Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9_20_2001 - Council Minutes - Adjourned Regular MeetingAPPROVED BY CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 9, 2001 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES ORANGE, CALIFORNIA OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING SEPTEMBER 20,2001 The City Council of the City of Orange, California convened on September 20,2001 at 5:30 p.m. in an Adjourned Regular Meeting in the Council Chambers, 300 E. Chapman Avenue, Orange, California. 5:30 P.M. SESSION 1. OPENING 1.2 PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG - Led by Mayor Murphy 1. 3ROLL CALL PRESENT - Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Cavecche ABSENT - Coontz 1.4 PRESENTATIONS/ ANNOUNCEMENTS/ INTRODUCTIONS - None.2. PUBLIC COMMENTS - None. 3. CONSENT CALENDAR All items on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and are enacted by one motion approving the recommended action listed on the Agenda. Any member of the City Council, staff or the public may request an item be removed from the Consent Calendar for discussion or separate action. Unless otherwise specified in the request to remove an item from the Consent Calendar, all items removed shall be considered immediately following action on the remaining items on the Consent Calendar.3.1 Declaration of City Clerk, Cassandra J. Cathcart, declaring posting of City Council agenda of an Adjourned Regular meeting of September 20, 2001 at Orange Civic Center, Main Library at 101 N. Center Street, Police facility at 1107 North Batavia,the Eisenhower Park Bulletin Board, and summarized on Time-Warner Communications, all of said locations being in the City of Orange and freely accessible to members of the public at least 72 hours before commencement of said Adjourned Regular meeting.ACTION: Accepted Declaration of Agenda Posting and authorized its retention as a public record in the Office of the City Clerk.ACTION:Approved.MOTION - Alvarez SECOND - Slater AYES - Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Cavecche ABSENT - Coontz All items on the Consent Calendar were approved as recommended.PAGEl CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20,2001 END OF CONSENT CALENDAR 4. REPORTS FROM MAYOR MURPHY - None.5. REPORTS FROM COUNCILMEMBERS - None.6. REPORTS FROM BOARDS, COMMITTEES, AND COMMISSIONS - None.7. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS - None.8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER 8.1 Presentations by the following groups related to the reuse ofEI Toro:I. Public Comments Related to Presentation Items Mara Brandman, address on file, asked for a moratorium on this project to allow the government time to assess the use of this property in order to insure public safety in light of the recent terrorist attacks.2. EI Toro Reuse Planning Authority (ETRPA)Meg Waters, representing the El Toro Reuse Planning Authority (ETRPA), introduced Tom O'Malley and Sada Yaghoubian, also of the ETRPA organization.Ms. Waters provided a chronology and history of the airport issue and of the ETRPA organization. She spoke on the proposed airport and its affect on air quality, traffic and noise impacts, air traffic and environmental concerns, pilot concerns, the current saturation of air traffic and general aviation concerns for a second airport in Orange County.She provided a map ofthe proposed flight paths, including those over the City of Orange.She indicated the City of Orange would be between the John Wayne Airport and El Toro Airport flight paths, and departing flights from El Toro would interfere with the approaching flights into John Wayne. She also spoke on the concerns with emergency situations and planes not being able to clear the nearby mountains.She spoke on the noise concerns, as there would be no night time curfews at El Toro and an increase in cargo planes, which are older and noisier.She indicated Orange County is already a strong economy and will be maintained even without the addition of a second airport.Council Questions Councilrnember Slater asked if there would be a financial burden to the County if the property were turned into a park; if there really was support for more educational facilities, which are proposed with this particular plan; and the airport's affect on regional issues.PAGE 2 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20,2001 8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued) Ms. Waters indicated the infrastructure necessary for a park would be put in over a long period of time, so would not be a financial burden. They have had inquiries from Cal State Fullerton, USC and trade technical schools expressing interest in having a facility at this location. With regard to regional issues, there may be a need for an additional airport, but this is not necessarily the place for it, as it should be located where it is wanted and needed. Mayor pro tem Alvarez expressed concern about planes having to maneuver in emergency situations, that this would occur within the City's sphere of influence as Orange's boundary is moving more easterly. He asked for clarification on an FAA Air Traffic Control statement that they were not allowed to comment on certain information. He asked about an air space analysis; and about runway 34, which is pointed north over Orange, and whether pilots would be turning left or right from this runway and what would happen if pilots couldn't land due to weather conditions. Tom O'Malley reported that pilots and other professional organizations have not really been brought into the equation, and spoke on the potential hazards of the proposed flight paths. With regard to weather conditions, planes can fly into John Wayne with lower minimum weather standards than El Toro because of E1 Toro's surrounding terrain and wind conditions. Weather has to be good to be able to approach El Toro, and El Toro could close while John Wayne would still remain open. Meg Waters indicated there are two divisions of the FAA, the Airports Division and the Flight Standards Division, whose missions are in opposition to each other. The Airports Division did indicate in a letter that an airport