Noise Concerns

Your July 4 issue contained only three letters on the subject of the Burbank Airport Authority’s revised proposal for a new terminal, all from Valley Village residents and all critical of the airport and authority. One was from the president of the Valley Village Homeowners Assn.

I am sick to death of these homeowner groups and their spoiled, meddling, NIMBY mentalities. How dare they (a vocal but very, very small minority) presume to speak for the majority of the people who live and work in Valley Village.

I would very much like to know when these persons purchased their homes in Lankershim / North Hollywood / Valley Village. And how long has Burbank Airport been in operation? I made a conscious choice to live in this neighborhood knowing full well that I would be living directly under one of the airport’s flight paths.

It’s very simple. Based on what these people visualized as an acceptable place to live, I’d say they made a very poor choice.

ANTHONY D. COMBS, Valley Village

*

The Times’ editorial, “Noise Secondary to Safety” (July 4), points to four emergency landings in the San Fernando Valley as a reminder that the “most important issue is safety.”

I believe that The Times strives to link issues that are actually unrelated to make its argument seem reasonable. Fact: The four recent emergency landings in the Valley and all the incidents of recent and past history in the Valley were caused by mechanical failure and were entirely unrelated to airport size or noise. If you are a pilot and your engines quit before you reach the airport, what in the world does this have to do with noise or the configuration of the airport runway?

Noise versus safety is an issue that does not exist.

LESTER KUSHNER, Valley Village