HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT RE: HANGARS DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Agenda Item 10
Reviewed:
AGENDA REPORT City Manager m5W
Finance Director N/A
MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 1 , 2020
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MATTHEW S. WEST, CITY MANAGER
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT
ENTITLED "WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THE HISTORIC TUSTIN
HANGARS?"
SUMMARY
Response to June 9 Orange County Grand Jury Report entitled "What's Happening with
the Historic Tustin Hangars?"
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1 . Approve the attached response to the Orange County Grand Jury and authorize
the Mayor to sign the cover letter on behalf of the City Council
2. Other actions at the pleasure of the City Council
FISCAL IMPACT
Not applicable.
BACKGROUND
On June 9, 2020, the Orange County Grand Jury (Grand Jury) released a report entitled
"What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?,"focused on the actions of the City
of Tustin (City) and County of Orange (County) in maintaining, planning and developing
the two blimp hangars and adjacent properties at Tustin Legacy (former MCAS Tustin).
A copy of the Grand Jury Report is included as Attachment 1 to this staff report.
The purpose and intent as described by the Grand Jury was to "provide a current review
of the County's plan to redevelop the 85-acre parcel within the former MCAS Tustin as a
county regional park"and, since no redevelopment plans by the County have progressed,
"facilitate a path forward that would be most beneficial to the residents of Orange County."
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4B21-9634-69295EF42613
Agenda Report—Grand Jury Response
September 1, 2020
Page 2
In compliance with California Penal Code 933.05, the City is required to provide a
response to each of the Grand Jury findings and recommendations directed to the City
by September 7, 2020. The Grand Jury Report contains five (5) findings and two (2)
recommendations requiring a response by either the County or the City. The County must
respond to all findings and one (1) recommendation, the City must respond to two (2)
findings and one (1) recommendation. The County approved its responses at the August
11, 2020 Board of Supervisors meeting, a copy of which is included as Attachment 2 to
this staff report. The proposed City responses are included as Attachment 3 to the staff
report for City Council consideration with a recommendation for approval.
DISCUSSION
County Regional Park Site History
Discussions and issues surrounding the 85-acre County Regional Park site at Tustin
Legacy are not a recent development. The history dates back to 1963, when the County
identified a Regional Park at Former MCAS Tustin in the first County Master Park Plan.
Since 1963, the City has consistently supported the idea of a County Regional Park at
Tustin Legacy, including-
- Supporting the County's application for a Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC) for a
Regional Park in 1994 (City Council Resolution 94-20)
- Incorporating the Regional Park into the final MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan in 1998
- Supporting the County's Regional Park concept plan development in 2010
- Testifying in support of the County's Regional Park concept plan in 2012 at a Board
of Supervisors meeting
Unfortunately, as the Grand Jury Report states, the County has declined to take any steps
to advance planning for the Regional Park site since the partial roof collapse of the north
hangar in 2013. After the partial roof collapse of the north hangar, the City initiated a
structural and reuse assessment of the south hangar and invited the County to participate
to include an assessment of the north hangar. The County declined to participate.
The County has also shown no interest in entering into a Lease in Furtherance of
Conveyance (LIFOC) for the Regional Park site in order to take responsibility for
maintenance and security while the Department of the Navy (Navy) prepares a Finding
of Suitability to Transfer (FOST). Federal regulations prevent the Navy from making any
significant improvements to the Regional Park site or from investing significant resources
into proper maintenance or security. Because of these issues, the County Regional Park
site has seen rapid physical deterioration since 2013.
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4B21-9634-69295EF42613
Agenda Report—Grand Jury Response
September 1, 2020
Page 3
Recent Activity
In 2019, two major incidents occurred on the Regional Park site requiring a significant
public safety response-
- February: Three (3) individuals climb to top of north hangar, one (1) has to be
airlifted off of the roof
- July: Tustin Police responded to a trespassing call for service in an unsecured
building that ultimately led to an officer involved shooting
Additionally, the City received over 100 calls for service on the Regional Park site in 2019.
These incidents and calls for service directly correlated to the lack of responsibility by the
Navy and County to maintain and secure the Regional Park site.
In response to these incidents and the ongoing issues with the property, the City was
compelled to act on its own to serve the greater Tustin community and decided to
intervene in this situation in the summer of 2019. The City performed the following actions
at its own cost, and without a proprietary interest in the County Regional Park site-
- Safety sweep of all buildings by City Police
- Removal of trespasser personal belongings (if any) from buildings and structures
by City Field Services
- Boarding up and securing of all buildings by City caretaker contractor and City
Field Services
- Trimming/removal of trees by City arborist contractor to clear sightlines into the
property and around buildings
The City also secured additional approvals under a License from the Navy to the City to
perform the following actions to ensure the site stays in a manageable condition and to
deter criminal activity-
- Ongoing Police monitoring and sweeping/securing of buildings
- Ongoing graffiti abatement
- Police use of certain areas for onsite training activities
County Regional Park Site Future
The future of the County use of the site as a Regional Park remains unclear for a variety
of reasons:
- County's PBC application is still with the National Parks Service (NPS), but no
planning progress has been made since 2013
- NPS has yet to give the County a firm deadline to perform or withdraw its
application
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4B21-9634-69295EF42613
Agenda Report—Grand Jury Response
September 1, 2020
Page 4
- The Navy is still in the process of finalizing a FOST, delaying final conveyance of
property
- North Hangar uncertainties (structural condition and reuse)
- City cannot perform due diligence or fully engage with the Navy on disposition of
the property unless the County withdraws its PBC application
The City has consistently supported a County Regional Park PBC. However, given the
deteriorating physical state of the site and the health and safety issues impacting the
Tustin community, the City firmly believes that the County must now either commit to the
site by entering into a lease with the Navy (LIFOC) to stabilize, maintain and secure the
site or withdraw its PBC application from the NPS. The City, as the federally designated
Local Reuse Authority (LRA), would ultimately be responsible for re-planning the site if
the County withdraws its PBC application.
County Responses to Grand Jury Report
The County responses to the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury Report
were approved by the Board of Supervisors on August 11, 2020. The County responses
generally reflect the following-
- County claims the City has not made south hangar reports and studies available
- County cannot commit to proceed since Navy has not issued a FOST
- COVID-19 is keeping County from taking any action or from exploring viable
alternatives
- County will not be deciding to proceed or withdraw PBC application within 90 days
as recommended to do so in the Grand Jury Report
Proposed City Responses to Grand Jury Report
Staff has proposed responses to the findings and recommendations of the Grand Jury
Report that are included with this staff report as Attachment 3. The proposed responses
generally reflect the following-
- City has made all south hangar structural reports publicly available since 2017
- County should enter into a lease or license with the Navy for site maintenance and
security if it intends to proceed with its PBC application
- If County withdraws its PBC application
o City will restart the planning process (acting as the LRA), which would
include community input, and make a recommendation to the Navy for
disposition
o City may enter into a LIFOC with Navy for portions or all of the property if
issues such as price and terms, site development costs and
CEQA/NEPA/Specific Plan matters are resolved
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4B21-9634-69295EF42613
Agenda Report—Grand Jury Response
September 1, 2020
Page 5
Staff has prepared responses on behalf of the City to two (2) findings and one (1)
recommendation of the Grand Jury report and recommends City Council consideration
and approval.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Grand Jury Report
Attachment 2: County of Orange response to Grand Jury Report (approved August 11)
Attachment I Proposed City response to Grand Jury Report
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
GRAND JURY 2019-2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY................................................................................................................................... 1
REASON FOR THE STUDY......................................................................................................3
METHODOF STUDY.................................................................................................................3
BACKGROUNDAND FACTS ...................................................................................................4
MCASTustin Base Closure......................................................................................................4
County's Conceptual Plan........................................................................................................ 8
Department of Navy Base Realignment and Closure .......................................................... 10
Cityof Tustin's South Hangar............................................................................................... 12
RecentCommunication........................................................................................................... 13
FINDINGS................................................................................................................................... 14
RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................................ 15
RESPONSES............................................................................................................................... 16
ResponsesRequired................................................................................................................ 17
Findings................................................................................................................................. 17
Recommendations.................................................................................................................. 17
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................ 18
Countyof Orange.................................................................................................................. 18
Cityof Tustin......................................................................................................................... 18
Departmentof Navy............................................................................................................... 18
National Park Services.......................................................................................................... 19
Historic Preservation ............................................................................................................ 19
GLOSSARY.................................................................................................................................21
APPENDIX..................................................................................................................................22
MCAS Tustin Hangar Timeline Overview...........................................................................22
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
FIGURES
Figure 1. Aerial view of the historic Tustin hangars ...................................................................... 2
Figure 2. Location map showing park location within former MCAS Tustin................................ 4
Figure 3. Parcel map showing Parcel 18 and improvements.......................................................... 5
Figure 4. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan, Page 2-4. Parcel 18 identified as PA 6............................. 7
Figure 5. County proposed Program of Utilization, 2012 .............................................................. 9
Figure 6. Ground contamination plumes 2018 ............................................................................. 11
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page ii
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
SUMMARY
When former Marine Corp Air Station(MCAS) Tustin closed in 1994, the County of Orange,
supported by the City of Tustin, applied for and received approval from the Department of the
Navy to develop Parcel 18 through a no-cost Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC). The 85-acre
property includes the North"blimp" Hangar, one of two similar historical structures on the
former base, which was proposed to be preserved as the centerpiece for a county regional park
(see Figure 1).
