SR 10-04-2011 4APr
D City of City Council Report
Santa mouica°
City Council Meeting: October 4, 2011
Agenda Item:
To: Mayor and City Council
From: Rod Gould, City Manager
Subject: Proposed Phase II Public Process Regarding the Santa Monica Airport
Campus
Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council review and comment on the Santa Monica
Airport Campus Phase I Public Process findings and direct staff to proceed with the
proposed Phase II Public Process concept.
Executive Summary
The City has embarked on a rigorous three -phase public process regarding the 227 -
acre Santa Monica Airport Campus (Attachment A), which includes 187 acres of
"Aviation Land" that must be used for aeronautical activities and 40 acres of "Non -
aviation Land" that is open to other uses. All land and building leases throughout the
Airport Campus as well as the current operating agreement with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) expire in 2015. Given the 2015 timeframe, on December 14,
2010, Council authorized the City Manager to negotiate and execute professional
services agreements with The RAND Corporation (RAND) for a study of best practices
and conceptual uses that could be compatibly located at the Airport Campus land and
Point C Partners (Point C) to formulate and manage a preliminary community interview
process regarding the range of possibilities for the future of the Airport Campus.
On February 22, 2011, Council authorized staff to proceed with Phase I of a proposed
comprehensive three - phased process that included a professional services agreement
with HR &A Advisors Inc. (HR &A) to analyze the general economic and fiscal impacts of
the current operation and activity at the Airport Campus. This Phase I process has
resulted in findings regarding best practices at general aviation facilities in relation to
local communities by RAND, results of interviews and surveys of the public by Point C,
and the Airport's economic impact on the local and regional economies by HR &A.
Phase I also included the development of the format for the Phase II public process of
focus groups, which is proposed in the body of this report. In Phase III, the studies from
Phase I and the results of the public dialogue from Phase II will be analyzed in depth
within their thematic outcomes and presented to Council for consideration of potential
policies and actions in early 2013.
1
Phase 11, as proposed, includes a comprehensive, transparent, and open public
dialogue through facilitated focus groups. The purpose of the focus groups is to gather
and record community comments and ideas with the ultimate goal of formulating,
discussing, and prioritizing potential policies and actions in advance of Phase III. Phase
III will involve strategic analysis of the themes articulated in Phases I and II in regards to
the Airport Campus and its facilities.
Background
Historic Context
The Santa Monica Airport is one of the oldest airports in the United States, and the
oldest, continuously operating airport in Los Angeles County. It is also one of the most
historically significant given its vital role in the development of the modern air
transportation system. The Airport was first established in 1917 and the original 170
acres of the Airport were acquired by the City in 1926. From the late 1920s through the
early 1970s, the Airport was home to the largest employer in the City, the Douglas
Aircraft Company.
In 1924, Douglas Aircraft and the Airport first gained fame when the Douglas World
Cruiser biplanes were the first aircraft to circumnavigate the globe. By 1929, Douglas
Aircraft had enlarged its Santa Monica Airport operations and began to ramp -up
production and testing of its early airliners, the DC -3 and DC -4, which launched
commercial aviation. During the years immediately preceding U.S. entry into World War
11, Douglas Aircraft became a major defense contractor, employing up to 44,000 workers
who worked three around - the -clock daily shifts, seven days a week. It transformed the
city as thousands of new homes were built for the Douglas Aircraft workers, fostering
the growth of communities such as Sunset Park and other neighborhoods around the
Airport.
In 1941, the federal government leased most of the Airport from the City to provide
protection for Douglas Aircraft and participated in expanding the publicly -owned facility
to its current 227 acres to accommodate the burgeoning production of military aircraft.
The runway expansions included replacing the earlier two - runway "X" configuration and
expanding the runway length east to near Bundy Avenue and west to 23`d Street to
2
accommodate the current single 5,000- foot -long runway designated as Runway 21 (for
departures to the west) and Runway 3 (for departures to the east) and two full - length
parallel taxiways.
With the end of World War II, the federal government wanted to relinquish its leasehold.
The City and federal government executed an Instrument of Transfer on August 10,
1948, and the City resumed operation of the Airport and constructed Airport Avenue in
1950 in order to provide access for general aviation facilities on the south side of the
runway. In 1959, Douglas Aircraft developed the DC -8 commercial jet to compete with
Boeing's 707. Over the next few years, Douglas Aircraft developed plans and proposed
that the City lengthen the runway to accommodate this new jet aircraft and acquire
additional acreage to build new corporate offices and other facilities so Douglas Aircraft
could establish a regional aerospace and electronics hub. The City declined, and
Douglas Aircraft shifted its jet manufacturing to the Long Beach Airport. Research and
development of missile production and sub - assembly work continued at the Santa
Monica Airport plant until the early 1970s when Douglas Aircraft closed its Santa
Monica operation and left the Airport. The relationship of the Airport's immediate
neighborhoods and the city changed with the departure of the then - largest employer
and the move away from a significant manufacturing base at the Airport.
Private general aviation activity began again at the Airport after the end of World War II.
