International Airport Called Best for El Toro

SANTA ANA — A crucial study on future uses of the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station concludes that converting it into an international airport is the best option--one that would pump nearly $10 billion a year into the area’s economy while reducing noise and air pollution and adding little to traffic woes.

The draft environmental impact report was hailed by airport supporters who believe a major aviation hub will further revitalize the regional economy and open up lucrative business opportunities with the Pacific Rim.

“I think it really shows what we’ve been saying all along,” said airport booster Timothy Cooley, an executive vice president of the Orange County Business Council. “It’s the best use of the base.”

The report, made public Thursday afternoon at a meeting of the El Toro Airport Citizens Advisory Committee, met with immediate criticism, however, from South County residents who fear that their quality of life will be adversely affected by the base’s transformation into a commercial airport.

They denounced the county report as a blatantly biased document that glossed over their concerns, and they scoffed at the notion that a major international airport in their midst would be better than no airport at all. They say it is evidence the county is doing all it can to force El Toro’s conversion to a commercial airport when the military abandons the base by 1999.

“Of course the report is going to show that an airport is not only viable, but it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread,” fumed Bill Kogerman, co-chairman of Taxpayers for Responsible Planning, an Aliso Viejo-based organization opposed to plans for an airport at El Toro. “It’s a totally biased report focused on one solution: an international airport.”

The environmental impact report weighed three possible roles for the 4,700-acre military base, with its two gigantic airstrips:

* An international airport that could serve more than 38 million passengers a year.

* A cargo and general aviation airport.

* Educational and institutional uses, such as a campus, and visitors’ attractions, such as a theme park.

All three options had several common components, including a 1,000-acre habitat reserve, a golf course and recreational facilities, a ground transportation center and areas set aside for research and development interests.

The report considered how each option would impact local noise, traffic and the environment, as well as several financial factors, such as cost, viability and market demands.

According to the report, an international airport landed at the top of nearly all categories, including:

* Traffic. The non-airport option would result in the worst increase to local traffic, with 310,610 average daily trips, an increase of 1.3%. The airport options would increase local traffic 0.8% to 1.2%. Regionally, an international airport would decrease traffic while the alternatives would increase it. The theory behind this was that passengers would no longer drive to Los Angeles International Airport and other airports outside the county, while residents and businesses outside the area would come to El Toro for cargo shipments, school or the latest theme park.

* Noise. The so-called noise “footprint”--the area most affected by the sound of flight departures and arrivals--would shrink dramatically under all options, because passenger and cargo planes are less noisy than military planes.

* Pollution. An international airport would reduce all pollutants, due mostly to reduced vehicle traffic and cleaner-flying planes. The non-aviation alternative would increase some types of pollution because of increased vehicle traffic.

* Economics. An international airport would create 143,100 jobs both on and off the base and generate $9.9 billion for the local economy, compared with the nonairport option that would produce 55,100 jobs and have a $4.2-billion impact on the economy.

On the negative side of the ledger, however, the report noted that an international airport at El Toro would likely generate continuous noise with around-the-clock flights--or an average of 50 takeoffs and departures an hour. The report also points out that any new project at El Toro would create unwanted noise from ground transportation traffic and cause air pollution problems during construction.

The new jobs may be welcome, but the report noted that an influx of new workers would place added strains on the county’s already inadequate supply of low- and moderate-income housing, as well as other government services.

An international airport would cost $1.6 billion to build, compared with $338 million for the non-airport option, but those costs would be largely borne by business investors, or fees generated by the proposed facilities, not the taxpayers.

“There is no taxpayer cost assumed with any plan, it will be covered by the revenue generated,” said O.B. Schooley, John Wayne Airport director and co-director of the El Toro project. “All the scenarios are net positive.”

The report assumes that John Wayne Airport will remain open.

Flight patterns are expected to remain the same as the military flies now, although the report says a “small” area of Leisure World might be exposed to higher noise levels.