The County of Orange has spent significant time and resources over the past twenty-five years
attempting to generate plans to redevelop the property as a regional park, yet has been unable to
obtain the necessary approvals for an economically viable plan within the constraints of the PBC.
Unexpected changes in the original conditions, including the Navy's prolonged and continued
cleanup of on-site contaminants and the North Hangar's partial roof collapse in 2013, have made
redevelopment potentially more complicated and costly.
As the Local Reuse Authority, the City of Tustin received the majority of the property within
former MCAS Tustin as part of an Economic Development Conveyance (EDC), including the
historic South Hangar, which was slated to be demolished. The EDC allows the City of Tustin to
generate income from property sales or leases to offset infrastructure and redevelopment costs.
In 2013, the City of Tustin commenced licensing the South Hangar for interim uses, and has
more recently developed plans and budgeted funds for initial repairs and renovation to begin in
2020. The planned retention of the South Hangar significantly reduces the potential economic
viability or public benefit to be gained from also retaining the North Hangar.
Based on altered conditions, the City of Tustin appears to be in a more advantageous position
than the County to redevelop the 85 acres within Parcel 18 as it is the Local Reuse Authority,
and could potentially accept the property through its existing Economic Development
Conveyance and re-plan/redevelop the property in joinder with currently owned adjacent
properties. The Department of the Navy has expressed its concern to the County that absent a
viable plan and path forward on the transfer of Parcel 18 to the County, the Navy will re-engage
the National Park Service (NPS) and the City of Tustin to discuss an alternative conveyance
mechanism to meet the objectives of the original agreement and the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan.
The County once envisioned a unique regional park with a grand testament to Orange County's
military history at its center. However, it has been ineffective in its planning efforts and
unexpected circumstances have diminished the potential economic viability and public benefit to
be gained from a county regional park in this location. Despite altered conditions and the lack of
an approved plan, there is no indication that the County has reevaluated the fundamental benefit
of remaining involved in development of Parcel 18. Best practices for any policy making body
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 1
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
includes reevaluating decisions made when circumstances change. It is time for the County of
Orange to reevaluate its ability to provide additional benefit to county residents from its
involvement with the redevelopment of Parcel 18 as a county regional park.
41k—
-VIM- de
r I ,
F moi' - ,'_- .:•
f i_r
t i
PARTIAL
ROOF COLLAPSE
OCTOBER 2013
Image clipped from Google Earth'
Figure 1. Aerial view of the historic Tustin hangars
North Hangar and Parcel 18 are in the foreground. South Hangar is in the background
1 Google Data LDEO-Columbia,NSF,NOAA Data SIO,NOAA,U.S.Navy,NGA,GEBCO Landsat/Copernicus
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 2
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
REASON FOR THE STUDY
The reason for this investigation is to provide a current review of the County's plan to redevelop
the 85-acre parcel within the former MCAS Tustin as a county regional park. It has been over
twenty-five years since the County's Public Benefit Conveyance application was approved by
the Department of the Navy, yet no redevelopment plans have been approved and the property
continues to deteriorate as surrounding properties become developed. The Orange County Grand
Jury's intent is to facilitate a path forward that would be most beneficial to the residents of
Orange County.
METHOD OF STUDY
In conducting its investigation, the Grand Jury completed extensive document review and online
research pertaining to the history and reuse of Parcel 18 within the former MCAS Tustin
property. The Grand Jury interviewed ten individuals including representatives from the City of
Tustin and Orange County who provided invaluable information to the Grand Jury in its
investigation.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
BACKGROUND AND FACTS
MCAS Tustin Base Closure
As part of the military base realignment and closures in the 1990's, Orange County applied for
and received approval in 1994 for a no-cost Public Benefit Conveyance of Parcel 18, containing
85 acres within the former MCAS Tustin(Figure 2).2 Sites and buildings obtained through the
PBC program are required to be used exclusively for parks and recreation purposes and any
income in excess of repairs, rehabilitation, restoration, and maintenance can only be used for
public historic preservation, park, or recreational purposes.
\ti•
it
i .
t �
T •
•1
�1 • � 1 � -- � Ir 1
f • / f ,}
it e F 4
Image from park concept report to County of Orange,2011,prepared by Tait and Associates
Figure 2. Location map showing park location within former MCAS Tustin
2 See Appendix for additional background and detail on base closure and history.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 4
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
Parcel 18 contains the historic North Hangar, also known as Hangar 1 or Building 28, along with
the historically significant control tower and helium storage buildings (Figure 3). The County
intended to redevelop the property as a county regional park, retaining the historic North Hangar
as a centerpiece.
ONE
101,
01.
v
a
e
+
Image from park concept report to County of Orange,2011,prepared by Tait and Associates
Figure 3. Parcel map showing Parcel 18 and improvements.
The County's role in preserving historical structures was the impetus behind its interest in
acquiring, redeveloping, and maintaining the property as a county regional park. Without the
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 5
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
retention of historic elements, the flat infill development site does not embody the typically
unique characteristics of regional recreational facilities within the recreation element of the
County's general plan, nor does it offer more than what is available in nearby local parks. The
proposed park lies within Supervisorial District 3, which currently has a larger share of parks in
comparison to most of the other districts. Moreover, there appears to be limited need or county-
wide political support to spend funds for additional recreational venues in this district.
The City of Tustin, as the Local Reuse Authority, approved and supported Orange County's PBC
application, and adopted the county regional park as a feature of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan.
3 The City of Tustin entered into a no-cost Economic Development Conveyance (EDC) with the
Department of the Navy to acquire the majority of the former MCAS Tustin property. The EDC
allows the City of Tustin the ability to generate income from land sales and leases to offset
infrastructure and development costs. Additionally, in its position as the Local Reuse Authority,
the City of Tustin has authority over the review and approval of any reuse or redevelopment of
property within the former MCAS Tustin under the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan.
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA), signed in 1999, between the Department of the Navy,
the California State Historic Preservation Office, Orange County, and the City of Tustin, sets out
the stipulations and mitigation measures which the County and the City of Tustin would be
required to meet if the hangar complexes are conveyed without historic preservation restrictions.