could be built safely at El Toro, but this is not the plan proposed by the County. The other division of the FAA has indicated in a letter that they have not completed the analysis and the County should not infer that the FAA has made a determination on safety. She also spoke on current air space crowding and that another airport should not be thrown into the mix. 3. Reasonable Airport Alternative Plan Bob McGowan, representing the Reasonable Airport Alternative Plan, stated the purpose of their organization is to propose changes to the County's umeasonable, inefficient and disturbing flight paths. He reviewed the County's proposed flight paths, stating they are not supported by aviation professionals, and indicated the alternative paths are safer, quieter, more efficient and over larger open space corridors. He encouraged the support for a parallel study. Council Questions Councilmember Cavecche asked for Mr. McGowan's opinion on why the County was looking only at their plan and what the safety concerns are between what is proposed and what will actually happen. PAGE 3 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued) Mr. McGowan stated the County plan is their current favorite plan and they don't seem to be willing to look at an alternative, and they would only have to revise the EIR and would not have to start the process over for an alternative. Also, the FAA does not want to do something against their better judgment, such as having a downwind airport that uses maximum thrust and takes off towards rising terrain, and he felt this plan would not be approved unless it was modified. Mayor pro tem Alvarez asked about high thrust airports and how this alternate proposal would be different from John Wayne Airport. Mr. McGowan stated planes at El Toro would use normal thrust which is the right amount of power needed for take off. Councilmember Slater stated if an airport is needed, this is the only plan that makes sense and asked for Mr. McGowan's opinion if an airport is really needed from an economic perspective and about the safety of John Wayne Airport Mr. McGowan stated it is very subjective and any airport proposal is looking at the year 2020. However, John Wayne Airport can not handle the traffic it has now and is considered one of the least desirable airports in the country. The Council recessed at 7:00 p.m. and reconvened at 7:05 p.m. 4. El Toro Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) Mr. Gary Simon, representing the El Toro Local Redevelopment Authority (LRA) stated the LRA is a federally designated entity responsible for implementing the re-use plan at El Toro. It is the County's intent is to build a safe airport and they have been working in conjunction with the FAA. Also, the Alternative Plan is outlined in the EIR along with a non- aviation plan.He highlighted the major events for this proposal since 1994. The EIR and Master Plan will be considered by the County Board of Supervisors in October, which will end the planning process and then the implementation phase will begin, with demolition and grading scheduled for December, 2003. Throughout this process, the County has held community open house events,encouraging participation from residents, businesses and community leaders.He stated a new airport is needed to meet regional needs as air passenger is expected to double in the next 20 years and cargo flights will triple. Los Angeles Airport is already maxed out, Long Beach Airport is limited and a proposed airport in the Inland Empire would be away from major areas. An airport at El Toro will be a joint system with John Wayne Airport and will benefit the economy and job growth throughout the entire County. He also pointed out that 2200 of the current 4700 acres is dedicated to open space, and is surrounded by a 14,000 acre noise buffer zone. PAGE 4r-- ,,'~'.__._--'- CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued) He stated that no flights from El Toro are proposed to gly over the City of Orange, but that alternatives for a larger airport at John Wayne would increase the number of flights which are already over Orange. Council Questions Councilmember Slater asked when the FAA report will be available, what the plans are to fly over Orange and expressed concern on why other alternatives are not being considered when the County Board of Supervisors approves the EIR next month. Mr. Simon stated he was not sure when the FAA report would be available, but when it does come out, the County will evaluate it and make recommendations to the Board; and reiterated that the County has no plans to fly over the City of Orange from El Toro. He stated that he could not predict what the Board of Supervisors would do, but pointed out that an EIR can always have a supplemental analysis performed at a later date. Mayor Murphy asked about the FAA report and what would happen to the planning process if the report stated the El Toro plan was unsafe; and asked if the County still intends to go ahead with the process even before the FAA report is out. He expressed concern that any proposed airport be developed safely without the same conditions and restrictions for take-offs and departures as at John Wayne.Mr. Simon stated the County has no intention of operating any airport unsafely. If the FAA report said the El Toro plans were unsafe, he would recommend stopping the planning process.They do meet regularly with the FAA and have never heard the FAA say the plan is unsafe and should be stopped.Mayor pro tem Alvarez asked about the documents which refer to take-offs going over Orange;and the proposed financing to pay for this airport.Mr. Simon stated that all documents he has read outline the flight paths straight out and not over Orange; and that financing can be developed with passenger facility charges and airport revenue bonds and they do not anticipate El Toro to be a drain on the County.Councilmember Cavecche pointed out that Orange will be expanding eastward and asked which agency developed the flight plans, who will give formal approval for the plan, and if the FAA has to give their stamp of approval.Mr. Simon indicated P & D Aviation were the primary consultants who developed the aviation master plan and the County Board of Supervisors have the final approval. However, they do have ongoing communication with the FAA, who will be issuing Environmental Impact Statements. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20, 2001 8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued) Councilmember Cavecche noted the consultants were hired by the County who also has the final approval for the plan. She also asked if we are waiting to see if the take off plan includes turns or not; asked for clarification on the County's statement that this will improve air quality in the region; and asked where the Orange County Regional Airport Authority (OCRAA) fits into this equation. Councilmember Cavecche also noted that although there are a great many technical details in the EIR, it did not seem to address how this proposed airport will affect the general culture and quality of life. Mr. Simon stated this is the County Plan, with mitigation measures outlined in the EIR, and will be operated as proposed unless it is proved to be unsafe. He also reiterated that air quality will be improved in the region as there will be shorter automobile trips to a more local airport. He indicated that the California Environmental Quality Act looks at traffic, noise, air quality, land use and hydrology - all elements that are considered quality of life, although it can be subjective. Mr. Jack Wagner, representing OCRAA, stated OCRAA, currently comprised of 16 cities, began in 1974 because it had a vision that Orange County needed additional air transportation capability both for transportation and cargo. The organization supports the County's plan because they believe it addresses the needs of Orange County in a responsible fashion. He pointed out the County has adopted an EIR based on existing FAA regulations. OCRAA will be an independent authority to advise the County and will comment on all plans.Councilmember Slater pointed out that many members of OCRAA feel the organization should be studying the proposed alternative plan and have not specifically had any votes definitely supporting the County plan. He also asked once the EIR and Master Plan are adopted, what would be the incentive to make any changes after that.Mr. Wagner concurred with Councilmember Slater, pointing out that they have encouraged Mr.McGowan to pursue submitting his report to the FAA. Once the FAA completes their EIS, the organization will be able to have a better dialog with them. Also, if new information and technology becomes available which are incorporated in FAA regulations, OCRAA would encourage the County to look at the new technology to determine if it provides for a safer and more efficient airport.Mr. Simon pointed out that the County Board of Supervisors are the policy makers and can do whatever they want. They can direct staff to complete additional environmental analysis and change the airport whenever they want. He also pointed out that the Board of Supervisors are very well informed and briefed on all alternatives.Mayor Murphy asked for clarification if the philosophy is not to evaluate anything that isn't commercially ready.PAGE 6 CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20,2001 8. REPORTS FROM CITY MANAGER (Continued) Mr. Simon agreed with Mayor Murphy, indicating that the alternative plan is based on merging technology. Public Questions Mayor Murphy read questions that were submitted by the audience. At what height will the planes be when they cross the 5 freeway? How many planes per day at this height? Mr. Simon responded that it could be maybe 1,000 feet, but that the website, eltorofacts.com simulation gives specific heights by type of aircraft. Your plan addresses some issues of safety and noise. However, how does your plan address issues of traffic, employee housing, fuel delivery, air pollution, and quality of life for Orange County residents?" Mr. McGowan responded that 10 million less passengers means less traffic. There are two fuel lines which means fewer trucks hauling fuel. Also, there is housing on the base that will still be there. Since the FAA has ultimate final say on takeoff and landing patterns, how can anyone assure the citizens of Orange that there will not be an increase of flights over the City of Orange?" Mr. Simon responded that there are no flights planned over the City of Orange. It's a moot question. How many pounds of pollution will be generated per day as a result of this airport?" Mr. Simon responded that this issue is fully covered in the EIR, a copy of which is in every County library. You have supported the County plan since the beginning, a long time ago. Why did you wait so long to come up with your safer plan?" Mr. McGowan responded that it is better late than never. He also noted the altitude of the airplanes when they cross 1-5 will be 575 feet.Does the OCRAA publications as issued (e.g. the recent "More Than a Park," etc) legally use the County of Orange logo? They are not part of the LRA or any official County organization."Mr. Simon responded that OCRAA has a contract with the county to provide public information on the airport. Their newsletter states that they are acting on behalf of the County.9. LEGAL AFFAIRS-None. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES SEPTEMBER 20,2001 10. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION The City Council recessed at 8:03 p.m. to a Closed Session for the following purposes: a. Conference with Legal Counsel pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 - existing litigation: OCM Litigation - City of Orange, et al v. Alabama Treasury Advisory Program, et aI., Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC 106-461 b. To consider and take possible action upon such other matters as are orally announced by the City Attorney, City Manager, or City Council prior to such recess unless the motion to recess indicates any of the matters will not be considered in Closed Session.11. ADJOURNMENT MOTION - Alvarez SECOND - Slater AYES - Slater, Alvarez, Mayor Murphy, Cavecche ABSENT - Coontz The City Council adjourned at 8:15 p.m.YE.MURPH TY CITY CLERK PAGE 8