SR-831025-12BC/ED:JL:nh
Council Mtg.: October 25, 1983
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: City Staff
~D~ /2-
Santa Monica, California
OCi 2 5 1988
SUBJECT: Appeal, Development Review No. 193, 3400 Airport Avenue,
M2, Construct an 8,000 sq.ft. Temporary Office Building,
Lear Siegler, Inc.
Introduction
This is an appeal from the Planning Commission's denial of an Interim
Development Permit for construction of a temporary office structure
at the Santa Monica Municipal Airport. The application is by Lear
Siegler, Inc. and the appeal is by Councilmember Christine Reed.
Background
The applicants propose to construct a one-story, 8,300 sq.ft. temporary
office building directly behind their existing office building at
3400 Airport Avenue to be used for expanded engineering services. The
proposed project meets all present Zoning and Interim Development
requirements and was recommended for approval by the Planning staff.
Following a Public Hearing at which the application was opposed by
one person on grounds of Lear Siegler's involvement in weapons
manufacturing, the Planning Commission failed to approve the project
on a vote of 3 in favor with 2 abstentions and 2 members absent.
Under Planning Commission rules, 4 votes are necessary for approval
and failure to approve constitutes a denial. Councilmember Reed
has appealed this action to the City Council
It is the opinion of the City Attorney that, in the context of the
present application, the involvement of the applicant in the
1Z-l~
CCi 2 5 1993
Mayor, and City Council -2- October 25, 1983
Defense Industry is not a proper factor for consideration under
Ordinance Number 1251(CCS).
Alternatives
Under the Interim Development Procedures established by Ordinance
1251(CCS) the City Council on appeal may affirm, reverse or modify
any action of the Planning Commission and. the decision of the
Council is final.
Recommendation
Inasmuch as the Planning Commission's disapproval resulted. from
abstentions and absences rather than failure of the. project to meet
established land use requirements, it is respectfully recommended
that the appeal be granted and the Interim Development Permit
approved on the following findings:
1. The development is consistent with the findings and purpose
of Ordinance 1251.
2. The proposed plans comply with existing regulations contained
in the Municipal Code.
3. The existing and/or proposed rights-of-way for both pedestrian
and automobile traffic will be adequate to accommodate the
anticipated results of the proposed development including
off-street parking facilities and access thereto.
4. The existing and/or proposed public and/or private health and
safety facilities (including, but .not limited to, sanitation,
sewers, storm drains, fire protection devices, protective
services, and public utilities) will be adequate to accommodate
the anticipated results of the proposed development.
5. The proposed development will not prejudice the ability of the
City to adopt a revised land use element..
The recommendations presented in this report do not have a budget/
financial impact.
Prepared by: James W. Lunsford