Orange County and Tustin completed those mitigation measures in 2009. As a result, the Navy
determined the MOA was no longer in effect and the future disposal of the property is not
encumbered by a historic preservation covenant.4
3 See References#5-Tustin Legacy Specific Plan
4 See References#15-MOA Stipulations
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 6
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
US IN
LEGACY
-_.-i-. _ SPFC1FrC PIAN
Fiq_tire 2 Land Use Plan
\ _ LEGEND
Tustin City Limit
"w* Specific Plan Boundary
Mixed-Use Transit
F Mixed-Use Urban
a ••` ( PA 20 lNIIIIIIIIIIII17 Commercial
PA 4-5 PA 7 ,� - 3 Commercial/Business
-• PA 15-A lr" Residential
.PA 1-A Park
IPA 2 PA 21 Tustin Legacy Park Overlay
PQ 1-C TransitionallEmergency Housing
IPA 1-J •PA 1-E - Education Village
Existing R.O.W.
PA 1.0 PA 6 'E -Kr '�; Proposed R.O.W.
IPA 3 PA 1-N P), Planning Area
PA 1-0 PA 15-B 1
I
PA 21
PA11
i PA t-L
1 PA 15-C
11 PA 1-F 3
PA 1-G PA 8,13&14
x i•' '''
PA 9.12 PA 16-19 'PA 22 '
1— - L J
p, k r=,.eoo•
!F s
2-4 City of Tustin
Figure 4. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan, Page 2-4. Parcel 18 identified as PA 6
Parcel 18 is designated as Planning Area 6 within the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan(Figure 4),
and its designated land use is as a county regional park. Section 3.9 of the Tustin Legacy
Specific Plan sets out the Development Standards and Use Regulations pertaining to Planning
Area 6 which regulate the redevelopment of the property. Surrounding land uses include
existing residential development to the north, undeveloped commercial designated land to the
south and east, and instituitonal uses to the west. A private high school is currently under
construction to the east of Parcel 18.
The City of Tustin is the owner of the adjacent commercially zoned vacant property to the east
and south of Parcel 18 and would be in a more advantageous position than the County to
potentially re-plan future uses in joinder with this larger land area. Changes to the land use of
Parcel 18 could have potential negative impacts on adjacent properties which were planned in
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 7
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
anticipation of a regional park being developed. Any proposed changes to the existing
recreational park land use to more intensive uses would require revising the Tustin Legacy
Specific Plan which would most likely include additional environmental impact assessments and
public hearings.
In May 2002, the City of Tustin received a Lease in Furtherance of Conveyance, (LIFOC), on
the majority of the property within the former MCAS Tustin, including the property containing
the historic South Hangar, known as Hangar 2. The South Hangar was slated for demolition, and
remained"moth-balled"with no activity through 2012. The county also considered accepting
Parcel 18 through a LIFOC from the Navy at the same time, but they decided not to pursue a
lease for unknown reasons.
In the original planning for the reuse of MCAS Tustin, the County of Orange also received
approval for a PBC of a parcel designated as Disposal Site 2, which is an approximate 10-acre
site to the northwest of Parcel 18, adjacent to Armstrong Avenue. Due to delays in transfer and
altered conditions from the original planning, the County subsequently agreed to withdraw its
application for the PBC of Disposal Site 2 as part of a multi-party agreement with the City of
Tustin and the South Orange County Community College District. The City of Tustin and
Department of the Navy agreed to amend their agreements to include Disposal Site 2 into the
City of Tustin's EDC. Based on this precedent, it is anticipated that the City of Tustin will be
able to amend its EDC to incorporate Parcel 18 should the County not proceed with its plans or
should it withdraw its PBC application.
County's Conceptual Plan
In February 2012, the Orange County Board of Supervisors approved a conceptual plan for the
Regional Park and submitted a Program of Utilization(POU)to the National Park Service (NPS)
(Figure 5). The County's conceptual plan for the POU included retention of the historic North
Hangar. The POU also included a private partnership comprised of USA Water Polo and the
Anaheim Ducks, who were proposing to lease areas within the future park. The POU had a
development cost estimate of$69,000,000 and annual maintenance costs of$1,700,000 in 2011
dollars. The submitted POU never received the required approval from the NPS.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 8
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
E+ Concept Plan
� •-` �� ��� ��-pq��7j�� �` _Legend
�w - i�vwro�w rAcni r E.Baktings to Renwn
_ xcaoc
Pop-ed Parlurg Lots
.. ZONEA �l M'h Pe---Ale Pavers
Hangar Ptata
_ - _ ,w•� O Pur%TrplLi
_tip' K.rn
•�' p. uesaaR?•rr [ Access Roads 13.3 AyeSI
�""r""' ® PulN.c Rwith
•• r ` r [ •• eanmm onnking Fnunlpm
Parking
I-
{,+' -,ti. ee..a.`•.13
u.r. w,.a.m fir. 0«..610'
W10,1n FMFp d LOU•05 5>aees
•o :,"• $a.•rnf WAnin Zone C-1. 50010 550 spews
Total FS:imalBd On•Si.'.0 Parsing•1500 5-0acas
� - ZONE
• '� P—;-LOCATION •: Santa Arre
�� ar •n Gnfiifi:nir� - - ••e. v
( �hI111Eiilflf�diNNAHNNII! IHNf € �" La uesa
_ win LOCRTIONMIP f
l' Ell, 9ELPCAL
- •wwo.•
w _
• a ' rutWe wi
wwo.. -•nwOYq NCu6•Rw vrLL
Image from Orange County Program of Utilization submittal to National Parks Service,2012
Figure 5. County proposed Program of Utilization, 2012
The preliminary financing plan forwarded to the NPS as part of the POU submittal indicated
there appeared to be viable financial support to design and construct the park at that time. The
source for repayment of the proposed bond debt was assumed to be Orange County Parks'
property tax apportionment revenue of approximately$9,800,000, which was to become
available in 2016. The County has made no modification to its program of utilization or
submittal to the NPS. Prospective tenants have moved on to other locations and the anticipated
financing is no longer in place.
In October 2013, a portion of the North Hangar's roof collapsed(see Figure 1). As a result,the
structure was "red-tagged" and not permitted to be occupied. The damage was temporarily
stabilized by the Department of the Navy in 2014, at a cost of$3.2 million. The Navy's annual
contracted cost to maintain the North Hangar structure is approximately$350,000. The
Department of the Navy is not legally obligated to repair the hangar, and the structure is only
required to be in a stabilized condition at the time of transfer. The County of Orange has sought
no engineering assessments or cost estimates to repair the damage to the North Hangar.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 9
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
An investigation and assessment of the historic South Hangar, conducted in September 2017 by
consultants to the City of Tustin, indicated potential hazardous materials within the structure.
The hazardous materials identified were asbestos, lead, biological contaminants, and
groundwater contaminates which may result in vapor intrusion issues. These same hazardous
materials would be assumed to exist within the North Hangar and mitigation of these hazardous
materials could add significant costs to either retention or demolition of either of the hangar
structures.
The County of Orange has retained multiple land use consultants to assess and provide
development concepts for the property over the past 25 years, including alternative
redevelopment conceptual plans without retaining the North Hangar. None of the potential
development concepts were considered to be economically or legally viable within the
constraints of a PBC. The cost to demolish the North Hangar and its ancillary structures to clear
the property would be significant, with preliminary estimates in the range of$15-25 million.
Without the retention of the historic structures, and with limited potential for recreational uses to
generate income, there does not appear to be significant offsetting financial or public benefit to
the residents of Orange County.
