Santa Monica Moves to Tap Airport-Area Development

The City of Santa Monica has begun one of the largest development projects in its history on 43 acres of land on the south side of the Santa Monica Municipal Airport.

City officials say they would like to move quickly to complete the project, which is expected to generate $4 million to $8 million in annual lease revenue. On Tuesday, the council approved a timetable that calls for selection of a builder by the end of the year and for construction to begin in 2 1/2 years.

During the next six months, the council, which has a number of options on what to build on the property, ranging from office to industrial facilities, will decide what to do with the land.

“The longer (the process) runs on, the less revenue we get,” Mayor Christine E. Reed said. “We have this asset we’re not realizing the benefit of fully.”

“This is our gold mine,” Councilman James P. Conn said. “This makes it possible for the City of Santa Monica to survive as one of the wealthier cities in the state.”

But Councilman William H. Jennings was more cautious. “(The land is) sandwiched between the runway and residences,” he said. “We have to go into this realistically. There’s always a possibility the market might not be there.”

The land, one of the largest parcels of undeveloped property on the Westside, will become available as the result of an agreement the city signed with the Federal Aviation Administration in January, 1984, to settle decades of disputes between pilots and neighbors over noise at the airport.

Under the agreement, some airport buildings must be moved from the south side of the runway to the north side before the 43 acres of land may be developed. This could take more than two years.

Council members said they see the property as a way to finance other city services.

“Two years of income and you’re talking about the pier,” Councilman David G. Epstein said. “You’re talking about the (Third Street) Mall. You’re talking about potentially enormous capital resources.”

The council members said, however, that there is likely to be disagreement over the best way to use the land.

According to one school of thought, the land should become “a ‘cash cow,’ where the city tries to maximize revenue, as opposed to the other approach, to use it more creatively,” said Councilman Ken Edwards.

“I think we’re obligated to get the maximum amount of revenue from that land,” Reed said at the council meeting. “I am not willing to trade off revenues for some use that would be of lower revenue.”

Ideas for the property have ranged from an office park and industrial area to a hotel and a movie studio.

Epstein said he preferred office buildings as the best way to maximize revenue. Councilman Dennis Zane said he would like to see the project have a “ripple effect” on the city’s economy, with research and development on the site generating product development in other parts of the city.

50 Calls From Developers

City Manager John Jalili said that he has received calls from 50 developers interested in the property over the last three years.

There will be some constraints on the development. The land, because it is next to an airport, will have to conform to Federal Aviation Administration requirements. It cannot be used for residences, schools or assembly halls. The development will also be limited in height.

Airport Commission Chairman Robert Muhlbach said he has deep concerns about what the city develops on the property. “I don’t want a development on 43 acres that creates traffic problems . . . or creates a nuisance. After all is done, I want something there we can be proud of and that will provide jobs and be an asset to the city,” he said.

During the next six months, the council, the staff, the Planning Commission and the Airport Commission will prepare a request for proposals which will outline what the city would like to see built on the site and restrictions on builders. They will then receive proposals from developers.

Proposals to be Reviewed

A committee will review the proposals and select the top three developers, who will be asked to submit additional design and financial information. The committee will recommend a developer to the council, which will have the final say in the selection.

The council decided Tuesday to hold a study session and a public workshop on the project.

The land is in Santa Monica north of Mar Vista and adjoins other densely populated residential areas and major thoroughfares, including Bundy Drive and National and Ocean Park boulevards. The project’s impact on traffic and parking will be studied.

One Mar Vista resident, who asked not to be named, said that he will be watching the process care fully. “I have a lot of concerns as a homeowner,” he said. “If the city is a good neighbor, fine.”

Source of Controversy

The airport has been a source of controversy since the 1920s. Neighbors have complained about noise and filed lawsuits in an attempt to close the airport, even as pilots have fought to keep it open. In the early 1980s, the City Council considered closing the airport and developing the entire 215 acres. A study was prepared for the council in 1980 to evaluate different uses of the property.

The January, 1984, agreement with the FAA resolved some of the controversy. The city agreed to keep the airport open until 2015, to institute a noise reduction program and to reorganize the airport’s facilities.

The agreement includes plans to move three private businesses from the south side of the airport to the north side, build a new airport administration office, repave the runways and install new drainage systems. The plans also call for adding four acres of airport land to Clover Park, on the northwest side of the airport.

“It could be five to seven years before anything is built on the residual land,” Airport Director Henry Dittmar said. “When did they start talking about Colorado Place? And that was an easier project.”

Councilman Conn said he wants to ensure that the city gets what it bargains for. “I want to make sure that we don’t get into the position where we bought the ultimate dream only to have somebody sit on it for four years . . . and then sell (the right to develop) to somebody else,” Conn said.

Expressed Confidence

Councilmen Edwards and Epstein were confident the project would not fail. “The land is too valuable,” Edwards said. “There’s too much interest. It’s one of the most valuable pieces of property on the Westside. Forty-three acres is a lot of land.”

“The problem is not going to be finding interest,” Epstein said. “The problem is being able to sort out the con men from the competent people.”

Reed said the city cannot lose in the deal. “A group of developers will make a deal on this,” Reed said. “They’ll take the risk, we’ll get the revenue.”

The 45-acre privately developed Santa Monica Business Park, built six years ago on the former Douglas Aircraft site north of the airport, includes about 1.3 million square feet of office space. Firms are leasing office space there for about $1.85 a square foot.