feds for the use of the airport.

You're missing the point, It's not how many people yell, scream, complain, etc.

You see when Surf Air first started 4 years ago they bragged as do many millennial startups do about how proud they are to be "Disruptors". Sort of an Uber of the air.

but I digress,

The obvious point that your missing is that so few people could bring SA to a screeching halt, enough to scare the pants right off the, friends and families, angels, round A's,' round B's' and so on with the simple dial up of a phone,

Everyone has been told to call the airport which directs you to public works, don't ask me why, except to make it difficult and discourage people from calling.

In addition to calling public works, call SA directly, put it on speed dial, and every time you get buzzed at 800' at 10:00 at night, call and leave a message, then call during business hours to make a personal formal noise complaint. You're entitled.

Surf Air has been lying to us for 4 years, the county has tried, the FAA could care less. The solution to bringing them to the negotiating table or putting them out of business is in your right hand. 1-200 calls a day directly to SA will keep them so busy they won't have time to book flights.

At the risk of repeating myself the investors will get nervous and when that happens, people start to bail, and the rest is history,

ball is in your court SA.

200 legitimate complaint calls a day could be disruptors. With a thousand people on the petition it shouldn't take long,


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 1, 2017 at 6:37 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The proof of the pudding is that the small number of disruptors has been and wii be insufficient to impact SurfAir - who has far more customers than there are disruptors.


Posted by Enough
a resident of Menlo Park: Linfield Oaks
on Jul 1, 2017 at 9:17 am

Peter, enough with your statements that there are a "small number of disruptors". That just is not true. Not everyone has the time to sit at their computer and fill up the comment section with words. Surf Air is a problem. Surf Air needs to be removed from our neighborhood skies, but NOT by spending county tax dollars to do it.


Posted by Peter F Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 1, 2017 at 9:31 am

I stand by my statement - The proof of the pudding is that the small number of disruptors has been and wii be insufficient to impact SurfAir.

The proof is that not only does SurfAir continue to exist but it is expanding.


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 1, 2017 at 10:17 am

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

SA:

you talk at cross purposes. You say it doesn't matter how many people call SA a day just that they do it and 200 times a day. Then you say SA doesn't care who it's disrupting. You're right about the latter and wrong about the former. SA won't care how many phone calls they get a day complaining about noise as long as the money and customers keep rolling in the door. And it does. They have a waiting list of people that want to give them their money. So you can keep wasting your time calling SA and those with common sense will realize they have better things to do than tilt at windmills.

People with common sense will also realize that this "plan" by the supes is nothing more than political theater so they can claim they are "doing something" about SA. There is NOTHING they can do about SA as it is up to the FAA, NOT them or anyone else. The supes are WASTING one million tax payer dollars. Think about that for a minute. What could be done with one million dollars that could ACTUALLY make a difference in our county? This sure isn't it.

Any chance the supes had in some day being able to have some control in this situation went out the window when they yet again took federal money for the airport. That money keeps control out of the county's hands for another twenty years. Yeah, the supes are really interested in "doing something" about this problem. NOT.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Jul 1, 2017 at 2:26 pm

Michael G. Stogner is a registered user.

Has the AGILE AIRPORT COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST been identified yet?


Posted by A wise guy
a resident of Menlo Park: Fair Oaks
on Jul 1, 2017 at 3:37 pm

Michael G. Stogner, yes, Peter C has been identified as the most likely candidate that should do it. Everyone else is too scared (smart?) to take it on fearing the wrath of the community.


Posted by Michael G. Stogner
a resident of another community
on Jul 1, 2017 at 4:44 pm

Michael G. Stogner is a registered user.

Very funny


Posted by bemused
a resident of another community
on Jul 1, 2017 at 5:47 pm

@Lydia, please no more jet noise over EPA. The implementation of Nextgen has already dumped the SFO traffic on us. And it's significant. At multiple times during the day there will be over an hour of jets every 2-5 minutes at 4,000 feet.


Posted by SA Noise
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 1, 2017 at 11:30 pm

SA Noise is a registered user.


MV,

"what could be done with one million dollars"

Not much,

For a million dollars you could buy 1 fixer upper starter home in the low rent part of Redwood City.

Doesn't quite put a dent in low income housing, any other ideas.


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 2, 2017 at 8:40 am

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

SA:

it may not buy a fixer upper but it would sure feed a lot of hungry people. A far better use than the waste that it is spending it on this ridiculous political theater.


Posted by SteveC
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Jul 4, 2017 at 10:58 am

SteveC is a registered user.

the goodie feely waste of money.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 5, 2017 at 7:35 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Lest anyone still have the illusion that the County can do anything about limiting SurfAir's operation please note the 26 Jane Supreme Court decision regarding East Hampton's attempt to impose noise controls and curfews:

"On June 26 the justices refused to review an appellate court ruling that invalidated restrictions on late-night and early-morning flights and thus noise — noise that opponents like Ms. Currie describe as a roaring, buzzing, round-the-clock nuisance, sometimes waking them up, sometimes shaking their houses."

Web Link


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 5, 2017 at 8:11 am

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

"“This decision reaffirms the longstanding policy that America has a national aviation system, not one subject to a patchwork quilt of local regulations,”


Posted by Thoughtful
a resident of Atherton: other
on Jul 17, 2017 at 1:19 am

Here's an idea for Atherton residents: stop opposing high speed rail and electrification of Caltrain. Fast, quiet rail service would easily put a dent into Surf Air's business.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 17, 2017 at 7:01 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

The facts do not support all the complaints.

Here is the latest noise map - note the relatively quiet zone South of San Carlos airport:

Web Link


Posted by Rational
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Jul 17, 2017 at 8:12 am

Peter Carpenter wrote: "The proof is that not only does SurfAir continue to exist but it is expanding"

I'm not sure why you keep making this point. One has nothing to do with the other. It's equivalent to saying Company XYZ's sales are growing which proves that child labor isn't a problem. Something can be popular with some people but be a big problem for others.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 17, 2017 at 9:23 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Just exactly how does SurfAir use child labor?


Posted by Menlo Voter.
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Jul 17, 2017 at 6:18 pm

Menlo Voter. is a registered user.

"It's equivalent to saying Company XYZ's sales are growing which proves that child labor isn't a problem. Something can be popular with some people but be a big problem for others."

Straw man.


Posted by Rational
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Jul 18, 2017 at 6:48 am

Rational is a registered user.

Peter wrote: "Just exactly how does SurfAir use child labor?"

[Part removed.] It's an analogy, as I'm sure you well know.


Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 18, 2017 at 7:09 am

Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

If it is analogy then what specific laws has SurfAir broken?


Posted by Rational
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Jul 18, 2017 at 11:27 am

Rational is a registered user.

Child labor isn't illegal in some places.

You seem more interested in nitpicking my analogy than addressing the point that I spelled out very clearly above: "Something can be popular with some people but be a big problem for others."


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from Almanac Online sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

James Beard Award winning chef Traci Des Jardins' restaurant el Alto abruptly closes its doors in Los Altos months after highly anticipated opening
By The Peninsula Foodist | 14 comments | 9,053 views

Palo Alto's bold proposal to jumpstart home electrification
By Sherry Listgarten | 21 comments | 5,254 views

San Bruno Wins Food Trend Craze with First Plant-Based Gas Mart
By Laura Stec | 2 comments | 2,795 views

How Much Time do You Spend Outdoors?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 2,144 views

Is Palo Alto Utilities ready for our increasing demand for more electricity?
By Diana Diamond | 8 comments | 2,053 views