Irvine Co. Has Reservations About El Toro

An international airport at El Toro should not be pursued if Orange County officials cannot guarantee strict noise limits to protect residents near the flight path, the Irvine Co. wrote this week to airport planning officials.

In the company’s strongest comments to date about the proposed airport, Senior Vice President Monica Florian said the county’s proposal to limit nighttime flights isn’t good enough to protect people from unacceptable airport noise.

Moreover, she said, there is serious doubt that the county has the ability to enforce noise reductions at El Toro--or to control any other aspect of airport operations, including prohibiting landings or takeoffs over Irvine. That authority belongs to the Federal Aviation Administration, she said.

“Such assurances must be prerequisite to county approval of any airport use at El Toro,” Florian wrote in comments responding to the county’s environmental review of the airport proposal. The Irvine Co., which has not taken a position on the airport, owns most of the land around the 4,700-acre base and is developing thousands of homes near the flight path.

“It is essential that the county put these questions of uncertainty to rest through specific mitigation requirements and documentation from the FAA,” she said.

Besides the noise problem, Florian expressed concern about the county’s proposed traffic plan around the airport, calling it inadequate, and also demanded that the county prohibit any landings over Irvine on El Toro’s eastern runway--envisioned for only 2% of flights during certain weather conditions.

Florian’s letter reiterated that the Irvine Co. hasn’t taken a position on whether an airport is the best option for the base, which closed in July. However, the company’s strong language appears to signal the company’s frustration with the county planning effort, especially the inability to guarantee protections for current and future homeowners if an airport is built.

Irvine Co. spokesman Paul Kranhold declined further comment on the company’s position Thursday. “The letter speaks for itself,” he said.

County planners said the company wants assurances that cannot be given at this time. The FAA has yet to complete its own environmental study of the county’s plan.

“We can’t give them guarantees until the FAA reviews [the project],” said Bryan Speegle, manager of the county’s El Toro environmental review. “We have to do things step by step.”

Airport foes, meanwhile, said they were “very encouraged” by the company’s aggressive stance. The Irvine Co. has been repeatedly criticized by Irvine city officials and many residents for staying silent on a such a monumental project, and the company has been pressured privately and publicly to take a stand.

Airing questions about noise guarantees--and other issues cited in Florian’s letter, including what the company called inadequate traffic analyses--are “very responsible concerns,” said Meg Waters, spokeswoman for the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority, a coalition of eight South County cities opposing an airport at El Toro.

“We don’t want an airport there under any circumstances, but we’re glad they’re taking this position,” Waters said. “We’ve said all along that the county is promising things it can’t deliver.”

Bruce Nestande, chairman of the pro-airport group Citizens for Jobs and the Economy, downplayed the Irvine Co.’s letter as a “political statement to satisfy the city of Irvine.” He invited the company to join his group in lobbying the FAA for ironclad noise restrictions at El Toro, similar to those in place for John Wayne Airport.

The Irvine Co.’s chief demand is its request that the county establish a maximum acceptable noise limit for the airport. If that cannot be established, the company said, the airport plan should be abandoned. The company recommended that county supervisors revisit the idea of a nighttime curfew, a measure explored but rejected by airport planners in favor of the restriction on louder aircraft.

Speegle said the county intends to establish a maximum high-noise zone for the airport that will correspond to requirements in state and federal law. County planners already have pledged that there will be no homes or schools within that zone. A similar zone was adopted in 1985 for the expansion of John Wayne Airport.

Speegle said county officials will respond formally to the company’s concerns--and about 300 other letters about the county’s environmental review--before a final vote in June on the airport project.