Pages 1--412 from Untitled

VOLUME 1
LIST OF ACRONYMS mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmom mmmm8mmmmmmmm ommm ommmmmo8mmmm mommmommom o8m LOA I

1 0 SUMMARY AND INTRODUCTION l om8m8mmm8mmm8mommmoom8m mo8mmm8 mm I l l 1.1 General Introduction 1 1
1.1.1 Proposed Project 1 1 1.2 History And Background 1 2

1.2.1 MCAS El Toro 1 2
1.2.2 John Wayne Airport 1 3
1.3 Relationship to EIR No 563 1 3 1 .4 Areas Of Controversy 1 5

1 .5 Issues to be Resolved 1 6 1 .6 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 1 6
1.6.1 No Project Alternative 1 7 1 .7 Organization of the EIR 1 7
1 .8 Referenced Documents and Availability of Studies and Reports 1 8 1 .9 Summary of Significant Effects of the Proposed Project and Mitigation
Measures and Alternatives that will Reduce or Avoid that Effect l 1 0 1.9.1 Land Use l 10
1 .9 .2 General Plan Consistency l 11 1.9.3 Transportation and Circulation l 11
1 .9 .4 Noise l 12 1.9.5 Air Quality 1 13
1.9.6 Soils Geology and Seismicity 1 15
1.9.7 Hydrology and Water Quality 1 15
1 .9 .8 Public Services and Utilities 1 16 1 9.9 Natural Resources and Energy 1 17

1.9.10 Recreation 1 18
1.9.11 Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials Use 1 19 1.9.12 Socioeconomics l 20

1.9.13 Risk of Upset 1 21

County of Orange EIR No 573 I Table of Contents 1
1 Page 2 3
1.9.14 Summq Of Cumulative Effects Of The Proposed Project And Mitigation Measures That Would Lessen Or Avoid That Effect l 2 1
1.9.15 Level of Significance After Mitigation 1 23

2.0 PROJECT HISTORY AND SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ~ 2 l
2.1 Project Background 21 2 .1 .1 History Of the El Toro Military Base Closure Process .2 1
2.1.2 MCAS EL Toro Community Reuse Plan CRP And Final EIR 563.2 2 2.1.3 Litigation Regarding Final EIR 563 and the Courts Judgments 2 -4
2.1.4 Transition From CRP to ASMP and Open Space Plan .2 5 2.2 Project Purpose and Need 2 6
2 .2 .1 Aviation Demand 2 7 2.2.2 Other Purpose and Need Factors 2 9
2 .3 Project Objectives 2 L 2 .3 .1 General Project Objectives 2 11
2.3.2 Aviation Related Planning Objectives 2 12 2.3.3 Ability Of The Proposed Project And Alternatives To Satisfy The
Project Objectives 2 13 2.4 Public Coordination and Participation 2 14
2.4.1 Notice of Preparation 2 14 2.4.2 Public Scoping Meeting 2 15
2.4.3 Distribution of the Draft EIR 2 15 2 .5 Relationship to Federal Environmental Processes 2 15

3.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT l mmmoomommmmommmmmmmom 3 l 3 .1 Introduction and Project Summary 3 1
3 .1 .1 Airport System Master Plan 3 3 3.1.2 Base Transition Plan 3 5
3.2 Project Location 3 5 3.3 Project Overview 3 5
3 .3 .1 OCX Proposed Aviation Facility Improvements 3 6 3.3.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 3 6
3.3.3 Base Transition Plan 3 26 3.3.4 Interim Aviation Uses 3 27
3.3.5 JWA Facility Improvements for the Proposed Project .3 27 3.3.6 Proposed Aviation Activity for the Two Airport System -3 32
3.4 Summary of CRP Project Addressed in EIR No 563 3 35 3 .4 .1 Comparison of Proposed Project with the Community Reuse Plan 3 35
3.5 Phasing 3 40 3 .5 .1 Phase 1 2000 2005 3 58
3.5.2 Phase 2 2006 20 10 3 63 3.53 Phase 3 201 l 2015 3 65
3.5.4 Phase 4 2016 2020 3 65

Table of Contents Ii County of Orange EIR No 573 2
2 Page 3 4
3 .6 Summary of Proposed Actions 3 66 3 .6 .1 County Implementing Actions and Discretionary Approvals .3 66
3.7 Intended Uses of the EIR 3 67 3.7.1 Approvals For Which The EIR Will Be Used 3 67

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ~ 888 8 m 1888 8 8 080 88 0mm a 0 m m888 8 m 0 4 l
Introduction Organization and Content 4 1
4.1 Land Use 4.1 1 4.1.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.1 1
4.1.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.1 2 4.1.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.1 2
4.1.4 Methodology 4.1 7
4.1.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.1 7
4.1.6 Project Impacts 4.1 S 4.1.7 Mitigation Measures 4.1 28

4.1.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.1 30 4.1.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.1 31

4.2 General Plan Consistency 4.2 1 4.2.1 Summary of Conclusions in EIR No 563 4.2 l
4.2.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.2 2 4.2.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.2 2
4.2.4 Methodology 4.2 11 4.2.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.2 11
4.2.6 Project Impacts 4.2 11 4.2.7 Mitigation Measures 4.2 18
4.2.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.2 20
4.2.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.2 20

4 .3 Transportation And Circulation 4.3 1 4.3.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.3 1
4.3.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.3 2 4.3.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.3 3
4.3.4 Methodology 4.3 8
4.3.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.3 11 4.3.6 Project Impacts 4.3 15

4.3.7 Mitigation Measures 4.3 43 4.3.8 Level of Significance Afier Mitigation 4.3 52
4.3.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.3 52

County of Orange EIR No 573 Table of Contents 3
3 Page 4 5
4 .4 N o i s e 4.4 1 4.4.1
Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.4 1 4.4.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.4 2

4.4.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.4 2
4.4.4 Methodology 4.4 45
4.4.5 Regulatory Setting 4.4 46 4.4.6 Project Impacts 4.4 56

4.4.7 Potential Mitigation Approaches 4.4 141
4.4.8 Mitigation Measures 4.4 l 78
4.4.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.4 183 4.4.10 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.4 l 84

4.5 Air Quality 4.5 l
4.5.1 Summary of Conclusions in EIR No 563 4.5 1 4.5.2
Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 Supplemental

4.5.3 4.5.4
4.5.5
4.5.6 45.7

4.5.8
45.9 4.5.10

4.5.11

Analysis 4.5 2 Summary of Conclusions in EIR No 573 4.5 4
Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.5 6 Methodology 4.5 36
Thresholds of Significance 4.5 36 Project Impacts 4.5 40
Mitigation Measures 4.5 75 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.5 86
Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.5 87
Air Toxics 4.5 87

4.6 Landform And Topography 4.6 l 4.6.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.6 l
4.6.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.6 2
4.6.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.6 2
4.6.4 Methodology 4.6 3
4.6.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.6 3 4.6.6
Project Impacts 4.6 4 4.6.7 Mitigation Measures 4.6 7

4.6.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.6 8 4.6.9
No Project No Activity Comparison 4.6 8

4.7 Soils Geology And Seismic y 4.7 l
4.7.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.7 l 4.7.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.7 2

4.7.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.7 2 4.7.4 Methodology 4.7 12

Table of Contents h County of Orange EIR No 573 4
4 Page 5 6
4.7.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.7 12 4.7.6 Project Impacts 4.7 12
4.7.7 Mitigation Measures 4.7 16
4.7.8 Level of Significance Afier Mitigation 4.7 18
4.7.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.7 18

4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality 4.8 1 4.8.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.8 1
4.8.2 Final EIRNo 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.8 2
4.8.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.8 2
4.8.4 Methodology Related to Hydrology and Water Quality .4.8 15
4.8.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.8 16 4.8.6 Project Impacts 4.8 16

4.8.7 Mitigation Measures 4.8 27
4.8.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.8 34 4.8.9 No Proj e No Activity Comparison 4.8 34

4.9 Biological Resources 4 9 l
4.9.1 Summary of Conclusions in EIR No 563 4.9 l
4.9.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.9 2 4.9.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.9 2

4.9.4 Methodology 4.9 23
4.9.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.9 24
4.9.6 Project Impacts 4.9 27
4.9.7 Mitigation Measures 4.9 52
4.9.8 Level of Significance tier Mitigation 4.9 56
4.9.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.9957

4.10 Public Services And Utilities 4.10 l 4.10.1 Summary of Conclusions of Final EIR No 563 4.10 l
4.10.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.1 o 4 4.10.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.1 o 4
4.10.4 Methodology 4.10 18
4.10.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.10 18
4.10.6 Proposed Transit Serving Improvements MCAS El Toro 4.1 O 20 4.10.7 Project Impacts 4.10 20

4.10.8 Phasing and Base Transition Plan 4.10 48 4.10.9 Mitigation Measures 4.1048
4.10.10 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.10 53
4.10.11 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.1 o 54

4.11 Natural Resources and Energy 4.11 l
4.11.1 Summary of Conclusions in EIR No 563 I 4.11 l 4.11.2 Effects Determined to be Mitigated to Below a Level of

Significance 4.11 2
County of Change EIR No 573 1 Table of Contents 5
5 Page 6 7
4.11.3 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.11 2 4.11.4 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.11 3
4.11.5 Methodology 4.1 l 9 4.11.6 Thresholds of Significance 4.11 9
4.11.7 Proposed Project Natural Resources and Energy .4.1 l 1 1 4.11.8 Project Impacts 4.11 11
4.11.9 Mitigation Measures 4.1 l 23 4.11.10 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.11 28
4.11.11 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.1 l 28
4.12 Aesthetics Light and Glare 4.12 1 4.12.1 Summary of Conclusions in FEIR No 563 4.12 1
4.12.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.12 1 4.12.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.12 2
4.12.4 Methodology 4.12 5 4.12.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.12 6
4.12.6 Project Impacts 4.12 7 4.12.7 Precautionary Mitigation Measures 4.12 13
4.12.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.12 14 4.12.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.12 14

4.13 Cultural Resources 4.13 1 4.13.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.13 1
4.13.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.13 1 4.13.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.13 2
4.13.4 Methodology 4.13 3 4.13.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.13 4
4.13.6 Project Impacts 4.13 5 4.13.7 Mitigation Measures 4.13 7
4.13.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.13 9 4.13.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.13 9

4.14 Recreation 4.14 1 4.14.1 Summary Of Conclusions In Final EIR No 563 4.14 1
4.14.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.14 1 4.14.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.14 1
4.14.4 Methodology 4.14 8 4.14.5 Thresholds Of Significance 4.14 9
4.14.6 Proposed Recreational Amenities MCAS El Toro .4.14 9 4.14.7 Project Impacts 4.14 12
4.14.8 Mitigation Measures 4.14 19 4.14.9 Level Of Significance After Mitigation 4.14 21
4.14.10 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.14 21

Table of Contents VI County of Orange EIR No 573 6
6 Page 7 8
4.15 Public Safetv 4.15 1 4.15.1 Sukmary of Conclusions in Final EIRNo 563 4.15 1
4.15.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.15 2 4.15.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.15 2
4.15.4 Methodology 4.15 l 1 4.15.5
Thresholds of Significance 4.15 12 4.15.6 Proposed Project Features Relevant to Aviation Safety Issues .4.15 l 5

4.15.7 Project Impacts Air Safety 4.15 16 4.15.8 Mitigation Measures 4.15 29
4.15.9 Level of Significance mer Mitigation 4.1531 4.15.10 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.15931

4.16 Hazardous Wastes and Hazardous Materials Use 4.16 1 4.16.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.16 l
4.16.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.16 3 4.16.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.16 3
4.16.4 Methodology 4.16 22 4.16.5 Threshold of Significance 4.16 23
4.16.6 Project Impacts 4.16 24 4.16.7 Mitigation Measures 4.16 51
4.16.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.16 56 4.16.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.16 56

4.17 Socioeconomics 4.17 1 4.17.1 Summary Of Conclusions In Final EIR No 563 4.17 1
4.17.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.17 2 4.17.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.17 2
4.17.4 Methodology 4.17 10 4.17.5 Thresholds Of Significance 4.17 10
4.17.6 Project Impacts 4.17 11 4.17.7 Mitigation Measures 4.17 20
4.17.8 Level Of Significance After Mitigation 4.17 21 4.17.9 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.17 22

4.18 Risk of Upset 4.18 1 4.18.1 Summary of Conclusions in Final EIR No 563 4.18 1
4.18.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis 4.18 l 4.18.3 Environmental Setting Existing Conditions 4.18 2
4.18.4 Methodology 4.18 3 4.18.5 Thresholds of Significance 4.18 12
4.18.6 Proposed Project Land Uses 4.18 12 4.18.7 Project Impacts 4.18 14
4.18.8 Mitigation Measures 4.18 30 4.18.9 Level of Significance After Mitigation 4.18 34
4.18.10 No Project No Activity Comparison 4.18 34
County of Orange EIR No 573 VII Table of Contents 7
7 Page 8 9
VOLUME 2B
5 0 l CUMULATIVE IMPACTS mmommomm8mmommmmmmmm mmmmmm mmommmmmmmmmmmmmmm8mmm 5 l 5 .1 CEQA Definition Of Cumulative Impacts 5 1
5 .1 .1 Methodology 5 l 5.1.2 Geographic Area 5 -5
5.1.3 Criteria for Selection 5 6 5.2 Summary Of Conclusions In Final EIR No 563 5 6
5 .2 .1 Land Use 5 -7 5.2.2 Transportation and Circulation 5 -7
5 .2 .3 Noise 5 7 5.2.4 Hydrology and Water Quality 5 -8
5.2.5 Public Service and Utilities 5 -8 5.2.6 Natural Resources and Energy 5 9
5.2.7 Cultural Resources 5 9 5.2.8 Socioeconomics 5 9
5 .3 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects 5 k 5 .3 .1 County of Orange Jurisdiction Land Use Projects 5 12
5.3.2 City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects 5 15 5.3.3 Transportation Land Use Projects 5 43
5.3.4 Other Land Use Projects 5 46 5.3.5 Non Planned Land Use Projects 5 49
5.4 Cumulative Impacts By Resource Area 5 50 5 .4 .1
5.4.2
5.4.3 5.4.4
5.4.5 5.4.6
5.4.7 5.4.8

5.4.9 5.4.10
5.4.11 5.4.12
5.4.13 5.4.14
5.4.15

Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Land Use 5 50 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to General Plan
Consistency 5 55 Transportation and Circulation 5 57
Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Noise 5 63 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Air Quality 5 65

Topography 5 67 Soils Geology and Seismicity 5 68
Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Hydrology and Water
Quality 5 68 Potential Cumulative Impact Related to Biological Resources .5 69

Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Public Services and Utilities 5 72

Natural Resources and Energy 5 76 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Aesthetics Light and
Glare 5 79 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Cultural Resources 5 80
Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Recreation 5 8 1 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Public Health and Safety 5 82

Table of Contents UIII County of Orange EIR No 573 8
8 Page 9 10
6 .0
7.0
8 .0

5.4.16 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste 5 83
5.4.17 Potential Cumulative impacts Related to Socioeconomics .5 84
5.4.18 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related To The Risk of Upset .5 86

LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT .6 l 6.1 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes That Would be Caused
by the Proposed Project Should it be Implemented 6 1 6.2 Growth Inducing Impacts of the Proposed Project 6 2
6.3 CEQA Definition Of Growth Inducing Impacts 6 2 6.4 Potential Growth Inducing Impacts By Alternative 6 3
6.4.1 Potential Growth Inducing Impacts Of The Proposed Project l
Reuse Alternative A 6 3

SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS l mmomommmmm om 7 l 7.1 Overview 7 1
7.2 Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts Under The Proposed Project 7 1

ALTERNATIVES ~ 8 l 8.1 Introduction 8 1
8.1.1 Final EIR No 563 Alternatives 8 1
8.1.2 ASMP Alternatives 8 2
8.1.3 Introduction to EIR Alternatives 8 3 8.2 No Project No Activity Alternative Alternative E JWA Status Quo

Aviation Roles No Aviation Reuse at Former MCAS El Tore .8 9 8.2.1 Aviation Uses 8 9
8.2.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 9
8.2.3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 9
8.2.4 Environmental Impacts of the No Project No Activity Alternative 8 0 I
8.2.5 Conclusions 8 29
8.3 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative 8 3 1
8.3.1 Aviation Uses 8 31 8.3.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 31

8.3.3 Phasing Build Out Over 20 Years 8 32
8.3.4 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 33
8.3.5 Environmental Impacts of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative 8 33

8.3.6 Feasibility 8 80
8.3.7 Conclusions 8 82 8.4 Alternative A JWA Status Quo Aviation Roles OCX Full Domestic 8 83

8.4.1 Aviation Uses 8 83
8.4.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 83 8.4.3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 84

8.4.4 Environmental Impacts of Alternative A 8 84

County of Orange EIR No 573 ix Table of Contents 9
9 Page 10 11
8.45 Feasibility 8 l 04 8.4.6 Conclusions 8 104
8 .5 Alternative C JWA Short Haul OCX Medium Haul to Full International Linked Air Service I 8 105
8.51 Aviation Uses 8 105 8.5.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 105
8 .5 .3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 106 8.5.4 Environmental Impacts of Alternative C 8 106
8.5.5 Feasibility 8 124 8.5.6 Conclusions 8 124
8 .6 Alternative F JWA Short to Limited Long Haul With Limited General Aviation No Aviation Reuse at Former MCAS El Toro 8 125
8.6.1 Aviation Uses 8 125 8.6.2
Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 126 8.6.3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 126

8.6.4 Environmental Impacts of Alternative F 8 126
8.6.5 Feasibility 8 141
8.6.6 Conclusions 8 142
8.7 Alternative G JWA Limited International No Aviation Reuse at Former MCAS El Toro 8 143

8.7.1 Aviation Uses 8 143
8.7.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 144
8.7.3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 144
8.7.4 Environmental Impacts of Alternative G 8 144
8.7.5 Feasibility 8 l 62
8.7.6 Conclusions 8 163
8 .8 Alternative J JWA Status Quo Aviation Roles OCX Full International With Widely Spaced Runways 8 165

8.8.1 Aviation Uses 8 165 8.8.2
Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 165 8.8.3 Attainment of Project Objectives 8 165

8.8.4 Environmental Impacts of Alternative J 8 166
8.8.5 Feasibility 8 168
8.8.6 Conclusions 8 168
8.9 Alternative OCX Airport Runway Layout Wildlands Ranch Alternative .8 l 69 8 .9 .1 Aviation Uses 8 169

8.9.2 OCX Facility Improvements for the Wildlands Ranch Alternative
October 5,1999 Submittal 8 177 8.9.3 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 8 l 84

8.9.4 Environmental Impacts of Wildlands Ranch Alternative 8 l 85 8.9.5 Conclusions 8 188
8.10 Land Use Alternatives at Former MCAS El Toro 8 l 89 8.10.1 Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 1 8 l 89
8.10.2 Environmental Impacts of Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 1 8 191

Table of Contents X County of Orange EIR No 573 10
10 Page 11 12
8.10.3 Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 2 8 195 8.10.4 Environmental Impacts of Nonaviation Revenue Support Area
Alternative 2 8 197
8.11 Alternative K JWA Stati Quo Aviation Roles Alternative Airport
Site Full Domestic to Full International No Aviation Reuse at MCAS
El Toro 8 203
8.11.1 CEQA Requirements for Alternative Sites 8 203 8.11.2 Previous Studies of Alternative Airport Sites 8 203

8.11.3 Alternative Sites Evaluated for EIR No 573 8 205 8.12 Environmentally Superior Alternative 8 206
8.12.1 Introduction 8 206
8.12.2 No Project No Activity Impacts Summary 8 206
8.12.3 Environmentally Superior Alternative 8 207
8.13 Comparison of the Environmental Impacts of the Project Alternatives 8 208
8.14 Alternatives Considered but Rejected 8 210 8.14.1 One Airport Scenarios Not Carried Forwad 8 210

8.14.2 Unlinked Two Airport Scenarios Not Carried Forward 8 2 12
8.14.3 Linked Two Airport Scenarios Not Carried Forward 8 2 16

9.0 INVENTORY OF MITIGATION MEASURES 88 00 0 8rn 9 l 9.1 Introduction 9 1
9.1.1 Standard Conditions Of Approval 9 1
9.2 Mitigation Related To Land Use 9 1 9.2.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 1

9.2.2 Additional Precautionary Mitigation Measures 9 2
9.3 Mitigation Related To General Plan Consistency 9 3
9.3.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 3
9.3.2 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 4
9.4 Mitigation Related To Transportation And Circulation 9 4 9.4.1 Final EIR No 563 And EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis

Mitigation Measures 9 4
9.4.2 DEIR No 573 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 7
9.5 Mitigation Related To Noise 9 8
9.5.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 8
9.5.2 Proposed Mitigation Measures 9 0
9.6 Mitigation Related To Air Quality 9 10 9.6.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 10

9.6.2 Mitigation Measures Updating The Final EIR No 563 Mitigation 9 12
9.6.3 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 17 9.7
Mitigation Related To Soils Geology And Seismic 9 18 9.7.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 18

9.8 Mitigation Related To Hydrology And Water Quality 9 19 9.8.1 Mitigation Measures Identified In Final EIR No 563 9 19

County of Orange EIR No 573 Xi Table of Contents 11
11 Page 12 13
99 l
9.10
9.11
9.12
9.13
9.14

9.15 9.16

9.17
9.18
9.19 9.20

9.8.2 Mitigation Measures Identified In Final EIR No 563 Final Supplemental Analysis 9 21
Mitigation Related To Biological Resources 9 23 9 .9 .1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 23
9.9.2 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 23 Mitigation Related To Public Services And Utilities 9 27
9.10.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 27 9.10.2 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 28
Mitigation Related To Natural Resources And Energy 9 29 9.11.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 29
9.11.2 Final EIR No 563 Supplemental Analysis Mitigation Measures .9 30 Mitigation Related To Aesthetics Light And Glare 9 3 1
9.12.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 31 Mitigation Related To Cultural Resources 9 31
9.13.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 3 1 Mitigation Related To Recreation 9 32
9.14.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 32 9.14.2 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 32
Mitigation Related To Public Safety 9 33 Mitigation Related To Hazardous Wastes And Hazardous Materials Use 9 33
9.16.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 33 9.16.2 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 35
Mitigation Related To Socioeconomics 9 37 9.17.1 Final EIR No 563 Mitigation Measures 9 37
Mitigation Related To Risk Of Upset 9 38 9.18.1 Additional Mitigation Measures 9 38
Mitigation Related To Cumulative Impacts 9 38 Standard Conditions 9 38

10.0 ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT mmmmm8emmmmmmm8mmmmmmmmmo mmm8mmm mmmmmmmmmmmm8mmmommmmomm8mom8m
IO I

11 O PERSONS AND ORGANIZATIONS CONSULTED 1 l l
12.0 LIST OF PREPARERS AND CONTRIBUTORS mm l 12 I

13.0 REFERENCES mmmmommommmo8mmmmmmmm mmm8mmmmmmmmm8m 8m mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmommmm 13 l

Table of Contents County of Change EIR No 573 12
12 Page 13 14
VOLUME 3 GRAPHICS
APPENDICES
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M

Notice of Preparation and Initial Study
Comments on the Notice of Preparation
Technical Reports Land Use Compatibility and General Plan Consistency
Technical Report Traffic Analysis
Technical Report Noise Analysis
Technical Report Air Quality Analysis
Technical Report Hydrology
Technical Report Biological Resources
Technical Report Hazardous Materials
Alternative Project Sites
Consistency with SCAG Policies
County of Orange Standard Conditions of Approval 1998
Technical Report Public Safety

County of Orange EIR No 573 Table of Contents 13
13 Page 14 15
LIST OF TABLES
Table l l Project Related Documents 1 9 Table 3 1 Proposed Project Uses Acreages By Planning Area 3 4
Table 3 2 Facilities at MCAS El Tore Proposed for Interim Nonaviation Reuse .3 28
Table 3 3 Major Buildings at MCAS El Toro Considered for Potential Aviation Reuse .3 30 Table 3 4 Summary of Facility
Requirements for Proposed Project at JWA 2020 .3 3 1 Table 3 5 Requirements for General Aviation at JWA 2005 to 2020 3 32

Table 3 6 Summ Of Aviation Activity Forecasts For The Proposed Project 2005 To 2020 3 34
Table 3 7 Comparison of the Community Reuse Plan and the Airport System Master Plan 3 36
Table 3 8 Comparison of Proposed Project and the 1996 Community Reuse Plan 3 38 Table
3 9 Summary List of Improvements at OCX and JWA Recommended in the Airport System Master Plan to 2020 3 41

Table 3 10 Demolition Construction Schedule at OCX 3 57
Table 3 11 Proposed Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses and Locations 3 59
Table 3 12 Proposed Agricultural Use Parcels at OCX Phase 1 3 61 Table 4.1 1 Proposed Agricultural Use 4.1 19

Table 4.2 1 Summary Orange County General Plan Consistency Topics Identified in
EIR No 563 4.2 3 Table 4.3 1 Comparison of CRP and Proposed Project Trip Generation 4.3 1

Table 4.3 2 Long Range Year 2020 Impacted Arterial Miles EIR No 563 4.3 l Table 4.3 3 Existing 1995 Impacted Arterial Miles EIR No 563 FSA 4.3 2
Table 4.3 4 Existing Trip Generation Summary 4.3 5 Table 4.3 5 Deficient Locations Based on Existing Levels of Service 4.397
Table 4.3 6 Analyzed Scenarios 4.3 9 Table 4.3 7
Roadway Level of Service LOS Descriptions 4.3 12 Table 4.3 8 Trip Generation Summary Proposed Project at Build Out 4.3 16

Table 4.3 9 Proposed Project Access Improvements 4.3 17 Table 4.3 l 0 Existing Plus Proposed Project Impact Summary 4.3 23
Table 4.3 l 1 Build Out 2020 Proposed Project Impact Summary 4.3 25
Table 4.3 12 Trip Generation Summary Base Transition Plan Pre Phase 1 Land Uses 4.3 26 Table 4.3 13
Trip Generation Summary Proposed Project Phase 1 4.3 28 Table 4.3 14 Phase 1 2005 Proposed Project Impact Summary 4.3 29

Table 4.3 15 Trip Generation Summary Proposed Project Phase 2 4.3 30 Table
4.3 16 Phase 2 2010 Proposed Project Impact Summary 4.3 3 1 Table 4.3 17 Trip Generation Summary Proposed Project Phase 3 4.3 32

Table 4.3 l 8 Phase 3 2015 Proposed Project Impact Summary 4.3 33
Table 4.3 19 Proposed Project Access Improvements 4.3 48
Table 4.3 20 Proposed Project Impact Mitigation Improvements 4.3 5 1 Table 4.4 1
Factors That Affect Individual Annoyance to Noise 4.4 5 Table 4.4 2 Land Uses Within the 1981 AICUZ 65 dB CNEL Contour 4.4 15

Table 4.4 3 1998 MCAS El Toru Aircraft Operations 4.4 16

Table of Contents Hlu County of Orange EIR No 573 14
14 Page 15 16
Table 4.4 4 Average Daily MCAS El Toro Aircraft Operations Percent by Time of Day for Calendar Year 1998 4 4 16
Table 4.4 5 MCAS El Toro Aircraft Types by Percent of Daily Operations for Calendar Year 1998 4.4 17
Table 4.4 6 Average Daily Jet Operations by Flight Corridor at the MCAS El Toro in Calendar Year 1998 4.4 18
Table 4.4 7 1998 MCAS El Toro Average Daily Runway Usage 4.4 20 Table 4.4 8 Existing 1998 MCAS El Toro CNEL Area In Acres 4.4 21
Table 4.4 9 Land Use Summary for the 1998 Existing Condition and 198 1 AICUZ 65 dB CNEL Contours 4.4 2 1
Table 4.4 10 Specific Receptor Locations and Existing Land Uses 4.4 22 Table 4.4 11 CNEL at Sensitive'Receptor Locations for Calendar Year 1998 MCAS El
Toro Military Operations 4.4 23 Table 4.4 l 2 SENEL for Military F A l 8 Operations 4.4 24
Table 4.4 l 3 SENEL for Various Military Aircraft Operations 4.4 25 Table 4.4 14 1998 JWA Air Carrier Operations by Percent of Aircraft Type
4.4 29 Table 4.4 15 JWA 1998 CNEL at Noise Monitoring Sites 4.4 30

Table 4.4 16 Sample Energy Average SENEL by Noise Monitoring Sites for JWA for the Fourth Quarter of 1998 4.4 3 1
Table 4.4 17 Time Above Values for Existing 1998 JWA Aircraft Operations in Average Minutes Per Day 4.4 32
Table 4.4 18 Arterial Road Vehicle Mix Data Traffic Distribution By Time of Day Shown as a Percent of Average Daily Traffic 4.4 33
Table 4.4 19 Contour Distances for Existing Conditions on Orange County Roads .4.4 34 Table 4.4 20 County of Orange Land Use Compatibility Criteria 4.4 52
Table 4.4 21 County of Orange Land Use Compatibility Criteria Explanations and Definitions 4.4 53
Table 4.4 22 FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria for Highway Construction Projects .4.4 54 Table 4.4 23 Annual and Daily Year 2020 Operations by Time of Day at OCX 4.4 57
Table 4.4 24 Year 2020 Daily Operations by Runway at OCX 4.4 57 Table 4.4 25 Interim Year Operations At OCX Under the Proposed Project
.4.4 58 Table 4.4 26 Summary of OCX Year 2020 Operations by Aircrafk Type 4.4 59

Table 4.4 27 Interim Year Fleet Mix at OCX 4.4 60 Table 4.4 28 Year 2020 Daily Departures at OCX by Stage Length for the Proposed
Project 4.4 64 Table 4.4 29 Land Use Comparison 1998 Military and 2020 Proposed Project
4.4 68 Table 4.4,29a Land Use Comparison Table Military CRP and Alternative B Year 2005

2010,2015 and 2020 4.4 69 Table 4.4 30 Comparison Of 1998 And 2020 CNEL At Sensitive Receptor Locations For
The Proposed Project 4.4 71 Table 4.4 30a Comparison of CNEL Alternative B Years 2005,2010,2015 and 2020
.4.4 72 Table 4.4 3 1 Corridor Comparison of 1998 Military Operations and Noise and the

Proposed Project 4.4 75 Table 4.4 32 Aggregation of Aircraft Operations into Aircraft 4.4 76

County of Orange EIR No 573 xu Table of Contents 15
15 Page 16 17
Table 4.4 33 Comparison of Existing Military Jet Average Daily Operations with Civilian Aviation Jet Operations by Flight Corridor 4.4977
Table 4.4 34 Time Above Data at Sensitive Receptors for 1998 Military and 2020 Proposed Project 4.4 79
Table 4.4 34a Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared with Years 2005,201O and 2015,24 Hour Exposure 4.4 81
Table 4.4.34b Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared With Years 2005,201O and 2015 Night Hours Only
10pm 7am 4.4 82 Table 4.4 35 Time Above 65 dBA for Existing Military and the Proposed Project
Operations 4.4 83 Table 4.4 36 2020 Annual and Daily Operations by Time of Day at JWA 4.4 84
Table 4.4 37 Summary of JWA Operations by Aircraft Type for the Proposed Project .4.4 85 Table 4.4 38 2020 Daily Operations by Runway for JWA 4.4 86
Table 4.4 39 2020 Aircraft Stage Lengths for JWA for the Proposed Project Average Daily Departures 4.4 86
Table 4.4 40 Aircraft Takeoff Profiles for JWA 4.4 87 Table 4.4 41 Land Use Comparison for 1998 and 2020 for JWA Area in Square Miles .4.4 88
Table 4.4 42 Comparison of 1998 and 2020 CNEL at JWA Sensitive Receptor Locations for the Proposed Project 4.4 89
Table 4.4 43 Time Above Data for JWA 1998 and 2020 Under the Proposed Project at Sensitive Receptor Locations 4.4 90
Table 4.4 44 Road Noise Level Changes for Future Conditions 4.4 94 Table 4.4 45 Road Noise Level Increases Greater than 1.5 4.4 117
Table 4.4 46 Contour Distances for Future Conditions Under the Proposed Project 4.4 127 Table 4.447 Utilization of RW 34 Right Tun by Aircraft Type and Stage Length 4.4 155
Table 4.4 48 Comparison of Years 1998 and 2020 CNEL at Sensitive Receptor Locations for Mitigation Alternative 1 Night Preferential Runway System 4.4 157
Table 4.4 49 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared With Night Preferential Runway Alternative 1 Night Hours Only 1 Opm Tarn
4.4 158 Table 4.4 50 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor
Locations Compared With Night Preferential Runway Alternative 1,24 Hour Exposure 4.4 159
Table 4.4 51 Comparison of Years 1998 and 2020 CNEL at Sensitive Receptor Locations for Mitigation Alternative 2 Night Curfew 4.4 161
Table 4.4 52 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared With Night Curfew Alternative 2 Night Exposure
IOpm 7am 4.4 162 Table 4.4 53 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor
Locations Compared With Night Curfew Alternative 2,24 Hour Exposure .4.4 163 Table 4.4 54 Comparison of Years 1998 and 2020 CNEL at Sensitive Receptor Locations
for Mitigation Alternative 3 Night SENEL 86 Limit 4.4 165

Table of Contents ml County of Orange EIR No 573 16
16 Page 17 18
Table 4.4 55 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared With 86 SENEL Night Limit Alternative 2 Night Exposure
lOpm 7am 4.4 166 Table 4.4 56 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor
Locations Compared With 86 SENEL Night Limit Alternative 2,24 Hour Exposure 4.4 167
Table 4.4 57 Comparison of Years 1998 and 2020 CNEL at Sensitive Receptor Locations for Mitigation Alternative 4 Right Turn Runway 34 Departures 4.4 l 68
Table 4.4 58 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor Locations Compared With Runway 34 North Right Turn Alternative 4 Night Exposure
lOpm 7am 4.4 l 69 Table 4.4 59 Time Above Data for Year 2020 Alternative B at Sensitive Receptor
Locations Compared With Runway 34 North Right Turn Alternative 4,24 Hour
Exposure 4.4 l 70 Table 4.4 60 Summary of Land Use Impacts Alternative B Year 2020 4.4 171

Table 4.4 61 Proposed Project Hour by Operations Per Year 2020 4.4 174 Table 4.4 62 Impact of Curfew on Annual Commercial Operations at OCX in 2020 .4.4 175
Table 4.5 l Ambient Air Quality Standards 4.5 12 Table 4.5 2 Air Pollutants and Their Effect on Human Health 4.5 14
Table 4.5 3 Ambient Air Quality at North Orange County Air Monitoring Station .4.5 l 6 Table 4.5 4 Ambient Air Quality at Central Orange County Air Monitoring Station 4.5 17
Table 4.5 5 Ambient Air Quality at North Coast Orange Air Monitoring Station .4.5 l 8 Table 4.5 6 Ambient Air Quality Saddleback Valley Air Monitoring Station .4.5 l 9
Table 4.5 7 El Toro MCAS Airport Flying Operations 1994 AQMP 4.5 23 Table 4.5 8 El Tom MCAS Airport Flying Operations 1997 AQMP 4.5 25
Table 4.5 9 1998 Aircraft Operations Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 26 Table 4.5 l 0 1998 Ground Support Equipment Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 27
Table 4.5 l 1 1998 Energy Consumption Emissions MCAS El Toro Site Pounds Day .4.5 28 Table 4.5 12 1998 Energy Consumption Emissions John Wayne Airport Pounds Day 4.5 28
Table 4.5 13 Existing Airport Vehicular Trips Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 30 Table 4.5 l 4Summarized Air Pollutant Emissions for Existing Conditions .4.5 3 0
Table 4.5 l 5 Existing 1 Hour CO Concentrations Year 1998 No Project Predicted One Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentrations for Intersections with the
Highest Volume and Worst Level of Service LOS 4.5 34 Table 4.5 l 6 Existing 8 Hour CO Concentrations Year 1998 No Project Predicted
Eight Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentration for Intersections with the Highest Volume and Worst Level of Service LOS 4.5 35
Table 4.5 l 7 1998 Pollutant Concentrations JWA Worst Case Operations and Meteorology 4.5 37
Table 4.5 l 8 1998 Pollutant Concentrations MCAS El Toro Worst Case Operations and Meteorology 4.5 38
Table 4.5 19 Assumed Distribution of Phase Activities 4.5 41 Table 4.5 20 Estimated Daily Truck Delivery Trips One Way During OCX
Construction 4.5 42 Table 4.5 21 Construction Trtic and Equipment Exhaust Emissions Proposed Project 4.5 44

County of Orange EIRNo 573 XVII Table of Contents 17
17 Page 18 19
Table 4.5 22 Fugitive Dust Emissions Proposed Project 4.5 45
Table 4.5 23 Aircr Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 48 Table 4.5 24 Ground Support Equipment Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 50

Table 4.5 25 Energy Consumption Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 52 Table 4.5 26 Fuel Storage and Dispensing Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 53
Table 4.5 27 Air Pollutant Emissions Vehicular Traffic Pounds Day John Wayne Airport 4.5 54
Table 4.5 28 Air Pollutant Emissions Vehicular Traffic Pounds Day Orange County International 4.5 55
Table 4.5 29 Air Pollutant Emissions Vehicular T c Pounds Day Both Airports 4.5 56 Table 4.5.30A Regional Vehicular Traffic Tons Day Emissions1 4.5 57
Table 4.5 3 1 Total Project Emission Inventory Pounds Per Day Unless Noted .4.5 59 Table 4.5.32A Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2020 Proposed Project No Project
Pounds Day Unless Noted 4.5 61 Table 4.5,32B Regional Vehicular Trafk Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 62
Table 4.5.32C Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2005 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted 4.5 64
Table 4.5.32D Regiunwide Emissions Inventory 2010 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted 4.5 65
Table 4.5,32E Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2015 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted 4.5 66
Table 4.5 33 Potential GSE Emissions Reductions Pounds Day 4.5 73 Table 4.5 34 Potential 2020 Proposed Project GSE Emissions Reductions Pounds Day .4.5 74
Table 4.5 35 Potential Project Emissions Reductions Pounds Per Day Unless Noted 4.5 85 Table 4.5 36 2020 No Project Nu Activity Alternative Regional Air Pollutant
Emissions Pounds Day 4.5 86 Table 4.5 37 TAC Emissions Under Existing Conditions 1998 at JWA and
MCAS El Toro 4.5 91 Table 4.5 38 TAC Emissions Under Existing Plus Proposed Project Conditions 2020
at JWA and Proposed OCX 4.5 92 Table 4.5 39 Estimated Worst Plausible TAC Related Health Effects 4.5 94
Table 4.5 40 Cential Tendency Excess Lifetime Cancer Risks per million for the MEIs 4.5 96 Table 4.5 41 Estimated Effects with Implementation of Mitigation Measures TAC 1
and TAC 2 4.5 98 Table 4.5 42 Estimated Effects With Implementation Of Mitigation Measures TAC 1
TAC 2 And TAC 3 4.5 99 Table 4.7 1 Soil Associations on the MCAS El Toro Site 4.7 4
Table 4.7 2 Faults and Seismicity Characteristics in the MCAS El Toro Site Area .4.7 7 Table 4.7 3 Soil Associations on the JWA Site 4.7 9
Table 4.7 4 Faults and Seismicity Characteristics in the JWA Area 4.7 l 1 Table 4.8 1 Summary of 100 Year Flows at MCAS El Toro Under Existing Conditions .4.8 4
Table 4.8 2 Summary of 100 Year Flows at JWA Under Existing Conditions 4.8 13 Table 4.8 3 Summary of 100 Year Flows and Related Capacity Under the
Proposed Project With Existing Drainage Facilities l 4.8 18

