Category: SFO Airport

  • SFO Repaving Reprieve

    The news that SFO will be shutting down runways 1Left and 1Right should give us, the poor neighbors to the airport, some summer reprieve from take-off back blast noise. 1L and 1R are the short ones that go out towards the East Bay and contribute most of the noise that washes over B’game during inversion layers. The Comicle notes

    Ten percent of all flights at San Francisco International Airport could face delays amid a massive runway rehabilitation project that begins next month and could last into November.

    Crews are set to close Runway 1 Right on March 30 to repave the asphalt and realign nearby taxiways, shifting all takeoffs and landings to runways 28 Left and 28 Right. Runway 1 Left, which borders the construction zone, would be converted into a temporary taxiway to ease bottlenecks before planes depart.

    SFO’s director of project management, Claudia Luquin, described the $200 million repaving and excavation work as “fast-paced,” and “highly sensitive” during a recent airport commission meeting. Overall, she said, it will help keep the airport in a state of good repair and improve safety.

    We discussed the sinking runways and sea walls needed to counter “sea level rise” back in December 2023 here along with proposed legislation about the noise that has gone…..nowhere since. But at least we get “emergency townhall meetings” about ICE and glossy mailers about “affordability”.

  • Coyote Point: A B’gamer returns

    The Chronicle’s local sightseeing tour guide/reporter, Peter Hartlaub, who grew up in B’game journeyed back to our little burg for a piece on Coyote Point. He has some fun little quips that we can enjoy here or you can click through for the whole article. It sounds like he grew up in Lyon-Hoag.

    Coyote Point’s geography is similar to other Bay Area parks, a 670-acre shoreline promontory with a tree-covered hill, laid out a lot like Oyster Bay Regional Shoreline in San Leandro and the East Bay’s Albany Bulb. But the overall vibes are one of a kind, with the airplanes, massive picnic areas, tide pools, a colorful playground, a hidden zoo, oh, and bursts of audible gunfire.

    It’s also a lesson for me: How the Bay Area things we grew up with that once felt routine, seem wild and mystical when you return with perspective. I was raised in Burlingame six blocks from Coyote Point, and thought this strange and versatile park was the norm. Biking through the entire thing for the first time in decades, I’m struck by how close I once lived to an open space unicorn.

    From (Caltrain) I bike slowly east through a town I barely recognize, retracing most of my old 1980s Chronicle paper route and passing my childhood home — bought by my parents for $35,000 in 1970 — now mostly unrecognizable after a recent modern makeover.

    After recapping the landfill in the 1880s that connected the island to the shoreline and the Pacific City fiasco, he mentions another long-gone landmark that we all miss as he bikes up the hill

    I power up the first hill and sadly find no sign of the Castaway, a tiki-themed fancy restaurant with airport views, where we gathered for graduations and Mother’s Day. (It was bulldozed in 2007.)

    As I’m leaving, I marvel at how much better this went than I feared. So much of my middle-class childhood on the Peninsula — every movie theater, drive-in, record store and favorite sandwich spot — has been swallowed by Silicon Valley. But this park is both preserved and objectively better than when I visited as a kid.

    I bike back through my old neighborhood slowly, wishing I had a few more Chronicles to deliver. Nostalgia is a powerful drug. Especially when it’s a half-century later and a special place still has some magic left.

    Let’s see if we can keep as much of “the magic” as possible. It’s very tough to do, but as some city council woman said more than once, “You’ll miss it when it’s gone”.

  • SFO: Palo Alto doing our job for us

    The Palo Alto Daily Post continues to lead the way in local news coverage of the harder-hitting variety. Today’s edition was no exception with their headline “City fights expansion of airport“. At first, I thought the San Carlos airport was seeking some expansion approvals, but no–Paly is going after SFO! Apparently SFO wants to add a new terminal and up to 13 new gates and thinks they have done a proper EIR. News to me. Have we heard any of this from the city of B’game? Any e-newsletters from Papan? Is Becker “creating change” in our dealings with SF? Nada. Paly has lawyered up via a January 23rd letter to the SF Supes. Their hot button is final approach noise, but we are sympatico about the general noise issue. Is there a Go Fund Me page that our city council can contribute to?

    Click on the SFO Airport Voice category on the right frame here. You will see that SFO is a crappy neighbor and like most crappy neighbors, just doesn’t care. “We bring a lot of money to SF and the Bay Area economy so you suburban plebes can just deal with the runway noise and loss of sleep”. 13 more gates? Too bad. 3 am engine testing? Gotta do it to keep the money flowing. I hope the Concerned Residents of Palo Alto keep the pressure up. Somebody has to.

