Mission Hills: Low End Trends

[jpinpb]

Who said they would not consider a home w/road noise and who is pimping it?

You mean pay $800 extra a month in HOAs and MR, like 14649 Caminito Lazanja.

I would really hate to have to pay those fees. But I wouldn’t pay 725k to hear to freeway either. Nevertheless, back in the peak it fetched $1,690,000. Any upper end home that saw this place sell for so much clearly must have figured their place is worth way more.

[sdrealtor]

Not you JP and not $800 a month (only $800/year which is what I pay in MR).

[sdrealtor]

Not you JP and not $800 a month (only $800/year which is what I pay in MR).

[sdrealtor]

Not you JP and not $800 a month (only $800/year which is what I pay in MR).

[sdrealtor]

Not you JP and not $800 a month (only $800/year which is what I pay in MR).

[sdrealtor]

Not you JP and not $800 a month (only $800/year which is what I pay in MR).

[pemeliza]

“An awesome bay view is not awesome if it includes jumbo jets and thiousands of cars/trucks drivng by at 70+MPH.”

I agree sdr and this is precisely why I ended up buying in north Mission Hills rather than south. That view of the airport and freeway is a major turn off for me as well even though they I do enjoy the city views at night.

Having said that, I can see how that combination of features would appeal to a certain class of buyer.

[pemeliza]

“An awesome bay view is not awesome if it includes jumbo jets and thiousands of cars/trucks drivng by at 70+MPH.”

I agree sdr and this is precisely why I ended up buying in north Mission Hills rather than south. That view of the airport and freeway is a major turn off for me as well even though they I do enjoy the city views at night.

Having said that, I can see how that combination of features would appeal to a certain class of buyer.

[pemeliza]

“An awesome bay view is not awesome if it includes jumbo jets and thiousands of cars/trucks drivng by at 70+MPH.”

I agree sdr and this is precisely why I ended up buying in north Mission Hills rather than south. That view of the airport and freeway is a major turn off for me as well even though they I do enjoy the city views at night.

Having said that, I can see how that combination of features would appeal to a certain class of buyer.

[pemeliza]

“An awesome bay view is not awesome if it includes jumbo jets and thiousands of cars/trucks drivng by at 70+MPH.”

I agree sdr and this is precisely why I ended up buying in north Mission Hills rather than south. That view of the airport and freeway is a major turn off for me as well even though they I do enjoy the city views at night.

Having said that, I can see how that combination of features would appeal to a certain class of buyer.

[pemeliza]

“An awesome bay view is not awesome if it includes jumbo jets and thiousands of cars/trucks drivng by at 70+MPH.”

I agree sdr and this is precisely why I ended up buying in north Mission Hills rather than south. That view of the airport and freeway is a major turn off for me as well even though they I do enjoy the city views at night.

Having said that, I can see how that combination of features would appeal to a certain class of buyer.

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=bearishgurl]While 2940 Columbia DOES look out over I-5 and the runway, it is NOT under the landing path. The actual Lindbergh Field landing path over Banker’s hill comes in at a diagonal over the park between the 2100 and 2200 blocks (bet Hawthorn and Ivy). The 2900-3000 block is way north of this and makes a huge difference in jet landing gear noise. Even Laurel Street (2500 bl) is sufficiently north of the path (2-3 blks) to be virtually out of it.[/quote]

You’re kidding right? I know people several miles off the flight path in Point Loma who have installed ACs in their house because they use to keep their windows open all summer and could no longer bear the sound of aircraft anymore. I have known 2 couples that moved from Point Loma to somewhere else because of the noise. One couple moved to North Mission Beach and still installed AC in the house because of the aircraft noise. So why would NOT being directly under the flight path make that much difference?

So this is where you take issue with the locations and the antidotal assessment but I say to you, PL or the airport overlook, it makes little difference as the FAA and the San Diego airport authority has demonstrated by their quarterly noise studies…

So submitted for your dis-approval…

Your quote of “virtually out of it” is simply incorrect. The 2100 to 2200 block is about 70 dBA over the ambient noise floor. The stated location of 2940 Columbia is inside the 65 dBA noise curve and while the difference between roughly -3 dB (or roughly 67 dBA… I am interpolating here a bit) in linear terms is a half power point between the two but on that same linear scale 60 dB alone is a million times greater over ambient. I am saying roughly 67 dBA but lets make the numbers easy… Lets work in favor of the “quiet” argument and say it only 66 dBA. So if 60 dB is a million time louder and 3 dB increase doubles that effect then 66 dBA is roughly a 4 million times over ambient. I defy you to find me one person on this earth that could tell the difference between the two numbers of 70dBa to 67 dBA nor say that 65 to 67 dBA is quiet and “Virtually out of it”.

http://www.san.org/documents/airport_noise/2009_SDIA_Contour.pdf

Of course how someone wants to spend 750K on a house and still consider this area to be desirable is subjective and in the “eye of the beholder” but you are not “virtually out of it” noise wise.

CE

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=bearishgurl]While 2940 Columbia DOES look out over I-5 and the runway, it is NOT under the landing path. The actual Lindbergh Field landing path over Banker’s hill comes in at a diagonal over the park between the 2100 and 2200 blocks (bet Hawthorn and Ivy). The 2900-3000 block is way north of this and makes a huge difference in jet landing gear noise. Even Laurel Street (2500 bl) is sufficiently north of the path (2-3 blks) to be virtually out of it.[/quote]

You’re kidding right? I know people several miles off the flight path in Point Loma who have installed ACs in their house because they use to keep their windows open all summer and could no longer bear the sound of aircraft anymore. I have known 2 couples that moved from Point Loma to somewhere else because of the noise. One couple moved to North Mission Beach and still installed AC in the house because of the aircraft noise. So why would NOT being directly under the flight path make that much difference?