The County of Orange has indicated an interest in applying to the National Park Service to alter
the conveyance mechanism to a Historic Monument PBC, yet has made little to no progress
towards submitting that application. Although a Historic Monument PBC may include revenue
producing activities to support the historic monument, all income exceeding the cost of repair,
rehabilitation, and maintenance must be used for public historic preservation, park or recreational
purposes. The application for Obtaining Real Property for Historic Monument Purposes
requires that some historical elements be maintained, and requires extensive details on the
proposed Preservation Plan, Use Plan, and Financial Plan. The County currently has no viable
proposals to meet the preservation, use, and financial requirements of a Historic Monument PBC.
Department of Navy Base Realignment and Closure
The Department of the Navy's Base Realignment and Closure Team, (BRAC), along with its
environmental Base Clean-up Team and Restoration Advisory Board, (RAB) for MCAS Tustin,
are the lead agencies in reviewing future uses and transfers of property within MCAS Tustin.
The Department of the Navy's BRAC team operates extraction wells and equipment on Parcel
18, and continues to oversee the monitoring, testing, and clean-up of Chemicals of Concern in
on-site soils and groundwater. The Navy will continue to monitor and clean-up groundwater
contaminants until cleared by regulatory agencies, regardless of when the transfer of ownership
of the property may ultimately occur.
5 See References#13-Public Benefit Conveyance—Historic Monument Application
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 10
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
1 -46 !k OU4E1 zs 1 cu
IRP-11(TCE) #, -;�.24_. jowr
/ IJJ
�a
gOpr� OI;:1E Northf i
,42 IF.P=117(E7 41
21 \- a ncla v<ewe � _
22A \ _ 32 28
OU-1 A 241Ai 41
B IRP-135(TCE) 226 J "'�\ IRP-12(TCE) -,j
\ 17
1A` 19A 40B 111 •.
x41
y 17A `
l\\ ,8 27
3 1B 196 `Carre-out 45 \\ 16B +
r g
_ 2B dJ 1� ! � 29
41
{ OU46 Mingled
P lames Prea(TCE) 16 30
i
31 '
16A 16C 16 -
1
Carve-0'.rt a5
LEG HD Carye oL0 t.6
--P�(3llk rel GauiR.xfer FlowDlreQlOnl, , - l.'L'-46
OFarms MC AS TLOi __! IF'. 'T E` —
QCer.e-0il Avrutirg Dig oral 1 'I -
iU-16 South _ -
Fi%tVMZGfutowb wPkn IRP-3(TC E1
1,2,3TCP(>05 PryL� 14 -
12
IL-I TCE('5 PgA-) - IF'F'-F;1. ;1-C'CPl 37
OOU-3 Bountler5'
Psml Bunasy - _
-P&CM40 lR gHolNMy') C a l'J -iJ l rt,. i IRP B(1,1-0CE)
Image from PowerPoint presented at RAB meeting,Tustin October 2018.See references#10
Figure 6. Ground contamination plumes 2018
Minutes from the October 2019 meeting of the RAB indicate that the Navy is continuing to
monitor, test, and clean groundwater plumes, and levels of potential contaminants of concern
continue to be reduced.6 Current contaminants of concern identified on the property include
1,2,3-TCP and PFAS. Figure 6 is a map of identified groundwater plumes on the MCAS site.
Parcel 18 with the North Hangar is identified as Carve-Out 5, and the Tustin Legacy area with
the South Hangar is identified as Carve-Out 6. The recently identified PFAS substances have yet
to receive clarification of contaminant levels by the regulating authorities, including the
California Department of Toxic Substances Control and will continue to be monitored and
reported on by the RAB.
The RAB is also responsible for establishing any institutional controls, deed restrictions and any
Covenants to Restrict Use of the Property(CRUP) documents. Potential institutional controls,
deed restrictions and CRUP documents for Parcel 18 are unknown at this time. Conditions may
include various measures such as grading limitations, vapor barriers, hazardous material
abatement, storm water runoff management, and other remediation and/or mitigation measures.
6 See References#10-Navy RAB
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 11
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
These restrictions could limit the extent of future development and add additional costs and time
to the redevelopment of the property.
On March 30, 2018, the Navy issued the draft Findings of Suitability to Transfer#10 (FOST
910), for Carve-Out 5 (which includes Parcel 18), and Carve-out 6 on former MCAS Tustin.
Draft FOST#10 summarizes how transfer requirements and notifications have been satisfied and
that the parcels are environmentally suitable for transfer. The draft FOST indicated that
finalization of the transfer was anticipated by August 2018. However, the identification of newly
emergent PFAS contaminates in 2018 has delayed the Navy's transfer timeframe. The Navy is
currently coordinating with the appropriate regulatory agencies, the City of Tustin, and other
stakeholders to develop a strategy to further assess PFAS impacts to groundwater. The Navy
currently indicates that it anticipates a final FOST in early to mid-2021.
Extended delays in the site clean-up and in the fee title conveyance from the Navy have made it
challenging for the County to develop plans and attract potential development partners. The lack
of clarity on potential institutional controls and deed restrictions which will be placed on the
redevelopment of Parcel 18 make it difficult to plan future uses and costs. While delays in the
Navy's environmental clean-up have impacted transfer timelines for most properties within
Tustin Legacy, these delays have not halted the City of Tustin's plans as it continues to complete
planning and site preparations on property still owned by the Navy in anticipation of future
conveyance.
City of Tustin's South Hangar
In 2013, the City of Tustin re-evaluated the use of the South Hangar and began issuing licensing
agreements for temporary uses. The City of Tustin currently maintains a website marketing the
South Hangar with an advertised rate of$9,000/day7 and is currently open to proposals for use.
The City of Tustin indicates that the South Hangar was utilized approximately 43 times in the
period from 2013-2019 (avg. 7 users/year)with a total gross revenue generated of approximately
$1,000,000 over the six-year period. The interim uses were primarily for film/advertising
production and community events. The City of Tustin currently has no economically viable
proposals from prospective long-term tenants.
In 2017, the City of Tustin retained consultants to lead an extensive investigation and
engineering assessment of the historic South Hangar structure. The resulting report, produced in
September 2017, indicated that the South Hangar was in relatively good condition and, in fact,
was in the best condition of the five remaining hangars which the team of experts had inspected.
The pre-design phase of the consultant's contracted work was completed in the fall of 2018 and
the design phase, which includes construction documents for permitting, is due to be finalized in
7 See References#8-City of Tustin,Tustin South Hangar Rental
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 12
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
2020. The City of Tustin indicates that the plans are due to be submitted to the Tustin City
Council for approval in the first quarter of 2020.
The City of Tustin indicates that it has spent approximately$680,000 on capital improvements
to the South Hangar through June 30, 2019, and have an additional $4,300,000 requested in FY
2019-2020 for truss repair and utility connections to improve the functionality and safety of the
hangar structure. An additional $10,000,000 in capital improvements for the South Hangar is
included in the City's Capital Improvement Program for FY22-23 and is dependent on the timing
of income from licensing and future land sales. Tustin's planned retention of the South Hangar
significantly reduces the potential economic viability or public benefit to be gained from
retaining the North Hangar.
Recent Communication
The Department of the Navy has recently urged the County to explore the option of converting
the hangar portion of the property from a Park PBC, into a Historic Monument PBC which
allows limited revenue generating activities compatible with retention of the structure.9 A
Historic Monument PBC requires that all income exceeding the cost of repair, rehabilitation, and
maintenance must be used for public historic preservation, park, or recreational purposes.
Although the County has attempted to meet with the NPS to discuss the option of converting
portions of the property into a Historic Monument PBC, no progress has been made. The
application to obtain property from the NPS for Historic Monument purposes requires extensive
plans and details including a Preservation Plan, a Use Plan, and a Financial Plan.10 The County
does not currently have a viable plan for a Historic Monument PBC, yet has indicated an interest
in identifying potential development partners through the Request for Proposals process.