  • Waymo in Bgame: Almost there

    After seeing multiple Waymo's in my neighborhood for a month or more I decided it was time to give it a try.  I actually like to drive especially with my manual transmission cars.  It's a control thing and that ain't Waymo.  But we were four and planned on having a nice dinner in Millbrae, so I hailed one.  It was prompt arriving when it said it would, but missing the pick-up location by four addresses–so we walked over to it since you can't wave at it.  Out to ECR, left turn and headed north it was very careful and direct.  It changed lanes oddly for no apparent reason although my friend noted maybe its suspension sensor guided it away from the right lanes that SamTrans and trucks have turned into a used-up mine field.  $18 seemed about right–no need to tip the driver.

    Drop-off was smooth and after dinner the pick-up was also smooth–like a Lyft.  Then the fun started.  Instead of going 75 feet, turning right on ECR and heading for B'game it made an inexplicable turn back to the Millbrae neighborhoods.  It made another five inexplicable turns on tight residential streets until finally getting to ECR.  Being in good moods we laughed at it.  Then the drop-off (supposedly back where we started) went South as they say.  It turned left instead of right and stopped several blocks from home on the other side of ECR. That was it.  Get out.  Live customer support came on the speaker promptly and indicated the drop-off was outside the service area!  She didn't know what to say when I told her it picked us up there two hours ago, but the fare was waived.  Very odd.

    Today's announcement that Waymo is cleared to start driver-assisted service into SFO made me think that one should leave plenty of time since a random walk through the neighborhood could add fifteen minutes to the trip.  I will improve, it's just not quite there yet.  Here's me on ECR.

    Waymo Joe_jpg

  • Sleepless in B’game: The numbers are only part of the story

    As we again reenter the ridiculousness of Standard Time tonight, the Merc has an article on sleep deprivation by county and towns in the Bay Area.  The headline has an Oakland ZIP code as the most sleep deprived, and the chart shows San Mateo County is the least sleep deprived county (i.e. averaging less than seven hours per night).  Solano County is the most sleep deprived at 38.1% and San Mateo County the least at 28.7%.

    Pulling the covers back a bit, the San Mateo County figure is lulled by Portola Valley at 23.2%.  The other rural towns are also quieter and sleep more.  Dear old B'game is a little better than the county average at 26%, but that may include our shared ZIP code sister, H'borough.  I am skeptical about the metric because the duration of sleep is only part of the story.  When weather conditions are just right–meaning just wrong for sleep–the jet backblast from SFO take-offs may not fully wake you up, but you're not in REM either.  It might also be making us…a bit heavier than need be.

    The "Fall back" is not as bad as the "Spring forward", but be careful out there as either change is associated with distracted driving, etc.  We all voted to stay on Daylight Savings time, but the Sacramento gang and Gavin haven't moved on making the change.  Add this to the "Sacramento Stupidity" category.

  • SFO: Is the airport making Burlingamers fat?

    Most of you probably are not up at 1:30 am or 2am, but I am–usually by choice.  The last three nights have had very bad runway backblast noise at that hour.  Between the Asia-Pac passenger and freight flights and US flights deadheading back east for the morning rush, it can get loud.  How loud?  Recall I had the airport put a temporary noise monitor in my yard for a couple weeks back in 2019 and the results were documented here.  30-50 second bursts of 65-68 dB were common.  How do we know that's too loud?  Because a recent academic study described here notes

    A new study from researchers at the Boston University School of Public Health and Oregon State University (OSU) found that people who were exposed to aircraft noise levels at 45 decibels or more were more likely to have higher self-reported body mass index (BMI)—an indicator of general obesity, which can lead to cardiometabolic diseases, as well as a range of other health issues. A noise level of 45 decibels (dB) is just above the hushed tones of a library (40 dB) and quieter than a typical conversation at home (50 dB).

    The researchers concluded that the highest BMI measures were linked to aircraft noise levels at 55 dB or above. Noise exposure at 45 dB or above was also associated with having higher BMI in middle to late adulthood from early adulthood.

    In a 2023 study, Peters found aircraft noise—even as low as 45 db—increased the risk of sleeping less than seven hours a night. She notes that the distance someone could experience 45 dB of aircraft noise could reach out as far as 22 miles from a major airport.

    Almost all of B'game is within about 4 miles of the airport with runways 1Left and 1Right pointed right away from us directing the engine run-up noise right at us.  The attempts to get some compensation for home noise improvements (i.e. great windows) and the loss of sleep/enjoyment of our properties went nowhere unless someone owned their home before 1980!  When Jackie Speier was in Congress, she made some attempts to change the law, but those haven't gone anywhere either.