Table of Contents xwi11 County of Orange EIR No 573 18
18 Page 19 20
Table 4.8 4 Summary of 100 Year Flows and Related Capacity Under the Proposed Project With Project Drainage Facilities 4.8 18
Table 4.8 5 Proposed Project Flow Capacity Compared to Existing Flow Capacity 4.8 19 Table 4.8 6 NPDES Permit Runoff Concentrations for MCAS El Toro Site
.4.8 22 Table 4.8 7 Percent Change from Existing Conditions of Outflow and Impervious

Drainage Area For Proposed Project 4.8 23
Table 4.8 8 Bee Canyon Agua Chinon Estimated Outfall Point Concentrations for Proposed Project 4.8 24

Table 4.9 1 Plant Communities in the Habitat Reseme 4.9 9
Table 4.9 2 Special Interest Plant Species on the MCAS El Toro Site 4.9 14 Table 4.9 3 Special Interest Wildlife Species on the MCAS El Toro Site

Habitat Reserve JWA and Upper Newport Bay Ecological Reserve .4.9 l 5 Table 4.9 4 Wildlife Species Known Expected Or With Limited Potential to Occur in
the Habitat Reserve 4.9 19 Table 4.9 5 Noise Exposure for Biological Resource Receptor Locations 4.9 34
Table 4.10 l OCTA Bus Transit Boardings 1994 l 998 4.10 7 Table 4.1 O 2 Existing Daily Bus Transit Trips 4.10 8
Table 4.10 3 Existing Metrolink Boarding lightings at Irvine Transportation Center 1998 4.10 8
Table 4.1 O 4 Fire Stations and Their Facilities at and in the Vicinity of JWA .4.1 O 1 6 Table 4.10 5 Average Daily Transit Trips at JWA and the El Toro Site Under
Project Build Out 2020 4.10 23 Table 4.10 6 Average Daily Transit Trips at JWA and El Toro Site Under
Project Phase 1 2005 4.10 24 Table 4.10 7 Average Daily Transit Trips at JWA and the El Toro Site Under
Project Phase 2 2010 4.10 24 Table 4.10 8 Average Daily Transit Trips at JWA and the El Toro Site Under
Project Phase 3 2015 4.1 O 25 Table 4.1 O 9 Proposed Project Solid Waste Generation 4.10 26
Table 4.10 10 Estimated Daily Demand for Electricity for the Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 4.10 33
Table 4.10 l 1 Estimated Daily Demand for Natural Gas for Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 4.10 38
Table 4 lo 12 Estimated Daily Demand for Domestic Water for the Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses 4.10 41
Table 4.1 O 1 3 Estimated Daily Demand for Recycled Water for the Nonaviation
Revenue Support Uses 4.1 o 43 Table 4.1 O 14 Estimated Daily Waste Water Generated by the Nonaviation

Revenue Support Uses 4.10 45 Table 4.11 l Estimated Daily Jet Fuel Use by Commercial Aircraft 4.1 l 8
Table 4.11 2 Summary of Agricultural Land Impacts 4.11 12 Table 4.11 3 tiual Electricity Demand GWH 4.11 14
Table 4.11 4 Annual Natural Gas Demand Therms 4.11 16 Table 4.1 l 5 Annual Automotive Gasoline Demand Gallons 4.11 17
Table 4.11 6 Annual Diesel Fuel Demand Gallons 4.1 l 17
County of Change EIR No 573 XIX Table of Contents 19
19 Page 20 21
Table 4.1 l 7 Construction Related Energy Consumption MCAS El Toro .4.11 19 Table 4.11 8 Estimated Jet Fuel Consumption for JWA and OCX Under the
Proposed Project C 4.11 20 Table 4.11 9 Projection of Jet Fuel Loaded onto Commercial Aircraft in the
Southern California Air Service Area 1998 And 2020 4.1 l 22 Table 4.1 l l 0 Forecast of Passengers and Cargo in the Air Service Area 4.1 l 22
Table 4.15 l Nationwide Existing Airport Related Military Aircraft Accident Rates
Table 4.15 2 NTSB Aircraft Accident Rates fur the United States 1982 1998 On and Off Airport Combined 4.1597
Table 4.15 3 Accident Summary for JWA 1964 1998 On and Off Airport Combined 4.15 7
Table 4.15 4 JWA Summary of Airport Related Accidents by Phase 1980 1998 .4.15 8 Table 4.15 5 Summary Comparison of Aircr Accident Potential For MCAS El Toro
and JWA Proposed Project 2020 a 4.15 17 Table 4.15 6 Proposed Project Forecast Mix of Large and Small Aircraft 4.15 27
Table 4.16 1 Installation Restoration Program Sites at MCAS El Toro 4.16 8 Table 4.17 l Population Housing and Employment Trends d Forecasts for 1990 to

Table 4.17 2 Demographic and Socioeconomic Characteristics in 1990 Project Site Surrounding Area and Orange County 4.17 8
Table 4.17 3 Comparison of Socioeconomic Characteristics of Final EIR No 563 CRP to the Proposed Project 4.17 11
Table 4.17 4 Projected On Site Employment Proposed Project 4.17 13 Table 4.17 5 Existing and Planned Residential Development in Planned Communities
in the El Tom Study Area 4.17 16 Table 4.18 l Accident Scenario Probabilities Frequencies 4.18 9
Table 4.18 2 Accident Severity Categories 4.18 11 Table 4.18 3 Proposed Project Estimated Daily Jet Fuel Tank Truck Supply Operations
by Year 4.1813 Table 4.18 4 Jet A Physical and Chemical Properties 4.18 15
Table 4.18 5 Jet ABulkFuel Storage T Release Scenarios MCAS El Toru a 4.18 17 Table 4.18 6 Jet A Tank Truck Highway Accident Release Scenarios Single
Incident a 4.18 18 Table 4.18 7 Proposed Project Jet Fuel Tank Truck Daily Accident Probabilities MCAS
El Toro Site 4.18 20 Table 4.18 8 Proposed Project Bulk Jet Fuel Storage Tank Daily Accident Probabilities MCAS
El Toro Site 4.1822 Table 4.18 9 Estimated Daily Aircraft Induced Bulk Fuel Storage Facility Accident
Probabilities MCAS El Toro Site Runway 7 Arrivals l 4.18 26 Table 4.18 l 0 Proposed Project Jet Fuel Tank Truck Daily Accident Probabilities JWA
Site 4.18 28 Table 4.18 l 1 Summary of Weighted JWA On Site Fatal Accident Potential Under
Proposed Project 2020 4.18 30

Table of Contents xx County of Orange EIR No 573 20
20 Page 21 22
Table 4.18 12 Bulk Jet Fuel Storage Tank Daily Accident Probabilities OCX with Pipeline Fuel Supply Option 4.18 33
Table 5.1 l Regional Growth Projections 2000 to 2020 5 3 Table 5.1 2 Comparison of Year 2020 OCP 96M and Post 2020 Cumulative Development
Forecasts 5 -4 Table 5.3 1 Reasonable Foreseeable Probable Future Projects July 1999 County of Orange
Jurisdiction Land Use Projects 5 14 Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects July 1999 City Jurisdictions
Land Use Projects 5 16 Table 5.3 3 Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine 5 27
Table 5.3 4 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects July 1999 Related Transportation Land Use Projects 5 44
Table 5.3 5 Reasonable Foreseeable Probable Future Projects July 1999 Other Related Land Use Project 5 47
Table 5.4 l Cumulative Impacts With Cumulative and Proposed Projects 5 51 Table 5.4 2 Post 2020 Non Committed Planned MPAH Improvements 5 59
Table 5.4 3 Post 2020 Unplanned Mitigation Improvements 5 61 Table 5.4 4 Summary of Off Site Cumulative Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts Acres by
Phase 5 70 Table 5.4 5 Summary of Off Site Agricultural Soils Impacts Acres by Phase 5 78
Table 8 l l Summary Comparison of Principal Aviation Characteristics and Major Impacts for the CRP Existing Conditions and Alternatives 8 -6
Table 8.1 2 Summary of Aviation Activity at Orange County Airports Under Alternative Airport System Development Scenarios 8 7
Table 8.2 l Residential and School Land Uses Within 65 CNEL 1 Table 8.2 2 Trip Generation Summary No Project No Activity Alternative .8 12
Table 8.2 3 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions Pounds Day 8 14
Table 8.2 4A Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2005 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted 8 15
Table 8.2 5 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Pollutant Concentrations JWA Worst Case Operations and Meteorology 8 20
Table 8.2 6 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Predicted One Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentrations for Intersections With the Highest Volume and
the Worst Level of Service 8 21 Table 8.2 7 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Predicted Eight Hour Ambient
Carbon Monoxide Concentrations for Intersections With the Highest Volume and the Worst Level of Service 8 22
Table 8.3 1 Trip Generation Summary ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative 8 34 Table 8.3 2 Existing Plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Impact Summary -8 36
Table 8.3 3 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Mitigation Improvements 8 38 Table 8.3 4 Traffic Noise Model Results Existing Conditions 8 46
Table 8.3 5 Traffic Noise Model Results Existing Plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Existing Segments With 1.5 dB or Higher Traffic Noise Increase 8 50

County of Orange EIR No 573 XXI Table of Contents 21
21 Page 22 23
Table 8.3 6 Traffic Noise Model Results Existing Plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan New Segments 8 51
Table 8.3 7 Year 2020 No Project vs Existing No Project Conditions Existing Segments With 1.5 dB or Higher Traffic Noise Increase 8 52
Table 8.3 8 Traf fic Noise Model Results Year 2020 No Project Condition New Segments 8 56
Table 8.3 9 Trtic Noise Model Results Year 2020 With ETRPA Nonaviation Plan vs Year 2020 No Project All Segments 8 57
Table 8.3 10 T Kc Noise Model Results Comparison Number of Segments With Traffic Noise Increase Over Existing No Project Condition 8 62
Table 8.3 l 1 Traffic Noise Model Results Comparison Number of Segments With Traffic Noise Increase Year 2020 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan vs Year 2020 No Project 8 63
Table 8.3 12 Year 2020 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions Pounds Day 8 66
Table 8.3 l 3 Year 1998 Existing Conditions Plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Predicted OneHour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentration for Intersections with the Highest
Volume and Worst Level of Service LOS 8 68 Table 8.3 14 Year 1998 Existing Conditions Plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Predicted
Eight Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentration for Intersections with the Highest Volume and Worst Level of Service LOS 8 69
Table 8.4 1 Trip Generation Summary Alternative A 8 86 Table 8.4 2 Summary Comparison of Traffic Impacts for Alternative A to Existing
Conditions and Existing Conditions Plus Project 8 87 Table 8.4 3 Land Use Comparison with Noise Contours for 1998 Military and Year 2020
Alternatives for El Toro 8 89 Table 8.4 4 Land Use Comparison with Noise Contours for 1998 and Year 2020
Alternatives for John Wayne Airport 1 8 90 Table 8.4 S Year 2020 Alternative A Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions
Pounds Day 8 92 Table 8.4 6 Regionwide Emissions Inventory Alternative A 2020 8 93
Table 8.4 7 Year 2020 Alternative A Predicted One Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentrations 8 95
Table 8.4 8 Year 2020 Alternative A Predicted Eight Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentrations 8 96
Table 8.5 l Trip Generation Summary Alternative C 8 108 Table 8.5 2 Summary Comparison of Traffic Impacts for Alternative C to Existing
Conditions and Existing Conditions Plus Project 8 109 Table 8.5 3 Alternative C Impact Summary 8 110
Table 8.5 4 Year 2020 Alternative C Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions Pounds Day 8 l 13
Table 8.5 5 Year 2020 Alternative C Predicted One Hour Ambient CO Concentrations 8 l 14 Table 8.5 6 Year 2020 Alternative C Predicted Eight Hour Ambient CO Concentrations 8 l 15
Table 8.6 l Trip Generation Summary Alternative F 8 127 Table 8.6 2 Summary Comparison of TraBic Impacts for Alternative F to Existing
Conditions and Existing Conditions Plus Project 8 128
Table of Contents XXII County of Orange EIR No 573 22
22 Page 23 24
Table 8.6 3 Year 2020 Alternative F Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions Pounds Day 8 131
Table 8.6 4 Regionwide Emissions Inventory Alternative F 2020 Pounds Day Unless Noted 8 132
Table 8.6 5 Year 2020 Alternative F Pollutant Concentrations JWA Worst Case Operations and Meteorology 8 l 33
Table 8.6 6 Year 2020 Alternative F Predicted One Hour Ambient CO Concentrations 8 134 Table 8.6 7 Year 2020 Alternative F Predicted Eight Hour Ambient CO Concentrations .8 l 35
Table 8.7 l Trip Generation Summary Alternative G 8 147 Table 8.7 2 Summary Comparison of Traffic Impacts for Alternative G to Existing
Conditions and Existing Conditions Plus Project 8 148 Table 8.7 3 2020 Alternative G Project Direct Air Pollutant Emissions pounds day 8 l 51
Table 8.7 4 Regionwide Emissions Inventory Alternative G 2020 Pounds Day Unless Noted 8 153
Table 8.7 5 2020 Alternative G Pollutant Concentrations JWA Worst Case Operations and Meteorology 8 l 54
Table 8.7 6 Year 2020 Alternative G Predicted One Hour Ambient CO Concentrations .8 l 55 Table 8.7 7 Year 2020 Alternative G Predicted Eight Hour Ambient CO Concentrations .8 l 56
Table 8.9 l Summary of Arrivals by Type of Aircraft Impacted by Short V Alternative Airport Runway Layout at OCX in 2020 8 l 80
Table 8.9 2 Summary of Impact Short V Alternative Airport Runway Layout on Projected Aircr Arrivals at OCX in 2020 8 181
Table 8.1 O 1 Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 1 8 l 90 Table 8.1 O 2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 2 8 l 96
Table 8.13 l Comparison of Key Impacts of Alternatives Relative to the Proposed Project 8 209

County of Orange EIR No 573 Table of Contents 23
23 Page 24 25
LIST OF FIGURES
All figures are bound separately in the Graphics Volume in the order listed below therefore
no page numbers are included in the listing below

Figure 1 1 Planning Areas at MCAS El Toro
Figure 2 l 1996 Community Reuse Plan for MCAS El Toro Figure 2 2 Air Service Area and Airports

Figure 2 3 Distance of Domestic Markets from Orange County
Figure 2 4 Air Passenger Demand Forecasts in ASA 1970 2020
Figure 2 5 Air Cargo Demand Forecasts in ASA 1975 2020 Figure 3 1 The Proposed Project at OCX Year 2020

Figure 3 2 Proposed Land Uses at OCX Year 2020
Figure 3 3 Proposed Land Uses at JWA Figure 3 4 Proposed Development Phases for OCX

Figure 3 5 Project Location Map
Figure 3 6 Regional and Local Access
Figure 3 7 Proposed Terminal Area Development at OCX Figure 3 8 Concept of Proposed Terminal Plan

Figure 3 9 Conceptual Cross Section of Proposed Terminal and Roadway
Figure 3 10 Proposed Terminal Roadways and Phasing at OCX
Figure 3 11 Trabuco ETC Interchange Option
Figure 3 12 Composite Open Space Plan
Figure 3 13
Figure 3 14
Figure 3 15 Figure 4.1 1

Figure 4.1 2
Figure 4.1 3 Figure 4.1 4

Figure 4.1 5
Figure 4.1 6
Figure 4.2 1
Figure 4.2 2 Figure 4.2 3

Figure 4.3 1
Figure 4.3 2 Figure 4.4 1

Figure 4.4 2 Figure 4.4 3
Figure 4.4 4
Figure 4.4 5

Proposed On Site Regional Park MCAS El Toro Site
Proposed General Aviation Development on East Side of JWA
Proposed General Aviation Development on West Side of JWA Proposed Project Surrounding Jurisdictions MCAS El Toro

Proposed JWA Project Surrounding Jurisdictions Existing Land Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed El Toro Project
General Plan Land Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed El Toro Project
Existing Land Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed JWA Project
General Plan Land Uses in the Vicinity of the Proposed JWA Project
County of Orange General Plan Designations MCAS El Toro City of Irvine General Plan Designations Planning Area 30

City of Irvine Planning Areas Within Project Vicinity MCAS El Toro
Traffic Analysis Study Area El Toro Circulation Plan

Examples of Various Sound Levels
Effect of Atmospheric Absorption on Sound Levels
Single and Cumulative Noise Metric Definitions Examples of Typical Outdoor CNEL Levels

Speech Interference and Noise Levels Figure 4.4.6a Causes and Prevalence of All Awakenings
Figure 4.4 6b Sleep Interference and Noise Levels

Table of Contents County of Orange EIR No 573 24
24 Page 25 26
Figure 4.4 7 Comparison of Logistic Fits to Original 161 Data Points of Schultz 1978 and USAF Analysis with 400 Points
Figure 4.4 8 1981 AICUZ Military Noise CNEL Contours
Figure 4.4 9 Historical Jet Operations at MCAS El Toro Figure 4.4 10 Runway and Corridor Names

Figure 4.4 11 Flight Tracks for Military Operations for Calendar Year 1998 Figure 4.4 12 Calendar Year 1998 Military Noise Contours CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB
Figure 4.4 13 Specific Point Receptor Locations Used for the Detailed Analysis Figure 4.4 14 SENEL 85 dB Contours for F8 Operations
Figure 4.4 15 JWA Existing Flight Tracks
Figure 4.4 16 JWA 1998 Contours CNEL 60,65,70 and 75 dB Figure 4.4 17 JWA Noise Monitoring Locations

Figure 4.4 18 SENEL 85 dB Contours for Various Aircraft Departures at JWA Figure 4.4 19 SENEL 85 dB Contours for Arrivals at JWA
Figure 4.4 20 JWA 1985 Master Plan CNEL 60,65,70 and 75 dB Figure 4.4 2 1 Federal Air Regulation Part 150 Land Use Guidelines
Figure 4.4 22 Proposed Project 2020 Operations by Time of Day Figure 4.4 23 Proposed Project 2020 Operations by Runway
Figure 4.4 24 Proposed Project 2020 Operations by Aircraft Type
Figure 4.4 25 Typical Aircraft Departure Noise Levels
Figure 4.4 26 Typical Aircraft Arrival Noise Levels Figure 4.4 27 El Toro Generalized Civilian Flight Tracks and Existing Buffer Zone

Figure 4.4 28 Typical JWA Track Dispersion Overlaid on OCX Figure 4.4 29 Flight Tracks at OCX for the Proposed Project
Figure 4.4 30 Aircraft Altitude Profiles Runways 34 Departures

Figure 4.4 3 1 Aircraft Altitude Profiles Runways 07 Departures Figure 4.4 32 Aircraft Altitude Profiles Runways 34 Arrivals

Figure 4.4 33 El Toro Average Wind Speed and Direction by Quadrant Figure 4.4 34 Proposed Project 2020 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB Contours
Figure 4.4 35 Proposed Project 2005 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB Contours
Figure 4.4 36 Proposed Project 2010 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB Contours Figure 4.4 37 Proposed Project 2015 CNEL 60,65 and
70 dB Contours Figure 4.4 38 SENEL 86 dB Contours for Various Aircraft for Runway 34 Departures

Figure 4.4 39 SENEL 86 dB Contours for Various Aircr for Runway 07 Departures Figure 4.4 40 SENEL 86 dB Contours for Various Aircraft for Runway 34 Arrivals
Figure 4.4 41 SENEL 86 dB Contours for Various Aircraft for Arrivals on Runway 16 and
Departures on Runway 34 Figure 4.4 42 Single Event Histograms and Bar Charts for 2020 for the Proposed Project

Figure 4.4 43 JWA 2020 CNEL Contours 60,65 and 70 dB Under the Proposed Project Figure 4.4 44 2020 No Project Alternative CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB at JWA
Figure 4.4 45 Proposed Project 2020 Combined Aircraft and Road Noise CNEL Contours at o c x
Figure 4.4 46 Proposed Project 2020 Combined Aircraft and Road Noise CNEL Contours at JWA
Figure 4.4 47 Noise Abatement Takeoff Procedures Example
County of Orange EIR No 573 Table of Contents 25
25 Page 26 27
Figure 4.4 48 Mitigation Alternative 1 Night Preferential Runway System
Figure 4.4 49 Mitigation Alternative 2 Full Curfew CNEL Contours Figure 4.4 50 Mitigation Alternative 3 Night 86 SENEL Limit

Figure 4.4 51 Mitigation Alternative 4 Runway 34 Right Turn CNEL Contours and Flight Tracks
Figure 4.4 52 Conceptual Noise Monitoring Locations at OCX Figure 4.5 l CO Hot Spot Modeling Locations Existing Condition
Figure 4.5 2 EDMS Dispersion Receptor Locations MCAS El Toro Figure 4.5 3 EDMS Dispersion Receptor Locations JWA
Figure 4.5 4 Year 2020 Emissions Projection Summary Figure 4.5 5 CO Hot Spot Modeling Locations Existing Plus Alternative B Condition
Figure 4.5 6 CO Hot Spot Modeling Locations 2020 No Project Figure 4.5 7 CO Hot Spot Modeling Locations 2020 Alternative B change to Proposed Project
Figure 4.5 8 EDMS Dispersion Receptor Locations OCX Figure 4.6 l Topographical Analysis of MCAS El Toro
Figure 4.6 2 Topographical Analysis of John Wayne Airport Figure 4.6 3 Rough Grading Plan
Figure 4.7 l Geologic Map of MCAS El Toro Figure 4.7 2 Expansivity Index of Soils at MCAS El Toru
Figure 4.7 3 Generalized Depth to Shallow Groundwater Aquifer at MCAS El Toro Irvine Sub Basin
Figure 4.7 4 Earthquake Epicenter and Fault Map of Southern California Figure 4.7 5 Expansivity Index of Soils at JWA
Figure 4.7 6 Generalized Depth to Shallow Gruundwater at JWA Figure 4.8 l Project Area Drainage Network
Figure 4.8 2 Flood Plain Map Existing Conditions at MCAS El Toro Figure 4.8 3 Existing Hydrology MCAS El Toro
Figure 4,8 4 Water Quality Outfalls Under Existing Conditions at MCAS El Tore Figure 4.8 5 Project Area Groundwater Elevations
Figure 4.8 6 Existing Hydrologic Conditions at JWA
Figure 4.8 7 Flood Plain Map Existing Conditions John Wayne Airport
Figure 4.8 8 Flood Plain Map Under the Proposed Project at MCAS El Toro Figure 4.8 9 Backbone Storm Drain System Under the Proposed Project at

MCAS El Toro Figure 4.9 l Existing Uses in the Federal Habitat Reserve
Figure 4.9 2 Central and Coastal Subregion of the NCCP Figure 4.9 3 NCCP Vegetation Communities on the MCAS El Toro Site
Figure 4.9 4 NCCP Vegetation Communities in the Federal Habitat Reserve Including Gnatcatcher and Cactus Wren Locations
Figure 4.9 5 NCCP Vegetation Communities and Special Interest Plant Species at JWA and Vicinity
Figure 4.9 6 Special Interest Wildlife Species at JWA and Vicinity Figure 4.9 7 Noise Receptor Locations for Biological Resources
Figure 4.9 8 198 1 AICUZ Proposed Project Noise Exposure with Biological Resources l998 Bum Area at MCAS El Toro

Table of Contents County of Orange EIR No 573 26
26 Page 27 28
Figure 4.9 9 1998 65 CNEL Noise Contour with Biological Resources at JWA Figure 4.9 10 Proposed Project 65 CNEL Noise Exposure with Biological Resources at JWA
Figure 4 lo 1 Existing Setting at MCAS El Toro Public Services Figure 4.1 O 2 Irvine and Saddleback Valley Unified School Districts
Figure 4.10 3 Existing Transit Routes Serving Project Zones Figure 4.1 O 4 Transit Routes and Facilities
Figure 4.1 O 5 Proposed Backbone Cable Television and Fiber Optic Facilities Figure 4.1 O 6 Proposed Backbone Communications Distribution Facilities
Figure 4.1 O 7 Proposed Backbone Electrical Distribution Facilities
Figure 4.1 O 8 Proposed Fuel Supply System For OCX Figure 4.1 O 9 Potential Bulk Fuel Storage Facility With Fuel Supplied by Truck

Figure 4.1 O 1 0 Proposed Backbone Natural Gas Facilities Figure 4.1 O 1 1 Proposed Backbone Domestic Water Facilities
Figure 4 lo 12 Proposed Backbone Recycled Water Facilities Figure 4.1 O 13 Proposed Backbone Sanitary Sewers
Figure 4.12 l Visual Character Areas Figure 4.12 2 Viewshed Vantage Points
Figure 4.12 3 Vantage Point 8 Visual Simulation MCAS El Toro Site Figure 4.12 4 Vantage Point 9 Visual Simulation MCAS El Toro Site
Figure 4.12 5 Vantage Point 10 Visual Simulation MCAS El Toro Site Figure 4.12 6 Vantage Point 11 Visual Simulation MCAS El Toro Site
Figure 4.14 1 Regional Recreational Facilities Figure 4.14 2 County Bikeways and Regional Riding and Hiking Trails
Figure 4.14 3 City of Irvine Conservation and Open Space Map Figure 4.14 4 City of Irvine Trails Map
Figure 4.14 5 City of Lake Forest Planned Bikeways Map Figure 4.14 6 City of Lake Forest Open Space Map
Figure 4.14 7 Proposed On Site Regional Park MCAS El Toro Site Figure 4.14 8 Proposed Golf Courses MCAS El Too Site
Figure 4.14 9 Project Aviation Noise Impacts on Recreational Facilities
Figure 4.14 l 0 Project Aviation Noise Impacts on County Bikeways and Regional Riding and
Hiking Trails Figure 4.15 l Off Site Accident Locations at MCAS El Toro

Figure 4.15 2 Aircraft Accident Rates at MCAS El Toro from 1966 to 1998 Figure 4.15 3 Existing MCAS El Toro Accident Potential Zones
Figure 4.15 4 Commercial Aircraft Accident Rates for 1967 to 1998 Figure 4.15 5 General Aviation Accident Rates for 1977 to 1998
Figure 4.15 6 Proposed OCX Arrival md Departure Routes Figure 4.15 7 Plot of Commercial Aircraft Landing Accidents Incidents Relative to Runway
Figure 4.15 8 Percent of Landing Accidents Incidents by Distance From Runway Approach End Figure 4.15 9 Plot of Commercial Aircraft Departure Accidents Incidents Relative to Runway
Figure 4.15 10 Percent of Departure Accidents Incidents by Distance From Runway Approach End
Figure 4.15 l 1 Air Safety Zones Proposed for OCX Figure 4,16 1 Installation Restoration Program Sites at MCAS El Toro

County of Orange EIR No 573 xwll Table of Contents 27
27 Page 28 29
Figure 4.16 2 Proposed Project With Existing Hazardous Waste Sites MCAS El Toro Figure 4.17 l Project Sites Surrounding Area and Orange County
Figure 8 1 Alternative A Figure 8 2 Alternative A Year 2020 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB
Figure 8 3 Alternative C Figure 8 4 Alternative C Year 2020 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dB
Figure 8 5 Alternative F Figure 8 6 JWA Year 2020 Alternative F CNEL Contours 60,65 and 70 dl3
Figure 8 7 Alternative G Figure 8 8 JWA Year 2020 Alternative G CNEL Contours 60,65 and 70 dB
Figure 8 9 Alternative J Figure 8 10 Alternative J Year 2020 CNEL 60,65 and 70 dE3
Figure 8 1 la Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 1 Figure 8 l lb Nonaviation Revenue Support Area Alternative 2
Figure 8 12 Wildlands Ranch Plan Alternative Presented April 7 1999 Figure 8 12a Wildlands Ranch Plan Alternative 1
Figure 8 12b Wildlands Ranch Plan Alternative 2 Figure 8 13 Nonaviation Alternative

Table of Contents County of Orange ElRNo 573 28
28 Page 29 30
5.0 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
This section addresses potential cumulative impacts to the environment that could be
associated with implementation of the Proposed Project in concert with one or more other past present and reasonably foreseeable probable fhture projects

This section also includes a list of approved and planned projects their environmental
consequences a brief discussion of their cumulative impacts on the environment and a description of the combined cumulative impact of the projects and the Proposed Project

5.1 CEQA DEFINITION OF CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
The CEQA Guidelines 5 15130 require that a project's cumulative impacts be discussed
when cl the incremental effect is cumulatively considerable According to CEQA Guideline 5 15065 c the term cumulatively considerable means that the incrementul

efects uf cln individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the eflects of past projects the eflects of other current projects and the eflects of probable fiture
projects Specifically CEQA Guideline 15355 defines cumulative impacts as
two or more individual eflects which when considered together are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts

The individual eflects may be chunges resultingfium a single project or a number of separate projects
The cumulative impuctfium several projects is the change in the environment which results fium the incremental impact of the project when added tu other cluseiy
related past present and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects Cumulative impacts can result fium individually minor but collectively significunt
projects taking place uver a period of time

5.1 I Methodology
When addressing cumulative impacts Section 15 130 b of the CEQA Guidelines notes that the elements necessary to provide an adequate discussion of significant cumulative impacts
encompass either
a A list of pust present and probable fiture prujects producing related or cumulative impacts including ifnecessary those projects outside the control of the agency or

A summary of prujectiuns cuntuined in an adopted general plan or related planning
document or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or
certiped which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions

County of Orange EIR No 573
51 I Cumulative Impacts 29
29 Page 30 31
contributing tu the cumulative impact Any such planning document referenced and made available to the public at a location spect ed by
agency
shall be the lead

Exis trig Setting Existing Conditions
The Environmental Setting Existing Conditions for this section is the Orange County Preferred l 996 Modified OCP 96M growth forecasts As discussed in Section 4.17 these

forecasts include the CRP and growth in nearby unplanned unentitled areas analyzed in EIR 5 6 3

Related Projects Included in OCP 96 M
Section 5.3 identifies individual projects identified by cities agencies within the vicinity of the Proposed Project The County reviewed these projects and determined that all of the
projects were consistent with the year 2020 projections contained OCP 96M adopted by Orange County Council of Governments and the County except the City of Irvine General
Plan post 2020 unspecified projects

A vail ability of OCP 96M
The OCP 96M forecasts are contained in and form the basis of the adopted County Land Use Element pg II 5 through H 12 which is available at the County Planning and
Development Services Department 300 North Flower St Santa Ana CA In addition to the County Land Use Element OCP 96M was approved by the Orange County Council of
Governments in 1997 and transmitted to the Southern California Association of Governments SCAG as the County input to the regional planning program SCAG
considers the forecasts in regional plans including the Regional Transportation Plan The Board of Supervisors adopted OCP 96M on July 22 1997 Table 5.1 1 summarizes the
OCP 96M forecasts for Orange County and the SCAG Baseline Projections for the year 2000 and 2020

Post 2020 Traffic Analysis
In response to NOP comments e g page 805 No 6 Section 4.5.3 includes an analysis of
development intensification in the traffic study area and build out of the MPAH This
scenario is titled post 2020 to distinguish it from the year 2020 OCP 96M forecasts Table 5.1 2 compares the year 2020 OCP 96M forecasts and the post 2020 forecasts

analyzed herein for the seven Community Analysis Statistical Areas Figure 4.17 1 where post 2020 impacts are anticipated by commentors to occur

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 30
30 Page 31 32
Table 5.1 l Regional Growth Projections 2000 to 2020
SCAG region includes Orange Los Angeles San Bernardino Riverside Ventura and Imperial counties SCAG projections for Orange County and OCP 96M differ slightly so totals for region do
not add
NOTES l age County Preferred 1996 Modified Prepared by California State University at Fullerton July 1997

PI SCAG Projections Adopted April 1998

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 31
31 Page 32 33
Table 5.1 2 Comparison of Year 2020 OCR96M and Post 2020 Cumulat Development Forecasts
Beach JWA
Area John Wayne

Airport
Industrial

48 5,671 6,996 1,325 2 ,5 4 0 4,578 2,03 8 59,983 70,904 10,92 1
100,566 118,144 17,578

South Irvine
Central Irvine
North Irvine
East Irvine Industrial

Total

5 0 36,760 47,627 10,867 1 5 ,1 0 9 19,571 4,462 19,279 36,701 17,422
5 1 83,487 93,026 9,539 2 8 ,6 2 5 34,048 5,423 38,387 63,841 25,454
5 2 94,983 108,821 13,838 3 5 ,3 7 7 41,320 5,943 70,069 80,388 10,3 1 9
5 3 0 0 0 00 0 40,526 68,353 27,827

277,882 314,990 37,108 105,585 124,162 18,577 1 350,850 460,506 109,656

Iotes CAA Community Analysis Area CA4 boundaries are shown on Figure 4.17 l
Year 2020 forecasts are based on OCP 96M

nnulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 32
32 Page 33 34
Cumulative Analyses in Section 4.0
Certain impact analysis are best understood and or are required by policy regulation e g Measure M CMP to include a cumulative impact component These analyses include issues
such as trafEc and trafEc related noise regional air quality and other impact categories Wherever this is the case Section 4.0 includes a cumulative analysis e g Transportation
and the discussion for these impacts will refer the reader to the appropriate subsection in Section 4.0

5.1.2 Geographic Area
The geographic area addressed in this cumulative impact analysis can vary according to the nature and characteristics of each environmental resource For example certain projectrelated
impacts tend to be site specific with limited potential for cumulative impacts beyond the general vicinity of the project site In contrast other project related impacts may exhibit
a greater potential for tiecting a larger geographic area perhaps on a regional scale Consequently two geographic areas have been defined for the purposes of this cumulative
impact analysis
The first area is the general vicinity of the Proposed Project encompassing the communities of Costa Mesa Irvine Lake Forest Laguna Woods Mission Viejo Newport Beach Santa
Ana and Tustin This geographic area generally coincides with that addressed in the impact evaluation section for Transportation and Circulation Section 4.3 Environmental
resources evaluated for cumulative impact potential within this area include

0 10
iii iv

VI vi
vii viii

ix
X xi

xii xiii

xiv
XV xvi

Land Use General Plan Consistency
Transportation and Circulation Noise
Local Air Quality Topography
Soils Geology and Seismic Hydrology and Water Quality
Biological Resources Public Services and Utilities
Aesthetics Light and Glare Cultural Resources
Recreation Public Health and Safety
Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste Area Socioeconomics

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 33
33 Page 34 35
The second geographic area encompasses the County and a substantial portion of the Southern California region generally the territory within the jurisdiction of the South Coast
Air Quality Management District SCAQMD comprising the Counties of Los Angeles Orange San Bernardino non desert portion and Riverside Environmental resources
evaluated for cumulative impact potential within this area include
i Regional Air Quality ii Natural Resources and Energy
iii County wide Socioeconomics
For these categories the cumulative impact analysis focuses primarily on the potential impacts of reasonably anticipated future projects Impacts of past and present projects are
reflected in the baseline environmental conditions in the Proposed Project area and are discussed as appropriate in Section 4.0

5.1.3 Criteria for Selection
The following criteria were considered in identifying those past present and reasonably anticipated projects that could potentially result in cumulative impacts

i Projects that have an application for construction and or operation pending before an agency with permit approval authority and or
ii Proposed projects that have the potential to generate environmental impacts that when addressed collectively with the Proposed Project could result in cumulative impacts to
the environment and or
iii Proposed projects that are of a similar character could tiect similar environmental resources or are located in geographic proximity to the Proposed Project

5.2 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS IN FINAL EIR
NO 563

The following paragraphs summarize the conclusions derived fkom the cumulative impact analyses of the MCAS El Toro Community Reuse Plan CRP Final Environmental Impact
Report No 563 CRP Final EIR No 563 as well as the Final Supplemental Analysis to EIR No 563 Also summarized are CEQA findings facts in support of findings and
overriding considerations relative to cumulative impact issues Final EIR No 563 Vol 6A Attachment A In addition specific mitigation measures pertaining to cumulative
impacts fkom the Mitigation Monitoring Plan contained within Final EIR No 563 as supplemented by the FSA are noted where appropriate and applicable

CEQA Guidelines Sections 15130 d and e and 15 183 permit reliance on a prior EIR to streamline cumulative impacts analysis The cumulative impacts analysis in EIR No 563
Cumulative Impacts
5 6 County of Orange EIR No 573 34
34 Page 35 36
was not challenged in court To the extent permissible under CEQA and except as otherwise stated herein this EIR incorporates by reference and relies upon the EIR No 563
Cumulative Impacts discussions

5.2.1 Land Use
Final EIR No 563 found that the CW 65 dE A CNEL noise contour encompassed a smaller area than the existing MCAS El Toro Policy Implementation Line PIL due to a projected
quieter commercial aircraft fleet mix Therefore restricted land uses in this area could be removed modified or otherwise converted to different less restrictive uses at subsequent
levels of planning According to Final EIR No 563 these potential changes could increase the overall land use intensity surrounding the site It was further noted that implementation
of the CRP would add to the overall urbanization of Orange County and the area surrounding MCAS El Tore

Final EIR No 563 judged these potential changes effects to constitute a significant cumulative impact related to land use which could not feasibly be mitigated to below a level
of significance Remaining unavoidable effects were judged to be acceptable when balanced against specific overriding economic legal social technological and other considerations

5.2.2 Transportation and Circulation
In Final EIR No 563 trtic impacts associated with the CRP were found to be significant It was anticipated that the CRP would result in significant cumulative adverse impacts
related to transportation and circulation when combined with other planned ur approved projects Although changes and alterations were incorporated into the design of the CRP to
substantially avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects the identified cumulative eflects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were identified to
mitigate this impact to below a level of significance However the County of Orange Board of Supervisors determined that this significant effect was acceptable because of specific
overriding economic legal social technological and other considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations

5.2.3 Noise
Final EIR No 563 concluded that the CRP could potentially contribute to background traffic noise exposure along the roadway segments of Trabuco Road This was considered to be a
significant adverse cumulative impact which feasibly could not be mitigated to below a level of significance The Board determined that the remaining unavoidable effects were
acceptable when balanced against the specific overriding economic legal social technological and other considerations described in the Statement of Overriding
Considerations