On March 8, 2018, prior to issuance of Draft FOST#10, the Department of the Navy and the
County met to discuss the transfer. At that time, the Department of the Navy expressed its
concern in writing that altering the current conveyance mechanism is not inconsequential and
will cause substantial delays in the transfer. The Navy was informed by both the City of Tustin
and County that the two are not coordinated in their efforts. The County indicated they have no
further direction from the Board of Supervisor beyond the 2013 Program of Utilization. The
Department of the Navy indicated in a March 27, 2018 follow-up letter to the County, that absent
a path forward, the Department of the Navy will re-engage the National Park Service and the
City of Tustin to discuss an alternative conveyance approach to meet the objectives of the Reuse
Plan.
s See References#7—Tustin Capital Improvement
9 See References#14—Requirements for Public Benefit Conveyance.
io See References#13—Public Benefit Conveyance-Historic Monument Application
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 13
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
In October 2019, the City of Tustin, notified the County and the Department of the Navy that
delays in advancing the County's regional park plans and transfer have resulted in unmaintained
and unsafe conditions on Parcel 18. The City of Tustin stated that there have been numerous
incidents on the property involving trespassing, vandalism and suspicious activity calls resulting
in Tustin Police Department response. They have expressed that the unmaintained condition of
the property is not a sustainable situation for the surrounding community.
FINDINGS
Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the Grand Jury requires (or, as
noted, requests)responses from each agency affected by the findings presented in this section.
The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
Based on its investigation entitled"What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars"the
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury has arrived at five principal findings, as follows:
Fl. The County of Orange has explored numerous planning options and development
proposals regarding Parcel 18 within former MCAS Tustin over the past twenty-five
years, yet has been ineffective in its efforts and has not been able to produce an approved
economically viable plan within the constraints of its Park Public Benefit Conveyance.
F2. Although the County of Orange has indicated an interest in applying to the National Park
Service to alter their conveyance mechanism to a Historic Monument PBC, it has made
limited progress and currently has no economically viable proposals within the
constraints of a Historic Monument PBC.
F3. The City of Tustin commenced licensing the historic South Hangar for interim uses in
2013 and has recently moved forward with its plans to renovate and retain the South
Hangar. The planned retention of the South Hangar significantly limits the potential
economic viability and public benefits of also retaining the North Hangar.
F4. The City of Tustin appears to be in a more advantageous position than the County to
redevelop the 85 acres within Parcel 18 as it is the Local Reuse Authority, and could
potentially accept the property through its existing Economic Development Conveyance
and re-plan/redevelop the property in joinder with adjacent property under its ownership.
F5. The Navy has stated to the County of Orange that absent a viable plan and path forward
on the transfer of Parcel 18 to the County, the Navy will re-engage the National Park
Service and the City of Tustin to discuss an alternative conveyance mechanism to meet
the objectives of the original agreement and the Tustin Legacy Reuse Plan.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 14
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
RECOMMENDATIONS
Pursuant to California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the Grand Jury requires (or, as
noted, requests)responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this
section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.
Based on its investigation entitled"What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?"the
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following two recommendations:
R1. Given the altered conditions since the initial planning, the County of Orange should
reevaluate its ability to provide additional value or benefit to county residents from its
involvement with the redevelopment of Parcel 18 as a county regional park, and the
Board of Supervisors should determine within 90-days of the release of this report
whether to proceed with or withdraw from its PBC application. (F 1 thru F5.)
R2. As the Local Reuse Authority, the City of Tustin should commence initial steps and
planning with the Department of the Navy for incorporating Parcel 18 into its Economic
Development Conveyance to meet the objectives of the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. (F3
and F4.)
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 15
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
RESPONSES
The following excerpts from the California Penal Code provide the requirements for public
agencies to respond to the findings and recommendations of this Grand Jury report:
§933 "Comments and Reports on Grand Jury Recommendations."
"(c)No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any
public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall
comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations
pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body and every elected county officer or
agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment
within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the
board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the
control of that county officer or agency head or any agency or agencies which that officer or
agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the
findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to
the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses
to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of
the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices.... ..
§933.05 "Response to Grand Jury Recommendations—Content Requirements; Personal
Appearances by Responding Party; Grand Jury Report to Affected Agency."
"(a)For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding
person or entity shall indicate one of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response
shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the
reasons therefor.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the
responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented
action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future,
with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and
parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for
discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed,
including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not
exceed six months from the date ofpublication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not
reasonable, with an explanation therefor.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 16
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
(c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or
personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the
agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand
jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or
personnel matters over which it has some decision-making authority. The response of the
elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations
affecting his or her agency or department."
Responses Required
Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with California Penal
Code Section 933.5 are required from:
Findings
County of Orange F1, F2, F3, F4, F5
City of Tustin F3, F4
Recommendations
County of Orange R1
City of Tustin R2
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 17
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
REFERENCES
County of Orange
1. Orange County Original Concepts for Park
https://www.ocparks.com/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=21919
2. Orange County Parks Website—Regional Park at Former MCAS Tustin
hLtp://www.ocparks.com/about/projects/tbh
City of Tustin
3. EDC/LIFOC (Between USA and City of Tustin) and Memorandum of Agreement
Among the Department of the Navy the California State Historic Preservation Officer and
the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for the Disposal and Reuse of Marine
Corps Air Station Tustin Orange County California.
hILtps://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenterNiew/I 162Navy-City-Economic-
Development-Conveyance-CoMpressed-PDF?bidld=
4. Photo Essay: Marine Corp Air Station&North Hangar, Tustin—Closed. May 30, 2013
https://www.avoidingre Bret.com/2013/05/photo-essay-marine-corp-air-station.html
5. Tustin Legacy Specific Plan
https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenterNiew/63 5/Tustin-Le gacy-Specific-Plan-PDF
6. The Tustin Hangars Titans of History
hLtp://www.militgnMuseum.org/NAS-Santa-Ana-Histoly.pd
7. Tustin Capital Improvement Program Fiscal Year 2019-2020
https://www.tustinca.org/DocumentCenterNiew/245 8/Capital-Improvement-Program-
Fiscal-Year-2019-Through-2020-PDF
8. Tustin South Hangar Rental
www.tustinca.org/766/Renting
9. Historic Preservation Video/DVD to emphasize Lighter-than-air operations
hqps://www.tustinca.org/765/Tustin-Hangars
Department of Navy
10. Navy RAB meeting minutes 2018
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 18
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
https://www.bracpmo.navy.mil/content/dam/bracpmo/califomia/fonner marine_corps ai
r—station tustin/pdfs/meetings/2018rab/20181011_Tustin_RAB_Meeting_Summary_pdf
11. Federal Register
hItps://www. ovg info.gov/content/pkg/FR-2001-03-02/html/01-5127.htm
12. Ground Contaminations Plumes 2015
hqps:Hca-tustin.civicplus.com/DocumentCenterNiew/I 149/Carve-Out-Areas-and-
Groundwater-Plumes-PDF
National Park Services
13. Public Benefit Conveyance—Historic Monument Application(Blank)
http:Hfiles.cityofportsmouth.com/files/mcipt�reproj ect/Historic%20Monument%20Appli
cation%20(May%202016)pdf
14. Requirements for Public Benefit Conveyance through National Parks Service
a. Public Parks and Recreational Areas: Title 40 U.S.C. 550 (e) ... recommended
by the Secretary of the Interior as being needed for use as a public park or
recreation area. Deeds conveying any surplus real property disposed of under this
authority shall provide that the property shall be used and maintained for the
purpose for which it was conveyed in perpetuity...
b. Historic Monuments: Title 40 U.S.C. 550(h) ...authorized by Secretary of the
Interior as suitable and desirable for use as a historic monument for the benefit of
the public...in conformity with the recommendation of the National Park
Advisory Board established under section 3 of the Act of Congress approved
August 21, 1935 (16 U.S.C. 463) and only so much of any such property shall be
so determined to be...necessary for the preservation and proper observation of its
historic features. Property conveyed for historic monument purposes may... be
used for revenue producing activities to support the historic monument. Deeds
conveying...property under this authority shall be used and maintained for the
purposes for which it was conveyed in perpetuity...
