private planes lower housing prices

More crap.... More delusion... More PPL BS.

You don't need a "study" to realize the obvious: continuous airplane noise
harrassment lowers property values. So what if the price near the airport
has increased. Homes everywhere have increased, just not as much in areas
infected with plane noise pollution.

But if you want a study, here's one...

http://www.eltoroairport.org/issues/taxloss.html

"Skylune" wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
More crap.... More delusion... More PPL BS.

You don't need a "study" to realize the obvious: continuous airplane noise
harrassment lowers property values. So what if the price near the airport
has increased. Homes everywhere have increased, just not as much in areas
infected with plane noise pollution.

But if you want a study, here's one...

http://www.eltoroairport.org/issues/taxloss.html


There is nothing in the GA fleet as loud as what used to fly out of El Toro.

So?

In article
outaviation.com,
"Skylune" plucked a fig, smoked some dope
and converted another booger from his nose to digital:

http://www.eltoroairport.org/issues/taxloss.html

Quote:"Several studies confirm that real estate values are negatively
impacted near the flight paths of major airports."

Note the term "major airports." i.e. JKF, ORD, LAX, etc.

Once again the anti-aviation loons distort facts and outright lie to
bolster their (weak) case against GA. They quote studies of major het
airports and try to use them against minor, GA airports.

In common terms: "That dog just don't hunt!"

In article ,
says...


Note the term "major airports." i.e. JKF, ORD, LAX, etc.

Once again the anti-aviation loons distort facts and outright lie to
bolster their (weak) case against GA. They quote studies of major het
airports and try to use them against minor, GA airports.



Welll. . . If you're going to be honest about it, both major, commercial
airports AND GA airports bring significant nuisance effects to surrounding
communities. True enough, most of the well organized anti-airport lobbies
deal with issues related to major airports, who, with their day-and-night
activities and thousand flight-a-day schedules have the effect of wearing
through the nerves of close residents. It's hard to pity them, because
100% of them moved there after the airport activity was well established,
often BECAUSE of the airport, one way or another, and they'll move away
when they've had enough. Besides - do they think they're going to close
ORD, just because they have a 6-month old baby?

BUT - GA airports have been targeted by opposition groups as well, and the
case is more delicate, because most people see GA activity as
recreational, and not revenue generating or otherwise necessary. Of
course, this is as much a distortion of the facts as the plane
enthusiasts' version of it, but the bottom line is times ARE changing, and
GA pilots are going to have to make efforts to fit better into their
communities. There are many ways to try to lessen the noise impact of a GA
airport on surrounding communities, but the ostrich method is one of the
less successful.

Educating the community about the full role of GA in the community/economy
is important, but in some cases it's not enough. Some citizens' groups
are contributing toward noise-reduction equipment on airplanes. Some
airports have specific, noise-abatement traffic patterns, others restrict
hours. The old, "I was here first, and it's my RIGHT" isn't going to cut
it much longer. One crash, and it becomes a safety issue, then the GA
airport, and its irascible users is gone.

G Faris

In article ,
Greg Farris wrote:

In article ,
says...


Note the term "major airports." i.e. JKF, ORD, LAX, etc.

Once again the anti-aviation loons distort facts and outright lie to
bolster their (weak) case against GA. They quote studies of major het
airports and try to use them against minor, GA airports.



Welll. . . If you're going to be honest about it, both major, commercial
airports AND GA airports bring significant nuisance effects to surrounding
communities. True enough, most of the well organized anti-airport lobbies
deal with issues related to major airports, who, with their day-and-night
activities and thousand flight-a-day schedules have the effect of wearing
through the nerves of close residents. It's hard to pity them, because
100% of them moved there after the airport activity was well established,
often BECAUSE of the airport, one way or another, and they'll move away
when they've had enough. Besides - do they think they're going to close
ORD, just because they have a 6-month old baby?

BUT - GA airports have been targeted by opposition groups as well, and the
case is more delicate, because most people see GA activity as
recreational, and not revenue generating or otherwise necessary. Of
course, this is as much a distortion of the facts as the plane
enthusiasts' version of it, but the bottom line is times ARE changing, and
GA pilots are going to have to make efforts to fit better into their
communities. There are many ways to try to lessen the noise impact of a GA
airport on surrounding communities, but the ostrich method is one of the
less successful.

Educating the community about the full role of GA in the community/economy
is important, but in some cases it's not enough. Some citizens' groups
are contributing toward noise-reduction equipment on airplanes. Some
airports have specific, noise-abatement traffic patterns, others restrict
hours. The old, "I was here first, and it's my RIGHT" isn't going to cut
it much longer. One crash, and it becomes a safety issue, then the GA
airport, and its irascible users is gone.

G Faris


The unseen agenda in most of the anti-GA airports is that of developers,
who covertly funnel money into the "community" groups, in hopes of
closing an airport and getting a nice, large, level, parcel on which to
build houses and commercial buildings.

The developers have come out into the open in Concord, CA, Hawthorne,
CA, and Atlantic City, NJ, where they brazenly state that THEY can
provide more "public benefit" (read: taxes) than the public benefit of a
nice GA Airport.

Of course, we then have the issue of Meigs, where a corrupt city
administration lets expensive contracts to their campaign supporters to
steal and destroy the airport in the middle of the night.

LOL. A "vast anti-GA conspiracy" maybe?? I hope you are correct, but this
is out there.

Provide evidence of covert funneling of money by developers to anti GA
groups. I believe there are probably developers who have made
redevelopment arguments (the "brazen statements"). But guess what? If
the airports haven't accepted the pact with the devil (i.e. the FAA
grants), the local community or private airstrip owner has discretion over
their property.

As far as Megis: which contractor received the contract to "steal and
destroy" the airport. Daley has for years publicly stated his intention
to close down Megis, then he did it. (After Boyer "took him on." LOL) The
people of Chicago elected him knowing of his plans to bulldoze that
airport.

In article outaviation.com,
As far as Megis: which contractor received the contract to "steal and
destroy" the airport. Daley has for years publicly stated his intention
to close down Megis, then he did it. (After Boyer "took him on." LOL) The
people of Chicago elected him knowing of his plans to bulldoze that
airport.

There's the planning to do it, wanting to do it, and the legal right
to do it. Daley did NOT have the legal right to destroy Meigs, strand
planes, and violate the FAA grant for public use.

'Vejita' S. Cousin wrote:

In article outaviation.com,

As far as Megis: which contractor received the contract to "steal and
destroy" the airport. Daley has for years publicly stated his intention
to close down Megis, then he did it. (After Boyer "took him on." LOL) The
people of Chicago elected him knowing of his plans to bulldoze that
airport.


There's the planning to do it, wanting to do it, and the legal right
to do it. Daley did NOT have the legal right to destroy Meigs, strand
planes, and violate the FAA grant for public use.

What does legal have to do with Chicago politics or politicians?

Matt

"'Vejita' S. Cousin" wrote in message
...
In article
outaviation.com,
As far as Megis: which contractor received the contract to "steal and
destroy" the airport. Daley has for years publicly stated his intention
to close down Megis, then he did it. (After Boyer "took him on." LOL)
The
people of Chicago elected him knowing of his plans to bulldoze that
airport.

There's the planning to do it, wanting to do it, and the legal right
to do it.

Daley did NOT have the legal right to destroy Meigs, strand
planes, and violate the FAA grant for public use.

Actually he did.