    Perhaps soon-to-be County supe Jackie Speier will light a fire under the County to take action against the City and County of SF who own and operate the airport.  It would have a lot more positive health impact than outlawing gas barbeques and stoves.  In the meantime, those extra pounds around our middles may not be entirely our fault–or Salt & Straw's or Pizza My Heart's fault.  "The airport made me do it".  Hat tip, Flip Wilson. 

  • SFO: The neighbor who will never move away…..

    A regular Voice reader and correspondent, Peter Garrison, has been on the case this week about Korean Air KAL 214 spewing 88-91 decibels over B'game and Hillsborough at 2:55 am.  It must be pretty important Korean freight for their 747 to wake up 100's (1000's?) of people.  One can only imagine.

    I'm hoping whichever candidate takes over Dave Pine's County Supervisor seat in November will Do Something Serious about the runway backblast and late night overflight noise.  Jackie Speier put some effort into the problem with Congressional legislation that needed more of a push as noted here.  I've seen Ann Schneider address the noise issue at the Airport Roundtable Ground Noise subcommittee a couple times.  She's a bit of a scatter shot but understands the problem and with some good technical and legislative guidance might make progress.  Either one of them would be more focused than the Supe who thinks either the Gazan Palestinians or the Israelis give a rat's ass about what she or San Mateo County, CA thinks.  Looking at you Noelia Corzo–dullest knife in the drawer. 

    Here's the latest bit of aggravating noise (decibel) data on KAL 214.  If you played your car speakers at the level on ECR at 2:55 am you would be arrested.

    Korean Air flight path

     

  • Waymo coming way mo’ closer to B’game

    Eighteen months ago, we watched with arms-length fascination as driverless robotaxis hit the streets of San Francisco.  We asked "What could go wrong?" here.  Cruise has since retracted its service in SF and elsewhere after a grisly accident where its robotaxi was the second vehicle to hit a pedestrian.  Now Waymo is ready to come down the Peninsula as reported by the Chronicle.  The DMV is apparently game:

    The company leading the robotaxi race wants to expand driverless ride-hailing to Los Angeles and 22 Bay Area cities in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties — even as San Francisco is suing to rein in its expansion.  Last Friday, Mountain View-based Waymo applied to the PUC, which regulates commercial robotaxi service in California, to expand its paid driverless operations to a swath of Peninsula cities including Sunnyvale, Palo Alto, Mountain View and San Mateo, as well as much of Los Angeles County.

    Another state regulator, the Department of Motor Vehicles, gave Waymo approval on Jan. 11 to operate on highways and city streets in a service area spanning San Francisco to Sunnyvale, according to the company’s PUC application.

    One of the juiciest operating permits would be to and from SFO

    San Francisco International Airport officials confirmed last year that Waymo sought permission to map roads in and surrounding the airport as it seeks to eventually bring its driverless ride-hailing service to the region’s busiest airport.

    “I’m being very candid and straightforward about it — I’m using that as an opportunity to try to force a more collaborative relationship with Waymo,” Aaron Peskin, president of the Board of Supervisors, told the Chronicle in November. “And if they take us up on it, great. And if they don’t, then I’m going to have the Board of Supervisors keep them off the airport until they do.”

    Let's not let EssEff take complete control.  B'game should be asking questions and seeking proof that Waymo can navigate odd roundabouts and weird lane patterns like California Dr.  What is the algorithm like regarding pedestrians in (and now legally outside of) crosswalks.  One hears that robotaxis are obeying traffic laws more than HV (human-driven vehicles), but how do they react to crazy drivers breaking the law by going around cautious robos?  If your destination is a building on El Camino, where will Waymo park to disembark?  Will they just add to the Amazon, UPS and DHL mess we have now on ECR?  All worthwhile questions for our leadership to ask.  It may not be as sexy as sea-level rise in 2050, but it's still important.

  • Bayfront shenanigans: Where to put the seawall?

    Sea level rise.  King tide flood control.  Airliner bird strikes.  A new lagoon with algae and sediment.  50 years of conflicting regulations.  Sinking runways. Shore-based or Bay-based.  Swing a cat–hit an environmental group:  Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge, the Center for Biological Diversity, Sequoia Audubon Society, Green Foothills, Baykeeper and Sierra Club.  The Daily Journal's Holly Rusch did as good a job as could be done describing the circular firing squad of government agencies, politicians, environmental groups and the OneShoreline county entity that seeks to build a seawall in the Bay from SFO to Coyote Point.  The article didn't note what size budget OneShoreline has to gather public comment and attempt to get a draft EIR out by 2025, but we will $niff that out going forward.  In the meantime, the engineer in me is very curious about this:

    The proposed barrier would remain open unless the Bay was hit by extreme storms or king tides, at which point the tidal gates would close to protect from flooding impacts.  One major concern regarding the project is the permitting and legal hurdles it could face when receiving approval due to its unprecedented scale and goals, said Save the Bay Executive Director David Lewis, a point his organization’s letter emphasized.  The “unprecedented” size of Bay fill required for the project, which includes a lagoon that could be as many as 670 acres, could require significant mitigation, BCDC warned in a letter to the agency.