Historic Preservation
15. MOA Stipulations required by Federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and
California Office of Historic Preservation.
i. Stipulation IA. Navy has submitted HABS report to required parties.
Report HABS No. CA-2707 is on file with the Library of Congress.
ii. Stipulation IB.Navy has provided all available plans/drawings etc. for all
facilities on site to local curation facility and to Tustin.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 19
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
iii. Stipulation IL After both Orange County and City of Tustin conducted
comprehensive marketing efforts, no viable adaptive re-use of the hangars
could be substantiated, therefor Stipulation III was required.
iv. Stipulation III. Parties were required to provide three things:
1. A written history of the LTA base. (See"Tustin Hangars, Titans of
History")11
2. Interpretive Video/DVD to emphasize the Lighter-than-air
operations. City of Tustin hosted a one-time distribution and
outreach program for the documentary video on September 1,
2009. Copies are available from the Cityla
3. Interpretative Exhibit. On display at Tustin City Hall.
Based on fulfillment of all required stipulations in the MOA, the Navy in a letter to both
Federal and State Historic Preservation Agencies has determined that the MOA is no longer in
effect with respect to historic preservation. (Letter dated November 3, 2009)
11 See Reference#6—Titans of History
12 See Reference#9—Historic Preservation Video/DVD
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 20
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
GLOSSARY
BoS Board of Supervisors
BRAC Base Realignment and Closure
COC Chemicals of Concern
CRUP Covenants to Restrict Use of the Property
DoN Department of the Navy
DTSC California Department of Toxic Substances Control
EDC Economic Development Conveyance
FOST Finding of Suitability to Transfer
HABS Historic American Buildings Survey
LIFOC Lease in Furtherance of Conveyance
LRA Local Reuse Authority
MCAS Marine Corps Air Station
MOA Memorandum of Agreement
NPS National Parks Service
PBC Public Benefit Conveyance
PFAS Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
PFOS Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid
POU Program of Utilization
RAB Restoration Advisory Board
1,2,3-TCP Trichloropropane
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 21
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
APPENDIX
MCAS Tustin Hangar Timeline Overview
The following timeline is a simplified, abbreviated list of events or occurrences shown in
chronological order. We include it, hoping that for some, a quick look at the actions by the
various players involved over time will aid in understanding how we got from the time of the
base closure to where we are now.
County of Orange Orange
City of Tustin Green
Department of Navy Blue
National Parks Service Purple
1991
Closure announced,Marine Corps Air Station(MCAS) Tustin. City of Tustin named as the Local
Reuse Authority(LRA).13
April 18, 1994
Department of Interior National Parks Service(NPS): Letter from NPS to Navy indicating an
application by Orange County for an urban regional park on the 85-acre site.It requires the county
to submit a detailed general development plan and implementation schedule for the park.It may be
as a historic monument transfer Title 40 U.S.C. §550(h) or a park and recreation transfer Title 40
U.S.C. §550(e).
1995
The county reveals concept for a regional park. OC Parks PowerPoint"Regional Park at former MCAS,
Tustin.
1996/98
Reuse Plan for MCAS Tustin approved by city of Tustin in 1996, amended in 1998. This later
becomes the Tustin Legacy Specific Plan. Ordinance 1482 07-18-17,Adopted October 31, 1996,
Amended September 8, 1998
1999
Tustin applies to the Navy for a no-cost Economic Development Conveyance(EDC)for 75% of
MCAS.
1999
"See References#11 —Federal Register
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 22
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
Base formally closes in July.Environmental documents, deeds and leases are prepared for
conveyance 1999-2002.Base closes July 2, 1999. Source: Federal Register Volume 66, Number 42
(Friday, March 2, 2001).14
May 10,2002
City of Tustin receives 75% of MCAS through an EDC via fee or lease.25% goes to public or
nonprofit entities. Source: Agreement Between the United States of America and city of Tustin,
California for the Conveyance of a Portion of the Former Marine Corps Air Station Tustin.
Execution Version May 10,2002.
1999
Orange County received approval of a Public Benefit Conveyance (PBC)of Parcel 18 containing Hangar
28 and Bldg. 28A for an 84-acre Regional park through the National Parks Service.
2009
County and city indicate compliance with mitigation measures required by MOA. Hangars are still
subject historic preservation standards until conveyed by the Navy.
2002-2012
South Hangar sits in"moth-balled"condition.No planned uses; slated for demolition.
December 27',2011
Consultant's report"Concept Plan for Regional Park at MCAS Tustin"received by Orange County
December 27, 2011.
2012
January 12,BOS approved a Conceptual Plan for a park including Historic Hangar 28. Finance was
directed to find a way to finance outside the General Fund. Estimated Cost 69 million dollars.
Maintenance annually 1.7 million dollars of which 400k is for the hangar.
February 28,2012
Board of Supervisors approved a Program of Utilization (POU)on February 28,2012. It was submitted
to National Parks Service and was not approved.
2013
Tustin begins licensing South Hangar for civic and private events, filming, storage etc.
October 1,2013
Feasibility Study by consultants to OC Parks. (Basic concepts;no details,no applications submitted.)
October 2013
Hangar 1 roof collapse; December 24,2013 Navy awarded contract to stabilize the damaged hangar.
February 2014
Navy begins Stabilization of Hangar.
is See References#11 —Federal Register
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 23
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
Apri17,2014
A revised consultant's proposal is submitted to OC for Re-Use Study of Hangar 1.
April 17,2014
(OC Register Article)The hangar is being prepared to be conveyed from the Navy to the county. It's
included in the county's plans for an 84.5-acre regional park,but following October's incident,county
officials have expressed some reluctance to take on a potentially expensive repair project. "It's all up in
the air, depending on the cost to fix it,"said a county supervisor. "I don't want that blimp hangar
destroyed or taken down,but we really need to know realistically what it's going to cost to repair that
hole."
Apri124,2014
Parks communication to District Supervisor: OC Parks has immediately decided to delay finalization of
the General Development Plan until concerns about integrity of the hangar and whether and at what cost
the hangar roof could be repaired. Revised consultant's proposal(April 7,2014)is submitted to OC for
Re-Use Study of Hangar 1.
May 9,2014
County solicits consultant's assessment report.
May 12,2014
County asks Navy for access to hangar 1 for consultant's assessment work.
June 17, 12014
City of Tustin: following North Hangar collapse,Tustin retains consultant to perform an assessment and
reuse study for South Hangar.
December 2016
County gets consultants to provide conceptual drawings for a park with and without the hangar.
"Development Concepts"PowerPoint presentation to Orange County dated December 2016
September 2017
Consultant's"Final Report—Tustin Hangar 2 Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study". Volume 1.
Prepared for City of Tustin.Board of Supervisors Agenda Item 14, September 19,2017. Professional
Services agreement with consultant to perform architectural and engineering design services related to
Maintenance,repairs and voluntary upgrades of Hangar 2.
September 9,2017
Tustin City Council approves purchase of a 185' boom lift to repair and maintain Hangar 2 on a regular
basis.Agenda Report Item 14 September 19,2017. City also approves two phases I-$1,004,410.00,phase
II 5 million appropriation for FY 17-18 from land sale proceeds for maintenance,repair and upgrade of
Hangar 2.