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 35
35 Page 36 37
5.2.4 Hydrology and Water Quality
Final EIR No 563 found that some cumulative water quality impacts would occur due to the intensification of urban uses on the MCAS El Toro site including roads parking areas and
structures which could result in increased urban pollutants in rain and irrigation runoff from the site When coupled with other projects in the San Diego Creek watershed it was
determined that the proposed CRP would contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to water quality in the area

Although changes and alterations were incorporated into the design of the CRP to substantially avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects the identified cumulative
effects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were identified to mitigate this impact to below a level of significance However the Board determined that
this significant effect was acceptable because of specific overriding economic legal social technological
Considerations and other considerations described the Statement of Overriding

5.2.5 Public Service and Utilities
Final EIR No 563 found that the CRP was not anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts on public services and utilities after mitigation However it also noted that in those
areas which are no longer subject to aviation related noise due to potential f re changes in the PIL more intensive development might be permitted Final EIR No 563 indicated that
such development could create a higher demand on public services and utilities than previous uses In addition Final EIR No 563 noted several related projects in the vicinity
of MCAS El Toro that would require public services and utilities In conjunction with these projects the CRP was found to result in significant cumulative adverse impacts related to
public services and utilities described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations
Although changes and alterations were incorporated into the design of the CRP to substantially avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects the identified cumulative
effects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were identified to mitigate this impact to below a level of significance However the Board determined that
this significant effect was acceptable because of specific overriding economic legal social technological and other considerations

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 36
36 Page 37 38
5.2.6 Natural Resources and Energy
Final EIR No 563 found that the loss of agricultural land on MCAS El Toro was a
significant unavoidable adverse impact and that the loss of agricultural land is also a significant adverse impact of many related projects Although changes and alterations were

incorporated into the design of the CRP to substantially avoid or mitigate significant
environmental effects the identified cumulative effects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were identified to mitigate this impact to below a level

of significance However the Board determined that this significant effect was acceptable because of specific overriding economic legal social technological and other
considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations

5.2.7 Cultural Resources
Final EIR No 563 found that implementation of the CRP had the potential to significantly and adversely afKect certain Cold War era historic resources on the MCAS El Toro site
Although changes and alterations were incorporated into the design of the CRP to
substantially avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects the identified cumulative
effects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were identified to mitigate this impact to below a level of significance However the Board determined that

this significant effect was acceptable because of specific overriding economic legal social
technological and other considerations

5.2.8 Socioeconomics
Final EIR No 563 found that implementation of the CRP was expected to result in several
socioeconomic impacts of potential significance when considered cumulatively with related
projects These impacts would be related to jobs housing balance and low moderate income
housing needs Although changes and alterations were incorporated into the design of the
CRP to substantially avoid or mitigate significant environmental effects the identified
cumulative effects remained significant and unmitigable No feasible measures were
identified to mitigate this impact to below a level of significance However the Board determined that this significant effect was acceptable because of specific overriding

economic legal social technological and other considerations described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations

A Supplemental Analysis SA for Final EIR No 563 was prepared in response to a January
6 1998 ruling and writ of mandate issued by the San Diego Superior Court which found
that certain portions of EIR No 563 were inadequate or incomplete under CEQA The SA
was not required to address CRP cumulative impacts

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 37
37 Page 38 39
5.3 REASONABLY FORESEEABLE PROBABLE FUTURE
This section addresses those projects that met the criteria outlined under Subsection 5.1.1 Methodology Varying levels and completeness of information depending on the current
development status of the particular project is provided for each of the projects addressed
below This information may range from a simple project description to a comprehensive environmental review Some of the cumulative projects were previously included in Final

EIR No 563 as provided below In such cases the local jurisdictions responsible for these projects were contacted and the information on these projects was updated

County Proiects
l Foothill Ranch Planned Community
l Portola Planned Community
l Saddleback Meadows

City Projects
a Sakioka Property
a Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan
a Westpark Project
a Moulton Parkway Commercial Development
a Foothill Aliso Commercial Center
a Saddleback Valley Church
a First American Title l
MacArthur Place a Nexus Twin Towers

a One Hutton Center

Transportation Related Proiects
l Alton Parkway Extension
l Foothill Transportation Corridor

Other Related Land Use Pruiects
Natural Community Conservation Plan l MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan
l James A Musick Facility

Other projects were identified by surveying other land use authorities within the planning area of the Proposed Project These surveys consisted of formal and informal inquiries

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573
s 10 38
38 Page 39 40
designed to acquire existing available environmental documentation and project descriptions These projects included the following
City Jurisdiction Land Use Proiect
Segerstrom Homes Ranch General Plan Amendment Zone Changes for 440 acres south of MCAS El Toro
Oak Creek Project Westpark Project
Revised City of Irvine Planning Areas 5 1 35 and 30 Annexation General Plan Amendment Pre Zoning and Zone Change Project
GPA ZC to allow housing in the Spectrum area of Irvine North Irvine Middle School
Northwood High School Alicia Skate Park
Allen Oldsmobile Cadillac Enterprise Car Sale
La Paz Park Mission Imports Remote Parking Lot
Moulton Elementary Field Improvements ShapelVAliso Creek
Shea Business Properties Ocean Ranch II St Anne's School
Tutor Time Tentative Parcel Map No 98 l 71 Town Centre
Home Depot Center Baker Ranch Planned Community
A J West Ranch Los Angeles Athletic Company Project
Mammoth Equities Project Painted Trails
Stone Ridge County Suites Hotel
Shea Properties Apartments Acero Street Office Project
Heritage Villas Senior Housing Camino Capistrano Mini Storage
Legacy Partners Office Building Mission Viejo Mall Expansion
Lexus Auto Dealership Rockwell Site Expansion
Koll Center Expansion Hertz Extended Stay Hotel and Office Project
Amendment 891 in Newport Beach

County of Orange EIR No 573
5 11 Cumulative Impacts 39
39 Page 40 41
l Conerant Expansion Project GPA 96 39 f
l OCTA CenterLine Project

Transportation Land Use Projects
l I 405 SR 55 HOV Access Improvement Project
l LAX Expansion Project
l Proposed High Speed Rail Project

The following subsections provide a discussion of probable fkure projects that when considered in combination with the Proposed Project have the potential to result in related or
cumulative impacts These projects are presented as follows
i County of Orange Jurisdiction Land Use Projects ii City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
iii Transportation Land Use Projects iv Other Land Use Projects
v Non Planned Areas Land Use Projects
The jurisdiction of the County of Orange encompasses the unincorporated territory of Orange County The city jurisdictions include the Cities of Costa Mesa Imine Laguna
Woods Mission Viejo Lake Forest Newport Beach and Santa Ana Laguna Niguel is located outside but adjacent to the area of cumulative project effects so future projects in
Laguna Niguel are not discussed in detail in this section of the EIR The potential for cumulative impacts associated with other projects in the vicinity of JWA and MCAS El Toro
also is discussed
One important consideration in the present cumulative impact discussion focuses on the removal or reduction of the existing PIL which restricts the development of noise sensitive
land uses in areas included within the PIL Removal of this noise constraint in the remaining undeveloped areas could encourage or might allow different land use mixes than
previously indicated on local jurisdiction's General Plans in the PIL area since certain noise sensitive uses could be deemed compatible with reduction or removal of the PIL The
principal area where residential or noise sensitive uses could be expanded is the undeveloped or underdeveloped areas of east Irvine which are now subject to the military 65 dB CNEL
line and the military accident potential zones

5.3.1 County of Orange Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
There are no proposed land use projects under County jurisdiction within the vicinity of JWA JWA is surrounded by the incorporated cities of Costa Mesa Irvine and Newport
Beach

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 40
40 Page 41 42
The County of Orange has identified a number of approved and planned projects in the
vicinity of MCAS El Toro that potentially contribute to cumulatively significant adverse impacts A summary of the projects that fall under the County of Orange jurisdiction is

provided in Table 5.3 l As noted in Subsection 5.1.1 the County determined that these
projects are consistent and included in OCP 96M Each is discussed separately below

For the present cumulative impact analysis the OCP 96M was used to assess population housing and employment projections for the MCAS El Toro and JWA site vicinities as well
as surrounding areas of the County This information was then used to evaluate the potential
for cumulative impacts to occur as a result of implementing the Proposed Project OCP96M
Projections were approved by the Orange County Council of Governments in 1997 and
were transmitted to the Southern California Association of Governments SCAG as the County input to the regional planning program SCAG incorporated OCP 96M into its

program including the Regional Transportation Plan

5.3.1 I Foothill Ranch Planned Community
The Foothill Ranch Planned Community comprises four primary land uses residential
commercial industrial and open space In general residential developments would be limited
to 3,900 dwelling units to be located between Whiting Ranch Wilderness Park and an Urban
Activity Center between Portola Parkway and the Foothill Transportation Corridor FTC
Commercial development within this Planned Community would be limited to 750,000 sq ft including a 500,000 sq ft regional commercial center Industrial uses include a business park

along the FTC in the Urban Activity Center In addition o e research and development uses would be developed In total these uses would not exceed 6,925 OOO sq ft on
approximately 415 acres At present approximately 95 percent of Foothill Ranch is built out
Orange County 1999e

5.3.1.2 Portola Hills Planned Community
The Portola Hills Planned Community covers approximately 1,006 acres in foothills of the Santa Ana Mountains
The site lies west of El Toro Road and south of Santiago Canyon Road in unincorporated areas of Orange County This project area is adjacent to the Foothill Ranch

Planned Community to the west and south and partially lies within the existing MCAS El
Toro PIL

The Portola Hills Planned Community comprises approximately 2,200 residential units on 493 acres a business park and commercial area totaling approximately 200 acres and dedicated
open space and open space easements totaling approximately 400 acres As of July 1999 Potiola Hills is 95 percent built out Orange County 1999e

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 41
41 Page 42 43
Table 5.3 l
Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects County Of Orange Jurisdiction Land Use Projects

3,900 dwelling units 750,000 sq ft including 500,000 sq fi regional
commercial center Industrial 6,925,000 sq ft business park on

Community
approximately 200 acres developed into business park and commercial areas
approximately 400 acres of dedicated open space

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 42
42 Page 43 44
5.3.1.3 Saddleback Meadows
The Saddleback Meadows project proposes development of 235 single family detached
residential units associated infrastructure a wildlife movement corridor hiking riding trail and biological resource enhancement on a 229.2 acre site The site is approximately 0.25

mile south of the intersection of El Toro and Live Oak Canyon Roads immediately north of the Hidden Ridge community and east of El Toro Road in the Foothill Trabuco Specific Plan
area of unincorporated Orange County As of November 1999 the Saddleback Meadows
project was being litigated and no development had occurred on the project site Orange
county 1999c

5.3.2 City Jurisd ictions Land Use Projects
The regiunal city jurisdictions include the Cities of Costa Mesa Irvine Laguna Niguel Lagma Woods Mission Vieju Lake Forest Newport Beach and Santa Am The related
projects that fall under city jurisdictions are outlined in Table 5.3 2

5.3.2.1 City of Costa Mesa Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
Sakioka Property
This project consists of the planned expansion of existing structures on a 47 acre site located
at 555 and 575 Anton Boulevard The project includes the construction of four office
buildings two restaurants a retail outlet a 200 room hotel one clubhouse and three parking
structures The project would add approximately 546,600 sq ft of commercial use The
City of Costa Mesa City Council approved the project in April 1999 The first phase of the project is underway The entire project should be built out between the year 2000 to 2005

The City is currently processing a General Plan Amendment to allow an additional 100 rooms to be constructed in the project Hotel The City Planning Commission may consider
this amendment in November 1999 letter fkom City dated Sept 30,1999

Segerstrom Home Ranch
The project is located on a 93 acre site between Harbor Boulevard and Fairview Road The project includes a 300,000 square feet for an IKEA Home Furnishing Store and 1,994,177
square feet of office space The City is processing a General Plan Amendment to allow for
this use A Draft EIR is currently being prepared on this project It is anticipated that this
project would be considered by City decision makers sometimes in the year 2000 It is also
anticipated that the IKEA Store will be developed within the year 2000 to 2005 The office development would be constructed in equal increments through the year 2020 letter from

City dated Sept 30 1999

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 43
43 Page 44 45
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects
City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects

Retail outlet hotel parking structures Council The City is processing a General Plan
Amendment GPA to allow the development of
up to 300 rooms in the Project Hotel The City
Planning Commission may consider the EPA in Nov

300,000 square feet IKEA Home Furnishings Store 1,994,17 square feet of office spaces the development of this
project A Draft EIR is also being prepared on this
project If approved the IKEA Store would be
developed within the year 2000 to 2005 The office
development would be constructed in equal
increments through the year

for 440 Acres Sou MCAS El Toro Hotel convention center currently in litigation with
Alternative to the Proposed County of Orange May be seded by Annexation

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 44
44 Page 45 46
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
community park and six some areas
res in Planning Area 1 2 complete Construction of
residential units continuing

Change Project An alternative to the
Proposed Project

ater District Parcels
considered by the City to Phase II of Millennium

Consideration of this
County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 45
45 Page 46 47
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects
City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects

Ocean Ranch II
Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 46
46 Page 47 48
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
Town Centre of space in the Town Centre commercial project which is located
on 14 acres on El Toro Road The ect includes 140 room Process Project to begin construction in early 2000

Depot Office Max Rite Aide Stater Brothers and in line retail
sq ft on approximately acre parcel 40,000 sq ft office building
3 acre right of way for Portola Parkway
the development of 110,000 square feet of commercial
development on this project site in November 1999 It
is anticipated that this project will be completed
between the year 2000 and

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 47
47 Page 48 49
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
ilding on 2.5 acres
Country Suites Hotel
Shea Properties Apartments
Acero Street Office Project

Parkway and Fieldcrest Street x x The project will accommodate X
l 468 single family dwelling units
l open space and local parks

City of Mission Viejo East of Marguerite Parkway and west of Foothill toll road ramps at Approved December 1998 x Los Alisos under construction

28941 Los Alisos Boulevard X January 2000 occupancy 118 room hotel

City of Mission Viejo East of Marguerite Parkway and west of the Country Suites Hotel Approved August 1998 X 28401 Los Alisos Boulevard X Under construction
230 apartment units May 2000 occupancy City of Mission Viejo 225,000 square feet office buildings located on Acero Street Proposed development
preliminary discussions projected January 200 1

26836 Oso Parkwa under construction
Cumulative Impacts
5 20 County of Orange EIR No 573 48
48 Page 49 50
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
residence on 4.79 acres October 1999 projected
t of office in two buildings
500,000 square feet of commercial

Also includes a GPA amendment ot Planned Community Development Plan and Traffic Study pursuant to the Newport
Beach TPO and an EIR

and Office Project Dove Avenue 100,000 sqft office building 350 bed hotel located at 1300 Quail Declaration approved by

County of Orange EIR No 573
521 I Cumulative Impacts 49
49 Page 50 51
Table 5.3 2 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects City Jurisdictions Land Use Projects
1,750 dwelling units 75 hotel motel units
acting as the lead agency on this EIR currently being
prepared on this project

70,000 sq ft of commercial uses 1 O acre elementary school site
216 acres for parks open space and habitat restoration

GPA 96 3 f project includes a GPA and PC amendments to allow for the development of an additional 566,000 sq ft of space for a total of
1,008,775 sq A of allowable building area on the project site
prepared on this project and is out for public review
Review of the project by the City's Planning
Commission and City Council has been
tentatively scheduled for

and Main Street and includes construction of ldings at 1,2 and 3 First American Way as

64,059 sq ft 2 story
k complex to residential housing

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 50
50 Page 51 52
3 51
51 Page 52 53
5.3.2.2 City of Irvine Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
General Plan Amendment Zone Change for 400 Acres South of MCAS El Tore

Approximately 340 acres of the MCAS El Toro site are within the City of Irvine corporate
boundaq The City has proposed GPA 21633 GA and a Zone Change which would allow the 340 acres to be developed as a multi use entertainment center The center would provide

areas for a sports stadium an arena a hotel convention center and other cultural uses A
multi modal transit corridor has been proposed to traverse the site This corridor is intended to accommodate a number of transit options including motor vehicles shuttles trams or

light rail It also features a pedestrian bicycle trail system An EIR was approved for this
project in 1996 It is the subject of litigation by the County That EIR may be superseded by the City's 1999 EIRs for the Millennium Plan or Millennium Plan II The Final EIR for

the Millennium Plan was not
November 1999 The Final Irvine 1999c approved in June 1999 and a revised Draft EIR was issued in EIR is expected to be reviewed again in early 2000 City of

Although this portion of the MCAS El Toro site lies within the City of Irvine corporate boundary the federal state or County government likely will be the ultimate property
owner in which case the property would not be subject to City of Irvine planning and zoning
laws and regulations Because this is a project alternative it would not cause cumulative
impacts in conjunction with the Proposed Project For an analysis of nonaviation land uses
at former MCAS El Toro refer to Chapter 8.0 Alternatives

Lower Peters Can yen Specific Plan
The Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan encompasses approximately 1,400 acres on a site bounded by the west leg of the Eastern toll road ETR and the planned alignment of Portola
Parkway to the north Culver Drive to the east I 5 to the south and Jamboree Road to the
west The Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan contains land use regulations and
development standards for all uses proposed for this site including an allowance for up to
10,568 residential dwelling units Currently development is undenvay for up to 8,000
residential dwelling units retail commercial land uses a special use park a community park six neighborhood parks a library and schools on 1,400 acres The site recently was

incorporated within the City of Irvine between the East Tustin Planned Community in the City of Tustin and the Northwood community in the City of Irvine Elements of the Lower
Peters Canyon Specific Plan currently are being implemented in phases Mixed uses have
been constructed as of July 1999 City of Irvine 1999b

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 52
52 Page 53 54
Oak Creek Project
The Oak Creek project lies within City of Irvine Planning Area 12 on a 1,250 acre site located north of I 5 east of Sand Canyon Avenue south of I 405 and west of Jeffrey Road
This mixed use project includes the planned development of 4,050 new residential units
1,105 OOO sq ft of new commercial uses 2,871,080 sq ft of new industrial uses 470,000 sq ft of new non residential uses 535,400 sq ft of new institutional uses and 339 acres of

conservation open space use The residential component of the Oak Creek project entailing
development of single family dwelling units on a 350 acre site will be constructed in various phases This project was approved by the City of Irvine and construction began on

a portion of the project in July 1999 City of Irvine 1999b

West Park Project
This project is located in City of Irvine Planning Area 38 on a 3 50 acre site It is bounded on the north by Irvine Center Drive on the south by Barranca Parkway on the east by
Culver Drive and on the west by Harvard Drive Ninety five percent of the proposed 3,850
units had been constructed as of July 1999 Development of the remainder of the West Park Project was still under City of Irvine review as of July 1999 City of Irvine 1999b

Revisions to City of Irvine Planning Areas 5 I 35 30 annexation of
certain areas into the City General Plan Amendment Pre Zoning
and zone change

The City of Irvine has proposed to amend Planning Areas 5 1 35 and 30 and to adopt the necessary pre zoning and a zone change for these areas to allow for land uses outlined in the
ETRPA Nonaviation Plan referred to by the City as Phase II of the Millennium Plan See Chapter 8.0 Alternatives for a discussion of the Millennium Plan

This project would also provide for the annexation of approximately 4,298 acres of the
MCAS El Tore site into the City of Irvine Also to be annexed into the City would be the James A Musick Jail and Irvine Ranch Water District parcels in the vicinity of the MCAS

El Toro with these land uses comprising an additional 113 acres
This project also calls for an amendment to the Master Plan of Arterial Highways for on site roadway classified as Major Primary and Secondary Arterial in the above areas

This project will also include at a minimum amendments to the following City of Irvine General Plan Elements Land Use Circulation Parks and Recreation Open Space and
Conservation Noise and Safety
In its NOP dated August 13,1999 the City of Irvine stated that a Program Final EIR will be prepared for the project that includes a detailed project description and an analysis of the
potential environmental effects of the project identification of mitigation measures
County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 53
53 Page 54 55
necessary to reduce significant environmental impacts and alternatives that could avoid or
substantially reduce significant effects of the project The Draft EIR was released for public review the day before Thanksgiving November 24 1999

This project would not co exist with the Proposed Project and thus does not contribute to
cumulative impacts in conjunction with the Proposed Project

Unspecified Future Projects
The City of Irvine has indicated that it anticipates that a number of new residential cummercial offLze warehouse and institutional type projects will be developed within the
various planning areas in the City in the years to come No specific information was received
on the exact location of these projects These projects are based on projections being made by the City on development that could occur throughout the City Proposed

development includes the land uses proposed by the revised Millennium Plan which is an alternative
project to the proposed project These projects are summarized in Table 5.3 3 1

General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to Allow Housing in the
Spectrum Area

The City of Irvine has initiated a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to allow housing in the Spectrum area of the City An amendment to the Irvine Center Development
Agreement may also be required for this to occur The City is in the process of retaining a consultant to prepare an EIR on this project The EIR is tentatively scheduled to be
distributed for public review in February 2000 Consideration of this project has also been tentatively scheduled for review by the City's Planning Commission in April 2000 and by
the City Council in May 2000

5.3.2.3 Irvine Unified School District IUSD
There are two school projects currently under consideration by the Irvine Unified School District IUSD Northwood High School which has been partially built and North Irvine
Middle School According to the IUSD the City of Irvine Planning Area 27 also proposes a possible element school development during the year 2003 as part of the City's Final EIR
IUSD 1999b However according to the IUSD no planning other than general discussion has been initiated for this potential school

IUSD North Irvine Middle School
The proposed middle school is located south of Hicks Canyon Wash and east of Hicks
Canyon Road in the City of Irvine The school will be located on 20 acres and will accommodate 750 students The school is in its pre planning and pre design phase It is

anticipated to open in Fall 2003 IUSD 1999

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 54
54 Page 55 56
Table 5.3 3
Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine

Ofrlce 2
Warehouse 2
300,226 300,226 150,000 899,774

11 Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area covered by the Millennium Plan

County of Orange EIR No 573 5 27 Cumulative Impacts 55
55 Page 56 57
Table 5.3 3 Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine
I Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area covered by the Millennium Plan

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 56
56 Page 57 58
57
57 Page 58 59
Table 5.3 3
Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine

1 J Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area coveted by the Millennium Plan

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 58
58 Page 59 60
Table 5.3 3
Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine

l Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area covered by the Millennium Plan

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 59
59 Page 60 61
Table 5.3 3
Unspecified Projects in the City of Irvine

I Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area covered by the Millennium Plan

Cumulative Impacts
5 82 County of Orange EIR No 573 60
60 Page 61 62
Table 5.3 3
Unspecified Proiects in the City of Irvine I

I Number in dwelling units 2 Number in square feet
3 85,000 seats for the stadium shown however no square footage is included in Planning Area total 4 Portion of PA 30 within the area covered by the Millennium Plan

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 61
61 Page 62 63
d zi 62
62 Page 63 64
IUSD Northwood High School
This high school is located at the northwest comer of the future intersection of Portola Parkway and Yale Avenue in the City of Irvine The project is located on approximately 43

acres and ultimately will accommodate 2,400 students The Planning Center 1995 The Northwood High School project was approved in 1995 and was opened in September 1999
IUSD 1999

5.3.2.4 City of Laguna Niguel Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
The City of Laguna Niguel requested that several projects within its jurisdiction be considered within the cumulative impact analysis of the Proposed Project City of Laguna
Niguel 1999 These projects are shown in Table 5.3 2 and include

9 ii

iii
iv
VI

vi

vii

viii
ix

Xl

Alicia Skate Park which is a new proposed park for skate boarding activities Allen Oldsmobile Cadillac Tentative Parcel Map 97 126 which is the expansion of
an existing automobile dealership located at Camino Capistrano and Paseo De Colinas
Enterprise Car Sales which is a new used car sales lot and rental facility on 2 acres located at 28112 Camino Capistrano in Laguna Niguel
La Paz Park which is a new 6.3 acre public park with lighted sports fields Mission Imports Remote Parking Lot which is a new 2.4 acre parking lot located at
1 Star Drive which would provide a surplus parking area with night lighting Moulton Elementary Field Improvements which would provide for the expansion of
active recreational facilities and parking area at this elementary school St Anne's School which would provide for the expansion of an existing private
school with the project to include 29,235 square feet of classroom building and 33,065 square feet of classroom administration building at 32451 Bear Brand Road
ShapeWAliso Creek Tentative Tract No 15670 which is a 9 acre tract of singlefamily dwelling units Forty six homes will be built in this new tract of homes
Shea Business Properties Ocean Ranch II which will provide 45,000 square feet of office dwelling and health club located at 3245 1 Golden Lantern Street in the city
Tutor Time Tentative Parcel Map No 98 17 1 which is located at Aliso Creek Road east of La Paz Road and will provide 12,000 square feet day care facility

However these projects fall outside of the planning area associated with the Proposed Project As a result the potential for these projects to contribute to significant cumulative
impacts in combination with the Proposed Project is considered to be minimal and unlikely Consequently they have not been included within this cumulative impact analysis

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 63
63 Page 64 65
5.3.2.5 City of Laguna Woods formerly Leisure World
Jurisdiction Land Use Projects

The unincorporated community of Leisure World incorporated to form the City of Laguna Woods in March 1999 The City is currently considering the following projects

Moulton Parkway Commercial Development
This 20,178 square foot commercial project will provide sorting and distribution space for the Los Angeles Times The project presently is slated to commence construction in Fall
1699 letter from City of Laguna Woods dated 9 29 99

To wn Cen tre
This project includes 7 buildings that contain 253,270 square feet of space in the Town Centre commercial project This project is located on 14 acres on El Toro Road The
project includes
a 140 room 80,000 square feet hotel b 40,000 square feet of medical off zes
c 7,000 square feet restaurant d 45,570 square feet of garden office
e 68,000 square feet of offices f 5,900 square feet of service retail
g 6,800 square feet of retail uses
The project is in building plan check with construction anticipated to begin in early 2000

Home Depot Center
This project contains 215,773 square feet of commercial use This project includes the following stores

a Home Depot b Office Max
c Rite Aide d Stater Brothers
e In line retail
f Bank g Pad fur future restaurant use

Most of the structures in this project have already been constructed and are in use

Cumulative Impacts County of Change ER No 573 64
64 Page 65 66
5.3.2.6 City of Lake Forest
Commercial Use on Portola Parkway
A conceptual site plan has been proposed for commercial uses of up to 110,000 sq ft on an
approximately 9 acre parcel The site is located on Portola Parkway between El Toro Road and Saddleback Parkway in unincorporated Orange County within the sphere of influence

of the City of Lake Forest The City of Lake Forest is processing this project which would be located on approximately 6 acres of land The project includes a Site Plan Use Permit
PA 95 0097 for the construction of a 40,000 sq ft ofice building and 7,000 sq ft
of e food facility The remaining 3 acres provide right of way for Portola Parkway The
project consists of several elements including

i General Plan Land Use Amendment on a 16 acre site of which 9 acres will be used for the project
ii Zone Change from Planned Community Open Space to Community Commercial
Sign Restriction and
iii Community Profile Amendment fkom Open Space Conservation to Community
Commercial

As of July 1999 the city was still reviewing a planning application for the site but no
development has been approved City of Lake Forest 1999

Baker Ranch Planned Community Project
The County of Orange originally approved a Planned Community and Development
Agreement for this commercial and industrial project in 1988 The project is located on 370 gross acres of land and is located south of the Foothill transportation corridor and west of

the City of Lake Forest city boundary and east of Baker Parkway The 1988 tentative tract map has expired and the property owner is currently processing a new tentative tract map
and revised area plan for 4.3 million square feet of business park development on the project
site with the City of Lake Forest It is estimated that the project will be completed between
2000 2010 Letter from City dated 9 27 99

A J West Ranch
This project is located south of the Foothill transportation corridor and east of Baker Parkway The project includes the development of 933,000 square feet of business park
development This project would be developed between the year 2000 and 2005 Letter
from City dated 9 27 99

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 65
65 Page 66 67
Saddleback Valley Church
This project is located on the northwest corner of El Toro Road and Portola Parkway and includes the development of 800,000 square feet of church related development Some
commercial development may also be included in this project The County of Orange originally approved 3 10,000 square feet of development as part of a master plan for this
Church Some Church buildings have already been constructed on the project site Precise development plans for the remaining 489,000 square feet have not been submitted to the
City of Lake Forest It is anticipated that this project will be built out by the year 2005 Letter from City dated 9 29 99

5.3.2.7 City of Newport Beach Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
Holtze Extended Stay Hotel and Office Project
The Holtze Hotel and Office Project located at 1300 Quail Drive and Dove Avenue in Newport Beach is the location of a former automobile dealership The Newport Beach City
Council approved a Mitigated Negative Declaration MND for the 100,000 sq ft office building and the 350 bed extended stay hotel The project was in the plan check stage as of
July 1999 The planned construction date is unknown City of Newport Beach 1999

Koll Center Expansion
The Koll Center Expansion project would entail expansion of parking space and facilities associated with an existing 250,000 sq ft IO story office tower in Koll Center Newport
located at the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Jamboree Road The project includes demolition and reconstruction of an existing parking structure as well as the
addition of a new parking structure The project involves a General Plan Amendment an amendment to the Planned Community Development Plan Zoning Document and a Trfic
Study pursuant to the Newport Beach Traffic Phasing Ordinance The project is undergoing environmental review by the City with an EIR to be distributed in January 2000 The
project is tentatively scheduled to be reviewed by the City's Planning Commission in March 2000 The City Council is tentatively scheduled to consider the project in April 2000 Letter
from City of Newport Beach Dated October 27,1999

Rock well Site Expansion
The project involves a General Plan Amendment and a Planned Community Amendment to allow for the development of an additional 566,000 sq ft for a total of 1,008 OOO sq ft of
allowable building area on the project site The project was undergoing environmental review by the City as of July 1999 City of Newport Beach 1999

Cumulative Impacts County of Change EIR No 573 66
66 Page 67 68
Amendment 89 7
This project is located on 4 12 acres of land at 5400 West Pacific Coast Highway The
proposed planned community would include the following uses

l 1,750 dwelling units
l 75 hotel motel units
l 70,000 sq ft of commercial uses
l lo acre elementary school site
l 2 16 acres for parks open space and habitat restoration

The project includes general plan amendment pre zoning pre annexation zoning a Local Coastal Permit and a development agreement The County of Orange is acting as the Lead
Agency on the EIR currently being prepared on this project

Coneran t Expansion Project GPA 96 3 f
This commercial project is located at 4311 Jamboree Road The project includes an
amendment to the City's General Plan and an amendment to the planned community
covering the project site to allow for the development of an additional 566,000 sq ft of commercial space for a total of 1,008,775 sq ft of allowable building area on the project

site
A Draft EIR has been prepared on the project and is out for public review Review of the
project by the City's Planning Commission and City council has been tentatively scheduled
for Febmary 2000

5.3.2.8 City of Santa Ana Jurisdiction Land Use Projects
First American Title
This project is part of the MacArthur Place project in the City of Santa Ana and involves the
construction of the new headquarters for First American Title The project has recently been
completed and included the construction of three separate office buildings at 1,2 and 3 First
American Way near the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Main Street in the City of Santa Ana The floor areas of the three buildings are 87,500 sq ft 3 story 64,059 sq ft

2 story and 60,210 sq ft 2 story respectively The environmental review process for this project has been completed City of Santa Ana 1999b

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 67
67 Page 68 69
MacArthur Pace Brea Properties
MacArthur Place is a mixed use development project that will involve the construction of retail space condominiums apartments and other uses Located at the intersection of
MacArthur Boulevard and Main Street in the City of Santa Ana a portion of the 8 building development is in the plan check stage of the development process This portion includes
280 apartments which would provide 29,419 sq ft of residential space The environmental review process has been completed City of Santa Ana 1999a

Nexus Twin Towers Nexus
This project is also part of the MacArthur Place project The Nexus Twin Towers project involves the development of an office building atop an existing parking garage located at 1
East Majestic Drive near the intersection of MacArthur Boulevard and Main Street in the City of Santa Ana The area of the office building now in the plan check stage of the
planning process will be 456,414 sq ft The office and parking garage combined will be 676,780 sq ft The environmental review process is complete City of Santa Ana 1999b

One Hutton Center
This project involves the construction of a proposed office building consisting of 12 stories and a 13 level penthouse for mechanical equipment a 2400room hotel a 5,000 sq ft
restaurant a 4,740 sq ft conference hall and a 7 story parking structure to accommodate 875 parking spaces The project is located near the northeast corner of MacArthur
Boulevard and Main Street The environmental review was completed in July 1992 No construction has been scheduled as of July 1999 and the Conditional Use Permit has been
extended City of Santa Ana 1999b

5.3.2.9 City of Mission Viejo Land Use Projects
Los Angeles Athletic Company LAACO Project
The LAACO project is located north of El Toro Road and east of Marguerite Parkway This project includes the development of 77,095 sq ft self storage facility on a 3 acre site The
project was approved in June 1999 It is in the early stage of development Construction is expected to commence on or before September 1999 LAACO 1999

Mamma th Equities Project
The Mammoth Equities project is located at the southeast comer of El Toro Road and Marguerite Parkway The project includes the development of 49,000 sq ft of commercial

office space on an approximately acre site However only 2.5 acres is to be developed due to zoning restrictions The project was approved in June 1999 As of July 1999 the project
was in the plan check stage Mammoth Equities 1999
Cumulative Impacts
5 40 County of Orange EIR No 573 68
68 Page 69 70
Pain ted Trails
This project is located north of the Foothill Transportation Corridor east of El Toro Road and west of Upper Oso Reservoir The project will accommodate 578 single family
dwelling units and several private parks The project is covered by Final Program EIR for the Mission Viejo General Plan which was certified by the Mission Viejo City Council in
1990 Portions of the project have been constructed as of July 1999 City of Mission Viejo 1999

Stone Ridge
This project is located east of Olympiad Road between Alicia Parkway and Fieldcrest Street
The project will accommodate 468 single family dwelling units open space and local parks on approximately 340 acres The project is covered by previously certified Final Program

Final EIR MV89 2 and the City of Mission Viejo General Plan Final Program EIR and
Initial Study Addendum IS GP91 1 which serve as the Program EIRs for the Stone Ridge
project Portions of the project have been constructed as of July 1999 City of Mission
Viejo 1999

Country Suites Hotel
This project is located east of Marguerite Parkway and west of the Foothill Transportation
Corridor ramp at Los Alisos Boulevard The project consists of a 118 room hotel The
project was approved by the City in December 1998 and is currently under construction Occupancy of the hotel is expected in January 2000 Letter from City of Mission Viejo

dated 10 12 99

Shea Properties
This proposed project is located east of Marguerite Parkway and west of the Country Suites
Hotel at 28401 Los Aliso Boulevard The project includes 230 apartment units The project
was approved by the City in August 1998 and is currently under construction The project should be ready fur occupancy by May 2000
Letter from City dated 1 O 1 2 99

Acero Street Office Project
This project is located on Acero Street in Mission Viejo The project includes 225,000
square feet of offIce space The project developer is currently discussing this project with
the City Should the project be approved by the City project occupancy is anticipated to occur in January 2001 Letter from City dated 1 O 12 99

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 69
69 Page 70 71
Heritage KWas Senior Housing
This project is located on the southeast corner of Oso Parkway and Country Club Drive at 26836 Oso Parkway The project includes 143 senior housing units The project was
approved by the City in October 1998 and is under construction The project should be ready for occupancy in April 2000 Letter from City dated 1 O 12 99

Camino Capistrano Mini Storage
This project is located on 4.79 acres of land on Camino Capistrano northerly of Crown Valley Parkway The project includes 107,108 square feet of mini storage space with a
caretaker residence The project is currently being considered by the City with City action scheduled in October 1999 The project is scheduled for completion in February 2001
Letter corn City dated 1 O 12 99

Legacy Partners Office Building
This project is located at 27101 and 27201 Puerta Real Street in Mission Viejo The project consists of 232,000 square feet of office space in two separate buildings The project was
approved by the City in June 1999 Preliminary site work has begun on this project The project is scheduled for completion in October 2000 Letter from City dated lo 12 99

Mission Viejo Mall Expansion
The Mission Viejo Mall has been expanded to include an additional 500,000 square feet of commercial space The project was approved by the City in 1997 with build out expected in
June 2000 The Mall has already been expanded by 250,000 square feet with new Nordstrom and Saks 5fh Avenue stores opened in Summer 1999 Letter from City dated lo12
99

Lexus Auto Dealership
This project is located north of Avery Parkway and east of Marguerite Parkway at 28242 Marguerite Parkway The project consists of a 38,164 square foot auto dealership The
project was approved in June 1998 with the project scheduled for completion in September 2000 Letter from City dated 1 O 12 99

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 70
70 Page 71 72
5.3.3 Transportation Land Use Projects
The projects related to transportation land use includes infrastructure improvement airport
expansion a proposed high speed rail system and a regional transit system being proposed by the Orange County Transit Authority An overview of these projects including

identification of jurisdiction are included in Table 5.3 4

5.3.3.1 I 405 SR 55 HOV Access Improvements Project
Significant traffic congestion occurs along portions of Interstate 405 I 405 State Route 55
SR 55 and Bristol Street in the vicinity of the City of Costa Mesa which impacts both regional mobility and local access To reduce congestion and encourage the use of buses

and high occupancy vehicles HOV the Orange County Transportation Authority OCTA has developed the I 405 SR 55 Transitway Project Elements of the Transitway Project
include

0 Direct HOV connector ramps between I 405 and SR 55 ii Access improvements along I 405
iii HOV drop ramps at Bear Street
iv HOV drup ramps at Von I man Avenue

The focus of the project is construction of access improvements along I 405 in the City of
Costa Mesa between Bristol Street and SR 55 A project to construct direct HOV connector
ramps between I 405 and SR 55 was initiated in 1993 by OCTA under the Measure M
freeway program following approval of a Project Report OCTA 1993 and supported by the California Department of Transportation The project is scheduled to begin construction

in November 1999 Caltrans 1999

5.3.3.2 Alton Parkway Extension
Altun Parkway is proposed as a major arterial highway with a 120 foot wide cross section providing 6 travel lanes and a 14 foot median The proposed 2.17 mile extension of Alton
Parkway f om Irvine Boulevard to the Foothill toll road FTR is within the North El Toro Regional Circulation Area County of Orange and is part of the Foothill Circulation
Phasing Program FCPP A portion of this proposed extension passes along the eastern
boundary of the MCAS El Toro site Although construction of the extension is not part of
the Proposed Project conveyance of right of way for this future FCPP improvement is
planned as part of the Proposed Project The proposed extension of Alton Parkway along
the eastern boundary of the MCAS El Toro site and through a portion of Lake Forest are the only unfinished segments of this master planned arterial These proposed extensions are an

important component of the FCPP The FCPP is designed to phase and coordinate road development with building permits in southeast Orange County

