17 FAA agreement ties City Hall’s hands at the SM airport
A plan to build a 21,000 square foot storage shed near homes in Sunset Park has renewed calls for the City Council to develop a comprehensive land-use plan for the Santa Monica Airport.
The Friends of Sunset Park neighborhood group and the Airport Commission have rejected the current proposal to build the shed south of Fire Station No. 5 on airport property, instead asking city staff to come back with detailed mitigation plans, including landscape drawings and specification.
They feel the storage shed as it is currently designed is too large for the site, insufficiently designed and harms the character and quality of life of the neighborhood.
The call for action highlights a 20-year battle between residents and City Hall over how the airport is used. Because the shed would be built at the airport, it does not need to go through the typical approval process, which includes reviews by both the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board.
Residents want that changed. “This is about 15 years of discussion on how things should be done at the airport,”said David Kaplan, an airport commissioner and resident of Sunset Park. “When I first moved here 20 years ago, there were no metal buildings at the airport. Now we have several. Prior city managers passed resolutions establishing a proper notifying process for construction process. Now, that seems to have been forgotten.
“They really do need something for the fire department,” Kaplan said.“But there are other sites that are not right next to homes.”
The storage shed would be used to store the fire department’s reserve and emergency response vehicles and equipment,disaster supplies and maintenance equipment that is currently sitting outside the various firehouses throughout the city.
In addition, airport maintenance materials, tools and equipment will also be kept there.
Storing the fire equipment will eliminate the deteriorating impacts of keeping the equipment and materials outside, enhance security, reduce response time during times of extreme emergencies and reduce blight, city officials said.
“This is not for our need. This is for the community’s need,” said Deputy Fire Chief Bruce Davis. “The community is very generous and has given the fire department the best equipment to care for them … This building will allow us to put equipment inside so that we can better take care of the investment made by the city and the residents.”
Davis said the location of the shed, which many residents would like changed, is ideal because it is next to a a firehouse with the proper staffing levels to maintain the vehicles, supplies and other equipment. By being next to the airport, the shed could be used as a staging area to either transport victims to area hospitals or gather food, water and medical supplies that would be brought in by plane or dropped from a helicopter hovering overhead.
“With everything spread out currently, we cannot mobilize quickly in the event of an emergency,”Davis said.“With this facility, the emergency vehicles would be fully equipped and ready to roll at a moments notice.”
Zena Josephs, a member of Friends, said residents support the fire department, but are simply seeking a proper review process that allows for more public input.
“This is a symptom of the airport not being zoned,” Jospehs said. “Because it does not go through the regular planning process, the only people who will have control over the design is the City Council. We have no control over what is happening and who’s to say that once they’re finished that they couldn’t go back and build something even bigger. There are 227 acres at the airport.”
There is already an existing storage shed at the site, but at 4,743 square feet, it is too small to house airport maintenance vehicles and the emergency response vehicles, city officials said.
What to do with the airport has been a contentious issues in the city for decades as elected officials have struggled with a legally-binding agreement with the Federal Aviation Administration that prevents City Hall from closing the airport down and converting it into a park or housing, as some have suggested.
The 1984 agreement will be around for another eight years, at which time there is hope amongst residents and city officials that the airport could scaled back if not demolished, however, until then, City Hall’s hands are tied when it comes to zoning, said Andy Agle, the director of resource management and a former city planner.
“At one point during the land-use review process (currently underway) it was considered whether or not to include the airport, and based upon some legal constraints, the council instructed staff not to include it,” Agle said. “But the planning of the airport is an important issue and we will continue to take public input on that.”
To ensure that the shed is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, city staff held a community meeting in November, at which time they presented three options that included different roof heights and facades.
That meeting was called at the request of the Airport Commission, and city staff failed to notify the public as required by previous commission action related to construction projects at the airport, a letter from commissioners to the council states.
“It was also noted that drawings and exhibits were incomplete and deficient for public discussion without showing full site, accurate use of spaces or scale of adjacent properties,” the letter adds.
The shed is expected to cost $77,000 to build. “(Zoning at the airport) has certainly been a big issue in the Sunset Park neighborhood,” said Amanda Schachter, a planning manager at City Hall who has worked in the city for 20 years. “It is an issue that council hasn’t given us direction at this point. Really, we have been instructed to just look at very broad policy, and any specifics will follow.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 13, 2007. Read the original PDF.