Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNTY RESPONSE LETTER 8.10.21 County of Orange • County Executive Office August 10, 2021 Matthew S. West City Manger City of Tustin 300 Centennial Way Tustin, CA 92780 RE: MCAS Tustin Parcel 18 and North Blimp Hangar Dear Mr. West, The County of Orange("County")is in receipt of your letter dated August 6,2021,which attaches a prior letter dated March 30, 2021, regarding the County's Public Benefit Conveyance ("PBC") Application to the National Park Service ("NPS") for Parcel 18 at the former MCAS Tustin ("Base"),which contains the North Blimp hangar structure ("Property"). Your letter addresses a public meeting that the City has scheduled for August 11, 2021, which appears to be identical to a prior public meeting held on February 23, 2021, which County staff attended. There has been no change in circumstances since the meeting on February 23, 2021. We understand that the delayed issuance of a final Findings of Suitability to Transfer for remaining carve-outs, including Parcel 18, has frustrated all parties. However, the County remains committed to exploring mutually agreeable scenarios for the Property with the City. To that end please refer back to our responses provided on February 23, 2021 in regard to any questions that you might have about the Property and the County's position regarding the Property. In addition, responses to the questions posed in the March 30, 2021 letter are below, as many of the statements in your August 6, 2021 are duplicative of that letter, as well as the issues covered at the February 23,2021 public meeting. Again, since City staff has refused to meet with County staff to this point, the issues raised in the County responses below remain outstanding. 1. City Question: "Since the 2012 proposed alternate POU that was submitted to NPS was not approved, is the County prepared to implement its original NPS-approved PBC Application for a Parcel 18 Regional Park as it is incorporated into the MCAS Tustin Reuse Plan, and do so within the next 1-3 years?" County Response: o The County's original NPS-approved PBC application included a conceptualized site plan typical of an Orange County Urban Regional Park. It also indicated that the recreational uses would be compatible with the historic nature of the 333 W.Santa Ana Blvd.,3'a Floor,Santa Ana,CA 92701-4062 • Phone(714)834-6200 • Fax(714)834-3018 • wwiv.ocgov.com Matt West,City Manager August 10,2021 Page 2 North Hangar and would influence the shape, design, and emphasis of the park. Lastly, the application indicated that the County was requesting the option to seek the conveyance of the North Hangar, and a small area of land surrounding it (approximately 10 acres), under a separate application pursuant to a Historic Monument conveyance statutes and application. Pursuant to the original NPS approved PBC application, the Boards last actions indicate a commitment to implementing an Urban Regional Park on Parcel 18, seeking approval of its Historic Monument PBC application for the North Hangar, and working with the City and NPS to update the Program of Utilization ("POU") if necessary. Implementation of the POU will be dependent on approval of the County's Historic Monument PBC application. With that approval in place a realistic implementation timeline can be provided to the City. o Based on the February 23, 2021, public forum we understand that the City does not support a passive park, so the County will continue to explore ways to funds a more active park scenario such as the Urban Regional Park concept in the County's original PBC. 2. City Question: "Is the County prepared to budget, fund, and dedicate County resources to make the Parcel 18 Regional Park a reality in accordance with the County's approved PBC Application within the next 1-3 years?" County Response: o See last question and answer. The County remains committed to dedicating resources to exploring and identifying a park concept that meets the approval of the City and the NPS. If that remains the Urban Regional Park concept in the County's original PBC application, then the County will pursue the Historic Monument PBC for the North Hangar and surrounding areas, as originally contemplated in that application. 3. City Question: "Are on-site commercial-revenue-generating activities (that have not been approved) necessary for the County to develop and operate the Parcel 18 Regional Park and/or to preserve the north hangar?" County Response: o The original NPS-approved PBC application recognized how the North Hangar complicated the park planning process and as such studies would be undertaken to determine viable uses that would generate revenue to pay for, or substantially offset restoration and ongoing maintenance cost of the North Hangar. o The 1999 Memorandum of Agreement (signed by the State Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Department of Navy, County of Orange,and City of Tustin) ("MOA") also clearly states that the County will seek to have part, or the entire, Hangar 28 Complex adaptively used by the private sector for recreation and ancillary entertainment, retail, or other related Matt West,City Manager August 10,2021 Page 3 revenue generating uses, through a concession agreement. We understand that these concession agreements are common at other decommissioned bases. o Even though specific on-site commercial revenue generating activities have not been approved yet, their use was clearly contemplated and deemed appropriate to support re-use/preservation of the North Hangar in the County's original PSC application. o Since the North Hangar continues to complicate the park planning process, revenue generation continues to be the most likely and expedient way to move along the County's park planning. Currently, while the funding stream for the development of the park and preservation of the North Hangar would be the County's park funding, there is not a budgeted amount for this effort. The cost related to the support of the Hangar was what drove the current passive park plan that was presented some years back and discussed at the City's public forum. 