October 17,2017
OC Board of Supervisors has closed session with the Department of the Navy and city of Tustin.
December 11,2017
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 24
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
Navy to Real Estate CEO—Request for meeting regarding Parcel 18 PBC.Navy anticipates FOST will be
ready for review early summer 2018. If county contemplates a change beyond existing PBC,talk to NPS
as soon as possible. County has not been able to attend meetings to discuss a way forward.
February 21,2018
County acknowledges receipt of letter referenced above. Is glad to coordinate and refers to contact
person.
March 8,2018
Orange County RE CEO team met with Navy BRAC team to discuss transfer of Parcel 18.
March 27,2018
Navy to Orange County Real Estate CEO—We are ready to convey Parcel 18 to National Parks Service
by September of 2018. Conveyance to Tustin is desirable for any scenarios beyond the original PBC.
Navy is concerned that changes to the original conveyance mechanism will cause substantial delays in the
transfer date.Any scenario that changes the reuse plan needs to be vetted with the LRA(Tustin). Both
city and county recently informed us the two parties are not coordinated on this effort. "Absent a viable
path forward,the Navy will re-engage National Parks Service and the city of Tustin to discuss and
alternative conveyance approach to meet the objectives of the reuse plan".
March 30,2018
Navy issues Draft FOST 10 setting out their findings of suitability to transfer. EPA defers to State
(DTSC) for review of environmental issues.
April 30, 2018
County to Navy and NPS—No additional direction from BoS since the previously approved POU(2012).
County states it is concerned about the condition of the North Hangar and ground contamination PFAS
and PFOS.
May 23,2018
Navy to Real Estate CEO Navy believes a reassessment of the financing plans for the 2013 POU is
prudent. Suggest you talk to NPS and Tustin if there is not an approved plan in place.Also,the Navy
provides the reports showing levels of PFAS and PFOS.
August 4,2018
Orange County gets consultant to provide conceptual plans for a park with hangar. (No details and no
attempts to gain the approval of NPS).
September 11,2018
Real Estate CEO letter to BOS: earlier this year,Navy said it intended to issue a FOST in September of
2018. CEO states County has not been able to determine if revenue is there to make the proposals viable.
They need to pursue the Historic Structure option to find greater economic opportunities. CEO asks BoS
if they want to accept the property.
2018
Tustin City Council approves a Capital Improvement Program Budget that includes funding for South
Hangar improvements.
October 5, 2018
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 25
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
From Navy to DTSC and WQCB: Final semi-annual groundwater monitoring data summary.
October,2018
RAB indicate DoN is continuing to monitor,test,clean groundwater plumes and will report their
conclusions and recommendations in 2018 and 2019.
November 30,2018
FINAL summery report for locations and levels of PFAS and PFOS on site.
December 18,2018
OC Board of Supervisors has closed session with the Department of the Navy,City of Tustin and Mater
Dei Development regarding Parcel 18.
March 2019
PEERS lawsuit against Navy.
August 1,2019
City of Tustin asks Navy to step up maintenance on Parcel 18. City has no right of entry(except in
emergencies) and no personnel or budget to provide security services.
August 2019
DTSC is unable to concur that a Carve Out property is suitable for transfer due to findings from HERO.
August 15,2019
Orange County Real Estate office e-mails the Navy to request meeting about Historic Monument
requirements of NPS with regard to the hangar structure. It wants to better understand the requirements to
help put together a proposal that will be met with approval by NPS.No response from NPS. (See October
15, 2019 entry below)
August 30,2019
Navy to Tustin: we will step up maintenance and security on North Hangar site per your request.
September 2019
Tustin City Council has consultant produce bid-ready documents for a power and lighting package, and a
structural package in line with CIP budget. Includes: voluntary upgrades to Hangar No. 2. (Truss Repair,
Hangar Doors,Power Distribution,Exterior Shell and Fire Life Safety/Disabled Access).
October 8,2019
City of Tustin meets with OC Supervisor Yd District,regarding the 85-acre parcel and North Hangar.
October 10,2019
RAB meeting at Tustin Senior Center. Ground contamination is being identified,classified and in some
areas remediated by Navy contractors on an ongoing basis. DTSC has no timeline for establishing PFAS
standards.
October 14,2019
City of Tustin sends letter dated October 14,2019 to Orange County reaffirming Tustin's good faith
commitment to work with the Navy on property acquisition and asking the county to decide whether they
still have a commitment to a regional park or not. If their intentions have changed,they need to engage
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 26
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?
the Navy and city of Tustin regarding their decision.Tustin cannot wait any longer.They need to start the
process of planning changes to the Tustin Legacy development if necessary.
2020
Tustin plans to begin construction of South Hangar improvements. Tustin has plans to continue
improvement and use of the South Hangar.They intend to continue to develop infrastructure adjacent to
and around the hangar and make the South Hangar more publicly accessible on a more regular basis.
2019-2020 Orange County Grand Jury Page 27
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Attachment B
•
•
DRAFT Responses to Findings and Recommendations
2019-20 Grand Jury Report:
"What's Happening with the Historic Tustin Hangars?"
SUMMARY RESPONSE STATEMENT:
On June 9,2020, the Grand Jury released a report entitled "What's Happening with the Historic
Tustin Hangars?"This report directed responses to findings and recommendations to the Orange
County Board of Supervisors. The responses are below:
FINDINGS AND RESPONSES:
F1. The County of Orange has explored numerous planning options and
development proposals regarding Parcel 18 within former MCAS Tustin over
the past twenty-five years,yet has been ineffective in its efforts and has not
been able to produce an approved economically viable plan with the
constraints of its Park Public Benefit Conveyance.
Response: Disagrees wholly with the finding. Parcel 18 has yet to be environmentally
cleared by the Department of Navy (Navy). Accordingly, the Navy has not
issued a Finding of Suitability to Transfer (FOST), which outlines the
environmental constraints for the development of the property. The County
has explored various concepts for Parcel 18, however soliciting the private
sector for proposals and developing plans prior to issuance of the FOST
would not be a prudent, sound course of action.
F2. Although the County of Orange has indicated an interest in applying to the
National Park Service to alter their conveyance mechanism to a Historic
Monument PBC, it has made limited progress and currently has no
economically viable proposals within the constraints of a Historic Monument
PBC.
Response: Disagrees partially with the finding. Prior to the COVID-19 Pandemic, the
County was in communication with the National Parks Service (NPS) regarding
the viability of converting a portion of the Park Public Benefit Conveyance
Page 1 of 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Attachment B
(PBC) into a Historic Monument PBC. As a result of these discussions NPS
instructed the County to submit a Historic Surplus Property application along
with an updated financial plan. The application requires a Preservation and
Architectural Use Plan and development of these plans requires the services of a
preservation architect. Presently, the COVID-19 pandemic has postponed the
County's ability to procure the services of a preservation architect,halted
discussions with NPS and furthered delayed the issuance of a FOST for Parcel
18. As the state of California progresses towards re-opening the County intends
to re-engage these efforts.
F3. The City of Tustin commenced licensing the historic South Hangar for
interim uses in 2013 and has recently moved forward with its plans to renovate
and retain the South Hangar. The planned retention of the South Hangar
significantly limits the potential economic viability and public benefits of also
retaining the North Hangar.
Response: Disagrees wholly with the finding. The County is unfamiliar with the details
surrounding the planned retention and reuse of the South Hangar by the City
of Tustin, if any. The County has repeatedly asked the City to provide the
County with information and studies relative to the reuse and demolition of
the South Hangar, but the information has not been provided. This
information could prove useful in analyzing potential reuses of the North
Hangar and their viability. At this time the County is not in a position to
agree or disagree with the Finding that the City retaining the South Hangar
"significantly limits the potential economic viability and public benefits of
also retaining the North Hangar," as it is premature to make such a
determination until further due diligence is completed and clarity with respect
to the City's plans is achieved.