    For those keeping track at home, 670 acres is about 29.2 million square feet or exactly two-thirds the size of Golden Gate Park.  What could go wrong?  The County Supe contender (against Jackie Speier) notes:

    Millbrae Councilmember Ann Schneider, who has been speaking out against the project since November when she was mayor, reiterated concerns that the community had not been given adequate time or space to provide feedback on the project.  “OneShoreline completely ignored me, me as the mayor of Millbrae, me who has been working on sea-level rise since they created the first vulnerability process,” she said.

    I predict a lot of sound and fury ultimately signifying nothing–apologies to the Bard.  Here is our local jewel Coyote Point yesterday as an airliner descends through our December clouds.

    Coyote Point in clouds

  • “SFO is sinking fast” while expired legislation is reintroduced.

    The Comicle front page headline blared out the news SFO’s runways are sinking, new research finds in the on-line version.  The print version (below) was even better.

    San Francisco Internation airport is sinking, fast. That’s according to new research, being presented at the American Geophysical Union conference in San Francisco this week.   SFO’s runways are sinking approximately 0.4 inches per year, the fastest among 15 coastal U.S. airports surveyed in new research from Virginia Tech. The research, which utilized submillimeter satellite imagery, found that Los Angeles International Airport’s runways are sinking at roughly 0.1 inches per year, the slowest among the measured locations.

    Subsidence, or sinking, can cause cracking and bulging on runways, a major hazard for aircraft while taking off and landing. SFO isn’t vulnerable to this cracking, but as the water level rises in nearby San Francisco Bay, the airport could be at risk in about 40 years, according to lead researcher Oluwaseyi Dasho, an environmental hazard specialist at Virginia Tech.

    They don't mention why SFO runways are not vulnerable to cracking.  That would have been helpful since they are mostly landfill to begin with.  For those keeping track at home 0.4 inches per year for 40 years is 16 inches–that's some speed bump at 120 mph or more.  And then there is the "seawall" project.

    Airport revenue will pay for the $590 million Shoreline Protection Program, a seawall that will shield the airport from some storm surge and future sea-level rise impacts. Project construction is scheduled to begin in 2025.

    We have our very own Hans Brinker effort going on although it would probably be wiser to emulate Tokyo or Denver and just start working on an adjacent airport out in the East Bay–maybe the Silicon Valley investors hoping to build a new city in Solano County could spare a few hundred acres.  Back in real time, our Rep. Kevin Mullin has reintroduced some of the same legislation that Jackie Speier logged as noted here.  The specifics of the two most important pieces are:

    Reps. Panetta, Eshoo, Mullin, Cárdenas, and Sherman introduced the following pieces of legislation to ensure quieter skies:

    The “Restore Everyone’s Sleep Tonight Act” or the “REST Act” (Panetta)

    Legislation which would authorize an airport to impose an access restriction between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. for aircraft.

     

    Reps. Panetta, Eshoo, and Mullin, all Bay Area members, introduced legislation specifically aimed at addressing issues with San Francisco International Airport (SFO):

    The “Serious Noise Reduction Efforts Act” or the “SNORE Act” (Mullin)

    Legislation that would address noise mitigation through soundproofing and other strategies in the communities surrounding San Francisco International Airport.

    This acknowledgement about the noise from take-offs and landings in the press release shows a good understanding of our current situation

    “This legislation requires the FAA to prioritize noise-related health impacts, enables communities to engage with the FAA, establishes standards related to ground-based noise".  We shall see if our local reps can muster any support in Congress.  I applaud the attempt.  Now put some juice behind it in DC.

    SFO sinking

The Burlingame Voice

Dedicated to Empowering and Informing the Burlingame Community

RECENT COMMENTS

RECENT POSTS

CATEGORIES

ABOUT THE VOICE

The Burlingame Voice is dedicated to informing and empowering the Burlingame community.  Our blog is a public forum for the discussion of issues that relate to Burlingame, California.  Opinions posted on the Burlingame Voice are those of the poster and commenter and not necessarily the opinion of the Editorial Board.  Comments are subject to the Terms of Use.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE

All content subject to Copyright 2003-2026