Menlo Park City Council Email Log

[ Home ] [ City Council ] [ Search ] [ 05/06 Archive ] [ 07/08 Archive ] [ 09/10 Archive ] [ 2011 Archive ] [ 12/13 Archive ] [ Watch City Council Meetings ]

Re: Aircraft Noise from SFO Arrivals...and the threat of DAVYJ

From: domainremoved <Kirsten>
Date: Thu, 27 Oct 2016 17:20:29 -0700

Hi Bill,

Thank you for your email. Aircraft noise is definitely a problem for so
many of us. I will continue to work on this issue through our Select

Best regards,

On Thursday, October 27, 2016, William Evans <william.evans_at_(domainremoved)

> Dear Richard, Kirsten, Catherine, Ray, and Peter,
> My wife and I have been residents of Menlo Park since 2001. Life has been
> peaceful in Menlo Park--but I worry that this is about to change. This
> letter makes two points.
> FIRST, I write you to express my concern regarding a proposal, DAVYJ,
> under review by the Congressional Select Committee for SFO South Bay
> Arrivals. If adopted, the proposed DAVYJ procedure for aircraft arrivals
> in SFO will seriously exacerbate the problem of noise over Menlo Park,
> especially near the FAA's "MENLO" waypoint near the intersection of Laurel
> Avenue and O'Keefe Street in Menlo Park. As you know, planes from Southern
> California and the Southwestern United States are generally routed over the
> MENLO waypoint, so any changes to procedures can have a huge impact on
> aircraft noise in our town.
> This new "DAVYJ" proposal has come to light since I met with Peter, our
> representative on the Select Committee, during this past summer. The new
> procedure was concocted and is being pushed by a group of residents (Quiet
> Skies NorCal) living in the Santa Cruz Mountains, north of Capitola. The
> deployment of the FAA's NextGen aircraft control changes caused aircraft
> noise to become worse generally across the South Bay, including along this
> North-through-Capitola corridor known as the "SERFR" procedure. Quiet
> Skies NorCal advocates moving the noise away from their region--westward
> over the heads of their neighbors. Their current strategy to move noise
> from their skies is "DAVYJ"--a new arrival procedure which Quiet Skies
> Norcal citizen members themselves have proposed to the FAA. Adoption by
> the FAA of the DAVYJ proposal would be a catastrophe for Menlo Park. See a detailed
> analysis of the FAA data
> <https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BwhUM0uZm_8KY180LVY3eEI2REk> by Jay
> Su, a member of Quiet Skies Mid-Peninsula citizen committee. You can also
> download it from www.quietskiesmidpeninsula.com. It is also attached.
> This analysis, *based on the FAA's own noise modeling*, predicts "a
> significantly increased impact in the >45 dBA DNL noise contour: 24,892
> people across the cities of East Palo Alto, Menlo Park, and Palo Alto would
> live within this (loudest) noise contour". The impact of DAVYJ on Menlo
> Park residents is part of the report and two images (one map, one table)
> follow below.
> SECOND, I write to share my dismay with the role of the FAA. While DAVYJ
> is clearly not an equitable solution, the FAA is more than willing to move
> noise over our heads. We must push back and insist that the FAA go back to
> the drawing board to find solutions that reduce noise for everyone, not
> choose among a limited set of bad options sourced by advocacy groups.
> We want reduced aircraft ground noise; let the FAA work out how to achieve
> this. The FAA is showing itself to be an agent of the airline industry.
> Ground noise can be reduced...but only if the FAA ranks ground noise as a
> priority along with airline operating efficiency. Our regions residents
> endure aircraft ground noise as a side-effect of the FAA's commitment to
> minimize airline fuel expenses. Please work with the Select Committee to
> push back against the FAA's plans to only offer solutions that optimize
> airline operational efficiency.
> Thank you for your service to Menlo Park. Aircraft noise isn't a major
> issue in this November's election, but that will certainly change if DAVYJ
> is adopted.
> Sincerely,
> Bill
> [image: Inline image 4]
> [image: Inline image 6]
> --
> Bill Evans william.evans_at_(domainremoved)
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','william.evans_at_(domainremoved)
> 814-8481

(image/png attachment: image.png)

(image/png attachment: 02-image.png)

Received on Thu Oct 27 2016 - 17:25:32 PDT

[ Search ] [ By Date ] [ By Message ] [ By Subject ] [ By Author ]

Email communications sent to the City Council are public records. This site is an archive of emails received by the City Council at its city.council_at_(domainremoved)