County of Orange EIR No 573
5 43 Cumulative Impacts 71
71 Page 72 73
Table 5.3 4 Reasonably Foreseeable Probable Future Projects Related Transportation Land Use Projects
Improvements Project
Alton Parkway Extension 4
Foothill Transportation Corridor FTC North and
South
LAX Expansion Project

Proposed High Speed Rail Project

County of Orange
County of Orange

City of Los Angeles

Southern California Association of
Governments SCAG

r
Mesa to include a Direct HOV connector ramps between I 405 and SR 55
l Access improvements along l 405
l HOV drop ramps at Bear Street

HOV drop ramps at Von Karman Avenue Modification to Alton Parkway to include 120 foot wide cross section

to provide 6 travel lanes and 14 foot median Approximately 30 mile connection between ETR Orange County
inland foothills to I S near San Diego County North Segment in the vicinity of MCAS El Toro 7.5 miles
South Segment connects Oso Parkway to San Diego County line Expansion project for the LAX to provide medium and long range
air transportation services through the following l new terminal
m 4 new concourses
l automated people mover system 4
R new cargo facilities l
redevelopment of the Century Cargo Complex Alternative 1 l new additional north runway

l relocation of 3 existing runways
l reconfiguration of north central terminal area

Alternative 2 2 new runways l a new concourse

6.2 billion project funded through Project California's private consortium no public operating subsidy to improve linkages to
and between airports l Core System to connect Riverside Orange and Los Angeles
counties along I 5 from MCAS El Toro site to Anaheim Union Station and Palmdale through ETC to SR 91 and
Riverside l Statewide System to connect in Palmdale and at Union Station

in Los Angeles

1 ii 5 B 4 X
X
X

Status Pending
North segment completed April 1995

No environmental documentation prepared to
date

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 72
72 Page 73 74
5.3.3.3 Foothill Transportation Corridor FTC North and South
The FTC connects with the eastern leg of the ETC in Orange County's inland foothills and is ultimately planned to connect with I 5 near the San Diego County
border The tutal length of the FTC is approximately 30 miles divided into the North and South Segments The North

Segment is in the vicinity of the MCAS El Toro site Construction began on the North Segment in November 1990 The first section fium Portola Parkway North to Portula Parkway
South opened on October 16 1993 The second section which extended the FTC south to
Antonio Parkway opened on April 7 1995 The completed section of the FTC is
approximately 10.2 miles long Construction of the section north of Portola Parkway North began in 1995
and is complete The South Segment of the FTC from Oso Parkway to the San Diego County line is undergoing environmental review TCA 1999

5.3.3.4 Los Angeles International Airport Expansion Project
The City of Los Angeles proposes to expand the Los Angeles International Airport LAX
New features would include a new terminal and four new concourses an automated people
muver system new cargo facilities and redevelopment of the Century Cargo Complex Two alternatives are also being proposed Alternative 1 would include a new runaway to the

north relocation of three existing runways and reconfiguration of the north central terminal
area The second alternative would include the construction of two new runways and a new
concourse Environmental review is pending

5.3.3.5 Proposed High Speed Rail Project
A high speed rail system is proposed by the Southern California Association of
Governments SCAG on several freeway rights of way with limited stations to improve
linkages to and between the region's airports The cure system would connect Riverside
Orange and Los Angeles counties along I 5 from the MCAS El Toro site to Anaheim
Union Station and Palmdale as well as from the MCAS El Toro site through the Eastern
Transportation Corridor to SR 91 and Riverside This rail system also would connect with the statewide high speed rail system in Palmdale
and at Union Station in downtown Los Angeles It would be constructed and operated through Project California a private

consortium at a cost of 6.2 billion on public right of way with no public operating
subsidy

5.3.3.6 Orange County Transit Authority Transit Project
A transit project between the Fullerton Transportation Center and the Irvine Transportation
Center is currently being studied by the OCTA The project could use a combination of at grade as well as elevated transit ways An EIR was released in September 1999 for public

review and comments The OCTA has decided to pursue further environmental analysis on
the 28 mile Fullerton to Irvine Centerline and to complete a supplemental environmental

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 73
73 Page 74 75
analysis on the full 28 miles In addition environmental analysis will be prepared fur the first phase minimum operating segment from Irvine to Costa Mesa The OCTA Board will
address the issue of preparing preliminary engineering and final environmental analysis in
Summerof2000

5.3.4 Other Land Use Projects
Several projects fall outside the categories referred to previously but are significant for evaluation under cumulative impact analysis These projects are outlined in Table 5.3 5

5.3.4.1 Natural Community Conservation Plan
The Natural Cummunity Conservation Plan NCCP provides the planning framework preserve natural biotic communities in Orange County Since the Orange County Board
Supetisurs has approved the reserve design it helps establish a geographic context
to
of of

preserved open space which assists in determinin g the cumulative impacts of individual project actions

In early 1991 the California State Resources Agency developed a concept fur a multiple species habitat conservation plan This pilot plan which focuses on coastal sage scrub habitat
was developed in collaboration with a number of landowners A primary element of the plan was establishment of a Scientific Review Panel SRP composed of five conservation
biologists which was to develop and oversee data collection procedures and to formulate regional and subregional goals and criteria for titure reserves Local jurisdictions are
responsible for developing local area NCCPs to be approved by the United States Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service USFWS A number of Orange County landowners
and the County of Orange assembled data collected in 1992 on coastal sage scrub species according to guidelines released by the SRP in December 1991 and developed the Orange
County NCCP A total of approximately 78,600 acres are enrolled countywide by public and private landowners compared to a total area of 393,655 acres in southern California
south of metropolitan Los Angeles
The Reserve Design which is the essential premise of the NCCP and identifies lands to be set aside was prepared on April 22,1994 which included special provisions fur the Central
Coastal Subarea in Orange County The NCCP was adopted by the County of Orange in April 1996 upon certification of its EIR for the project which was nut challenged in court
The federal and state governments various municipalities and landowners entered intu an implementation agreement for the NCCP shurtly thereafter In general the Central subarea
Reserve Design incorporated committed open space along with areas contemplated as open space in conjunction with the approval of certain development projects in other areas This

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 74
74 Page 75 76
75
75 Page 76 77
open space system has been augmented by adding reserve areas known to contain substantial populations of the California gnatcatcher and cactus wren and to provide linkages of rmtural
habitat The Reserve Design incorporates over 21,000 acres of coastal sage scrub and its matrix of other associated habitats including lands necessary for connectivity i e contiguous
open space to promote genetic exchange Existing planned and or proposed regional open space lands in the Central Subarea include a total of 8,379 acres of coastal sage scrub in Weir
Wilderness Park Santiago Oaks Regional Park Irvine Regional Park Open Space Area 31 in Gypsum Canyon Peters Canyon Regional Park the Loma Ridge open Space system
miscellaneous open space associated with the East Orange Planned Community and Limestone Whiting Wilderness Park These areas are generally northwest north and northeast
of the MCAS El Toro site A 998 acre habitat reserve has been identified on the MCAS El Toro site in the Reserve Design This 998 acre habitat reserve would partially implement the
adopted NCCP in Orange County as it is a portion of the total reserve design for the subarea Also see the discussion in Section 4.9 Biological Resources for more information on the
NCCP
The County is currently in the process of preparing a Southern Region NCCP which will cover additional lands in South County The area covered by this plan will be added to the
previously approved Central Coastal HCCP and provide additional land for the preservation of natural biotic communities in Orange County

5.3.4.2 MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan
The City of Tustin has conducted comprehensive planning for future reuse of the MCAS Tustin facility which has been identified for closure by the Federal government A Reuse
Study has been completed which identifies a long range land use and transportation plan for redevelopment of the Base A task force of elected officials and representatives fkom
various area jurisdictions assisted in the planning process and adopted a conceptual land use plan This plan shows a variety of uses including residential commercial offIce and
industrial uses The City identified a Preferred Alternative the Local Reuse Alternative LRA for the reuse of the Base that addresses issues opportunities and constraints
associated with the site and that attempts to be practical in economic terms and to respond to fbture opportunities City of Tustin 1999a

A joint Environmental Impact Report Environmental Impact Statement Final EIIUEIS for the reuse of MCAS Tustin is scheduled to be completed in February 2000 The federal
government is currently scheduled to consider formal approval of the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan in early 2000 The City Council of the City of Tustin will consider approval of a specific
Plan for the site at that time City of Tustin 1999b

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 76
76 Page 77 78
5.3.4.3 James A Musick Facility
The James A Musick Facility is a County operated detention facility located southeast
the fhre extension of Alton Parkway and northwest of existing Bake Parkway
unincorporated Orange County The facility is in the sphere of influence of the City
Irvine and is immediately adjacent to the City of Lake Forest The municipal boundary
the City of Irvine borders the property on the south southwest

of
in
of
of

The James A Musick facility is being considered for expansion to 7,584 inmates with a full
range of classifications from minimum to maximum security Inmate bookings and releases
are proposed to be handled at the facility for a full classification of inmates to assist in handling a shortfall in capacity for incarceration facilities in Orange County This project is proposed to

include a 20,000 sq ft Sheriffs Station on the site and could include an Interim Care Facility
ICF in an area adjacent to the substation The Sheriffs Station would provide improved law
enforcement services to the area The ICF is a residence facility operated by the County
Mental Health Board for young people unable to diction in a foster or group home or Juvenile Hall due to emotional or psychiatric instability The youths are confined in the home and are

not free to come and go
Alton Parkway will be extended northeast from Irvine Boulevard Trabuco Road to the site
entrance Although the Musick Drive entrance may still be used for inmate buses and
deliveries the primary traffic impact of the facility staff and visitor access will be absorbed on
the Alton Parkway extension Bake Parkway will be used to access the Sheriffs Station The
County originally approved the project in November 1996 and re approved in October 1998 However the project is in litigation at this time Orange County 1999a

5.3.5 Non Planned Land Use Projects
A general assessment was made as part of FEIR No 563 of areas currently designated for
agricultural and open space uses which are adjacent to the MCAS El Toro site and within the PIL These areas are referred to as non planned areas It is conceivable that these areas could

convert to other uses regardless of the disposition of MCAS El Toro Land uses anticipated to
be developed between the year 2005 and year 2020 were included as fhture prospects in the OCP 96M Land uses anticipated to be developed beyond the year 2020 were previously

estimated by the Irvine Company According to the Irvine Company potential land uses fur
these areas may include residential industrial and institutional uses However at the time
specific project proposals are submitted for consideration environmental documentation must
be prepared for these projects

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 77
77 Page 78 79
5.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS BY RESOURCE AREA
This section analyzes potential cumulative impacts to the environment that could be associated with implementation of the Proposed Project in concert with cumulative
development and growth including the above listed past present and reasonably
foreseeable f tre projects For the cumulative impact analysis OCP 96M was used to
assess population housing and employment projections for the MCAS El Toro and JWA site vicinities as well as surrounding areas of the County The County reviewed and determined

that the cumulative projects were included in OCP 96M These data then were used to
evaluate the potential for cumulative impacts as a result of implementing the Proposed
Project See Table 5.4 1 for a summary of cumulative impacts by resource areas

The threshold of significance used to determine whether the cumulative projects considered
would create a significant impact on the environment was taken from the CEQA
Environmental Checklist and is as follows

0 i Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental eflects of an
applicable project are considerable when viewed in connection with the eflects of pust prujects the eflects of other current prujects and the effects of probable fiture

prujects
The threshold of significance for each impact category is provided separately below

5.4 I Potential Cumulative Impacts
The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative 1

0 i Does the project have land use impacts that cumulatively considerable

Related to Land Use
and use impacts is as follows

are individually limited but

5.4.1 I Cumulative Impacts
FEIR No 563 found that the CRP project would have significant unavoidable adverse
cumulative land use impacts because it would add to the overall urbanization of Orange
County and the area around MCAS El Tore However under the Proposed Project the nonaviation
land uses have been reduced substantially in intensity as compared to the CRP
consisting now primarily of parks open space and golf courses and approximately 87 acres
of business park development Table 3 7 Under existing conditions approximately 2,130 acres of land are devoted to open space land uses including agriculture golf course

recreation restricted open space and the open space surrounding the ordnance storage and disposal site Under the Proposed Project condition approximately 2,056 acres of land

Cumulative Impacts County of Change EIR No 573 78
78 Page 79 80
Table 5.4 l
Summary of Cumulative Impacts

lnese projects are not compatlDle wltn 51nQ woula not De constructed wltn tne rropOSed YroJect and thus the Proposed ProJect causes no cumulative impacts with these competing alternative projects
Legend
YES U No significant impact after mitigation Unavoidable potentialiy significant adverse impact Unknown

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 79
79 Page 80 81
Table 5.4 l
Summary of Cumulative Impacts

LGFZFPeters Canyon Specific YES I I I YES I I I VFS I I II I I Plan
MacArthur Place 7
A V I I I

Mammoth Equities Project MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan
Mission Viejo Mall Exp

iES YES
YES YES
YES YES Moulton Parkway Commercial

Development Natural Community

ConservaGon Plan Nexus Twin Towers

North Irvine Middle School Northwood High School
Oak Creek Project OCTA Centerline
One Hutton Center Painted Trails
Portola Hills Planned Community
Revised PAS 51,35 30 Annexation GPA Pre Zone
Zone Change Rockwell Site Expansion
Saddleback Meadows
Saddleback Valley Church Sakioka Property

YES YES YES
YES YES YES YES
YES YES YES YES YES
YES YES YES
YES
YES YES

YES YES YES YES YES YES
YES YES YES

YES YES
YES YES YES

No significant impact after mitigation YES Unavoidable potentially significant adverse impact
TBP To be provided Documentation pending u Unknown

Cumulative Impacts 5 52
County of Orange EIR No 573 80
80 Page 81 82
Table 5.4 l
Summary of Cumulative Impacts

Segerstrom Home Ranch Spectrum Housing GPA 2C
1These projects a not compatible wi I and woul I not be constructed wrth the Proposed Project and thus the Proposed Project causes no cumulative impacts with tl Stone Ridge
Shea Properties Apts YES YES YES T o w n Ceitre West
Park Project Unspecified Projects in Irvine2
I
YES U U U YES

YESL YES YESL

Legend
YES U No significant impact after mitigation Unavoidable potentially significant adverse impact Unknown

zse compe al temati ve prqjects

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 81
81 Page 82 83
would be allocated to open space uses including agriculture golf course recreation restricted open space and habitat areas which represent a one percent reduction in open
space However the project would have a significantly beneficial cumulative impact because a recreational uses would be increased and open to the public i e golf courses
regional park and b open space areas would be developed and maintained for habitat values not for military uses
Under existing conditions recreational uses were generally limited to military personnel with the exception of limited public access to the stables and

golf course Wildlife habitat areas were not managed for wildlife purposes and were not enrolled in programs such as the NCCP In summary the project would not add
significantly to the urbanization and the project recreation and open space components would mitigate to a degree the urbanization of cumulative development Therefore the
Proposed Project would not have a significant adverse cumulative impact related to increased urbanization

Similar to the FEIR No 563 CRP project under the Proposed Project the land uses restricted by the military 65 CNEL dB PIL are anticipated to be converted to different less
restrictive uses for those portions where the PIL and the project 65 dB CNEL contour no longer overlap Since the announced closure of MCAS El Toro two proposals fur
conversion of land classified business pa town center commercial to residential uses have been considered by the Board of Supervisors The Board denied a proposal for residential
uses in the Portola Hills Planned Community and approved a proposal to reallocate a maximum of 1,800 dwelling units to Planning Areas 40 52 and 53 in the Aliso Viejo
Planned Community Note however that this was a reallocation of dwelling units from other planning areas so there was no net increase in dwelling units In addition the City of
Mission Viejo approved a reallocation of a maximum of 825 dwelling units to replace planned light industrial uses in Planning Area 11 in the Mission Viejo Planned Community
No other conversions of nonresidential uses to noise sensitive uses within the MCAS El Toro 65 dB CNEL contour have been approved

There appear to be no additional sites where conversion of existing planned uses are contemplated south or east of the El Toro site However proposals for residential
development are anticipated to the west and southwest of the El Toro site in the City of Irvine's Planning Area 33 approximately 1,200 dwelling units Planning Area 6
approximately 5,780 dwelling units and Planning Area 9 approximately 8,900 dwelling units as a result of the conversion of MCAS El Toro to civilian uses and the proposed
changes in the 65 dB CNEL contour PIL These conversions are also a result of the proposed reduction in the land tiected by the military runway protection zones i e APZ I
and APZ II compared to the proposed project safety zones The reduction in the runway protection zone area permits residential uses where the land is also outside the OCX 65 dB
CNEL contour or an intensification of commercial and industrial occupancies e g Baker Ranch Planned Community where the land would be within the OCX 65 dB CNEL contour
Intensification is anticipated in Planning Areas 13 32 to 3 5 and 39 in Irvine and Baker Ranch in the City of Lake Forest However no change in the land use is anticipated The
net increase in residential development in Planning Areas 6 9 and 33 is however unknown at this time because of the preliminary information available That is it is unknown if these

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 82
82 Page 83 84
dwelling units represent increases in the City of Irvine's General Plan the County's General
Plan or the OCP 96M residential allocations or if these dwelling units are reallocations of
dwelling units from other planning areas or community analysis areas According to preliminary information the residential units would be a reallocated within the OCP 96M

forecasts and b located outside the OCX 65 dB CNEL contour and runway protection zones The residential units would require General Plan and zoning amendments and related
CEQA documents The County and City General Plans include Growth Management Elements public services and facilities phasing policies ordinances and land use standards
which when applied to development proposals are anticipated to reduce land use impacts to
a level of insignificance

The Irvine General Plan includes post 2020 development Table 5.3 3 not included in the
year 2020 OCP 96M However this development is not allocated to specified projects
therefore the land use impacts if any are speculative for purposes of this section

5.4.1 l 2 Conclusions
Portions of the existing agricultural uses will be retained on the MCAS El Toro site as part
of the Proposed Project Agricultural uses are compatible with the proposed aviation and
non aviation uses Therefore there will be no significant cumulative impacts of the Proposed Project from agricultural operations Section 5.4.11 addresses potential

cumulative impacts related to loss of farmlands
In the J WA area the Proposed Project would have no land use compatibility impacts since the service level at the airport would be reduced from the current level and the surrounding
area is almost fully developed No reduction in the PIL is proposed Therefore the project would not result in cumulative impacts on land use

In conclusion a the project would result in fewer cumulative land use impacts than
existing forecasts which are based on the CRP b changes in the project since EIR No 563
have reduced the cumulative impacts of the project on increased urbanization to a level of insignificance and c the project would reduce off site aircraft restrictions that would

permit up to 15,880 dwelling units to be reallocated to Irvine Planning Areas 6 9 and 33 These impacts are anticipated to extend adjacent land uses and therefore would not divide
existing communities result in land use incompatibilities or impair emergency response
plans

5.4.2 Potential Cumulative impacts Related to General
Plan Consistency

The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative General Plan consistency impacts is as follows

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 83
83 Page 84 85
0 i Does the project have General Plan consistency impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable
5.4.2.1 Cumulative Impacts
Any effects of General Plan inconsistencies are either 1 direct effects limited to the affected jurisdiction requiring a General Plan Amendment or 2 indirect effects which are generally
secondary land use effects addressed in Section 4.1 Land Use of this EIR Implementation of the Proposed Project will require an amendment to several Orange County General Plan
Elements at the time of project approval These amendments will occur prior to project implementation or prior to development applications for off site lands therefore there are
no project related effects relating to General Plan consistency
As analyzed in Section 5.4.1 the project would reduce the land area within the aircraft 65 dB CNEL contour and the runway protection zones e g the Military Accident Potential
Zones I and II compared to the existing military AICUZ Study policies This reduction
would permit noise sensitive land uses to be proposed inside the military 65 dB CNEL contour PIL but outside the OCX 65 dB CNEL contour and would permit higher intensity

occupancies e g employees at nonresidential uSes within the military APZ I and APZ II zones but outside the OCX safety zones As noted in the previous section the City of
Mission Viejo and the County have approved residential reallocations in respectively Mission Viejo Planned Community Planning Area 11 and Aliso Viejo Planned Community
Planning Areas 40,52 and 53 within the military 65 dB CNEL contour PIL but outside the
OCX 65 dB CNEL contour PIL

These approvals and the denial of the Portola Hills Plamed Community proposal appear to represent the extent of conversions of land uses to the south and east of the El Toro site
However the City of Irvine has initiated a proposal to permit approximately 1,200 dwelling units in Planning Area 33 and applications are anticipated for up to 5,780 dwelling units in
Planning Area 6 and approximately 8,900 dwelling units in Planning Area 9 of the Irvine General Plan which are located within the military 65 dB CNEL contour PIL In addition
development applications are anticipated in Irvine Planning Areas 13 32 to 35 and 39 and for Baker Ranch in Lake Forest to intensify occupancies within the former military APZ I
and APZ II These proposals would require amendment of the AELUP and the City and or
County General Plans to replace the military PIL and APZ I and APZ II policies with the OCX 65 dB CNEL contour and OCX runway protection zones

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 84
84 Page 85 86
5.4.2.2 Conclusions
The City and County General Plans include Growth Management Elements policies and development standards that will ensure that development proposals are compatible with the
respective General Plans In addition each project will be required to comply with CEQA Based on these facts no significant cumulative impact is anticipated regarding General Plan
consistency

5.4.3 Transportation and Circulation
The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative transportation and circulation
impacts is as follows

Does the project have transportation and circulation impacts that are individuallv
limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.3.1 Cumulative Analysis Method0
Section 4.3 includes a cumulative analysis of the traffic
development forecasts for the County Refer to Secti
effects

1 J
ogy and Results
impacts of the project and OCP 96M
In 4.3 for the year 2020 cumulative

Comments on the NOP e g pg 805 No 6 request that this EIR analyze the traffk impacts
of development which exceeds OCP 96M In response the following analysis was completed of an intensified land use scenario for the vicinity of the El Toro site and JWA

To avoid conflict with the adopted OCP 96M forecasts the scenario is designated post2020 The post 2020 cumulative setting also analyzes til development of the Proposed
Project and its associated site access plan as well as implementation of the circulation
system improvements which are necessary to mitigate the year 2020 trafk impacts The
traffic conditions are analyzed herein based on the Table 5.1 2 in the traffic analysis study
area Figure 4.3 1

The analysis involved preparing vehicle trafk forecasts and levels of service which were utilized to identify circulation deficiencies A traffic shares analysis was then performed for
each location where non committed improvements are required for example according to the MPAH or where deficiencies are forecast in order to identify those locations that would
Cathy a significant amount of project traffic under cumulative post 2020 conditions refer to
Section 15.0 in the Appendix D Traffic Analysis Technical Report for detailed summaries of
the traffic volumes levels of service and trafk shares

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 85
85 Page 86 87
Table 5.4 2 summarizes the non committed but planned Master Plan of Arterial Highways improvements for the locations which are forecast to carry a significant amount of project
traffic Table 5.4 3 summarizes unplanned improvements which if implemented would improve the levels of service at the locations which are forecast to operate deficiently and to
carry a significant amount of project traffic
Mitigation measures are presented below identifying the project's responsibility to participate in the long range implementation of these non committed circulation
improvements which are either currently planned or which are needed to address deficiencies at locations where the project is forecast to contribute significant levels of
trafic
In conclusion all the post 2020 impacts can be accommodated by the existing Master Plan of Arterial Highways except 1 Moulton Parkway f om Ridge Route to Glenwood and 2
Laguna Canyon Road from Bake Parkway to Santa Maria The project impact on these highway segments is 3 and 4 respectively and the improvements would be required
without the project
With the exceptions of Moulton Parkway Ridge Route to Glenwood and Laguna Canyon Road Bake Parkway to Santa Maria the planned and unplanned improvements shown in
Tables 5.4 2 and 5.4 3 will be implemented as development projects are entitled by the County and Cities per their General Plans The County and City Growth Management
Plans and Measure M CMP require that conditions be applied to projects fee programs be established and or public works programs be amended as growth and development proceed
to meet Measure MKMP and General Plan level of service policies Therefore no new or additional ordinances regulations or conditions of approval would be required to implement
the improvements with the two exceptions noted Mitigation measures are proposed to ensure that the post 2020 impacts are addressed

5.4.3.2 Mitigation Measures For Post 2020 Impacts
T 12 Prior to issuance of the first building permits for each phase of the Airport System Master Plan development the County will determine if the phase's traf Eic plus
cumulative development traffic requires any improvement listed in Tables 5.4 2 and 5.4 3 If any improvement is required the County will enter into a cooperative
agreement with the lead local jurisdictions responsible for the cumulative development impacts to participate on a fair share basis in the implementation of the
planned and unplanned long range circulation improvements listed in Table 5.4 2 and 5.4 3 The agreements will commit the County to participate in the
implementation process i e the establishment of funding mechanisms the preparation of design plans the performance of feasibility assessments etc based
on the project fair share percentages identified in Tables 5.4 2 and S 4 3 Where the County is the lead the unty will prepare cooperative agreements and use its best
efforts to obtain fair share participation by non lead local jurisdictions

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 ii 58 86
86 Page 87 88
Table 5.4 2 Post 2020 Non Committed Planned MPAH Improvements
Eastern Toll Road ETR East Leg SR Convert to a toll free facility and improve to 6 91 to ETR West Leg Caltrans and provide two high occupancy vehicle HOV
TCA Planned lanes
MPAH ETR East Leg ETR West Leg to I 5 Convert to a toll free facility and improve to 1 3

Caltrans and provide two HOV lanes and interchanges at TCA Planned Culver Dr and Jeffrey Rd

MPAH I 405 at Von Karman Construct HOV ramps 5
Cakrans R
i Aliso Creek Laguna nyon to El Toro I county Construct as four lane secondary arterial 2

1 Culver ETR to Santiago Canyon I county 1 Construct as six lane major arterial 1 2 1 1 Irvine PA2 East Access Rd to Alton I Countv I Improve to six lanes 1 32 ti
Jeffkey ETR to Santiago Canyon county Construct as four lane primary arterial Jeffrey Irvine to Portola county Improve to six lanes
Jeffkey Portola to ETR county Construct as four he primary arterial Portola FTR to Alton 1 county Construct as four lane primm arterial
3 i 6
3 3
1 Santa Maria west of Moulton to Laguna 1 County 1 Construct as four lane secondary arterial ~ 1 2

Chapman Jamboree to Santiago County Improve to six lanes Canyon Orange
Bake Lake Forest to Laguna Canyon Irvine Construct as six Iane m jor arterial
3
3 Old Laguna Canyon Alton to Lake
Forest Irvine Improve to four lanes and realign to Lake 1 Forest Dr I I

Sand Canyon I 5 to Oak Canyon 1 INine 1 Improve to six lanes 15 11 1 Sand Canyon I 405 to Michelson 1 Irvine 1 Construct as six lane major arterial 1 1 fl

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 87
87 Page 88 89
Table 54 2
Post 2020 Non Committed Planned MPAH Improvements

University Michelson to I 405 Irvine Improve to six lanes 5 Yale I 405 overcrossing Irvine Construct two lane overcrossing 5
Ridge Route west of Moulton to Bake Imind Construct as four lane secondary arterial 4
LagunaRidge Route I 5 overcrossing Laguna Hills Construct four lane overcrossing 6 OO

LagunaWd LakeFm
Ridge Route Moulton to Avd Carlota LagmaW Improve to four lanes 1
LagunaWd Los Alisos Muirlands to Avd Carlota LagunaHW Improve to six lanes 4

LakeFore Mission Viejo

El Toro north of Trabuco Lake Forest Improve to six lanes 4 El Toro Trabuco to I 5 Lake Forest Improve to eight lanes 5 0
Chapman west of Newport Orange Improve to six lanes 1 Jamboree Tusk Ranch to Chapman Orange Improve to six lanes 2
Tustin Irvine Prospect to Newport Tustin Improve to six lanes 2

Red Hill north of Bryan to El Camino Tustin Improve to six lanes 2 Real
INTEZZSECTXON RO Culver Michelson Irvine Add second NB left turn lane l OO
Jamboree Michelson Irvine Add third WB and EB through lanes and free 3 NB right turn lane
Bake Irvine Trabuco Irvine Add third NB through lane 1 7 Lake Forest
Prospect Irvine Tustin Add second SB left turn lane 1 Abbreviations NB northbound EB eastbound
SB southbound WB westbound

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 88
88 Page 89 90
Table 5.4 3 Post 2020 Unplanned Mitigation Improvements
Im un DEBW3ENT INTERSECTIONS
Aliso Creek Laguna Hills

Pruject J E E HB Improvement share

I COUntJ Convert WB shared second left tum thirdi 2

Laguna Canyon Santa Maria Caltrans
Moulton Glenwood 1 Laguna Woods I countv Moulton Laguna Hills
Culver Michelson Irvine Center Bake
Jefiey Alton Jeffkey Irvine Center
Jeffrey Walnut 5 SB

COU
Irvine Irvine

Irvine
Irvine
Irvine

Laguna Canyon Bake Caltrans Irvine

through lane to second left turn lane add third WB through lane and eliminate eastwest
split phasing Add third NB through lane 4

Add fourth NB through lane 3 Add fourth NB through lane 3
Add second EB through lane 1 Add fourth NB through lane 4
Add third EB and WB through lanes 4 Add free WB right tum lane 4
Convert WB through lane to shared 3 through second right turn lane
Add third SB through lane 1 3 Sand Canyon I 5 NB Ramps Irvine
I Convert EB left turn lane to shared second left turn second right turn lane I 1 Sand r Canyon Irvine Center Irvine Add fourth WB through lane 1 11
f Sand Canyon Oak Canyon Irvine Reconstruct WB approach to provide a left 1 4 turn lane a right turn lane and a shared
through second right turn lane

I Technology Barranca Irvine Add SB right turn lane and convert second 2 SE3 through lane to shared second through Von Karman Michelson Irvine second right tum lane Add third SB through lane and second SB 3

IYale Irvine Irvine 1 Yale Walnut Irvine
Bake Jeronimo Irvine Lake Forest

left turn lane Add second SB and EB left turn lanes
Add second EB left turn lane Add second NB left turn lane

1 Irvine Center Lake Forest I Irvine 1 Add fourth NB through lane 3
Lake Forest Avd Carlota Laguna Hills Irvine Convert second WB right turn lane to 3 Laguna Hills shared second left turn second right turn
lane and add second EB right turn lane and NB right turn lane
El Toro Avd Carlota

Moulton Alicia
Convert NB right turn lane to shared fourth 4 through right turn lane and convert WB
through lane to shared through second rightturn lane
I L I 1 Lamma Hills 1 Add fourth NB through lane 1 3

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 89
89 Page 90 91
Table 5.4 3 Post 2020 Unplanned Mitigation Improvements
L Prgject
improvement siik

Laguna Hills Paseo Valencia Laguna Hills Add EB right turn lane and convert third EB 4 Laguna Woods through lane to shared third through second
II I 1 right turn lane I 1 Laguna Hills Add fourth NB and SB through lanes 31 OO
Laguna Woods I I

P Moulton Santa Maria Laguna Hills Add fourth NB and SB through lanes 3 OO Laguna Woods 1 El Toro Jeronimo Lake Forest 1Add EB right turn lane

I Los Alisos Muirlands Lake Forest I Add second EB left turn lane 4 Mission Viejo I Alicia Muirlands Mission Viej o Add second SB left turn lane and SB EB 4 and WB rkht turn lanes 1 La Paz MuirlandsA 5 NB 1Mission Viejo 1Add second NB left turn lane

I Moulton El Toro to Glenwood I Improve to eight lanes 3 Laguna Woods Moulton Ridge Route to Santa Maria Improve to eight lanes
Orange and county
l 5 at Sand Canyon SB Off ramp Add second drop lane from freeway mainline to off mm9 I 16 1
I 405 at Sand Canyon SB Off ramp Cakrans Irvine Add second droi lane from freeway 2 mainline to off ramp
I 5 at Lake Forest NB Off ramp Caltrans Lake Forest Add second drop lane from freeway mainline to off ramt
Abbreviations NB northbound EB eastbound SB southbound WB westbound

I Only required with the Trabuco Road ETR interchange option

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 90
90 Page 91 92
T 13 Prior to issuance of the first building permits for the Airport System Master Plan Development the County will use its best efforts to obtain a cooperative agreement
with the applicable lead jurisdictions to process amendments to the Orange County Master Plan of Arterial Highways MPAH as appropriate through the Orange
County Transportation Authority OCTA for the unplanned long range circulation
improvements listed in Table 5.4 3 i e Moulton Parkway and Laguna Canyon Road with the County's participation in the MPAH process being based on the

project fair share percentages identified in Table 5.4 3
Note Pursuant tu CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 a 2 portions of these measures are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and
nut the County of Orange

5.4.3.3 Conclusions
The potential cumulative traMic impacts of the Airport System Master Plan Proposed Project
would be reduced to below a level of significance based on the implementation of mitigation measures included in Section 4.3 For the post 2020 conditions the impacts of cumulative

development would be reduced to a level and T 13 of insignificance with Mitigation Measures T 12

5.4.4 Potential Cumulat Ive Impacts Related to Noise
5.4.4.1 Aviation Noise Impacts
The project noise analysis Section 4.4 indicated that the Proposed Project would not result
in significant impacts on existing and cumulative OCP 96M noise sensitive land uses by
reference to traditional and generally accepted 65 dB CNEL contour significance criterion However the development of a civilian airport at MCAS El Toro would result in a

significantly greater number of airplanes approaching departing OCX and operations during
nighttime hours compared to when the MCAS El Toro was used as a military airport Noise fi om nighttime use of the Proposed Project will cause some sleep disturbance even after

mitigation
Section 4.4 also analyzes the aviation noise impacts of JWA on existing and cumulative
OCP 96M noise sensitive land uses

Within Orange County JWA and OCX would be the sources of commercial aircraft noise
impacts although Fullerton Airport would generate cumulative GA aircraft noise impacts and Los Alamitos AFRC would generate cumulative military aircraft noise impacts in

Orange County In addition to airports in the County GA and military aircraft overfly the County on approaches and departures to regional airports While individually these flights
generate less than significant noise impacts see Section 4.4 for significance discussion in
County of Orange EIR No 573
5 63 Cumulative Impacts 91
91 Page 92 93
the vicinity of JWA and the El Toro site they have generated noise complaints in Southern
Orange County since military aircraft ceased regular operations at MCAS El Toro Since
Section 4.4 concludes that OCX would have significant aircraft noise impacts after mitigation the project is anticipated to result together with other aircraft noise in a

significant aviation noise impact
Currently regional commercial airports including LAX Long Beach Ontario Burbank San
Diego and March APB include existing and or planned noise sensitive land uses within the aircraft 65 dB CNEL contour The cumulative impact of the project would be to reduce or

avoid increases in aviation operations and therefore reduce cumulative regional aircraft
noise impacts on noise sensitive uses including sleep disturbance Because regional airports
already include large numbers of noise sensitive uses Table 8.2 l within the 65 dB CNEL contour
unlike OCX and JWA the net cumulative impact of the project is anticipated to be beneficial That is the project impacts in the vicinity of OCX and JWA after mitigation are

anticipated to be less than No Project Alternative effects at regional airports

5.4.4.2 Conclusions
In summary the project is anticipated to have a locally significantly adverse aviation noise
impact but a regionally beneficial cumulative aviation noise impact As discussed in Section 4.4 mitigation measures would reduce local aviation noise impacts but local

impacts would remain significant after mitigation

5.4.4.3 Highway Noise Impacts
Section 4.4 includes a cumulative with trtic generated by OCP 96M
and conclusions
analysis of the project highway noise impacts together growth forecasts Please refer to Section 4.4 for impacts

Section 5.4.3.1 includes an analysis of post 2020 cumulative traffic impacts including
highway improvements that would reduce post 2020 impacts to a level of insignificance
All but two improvements are included in the MPAH which is the basis of the County and City Noise Elements for highway noise policy and regulation of development impacts The

two highway improvements not included on the MPAH are Laguna Canyon Road between Bake Parkway and Santa Maria Avenue to which the project would contribute four percent
of the cumulative growth and Moulton Parkway between Ridge Route and Glenwood to which the project
would contribute three percent of the cumulative growth in traffic and traffic noise

The County and City General Plans include Growth Management Elements Plans and Noise
Element policies programs and standards and development regulations that ensure that highway noise impacts would be analyzed and mitigated during the review of the General

Plan and zoning amendments required for the currently unplanned post 2020 cumulative
development In addition these amendments would be subject to CEQA

Cumulative Impacts
5 64 County of Orange EIR No 573 92
92 Page 93 94
5.4.4.4 Conclusions
Based on County and City General Plan Growth Management Elements Plans and Regulations post 2020 highway noise impacts are anticipated to be reduced to a level of
insignificance
However as noted above local aviation noise impacts would remain significant after mitigation Therefore the combination of highway and aviation noise in the vicinity of the
El Toro site is anticipated to be cumulatively significant after mitigation

5.4.5 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Air
Quality

The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative air quality impacts is as follows

0i Does the project have air quality impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.5.1 Construction Impacts
The Proposed Project is expected to be constructed in four phases lasting approximately 20 years Air pollution from project construction activities has the potential to affect a wide

area Ozone precursors ROC and NO from construction equipment exhaust and fugitive dust from soil disturbance generated during construction of each of the related projects
identified above as well as the Proposed Project will cumulatively affect the region's air
quality

The South Coast Air Quality Management District SCAQMD has included the construction emissions within the South Coast Air Basin Basin in its preparation of the
emissions inventory in the regional Air Quality Management Plan AQMP and therefore in its projection of the attainment of these air pollutants Each related project similar to the
Proposed Project would be required to implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the air pollutant emissions Because the South Coast Air Basin is nonattainment in ozone
and PM cumulative construction emissions are anticipated to remain significant and unavoidable for cumulative effects under OCP 96M forecasts

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 93
93 Page 94 95
5.4.5.2 Local Air Quality
Although the Basin is in nonattainment for federal CO standards concentrations of carbon monoxide CO monitored in Orange County stations have been below the State and federal
standards for the past five years Cumulative tra volumes based on the project for the JWA and El Toro sites and on OCP 96M forecasts for offsite development were used to
assess the CO concentrations at most affected intersections in the project vicinity in Section 4.5 No exceedance of the State or federal CO standards was identified in titure years No
exceedance of the State or federal CO standards was found related to aircraft emissions fkom the Proposed Project Cumulative local CO hot spot impacts would be less than significant
For the post 2020 trtic conditions all intersection impacts would be mitigated to
acceptable levels of service with the recommended mitigation measures Based on this no
CO hot spots are anticipated