4. City Question: "Since the NPS does not permit commercial-revenue-generating activities as part of the PBC, what are the County's plans to develop and operate the Parcel 18 Regional Park and preserve the north hangar?" County Response: o The County's Plan: ■ To determine the development and financial viability of developing the North Hangar for revenue generating uses the County is preparing to engage the efforts of a historic preservation Architecture, Planning and Conservation firm,to conduct a general conditions assessment of the North Blimp Hangar, a focused assessment of the damaged roof, and development of probable costs for repair options. ■ With this information the County can determine the viability of moving forward with a Park and Historic Monument PBC. If the option is a viable one, the County would submit a revised POU for a Phased Park Plan and a Historic Monument PBC for the North Hangar. ■ The County has conceptual buy-in from both the Navy and NPS for this approach and anticipates the City's support since it was an option contemplated in the MCAS Tustin Specific/Reuse Plan. Specifically, the MOA referenced above has been entered into between the State Historic Preservation Office, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Department of Navy, County of Orange, and City of Tustin which states, "As described in the LRA Reuse plan for MCAS Tustin, preservation of the Hangar 28 Complex is dependent upon its marketability for economically viable adaptive uses. The County, the most likely initial transferee of the Hangar 28 Complex, does not propose to expend general fund revenues for the preservation of the Hangar 28 Complex. The County seeks to have the 85 acres surrounding and including, the Hangar 28 Complex, be used in a manner consistent with the land uses specified in the MCAS Tustin Specific/Reuse Plan and Errata Matt West,City Manager August 10,2021 Page 4 dtd October 1996, and dtd September 1998. For either a Federal Lands to Parks or Historic Monument Program use, the County will seek to have part,or the entire Hangar 28 Complex adaptively used by the private sector through a concession agreement." ■ With approvals in place, the County would solicit development proposals from the private sector to enter a public-private partnership ("P3") for redevelopment of Parcel 18 consistent with the MCAS Tustin Specific/Reuse Plan as well as Historic Preservation Standards and Guidelines. 5. City Question: "At the LRA meeting, the County introduced for the first time a different, unvetted proposal for the Regional Park by introducing the concept of a "Phased, Passive Park." If the County desires to amend its PBC Application to seek approval by the NPS for a 'Phased, Passive Park' in lieu of the Parcel 18 Regional Park, and should the LRA support it,how will the County fund this concept and either the(i)restoration, operation, and maintenance, or(ii) demolition of, the north hangar?" County Response: o The County plans to fund the development of Parcel 18 with revenue generated from the P3. Barring that ability, the County has not identified a funding source and would have to develop the passive park plan in phases as funding becomes available. 6. City Question: "If the County desires to amend its PBC Application to seek approval by the NPS and proceed with a "Phased, Passive Park" in lieu of the Parcel 18 Regional Park, and should the LRA support it, when will the County hold public workshops to present the plan to the community as it did with the Regional Park concept in 2013?" County Response: o The County would host public workshops after completing its due diligence regarding the development potential of the North Hangar and prior to finalizing development plans with its P3 partner,whether the County chooses to pursue the Urban Regional Park concept in its original PBC application or the more passive park plan. 7. City Question: "Is the County willing to accept, without further delay, a LIFOC and assume site control of Parcel 18 from the Navy in order to safely secure and maintain the property while it proceeds to develop a Regional Park under its NPS-approved PSC Application?" Matt West,City Manager August 10,2021 Page 5 County Response: o As discussed at the public forum on February 23, 2021, without an updated POU from the NPS the County lacks clarity on its future uses of the Property and this is not in a position to accept a LIFOC, which is the next step in the conveyance process. A LIFOC is also not a mandatory requirement as part of the PSC process, so the County will consider this step only when appropriate. 8. City Question: "Or is the County willing to accept,without further delay,an Interim Lease with specific performance milestones and assume site control of Parcel 18 from the Navy in order to safely secure and maintain the property to demonstrate its commitment to construct a passive park, while it seeks to amend its approved NPS PBC Application?" County Response: o Once the County has completed its due diligence and determined the North Hangar has viable development potential the County would submit a revised Park and Historic Monument PBC application to NPS for approval. With these approvals in place the County would be willing to accept site control under a Lease with the Navy. Thank you again for your continued partnership with the County on this important public project. We look forward to continuing this effort to identify a mutually agreeable path forward and meeting when the City is able. Very Truly Yours, Digitally signed by Frank Kim DN:cn—Frank Kim,o-County of Orange,ou=CEO, email=fran k.kim@ocgov.com, C=US Date:2021.08.09 16:58:12 -07'00' Frank Kim County Executive Officer cc: Supervisor Donald P. Wagner, Third District David Siegenthaler, National Parks Service Laura Duchnak, Department of the Navy Charles L. Perry, Department of the Navy Alexander B. Bethke, Department of the Navy Amy Jo Hill, Department of the Navy Elizabeth A. Larson, Department of the Navy Kyle E. Olewnik, Department of the Navy