The report was produced by the staff at the county’s Environmental Management Agency and John Wayne Airport, and by outside consultants specializing in aviation. Thursday’s presentation marks the start of a 45-day comment period during which five public hearings will be held around the county.

County staff will incorporate comments into the final report and make recommendations to the citizens advisory committee, which in turn will make a recommendation to the Orange County Board of Supervisors. The county is aiming to meet a mid-December deadline to submit the reuse plan to the Pentagon.

The Pentagon, which has the final say on El Toro’s future, must then decide whether the proposed use is of sufficient public benefit to warrant a transfer of base ownership to the county.

Many county residents, including Supervisor Marian Bergeson, say the current timetable is too rushed and want the 45-day comment period to be extended. Some at Thursday’s hearing said the federal government should be asked to push back its deadline to give the county some breathing room.

“This is a huge decision for Orange County. We have to ask what the hurry is,” Bergeson said. “There’s a lot to go over. Why the rush on this? Why don’t we allow enough time for an adequate review?”

Bergeson also said she is not yet convinced there is the “demand” in the county for an international airport that would accommodate 38 million passengers a year. She said the report’s findings need to be scrutinized, and urged the public to become involved.

The report does nothing to quell the controversy surrounding the base’s future. Even though voters have twice endorsed the idea of turning the retired military base into an airport, opponents have not given up their fight, and will almost certainly turn to litigation.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Airing of Concerns

The county will present the highlights of an environmental impact report on the future of El Toro Marine Corps Air Station at four open houses at which residents may voice their concerns. Meeting times and places:

Aug. 20, 6 to 9 p.m.

Brookhurst Community Center, 2271 W. Crescent Ave., Anaheim

Aug. 24, 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Huntington Beach Mall community room, 7777 Edinger Ave.

Aug. 27, 6 to 9 p.m.

El Toro High School multipurpose room, 25255 Toledo Way, Lake Forest

Sept. 7, 11 a.m. to 2 p.m.

Dana Point Community Center, 34052 Del Obispo St.

There will also be a meeting of the El Toro Airport Citizens Advisory Commission at 4 p.m. Aug. 22 in the Planning Commission hearing room, Hall of Administration, 10 Civic Center Plaza, Santa Ana

****

Write On

Written comments, which will be included in the final environmental impact report, can be sent to:

Environmental Management Agency/Environmental and Project Planning Division

Attn: Paul Lanning

County of Orange

P.O. Box 4048

Santa Ana, CA 92702

Fax: (714)-834-6132

****

The Whole Story

The lengthy environmental impact report and several volumes of supporting documents can be viewed at county branch libraries. The entire report, or portions, can be purchased at $356 bound or $336 unbound. Information: (714) 660-1150.

Source: Orange County Environmental Management Agency

Researched by RENEE LYNCH / Los Angeles Times

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Flight Plans

Although an international airport would cost more to develop than a cargo/general aviation facility or an educational center, a county report says it would generate more jobs and have a larger economic impact:

Development Costs (millions)

International airport: $1,600

General aviation: $341

Education center: $338

****

Economic Impact (billions)

International airport: $9.9

General aviation: $5.7

Education center: $4.2

****

On- and Off-Base Jobs

International airport: $143,100

General aviation: $64,200

Education center: $55,100

Source: Orange County Environmental Management Agency

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Sound Alternatives

Plans for turning El Toro Marine Corps Air Station into an international or general aviation airport change the facility’s noise “footprint”--the area over which noise is spread. Here are the outer reaches of a 60-decibel footprint for El Toro as it exists and under the two alternatives:

Note: Decibel levels higher with closer proximity to runway.

Current

International airport

General aviation/cargo

Noise Scale

Different decibel levels:

140: Pain threshold

120: Amplified rock band

100: Circular saw

87: MD-80 taking off at John Wayne Airport

80: Vacuum cleaner

70: Normal traffic

60: Noisy office

40: Light traffic

30: Normal conversation

20: Quiet conversation

10: Light whisper

0: Threshold of audibility

Source: Orange County Environmental Management Agency