Due to the low background concentrations for SO in Orange County no exceedance of the State and federal SO standards was found related to the aircraft exhaust The Basin is in
attainment with State and federal SO standards Cumulative emissions of SO are not anticipated to result in local concentrations of SO in Orange County to exceed the State or
federal standards
There would be no exceedance of the State's l hour NO standard at all receptor locations around both airports However there would be one exceedance of the federal annual
arithmetic mean AAM standard 0.0534 ppm for NO concentration at Irvine Transportation Center around OCX for the Proposed Project in Year 2020 A mitigation
measure has been included to reduce this impact Cumulative development identified above would result in the emission of NO It is not anticipated that NO emissions from the
related projects and the OCP 96M post 2020 forecasts would increase the NOz concentrations around the project sites by a significant amount Based on this no NO
exceedances are anticipated after mitigation

5.4.5.3 Regional Air Quality
The SCAQMD has included the operational emissions from existing and future development
within the South Coast Air Basin in its preparation of the emissions inventory in the regional Air Quality Management Plan AQMP and therefore in its projection of the attainment of

these air pollutants Future offsite development is based on SCAG and OCP 96M forecasts Each cumulative or related project similar to the Proposed Project would be required to
implement all feasible mitigation measures to reduce the air pollutant emissions

5.4.5.4 Conclusions
Although the Proposed Project would result in additional air pollutant emissions in the project vicinity air pollutant emissions in the Basin are anticipated to be lower with the
implementation of the proposed project due to reductions in regional VMT and aircraft

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 94
94 Page 95 96
emissions and with implementation of plans policies and regulations set forth by other regulatory agencies including the SCAQMD ARB and EPA see Section 4.5 However
because the South Coast Air Basin is nonattainment in State and federal standards for ozone and PM and nonattainment in State CO standards cumulative construction and operational
emissions would remain significant and unavoidable under both the OCP 96M and the post2020 cumulative development scenarios

5.4.5.5 Toxic Air Contaminants
The SCAQMD recently released the Draft Final Report for the second Multiple Air Toxics Exposure Study MATES II This report includes the results from a year lone air toxics
monitoring program as well as an update of the toxics emission inventory and regional modeling of air toxics and cancer risks in the South Coast Air Basin This study determined
that the levels of risk monitored were for the most part consistent with the long term
downward trends evident in the ARB data since 1990 This study however does not
provide information about anticipated future conditions out to 2020

5.4.5.6 Conclusions
The project would increase toxic air contaminants due to aircraft and GSE emissions resulting in health impacts which are individually small compared to ambient air quality
but which are anticipated to be cumulatively significant tier mitigation

5.4.6 Topography
The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative topography impacts is as
follows

0 i Does the project have topography impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.6.1 Cumulative Impacts
Existing topography varies substantially among the various related project development
areas Locally these topographic features may be altered depending on construction development specifics of the individual projects However the County and City General

Plans hillside grading policies and grading ordinances are anticipated to mitigate topographic impacts in the project area

5.4.6.2 Conclusions
The project will not have a significant adverse impact on topography and is not anticipated to contribute to a significant cumulative impact

County of Orange EIRNo 573
5 67 Cumulative Impacts 95
95 Page 96 97
5.4.7 Soils Geology and Seismicity
The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative soils geology and seismicity
impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have soils geology and seismicity impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.7.1 Cumulative impacts
The geologic impacts vary substantially among projects within the cumulative study area
including the Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan Foothill Ranch Portola Hills Tusk MCAS
Reuse Plan and the Eastern Transportation Corridor areas Cumulative development covers a
wide geographic area and includes numerous geologic features

However none of the projects in the cumulative study area are anticipated to result in
significant adverse impacts related to geology seismicity and soils after mitigation
Engineering and design features required by County and City General Plans and development regulations are anticipated to adequately address any potentially significant adverse impacts

related to soils geophysical and reasonably foreseeable seismic impacts

5.4.7.2 Conclusions
The project is not anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts due to soils geology or
seismicity Therefore cumulatively significant adverse impacts related to soils geology and seismic in the area are not anticipated

5.4.8 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to
Hydrology and Water Quality

The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative hydrology and water quality
impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have hydrology and water quality impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.8.1 Cumulative Impacts
The potential impacts of cumulative development will be mitigated to acceptable levels for hydrology as a result of flood control improvements required by County and City General
Plans and development regulations and Master Plans of Drainage for project approval These flood control features such as construction of retarding basins the lining of flood
control channels and ultimate implementation of area flood control master plans will

Cumulative Impacts County of Change ETR No 573 96
96 Page 97 98
contribute to reducing flood control hazards associated with these projects Regional hydrology will be improved as a result of these projects and their associated flood control
requirements
For water quality the increase in urban runoff from cumulative development will continue to provide a source of heavy metals and fertilizers to the downstream watersheds
particularly San Diego Creek Upper Newport Bay and ultimately the Pacific Ocean
Pursuant to the State and federal Clean Water Act applicable regulatory agencies established total maximum density load TMDL pollutants inland to improve the water
quality of receiving waters Any cumulative impacts from surface water runoB quantities fkom cumulative development will be mitigated to below a level of significance by
mitigation measures included in these projects in conformance with federal State County and local regulations and policies The implementation of Best Management Practices
included in required National Pollution Prevention Plan Permits and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans is anticipated to reduce pollutants in runoff water to acceptable levels

5.4.8.2 Conclusions
Based on the foregoing cumulative impacts are anticipated to be reduced to acceptable levels after mitigation

5.4.9 Potential Cumulative Impact Related to Biological
Resources

The threshold of significance used to determine cumulative biological resource impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have biological resource impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable
5.4.9.1 General Impacts
The regional context for the consideration of potential cumulative adverse impacts on biological resources is the Central and Coastal NCCP Subregions The NCCP Central
subregion area includes most of the frontal slopes of the foothills west of the Santa Ana Mountains from State Route 91 to the natural areas near Aliso Creek The NCCP Coastal
Subregion of the NCCP focuses on the San Joaquin Hills south of the MCAS El Toro site However because the biological resources on the MCAS El Toro site and on the sites of
most of the related projects are generally in the Central Subarea this discussion focuses primarily on potentially significant cumulative adverse impacts on biological resources in
that area

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 97
97 Page 98 99
Although the project is not expected to have significant impacts cumulative development in this area could result in significant adverse impacts on biological resources as described in
the environmental documents for each project and or could contribute to cumulatively significant adverse impacts on biological resources in the Central Subarea These projects
include the Lower Peters Canyon Specific Plan the Foothill Ranch Planned Community the Portola Hills Planned Community Saddleback Meadows Northwood High School in Irvine
the Alton Parkway Extension the improvements to Rockfield Road and the north segment of the Foothill Transportation Corridor

The Proposed Project would also contribute to the need for off site highway improvements which will impact biological resources Specifically the project would contribute 3 of the
cumulative total traffic growth at off site highway improvements on Laguna Canyon Road south of El Toro Road that will have impacts on off site coastal sage scrub habitat as shown
in Table 5.4 4 These highway improvements and the off site coastal sage scrub habitat impacts would result with or without the project

Table 5.4 4
Summary of Off Site Cumulative Coastal Sage Scrub Impacts Acres by Phase

The primary potential significant cumulative adverse impact on biological resources is the continued fragmentation of ecosystems resulting from the incremental loss of native habitat
and the separation of areas of native habitat from other areas of native habitat by intervening urban and suburban development Habitat fragmentation has been linked to the reduction of
sustainable population levels for many species particularly free ranging mammals such as the mountain lion bobcat and mule deer that require large expanses of land However a
coordinated open space plan that enhances and preserves remaining areas supporting native habitats would reduce such impacts on biological resources The central coastal NCCP
other open space preservation activities and the Habitat Reserve and Wildlife Habitat Area included in the Proposed Project will provide connectivity among a number of large
protected open spaces in this part of the County Therefore the Proposed Project will not contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact on biological resources but will
contribute beneficially to long term preservation and protection of biological resources in the NCCP Central Subregion

5.4.9.2 Conclusions
The project is nut anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts but would have
beneficial impacts by preservation of habitat areas and construction of new habitat areas

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 98
98 Page 99 100
Therefore the project would not add to cumulative adverse impacts of related projects or OCP 96M
5.4.9.3 Alton Parkway Impacts
The extension of Alton Parkway was committed and funded to serve off site development
prior to the Department of Defense decision to close MCAS El Toro The Proposed Project
consistent with the CRP and EIR No 563 contemplates requesting conveyance of the rightof
way for the extension to the County Construction of Alton Parkway is and has been
since the late 198Os an independent project The Alton Parkway extension is required
without the Proposed Project and was funded separately from the planning of the reuse
project Therefore any impacts of the construction and operation of Alton Parkway are
analyzed as potential cumulative impacts

As currently aligned construction of the extension would impact biological resources The
biological resources potentially impacted include coastal sage scrub southern willow scrub
coast live oak woodland ephemeral drainages and washes and primarily annual non native
grassland Site preparation activities are estimated to impact an estimated five acres of coastal sage scrub In addition based upon the 1992 NCCP baseline target species data one

pair of California gnatcatchers is present within the impact area of the roadway Although
specific delineations have not been completed there appears to be less than one acre of Waters of the U S Army Corps of Engineers jurisdiction and up to four acres of riparian

scrub which would be impacted if the Alton Parkway is constructed as presently proposed
The four acres of riparian scrub would include one acre of Waters of the U S These
acreages occur within the impact area of the roadway Riparian scrub would include willow
and mulefat communities along Borrego Wash and a tributary A specific jurisdictional
wetland delineation has not been conducted for Borrego Wash but it is likely to be a subset of the acreage defined for Waters of the U S

5.4.9.4 Conclusions
These impacts prior to mitigation see Section 5.4.9.7 would be considered a significant cumulative impact for biological resources

5.4.9.5 Marshburn Channel Impacts
Marshbum Channel improvements are required as a part of regional off site development
and are required even without the Proposed Project Marshbum Channel between Irvine
Boulevard and Trabuco Road is a gunite lined open trapezoid channel that is planned to be
improved to a concrete lined open channel In addition and along Irvine Boulevard the existing open channel is planned to be improved to a reinforced concrete box The

Marshbum Channel does convey Waters of the U S An estimated 1.9 acres of Waters of the U S would be impacted as part of this regional project The 1.9 acre impact is considered a

County of Orange EIR No 573
5n I Cumulative Impacts 99
99 Page 100 101
cumulative impact There are no substantive biological resources contained within the cross section of this drainage
5.4.9.6 Conclusions
No cumulative significant adverse biological resource impacts are anticipated to occur as a result of the Marshbum Channel improvements

5.4.9.7 Mitigation Measures
Section 4.9 includes mitigation measures for construction activities that would reduce the impacts of the Alton Parkway extension on biological resources In addition to these
impacts the following mitigation measure is incorporated
B 17 The County is the lead agency for a redesign of Alton Parkway It will redesign the extension to minimize biological impacts to one acre or less of Waters of the US
and jurisdictional wetlands

5.4.9.8 Level of Significance After Mitigation
The cumulative impacts associated with the Alton Parkway extension on biological resources have been determined to be significant prior to mitigation While the application
of project mitigation measures Section 4.9 to the Alton Parkway extension would reduce non wetlands impacts these impacts would remain significant after mitigation With the
incorporation of Mitigation Measure B l 7 the total Waters of the U S impact for the Alton Parkway extension can be reduced to approximately 0.7 acre which includes 0.45 acre along
Borrego Wash and 0.25 acre along the local tributary In addition the total linear distance of the crossing of these drainages will also be reduced as well as the amount of acreage of
riparian scrub Therefore due to the small streambed acreage directly impacted and Mitigation Measure B 17 the cumulative riparian resource impacts are less than significant
after mitigation

5.4.10 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Public
Services and Utilities

The threshold of significance to determine cumulative public services impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have public service impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 100
100 Page 101 102
5.4.10.1 Potential Impacts Related to Public Services
Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative offsite development is anticipated to increase the demand for public services
including police fire and emergency medical schools libraries transit and solid waste In combination with cumulative development projects the Proposed Project at the MCAS El

Toro site will also contribute to the demand for public services Although the Proposed
Projects incremental contribution is not anticipated to be significant based on implementation of mitigation measures and the standard conditions of approval listed in

Section 4.10
Cumulative developments will be required under County and City General Plan Growth
Management Elements public service and facilities policies and development regulations to provide for mitigation that will reduce significant public services impacts Cumulative

impacts on the provision of schools police and fire and emergency services will be analyzed in the CEQA and fiscal impact documents required by County and City General
Plans for all titure cumulative projects and these impacts are anticipated to be reduced to below a level of significance with the addition of staff facilities or the payment of
applicable fees The OCTA will be able to determine the need for transit service and plan accordingly as reasonably foreseeable hture projects develop With adherence to the
IWMD recommendations and State local and federal regulations that address the disposal of waste the cumulative projects are not expected to have a significant cumulative impact on
solid waste services

5.4.10.2 Conclusions
In conclusion no significant cumulative effects are anticipated

5.4.10.3 Potential Impacts Related to Utilities
The threshold of significance to determine cumulative utility impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have utility impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

Cumulative development is anticipated to increase the demand for the following utilities
Cable Television1 Services
As stated in Section 4 10 the project with Mitigation Measures U l U 2 U 3 will not result in significant short or long term impacts related to cable television

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 101
101 Page 102 103
Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand fur cable television
services The cable television providers in the region have or would provide cable
television telecommunications data systems and Internet services to these projects Shortterm construction related impacts to cable television facilities will be mitigated to below a

level of significance by mitigation measures included in these projects as required by County and City development policies Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other
projects in the region will not contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact
related to cable television services

Communication Facilities and Services
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project with Mitigation Measure U 3 would result in no
significant adverse impacts on Communication Facilities and Services

Cumulative development will result in increases in the demand for communication facilities
and services It is anticipated that the communication providers in the region have or would
also provide telecommunications data systems and Internet services to these projects
Short term construction related impacts on communication facilities will be mitigated to
below a level of significance by mitigation measures included in these projects as required by County and City development policies Cable television providers master plan their

facilities infrastructure services and programming based on planned and anticipated land uses and market based demand in their service areas Communications providers master plan their
facilities infktructure and services based on planned and anticipated land uses and market
based demand in their service areas Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with
other projects in the region will not contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to communication facilities and services

Electrical Facilities and Services
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project with Mitigation Measures U 1 U 2 and U 3 would be reduced to a level of insignificance

Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand for electric facilities and services County and City development policies require will serve commitments from
Southern California Edison SCE or San Diego Gas and Electric ensuring that itiastructure
and supplies are adequate to serve these projects Short term construction related impacts to
electrical facilities will be mitigated to below a level of significance by mitigation measures
required by County and City development policies Therefore the Proposed Project when
considered with other projects in the region is not anticipated to contribute to a
cumulatively significant adverse impact related to electric facilities and services

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 102
102 Page 103 104
Fuel Facilities
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the fuel facility demand at JWA would be reduced in the project
case and the impacts of the project at the El Toro site would not be significant

Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand for fuel County and City development policies require will serve commitments from service providers prior to
development Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other aviation related projects in the region is not expected to contribute a cumulatively significant adverse impact
related to fuel and fuel facilities

Na turd Gas
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project impacts with Mitigation measures U l U 2 and U 3
would be reduced to a level of insignificance for natural gas

Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand for natural gas facilities and services County and City development policies require will serve commitments prior
to project development from the Southern California Gas Company SCGC It is anticipated that short term construction related impacts created by the construction of new
natural gas facilities will be mitigated to below a level of significance by County and City development policies Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other projects
in the region is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to natural gas services and facilities

Domestic Water
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project with Mitigation Measures U l U 2 and U 4 would not result in significant adverse short or long term domestic water impacts

Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand for domestic water County and City development policies require will serve commitments prior to project
development fkom water districts It is anticipated that short term construction related impacts created by the construction of new domestic water facilities will be mitigated to
below a level of significance by County and City development policies Other projects in the region are also anticipated to increase the demand for domestic water in the region The
water districts master plan their facilities infhsmcture and services based on planned and anticipated land uses adopted forecasts including OCP 96M and market based demand in
their service area Each project is reviewed independently by the applicable water district to ensure that suffkient facilities are in place and available domestic water supplies are
adequate to properly service each project Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other projects in the region is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulatively significant
adverse impact related to domestic water resources

County of Orange EIR No 573
5 75 Cumulative Impacts 103
103 Page 104 105
Ret ycled Wa tet
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project with Mitigation Measures result in a sign an1 adverse impact on recycled water facilities U 1 and U 2 would nut

Cumulative development will result in an increase in the demand for recycled water Short term construction impacts will be created by the development of new recycled water
facilities including disruption of recycled water service or accidental damage to existing recycled water facilities Other projects in the region are also anticipated to increase the
demand for recycled water The water districts master plan their facilities inf tructure and services including recycled water based on planned and anticipated land uses adopted growth
forecasts including OCP 96M and market based demand in its service area Each project is also reviewed independently by the water district to ensure that sufficient facilities are in
place and available recycled water supplies are adequate to properly service each project Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other projects in the region is not
anticipated to contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to recycled water

Sanitary Sewers
As stated in Section 4.10.7 the project with Mitigation measures U l and U 2 would not result in a significant adverse impact on sanitary sewers

Cumulative development will increase the generation of wastewater County and City development policies require will serve commitments prior to project development from the
applicable water district Other projects in the region would also increase the generation of wastewater in the region As noted earlier the water districts master plan their facilities
tiastructure and services including sanitary sewers based on planned and anticipated land uses and market based demand in its service area Each project is also reviewed
independently by the water district to ensure that sufficient facilities are in place to properly serve the wastewater collection and treatment needs of each project Therefore the
Proposed Project when considered with other projects in the region is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to wastewater

5.4.11 Natural Resources and Energy
The threshold of significance to determine cumulative natural resource and energy is as follows

0 i Does the project have natural resources and energy impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 104
104 Page 105 106
5.4.11 I Mineral Resources
As stated in Section 4.11.8 there are no mineral resources on the JWA site and any
resources on the El Tore site will not be used for commercial purposes Mineral resources available in the region are anticipated to be adequate for the project In conclusion the

Proposed Project's effects on mineral resources would not be significant
Cumulative development will require the use of building materials including such mineral
resources as sand gravel and other similar construction materials County and City
Resource Element policies and the Surface Mining Recovery Act will ensure that these
materials are available in sufficient supply to provide for the development of these ure projects since these materials are readily available in the County and region Also the

tiected area does not include active mineral mining sites and the cumulative projects will
not affect extraction operations or its resources Finally sand gravel and construction
materials are proposed to be recycled on the project site reducing project demand

5.4.1 1.2 Conclusions
Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other projects in the region is not
anticipated to contribute to a cumulatively significant impact related to mineral resources

5.4.1 1.3 Agricultural Resources
As stated in Section 4.11.8 there are no agricultural resources on the JWA site and the project would result in the loss of 902 acres 87 of the agricultural resources at the
El Toro site This impact is significant and would remain significant after mitigation This conclusion is the same as EIR 563

The depletion of agricultural and farmland throughout the region is a significant adverse
impact that can in most cases not be mitigated Although the California State Legislature
provides incentives to retain farmlands for agricultural purposes under the Williamson Act
the policy does not guarantee the long term preservation of agriculture lands The Proposed Project will result in the loss of substantial agricultural farmland on
the project site due principally to be construction of nunaviation uses including golf courses a business park

and public facilities see Section 4.11.7.1 In addition the project would result in off site direct due to project improvements and indirect due to cumulative traffic improvement
requirements impacts as shown in Table 5.4 5

County of Orange EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts 105
105 Page 106 107
Table 5.4 5
Summary of Off Site Agricultural Soils Impacts Acres by Phase

1 Direct 1 9.76 1 0.66 1 0 I 3.43 1 13.85 1 Indirect 0 34.00 0 0 34.00 II
Total 9.76 34.66 0 3.43 47.87
Trabuco Road ETC Interchange

5.4.1 I .4 Conclusions
Some of the other related projects will also result in the incremental loss of agricultural and farmland in the Orange County area Therefore these projects will contribute to the
cumulatively significant loss of agriculture resources see Section 4.11 This was the same conclusion made in Section 7.3.10.1 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Natural
Resources and Energy Under the CRP of Final EIR No 563

5.4.11.5 Water
As stated in Section 4.11.8 there are no surface water resources at the El Toro or JWA sites and no groundwater modification is planned Therefore the Proposed Project would result
in no significant adverse impacts to water resources
Cumulative development will also result in the use of additional amounts of water which will result in a significant adverse cumulative impact on water County and City
development policies require will seme commitments prior to development from water purveyors The regional water districts master plan their capacity based on planned
development and adopted growth forecasts such as OCP 96M Water reclamation and recycling groundwater recharge and other supply strategies are required by County and City
policies as well as water district policies and programs in order to meet the demand of continued growth and development County and City Growth Management Elements and
public services and facilities policies ensure development is phased in coordination with water capacity

Cumulative projects are also required to comply with CEQA including water impact mitigation programs However since water is a finite resource cumulative development and
the project will contribute individually small but cumulatively significant demands for a limited resource

5.4.11.6 Conclusions
Cumulative development impacts on water demand are significant adverse impacts
Cumulative Impacts
5 78 County of Orange EIR No 573 106
106 Page 107 108
5.4.11.7 Energy
As stated in Section 4.11.8.2 electricity demand at JWA would decrease with the project
and increase at the El Toro site The increase at the El Toro site would contribute
substantially less than 1 of the peak SCE service in year 2020 Regarding natural gas the demand at JWA would also decline under the project but increase at the El Toro site

Again the increase at El Toro would be substantially less than 1 of statewide and ASA
growth Section 4.11.8.2 analyzes the project impacts on highway construction and aviation
fiels for JWA and the El Toro site For each of these impacts Section 4.11.8.2 determines
that the project would result in substantially less than 1 increase in demand but the project's encouragement of the use of jet fuel is an impact that cannot be mitigated to a level

below the level of significance
Cumulative development projects vary in contribution to cumulative adverse impacts on energy resources Some of the proposed
projects and projects under construction will create increased need for energy as well as services and facilities required for the supply of these

resources On the other hand projects described under Section 5.3.3 Transportation Projects of the Project Draft EIR may contribute to beneficial impacts on such energy
resources as fossil fuels by reducing trip length and vehicular tie1 consumption in the
region However considered cumulatively cumulative development will have an adverse
impact on energy resources in the region because nonrenewable energy resources are finite

5.4.1 1.8 Conclusions
Therefore the Proposed Project considered with other projects in the region will contribute
to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to energy

5.4.12 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to
Aesthetics Light and Glare

The threshold of significance to determine cumulative aesthetic light and glare impacts is as
follows

0 i Does the project have aesthetic light and glare impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.12.1 Cumulative Impacts
The Proposed Project would change the views of the site from the existing closed military base to an airfield with new airport terminal aviation support use buildings and nonaviation
revenue support uses which is considered a beneficial impact Cumulative projects have or will result in a change in the aesthetics of the area in which they are constructed However

County of Orange EIR No 573
5 7 l
Cumulative Impacts 107
107 Page 108 109
each project has or will be required to comply with CEQA and County or City development
policies or regulations which are anticipated to mitigate their aesthetic impacts to an
acceptable level Therefore the Proposed Project when considered with other related projects in the region will not contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact

related to aesthetics

5.4.12.2 Conclusions
The Proposed Project would not create light and glare substantially greater than that
generated by 1998 military base operations because of the similar type of use proposed
Cumulative development will incrementally add sources of light and glare to the area where they are constructed However each project has or will be required by County or City

development policies to mitigate light and glare impacts to below a level of significance Therefore the Proposed Project considered
with other projects in the region will not contribute to a cumulatively significant adverse impact related to light and glare

5.4.13
The threshold
follows

Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Cultural
Resources

of significance to determine cumulative cultural resource impacts is as

0 i Does the project have cultural resource impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable
5.4.13.1 Cumulative Impacts
The Proposed Project considered by itself will not generate any significant adverse impacts
to cultural resources since the studies required by the mitigation measures in FEIR No 563

concluded that 1 the post war era buildings at MCAS El Toro were nut eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places and 2 the archaeological site CA ORA is

not considered a unique resource or eligible for the National Register Significant paleontological sites are not known to be present however the on site soil formations have
the potential for these resources Standard construction monitoring procedures will be required for the project to ensure that no significant impacts occur if such paleontological
resources are discovered during grading activity Application of those procedures will
reduce any potentially significant impact to paleontological resources to less than
significant

The Proposed Project considered in conjunction with cumulative development projects in
the study area would not contribute tu cumulative impacts on cultural resources since all development projects are subject to County and City development policies or requirements

These mitigation requirements will ensure that adequate procedures such as research site
testing construction monitoring and data recovery take place as necessary Therefore

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 108
108 Page 109 110
impacts caused by other cumulative projects approved in the study area have been or will have been mitigated to appropriate levels
At JWA there are no cultural resources on the site that would be disturbed by the Proposed Project improvements

5.4.13.2 Conclusions
The Proposed Project when considered with other projects in the region will not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to cultural resources

5.4.14 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to
Recreation

The threshold of significance to determine cumulative recreation impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have recreational impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.14 I Cumulative Impacts
The Proposed Project considered by itself will not create any significant impacts to recreational facilities that cannot be mitigated to a level below significance One potentially
significant impact would occur by the project due to inconsistency with the Open Space Conservation Map in the County General Plan Resources Element This condition would be
corrected upon implementation of Mitigation Measure L l which would amend the County General Plan elements to be consistent with the Proposed Project In the long term
the Proposed Project does not physically disrupt any existing parks off road trails or other recreational facilities The project provides for open space and recreational uses that would
be compatible with the proposed commercial airport and aviation related uses In that the project provides recreational uses that would be available for public use it adds recreational
components to the MCAS El Toro area that were previously not available for public use
Considered in combination with the reasonably foreseeable future projects in the cumulative study area the Proposed Project does not cause increased use of existing recreational
facilities nor does it cause a need for more recreational facilities to be built

5.4.14.2 Conclusions
In conclusion the recreational effects of the Proposed Project would not be cumulative significant

County of Orange EIRNo 573 Cumulative Impacts 109
109 Page 110 111
5.4.15 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to Public
Health and Safety

The threshold of significance to determine cumulative public health and safety impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have public health and safety impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable
5.4.15.1 Cumulative Impacts
Cumulative development will create incremental public health and safety impacts to the degree that projects require the use of hazardous materials for construction and operation
However transportation storage use and disposal of these materials are strictly regulated by existing federal State County and in some areas city regulations In addition each
cumulative project must comply with CEQA Therefore these projects are not anticipated to create significant public health and safety impacts

Cumulative aircraft safety impacts related to the Proposed Project would result from increases in aviation activity at other airports in the Air Service Area Within the Air Service
Area the number of passengers is projected to increase from 9 1.8 MAP in 1996 to 178.6 in 2020 a 95 percent increase Air cargo handled in the region is projected to increase from
2.5 million tons in 1996 to 8.9 million tons in 2020 a 256 percent increase While these increases are not expected to affect air safety in the immediate vicinity of JWA and OCX
beyond that estimated for the Proposed Project they will tend to increase the risk of mid air collisions in the Air Service Area

Because general aviation aircraft were involved in the two significant commercial aircraft mid air collisions in the Air Service Area Cerritos and San Diego general aviation flying
is seen as a significant factor in the risk of mid air collisions The number of general aviation aircraft based in the region and presumably the number of general aviation
operations is projected to remain essentially the same in 2020 as in 1997 The stabilizing of general aviation activity in the region is expected to moderate potential increases in mid air
collision risk
Growth in urbanization around JWA and OCX would tend to increase the potential for
personal injury to people on the ground or property damage in the event that an off site accident occurred However property around JWA is essentially fully built out and the

proposed safety zones at OCX will mitigate this potential impact to a level of insignificance Section 4.15

Although cumulative growth has the potential to increase the risks associated with aircraft accidents the cumulative impacts are not estimated to be significant relative to Existing
Conditions or the Proposed Project due to the extremely smaI1 likelihood of occurrences
Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573
s 84 110
110 Page 111 112
5.4.15.2 Conclusions
The Proposed Project considered with other projects in the region will not contribute to a
cumulative significant adverse aviation impact related to public health and safety

5.4.16 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related to
Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Waste

5.4.16.1 Asbestos and Lead Based Paint
The threshold of significance to determine cumulative hazardous materials and hazardous
waste impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have hazardous materials and hazardous waste impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

As discussed in 5.4.15 above cumulative development has the potential to use hazardous materials for construction and operation However the transport storage use and disposal
of these materials are strictly regulated by existing federal State County and in some
areas city regulations In addition each cumulative project must comply with CEQA
Therefore these projects are not anticipated to create significant hazardous conditions

Under the Proposed Project a number of buildings that contain asbestos and lead based
paint will remain on the site at the time of Marine Corps conveyance of the site to the County However according to DoD policy the Marine Corps is required to maintain all

asbestos containing materials ACM and lead based paint LBP in a manner protective of
human health and the environment and in compliance with all applicable federal state and
local laws pertaining to these materials

5.4.16.2 Conclusions
Therefore it is anticipated that all structures containing ACM and LBP will be received by
the County in a condition that will not contribute to a cumulatively significant impact related
to ACM and LBP

5.4.16.3 Hazardous Materials Use and Hazardous Waste
Generation

Land uses under the Proposed Project and potentially foreseeable future projects potentially include hazardous materials and generate hazardous wastes such as petroleum wastes spent
solvents used oils and oily wastes and other miscellaneous hazardous wastes These
substances will be managed and controlled based on existing federal state and local

County of Orange EIR No 573
5 88 Cumulative Impacts 111
111 Page 112 113
regulations governing the storage handling transportation and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes Therefore since these materials will be managed and controlled they
are nut anticipated to contribute to a cumulative significant impact related to the use and disposal of hazardous materials

As analyzed in Section 4.16 the right of way for northeasterly extension of Alton parkway
is located in the immediate vicinity of landfill Site 2 within 1000 feet and therefore may be
adversely afkted by the imposition of institutional controls for Landfill Site 2 DON recognizes the future construction of the Alton Parkway extension and states in the Final

ROD fur Site 2 that In developing the proposed remedy for Site 2 DON intends that all relevant parties including the DON FFA signatories and the County of Orange will
cooperate with one another to ensure that all proposed projects the remedy for Site 2 the construction of Alton Parkway and improvements to Borregu Canyon Wash are designed
constructed and maintained in a prompt and reasonable manner Therefore implementation of DON's selected remedy is anticipated to reduce impacts related to the presence of Site 2
on Alton Parkway to below a level of insignificance

5.4.16.4 Conclusions
The Proposed Project considered with other projects in the region will not contribute to a
cumulative significant adverse impact related to hazardous materials and hazardous waste

5.4.17 Potential Cumulative impacts Related to
Socioeconomics

The threshold of significance to determine cumulative socioeconomic impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have socioeconomic impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.17.1 Cumulative Impacts
When considered together with related projects the Proposed Project is anticipated to result in significant adverse cumulative socioeconomic impacts Section 4.17 includes a
cumulative analysis of the project compared to OCP 96M refer tu Section 4.17 for the analysis mitigation measures and conclusions The Proposed Project would redesignate
substantial portions of the MCAS El Turu site for aviation recreational institutional and commercial industrial uses As discussed earlier in Section 4.17 Socioecunomics
redevelopment of the site with these uses could result in significant impacts relative to a inducing substantial growth and concentration of non resident employee population
b increasing demand for all types and prices of housing while not directly supplying any
new housing to meet this demand and c reducing the supply of available housing in the county

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIRNo 573 112
112 Page 113 114
The project is not however anticipated to result in cumulative demand off site for additional support development The project includes sufficient land and development Section 3.0 to
accommodate all ancillary uses such as car rentals hotel rooms flight catering etc In addition the project includes 99 acres of aviation industrial uses and 87 acres
of business park uses which will meet the support needs of aviation and nonaviation uses proposed

Finally approximately 200 acres of land adjacent to Planning Area 1 is classified for
employment development in the County Land Use Element According to the County
General Plan this area would accommodate 2.5 to 5.0 million square feet of light and
service industries and professional administrative office uses and up to 26,000 employees This development
is included in OCP 96M and the trtic and other impact categories related to OCP 96M in Section 4.3 Based on these directly provided support uses and

already planned adjacent uses no further support uses would be required for the project

Several of the related projects could produce similar impacts cumulatively increasing the magnitude
of these impacts Specifically

0 The owners of unplanned and undeveloped areas surrounding the MCAS El Toro site could propose land uses not currently accounted for in the adopted regional growth
forecasts These proposals will be subject to review including CEQA analysis by the
affected cities The County and City of Irvine General Plans include Growth
Management Elements which include policies and standards for these types of
proposals which could mitigate impacts to a level of insignificance However
potential land uses developed at these sites could impact the distribution of regional growth and thus cumulatively increase the magnitude of inconsistency with adopted

regional growth forecasts if the affected cities chose to override the growth forecasts
ii The related projects listed above could result in substantial growth and concentration
of both resident and non resident population cumulatively increasing the impact of
the Proposed Project

iii The commercial and industrial projects that do not include a residential component i e Sakioka Property Koll Center Expansion Rockwell Site Expansion Hotel and
Offrce Development on Former Car Dealership Nexus Twin Towers First American Title Project Foothill Aliso Commercial Center Shea Business Properties
Enterprise Car Sales commercial development along El Toro Road office
development along Moulton Parkway LAX Master Plan and other such cumulative
projects could cumulatively induce substantial non residential development without
providing any housing to accommodate potential new employees at these sites These projects in concert with the Proposed Project could cumulatively increase demand

for all types and prices of housing while not directly supplying any new housing to
meet this demand

Each related project would be required to comply with CEQA and mitigation measures will be or have been considered together with fmdings Mitigation Measure SE 1 in Section 4.17
would reduce the cumulative impacts noted above in relation to adopted forecasts
County of Orange EIR No 573
5 85 Cumulative Impacts 113
113 Page 114 115
However cumulative socioeconomic impacts are anticipated to be significant after mitigation as analyzed in Section 4.17
5.4.17.2 Conclusions
The project would incrementally add to the cumulative adverse impacts noted in Section
4.17 and impacts will remain significant after mitigation

5.4.18 Potential Cumulative Impacts Related To The Risk
of Upset

The threshold of significance to determine risk of upset impacts is as follows

0 i Does the project have risk of upset impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable

5.4.18.1 Cumulative impacts
Cumulative impacts pertaining to risk of upset refers to the likelihood or potential of the related projects and the Proposed Project to contribute to community hazards associated with
explosions fires or release of hazardous substances in combination with other sources of such hazards The risk of upset conditions associated with the other related projects include
the spill of fuel and other hazardous materials during construction of these projects and the loading of fuel fkom aboveground or belowground storage tanks The primary risk of upset
associated with the Proposed Project relates to the potential exposure of nearby residents and or persons using nearby roadways resulting Tom the planned on site storage and use of
aviation fuel as well as its highway transport to the MCAS El Toro and JWA sites Section 4.18 includes a mitigation measure that would reduce highway transport impacts due to
OCX to a level of insignificance No new or additional impacts are proposed at JWA

5.4.18.2 Conclusions
Fires or explosions involving the bulk storage of flammable or combustible liquids while potentially serious or catastrophic are isolated local events typically restricted to industrial
or similar areas Because no facilities storing similar large volumes of such materials are known to exist or to be included in the related impacts near the related project areas or near
the bulk fuel storage installations at OCX or JWA the potential for these projects to contribute to significant cumulative community risk of upset is remote

Therefore the Proposed Project considered with the other projects in the region will not contribute to a cumulative significant adverse impact related to risk of upset conditions

Cumulative Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 114
114 Page 115 116
LONG TERM IMPLICATIONS OF THE
6 1 l CHANGES THAT WOULD BE CAUSED BY THE

CEQA Guidelines Section 15 126.2 describes the issues for this section as follows
Uses of nonrenewable resources during the initial and continued phases of the project may be irreversible since a large commitment of such resources makes removal or nonuse
thereafter unlikely Primary impacts and particularly secondary impacts such as a highway improvement which provides access to a previously inaccessible area generally
commit future generations to similar uses Also irreversible damage can result from environmental accidents associated with the project Irretrievable commitments of
resources should be evaluated to assure that such current consumption is justified
The construction of the land uses under the Proposed Project would require the commitment of a substantial amount of building materials such as concrete asphalt aggregate steel and other
materials used in the construction of buildings parking areas streets and infrastructure However the commitment of building materials under the Proposed Project would not be a
significant adverse impact because the demand for these materials would be phased consistent with the phasing of the construction of the land uses and these resources are generally
considered to be readily available and in sufficient quantity in this region
The Proposed Project would alter part of the site from the existing agricultural uses to urban uses This would cause the irreplaceable loss of use of the agricultural soils on the Marine Corps
Air Station MCAS El Toro site This impact is significant and cannot be mitigated to a level below the level of significance see Section 4.11 Natural Resources and Energy

The implementation and operation of the land uses under the Proposed Project would require a long term irretrievable commitment of natural resources including water jet fuel gasoline
diesel fuel natural gas and electricity As described earlier in Section 4.10 Public Services and Utilities and Section 4.11 Natural Resources and Energy it is expected that the demand for
these types of resources is within the capacity and capability of the applicable service providers to satisfy Therefore the commitment of these types of resources to the long term operation of
the land uses under the Proposed Project would not result in a significant adverse impact except for consumption of jet fuel as compared to the existing condition However to the extent these
resources are non renewable and have finite limits the project will have an impact on the longterm supply in generations to come absent technology changes to decrease or eliminate reliance
on them
The long term operation of the airport and public streets under the Proposed Project would require a commitment on the part of the applicable parties to maintain and operate these

County of Orange EIR No 573
6 l Long Tern Implications of the Proposed Project 115
115 Page 116 117
facilities This is not expected to be a significant adverse impact of the Proposed Project although it will require a commitment of financial personnel and facility resources by the
applicable operators and agencies
The protection of the wildlife habitat area and open space on the MCAS El Toro site is a beneficial effect of the Proposed Project related to natural resources

In summary the Proposed Project will not result in a significant adverse impact related to the commitment of resources for construction and operation of the proposed land uses on the MCAS
El Toro site with the exception of encouragement of large amounts of jet fuel consumption when compared to the existing condition as acknowledged in Section 4.11 and Chapter 5.0 However
the commitment of agricultural land for urban uses is a significant adverse impact of the Proposed Project related to natural resources that cannot be mitigated to below a level of
significance This impact was acknowledged in EIR No 563 and the Supplemental Analysis and does not represent a new impact The Proposed Project preserves additional acres of agriculture
that were not preserved in the CRP project

6.2 GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT

The text that follows is taken from EIR No 563 because the growth inducing impacts of the Proposed Project have not changed substantially since EIR No 563 The analysis provided in
EIR No 563 was not challenged in court The text and analysis have been updated to reflect both changed conditions and the current Proposed Project

