Comments on: Burbank Looks to Add Curfew While LAX Keeps Expanding

By: Aviatrix

Aviatrix — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 23:44:02 +0000

SF_Burbankian, I had to laugh when you said “This only leads to more traffic, more pollution, more noise.” The San Fernando Valley is the definition of traffic (101/405 interchange), pollution (can’t see the mountains over downtown Burbank on most days), and noise (no matter where in the valley you are you hear the freeway roar). A 21st century airport is a necessity. LA has the highest population density in the country behind NYC – and they have three major airports serving them. LA has LAX. That’s it. The voters have prevented any upgrades at BUR, apart from widening the hallway a few years ago and adding a crappy restaurant. The people of the valley are underserved – they need expanded service, not just another OAK or LAS flight out of BUR. And I lived under the landing pattern for 8 years – jet engines never drowned out the sound of my TV or halted conversations. But the whine of a dozen news choppers sure did whenever there was a wreck on the freeway.

By: David Ross

David Ross — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 03:36:00 +0000

The authorities should be imposing a “I’m a stupid idiot” fine for the idiots who moved near the airport. Come on, people, there’s an airport nearby. Didn’t you think there would be noise nearby?

Unless you have lived near the airport since before it was an airport, you have NO right to complain about the noise.

Me? I’d love to live near the airport.

Mark is entirely wrong. A curfew does restrict interstate commerce. There are many people who want to fly to the east coast after spending a full day in the area. If they leave after 6 but before the stupid curfew time of 10, then they arrive on the east coast in the wee hours of the morning. If they leave around midnight then they arrive at a more decent time.

If it was up to me, the only time there would be a curfew would be…. NEVER.

By: Mark

Mark — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 15:06:47 +0000

Shane:

In my mind as far as curfews are concerned, the municipalities are not regulating the airlines. They are regulating the airports. It is the owner of the airport that sets hours. The airlines are merely customers or tenants of the airport.

The Burbank Glendale Pasadena Airport Authority owns and controls BUR. So, they have the right to set hours. If they wanted to be open from 1:00 to 2:00 in the morning only, then they could do that provided they met environmental, noise abatement and other guidelines as set forth by the government agencies regulating them.

This is quite simplistic, and you do bring up a fair point, as to the rights of airlines as common carriers etc. etc. However, I don’t think anyone could make a case that this curfew in particular is restricting interstate commerce, especially given the availability of landing spots at other close-by airports. As CF points out, most of the traffic that wants to land post-curfew is freight. There is a HUGE logistical airport open 24-7-365 just over the hill (SCLA) that the freighters can use as an alternate to BUR.

My amateur law firm is now closed.

By: CF

CF — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:50:08 +0000

Shane – I don’t think the airlines can get out of this one. In this case if you look at the application, you’ll see it says “FAA approval must be obtained by the Airport Authority prior to the implementation of any of the three curfews.” So, this may be implemented by a local body, but it’s done with the permission of the FAA.

By: Shane

Shane — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:37:00 +0000

With the ruling about passenger bill of rights stating that only the federal government can regulate airlines, can that possibly be extended to local regulations on flight times? Essentially, can the court ruling open up the opportunity for airlines to challenge the curfew in court on the bases that it regulates the airline’s operating proceedures, which only the feds have the right to do. Where does the line stand between what is interstate commerce and the rights of local municipalities?

By: CF

CF — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 14:20:16 +0000

Josh – At the JetBlue press conference announcing service to LAX, the mayor was crowing about how Burbank and Long Beach would get additional service and how that was part of his regionalization plan. He’s including all airports in the region in his plan, but of course he’d rather see service at Palmdale or Ontario.

By: Josh

Josh — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 10:09:45 +0000

The mayor’s regionalization plan consists of diversifying traffic from LAX to the other LAWA airports: ONT and PMD. Despite their location, the city of LA has substantial interest in those airports, indirectly as LAWA is a city department, IIRC. The mayor of LA could care less whether or not BUR so much as closed.

By: ari

ari — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 04:36:30 +0000

Santa Monica, which is GA only, has similar hefty fines. These are politically active NIMBY citizens standing up for their selfish interests. I look forward to the day when the neighborhoods east of LAX (right now poor and African-American) will put similar restrictions on LAX.

By: Alex C

Alex C — Wed, 26 Mar 2008 01:40:58 +0000

I’m not sure whether the “direct result” line is sad or just funny. I’m also not sure why the mayor’s office would have seen fit to issue a press release, unless he was just trying to show that his trip wasn’t a waste.

If there were suddenly non-stop flights ICN-BUR, now THAT would be newsworthy!

By: CF

CF — Tue, 25 Mar 2008 22:07:40 +0000

It’s true, I haven’t heard anything about expansion. Burbank is a notoriously difficult community to deal with. The airport tried to build a new terminal a few years back and failed thanks to community opposition. It wasn’t for expansion purposes, but rather to create a nicer passenger experience and more importantly, the move the terminal further from its dangerous proximity to the runway. No way.

You’re not going to see DC-10s flying over anyone’s house there, because even if the terminal could handle it, the runways are too short.

There isn’t a curfew now and there are only a couple of commercial flights scheduled outside the window, and only barely. For commercial flights, this will only serve to force delayed airplanes to divert or not even depart for Burbank in the first place. It’s a terrible inconvenience for a lot of people that take those flights.

This isn’t about expansion. This is about the community trying to shrink the airport, and that’s not right. If you live by a commercial airport, you should expect it to grow. I live right by Long Beach, and I understand that if the city wanted to raise the cap on number of flights, they could. The airport was there first.

A side note – for cargo and general aviation that do operate more often at night, this will be really annoying to the point where they will have to go elsewhere. I haven’t focused on those areas, because that’s not the focus of my blog.