San Marcos residents urge action over Palomar Airport noise; local representative on abatement committee outlines next steps
Loading...
Summary
Residents told the San Marcos City Council that increased jet traffic from Palomar Airport is disrupting neighborhoods; one resident who sits on the airport’s Noyes Abatement Committee said the group will present recommendations to the county director of airports in March and asked the city to stay involved.
Public speakers at the San Marcos City Council meeting on Feb. 10 urged the city to pay closer attention to increasing jet traffic and noise from Palomar Airport. Kathy Gillen, who said she is the sole San Marcos representative on the Noyes Abatement Committee formed by the Palomar Airport Advisory, told the council the group is focused on mitigating airport impacts and will present recommendations to the San Diego County Director of Airports in March.
Longtime resident Jane Marmack told the council she has watched operations at Palomar change since moving to San Marcos in 1979. "Now, 250 flights land every single day and then another 250 take off," Marmack said, adding she believes that represents about a 30% increase over the last 10 years and that larger jets are flying lower and louder than before. Marmack said she has noticed grime on cars and solar panels and urged the city to support nearby Vista and Carlsbad in opposing expanded commercial airline operations at Palomar.
Mayor Jones responded that the city would follow up and suggested staff would reach out to Gillen; she also noted she believes the Federal Aviation Administration, not the county, makes many of the regulatory decisions about airport operations. "I don't believe it's the county, but we will we will reach back up to you," the mayor said.
Gillen said the Noyes Abatement Committee has met bimonthly since its formation and is emphasizing pilot awareness, mitigation measures and community education. She asked the city to accept committee contact information from constituents and to stay informed about the committee's March presentation.
The council did not take formal action on the matter during the Feb. 10 meeting. Council members encouraged staff follow-up and said they would accept contact information through the city clerk to keep lines of communication open.