So this is where you take issue with the locations and the antidotal assessment but I say to you, PL or the airport overlook, it makes little difference as the FAA and the San Diego airport authority has demonstrated by their quarterly noise studies…

So submitted for your dis-approval…

Your quote of “virtually out of it” is simply incorrect. The 2100 to 2200 block is about 70 dBA over the ambient noise floor. The stated location of 2940 Columbia is inside the 65 dBA noise curve and while the difference between roughly -3 dB (or roughly 67 dBA… I am interpolating here a bit) in linear terms is a half power point between the two but on that same linear scale 60 dB alone is a million times greater over ambient. I am saying roughly 67 dBA but lets make the numbers easy… Lets work in favor of the “quiet” argument and say it only 66 dBA. So if 60 dB is a million time louder and 3 dB increase doubles that effect then 66 dBA is roughly a 4 million times over ambient. I defy you to find me one person on this earth that could tell the difference between the two numbers of 70dBa to 67 dBA nor say that 65 to 67 dBA is quiet and “Virtually out of it”.

http://www.san.org/documents/airport_noise/2009_SDIA_Contour.pdf

Of course how someone wants to spend 750K on a house and still consider this area to be desirable is subjective and in the “eye of the beholder” but you are not “virtually out of it” noise wise.

CE

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=bearishgurl]While 2940 Columbia DOES look out over I-5 and the runway, it is NOT under the landing path. The actual Lindbergh Field landing path over Banker’s hill comes in at a diagonal over the park between the 2100 and 2200 blocks (bet Hawthorn and Ivy). The 2900-3000 block is way north of this and makes a huge difference in jet landing gear noise. Even Laurel Street (2500 bl) is sufficiently north of the path (2-3 blks) to be virtually out of it.[/quote]

You’re kidding right? I know people several miles off the flight path in Point Loma who have installed ACs in their house because they use to keep their windows open all summer and could no longer bear the sound of aircraft anymore. I have known 2 couples that moved from Point Loma to somewhere else because of the noise. One couple moved to North Mission Beach and still installed AC in the house because of the aircraft noise. So why would NOT being directly under the flight path make that much difference?

So this is where you take issue with the locations and the antidotal assessment but I say to you, PL or the airport overlook, it makes little difference as the FAA and the San Diego airport authority has demonstrated by their quarterly noise studies…

So submitted for your dis-approval…

Your quote of “virtually out of it” is simply incorrect. The 2100 to 2200 block is about 70 dBA over the ambient noise floor. The stated location of 2940 Columbia is inside the 65 dBA noise curve and while the difference between roughly -3 dB (or roughly 67 dBA… I am interpolating here a bit) in linear terms is a half power point between the two but on that same linear scale 60 dB alone is a million times greater over ambient. I am saying roughly 67 dBA but lets make the numbers easy… Lets work in favor of the “quiet” argument and say it only 66 dBA. So if 60 dB is a million time louder and 3 dB increase doubles that effect then 66 dBA is roughly a 4 million times over ambient. I defy you to find me one person on this earth that could tell the difference between the two numbers of 70dBa to 67 dBA nor say that 65 to 67 dBA is quiet and “Virtually out of it”.

http://www.san.org/documents/airport_noise/2009_SDIA_Contour.pdf

Of course how someone wants to spend 750K on a house and still consider this area to be desirable is subjective and in the “eye of the beholder” but you are not “virtually out of it” noise wise.

CE

[CDMA ENG]

[quote=bearishgurl]While 2940 Columbia DOES look out over I-5 and the runway, it is NOT under the landing path. The actual Lindbergh Field landing path over Banker’s hill comes in at a diagonal over the park between the 2100 and 2200 blocks (bet Hawthorn and Ivy). The 2900-3000 block is way north of this and makes a huge difference in jet landing gear noise. Even Laurel Street (2500 bl) is sufficiently north of the path (2-3 blks) to be virtually out of it.[/quote]

You’re kidding right? I know people several miles off the flight path in Point Loma who have installed ACs in their house because they use to keep their windows open all summer and could no longer bear the sound of aircraft anymore. I have known 2 couples that moved from Point Loma to somewhere else because of the noise. One couple moved to North Mission Beach and still installed AC in the house because of the aircraft noise. So why would NOT being directly under the flight path make that much difference?

So this is where you take issue with the locations and the antidotal assessment but I say to you, PL or the airport overlook, it makes little difference as the FAA and the San Diego airport authority has demonstrated by their quarterly noise studies…

So submitted for your dis-approval…

Your quote of “virtually out of it” is simply incorrect. The 2100 to 2200 block is about 70 dBA over the ambient noise floor. The stated location of 2940 Columbia is inside the 65 dBA noise curve and while the difference between roughly -3 dB (or roughly 67 dBA… I am interpolating here a bit) in linear terms is a half power point between the two but on that same linear scale 60 dB alone is a million times greater over ambient. I am saying roughly 67 dBA but lets make the numbers easy… Lets work in favor of the “quiet” argument and say it only 66 dBA. So if 60 dB is a million time louder and 3 dB increase doubles that effect then 66 dBA is roughly a 4 million times over ambient. I defy you to find me one person on this earth that could tell the difference between the two numbers of 70dBa to 67 dBA nor say that 65 to 67 dBA is quiet and “Virtually out of it”.

http://www.san.org/documents/airport_noise/2009_SDIA_Contour.pdf

Of course how someone wants to spend 750K on a house and still consider this area to be desirable is subjective and in the “eye of the beholder” but you are not “virtually out of it” noise wise.

CE

[Author]

Posts