Torrance Finding Widens Airport Options

In 1948, when the federal government gave Torrance an airport, a deed restriction said the land had to remain an airport or revert to the government.

Eight years later, the government gave up its right to reclaim the land or restrict its use, but until recently Torrance officials didn’t notice the change. And federal officials chose not to tell them.

‘No Reason to Educate Them’

“Since Torrance is apparently unaware of this, I see no reason to educate them,” wrote Ned K. Zartman, former regional counsel for the Federal Aviation Administration, in a 1968 memo.

But now officials have been educated, thanks to City Atty. Stanley E. Remelmeyer, who researched the airport deed and released his findings Wednesday.

“It’s quite a revelation,” said Mayor Katy Geissert, “because we have been under the assumption for many years that we have been granted the airport property on the condition that we maintain it as an airport.

As subdivisions grew up around it, the airport has spawned complaints of noise and fears of crashes. Some neighbors have called for the airport to be closed, and officials have imposed restrictions on noise and hours of operation. About 825 planes are based at the airport, which is in South Torrance.

Councilman Tim Mock said the City Council “very briefly” discussed closing the airport in a closed session recently after reading Remelmeyer’s report, but “the consensus was we’re not going to take steps to close the airport. . . . It’s a valuable asset to the community as long as it’s controlled within the bounds of noise levels and safety.”

City officials said they believe the opinion will rekindle differences between homeowners surrounding the airport--who have frequently complained about the noise--and area pilots who have been upset by restrictions imposed by the City Council.

Pilots’ Leverage

Councilman Dan Walker said, “It certainly will lead to perhaps more interesting conversations about the airport, our noise regulations (and) the leverage that the pilots and the (airport) operators have with dealing with the city.”

In 1948, the city obtained a quitclaim deed for about 500 acres including the airport through the War Assets Administration. The federal government retained ownership of the northern runway, known as the Lomita Flight Strip, but allowed the city to use it, according to Remelmeyer’s report.

The 1948 deed contained five pages of restrictions, most notably that the property had to “be used for public airport purposes, and only for such purposes,” the report said. The federal government reserved the right to take back the land if any of the restrictions were violated.

In 1956, the federal government gave the city another deed, which, until recently, city officials believed only gave them the Lomita Flight Strip. Remelmeyer discovered that the 1956 deed “is free of any requirement to use the property for public airport purposes and of any other restrictions and conditions, (and) superseded the terms of the 1948 quitclaim deed,” his report said.

The city never knew what it had, Remelmeyer said in an interview. “I never suspected it.”

DeWitte T. Lawson Jr., regional counsel for the FAA, agreed that the city in effect owns the airport free and clear. But in a letter to Remelmeyer, he urged the city to continue using the property as an airport.

The federal government did reserve the right of exploration and excavation for uranium and other fissionable materials, known as an AEC license, Remelmeyer said.

The federal government apparently decided to let city officials think the airport had to be operated under federal restrictions. In a 1968 memo, former FAA regional counsel Zartman said: “The 1956 deed conveyed the fee and extinguished all prior conditions and reservations set out in the 1948 deed, except the AEC license. However, since Torrance is apparently unaware of this, I see no reason to educate them.” Remelmeyer said he obtained a copy of the document from the federal government through the Freedom of Information Act.

Trusting the Government

“I think the federal government was misleading us in terms of what we could and could not do with the airport,” Mock said. “It doesn’t make me too trusting of the federal government.”

Fred O’Donnell, a spokesman for the FAA, would not comment on Zartman’s memo, saying it was in the past and the attorney is no longer with the FAA.

Ironically, Remelmeyer’s research on the ownership of the airport began after the Torrance Area Pilots Assn. filed a complaint with the FAA in 1982, alleging that restrictions placed on the airport by the council violated the 1948 deed and asked the FAA to repossess the airport under its reverter clause.

The FAA issued a response the following year rejecting some of the pilots’ complaints, but upholding others. By 1985, most of the problems between the FAA and the city had been resolved. He said the city never “had any great reason for (reviewing the airport documents) until the pilots started complaining.”

Geissert and other city officials said they will no longer have to feel threatened by pilots who--unhappy about city-imposed restrictions--have threatened to try to get the federal government to take control of the airport.

Officials said the airport is “an asset” to the community but want it to be compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods.

Ted Stinis, president of the Torrance Area Pilots Assn., said Wednesday that he was not aware of the opinions of the city and FAA attorneys but believes that they are wrong in saying that the city has free and clear title of the airport. “It makes me quite apprehensive that the city will think it has sole reign over the airport,” he said. “We’re certainly going to look into it real quick.”

Michael Bedinger, a board member of the Southwood Riviera Homeowners Assn. and a member of the city’s Airport Commission, said he does not believe the clear title will change anything.

“I never believed that was a problem,” said Bedinger, whose group has fought airport noise. He believed that the city could have obtained the title anyway by asking local congressmen to sponsor such legislation, he said. He said he does not want the airport closed, just higher standards for allowable noise levels.