El Toro Proposals Could Never Fly

* I read with interest that a Newport-based group is diligently working on plans to make El Toro an aviation hub of county-based activities (“Planners Push ‘Community’ Airport Idea,” Oct. 13).

I’m sure that people look forward to playing golf, sitting around hotel swimming pools and dining in restaurants--while enjoying the deafening noise of jets taking off every one to three minutes and inhaling the pollution, after having driven through airport traffic to arrive at this destination site.

We live about 10 miles from El Toro (seven air miles), and in recent months some of the jets have been so loud it seems as though they are about to land in our yard. So, if they build an international airport at El Toro, we will not need to undertake the drive to the new hub. We can just stay home and experience the same pleasures.

CYNTHIA WEITZ

Laguna Niguel

* With respect to the article “Another Pilots Union Warns of El Toro Risk” (Oct. 9), why is it that the reader doesn’t learn until the 10th paragraph that the pilots’ unions have also expressed safety concerns regarding John Wayne Airport, LAX, San Francisco International and Lindbergh Field in San Diego? Your headline deceives the reader and is not even-handed.

SUSAN HAUCK

Newport Beach

* At last a voice of reason is being heard in the wilderness of Orange County (“Judge Blasts Report on El Toro as ‘Unrealistic,’ ” Oct. 11).

Judge Judith McConnell was not swayed by the glossed-over environmental impact report for an international airport at El Toro that had been prepared by the county.

Finally, someone is willing to listen. Hopefully, we are emerging from this time warp. Today we are more knowledgeable and better able to scientifically calculate the impact of an airport, yet we were being forced to accept an inaccurate EIR. Any time it was refuted or challenged, the claims were simply dismissed as NIMBY charges.

Let’s now see if our county supervisors can open their minds and hearts as easily as they opened our pocketbooks for airport studies and set up an equal playing field for other uses. After all, they did agree last December by vote to study alternate uses for El Toro as well as an airport.

MARY SCHWARTZ

Santa Ana

* Re Christina Shea’s Op-Ed piece (“Irvine Offers the NFL a Place to Call Home,” Oct. 12).

If you are going to develop a piece of property, you must first own it. Unfortunately, Ms. Shea neglects to tell her readers that Irvine does not own the 440 acres she’s offering to the NFL. Rather, the federal government owns the property. Moreover, Ms. Shea conveniently forgets that Orange County already has a stadium and an arena in Anaheim. There are other facts that Ms. Shea has failed to mention.

1. Stadiums are built at taxpayers’ expense: Recent stadiums have cost taxpayers $200 million or more to build. They are funded with taxes and offer little in economic development.

2. El Toro MCAS is 4,700 acres; a stadium is 90-plus acres: If Anaheim Stadium is any indication, a stadium with parking is approximately 90-plus acres (you could put 52 such stadiums on the base). Moreover, under the current planning process favored as recently as Oct. 7 by 78% of the residents of Orange County, 2,663 acres or 56% of the 4,700-acre base would be composed of non-aviation uses.

3. The economic and environmental case for an airport is compelling: An airport would generate at least 153,000 jobs and more than $12 billion in annual economic activity. Irvine’s proposal generates nothing close. Moreover, their proposal will generate much greater environmental impacts than an airport. Irvine plans to put 2 million to 3.5 million square feet of retail and R&D; on the 440 acres, and admits in their own environmental documents that the average daily auto trips will be 180,000.

4. What about good neighbor policy? This is 52,000 more daily trips than is generated by an airport on 2,000 acres. In conjunction with 100-million-plus square feet of office and R&D; (larger than downtown Los Angeles and Century City combined) that Irvine has already entitled in its master plan, you can see the impacts are far greater--and not only in Irvine but also on neighboring cities.

The vote on Measure A and Measure S proved that the people of Orange County know the benefits and want an airport.

THOMAS C. EDWARDS

Mayor Pro Tem

Newport Beach

* Again we see the arrogance of the county officials in reference to the conversion of the USMC base at El Toro.

Cases in point: a) A letter was received from a union official stating, “It is the unanimous decision of” two unions representing all the pilots of all the major airlines “that it is unsafe to fly the departure and landing routes under the airport plan.” County officials dismissed the letter as an attempt to derail the airport project by South County residents. b) A judge accuses planners of minimizing an airport’s impact on noise, traffic and pollution in surrounding South County communities. County officials and airport supporters downplayed the judge’s decision as little more than a minor setback.

Apparently the majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors have forgotten they should be concerned with the health and welfare of, and answer to, all the citizens of Orange County. We pay taxes, thus their wages, to do their job for all of us.

It appears that all good solutions for the land use, other than an airport, are being passed over by the board. What are we to do about this?

Perhaps the time has come for us to start thinking about withdrawing from Orange County and claiming we are the new “South County” California. After all, are we not already known by that name?

H.H. MINICK

Laguna Hills