Edmonds, Mukilteo plan to fight Paine Field air service
EVERETT, Wash. (AP) - The cities of Edmonds and Mukilteo and other opponents of commercial air service at Paine Field have filed a notice to challenge the decision in federal court.
The Daily Herald reports the notice filed with the federal court of appeals could lead to a hearing in April.
The Federal Aviation Administration determined in December that flights proposed by Allegiant Air and Horizon Air at the Snohomish County airport would not significantly increase noise, traffic or air pollution in nearby communities.
The county is starting to plan for a terminal. Although most county officials oppose commercial flights at Paine Field, the county is required to provide space to airlines if it wants to continue receiving federal money for airport maintenance and projects.
The Daily Herald reports the notice filed with the federal court of appeals could lead to a hearing in April.
The Federal Aviation Administration determined in December that flights proposed by Allegiant Air and Horizon Air at the Snohomish County airport would not significantly increase noise, traffic or air pollution in nearby communities.
The county is starting to plan for a terminal. Although most county officials oppose commercial flights at Paine Field, the county is required to provide space to airlines if it wants to continue receiving federal money for airport maintenance and projects.
so where do the people complaing about the noise fly out from? seattle? how about keeping your own noise pollution in your own town instead of trying to burden people in seattle with it?
A few commercial flights is just the beginning.. then there will be more, and more, and pretty soon.. we will have gridlock on 128th... Oh wait, ... we already do...Â
The problems I see, are additional traffic, combined with Boeing's thousands of workers.....Â
I do think that we should have limited commercial flights... small puddle jumpers like Oak Harbor Airlines uses... those would be good.. No more noisier than some of other twins flying out
For the idiots who argue you knew what to expect when moving near an airport this MRD (which the surrounding communities relied upon) is still in effect as much as the proponents of expansion wish it weren't:
Â
In 1978, the University Of Washington Office Of Environmental Mediation convened a panel to recommend the future role of the Snohomish County Airport (Paine Field). The âmediated role determinationâ (MRD) panel suggested that general aviation and commercial aeronautical work (such as Boeingâs Everett plant) be the dominant uses of Paine Field. The MRD Panel recommended encouraging those uses, and discouraged any usages incompatible with community harmony.
In late 1978 and early 1979, the Snohomish County Planning Commission adopted the recommendations and forwarded them to the County Commissioners who adopted the recommendations with few changes. These two documents are colloquially known as the âMRD Documentâ.
@Seattleisaslew You're referencing 35 year old studies....Really?
@NoiseMan Really? Yes really. Maybe do your homework next time before you make yourself look like a dope.
@Seattleisaslew But if you read on...
The FAA in June 2008, in receipt of correspondence between Allegiant Air and Snohomish County and county executives, wrote the airport authority to reiterate that a recipient of federal FAA grants requires the County to not discriminate against commercial aeronautical activities offering services to the public, or risk an enforcement action under FAR 16. The FAA also stated that it would reasonably expect the airport operator to change the existing Class IV Airport operating certificate (AOC) to a Class I AOC in the event that Allegiant Air can secure facilities and/or land at the airport.
Dependant upon an impact statement which, IMO, both cities correctly determined to be in error due to the reasons I've already stated.
I think it is a good Idea it close, If the people that moved that close to the airport and did not it was a airport that's to bad. I think it will help Everett grow.
% of the households that are either directly or indirectly dependent on Boeing in those 2 communities is what?
Â
Â
Couple things here:
Â
Edmonds - you are too far away, so put the soap box back into your laundry closet and go back to driving slow on 99.
Â
Mukilteo - Um, JOBS, hello? And it's not like the noise will be much different than it is now. It's only a few flights. I bet you wouldn't even notice if some rich guy with a private 757 works the pattern for a few hours every day--you'd probably just do what everyone else does and shrug it off as another Boeing test flight.
Â
Point is, you chose to live near an airport, as did I. I live under one of the main approach/departure paths just south of Paine, and it doesn't bother me one bit when that pregnant 747-thing blasts off right over us. Mind you, I'm closer to the field than some of you folks over in Mukkityville, but still, as Americans, you have a choice to live where you want. Honestly, if you can't stand the few extra flights per day, I encourage you to leave. We don't want your type, anyway (and you probably have some cushy Boeing job as it is...go figure, hypocrite)!
Will both sides of this now decades-long battle grow up and be realistic, rather than the ridiculous polarizing crap that's getting us nowhere on any political level?
Â
If it's only going to be a few flights therefore no noticeable increase in traffic, crime, etc., it will NOT bring in countless dollars.
Â
If it will bring in countless dollars, there will have to be many flights, which will bring a noticeable increase in crime, traffic, etc.Â
Â
If anyone thinks Las Vegas gamblers are going to flee the neon jungle to fly to Everett, hop a cab or rental car to Marysville and unload big money at our puny casinos, they are utterly delusional.Â
Â
Be realistic about the positive aspects it can add, so we can maximize them. Be realistic about the negative aspects it can add, so we can be proactive in minimizing them.Â
Â
Really, how difficult is that?Â
Â
Now sit down at that table like grownups, and work out a realistic compromise. The sky will NOT fall if commercial traffic comes here to Mukilteo, and the ground will NOT swallow us all up if it does not. Good Lord, people, at least don't add hypocrisy to your ignorance by complaining about the behavior of children these days!