F4. The City of Tustin appears to be in a more advantageous position than the
County to redevelop the 85 acres within Parcel 18 as it is in the Local Reuse
Authority, and could potentially accept the property through its existing
Economic Development Conveyance and re-plan/redevelop the property in
joinder with adjacent property under its ownership.
Response: Disagrees partially with the finding. In the event the NPS agrees with the
conversion of the Park PBC to an Economic Development Conveyance, with
the loss of potential parkland, the City may be better positioned to facilitate
the development of the property under that method of conveyance. However,
this may not be in the best interest of the County as a whole relative to the
potential development of a regionally significant park project.
F5. The Navy has stated to the County Orange that absent a viable plan and path
forward on the transfer of Parcel 18 to the County, the Navy will re-engage the
National Park Service and the City of Tustin to discuss an alternative
Page 2 of 3
Page 2 of 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Attachment B
conveyance mechanism to meet the objectives of the original agreement and
the Tustin Legacy Reuse Plan.
Response: Disagrees partially with this finding. In a letter dated March 27, 2018 to the
County, the Navy stated "Absent a viable path forward, the Navy will re-
engage the National Park Service and the City of Tustin to discuss as
alternative conveyance approach to meet the objectives of the Reuse Plan."
That language is not necessarily synonymous with meeting the objectives of
the Tustin Legacy Reuse Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS AND RESPONSES:
R1. Given the altered conditions since the initial planning, the County of Orange
should reevaluate its ability to provide additional value or benefit to county
residents from its involvement with the redevelopment of Parcel 18 as a
county regional park, and the Board of Supervisors should determine within
90-days of the release of this report whether to proceed with or withdraw from
its PBC application. (F1 through F5.)
Response: The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not reasonable.
As stated in Findings 1-4, the Navy has not issued the FOST for Parcel 18. In
addition, the COVID-19 pandemic has limited the County's ability to procure
the services of a preservation architect and to continue discussions with NPS.
As California progresses towards re-opening, the County intends to resume its
efforts to obtain all the information needed for the Board of Supervisors to
make an informed decision to proceed with or withdraw the County's PBC
application. Thus, a 90-day determination for withdrawal or proceeding with
the County's PBC application at this time is both premature and
unreasonable. In the meantime, the County continues to complete its due
diligence and explore options for the redevelopment of Parcel 18 to serve the
taxpayers of Orange County as a countywide asset.
Page 3 of 3
Page 3 of 3
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
September , 2020
The Honorable Kirk H. Nakamura
Presiding Judge
Orange County Superior Court
700 Civic Center Drive West
Santa Ana, CA 92701
SUBJECT: City of Tustin response to the Orange County Grand Jury 2019-20 Report,
dated June 9, 2020, titled "What's Happening with the Historic Tustin
Hangars?"
Dear Judge Nakamura-
In accordance with Section 933.05 of the California Penal Code, the City of Tustin (City)
respectfully submits the attached responses to Findings F3 and F4 and Recommendation R2 of the
Orange County Grand Jury Report dated June 9, 2020,titled"What's Happening with the Historic
Tustin Hangars?"
Should you have any questions, please contact City Manager Matthew S. West, at 714-573-3012
or at mwestgtustinca.org.
Sincerely,
Dr. Allan Bernstein
Mayor
cc: Tustin City Council
Orange County Grand Jury
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Response to Findings
F3. The City of Tustin commenced licensing the historic south hangar for
interim uses in 2013 and has recently moved forward with its plans to
renovate and retain the south hangar. The planned retention of the
south hangar significantly limits the potential economic viability and
public benefits of also retaining the north hangar.
Response: The City partially disagrees with this finding. A more current economic and
structural viability study would need to be conducted on the north hangar to
determine if retention of the south hangar may significantly limit the
potential economic and public benefits viability of the north hangar. The
City has invested a significant amount of time and resources into the
publicly available assessment plans and structural reports for the south
hangar, and believes that comparable investments of time and resources
should be allocated for the north hangar so development plans can be
fashioned and accelerated to put the north hangar property to productive
use.
F4. The City of Tustin appears to be in a more advantageous position than
the County to redevelop the 85 acres within Parcel 18 as it is the Local
Reuse Authority, and could potentially accept the property through its
existing EDC and re-plan/redevelop the property in joinder with
adjacent property under its ownership.
Response: The City partially disagrees with this finding. The City may be in a more
capable position given its existing EDC to explore alternatives for the
property, but there remain many factors that would first need to occur that
would impact or limit the City's determination whether to accept the
property and pursue any potential redevelopment. Since the County has not
withdrawn its PBC application, the City, as the LRA, is not yet able to
consider and assess potential alternative future uses for the historic north
hangar and associated property, let alone to negotiate with the Navy to
determine price and terms of a potential EDC amendment. In addition to
any negotiated land costs to the City, any use other than the proposed
Regional Park will require community engagement in accordance with the
base reuse planning process, CEQA and/or NEPA analysis, Tustin Legacy
Specific Plan amendments for alternate land uses, and an assessment of the
potential cost impacts of any mitigation measures. Nevertheless, if the
County withdraws its PBC Application,the City,as the LRA would be duty
bound to undertake the required analysis to determine whether to seek to
add the north hangar property to the EDC, or to recommend alternative
disposal methods to the Navy, so the impasse may be broken and the
property may be put to productive use for the benefit of the local
community.
DocuSign Envelope ID: E3418FB5-89F5-4821-9634-69295EF42613
Response to Recommendation
R2. As the Local Reuse Authority, the City of Tustin should commence
initial steps and planning with the Department of the Navy for
incorporating Parcel 18 into its EDC to meet the objectives of the
Tustin Legacy Specific Plan.
Response: This recommendation requires further analysis. Unless the County
determines to withdraw its PBC application, the City is not in a position to
discuss an EDC amendment with the Navy. If the County withdraws its PBC
application and waives its rights to the property,the City,as the LRA,would
first need to determine appropriate future uses for the property, in
accordance with the base reuse planning process. Then, prior to seeking
additional property under the EDC, the City would need to undertake
additional due diligence, including without limitation: (1) The City would
need confirmation from the Navy as to their willingness to discuss a change
from a PBC and pursue an EDC amendment; (2) The City must assess the
economic costs and opportunities of the newly determined future uses, if
not a regional park, (3)The City must understand price and terms of an EDC
amendment from the Navy; (4) The City would need to understand the
potential costs of assuming responsibility for the structural, maintenance,
and redevelopment of the north hangar,the associated buildings and the site;
(5) Based on any approvals for a viable land use plan, there may be a need
for CEQA and /or NEPA analysis, Tustin Legacy Specific Plan land use
amendments, and assessment of the cost impacts of any mitigation
measures. An understanding of the aforementioned items will be
instrumental in assessing whether or not to incorporate Parcel 18 into the
City's EDC.
Additionally, as noted in the Grand Jury report, the City has been forced to
respond to various public safety incidents that have occurred on Parcel 18
resulting in the expenditure of City public resources to secure the site and
its structures. The County, as the PBC applicant and designated future
owner/operator of Parcel 18 should enter into a lease or license agreement
with the Navy to maintain, secure and potentially demolish improvements
on Parcel 18 and thereby contribute to the health and safety of the
surrounding community. This is possible even though the Navy has not
completed a FOST for the property; the City has a lease from the Navy for
the maintenance and security of the south hangar and additional property at
Tustin Legacy that has not yet received a FOST from the Navy, similar to
Parcel 18. Should the County step aside, the City as the LRA, would
consider entering into a new lease with the Navy for all or portions of Parcel
18, or expanding its existing lease so Parcel 18 comes under local control.