Santa Monica |
News | Special Reports | Archive | Links | About | Editor | Send PR |
City May Need to Explore Housing at Airport
|
|
||||||||||
By Jorge Casuso January 27, 2025 -- As the Airport Conversion Project prepares to fly into its next phase Tuesday night, the possibility looms that the plan to create "a great park" could eventually include housing with possible citywide implications. A 36-page staff report to the City Council, which will consider the project Tuesday night, as well as a memo from the City Attorney, address the possible need to include housing on the 227 acres of publicly owned land. Housing advocates are eyeing the site -- which is currently scheduled to close as an airport at midnight, December 31, 2028 -- as a blank slate that could help the City meet the state-mandated housing quota, especially for affordable housing, over the eight years starting in 2029. According to the staff report, a City survey to inform the process included "a significant number of respondents who wrote into several questions the need to keep the Airport and the need for affordable housing." Meanwhile, slow growth advocates worry that State housing officials, who have largely taken control of City planning, could increase Santa Monica's housing quota by eyeing the airport site for additional low-income housing. Among the "top concerns" about the Airport Conversion Project expressed in the survey's 1,921 completed responses are "development concerns, traffic & congestion," staff wrote. Following are some of the key points that have given hope to pro-housing advocates, while worrying their slow-growth opponents. 1. Building a "great park" is enormously costly, and Santa Monica is strapped for cash after paying $230 million to settle child sex abuse cases that continue to be filed, while racking up a legal bill of more than $14 million in its eight-year battle to oppose voting districts. "Parks are expensive to build, operate, and maintain and do not typically generate revenue unless complimented with uses that specifically generate income," staff wrote in its report. "At the scale of the Airport site, investments in converting the land into parkland could have enormous costs." 2. If the City opts to generate significant revenue to pay for a park by selling or leasing some of the land for more than 15 years, it would need to declare the site as surplus land under State law. This would open it up to affordable housing, one of the priorities in the Surplus Land Act, overriding Measure LC, which was approved by local voters in 2014 to require the land to be used as a park. The City "may not be able to limit residential use of the Airport land post-closure if it desires to sell or lease the land to a third party, regardless of the limitations imposed by Measure LC," City Attorney Doug Sloan wrote to the Council. "If the City wanted to proceed with third party disposition of property post-Airport closure, it would be advisable for the City to consider whether housing should be considered as part of 'the Project' for purposes of (environmental) analysis as well as future voter approval." 3. The City must show State Housing officials how it plans to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) set by the State when it submits its housing plan by October 15, 2029. "State Housing Element Laws require the City to upzone as necessary to ensure that there are sufficient suitable sites to accommodate the City's next RHNA allocation or face decertification of whatever housing element is adopted, even if the City obtains certification," staff wrote. As a result, the City may need to "consider whether any level of anticipatory new housing" is "appropriate to be studied" as part of the environmental analysis for the airport after it closes, staff said. "Any restrictions under Measure LC that prevent housing will have no limiting impact if the city cannot sufficiently upzone areas citywide to accommodate the RHNA allocation." 4. A decision on whether to include the Airport as a potential site for housing would need to be made when the City receives its housing allocation, which was noted as likely taking place before the airport closes. This, Sloan told the Council, "may alter the assumptions for development of the Airport land post-closure, particularly if the City is unable to demonstrate adequate suitable sites for housing development" that are "outside the Airport land." "Failure to upzone could subject the City to all legal remedies under State Housing Laws, including monetary penalties, third-party lawsuits, and the Builder's Remedy, citywide," Sloan warned. |
![]() |
©1999-2025 surfsantamonica.com. All Rights Reserved. | About | Disclosures |