@MargeGunderson Are you for it, against it or just rambling a bunch of nonsense? First of all the FAA's study is complete crap and I believe the lawsuits are a no brainer win. Will new commercial flights cause more noise, traffic, etc? Absolutely! Second, Sno Co promised the surrounding cities over 30 years ago that this would not happen. The only city for this is Everett. Even the majority of Sno Co's officials are against it as is Edmonds, Mukilteo, Lynnwood, etc and yes, even Boeing. So what we have is a commercial airport being shoved down their throats against the wishes of the vast majority. As usual follow the money to find out the minority who will financially benefit: http://www.flyfromeverett.org/aboutus/supporters/Â
 @Seattleisaslew So the addition of several flights per day to the airport, accounting for a noise change that won't be noticed (and would probably be shrugged off as another Boeing testflight) is complete crap? Do you live next to the airport, or down in Edmonds? Oh, and you do remember what an aero-plane looks like, right? We're not talking about a flying godzilla monster that breathes flames as it hovers above your house, we're talking about modern, fuel-efficient aircraft. And if it's such a big deal for several planes to fly out of Paine, just remember that Horizon Air's Dash 8-400 birds are virtually SILENT.
@Donkey Kong @Donkey Lived here all of my life more than five decades. I am not the one posting with a lack of knowledge of the area, facts or history newby.
 @Seattleisaslew  @Donkey  @Donkey I call it progress. You can, if you want, move back to California.
@Donkey Kong @Donkey You, like others, keep buying into the noise issue which isn't the issue at all. Here's how it will go:
1) approval of an airline
2) build terminal
3) Developers start buying up properties.
4) Developers grease palms for re-zoning.
5) Developers tear down neighborhoods and build commercial.
6) Neighboring property values plummit.
7) Traffic becomes a mess.
8) Taxpayers pick up the tab for roads.
9) Other airlines move in.
Â
Write this down so in ten years you can check these off and see that IÂ was 100% correct.
Â
 @Seattleisaslew  @Donkey Paine Field is not destined to become the next JFK by any means, the demographics aren't right.
Â
I also know of the ghetto that you speak of.
Â
You do, with all due respect, make it sound like the whole area is gonna turn into Sea-Tac or Jamaica, New York, overnight, if approved. I really don't see Paine Field shooting out the flights every 90 seconds.
Â
But, maybe there is a way to compromise. KSNA, Santa-Ana/John Wayne in Anaheim has a "noise abatement" procedure in effect that requires airplanes to initiate certain take-off maneuvers to reduce noise pollution in the populated area around that airport.
Â
Besides, South Everett is already a ghetto.
@Donkey Kong First of all you need to look at a map. Edmonds stretches to 148th. Second there is absolutely no gaurantee of "only a few flights". If there were than there's no justification for the cost of going commercial. As I said below, it's not about the noise. It's about the mega commercial developement that will follow. And those behind this stand to gain via that. If you truly do live "just south of Paine" then you need to take a drive to the surrounding SeaTac area in order to vision what the area is going to become.
Airline service north of Seattle is long overdue. It's about time this process got started. Airport impacts, to some degree, are a part of almost all urban life. South Snohomish is hardly the suburbs anymore. Surrounding communities should direct their energy and resources to working with the airport to mitigate the impacts rather than waste badly needed money fighting what is clearly going to be a losing battle. That would be where the smart money goes. The question is: Do we have smart people in Edmonds and Mukilteo that can rise up to that task? People should learn lessons from SeaTac's third runway fight, and for that matter, every other airport expansion project across the country.
This is long overdue.  Snohomish county needs a commercial airport.
Ugh...Allegiant Air...the worst airline to date.Â
 @Bianca Why? 2 awards from Forbes, one from the FAA for good maintenance, one from Aviation week, zero injuries from accidents. Yeah, its cheap, but thats the whole point.
Fight away. I hope a limited amount of smaller short-hop flights becomes the norm though. Kind of a waste having the field and not utilizing it more towards it's design capacity.
Â
PS. anyone who buys near an airport (with jet traffic) and complains about noise can kiss my a**. Guess which was there first.
 @theToucan Or the people who seem to forget there is air traffic there already with test flights and such everyday as well. This will hardly add to it, because I think it is only going to be a few flights a day.
@jakerepp @theToucan It opens the door. Alaska/Horizon has expressed interest in the past. Here's the rub. It's not about the noise. There are no shuttles, taxis, hotels, motels, parking garages, parking lots, a commercial terminal, etc. etc. etc. that all spring up around a commercial airport. And there's no room for all of that crap.
@Seattleisaslew No, it was a condition of the the grant. The airport must abide by those terms for a period of time (I think 7 years) after the closing of the grant. So it's not as easy as simply "washing their hands" of federal dollars to remove the terms of an agreement. Also the airport depends on those grants just to maintain a basic level of service, so it's highly unlikely the airport can survive without those federal dollars.Â
@NoiseMan "they are required to provide it". Not true. They are required to provide it if they want to continue receiving federal dollars. If Boeing were willing to fund it Sno Co could tell commercial airlines to take a flying leap.
@Seattleisaslew If an airline chooses to fly out of an airport, the airport is required to provide terminal and gate space. They can impose fees to recover their costs, but they are required to provide it. That is the agreement the airport enters into every time a federal dollar is accepted by an airport for infastructure. There was no room around SeaTac in the early years, but it didn't take long for a federal grant or two to provide what was needed to acquisition the property surrounding the airport. Once the airport impacts begin to magnify, the non-commercial property owners are all too happy to sell out to the expansion needs of the airport. .