No additional text has been inserted from the Supplemental Analysis because this topic was not required to be addressed in the Supplemental Analysis A
Text that is no
6.3
longer applicable is shown in strikeout New text is shown in underline
CEQA DEFINITION OF GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS

Sections l 4S26 9 15 126 d and 15 126.2 d of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an environmental impact report discuss the ways in which a proposed project could foster economic or
population growth or the construction of additional housing whether directly or indirectly
Direct growth inducing impacts are generally associated with the provision of urban services and the extension of infrastructure to an undeveloped area The provision of services and facilities to
a site can reduce development constraints for other nearby areas and can serve to induce further development in the vicinity of a project Indirect or secondary growth inducing impacts consist
of growth induced in the region by the additional demand for housing employment and goods and services associated with population increases caused by or attracted to new development

Long Term Implications of the Proposed Project 6 2 County of Orange EIR No 573 116
116 Page 117 118
Section 15.0 in this EIR No 573 Cumulative Impacts discusses the potential cumulative impacts of the reuse alternatives and other existing approved and planned projects in the
vicinity of the 0 qe kr S ez M CAS3 El Toro site and JWA To avoid extensive and
unnecessary repetition the information in Section 75.0 is not repeated in this section although some of the identified cumulative impacts may be considered as potentially growth inducing as well

as cumulative impacts Section 4.17 Socioeconomics describes the source for the employment projections assumed under the reuse alternatives It is important to remember that in effect a
number of the defined objectives of the project see Section 12.0 in this EIR No 573 seek to foster economic growth and job creation

6.4 POTENTIAL GROWTH INDUCING IMPACTS W

6.4.1 Potential Growth Inducing Impacts Of The Proposed 1
Project ettsc n1 2 A

The Proposed Project would result in a net increase over existing conditions of 23,500 iobs at MCAS El Toro an increase of 400 Dercent and 1,258 jobs at JWA a 60 Dercent increase in 2020
based on the total number of new iobs minus the existing military iobs at MCAS El Toro and existinkiobs at JWA

With regard to direct growth inducing impacts the Iproposed project k would generate approximately G M 26,200 jobs on the MCAS El Toro site and 3,300 iobs at JWA
for a total of 29,500 iobs The mow inducing impact of this increase in iobs would be greatest on nearby areas designated for urban development or which are likely to become urban development
prope y in the foreseeable f re but which are currently undeveloped These include parcels of vacant land north south and west of the MCAS El Toro site some of which are currently in
agricultural production ln the immediate vicinity of the MCAS El Toro site in the area south of Loma Ridge west of Limestone Whiting Wilderness Park north of the proposed alignment of
Portola Parkway and west of the east leg of the Easta Transportation Corridor ETC there are three distinct areas shown on the County of Orange Community Profile Map designated for low 1.2
dwelling units per acre duke and medium 6.5 U ddac density residential uses T h e s e combined areas cover well over 1,000 acres There are no specific development plans for these
areas at the present time The buildout of the land uses under the proposed project w and the associated infktructure improvements on the MCAS El Toro site would
make it easier to develop these areas since utilities and services would be increased and improved in the area near ethem

It is important to recognize that most mf the land use designations in these areas particularly the low density residential de tions are subject to hqp ethe Natural Community
Conservation Planning NCCP process The Reserve Design under the NCCP includes large parts of these areas as natural reserves particularly Upper Rattlesnake Canyon and Hicks
Canyon Although the majority of the NCCP Reserve is committed to public ownership the Reserve will set aside an additional 3,000 acres of land previously planned for residential use
e b long the fkontal slopes of Loma Ridge tiF separate dedication agreements so that

County of Orange EIR No 573 Long Term Implications of the Proposed Project 117
117 Page 118 119
it will not now be developed However development of new residential uses north northwest west and south of the MCAS El Toro site is more likely to occur in response to local and regional
economic conditions and forces than in response to the development of other projects in the vicinity of the MCAS El Toro site The Central Coastal Orange Countv Subregion NCCP has now been
adoDted This does not chame the conclusions of this section
With regard to indirect growth impacts the estimated 24,758 new jobs which could locate on
the MCAS El Toro and JWA site under the proposed project would generate increased demand for goods and services This increased demand for goods and services would create additional jobs

in the surrounding region In addition it is expected that a portion of the visitors to Orange Count v that would use El Toro in the year 2020 would spend less time and money in Orange Counm ti
l if commercial air service were not available at El Toro and they had to enter the

on through another airport outside of Orange County Technical Report No 16 Economic Benefits Study November 5 1999 Zi d n

Multiplier impacts will include increases in employment created by successive rounds of spending and re spending of income generated by direct economic activities associated with development
on the proiect site under the Proposed Proiect Indirect and multiplier effects of the direct on site jobs will create another 16.200 indirect and multiplier effect iobs bv 2020 for a total of 45,700
jobs in Orange Countv beinn supported bv economic activities occurring on El Toro and JWA The average personal income of these direct indirect and multiplier iobs is proiected to be
37,400 higher than the average personal income per iob countvwide Technical Report No 16 Economic Benefits Studv November 5,1999

In addition visitors that use OCX and JWA will spend a portion of their trip duration in Orange Countv During their stay these visitors spend money on lodging food and beverage retail
goods and services recreation and ground transportation These expenditures support additional job ~zrowth in the vital tourism and business travel services sector of the Orange Count v
economy Airport activity will also generate additional expenditures by persons booking airline tickets using Orange Countv travel agents and by airline crews on layover in the County BY
2020 these expenditures in Orange Countv are expected to support 76,900 iobs Technical Report No 16 Economic Benefits Study November 5 1999 Multiplier effects of these visitor
expenditures will support another 23,500 iobs for a total of 100,400 iobs supported by visitors using OCX and JWA As is typical with the visitor service sector employment in Orange Co ty
and elsewhere the average personal income due to these iobs is lower than the Countvwide average at 22.600 per iob Technical Report No 16 Economic Benefits Study November 5
1999
In total economic activity to be generated by aviation and nonaviation activities at OCX and JWA as well as bv tourism related iobs generated by visitors to Orange Counm using OCX and

Long Term Implications of the Proposed Project County of Change EIR No 573
64 118
118 Page 119 120
No 16 Economic Benefits Study November 5,1949
While the direct emplovment generated by the Promsed Project activity will be onsite at the OCX and JWA sites the multiplier effect employment as well as the visitor related
emplovment will largely occur off the proiect site Some of this indirect and multiplier effect employment will be located in areas adiacent to OCX and JWA as well as at locations
throughout the County

e on the recreational restaurant pectrum area south and west of
MCAS El Toro site and other areas to be developed in the future surrounding the MCAS El Toro
site This is a significant gruwth inducing impact of the proposed project c m Q

Employees of the aviation commercial industrial institutional and recreational uses on the MCAS l El Tom site under the proposed project c m A are expected to be drawn from the
existing and projected labor pool in the southern California region Some employees may choose to relocate to housing closer to the MCAS El Tom site This would occur over time as the land uses
under the proposed project w LA are developed The resulting increased demand
for housing over time would be satisfied by existing housing resources and new residential units that would be developed in the MCAS El Tom area Based on the amount of planned and undeveloped

residential land in the surrounding area a substantial portion of this induced housing growth would be absorbed in residential projects currently under development tw G
5845 There are approximately 5 1,000 Bditional ih residential planned communities Rigardless of the
housing in the planned communities the proposed project R R A will generate a

need to develop and would result in growth inducing impacts related to housing

The direct impacts of the Proposed Proiect will slihtlv reduce the forecasted iobs housing ratio in a jobs rich area relative to the adopted retion g rowth forecasts the Proposed Proiect will not result in
sitificant adverse impacts related to the projected iobs housinn ratio
The conclusion is differennt than the conclusion reached in Final EIR No 563 which found that the CRP would have a sitificant adverse impact related to pro ted iobs housina ratio However that
finding was based on a comparison with the iubs housing ratio expected under the previously adopted Orange Counw Proiections 1992 Modified reejonal growth forecasts Those forecasts have
been superseded by Orange County Projections 1996 Modified OCP 96 Modified which was
used in this analysis and result in a revised finding of no significant adverse impact

Another growth induchg effect associated with the proposed project sc wis the conversion of agricultwal uses on the north and south side of the MCAS El Toro site to urban uses
Under the proposed project 1 A9 a regional park and airport parking 4e

Swould replace the exi ng agricultural mzn the north part of the MCAS El Tuo site Business Dark uses would replace agricultural uses at the southern end of the
I I I site adiacent to the I 5 Freeway K zh

County of Orange EIR No 573
6 5
Long Term Implications of the Proposed Project 119
119 Page 120 121
T m qp Am 3 LI J x -11 u
There will still be a loss of agricultural land but 138.93 acres will be preserved for agriculture cornDared to no acres of a culture in the CRP proiect Conversion of

these areas would reduce the total amount of agricultural land in unincorporated Grange County and
could also negatively impact continued farming in the remaining agricultural areas in the vicinity of the MCAS El Turo site Therefore the conversion of this agricultural land will result in significant

growth inducing impacts adversely afkcting agricultural resources in this part of Orange County
Under the proposed project F RX W A the total area within the 65 dB CNEL noise
contour would p e reduced compared to the Policy Implementation Line PIL identified for MCAS El Toro in the current Noise Element of the Orange County General Plan See the

discussion regarding the 65 dB CNEL contour R and related issues in Section 4.4 Noise The
pruiect includes a If k t Noise Element amendment to define a reduced65 dl3 CNEL PIL thekefore the'ti land uses outside the redefined PIL could be

convert4 to different uses or could be developed essentially as they are designated in the exist General Plans The areas must likely to be converted include Planning Areas 6 9 and 33 of the
City of Irvine's General Plan located northwest west and southwest of the MCAS El Toro site These areas are currently restricted by the Airport Environs Land Use Plan due to militarv aircraft
noise and accident potential zones which will be reduced or eliminated under the Proposed Project
For analysis purnoses Plannina Area 9 is estimated to accommodate about 8,900 dwelling units which would generafe apDroximatelv 83,700 daily trims Planning Area 6 is estimated to include
5,800 dwellinn units which would generate approximately 54,300 daily tips and Planninrr Area 33 would accommodate about 1,200 dwelling units which would generate aDnroximatelv 8,600
daily trims The total proiected increase would be about 15,900 dwelling units and ap oximately 146,600 daily trims This scenario raresents one r otential conversion approach of this area to
provide evidence of Drubable imDacts However development plans have not been promsed at this time and therefore this scenario represents a ~relkninarv estimate Note that OCP 96 Modified
which was adopted by the Orange County Council of Governments and the Board of Supervisors in 1997 includes employment in Planninrr Areas 6 and 9 that was forecast to result firom development

travelled VMT and regional air pollutant emissions These potential impacts are analyzed and discussed in Section Q 5.0 Cumulative Impacts
1 An analysis of the post 2020 t k imrx3cts A Wf non planned areas adjacent to the MCAS El Toro site but within the existing PIL is
included in Section ZQ 5.0 Cumulative Impacts These non planned areas are currenti designated for agricultural and open space uses

but may be pruposed for other uses in the future 3

Lang Term Implications of the Proposed Project County of Orange EIR No 573
6 6 120
120 Page 121 122
7 1 m OVERVIEW
7.0 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS

This section of this Environmental Impact Report EIR summarizes the potential significant unavoidable adverse impacts that could result from the implementation of the Proposed Project
These impacts are adverse impacts that cannot be avoided and that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance based on implementation of the mitigation measures provided earlier in
Chapter 4.0 Environmental Setting Impacts and Mitigation Measures of this EIR The summary of significant unavoidable adverse impacts provided in this section is based on the detailed
environmental analysis provided earlier in Chapter 4.0
The impacts of the Proposed Project found not to be significant or that can be mitigated to below a level of significance based on implementation of the mitigation measures described earlier in
Chapter 4.0 of this EIR are discussed in the detailed environmental analysis provided earlier in Chapter 4.0

7.2 SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE IMPACTS UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT
As described in detail earlier in Chapter 4.0 the Proposed Project is anticipated to result in the following significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance
after implementation of relevant existing regulations and the identified mitigation measures
l Noise impacts due to increased aircraft operations and nighttime aircraft operations in the
vicinity of the El Toro site

l Noise impacts on the use of 1 the proposed on site recreational facilities 2 existing local
parks and open space areas in the northern part of the City of Lake Forest 3 future off site trails including portions of the future Borrego Canyon Bikeway the future Jeffrey Road

Bikeway and the future Hicks Canyon Trail and 4 portions of Class II on road bikeways on Alton Parkway Portola Parkway Bake Parkway and Lake Forest Drive

l Loss of agricultural soils
l Encouragement of use of large amounts of jet fuel when compared to the existing conditions
l Short term air quality impacts during construction

Public acute health impacts due to potential toxic air contaminant emissions during operation
Demand for all types and prices of housing including low and moderate income housing and impacts of inducing substantial growth or concentration of non resident employee

population and reducing the supply of available housing in the County
The Proposed Project will also contribute to potentially significant cumulative adverse impacts related to noise air quality toxic air contaminants water quality water fossil fuels and

County of Orange EIR No 573
7 l
Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 121
121 Page 122 123
socioeconomic impacts related to low and moderate income housing and impacts of inducing
substantial growth or concentration of non resident employee population and reducing the supply of available housing in the County to low and moderate income housing The Proposed

Project's contribution to cumulative impacts in the areas of traffic biological resources and hydrology water quality are reduced to below a level of significance with the proposed
mitigation measures

Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts County of Orange EIR No 573 122
122 Page 123 124
8.0 ALTERNATIVES
8.1 INTRODUCTION
8.1.1 Final EIR No 563 Alternatives
Final Environmental Impact Report EIR No 563 for the Community Reuse Plan CRP for the Marine Corps Air Station MCAS El Toro considered a number of possible reuse
alternatives including

0

ii
iii
iv
9

Reuse Alternative A which proposed a commercial passenger and cargo airport at El Tore surrounded by nonaviation uses including a Habitat Reserve educational and
institutional uses residential uses recreation and open space uses research and development light industrial uses a meeting center mixed retail office commercial
uses office and conference center uses and multimodal surface transportation center Reuse Alternative A assumed commercial operations at JWA would cease The
County of Orange Local Redevelopment Authority L Y adopted Reuse Alternative AastheCRP

Reuse Alternative B which proposed a commercial airport limited to cargu and general aviation operations at the MCAS El Toro site surrounded by nonaviation
uses including a Habitat Reserve educational and institutional uses residential uses recreation and open space uses research and developmentiight industrial uses office
and conference center uses and a multimodal surface transportation center Reuse Alternative B assumed all commercial passenger operations would be provided by
JWA
Reuse Alternative C which proposed a wide range of nonaviation uses at El Toro including a Habitat Reserve visitor oriented attractions residential uses recreation
and open space uses research and development light industrial uses educational and institutional uses mixed retail of fice commercial uses and a multimodal surface
transportation center Reuse Alternative C assumed all commercial cargo and general aviation passenger operations would be provided by JWA

No Project Alternative D which assumed the military would retain ownership and operation of the MCAS El Toro site and that operations would continue at 1994
levels
No Development Alternative E which assumed the military would leave the site and the site would be vacant and unplanned

I The 970 acre Habitat Reserve in Planning Area 6 is subject to a federal agency to federal agency
transfer and is not part of the Proposed Project

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 123
123 Page 124 125
Final EIR No 563 also considered secondary alternatives to Alternatives A and B which essentially considered different airport configurations or operating conditions compared to
Alternatives A and B Final EIR No 563 also considered alternative sites for the proposed airport use as described in detail later in Section 8.12.5.1 Alternative Sites Evaluated i n Final
EIR No 563 Section 15 126.6 2 c of the CEQA Guidelines permits reliance in this document on the analysis provided in EIR No 563

Zimited new unulysis required mere a previous document has sz iently analyzed a range of reasonable alternative locations and
environmental impacts fur projects with the same basic ptrpuseJ the lead agency should review the previous document The EIR may rely on
the previous document tu help it assess the feasibility ufputentiulpruject alternatives tu the extent the circumstances remain substantially the
same us they relute tu the alternative

8.1.2 ASMP Alternatives
With the starting point of the CRP and the Board's direction to develop a two airport system the Airport System Master Plan ASMP analyzed a broad range of airport development
options for MCAS El Toro and JWA Preliminary screening of these options described families of potential airport system solutions and consisted of two components for each
airport

0 an airport role type of service provided and ii airport facility improvements

Technical Report 6 Alternatives Definition Report developed in April 1998 was prepared to analyze preliminary screening scenarios that cover a broad range of possible airport
system options for Orange County Other documents used to conduct the alternatives analysis include Working Paper 2 List of Preliminary Project Planning Issues Technical
Report 1 Airport System Feasibility Technical Report 2 Planning and Performance Parameters Technical Report 3 Existing Facilities and Technical Report 4 Aviutiun
Demand Forecasts The selection of alternatives analyzed by the ASMP and also the present EIR focused on alternatives to the Proposed Project which meet the planning goals
and criteria established by the following
0

ii
Orange County Board of Supervisors December 11 1996 Resolution No LRA R96 02 which adopted the Community Reuse Plan CRP for MCAS El Toro and
initiated the ASMP Policies established in the Orange County General Plan by Measure A approved in

iii 1994 The need as part of the Master Development Program address issues of unique importance to the planning of
COunty
MDP planning process to an airport system in Orange

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 124
124 Page 125 126
iv
V
The need to address issues of special importance to the public and the Board of Supervisors
California Environmental Quality Act CEQA criteria for the definition of alternatives

Please see the ASMP Technical Report 17 for a complete description of the ASMP alternatives evaluation

8.1.3 Introduction to EIR Alternatives
Section 15 126.6 a of the CEQA Guidelines indicates the scope of alternatives to a Proposed Project that must be evaluated

An EIR shall describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project or to the location of the project which would feasibly attain most of the basic
objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant eflects of the'pruject and evaluate the comparative merits of the
alternatives An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project Rather it must consider a reasonable runge of potentially feasible
alternatives that will foster informed decisionmaking and public participation An EIR is not required to consider alternatives which are infeasible The lead
agency is responsible for selecting a range of project alternatives fur examination and must publicly disclose its reasoning for selecting those
alternatives There is no ironclad rule guverning the nature or scope of the alternatives tu be discussed other than the rule of reason

As described in detail earlier in Chapter 4.0 the Proposed Project is anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts that cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance after
implementation of relevant standard conditions of approval regulations nd mitigation measures In summary these unavoidable impacts are as follows

l Significant adverse noise impacts due to increased aircraft operations and nighttime
aim operations

l Significant unavoidable adverse noise impacts to the use of 1 the proposed on site
recreational facilities 2 existing local parks and open space areas in the northern part of the City of Lake Forest 3 future off site trails including portions of the future Borrego

Canyon Bikeway the future Jeffrey Road Bikeway and the future Hicks Canyon Trail and 4 portions of Class II on road bikeways on Alton Parkway Portola Parkway Bake
Parkway and Lake Forest Drive
l Significant loss of agricultural resources

l Short term air quality impacts during construction

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 125
125 Page 126 127
Significant adverse impact to public health due to potential toxic air contaminant emissions during operation
l Significant adverse impacts related to the demand for all types and prices of XXXXXX
including low and moderate income housing and impacts of inducing substantial growth or concentration of non resident employee population and reducing the supply of

available housing in the County
The Proposed Project will contribute to potentially significant cumulative adverse impacts
related to land use related to the change in the area covered by the 65 dBA CNEL contour noise air quality water quality energy resources water and socioeconomic impacts related

to low and moderate income housing and impacts of inducing substantial growth or concentration of non resident employee population and reducing the supply of available
housing in the County to low and moderate income housing
In this light this chapter presents a reasonable range of alternatives to the Proposed Project These alternatives include the following

i ii
iii

vi
vii
viii
ix

x xi
xii
xiii xiv

No Project No Activity ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative
Alternative A JWA Status Quo Aviation Roles Reduction to 6 Million Annual Passengers or MAP OCX Full Domestic Service Airport 19 MAP
Alternative C JWA Short Haul Domestic 10.1 MAP OCX Full International Service Airport excluding Short Haul Domestic 23.4 MAP
Alternative F JWA Short Medium and Limited Long Haul Passenger and Cargo Service with No Operational Limitations and No General Aviation Use 14 MAP
OCX No Aviation Reuse Alternative G JWA General Aviation and Cargo Passenger Service from Short Haul
to Limited International 25 MAP OCX No Aviation Reuse Alternative H JWA Status Quo 10.8 MAP OCX Limited Use 10 MAP
Domestic Service Airport Alternative I JWA Status Quo Aviation Roles 7 MAP OCX Limited Use 15
MAP Domestic Service Airport Alternative J JWA Reduced Service 5.4 MAP OCX Full International Service
Airport at OCX at 28.8 MAP with Widely Separated North South N S Runways Alternative OCX Airport Runway Layout Wildlands Ranch Plan Alternative
Land Use Alternatives at OCX Nonaviation Land Use Component Alternative K Off Site Alternatives JWA 8.4 MAP
Alternatives Considered But Rejected For comparison purposes the data regarding the CRP as adopted in December 1996
are carried forward

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 126
126 Page 127 128
As indicated above this section also presents a number of alternatives to the Proposed
Project not carried forward for further analysis and the rationale for their exclusion Table 8.1 l provides a summary comparison of the aviation characteristics trip generation vehicle

miles traveled aircraft noise impacts and air quality emissions for existing conditions and each alternative analyzed herein In addition the last part of this section presents a matrix
comparison of the environmental impacts of the alternatives considered in detail
A summary of the aviation activity under the Proposed Project and the aviation alternatives to be carried forward is provided in Table 8.1 2

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 127
127 Page 128 129
128
128 Page 129 130
Table 8.1 l
Summary Comparison of Principal Avktion Charrcteristics aad Major tmpacts for tlrc CRP Existing Conditions and Altcrrratives

A I t c r n Y t i v c s
I'r0pOStd Alternative OCX Land
A c F c II t I K u n w a y Iksiga I i
CKI Existing N O
AII A C o n d i t i o n s Proiect

28.8 0
5.4 8.4
34.2 8.4

300,600 0
426,700 462,000
727,300 462.000

150,222 0
32,690 5 1,706
See see No
Project Prujccl

0 0
0 0
1,837 0

0 0
79 236
577 997

0 0
7 9 236
2,414 997

See
Project
Data

SCC
No
Project

3UhlMARY OF AVIATION CIlAKA EKISTlCS
blillion Annurl Frsscnrvrs MAP
ocx
J W A
Total

38.3 0 0
0 7.5 8.4
38.3 7.5 8.4

0 I 9 23.4 0 0 IO I5 28.8
8.4 6 10.1 14 2s 10.8 7 5 4
8.4 25 33.5 14 2s 20.8 22 34.2

bmurl Aircraft Operations
OCX
IWA
Total

447,000 30,2 I7 0 300,600 0 252,400 191,800 0 0 3 14,200 209,900 300,600
375,000 4 17,725 462 CKM 426,700 462,000 432,300 464,200 I72 lOO 347,400 3 19,800 448,100 426,700
822,000 447,942 462,000 727,300 462,000 684,700 656,000 l72 lOO 34 7,600 634,000 658,000 727,300

SUMMARY OF MAJOR IMPACTS
rransporlation

El Toro Site ADT Gcncrated 305,240 25,400 0 176,123 39 1,322 138,157 152,273 39 1,322 39 1,322 lo9 ooo 142,400 176,123
J WA ADT Ckneratcd 0 47,450 s1,7Q6 32,690 S 1,706 36,274 48,876 83,943 I 16,424 48,390 44,000 32,690
Regional Vehicles Miles Travclltd N A 32 I ,922,797 442,83 1,642 442,069,732 442,787,665 442 I 15,204 See 442,679,260442,351,639 442,289,168442 t 58,695 see
Regional Transit Miles Travelled N A 404,798 494,777 502,388 506,37 I SO 1,478 Project 494,777 498,585 501,478 SO 1,478 Project

Noise No of Rtsidtnccs Within Each CNEL
OCX CNEL 70
OCX CNEL 65
OCX CNEL 60

JWA CNEL 70
JWA CNEL 65
JWA CNEL 60

0 0
318 0
2,034 0

0 0
0 134
0 682

0
0
0

0
236
997

0 0 0
0 0 0
1,837 0 1,312

0 0 0
79 236 7 9
577 997 557

0
0
787

0
236
1,023

0
236
1,810 I

I

0
0
0

0
184
997

0 0 0 0
0 394
446 0
1,863 236
6,954 1,023

446 0
1,863 236
6,954 1,417

0 0
0 525
787 3.41 i

0 0
236 79
997 577

Total CNEL 70 0 0 0 0
Total CNEL 65 318 134 236 79
Total CNEL 60 2,034 682 997 2,4 14
NA
NA

0
79
1,869

0
184
997

0 0
236 604
I 784 3,988

Air Quwlitv Dataarc tllc cttfnec frnnl No Froiect
Air Quality Rcgionrrl I ll w t Emissions lhs da

c o
NOx
ROC

Similar to
Project
Data

-96
-4,363
4

set Project
Data
SOx AricrafUGS nergy
PM10

-4,603
-949
-648
-17

L

3,439,902 2,975,022 10,799 38 949
800,982 594,728 -5,833 -4,660
-8 I24
-3,955
235,778 90,9I 3 -1,307 5,156 -879
107 3,520 -287 -3 -232

2%14 663 I O 393 -25 2 87 I -38

3,729
I ,284
183
-150
-7
-208
-12

-5,562 -7,600
-3,234 -3,460
-1,075 -788
-232 -225
-15 -19

SCC
Analysis

see Analysis

See
Analysis

S e e
Analysis

NA
NA
N A

See
Analysis

See
Analysis

I CRP impacts arc for the El Toro site only JWA is not included
2 Alternatives F and G would result in a nonaviation plan at El Ton such as the ETRPA Alternative
31 ADT for LU2 LU I ADT is estimated at 153,494
4 Source FEIR No 563 these data are not directly comparable due to differences in methodology
S Includes tmissions at other regional airports for the No Project scenario

NA Data not available
County of Orange EIR 573
Allcrn riivo 129
129 Page 130 131
130
130 Page 131 132
Table 8.1 2
Summary of Aviation Activity at Orange County Airports Under Alternative Airport System Development Scenarios

Domestic International
Total
Air Cargo millions U S tons Domestic
International
Total

Based Aircraft
AircraR Operations Passenger
All Cargo General Aviation
Military
Total

20.6 5.4 26.0 8.2 10 8.2
5.4 34.2

1.19 0.02 1.21 0.82 L 0.82
2.01 0.02 2.03
1 4 570 584

251,100 67,500 3 18,600 26,600 26,600
22,000 359,000 381,000 900 200 1,100

300,600 426,700 727,300

18.7 6.0 24.7 0.3 0.3
6.0 25.0

1 .2 1 0.02 1 .2 3 0.04 0.04
1.25 0.02 1.28
20 567 587

196,000 75,100 271,100 22,600
33,000 357,000 22,600 390,000 800 200 1,000

252,400 432,300 684,700

14.0 10.1 24.1 9.4 9.4
23.4 10.1 33.5

1.18 0.05 1 .2 3 0.84 0.84
2.02 0.05 2.07
9 5 0 3 512

150,200 f47 OOO 297,200 26,000 26,000
15,000 317,000 332,000 600 200 800

191,800 464,200 656,000

I 8.4 8.4
L I II

8.4 8.4

II 0.05 0.05
I -0 II

3 0.05 0.05

0 582 582

r 95,100 95,100 rr
cm 366,700 366,700 -0 200 200
II 462,000 462,000

Alternative J has the same activity levels as the Proposed Project
County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 131
131 Page 132 133
Table 8.1 2 Summary of Aviation Activity at Orange County Airports Under Alternative Airport System Development Scenarios
Air Passengers millions
Domestic
International

Total

Air Cargo millions U S tons
Domestic
International

Total

Based Aircraft
Aircraft Operations
Passenger

All Cargo
General Aviation
Military

Total WI 172,100 172,100
I

mm 347,600 347,600

9.9 10.8 20.7 1 14.8 7.0 21.9
1.06 0.05 1.11 1.15 0.03 1.18
0.03 0.03 I 0.04 0.04
1.09 0.05 0.03 1.22

294 293 567 579

106,300 135,100 90,700 250,100
22,600 185,200 184,600
357,200
22,600
384,500
100 100 200 800

3 14,200 3 19,800 634,000 I 209,90 448,100 658,000 0

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 132
132 Page 133 134
8.2 ALTERNATIVE E JWA STATUS QUO
AVIATION ROLES NO AVIATION REUSE AT
FORMER MCAS EL TORO

This section presents the potential impacts of the No Project No Activity Alternative as
measured against the existing setting as well as a comparison of the alternative's impacts to
those of the Proposed Project at build out In those instances in which the comparison of the
alternative to the Proposed Project is materially affected by the phasing of the project i e in
those instances in which the impacts of the Proposed Project during the phasing years are materially different fi om those impacts at year 2020 a comparison of the alternative's

impacts to those of the Proposed Project for the applicable phasing year is also provided

8.2.1 Aviation Uses
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative JWA would continue to operate as it does presently providing general aviation service short and medium haul domestic passenger
service with limited long haul service and very limited all cargo service JWA would be constrained to 8.4 MAP in the year 2020 under this alternative There would be no aviation
reuse of MCAS El Toro and the site would remain vacant and undeveloped Therefore aviation demand projected to use Orange County airports under the Proposed Project would
need to use other airports in the region This is discussed fkther in Section 8.2.4.1 below

8.2.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative the MCAS El Tore would remain vacant and
undeveloped with no nonaviation uses

8.2.3 Attainment of Project Objectives
This alternative would not meet any of the general project objectives identified in Chapter
3 O regarding base redevelopment This alternative would not meet the aviation objectives
relating to passenger and cargo demand service opportunities industry competition economic growth business activities existing land use restrictions or General Plan

implementation The No Project No Activity Alternative would meet or partially meet the
aviation objective relating to general aviation by maintaining GA uses at JWA

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 133
133 Page 134 135
8.2.4 Environmental Impacts of the No Project No
Activity Alternative

8.2.4.1 Land Use
A vacant and undeveloped site at MCAS El Toro would be incompatible with adjacent or nearby land uses No activity at the El Toro site would be inconsistent with the Base
Realignment and Closure BRAC objectives to transfer closed bases and mitigate economic loses in the community No activity would eliminate revenue to the United States
Department of Defense DOD to offset maintenance No activity would lead to decay and vandalism This alternative is comparable to the Proposed Project at JWA in that no
significant adverse impacts to land use would occur This alternative would not avoid or
lessen impacts compared to the project

As discussed at the outset of this section under the No Project No Activity alternative aviation demand projected to use Orange County airports under the Proposed Project would
need to use other airports in the region To evaluate the ability of the regional aviation system to accommodate this additional demand the allocation model used to project
commercial aviation demand at each airport in the region for the Proposed Project in 2020 was used to forecast and analyze the redistribution of regional demand under the No
Project No Activity Alternative The model and assumptions used to project demand under the Proposed Project is documented in Appendix B Technical Report 6 Alternatives
Definition Report April 17 1998 revised October 15 1999
Additional research was undertaken in late 1998 to identify potential constraints at commercial service airports in the region that might affect their ability to accommodate
future commercial aviation demand This research found that capacity at three other airports in the region could be limited due to existing airfield or other constraints as follows

0 i LAX limited to 96 MAP based on alternatives under consideration in the LAX Master Plan
1 i i Ontario International Airport limited to 20 MAP based on potential existing airfield capacity
iii Burbank Airport limited to 15 MAP based on potential runway capacity and other information provided by airport staK
No other airports in the region were determined to be capacity limited when compared to potential levels of demand These assumptions were incorporated into the No Project
forecast and the model was rerun The No Project forecast shows that demand at other
airports would increase to absorb demand not accommodated at OCX

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 134
134 Page 135 136
The increase in passenger demand at other airports in the region over the level anticipated under the Proposed Project will increase the number of commercial aircraft operations at
these airports causing associated increases in the noise from these aircraft operations see Table 8.2 l below The increased travel distances and times required for some passengers
to reach these alternative airports would also af ect regional transportation and circulation as well as air quality These issues are discussed below

Table 8.2 l Residential and School Land Uses Within 65 CNEL

~ Burbank
Oxnard forecast for ~ 2003
John Wayne Airport LAX 3 1,335
I 84,054 I 3 6 1 ocx 2020

1,400 Dec 1998 4,140 Dec 1998 4 mid l 989
forecast for 2000 5 6

0 I 0 I 0
Sources JWA Noise Abatement Quarterly Report June 30 1998
LAX Quarterly Report Second Quarter 1998
Total schools estimated fkom land use map 1 not insulated 35 are sound insulated

8.2.4.2 General Plan Consistency
This alternative would be incompatible with Policies 13.1 through 13.7 of the County Land Use Element and Policy 5 of the County Public Services and Facilities Element regarding
MCAS El Toro as regulated by Measure A Amendments to the AELUP Noise Element Safety Element and possibly the Land Use Element would be necessary to reflect that the
aviation noise contours and associated land use restrictions would no longer be applicable around the El Toro site Therefore this alternative would have greater adverse impacts
related to General Plan consistency than the Proposed Project This alternative would not avoid or lessen impacts compared to the project

8.2.4.3 Transportation and Circulation
The transportation and circulation impacts for the No Project No Activity Alternative were analyzed based on existing roadway conditions plus committed improvements and OCP 96
development growth for 2020 The AM and PM peak hour and ADT traffic generated by JWA and the former MCAS El Toru site under 2020 No Project No Activity conditions is
summarized in Table 8.2 2 Refer to Section 14.0 in the Traffic Analysis Technical Report Appendix D for detailed inknation on the methodology applied to produce trip
generation estimates for the No Project No Activity Alternative and for detailed summaries

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 135
135 Page 136 137
of the No Project o Activity Alternative traffic circulation system in the traffic analysis study area volumes and associated LOS for the
Table 8.2 2
Trip Generation Summary No Project No Activity Alternative

1,552 1,037 2,589 2,047 2,050 4,097 51,706
In conclusion the No Project No Activity Alternative would result in no new or additional local impacts related to transportation and circulation In comparison as discussed in detail
in Section 4.3.6.6 of this EIR under the Proposed Project phasing years four intersection locations and two arterial roadway segments would be significantly impacted under Phase 1
conditions 2005 five intersection locations and two arterial roadway segments would be significantly impacted under Phase 2 conditions 2010 and nine intersection locations and
two arterial roadway segments would be significantly impacted under Phase 3 conditions 2015 In each case however the identified impacts will be mitigated to a level below
significant during the applicable phasing year see Section 4.3.7.2 Table 4.3 20
This alternative would avoid the transportation and circulation impacts of the Proposed Project at the El Toro and JWA sites However regional vehicle miles traveled would be
greater than the Proposed Project under this alternative Since the impacts of the Proposed Project would be mitigated to a level of insignificance this alternative would not avoid a
significant impact however this alternative would reduce less than significant highway impacts near the El Toro site In conclusion the increase in VMT due to this alternative
would result in a worse impact than the Proposed Project and this impact would not be mitigatable except through expansion of airport facilities in the County

8.2.4.4 Noise
Aircraft Noise
This alternative will not result in an increase in aircraft generated CNEL or SENEL contours at the MCAS El Toro site since no airport would be developed on the MCAS El Toro site
No airport expansion would occur at JWA and the CNEL contours would be expected to increase over 1998 conditions in proportion to the anticipated growth in activity to JWA's
currently authorized service level This alternative would however lead to an increase in the 65 dB CNEL contour at regional airports see Section 8.2.4.1 which would increase the
existing adverse impacts of these airports on noise sensitive land uses Table 8.2 1 Therefore compared to the Proposed Project this alternative would avoid aviation noise at
the El Toro site but would increase aviation noise impacts on a regional basis

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 136
136 Page 137 138
Ground Jransporta Con
The Proposed Project Noise Study analyzed the potential increase in noise on the road network surrounding the El Toro site and JWA for this alternative The Federal Highway
Administration standard an increase of 1.5 dE for a significant noise increase was used in this study This alternative would not increase noise levels for any roadway link In
comparison under the Proposed Project while roadway noise impacts at two roadway links will be significant these impacts will be reduced to a level below significance with project
mitigation

8.2.4.5 Air Quality
The air quality impacts of the No Project No Activity Alternative were identified by analyzing the construction regional and local impacts associated with this project
alternative As summarized below the No Project No Activity Alternative would result in new regional air quality impacts These regional impacts would be greater in all phasing
years than under the Proposed Project's development scenarios This alternative however would avoid the significant local impacts of the Proposed Project that would occur sometime
after 2015 the significant construction impacts of the Proposed Project that would occur under all development scenarios and the significant toxic air contaminant impacts of the
Proposed Project Since the significant local impacts of the Proposed Project would be mitigated to a level of insignificance this alternative would not avoid a significant local air
quality impact The No Project No Activity Alternative however would avoid the significant and unavoidable construction and toxic air contaminant impacts of the Proposed
Project under all development scenarios

Cons true tion
Under this alternative no runway improvements at JWA would be necessary and there would be no aviation reuse of MCAS El Toro Additionally no nonaviation land uses are
planned for the El Toro and JWA sites under this alternative Therefore local construc tion emissions under this alternative would be less than those of the Proposed Project and would
not be significant Similarly peak daily local emissions including both equipment exhaust and figitive dust would be less than those of the Proposed Project and would not be
significant Therefore compared to all phases of the Proposed Project this alternative would avoid significant and unavoidable local construction emission impacts of the
Proposed Project

Regional Air Quality Impacts
Direct air pollutant emissions projected under No Project No Activity are shown in Table 8.2 3 Regional air pollutant emissions projected under the No Project No Activity 2005
2010 20 15 ifnd 2020 Alternative that are associated with airport operations including
aircraft GSE energy consumption and vehicular trips are shown below in Tables 8.2 4A

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 8 18 137
137 Page 138 139
B C and D for this alternative A comparison of the No Project No Activity Alternative with the Proposed Project in all phasing years is also provided in these tables A comparison
of the No Project No Activity Alternative with existing conditions 1998 was previously provided in Table 8 l l

Table 8.2 3
Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Project
Direct Air Pollutant Emissions Pounds Day

1 co t NOX g O sax PM10 Aircraft 7,243 2,135 396 92

o c x 0 0 0 0 0 JWA 7,243 2,135 396 92 II
GSE APU 5,832 664 186 1 7 2 7 o c x 0 0 0 0 0
JWA 5,832 664 186 1 7 2 7 Fuel Storage Dispensing 111 111 8 WI II
o c x 111 W W 0 w 1 111
JWA We I 8 I 111
Energy Consumption 31.6 182.2 17 18.7 62
o c x 0 0 0 0 0
JWA 31.6 182.2 17 18.7 6 2
Vehicular Traffic 12,915 3,442 1,3ds NA2 9 7
o c x 0 0 0 NA 0 JWA 12,915 3,442 1,308 NA 937

