Santa Monica Airport Bans Jet Traffic

On Apr 3, 12:09 am, (Alan) wrote:
In article Larry Dighera writes:

Here's a case of national proportions to watch:

FAA CHALLENGES SANTA MONICA JET BAN

Well, Santa Monica lost about 30 years ago. I am sure they have been
trying to figure a way to ban jets ever since then.

There used to be a huge "NO JETS" on the sloping ground between Bundy
Drive and the approach end of runway 21.

Hopefully the FAA will insist that the city return money used on airport
improvements, or some similar action to convince the city of the error of
its ways.

Alan

Mmmm, condos, swimming pools, movie stars. Any payments to FAA will be
covered by the first years' property taxes from redevelopment...JG

In article
,
wrote:

On Apr 3, 12:09 am, (Alan) wrote:
In article Larry Dighera
writes:

Here's a case of national proportions to watch:

FAA CHALLENGES SANTA MONICA JET BAN

Well, Santa Monica lost about 30 years ago. I am sure they have been
trying to figure a way to ban jets ever since then.

There used to be a huge "NO JETS" on the sloping ground between Bundy
Drive and the approach end of runway 21.

Hopefully the FAA will insist that the city return money used on airport
improvements, or some similar action to convince the city of the error of
its ways.

Alan

Mmmm, condos, swimming pools, movie stars. Any payments to FAA will be
covered by the first years' property taxes from redevelopment...JG

No -- that area of Santa Monica is mostly old, rental units, filled with
people like "jgrove," who defecate in everybody else's front yard.

The cost os police, fire, water and sewer will far exceed any increase
in tax revenue.

BTW -- every based plane there contributes 1/3% of its "fair market
value" to the city, 1/3% to the schools and 1/3% to the county.

It does not make any sense to replace a number of $30 million jets with
the same number of $500K houses.

as usual, "jgrove" shows himself to be a complete fool and troll.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

On Apr 4, 8:18 pm, Orval Fairbairn
wrote:
In article
,



wrote:
On Apr 3, 12:09 am, (Alan) wrote:
In article Larry Dighera
writes:

Here's a case of national proportions to watch:

FAA CHALLENGES SANTAMONICAJET BAN

Well, SantaMonicalost about 30 years ago. I am sure they have been
trying to figure a way to ban jets ever since then.

There used to be a huge "NO JETS" on the sloping ground between Bundy
Drive and the approach end of runway 21.

Hopefully the FAA will insist that the city return money used on airport
improvements, or some similar action to convince the city of the error of
its ways.

Alan

Mmmm, condos, swimming pools, movie stars. Any payments to FAA will be
covered by the first years' property taxes from redevelopment...JG

No -- that area of SantaMonicais mostly old, rental units, filled with
people like "jgrove," who defecate in everybody else's front yard.

What?? sounds like the opening setup to the Aristocrats..Gilbert
Godfried your flight to the Empire State building is boarding.

Old?? because no middle class person would live under a jet flight
path. This area should be on par with Beverly Hills. Doze that
"airport" and the potential for $billions in redevelopment exists.
Legitimate air traffic can move to LAX, its only 10 miles away.
Who's up for another midnight dozing ????


The cost os police, fire, water and sewer will far exceed any increase
in tax revenue.

It penciled out OK for El Toro redevelopment.

Look at all the construction cranes around NORTHERLY ISLAND:
http://www.glasssteelandstone.com/Bu...etail/1333.php

http://www.urbantoronto.ca/showthread.php?t=7029

Surely, airport height limits would have killed most of these new
buildings.