Decisions for El Toro

With the release of four options for converting the El Toro Marine Corps Air Station to an airport, the county now has the most detailed look at concrete choices since the impending base closure was announced in 1993. The proposals arrived shortly after a nonaviation plan was presented, thus providing real points for comparison all around. Clarity--to the extent that it has been offered--is welcome.

We have come a long way from the vague general options that were contained in proposals voted on in late 1996 by the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. Planners have heeded the mandate of the supervisors to provide options that would address concerns of South County. Indeed, the big 33.5-million passenger airport was included in the array of choices mostly to demonstrate it was considered, and was widely received as unworkable.

Supervisor William G. Steiner, a crucial vote in the board’s three-member majority supporting an airport, first indicated his preference for only the smallest of the airports--a 19-million-passenger facility--then moved off it. While there was no political support on the board for that idea, it should remain in play in some form as one of a number of options. An important test for an airport should be not whether the politicians cotton to it but whether the community can accept it.

Steiner eventually joined two colleagues in voting for what is now called a mid-sized international airport. While that may be the preferred alternative of the four, and while it may be tempting to seek quick resolution, time is on the side of reserving judgment on exactly what formula might work best. Let the master planning process do its job.

It is good that the county now plans to get out and talk to the community about these proposals and to explain what might be involved. County planners acknowledge that many things still are on the table, so here is the public’s chance to be heard.

Also, it is important that a high-quality evaluation be done of the potential environmental impact of these options. Some healthy skepticism about the environmental review process remains in order. The county’s early try at an environmental impact report was tossed out of court as inadequate in its assessment of the effect of a commercial airport on surrounding communities. It is up to the pro-airport supervisors who say they won’t impose something bad on South County to provide better oversight this time.

We also know that, given the political nature of this debate, the supervisors took steps at the end of 1996 to rule out westerly takeoffs. But since that time, the safety of takeoffs to the east has come under persistent criticism from pilots and others. These questions also have opened the door to whether runways will have to be rebuilt, what communities will bear the burden of takeoffs and indeed, the entire question of how much public subsidy would be necessary.

To date there really are not very good answers. Should a plan become unworkable, the county also has the makings of a promising nonaviation proposal waiting in the wings, a tribute to South County’s hard work.

Further discussion across the region also is desirable on what contribution Orange County really must make to serve the area’s air transportation needs. If there is to be an El Toro airport, it should fit with regional demand and expansion plans at other facilities.

These new options are unlikely to assuage the concerns of those in surrounding communities who want no airport. But planners at least appear to have put to rest the “big international airport” proposal that seemed so out of line when it was on the table in December of 1996. Any final airport plan will have to take into full consideration the safety and quality of life of adjacent communities, and be carefully regulated.

Consider it a start. The long debate over the future of the base continues, and probably won’t be resolved quickly. Still, the arrival of concrete information is welcome to focus the debate.