Total 26,022 6,423 1 1,900 128 970
Source CH2M Hill and LSA Associates Inc 1999 1 ROC emissions obtained by multiplying HC emissions reported by EDMS by a factor of 1.14

2 SO emissions are not reported by the URBEMWG model

As can be seen fkom the tables provided the No Project No Activity Alternative would result in regional emissions impacts that exceed both the existing conditions 1998 and the
Proposed Project in all phasing years Although there is suffkient existing capacity at airports in the region to absorb the projected unconstrained demand without expansion of
runway capacity in Orange County the failure to provide sufficient airport capacity in Orange County to meet the locally generated demand will result in greater average highway
trip lengths and therefore increased vehicle miles traveled VMT by air passengers and shippers In addition accommodating future demand without the project at other Basin
airports would increase average delay time at those airports This would result in increased aircraft emissions due to longer taxi times and LTO cycle time Longer aircraft taxi times
generate major increases in the amount of aircraft emissions Therefore for the No Project No Activity Alternative emissions at other regional airports would be higher per
operation than at OCX as a result of longer taxi and LTO cycle time All of these factors would result in significant regional air quality emissions for the No Project No Activity
Alternative that exceed the Proposed Project in all phasing years

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 138
138 Page 139 140
Table 8.214A
Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2005 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted

g g j b y 7 A I x y
~

2,413
1,232
67,112
70,757
566
501
1,067
207 8 5

2,318
2,610 I

5,389
2,265 433,716

44 1,370
515,804
-738

0 0 1,702 336
69,836 14,555
71,538 14,89 1

I r
y Y s
x

0
8,458
143,578
152,036

Aircraft El Toro
JWA
Other Airports Regional

Aircraft El Tore 2,677
JWA 6,193
Other Airports 137,545
Regional 146,415
173
135
308

21
21
42

GSE El Toro 0 0 0 0
JWA 5,460 576 169 2 3
Regional 5,460 576 169 2 3

GSE El Toro 5,872
JWA 4,046
Regional 9,918
Nat Gas El Toro JWA

Others
Regional

3 6
1 5
403
454

2
1
22
2 5

7
3
79
8 9

Nat Gas El Toro JWA
Others Regional
0 20
425
445

0 117
2,446
2,563

0 1
2 3 24
0 4
8 4
8 8
Fuel El Toro JWA

Regional
1 3
5
1 8

Fuel El Toro JWA
Regional
0 3,442 43 8,423

441,865

22,795
8,50 1
1,365,700
1,396,996

2,420
861
91,312
94,593

1,447
617
6,380 8,444

Roads El Toro
JWA
Others
Regional

12,915
1,386,436
1,399,351

Roads El Toro
JWA Others

Regional

0 1,308
93,401 94,709
0 937
7,519 8,456
1,553,783 8,871 1,557,292 516,542 TOTAL boundslda TOTAL pounds day Change from No Project
pounds day
SCAQMD Threshold for Operation pounds day

Source LSA Associates Inc 1999

Emission sources included in the Other Airports category include aircraft GSE and roads parking lots at other airports in the region
County of Orange EIR No 573
845 Alternatives 139
139 Page 140 141
Table 8 2 4B Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2010 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted
Aircraft El Toro
r t A Xte y y v
fjj I

5,193 888

68,416
74,497

I as I
5,077
5,932
140,219 151,228

Aircraft El Toro JWA
Other Airports Regional
975
280
13,780
15,035

0
7,423
156,121
163,544
0
6,164
6,164

0
2,212
76,115
78,327

JWA Other Airports1
Regional GSE El Toro GSE El Toro 11,627 1,162 345 4 3
JWA 3,180 446 112 19 Regional 14,807 1,608 457 62 0 698 698 JWA Regional
Nat Gas El Tore JWA
Others Regional
Fuel El Tore
JWA Regional

Roads El Tore JWA
Others
Regional TOTAL pounds day

b p

Nat Gas El Tore JWA
Others Regional
71 15
438
524

408
8 5
2,522
3,015

4
1
24
29

1 4
3 8 6

103

0 0
20 117
492 2,832
512 2,949
Fuel El Tore JWA

Regional
33,264
6,037
2,928,553

2,967,854

2,19
438
6,536

9,165
9,631

Roads El Toro
JWA
Others

Regional

8,131 1,609
551,497
561,237

3,480
612
107,936

112,028

0
12,915 2,960,002

2,972,9 17

0
3,442 558,499

561,941
3,134,413 640,357 127,596 TOTAL pounds day

Change from No Project pounds day 643,915 -8,724 -3 ,5 5 8 1,042 -18

SCAQMD Threshold for Operation pounds day

Source ISA Associates Inc 1999

r Emission sources included in the Other Airports category include aircraft GSE and roads parking lots at other airports in the region
Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573
6 16 I 140
140 Page 141 142
Table 8,2 4C Regionwide Emissions Inventory 2015 ProDosed Project No Project Pounds Dav Unless Noted

0
7,334
170,477
177,811

0
400
17,234
17,634

Aircraft El Tore JWA
Other Airports Regional
GSE El Tore JWA
Regional Nat Gas El Two

JWA Others
Regional Fuel El Tore
JWA Regional
Roads El Toro JWA
Others Regional
TOTAL pounds day

Aircraft El Tom 6,142 6,472 1,157 JWA 6,056 1,050 289
Other Airports 149,425 72,910 14,679 Regional 161,623 80.432 16,125
0 0 0 0
5,998 681 191 28
5,998 681 191 28

1,394 404
3,657
13,456I
480
I
125 17,113 1,874
529

51 20
71
GSE El Tore JWA
Regional 0 0 0
0 20 117 1
4 563 3,240
30 111 583 3,357 31 115

90
I
516 5
18 101 I 1 489 2,815 26 18 4 96

118

Nat Gas

Fuel
El Toro JWA
Others Regional
El Toro JWA
Regional

597 3,432 32
58 I L
5 0 0 0 8
8

0 I
I I 63 0 0 0
12,915 3,442 1,308 2,595,214 504,136 77,389
2,608,129 507,578 78,697

2,470
515
6,496
9,481

0
937 8,559

9,496
10,017

Roads El Toro JWA
Others Regional
37,250 9,161 3,882
7,101 1,892 719
2,559,351 495,940 74,015 2,603,702 506,993 78,616

2,792,521 597,298 96,561 2,783,035 1 592,731I 95,365 TOTAL pounds day
Change from No Project pounds day -9,486 -4,567

I I
-1,196 -29

150

Alternatives

I
550 55 55 SCAQMD Threshold for
Operation pounds day

Source LSA Associates Inc 1999

Emission sources included in the Other Airports category include aircraft GSE and roads parking lots at other airports in the region
County of Orange EIR No 573
II 17 I 141
141 Page 142 143
Table 8.2 4D Regionwide Emissions Invento'ry 2020 Proposed Project No Project Pounds Day Unless Noted
Nat Gas
Fuel Regional 673 3,874 36 El Toro I 7 8 JWA I 5
Roads Regional El Toro
8 3
41,56 10,289 4,3 14 JWA 8,165 2,176 827

Others 2,722 s 11 483,968 66,692 Regional 2,772,239 496,433 71,833

Change from 2020 No Project tons year
SCAQMD Threshold for Operation pounds day
1,967 -1,065 -239
550 5s 55

Source LSA Associates Inc 1999

132 Fuel Regional 673 3,873 3 6 132 El Toro 0
JWA 8
2,776 Roads Regional El Toro
1 8 1

I 593

6,445 9,8 14

1 Emission sources included in the Other Airports category include aircraft GSE and roads parking lots at other airports in the region
Alternatives
8 18 County of Orange EIR No 573 142
142 Page 143 144
Local Air Quality Impacts
An airport emissions dispersion analysis was conducted for JWA for the No Project No Activity Alternative Table 8.2 5 shows that no local criteria pollutant hot spots from airport
operations were found under this project alternative Therefore the No Project No Activity Alternative would not result in any significant local air quality impacts In comparison
under the Proposed Project there will be one exceedance of the federal AAM standard for NOz projected at the Irvine Transportation Center This Proposed Project impact however
can be mitigated to a level below the level of significance Therefore the No Project No Activity Alternative would not avoid a significant local air quality impact

Additionally for the No Project No Activity Alternative at intersections in the vicinity of the project sites the CAL3QHC model was used to assess the CO concentrations Tables
8.2 6 and 8.2 7 show that the l hour and 8 hour CO concentrations would be below the State and federal CO standards No CO hot spots would occur from vehicular trafk trips
Similarly under the Proposed Project no CO hot spots would occur from vehicular trafk trips

Toxic Air Contaminants
Under this alternative no runway improvements at JWA would be necessary and there would be no aviation reuse of MCAS El Toro In addition no nonaviation uses are planned
Therefore toxic air contaminant impacts would be less than under the Proposed Project

8.2.4.6 Topography
The No Project No Activity Alternative would not involve construction at the MCAS El Toro site and therefore would not result in impacts related to topography Therefore this
alternative would avoid topographic impacts of the Proposed Project at the El Toro site However since the project impacts are insignificant no significant impacts would be
avoided
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative no changes would be made to existing operations at JWA Therefore no changes to existing topographic conditions at JWA would
occur This is also the case under the Proposed Project

8.2.4.7 Soils Geology and Seismicity
The No Project No Activity Alternative would not involve construction or development at MCAS El Toro and would therefore not result in impacts related to soils or geologic
features Since MCAS El Toro would be closed and remain vacant and unoccupied under this scenario it would not expose residents employees or visitors to potential seismic
effects

County of Orange EIRNo 573 Alternatives 143
143 Page 144 145
Table 8.2 S Year 2020 No Project No Activity Pollutant Concentrations
JWA Worst Case Operations and Meteorology

Source CH2M Hill and LSA Associates Inc 1999 NOTE I Includes ambient I hour CO concentration of 7 ppm and 1 hour CO concentration reported
by EDMS
PI Includes ambient 8 hour CO concentration of 4.1 ppm and 8 hour CO concentration reported by EDMS

PI Includes ambient 1 hour NOz concentration of 0.113 ppm and one tenth of the 1 hour NOx concentration reported by EDMS
WI Includes ambient AAM NO concentration of 0.017 ppm and 75 percent of the annual NOx concentration reported by EDMS
PI Includes ambient 1 hour SO concentration of 0.019 ppm and 1 hour SO concentration reported by EDMS
WI Includes ambient 24 hour SO concentration of 0.003 ppm and 24 hour SOx concentration reported by EDMS

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 144
144 Page 145 146
I 4
Table 8.24 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Predicted One Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentration For hteraectiona with the Highest VoIume and Worst Level of Service LOS

INT INTER ZECTING STREETS RECl RECZ REc3 Iux4 HE REC6 REC7 RECI REC9 REClO REC11 REC12
CITY OF SANTA ANA
1 5 4 MacArthur Main 1 3 .0 1 3 .1 13.0 13.1 12.9 12.8 12.6 13.0 12.8 12.9 12.6 1 2 .8
1 5 2 Main Sunflower 12.9 13.0 12.6 13.0 12.5 12.9 12.4 12.4 12.6 12.7 13.0 1 2 .7
90 Grand Edinger 12.9 12.9 1 2 .8 13.0 12.8 12.9 12.7 13.0 12.5 12.8 12.7 1 2 .7

9 3 Newport Edinger 13.1 12.9 12.7 1 3 .1 12.6 12.5 12.5 12.6 12.6 12.9 12.5 1 2 .8
1 1 5 Von Karman Barranca 12.9 13.0 13.0 1 2 .9 12.5 13.0 12.6 12.8 12.5 12.5 12.6 1 2 .9 9 5 Tustin Ranch Edinger 13.1 12.9 1 2 .8 1 3 .0

12.6 12.8 12.5 12.6 12.8 12.8 12.5 12.9

1 1 6 Jamboree Barranca 8.3 8.4 8.0 8.0 7.6 8.0 7 7 7.9 7.9 7.8 7.9 8.3 1 5 6 Jamboree Main 8.0 7.9 8.1 7.8 7.6 7.8 7.7 7.8
7.7 7.7 7.8 8.0
134 Jamboree Alton 8.0 8.0 8.1 7.9 7.6 7.9 7.6 7.6 7.8 7.8 7.8 8.1
9 8 Culver Irvine Center 8.0 8.0 8.1 8.1 7.7 7.8 7.8 7.9 7.7 7.9 7.8 7,9
17s Jamboree Michelson 8.1 7.8 7.8 7.9 7.6 7.8 7.6 7.7 7.8 7.8 8.0 7.8
151 Red Hill MacArthur 8.1 8.0 7.9 8.0 7.5 7.9 7.7 7.7 7.8 7.9 7.7 7.9
100 Jeffrey Irvine Center 8.0 7.9 7.9 8.0 7.8 7.9 7.6 7.7 7.9 8.2 7.5 7.8
155 Von Karman Main 7.9 8.0 8.2 7.9 7.7 8 O 7.6 7.8 7.7 7.7 7.8 7.9
IS3 Red Hill Main 7.8 7.9 7.9 8.0 7.5 7.7 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.6
174 Von Kamwn Michelson 7.8 7.8 7.7 7.6 7.4 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.3 7.7
174 MacArthur Campus 8.1 7.8 7.7 7.9 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.6 7.6 7.6 7.5 7.7

2 9 9 Moulton El Toro 7.8 7.8
2 8 0 E l Toro Avd Carlola 7.8 7.8
265 Alicia Muirlands 8.0 7.9

CITY OF TUSTIN
CITY OF IRVINE

CITYOFLAGUNABEACFI
CITY OF LAGUNA HILLS

CITY OF MISSION VIEJO

7.9
7.8
7.9

7.9
7 7
7.8

7.5
7.4
7.6

7.7
7.7
7.7

7.8 7.8 7.4 7.7
7.4 7.5 7.6 7.6
7.6 7.6 7.4 7.6
Note l Concentrations are in parts per million ppm federal 1 hour CO standard is 35 ppm State 1 hour CO standard is 20 ppm I RECI SWCORNER
2 REC2 SE CORNER
3 REC3 NE CORNER
4 REC4 NW CORNER
5 RECS S DEPARTURE MID BLOCK
6 REC6 N APPROACH MID BLOCK 7 REC7 E DEPARTURE MID BLOCK

8 RECS W APPROACH MID BLOCK
9 REC9 N DEPARTURE MID BLOCK

IO REClO S APPROACH MID BLOCK 1 1 RECl 1 W DEPARTURE MID BLOCK

1 2 REC12 E APPROACH MID BLOCK

7.5
7.5
7.7

7.5
7.7
7.8

13 The ambient one hour CO concentration 12.0 ppm the second higheast one hour CO concentration at the nearest air monitoring station Central Orange County Air Monitoring Station between the years 1993 to 1997 is added to the calculated one hour levels
14 The ambient one hour CO ancentralion 7.0 ppm the second high one hour CO concentration at the nearest air monitoring station Saddleback Valley Air Monitoring Station between the years 1993 to 1997 is added to the calculated ant hour levels 145
145 Page 146 147
Table 8.24 Year 2020 No Project No Activity Alternative Predicted Eigbt Hour Ambient Carbon Monoxide Concentration For Intersections with the Highest Volume and Worst Level of Service LOS
INT INTERSE ING STREETS FUXI FtEcz REc33 REca RI RmP REc7 FtEC8 REc9 REclo'e luml Fum2

154 MacArthur Main 8.7 8.8 8.7 8.8 8.6 8.6 8.4 8.7 8.6 8.6 8.4 8.6
I52 Main Sunflower 8.6 a 7 8.4 8.7 8.4 a 6 8.3 a 3 a 4 8.5 8.7 8.5
9 0 Grand Edinger 8.6 8.6 8,6 8.7 8.6 8 6 8.5 8.7 8.4 8.6 8.5 8.5

9 3 Newport Edinger 8.8 8.6 8.5 8.8 a 4 a 4 8.4 a 4 8.4 8.6 a 4 8.6
115 Von Karman Barranca 8.6 8.7 8.7 8.6 8.4 8.7 8.4 8.6 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.6
9 5 Tustin Ranch linger 8.8 8.6 8.6 8.7 8.4 8.6 8.4 a 4 8.6 8.6 8.4 8.6

116 Jamboree Barranca 5.0 5.1 4.8 4.8 4.5 4.8 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 5.0
156 Jamboree Main 4.8 4.7 4.9 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.8
134 Jamboree Alton 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.9
9 8 Culver Irvine Center 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.7

175 Jamboree Michelson 4.9 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.7 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.7
151 Red Hill MacArthur 4.9 4.8 4.7 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.7
loo Jeffrey Irvine Center 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.9 4.5 4.7
I55 Von K an Main 4.7 4.8 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.8 4.5 4.7 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7
153 Red Hill Main 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.8 4.5 4.6 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
174 Von Karman Michelson 4,7 4.7 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.3 4.6
174 MacArthur Campus 4 9 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.6

2 9 9 Moulton El Toro 4.7
2 8 0 El Tore Avd Carlota 4.7
265 Alicia Muirlands 4.8

CITY OF SANTA ANA
CITY OF TUSTIN
ClTY OF lFWINE

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
CITY OF LACUNA HILLS
CITY OF MISSION VIEJO

4.7
4.7
4.7

4.7
4.7
4.7

4.7
4.6
4.7

4.5
4.4
4.5

4.6
4.6
4.6

4.7
4.4
4.5

4.7
4.5
4.5

4.4
4.5
4.4

4.6 4.5 4,5
4.5
4.5
4.5 4.6
4.6 4.7
Note Concentrations are in parts per million ppm federal and State 8 hour CO standard is 9 ppm 1 RECl SW CORNER
2 REC2 SE CORNER
3 REX3 NE CORNER
4 REX4 NW CORNER
5 UC5 S DEPARTURE MID BLOCK
6 REX6 N APPROACH MID BLOCK
7 REC7 E DEPARTURE MID BLOCK
8 REC8 W APPROACH MU3 BLOCK
9 REC9 N DEPARTURE MID BLOCK
10 RECIO S APPROACH MID BLOCK
I 1 RECI I W DEPARTURE MID BLOCK

12 RECI2 E APPROACH MID BLOCK
13 The ambient eight hour CO concentration 8.0 ppm the second highest eight hour concentration at the nearest air monitoring station Central Orange County Air Monitoring
Station between the years of 1093 and 1997 is added to the product of the calculated one hour levels multiplied by a persistent factor of 0.7
14 The ambient eight hour CO concentration 4 I ppm the second highest eight hour concentration at the nearest air monitoring station Saddleback Valley Air Monitoring
Station between the years of 1993 and 1997 is added to the product of the calculated one hour IeveIs multiDlied by a Dersistent factor of 0.7 146
146 Page 147 148
Under the No ProjectNo Activity Alternative no changes would be made to existing operations at JWA Therefore no changes to existing conditions regarding soils geologic
features or seismicity would occur at JWA
This alternative would avoid impacts of the Proposed Project at the El Toro site However since the project impacts are insignificant no significant impacts would be avoided

8.2.4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative existing on base flooding would continue and necessary improvements would not be made In addition improvements such as
Marshbum Channel would not be made and regional flood control plans would not be implemented In contrast under the Proposed Project improvements to the existing storm
drain system at MCAS El Toro will be made resulting in beneficial impacts
No groundwater will be pumped from the MCAS El Toro site under this alternative so there will be no impacts to local groundwater levels or basin storage under this alternative
Groundwater quality impacts under this alternative will be similar to those discussed for the Proposed Project

With respect to water quality under the No Project No Activity Alternative sedimentation impacts due to erosion at the MCAS El Toro site would be significant In comparison under
the Proposed Project improvements to the drainage system will reduce water quality impacts to a level below significant

Under this alternative JWA will require no new construction Therefore this alternative will not result in impacts related to hydrology and water quality
In summary this alternative would result in worse impacts than the project and would not avoid or lessen project impacts

8.2.4.9 Biological Resources
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative the MCAS El Toro site would remain vacant and undeveloped which would not result in direct adverse impacts to biological resources
There would be no improvements to channels or streambeds and they would be retained at the MCAS El Toro site However agricultural activities would cease and foraging would
not occur Depending upon the amount of time that this alternative continued some areas may become more naturalized and some wildlife may increase in numbers as a result
There would be no aircraft flyovers in the federal Habitat Reserve as part of this alternative Under the Proposed Project however a Wildlife Habitat Area will be created
Consequently no beneficial impacts associated with the creation of coastal sage scrub on the eastern portions of the MCAS El Toro site will result under the No Project No Activity
Alternative This alternative would not result in any project impacts at the El Toro site but

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 147
147 Page 148 149
since the project would have no significant impacts this alternative would not avoid any identified significant impacts
This alternative would preclude implementation of the Wildlife Habitat Area therefore this alternative would have a significant adverse regional

wildlife impact
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative for JWA there would be no adverse biological resource impacts at JWA or in Upper Newport Bay since there is no physical
improvements and no substantial change in aircraft operations The current indirect impacts on biological resources in Upper Newport Bay result from existing commercial operations at
JWA These impacts include noise motion and startle effects frum direct aircraft flyovers These impacts would continue under the No Project No Activity Alternative This
alternative would not avoid or lessen these impacts compared to the project

8.2.4 IO Public Services and Utilities
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative the MCAS El Toro site would remain vacant and undeveloped which would require no utilities However a large scale vacant site with
standing buildings such as the El Toro site would require some form of police security and a plan to utilize nearby fire stations for fire and emergency medical services However the
site would generate no revenues to offset costs requiring a subsidy from federal and or local agencies The lack of police and fire services under the No Project No Activity Alternative
results in significant adverse impacts In addition the proposed OCFA station on Irvine Boulevard that is part of the Proposed Project would not be developed and OCFA would be
required to obtain another site for relocation of the Spectrum Lake Forest temporary OCFA station In addition the candidate OCFA station site in Planning Area 4 would not be
developed and OCFA would be required to obtain another site to serve the Irvine area west of the El Toro site This alternative would preclude all the public facilities proposed in the
ASMP which would be a significant adverse impact to State County and special district operators

JWA would remain status quo operations and therefore no change to the existing public service and utilities conditions would occur
With respect to utilities as described in Section 4.10 Public Services and Utilities the Proposed Project is not anticipated to result in significant adverse impacts related to utilities
Therefore the No Project No Activity Alternative would not avoid a significant impact Utilities demand at JWA under the No Project No Activity Alternative would be similar to
existing demand and could be served without significant adverse impacts after mitigation similar to the Proposed Project

In summary this alternative would not avoid impacts but would lessen impacts compared to the project However this alternative would generate new significant adverse impacts by
precluding all the public facilities included in the ASMP

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 148
148 Page 149 150
8.2.4.11 Natural Resources and Energy
As noted in Section 4.11 Natural Resources and Energy the Proposed Project would not result in significant adverse impacts to natural resources and energy with the exception of

impacts to consumption of jet fkel in the region when compared to existing conditions and to agricultural resources at MCAS El Toro which could not be mitigated to below a level of
significance This alternative anticipates no activity at the El Turo site so all agricultural operations would cease However the Prime Agricultural Soils would not be lost to
development There are no natural or agricultural resources at JWA
Under this alternative energy consumption associated with construction activities at El Toro would be eliminated and this component of the alternative's energy consumption would be
less than that of the Proposed Project From a regional standpoint however this alternative would not meet the forecasted increase in air service demand a substantial portion of which
would have been met by the Proposed Project Under this circumstance it would be necessary for the shortfall in air service demand to be met at other regional airports which in
turn would entail energy jet fuel consumption on a par with that of the Proposed Project As noted in Section 4.11 if for any reason the regional demand for air passenger and cargo
service was not fully met the Proposed Project would have a greater impact on consumption of jet fuels than the No Project No Activity Alternative In addition providing air services
equivalent to those of the Proposed Project at other regional airports also could increase overall highway travel related fkel consumption as air travelers drive to other more distant
airports within the ASA Consequently the long term regional energy consumption implications of this alternative will be equivalent to and possibly greater than those of the
Proposed Project so long as regional air passenger and air cargo demand is met elsewhere
In summary this alternative would avoid the loss of Prime Agricultural Soils and lessen impacts on energy resources compared to the Proposed Project

8.2.4.12 Aesthetics Light and Glare
The No Project No Activity Alternative would eliminate all activities and potential revenue for maintenance activities and lead to decay and vandalism This would result in a
significant adverse impact on aesthetics No new ur additional light or glare impacts would occur at either the El Toro site or the JWA site Although this alternative would decrease
the level of light and intensity of glare at El Toru this was not identified as a potentially significant impact under the Proposed Project

In summary this alternative would have significant adverse aesthetic impacts not identified under the Proposed Project

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 149
149 Page 150 151
8.2.4.13 Cultural Resources
With the No Project No Activity Alternative no future uses would be developed on the former Marine base site Any cultural resources on the site would not be disturbed under the
No Project No Activity Alternative The Proposed Project would also have no significant impacts on cultural resources therefore this alternative would not avoid project impacts

The No Project No Activity Alternative anticipates status quo operations at JWA As such there would be no additional or new impacts on cultural resources in the JWA area
Similarly the Proposed Project would not impact cultural resources in the JWA area

8.2.4.14 Recreation
Assuming no future development of the MCAS El Toro site under the No Project No Activity Alternative there would not be any physical impacts to area recreational facilities
trails and parks However under the No ProjectBIo Activity Alternative the recreational facilities proposed as part of the project at the El Turo site would nut be provided The
demand for these recreational uses in South County would be increased This alternative would not avoid impacts but would significantly reduce recreational facilities which would
be a significant adverse impact of this alternative
At JWA status quo operations would continue under this alternative and no additional impacts or changes to existing impacts on use of recreational facilities in the area would
occur

8.214.15 Public Health and Safety
A via tion Safety
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative the potential air carrier and air cargo accident risks at JWA would increase over the Proposed Project by approximately 40.9 to reflect
the number of increasing aviation activity at JWA and the potential accident risks for general aviation at JWA would slightly increase by 2.1 correspondingly Since there would be no
aviation activity at OCX there would be no aviation risks Compared to the Proposed Project this alternative would avoid impacts at the El Toro site but would increase impacts
at JWA
This alternative would avoid the health risks of aviation toxic air contaminants at the El Toro site but increase them at JWA compared to the project

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 150
150 Page 151 152
8.2.4.16 Hazardous Materials and Hazardous Wastes
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative no new construction would occur at the MCAS El Toru site and JWA would continue to operate at 8.4 MAP Remedial
investigations and response actions would continue at all IRP sites at El Toro consistent with the current program requirements of industrial cleanup standards This is also the case
under the Proposed Project
Under the No Project No Activity Alternative no new hazardous materials would be used or stored and no new hazardous waste would be generated from the El Tore site Hazardous
waste handling practices would remain unchanged at JWA Likewise there would be no impacts associated with the new use of hazardous materials or new generation of hazardous
waste materials at the El Toro site under the Proposed Project
In comparison to the Proposed Project over the long term existing structures with AsbestosContaining Building Materials ACBMs and lead based paint would no lunger be
maintained under the No Project No Activity Alternative Structures containing asbestos and lead paint would deteriorate over the long term a condition which could represent a
human health hazard This would be a significant adverse impact associated with this alternative

This alternative would avoid new hazardous materials asbestos and lead paint hazards compared to the project impacts but would result in worse

8.2.4.17 Socioeconomics
This alternative would result in a reduction of 24,300 jobs compared to the Proposed Project Under this alternative an estimated 5,200 jobs would be generated at JWA a net increase of
3,100 jobs over existing 1998 conditions at JWA However this would be a significant reduction from the project case

As with the Proposed Project economic activity at JWA under the No Project No Activity Alternative as well as expenditures by visitors arriving by air through JWA would
stimulate additional off site job growth However the total number of on site and off site jobs stimulated by the airport system would be significantly lower under the No Project No
Activity Alternative than under the Proposed Project
Given the fewer number of jobs generated under this alternative at 5,200 jobs versus 29,500 jobs under the Proposed Project the magnitude of impacts related to induced growth or
concentration of population and employment in the area and increasing demand for housing including low and moderate income housing beneficial socioeconomic impacts would be
significantly lower under the No Project No Activity Alternative than under the Proposed Project

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 151
151 Page 152 153
In summary this alternative would not avoid or lessen adverse impacts compared to the Proposed Project This would be true under all development scenarios
8.2.4.18 Economic Implications
To provide a point of comparison regarding the potential unrealized economic benefits to
Orange County associated with the No Project No Activity Alternative the level of economic benefits generated under this scenario was also estimated

Without the development of commercial aviation facilities at MCAS El Tore the Orange County air service deficiencies are projected to increase significantly by 2020 even if JWA
were to expand to its maximum passenger capability In 2020 the air passenger capacity deficiency at Orange County airports would range from 9.2 to 14.8 million origin and
destination passengers excluding connecting passengers depending on the extent to which JWA could be expanded The 2020 air cargo deficiency would be approximately 2.0 million
tons without development of OCX
The potential economic implications associated with the No Project No Activity Alternative are twofold First passengers served in the year 2020 in Orange County would be reduced
from 34.2 MAP to 8.4 MAP leading to substantial reductions in the output income and employment associated with the direct provision of service activity Second while the air
passengers and cargo projected to use OCX and JWA under the Proposed Project could be accommodated at other airports in the region there would be some reduction in the level of
visitor expenditures in Orange County from these air passengers as well as a potential loss of economic competitiveness for the County

Direct provision of service benefits to Orange County's economy generated by the No Project No Activity Alternative in 2020 are projected to amount to 1.3 billion in output
496 million in personal income and 13,600 jobs In terms of potential unrealized direct economic benefits in 2020 the No Project No Activity Alternative generates 2.9 billion
less in total output 1.2 billion Zess in personal income and 32,000 kwer jobs than the airport related direct provision of service benefits associated with the Proposed Project

Indirect benefits under the No Project No Activity Alternative would be generated by use of aviation sewices provided at JWA These use of service benefits include expenditures by
visitors arriving on commercial and general aviation flights at JWA aircrew layovers from commercial flights using JWA and revenue to local travel agencies from Orange County
residents booking flights from JWA The total economic benefits including indirect and induced activity generated by use of service provided at JWA in 2020 under the No
Project No Activity Alternative amounts to 34,100 jobs 784 million in personal income and 1.9 billion in output

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 152
152 Page 153 154
The total economic benefits including indirect and induced activity generated by both provision and use of service provided at JWA in 2020 under the No Project No Activity
Alternative amounts to 47,700 jobs 1.3 million in personal income and 3.2 billion in output In 2020 the No Project No Activity Alternative generates 6.5 billion less in total
output 2.7 billion less in personal income and 98,000 fewer jobs than the benefits associated with the Proposed Project

However these differences overstate the level of potential unrealized indirect use of service economic benefits associated with the No Project No Activity Alternative It is
anticipated that air passengers projected to use OCX and JWA under the Proposed Project could be accommodated at other airports in the region under the No Project No Activity
Alternative Thus the visitors to Orange County expected to use OCX and JWA under the Proposed Project will still spend time and money in Orange County under the No Project No
Activity Alternative
As regional ground access travel times increase which regional transportation planning agencies expect will occur reaching Orange County from airports outside of the County will
become less convenient and more time consuming Because visitors both business and pleasure to the region arriving by air desire convenient fast transportation between their
origin and destination this will place leisure and business destinations in Orange County at a competitive disadvantage in the region potentially leading to reductions in the amount of
time spent and associated expenditures in Orange County under the No Project No Activity Alternative

There is no reliable method to quantify this reduction in visitor expenditures caused by less convenient access to the County by air passengers However the magnitude of the impact
could be significant and would result in economic benefits generated by visitors to Orange County arriving by air that are less than the level estimated under the Proposed Project

8.2.4.19 Risk of Upset
Implementation of the No Project No Activity Alternative will not result in significant adverse impacts to public health and safety related to risk of upset conditions This
alternative would avoid impacts compared to the Proposed Project However since the Proposed Project impacts are insignificant tier mitigation no significant impacts would be
avoided by this alternative

8.2.5 Conclusions
The No Project No Activity Alternative would

0 i Not meet any of the general project objectives and would not meet the aviation objectives relating to passenger and cargo demand service opportunities industry

County of Orange EIRNo 573 Alternatives 153
153 Page 154 155
i i
Ill

1 iv

Not avoid impacts on land uses General Plan consistency and regional air quality emissions
Result in new or additional significant adverse impacts to regional VMT regional air quality emissions hydrology public services aesthetics recreation aviation safety
at JWA asbestos and lead paint hazards and economics and
Avoid or lessen impacts on topography soils geology and seismic aviation noise at the El Toro site including sleep disturbances and recreation uses toxic air
contaminants at El Toro utilities Prime Agricultural Soils energy resources aviation safety at El Toro new hazardous materials and wastes and risk of upset
However the Proposed Project would have no significant impact tier mitigation in these categories except for sleep disturbance jet fuel consumption toxic air
contaminants and agricultural resources
I III summary the No Project No Activity Alternative would avoid unmitigatable project
impacts on agricultural resources toxic air contaminants near the El Toro site and noise impacts on sleep disturbance and recreation uses However this alternative would increase

significant aviation noise and air quality impacts at regional airports including toxic air contaminants and sleep disturbance This alternative would result in new or additional
impacts in several categories including significant increases in regional VMT and regional air quality emissions

competition economic growth business activities existing land use restrictions or General Plan implementation

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 154
154 Page 155 156
8.3 ETRPA NONAVIATION PLAN ALTERNATIVE
This section presents the potential impacts of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative as measured against the existing setting as well as a comparison of the alternative's impacts to
those of the Proposed Project at build out In those instances in which the comparison of the alternative to the Proposed Project is materially affected by the phasing of the project i e in
those instances in which the impacts of the Proposed Project during the phasing years are materially different from those impacts at year 2020 a comparison of the alternative's
impacts to those of the Proposed Project for the applicable phasing year is also provided

8.3.1 Aviation Uses
No aviation reuse activities are proposed for MCAS El Toro under the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

8.3.2 Nonaviation Revenue Support Uses
The El Toro Reuse Planning Authority ETRPA composed of the cities of Irvine Lake
Forest Dana Point Laguna Beach Laguna Hills Laguna Niguel and Mission Viejo prepared a nonaviation plan Millennium Plan April 1998 for the El Toro site In October

of 1997 the Board of Supervisors directed that if ETRPA timely delivered to the County a nonaviation development proposal for El Toro in form and detail adequate for analysis in the
Master Development Plan EIR the proposal would be analyzed as an alternative in the EIR The Board also directed that environmental comparison to the Proposed Project in the EIR
be provided on all environmental categories where the nonaviation alternative would result in significantly different impacts than the Proposed Project At a minimum the alternative
will be analyzed for noise air quality and traffic impacts
EIR No 563 included analysis of a nonaviation development plan for the El Toro site Alternative C which was analyzed at a level of detail equal to the aviation alternatives
Alternatives A and B The EIR No 563 nonaviation alternative included a land use mix
similar in key areas to the ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative While there are differences in the individual land uses and land use locations the overall objective of both alternatives is

similar that is to establish a nonaviation planned community with a mix of residential employment institutional and open space recreation uses including a major visitor serving
commercial use component In its certification of Final EIR No 563 the LRA determined that the nonaviation alternative would not meet the objectives of the project and would have
certain impacts greater than the CRP
Since the nonaviation alternative was rejected during certification of Final EIR No 563 the nonaviation plan is not required to be carried fonward for analysis in Draft EIR No 573
However the LRA directed that the nonaviation alternative will be analyzed in case an aviation plan is determined to be infeasible at a fkture date

County of Orange EIR No 573 8 a Alternatives 155
155 Page 156 157
The land uses assumed on the former MCAS El Toro site under this alternative are organized around four districts three of which would be developed with mixes of various
land uses and are referred to as an Arts and Culture district an Education Research and Technology ERT district and a Sports and Entertainment district The fourth district is
designated as an undeveloped Habitat Reserve district which would not generate an appreciable amount of vehicle traffic Each of the three developed districts contains a
mixed use village as its core activity center The mixed use villages are envisioned as intensive activity areas composed of both residential and nonresidential uses that establish
the theme for each district Figure 8 1 depicts the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative
Under this alternative and as in the No Project No Activity Alternative JWA is assumed to continue providing general aviation and short and medium haul domestic air passenger
services at a service level of 8.4 MAP an average of 23.0 thousand passengers per day all of which are non connecting passengers JWA is also assumed to continue to annually
handle approximately 6.4 thousand tons of domestic belly cargo and 13.6 thousand tons of arr express cargo

8.3.3 Phasing Build Out Over 20 Years
Development and build out of this alternative is proposed to occur over a 20 year period in four 5 year phases However the feasibility of this absorption rate for the proposed uses is
questionable Phase One development would encompass a 1,826 acre area north and south of Irvine Boulevard at the western boundary of MCAS El Toro nearest the Eastern
Transportation Corridor Uses designated for the Phase One area include industrial hightechnology and commercial uses as well as a small portion of the ERT Village Other
Phase One uses include a sports stadium auto center office and industrial uses and a 995 acre habitat area

Phase Two includes an Arts and Culture Village park space Central Park and a resort hotel conference center with related golf course This phase also includes development of
residential areas related to the Village and areas adjacent to the Village
Phase Three includes ERT uses in the southwest comer of MCAS El Toro and Entertainment Mixed Use areas Phase Three developments also include an Outdoor Sports
Complex and single family residential development north of Irvine Boulevard
Phase Four development includes additional residential areas near Central Park and south of Trabuco Drive Also included are residential areas adjacent to the existing golf course and
research and development areas Phase Four also plans for the final development of Central Park

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 156
156 Page 157 158
8.3.4 Attainment of Project Objectives
This alternative would meet the general project objectives of development and surrounding land use compatibility The ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative would not meet the
general project objectives of economic opportunities timely implementation and special planning of the aviation related objectives with the exception of preserving general aviation
opportunities but not the objective of enhancing these opportunities

8.3.5 Environmental Impacts of the ETRPA Nonaviation
Plan Alternative

8.3.5.1 Land Use
Under the ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative the MCAS El Toro site is proposed to be developed with a variety of nonaviation uses including parks and open space residential
areas employment uses and an arena stadium As with the Proposed Project the proposed perimeter land uses along the northeast and southeast portions of the site are primarily open
space such as golf habitat and park areas These uses are similar in intensity or less intense than the existing and General Plan approved uses off site The northwest portion of the
MCAS El Tom site under this alternative would be developed with business technology education research and development and village uses Villages include a range of residential
densities retail office and hotel uses These uses are consistent with the employment uses provided for in the Orange County General Plan in the adjacent areas The ETRPA
Nonaviation Alternative perimeter uses for the southwest portion of the site abutting the business park uses in the City of Irvine include business park transportation center
adjacent to the Irvine Transportation Center entertainment uses and a stadium near the confluence of I 5 and I 405 These proposed uses are compatible with the existing business
park light industry in this area There are no significant land use conflicts associated with the proposed land uses of the ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative

This alternative dues nut include any agricultural uses therefore there is no impact of agriculture on more urbanized development The loss of agricultural acreage is addressed in
Section 8.12.4.11 Natural Resources and Energy Concerns that an airport would attract undesirable land uses such as sexually oriented businesses is not an issue since there is no
airport use proposed in the ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative
The ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative does not address any changes to JWA therefore the impacts are the same as the No Project No Activity Alternative E There are no significant
land use impacts at JWA associated with the ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative
In summary the impacts of this alternative related to land use are generally less than or comparable to the impacts under the Proposed Project

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 157
157 Page 158 159
8.3.5.2 General Plan Consistency
The ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative would require several General Plan amendments This alternative is not consistent with the current Public Facilities and Open Space designations
of the Orange County General Plan and would require an amendment to the Land Use Element An amendment to the Noise Element of the County General Plan and the AELUP
would be needed to eliminate aviation noise contours relating to the MCAS El Toro site The ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative is not consistent with the City of Irvine General Plan
The ETRPA Nonaviation Alternative would require amendments to the same elements as the Proposed Project with the exception of the Safety Element of the Orange County General
Plan and therefore would result in comparable impacts to General Plan consistency as the Proposed Project

8.3.5.3 Transportation and Circulation
The transportation and circulation impacts with full build out of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative were analyzed for two scenarios The first scenario analyzed the effects of
the alternative on the existing roadway system without any mitigating improvements and without the impacts of committed growth and development for the purpose of determining
the significance of this alternative's impacts In order to identify specific project related roadway impruvements required with Ml build out of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan
Alternative the second scenario analyzed the effects of the alternative based on existing roadway conditions plus committed improvements and foreseeable development as
represented by OCP 96 development growth fur 2020 Trtic generation characteristics of JWA and the former MCAS El Toro site under this alternative were determined according to
two components 1 the ERTPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative land uses at the former MCAS El Tore site and 2 aviation uses at JWA

The AM and PM peak hour and ADT trips generated by the nonaviation land uses at the former MCAS El Toro site and by the aviation operations at JWA with build out of this
alternative are summarized in Table 8.3 l Refer to Section 13 O in Traffk Analysis Technical Report Appendix D for detailed information on the methodology applied to
produce trip generation estimates for the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

Table 8.3 l
Trip Generation Summary ETFWA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

1 Former MCAS El Toro Site ETRPA Nonaviation Plan
Aitemative Land Uses
JWA 1,552 1,037 2,589 2,047 2,050 4,097 5 1,706
TOTAL 25,330 3,458 33,788 13,803 27,205 41,008 391,322

Alternatives 158
158 Page 159 160
The circulation plan that is proposed to provide access to the former MCAS El Toro site as well as to facilitate the project's on site circulation needs under this alternative is described
in detail in Section 13.0 of the Trtic Analysis Technical Report Appendix D The plan is comprised of a number of arterial roads proposed to be constructed both on and off site and
an ETC East Leg access system that provides full access at Trabuco Road and improved access at Irvine Boulevard No changes to the connections which currently provide access
between JWA and the surrounding circulation system are envisioned with development of this alternative

Existing Conditions Plus Alternative Build Out Impact Analysis
The impacts of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative on existing conditions were identified by superimposing Ml build out of the project onto the existing circulation setting
This scenario analyzes the impacts of the project without any mitigating improvements and without the impacts of committed growth and development and is intended to identify the
uniquely applicable potential significant effects of the alternative for the purpose of determining the significance of the alternative's impacts

The on site and site access plans for this alternative were applied in the existing plus project analysis with the exception of the ETC access system improvements since the ETC had not
yet been constructed under 1997 conditions and road extensions associated with the El Toro circulation plan which assume unplanned off site alignments The resulting existing plus
project peak hour LOS were compared with corresponding results for existing conditions refer to Section 13.0 in the Traffic Analysis Technical Report for detailed summaries of the
existing plus project traf5c volumes and LOS as well as comparisons between existing and existing plus project conditions Table 8.3 2 summarizes the intersection locations arterial
roads and freeway ramps which are significantly impacted under existing plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative conditions

This scenario i e build out of the 20 year project without the consideration of committed improvements to the roadway network or the impacts of other growth and development will
never actually occur and is analyzed to determine the significance of this alternative's potential trtic impacts Potential impacts identified in the existing plus ETRPA
Nonaviation Plan Alternative analysis would be mitigated through the implementation by others of committed non project related roadway improvements during the actual phased
development of this alternative and through the implementation of specific project mitigation measures identified based on the existing plus committed impact analysis that is
summarized below for this alternative

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 159
159 Page 160 161
Table 8.3 2 Existing Plus ETFWA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Impact Summary
Bake Portola E Central Park Irvine Jeffrey I 405 SB Ramps Jefiey Walnut I 5 SB Irvine Irvine
Millennium Barranca Millennium Central Park
Millennium Irvine Millennium Jeronimo
Sand Canyon I 5 NB Ramps Sand Canyon I 5 SB Ramps
Technology Barranca Irvine Center Lake Forest
1 Irvine Irvine
Irvine Irvine
Lacuna Hills Millennium Marine Bake Jrvine Trabuco Irvine
Lake Forest Millennium Rockfield
Bake Jerunimo Irvine Lake Forest

Research Irvine Bake Toledo INine Lake Forest
Sand Canyon Trabuco Jamboree Irvine 1 Irvine Tustin Trabuco Irvine
W Central Park Irvine La Paz Cabot I 5 SB Bake Commercentre Laguna Hills Lake Forest W Central Park Portola El Tore Rockfield Lake Forest
Alton Irvine Lake Forest Jeronimo Lake Forest Alton Toledo
Bake I 5A 405 NB Ramps Irvine Irvine Lake Forest Rockfield Lake Forest Trabuco Lake Forest Lake Forest Bake I 5 405 SB Ramps Los Alisos Muirlands

Jeffrey Alton Jeffrev I 405 NB Ramps Irvine Irvine Newport Old h vine 1 Tustin
ii IMPACTED ARTERIAL ROADS Irvine Jeffrey to Research COunty Laguna Canyon south of El Toro County
Laguna Beach
1 Irvine Millennium to Trabuco I county 1 Irvine Alton to Bake 1 INine I fortola w Central Park to FTC 1 County Sand Canyon Trabuco to I 5 Irvine

Laguna Canyon I 405 to SR 73 Countylkvine Bake north of Irvine Trabuco Irvine Lake Forest
IMPACTED FREEWAY RAMPS I 5 at Bake SB Loop On ramp
I 5 at Bake NB Direct On ramp Irvine Irvine I 5 at Sand Canyon NB On I 5 at Sand Canyon SB Off Irvine Irvine

Alternatives 8 66 County of Orange EIR No 573 160
160 Page 161 162
Alternative Build Out Impact Analysis
In order to identify project impacts that require specific project related roadway improvements traffic conditions were analyzed based on build out of the ETRPA
Nonaviation Plan Alternative The traffic forecasts were prepared based on the circulation system that is committed to be in place within the study area by 2020 and OCP 96
development growth for 2020 Peak hour levels of service with and without the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative were compared in order to identify the locations on the
existing plus committed circulation system that require specific project related improvements to address the tr c impacts of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

Table 8.3 3 summarizes the intersection locations arterial road and fieeway tollway ramps which are significantly impacted by this alternative at build out refer to Section 13.0 in the
Appendix D Traffic Analysis Technical Report for detailed summaries of the tr c volumes and LOS as well as comparisons between existing plus committed conditions with and
without this alternative The summary table also identifies circulation improvements which serve as mitigation measures for this alternative's impacts as well as the project's obligation
till share or fair share to implement the proposed mitigation improvements
Implementation of the circulation improvements identified in Table 8.3 3 would effectively mitigate to a level of insignificance all of the project impacts identified with project
conditions with the exception of the intersection of Bake Parkway and the WI 405 1 northbound ramps and the northbound direct on ramp from Bake Parkway to the 1 5 I 405
Freeways As noted in the summary table no feasible improvements that would address the impacts of this alternative were able to be identified at these two locations

In comparison as discussed in detail in Section 4.3.6.6 of this EIR under the Proposed Project phasing years four intersection locations and two arterial roadway segments would
be significantly impacted under Phase 1 conditions 2005 five intersection locations and two arterial roadway segments would be significantly impacted under Phase 2 conditions
2010 and nine intersection locations and two arterial roadway segments would be significantly impacted under Phase 3 conditions 2015 In each case however the
identified impacts will be mitigated to a level below significant during the applicable phasing year see Section 4.3.7.2 Table 4.3 20

This alternative includes new arterial highways that would require a cooperative study and an amendment of the MWH maintained by OCTA In addition this alternative includes
highways e g Millennium Parkway that are parallel to the Eastern and Foothill Toll Road and that could adversely impact toll revenues potentially requiring that Caltrans compensate
the TCA Finally this alternative proposes new interchanges such as the Trabuco RoadETC Interchange which require Caltrans TCA approval

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 161
161 Page 162 163
Table 8.3 3 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Mitigation Improvements
ETC East Leg NB Irvine County Convert second EB free right turn Fully fund 100 lane to third through lane and
convert NB left nun lane to shared
left turn second right turn lane ETC NB Off Santiago county Convert NB shared second left tum Fully fund
100 Canyon lanelright4um lane to right turn

lane and add a NB shared second left turn lane second right turn lane
Lake Forest Portola county Add NB right turn lane and convert Fully fbnd 100 second NB through lane to shared
second through second right turn lane
Millennium Alton county Add fourth SB through lane Fully tid 100 Millennium h vine county Add third EB and WI3 through lanes Fully fimd 100
Moulton Laguna Hills county Convert SB right turn lane to tiee Fully fund 100 right4urn lane
Research Irvine county Add third and fourth WI3 through Fully fund 100 lanes third EB through lane second
NB and EB left lanes and dual SB right turn lanes
Sand Canyon Trabuco county Add third NB and SB through lanes Fully fund 100 second EB through lane and second
WB lefhm lane Trabuco Irvine county Add third EB and WB through lanes Fully fimd 100
and second NB right turn lane W Central Park Irvine county Add third EB and WB through lanes Fully fund 100
J ey Irvine County Irvine Add third EB and WB through lanes Fair share 22 Alton Jeronimo Irvine Add second EB and WB through Fully fimd 100
lanes Bake I YI 405 NB Irvine No feasible improvements could be Not applicable
Ramps identified Bake I 5 405 SB Irvine Convert second EB right turn Iane Fully f'und 100
Ramps to third l turn lane Culver Irvine Irvine Add fourth WB through lane Fully fund 100
Jeffrey Walnut M SB Irvine Convert WI3 through lane to shared Fully find 100 through second right turn lane
Sand Canyon I 5 NB Irvine Add third SB through lane NB Fully find 100 Ramps right turn lane NB shared third
through lane second right turn lane second EB through lane second
WI3 through lane and second WB left turn lane

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 162
162 Page 163 164
Table 8.3 3 ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Mitigation Impruvements
Bake Jeronimo
Bake Toledo
Jamboree Portola

Irvine Lake Forest
Irvine Lake Forest
Irvine Tustin

Add second NB and SB left turn Fully fund 100 lanes
Add WB right turn lane Fully tid 100
Convert second WB through lane to Fully fimd 100 second ri t tum lane
1 Jamboree Tustin Ranch Irvine Tustin 1 Add fourth NB throwh lane Fair share I 3 Alicia Paseo Valencia Laguna Hills Add second EB right turn lane Fair share 15 0
El Tom Paseo Valencia 1 Laguna Hills Add EB right turn lane Fully bd 100 La Paz Cabot I 5 SB Lawna Hills Add EB right turn lane Fair share 1 9
Laguna Hills P Valencia Laguna Hills
I I
Add EB right turn lane and convert Fair share 13 Laguna Woods third EB through lane to shared
third throuehlsecond rid tum lane El Tore Jeronimo Lake Forest Add second SB lane Fair share 27
El Tore Rockfield Lake Forest 1 Add fourth NB and SB through Fair share 1 21
Los Alisos Rockfield Lake Forest 1 lanes and EB right turn lane Add second NB lefi turn lane Fully fund Alicia Jeronimo Mission Viejo Add second NB left turn lane Fair share 20
Red Hill I 5 NB Ramps Tustin 1 Add WB shared second lefMum Fully fund 100
Red Hill Irvine Tustin Second right turn lane Convert NB rig urn lane to Fair share 8 shared second through right turn
lane IMPACTED ARTERIAL ROADS I

I Irvine ETC East Leg to county Improve to six lanes Fully fund 100 Research

Trabuco Jeffrey to Sand Canyon
Laguna Canyon south of El Toro
Irvine Yale to Jeffkey

county Improve to four lanes Fully fund 100
Laguna Improve to four lanes Fair share 14 Beach County
Irvine Improve to six lanes Fully fund 100

County of Orange EIR No 573 163
163 Page 164 165
Table 8.3 3
ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Mitigation Improvements

Jamboree north of Tustin Ranch
ETC East Leg at Santiago Canvon NB OffkamD
TudidIrvine
county
ETC East Leg at Trabuco County NB Offkamp

I 5 at Bake NB Direct On ramp
I 5 at Jamboree NB Offramp Irvine
I 5 at Alicia SB Off ramp Laguna Hills

I 5 at La Paz SB Offramp Laguna Hills
FTC at Portola East NB Lake Forest

Improve to six lanes Fair share 31OO
Add second drop lane from tollway 1 Fully fund 100 mainline to off ramp
Provide two drop lanes from the SB Fully fUnd 100 I 5 connector ramp in addition to
one lane from the NB I 5 connector ramP
No feasible improvements could be Not applicable identified
Add second drop lane from freeway Fully fknd 100 mainline to off ramp
Convert second drop lane from tieeway mainline to off ramp to
second auxiliary lane to the off
Fair share

P Add second drop lane from freeway Fair share 22
mainline to off ramp Add second drop lane from tollway Fully fund 100

mainline to off ramp Abbreviations NB northbound EB eastbound
SB southbound WB westbound

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 164
164 Page 165 166
Comparison of Alternative Impacts to Proposed Project Impacts
This alternative generates 339,6 16 daily trips from the MCAS El Toro site compared to the Proposed Project's 176,123 daily trips at MCAS El Tore This alternative would not

decrease traffic at JWA whereas the Proposed Project would decrease JWA trips by 14,760
Comparison to Existing Conditions
A comparison of the impacts of the Existing plus ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative and
Existing plus Proposed Project is as follows

impacted Intersections
The following intersections are impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

Bake Portola
Sand Canyon Trabuco
Bake I YI 405 SB Ramps
Bake Rockfield
Jefiey Alton
Jeffrey I 405 NB Ramps
Jeffrey I 405 SB Ramps
Jefiey Walnut I 5 SB

Sand Canyon I 5 NB Ramps
Sand Canyon I 5 SB Ramps
Irvine Center Lake Forest
Bake Irvine Trabuco
Bake Toledo
Los Alisos Muirlands
Alicia Jeronimo
Newport Old Irvine

The following intersections are impacted by the ETIXPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative only
E Central Park Irvine
Millennium Barranca
Millennium Central Park
Millennium Irvine
Millennium Jeronimo
Millennium Marine
Millennium Rockfreld
Research Irvine
Trabuco Irvine
W Central Park Irvine
W Central Park Portola
Alton Irvine
Alton Toledo
Bake I WI 405 NB Ramps

I 5 HOV Ramps Barranca
I 5 NB Ramps Alton
Technology Barranca
Bake Jeronimo
Jamboree Irvine
La Paz Cabot I 5 SB
Bake Commerce e
El Toro Rockfield
Lake Forest Jeronimo
Lake Forest Rockfield
Lake Forest Trabuco
Alicia Muirlands
La Paz Muirlands I 5 NB

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 165
165 Page 166 167
Impacted Arterial Roads
The following intersections are impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

l Laguna Canyon I 405 to SR 73
The following arterials are impacted by the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative only
l Irvine Jeffrey to Research l Irvine Alton to Bake
l Irvine Millennium to Trabuco l Sand Canyon Trabuco to I 5
l Portola W Central Park to FTC l Bake north of Irvine Trabuco
l Laguna Canyon south of El Tore

The Proposed Project impacts the following additional arterials
l Laguna Canyon south of El Toro
l Culver Bryan to Trabuco

Impacted Freeway Ramps
The following freeway ramps Nonaviation Plan Alternative are impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA

l I 5 at Sand Canyon NB On
l I 5 at Sand Canyon SB Off

The following freeway ramps are impacted by the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative only

l I 5 at Bake SB Loop On ramp
l I 5 at Bake NB Direct On ramp

The following freeway ramp is impacted by the Proposed Project only
l I 5 at Culver SB Off

Comparison to Existing Plus Committed Conditions
Impacted Intersections
The following intersections are impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 844 166
166 Page 167 168
l ETC East Leg NB Irvine l Sand Canyon Trabuco
l Jeffrey Irvine
l Sand Canyon I 5 NB Ramps
l Sand Canyon I 5 SB Ramps
l Alicia Paseo Valencia

l La Paz Cabot I S SB
El Toro Rockfield l
Alicia Jeronimo l
Red Hill I 5 NB Ramps l
Red Hill Irvine

The following intersections are impacted by the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative only
ETC NB Off Santiago Canyon
Lake Forest Portola
Millennium Alton
Millennium Imine
Moulton Laguna Hills
Research Irvine
Trabuco Irvine
W Central Park Irvine
Alton Jeronimo
Bake I 5 I 405 NB Ramps
Bake 1 5 I 405 SB Ramps
Culver Irvine

Jeffrey WalnutA 5 SB
Sand Canyon Irvine Center
Technology Barranca
Lake Forest Avd Carlota
Bake Jeronimo
Bake Toledo
Jamboree Portola
Jamboree Tustin Ranch
El Toro Paseo Valencia
Laguna Hills P Valencia
El Toro Jeronimo
Los Alisos Rockfield

The following intersections are impacted by the Proposed Project only
l Sand Canyon Irvine
l Jeffrey Trabuco
l Tustin Ranch Irvine

Impacted Arterial Roads
The following arterial roads are impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative

l Irvine Jeffrey to Sand Canyon
l Laguna Canyon south of El Toro

The ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative alone impacts the following arterials
l Irvine ETC East Leg to Research l Trabuco ETC East Leg to Research
l Santiago Canyon east of ETC l Trabuco Jeffrey to Sand Canyon

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 167
167 Page 168 169
l Irvine Yale to Jeffkey
The Proposed Project alone impacts the following arterials
l Irvine ETC East Leg to PA 2 East Access Road
l Portola ETC West Leg to Culver

Impacted Freeway Tollway Ramps
The following freeway ramp is
Nonaviation Plan Alternative impacted by both the Proposed Project and the ETRPA

l I 5 at La Paz SB Off ramp
The ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative alone impacts the following fieeway tolhvay ramps

Jamboree north of Tustin Ranch
l ETC East Leg at Santiago Canyon NB
Offkmp l l
ETC East Leg at Trabuco NB OffranlP

l I 5 at Bake NB Direct On ramp
l I 5 at Jamboree NB Off ramp
l I 5 at Alicia SB Offkmp
FTC at Portola East NB Off ramp

Level of Significance After Mitigation
Under this alternative impacts to two locations cannot be mitigated to below a level of significance With the Proposed Project all impacts will be reduced to below a level of
significance

8.3.5.4 Noise
Aircraft Noise
Compared to existing conditions this alternative would create significant adverse noise impacts since JWA would have to be expanded to handle additional passengers that could
not be accommodated on the MCAS El Toro site Therefore it is anticipated that there would be a sizable increase in the 60 and 65 CNEL noise contour around JWA in
comparison to both the 1998 and 1985 airport noise contours The total number of jet carrier SENEL events would also increase A possible consequence of this alternative is pressure
on the County to expand JWA to respond to growth in aviation demand and to relax
existing restrictions on the use of JWA including nighttime restrictions Even with the mitigation measures proposed for the Proposed Project and the ETRPA Nonaviation

Alternative the aviation impacts of this alternative would not be reduced to below a level of

Alternatives County of Orange EIR No 573 844 168
168 Page 169 170
insignificance because of the sleep disturbance that would be created by the increased number of
airplanes that would use JWA and the possible increase in nighttime operations if existing restrictions were relaxed

Traffic Noise
Noise associated with vehicular trafk for this project alternative was conducted using the FHWA
highway noise model The FHWA model uses traffic volumes vehicle mix average vehicle speeds road geometry and sound propagation path characteristics to predict hourly

A weighted LEQ values adjacent to a road Vehicle mix is reported in terms of the number
of automobiles medium trucks and heavy trucks The truck categories are defined in the
FHWA model by number of axles and weight To compute a CNEL value for roads the hourly data for a 24 hour period are used according to the CNEL formula Vehicle

distribution over the 24 hour day must be known that is the percentage of vehicles in the daytime period between 7 a m and 7 p m in the evening period between 7 p m and 10
p m and in the night period between 10 p m and 7 a m To determine the location of noise
contours noise levels are calculated at a large number of distances and the location of constant value CNEL is determined

Table 8.3 4 shows the existing road links included in the Airport System Master Plan
ASMP with trtic volumes provided in the traffic report by Austin Foust Associates
Table 8.3 5 shows road links that would have a potential noise increase greater than 1.5 dB over the existing conditions for the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative Existing Plus

ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Conditions A total of 12 road links would have a traffic noise increase between 1.5 and 3.0 dB A total of 15 road links would have an increase of mure
than 3 dB over their corresponding existing conditions levels The noise level increase along these road links due to the implementation of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative
would be considered significant Except along Portcla Parkway west of Jamboree Road
where the 60 dB CNEL noise contour would remain within the roadway right of way existing residences along these other road links may be exposed to traffic noise exceeding 65

dB CNEL
Table 8.3 6 shows the noise levels along the new road links that would be constructed with the implementation of the ETRPA Nonaviation Plan Alternative under the existing
condition Because no road traffic exists for comparison with these road links their impacts
are based on whether there is a potential for existing residences adjacent to these road links to
experience noise level exceeding 65 dB CNEL Except fur areas along portions of East Central Park and East Culture most of these road links would have the 65 dB CNEL noise

contour extend outside the right of way and potentially impact residences along the road
Table 8.3 7 shows the noise levels along existing road links that would have 1.5 dB or more noise increases in year 2020 under the no project scenario Alternative E over the existing
conditions There would be 58 road links that would have 1.5 tu 3 O dB increase in traffic
noise over their corresponding existing level A total of 115 road links would have 3 dB or

County of Orange EIR No 573 Alternatives 169
169 Page 170 171
Lirporr Sylttm Muttr Plan ASMP 1997
Reference CNEfa for crirtinl sqncnts

IDU New Segment Nlmn
3 I 71h do Proqxl

Spd u of ADT mph Lam
22100 3 0

4

30
31
28
2 9
1 3 1 2

4s9 463
461
4 6 2
4 6 0 464

4 6 6
4 6 5
381 382

383 lo4
114
113 102

Ill 106
I00 II0
I05 3 9 5
3 9 6
3 9 4 3 9 7

3 9 0
1 0 3
107
II2
IO1 106

9 9 IO9
363 360
361 3 6 2

3 9 9 4 0 5
400
4 0 2
4 0 3 4 0 4

4 0 6
401
39R
I36

17th e o SR SS 3x00 17th t o Yorba
27bO0 17th w o Newport lwoo

Ist w o EJ Cmino Real 18100 1st wlo Nowport I5300
1st w o Tustin ia 1st w o Yorbm I7800
41h w o SR 55 2 xloo 41 w o Twin 20200
Alicia e o Mafawritc 25800
hlifir nlo I S 60500
Alicia nlo Jcronimo 40500
AIici8 t Muirlands 56300
Alicia nlo Ttabuco 34400 Alicia s o l 5 49100

Alicir sh Moutton 36600
AMa do Pasco Vakncia 43300
hliu Creek c o El Tore 18400 AHm Crack slo Glad 18300

Aliso Crk Jo Lylunn Hills 24500
Alton c o Culver 24200 Allon do I S 42300

Allon do lrvinc Center 24900 Alton c o Jnmboree
i a300 Alton do Llrguna Canyon Id700

Alm cl0 Lake 20600
Alton c o Red Hill 14700 Allon c o Sand Canyon
ldpoo Allon 40 WCJI Yak bp 22900

hlton nlo Jcronimo 22700
Alton do Muirlsndr 32500
hlton rlo lwint 12100
Al n do Muirlands 28800 A Iton do Portola
3800 nrtorl w o Culver 15900

Allon w o East Ydc Loop 20100
Alton w o Irvine Ccntcr 14400
Alton w o Jamboroc 16900 Alton w o Jeffrey
25900 Alton w o Rti Hill
4 3 0 0 Alton w o Sand Canyon ISo

Avd Cariota c o El Tore IS400 Avd Culota c o Lake Forest 10400
hvd Carlob clo Ridac Route I4700 Avd Carbtr w o 81 Tore 29800
Bake n o Commerccntrc 30800 Bake do I S 64900
Bake n o Inim liabuco 36200
Bake n o Jcronimo 43700
B c nlo Muirlands 58600
Bake do Rockfild 52oOO Bake do t 5 4500

Bake 0 Irvitirabuw 41200 Bake do PoftOlr 30800
Baker t o SR 55 ISloo

30
3 0 3 0

30
3 0
3 5 3 0

4 0
4 0
S O 4s

4 5
4 5 4 5

4s 4 5
4 5 3 5
5 5
s5 4 s

5 s
55
s o
5s 45

50
5 5 45

55 55
5 5
5s
5s 5 0

50
5 5
5 0
5 0 5 0

S O 4 0
IS
4 5 4 5

55 5 0
ss
5 0
5 0 5 0

50
SO 5 5

4 0

4 6
6
4 4

4
4 4

6
6
6
6 6

6 6
6
6
6 4

4
4 4

8
6
4
4 4

4
4 4

6 6
6 6
6
6
4
4
4
4 4

4 4
4
4 4

4
sl 6

6
6 6

6
6 4

4

HLRES TS CNEL at 70 dB 6Sd8 6068
wLC R C N E L C N E L CNEI
dBA Ft Ft Ft ID U New Scimcnt Namea 66 RdHW 5 2 111 I35 I38Iccr w a Sk 55

67.7 6 7

64.6 65.1
61.4 66.9
6 S l
70.3
68.7 72.1

74.7
7 3
74.4
72.3 73.8

72 S
73.3 71.7

71.7
73.3 70.7

75.3
7 3 70.7

70.7
7 0
69.7
71.3 70 s

72.6 74.2
69.9
73.6 64.8

7 0
71.1
70.6
70.3 72.2

64.4
69.8 67.5

6 7 I b 8 .6
71.6 73.9
7 6 I 74.6
74.4 75.7
75.2
64.6 74.2

73.9
67.4

RdHW
RdHW RdHW

RdHW RdHW
2 9 RdHW
5 0
4 0

I
7 8
9 8
7 0 9 0

7 3
8 2
68 68

8 7
5 6 II8

a3
57
5 9 5 0

49
6 5 5 4

7 8 100
52
9 2
c RdHW S2

60
S8
5 4
7 1 RdHW

S O 3 3
3 2
40 6 4

9 7 132
10 1 0 1
I24 IlS
RdHW 9 7
9 7
3 3

6 7 I44
60 130
4 2 9 0 46 98

4 0 8 7
6 2 I34 4 5 9 7

108 232
8 6 I84
I53 3 3 0
2 2 2 477 I68 362

212 456
IS1 325 I93 4 1 6

I58 3 4 1
I76 3 7 9 I46 315

146 315
I87 403
120 258 254 5411

I 7 9 385
122 262
I28 275 I08
232 lob 2 2 9

140 301
II6 251
lb8 362 215 463

Ill 2 3 9 199 4 2 9
5 2 111
II1 239 I30 2 7 9

I26 271
116 251
153 3 3 0
4 6 lo0 108 232

71 I53
6 8 I46
8 6 184 I 3 8 297

208 4 4 9
283 610
232 ml 21 470

266 574 247 532
4 8 IO3 2 0 8 4 4 9
2 0 8 4 4 9
7 0 151

irport 8yalen Muttr Phn ASMP 1997
Irhreacc CNEIJ tbt trWin mqmtnb

a7 B do Culver
9 6 Bmanca do Irvine Ccnlcr 85 E d o Jamboree

9 4 Barmnca e o Lqlau Canyon
8 9 e do take
a3 Fhrmra do Red Hill
9 3 Bufrmca do Sand Canyon 9 8
B clo Tcchnobgy 88 B do wm Yak L4mp

347 Bumcr w o Alton
86 R w o Culver 9 0 B w o Eur Yek Loop

95 B w o Irvine Center
8 4 Bamnco w o Junbonc
91 B w o Jeflicy 9 7 Ban mm w o Tcctmlo y

I42 Birch clo MaizAtihur
1W Birch n o North Bristol
200 Birch Jo North Bristol 201 Birch do So Brislol

I43 l h w a Jmnbott 1 4 5 Bristol do Red Hill
IS4 B to1 wlo Red Hill 202 Browning nlo FIryan
203 Browning nlo El Camino ReaI
204 Browning n o WaInut
3 9 Bryan do Culvct 3 8 Bryan e o Jamboree

3 s Bryan W O Browning
3 7 Btyn w o Jamboree 4 0 Eryan w o Jtmty

34 Dryan w o Red 1IiIl
3 6 Bryan w o Tustin Ranch 139 cunpusdo Jamborae

I37 Ctunpus e o MacArthur I41 Campus e o University
19s Campu nlo North Bristol
I96 Campw do North Bristol 138 Campus w o Jlmbrmc

I40 Campus w o University 238 Carlran do Michelson
323 Commacentrc w o Bake 25s Culver n a Alton
2 5 4 Culver n o Burancn
2 4 9 Culver n o Bryan 257 Culver n o 1 40s

232 Culver nl43 Ifv inc Ccntcr
2 5 6 Culver n o Main 2 5 0 Culver n o T l S

253 Culver nlo Wuncr
238 Culver do I 405 2 5 9 Culver s o Michelson

260 Culver Sro Univtrrity 152 Del Mnr Jo Newport NB
IS3 Del Mar W Q Irvine a 2 Dytl do SR 55
81 Dyer w o Hokl Tmrs
273 EaslYalelmprhAhm
232 EaslYal8lAmprwhrmca

Spd u or ADT mph Lanes
ZilOO 23100
16100
24700
3200
19000
nc o 4400

14800
22300
13300 22300

I8300
10900 28900

16700
I8400
9500 I4800

5900
5900 7400

3oooo 2s200
2900
2400 2600

7800
II400 12400

I2600 5200
14300
I2200
l9100
20600
20700 31400

27500
I5000 i 8300

2300
500 44400

43100
16800 5o9oo

43200 4s300
27300 44200
49500 36ooo
37100
6400 43300
32500
11500
10100

4 0 4s
55
S O
5s
50
S O 55

S O 45
S O 5 0
5 0
S5 S O

S O
SJ
4 0 4 0

4 0 4 0
4 0 4 5
4 5
4 0 4 0

3s
4 5 45

4 0
4s
S O 4 0

4s
4s
4 0 4 5

4 s
4s
4 0
4 5 3 5

4 5
5 5 55

4 5 4s
5s 5 5
4 5
55
4 5 45

45
3 0
3 0
4 0
4 0
4 s
4 5

4 4
4
6
4
4 4

4
4
4
4 6

4
4 6

4 4
4
4
4 2

4 4
4
4 4

2
4 4

4
4 4

4
4
4
4 4

6
4

t
6
4
6 6

3
4 6

6
3 6

6 6
6
2
2
6
6 4

4

ELrlEwrrs
CNEL at 70 dB 65dB 66dB
5arLc R C N E L CNEL CNEI

dBA IF 4 7 0 1 1'0 3 WL 2 2 2

70.9 5 7 124 266
7 1 .1 6 3 I36 2 9 2
7 2 6 9 I49 3 2 0
64.1 c RdHW 4 6 98 70.8 5 8 I26 271

73.2 8 4 182 391
65.5 2 6 5 7 I22
69.7 4 9 I06 2 2 9
70.4 5 3 115 2 4 7
69.3 4 6 9 8 2 1 2 71.5
65 I40 301 70,7 s7 122
2 6 2 69.4 4 8 104 2 2 5

72.6 7 7 166 3 5 7
70.3 53 II5 2 4 7
71.7 6 8 I46 315 65.4
RdHW 5 2 I I I 67.3 3 2 6 9 149

4 .5 RdHW 3 7 8 0 63.3
I 7 3 7 8 0 61.3 RdlIW 4 4 9 4

71.7 6 4 138 2 9 7 70.9 5 7 124
2 6 6 60.3 x RdHW z RdliW 5 0

59.4 RdHW RdHW 4 4
58.4 RdHW If 3 6
65.8 26 57 I22 67.5 3 4
7 2 156 66.6 2 8 61 I32

67.9 3 6 7 8 I68 65.2
2 5 5 3 II5 67.2
3 2 68 I4b 47.8 3 5 7 6 I63

69.7 4 8 I03 2 2 2
68.8 4 0 8 6 184 70.1 S O
108 2 3 2 71.9 66 142
3 0 6 71.3 61 I32 2 8 3

67.4 3 3 7 0 1st
69.5 4 6 100 21s
57.8 RdHW RdllW RdHW
53.9 RdHW RdlIW RdHW
75s I24 266 5 7 4 75.4 120 2S8 ss7

69.2 4 4 9 4 2 0 2 7 4 9 1 196 4 2 2
75.4 120 258 5 5 7
75.6 124 2 6 6 574
71.3 6 0 I30 2 7 9 75.5 122 2 6 2 5 6 5

7 4 9 0 193 4 1 6 72.5 7 2 I56 33s
72.6 7 s I61 3 4 6
62.4 14 3 0 64
bO 6 4 RdHW 2 3 4 9
7 2 6 6 142 3 0 6
70.8 s4 116 251 67.5
3 4 7 3 I58
b6.9 31 6 7 I44

~ EIR
No 573 C o u n t y o f Orange Table 8.314 SOURCE LSA Associates Inc Q 99

Traffic Noise Model Resull Existing Conditions 170
170 Page 171 172
Airport Symhn Matter Pbn ASMP 1997
R rrncc CNEIa for erlrtiaa rqmtrtr

IDI Ntw Scrmml Warner
274 EtStY LOOpdOAkon
64 Fdtnaer do Jmbrce
62 Edinacr rlo Rtd Hill 61 Edinaer w o Rtd HII1

60 Edlnjp w o SR SS
44 El Camin Rut cl0 Red I lit
41 El Camtm Real nIti Main 46 El Camino Real w o Jrmbotee

42 El Camin Real w o Newpt
43 El Camino Rud w o Red Hill 45 El Camino w o Tuscin Rsnch

444 El Tom do Lagma CMnyorl
431 El TONI do Mqucrile
432 El Tom e o Smtr Muauila 439 El Two nlo B l S

430 El Tom n o Clknn Rmch
436 El Tore n o Jcrontmo 437 El Two nlo Muirlands

438 El Tore n o Rod td 434 El Tore do Tmbuco
443 El Ton s o Aliso Creek 440 El Tom Jo Avd Culota
435 El Tore I Tmkr r
442 El Tom w o Moulbn 441 El Tore w o Puoo V ncia

433 El Tore w o Saner Mquita
559 FTC do Attml
560 FTC J o l c Forest
558 FTC do Polwla I FTC fI0 Santa Marauita

308 c lenn Ranch nlo Portola
309 Gknn Ranch w o El Tore 455 Glenwood wto Aliso Cmk

454 Glen w o Moulton
I71 GraJd do Dyer
I70 Grtnd do Edinp 242 Hawud Iv0 Ah

241 Hawud nlo B239 I tarvard n o Irvine Ccnkr
243 Hwvard nlo MJn
245 Harvti do University 240 Haward Jo twine Cenlct

244 HIlnard da Main
246 Haward Jo Univcnity IS9 Ho11 nlo lwinc

MO I tall Jo lnrine
St6 I 405 do 1 s 580 I 405 do JMlbort c

578 I 105 do SR 55 512 t 405 3Q Culver
511 t 405 do Junbree
583 1405 Jtfky sa4 l 405 do Snd Curyon

585 l 405 sfo SR 133
579 1405 do SR 55 562 1 S do SRJS

s76 Id I o Alicia
571 I 5 do Alron 573 l 5 rlo Bnkc

568 1 s rlo Culver

CWBL RWULTS
CNEL It ta ctB 65 d6 6 dB
spd Of S9fFX R CNEL CNEL CNEI ADT mph Iann dBA Ft FL Ft

13300 45 4 68.1 37 80 173
206lKt 50 6 71.2 61 I32 283 l79tnI 5s 6 71.6
67 I44 311 28900 40 4 70.2 50
IO8 232 32600 45 4 72
68 146 315 aam 35 4 63.7 RdHW 38 a2

64fm 35 4 62.3 RdHW 31 66 13500 35 4 65.5 RdHW so 108
am 35 4 63.7 RdHW 38 82
lllcm 35 4 RdHW 44 95 5500 35 4 Yl RdHW 27 59

17100 3s 2 66.5 27 59 I28
II700 55 2 69.7 51 I09 236 as00 55 6 68.3 II a8 No

52800 35 6 71.4 58 I26 271
11100 5s 2 69.5 48 IO4 225
33800 S O 6 73.3 86 184 397
36360 50 6 73.6 90 193 416
42200 40 6 71.9 6S 140 301 27500 S O 5 72.4 75 161 346

29ooo 4s 6 71.5 63 I36 292 34200 35 6 69.5 44 94 202
31500 SO 6 73 a2 176 379 197Qo 50 6 71 59 I28 275
35300 i 6 71.1 57 124 266 l9ooo 6 71.8 70 I51 325
21000 65 6 74.1 I03 222 477 Mooo ii 6 73.5 92 I99 429
23ooO 6 74.5 to9 236 SO8 2OOOO 6S 6 73.9 100 215 463
lo600 55 4 69.3 47 to1 2 1 8
4100 5s 4 65.2 25 54 II6 llooD 50 4 68.4 40 87 I87

8100 S O 4 67.5 35 75 161
22800 40 6 49.2 43 92 199 26900 45 6 71.2 60 130 279

11300 S O 4 68.6 41 aa I90
lllOO 50 4 68.5 40 87 tat 2 67.8 37 79 171

l7oQO 4 70.3 54 I I 6 251
I3900 45 2 68.3 39 83 179 10300 S O 4 6a 2 39 a3 I79

I7600 S O 4 70.5 5s 118 254
12100 45 4 67.7 35 76 163 6900 40 4 64 RdHW 42 90

30 4 60.3 c RdHW RdHW 47
t49doo 65 I I 82.6 379 817 1761 25tooo 65 I4 84.9 s40 II63 2