In the 1960s, the first general aviation jets arrived at the Airport. They were "pure jets,"
which were louder than present -day fan jets. The noise impacts upon neighborhoods
adjacent to the Airport were very significant and lacked any connection to the national
defense and employment significance associated with the former operation of Douglas
Aircraft. The advent of these jet aircraft, the high volume of general aviation activity,
and attendant increased impacts upon residents living in close proximity to the Airport
brought controversy, resulting in litigation regarding the City's ability to limit Airport
usage and a dispute between the City and the FAA.
k?
In the mid- 1980s, the City and the federal government came to a settlement agreement
with the adoption of the 1984 Agreement governing Airport operations. The 1984
Agreement facilitated the City's enactment of one of the strictest Airport Code and Noise
Ordinances in the nation. These operational restrictions limit, among other things, the
maximum allowable noise level an aircraft can generate, the hours of operation of the
Airport, and the types of aircraft operations. The restrictions also prohibit helicopter
flight training. This Agreement expires in 2015.
The Airport Campus Today
Today the 227 -acre Airport Campus is the largest facility owned and operated by the
City. The Airport Campus is comprised of Aviation Land and Non - Aviation Land.
Serving the primary function of the Airport with facilities dedicated to aviation - related
uses is the northern and central area of the campus on 187 acres that is referred to as
Aviation Land. This area is restricted to aviation - related uses. The area known as Non -
aviation Land is south of Aviation Land and consists of 40 acres. Use of this area was
identified in the 1984 Agreement and the area hosts many community, business, and
aviation industry- supporting uses.
Aviation Land is home to over 400 based aircraft and numerous aviation service
providers that offer a wide range of services to the flying public. The Airport also
houses Angel Flight West, a non - profit volunteer organization that organizes free air
transportation to deal with medical care needs for children and adults, and EVAC, an
emergency disaster response program. The Airport plays a critical role in the city's and
the region's emergency preparedness, serving as a major emergency response site and
facility in case of natural disasters such as earthquakes or other urgent situations.
In addition to its core aviation services, on Non - Aviation Land the Airport serves the
community with recreational opportunities at the 8.5 -acre Airport Park that has play
fields, picnic areas, and a dog park. There is also the sustainably- landscaped Airport
Avenue Demonstration Gardens located at 3200 Airport Avenue. The Non - aviation
Id
area further provides a home for a thriving cultural and arts community that includes the
highest concentration of artist studios in the city as well as galleries and live theater.
Furthermore, it is the site of the twice - monthly Antique Mart and the annual Art Walk.
Also located at the Airport is the Santa Monica College Arts Campus.
Within the Non - aviation Land there are major event sites including the Baker Hangar
and the Santa Monica Arts Studios that offer programs such as the LA Art Show and
PAL Halloween and events for non - profits like Heal the Bay and Children with AIDS. It
also contains creative and professional office space as well as the Westside Small
Business Development Center and the DC -3 monument. In addition, the Museum of
Flying will be open to the public soon.
Community concerns with airport operations have continued with complaints frequently
expressed about noise, safety, pollution, and pattern flying, particularly by Airport
Campus neighbors both in Santa Monica and Los Angeles. Noise concerns have
primarily been directed at jet, helicopter, and piston aircraft operations The community
expressed concerns about pollution, raising concerns about jet aircraft emissions
(particularly when holding on the runway), the smell of jet fuel, and the presence of lead
in piston aircraft fuel. Safety is also an expressed concern with regard to pattern flying
and flight training. Complaints regarding piston aircraft were heightened with the start of
the FAA test of a proposed 250 - degree turn for Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) piston
aircraft with safety concerns about possible aircraft either overrunning the runway or
landing short, particularly since there are no runway safety areas. The concern over
safety elevated recently due to a non -fatal crash in August 2011. The City takes the
issue of safety very seriously and will remain vigilant in operating the Airport as safely
as possible. Any actions taken at the Airport Campus to address these concerns must
be implemented within the context of a complex jurisdictional and legal environment.
The Legal Constraints Established by Federal Law
In identifying and considering the possibilities for the Airport Campus's future, it is
absolutely essential to bear in mind federal legal constraints. The City owns and
operates the Airport. But, federal law governs and strictly regulates the national air
transportation and commerce systems; and, subject to limited exceptions, federal law
preempts local regulation in this area.
Congress gave very broad responsibility and authority to the FAA in order to ensure that
the nation has a safe and efficient air transportation system. This authority is multi-
faceted. It includes the power to regulate and control navigable airspace, air traffic, and
air navigation facilities. (49 U.S.C. § 40101 et seq). Also included in the FAA's mandate
is the. power to regulate local noise controls. (49 U.S.C. § 47521- 47533). And, among
other things, the FAA is charged with the responsibility for airport development. (49
USC § 47101). Pursuant to the statutory authority granted by Congress, the FAA has
adopted regulations that effectuate its powers. These regulations, like their federal
statute counterparts, cover a very wide variety of aviation - related fields. Thus, for
example, the FAA has adopted regulations governing aircraft certification and aircraft
operations. (See 14 C.F.R. Parts 25, 91, 121, 125 and 135).
As an adjunct to its responsibility for airport development, the FAA is authorized to
award federal grants for airport construction and improvement. (49 U.S.C. § 47101 et
seq.) Congress has mandated that all such grants must be conditioned upon written
assurances that the grantee airport "will be available for public use on reasonable
conditions and without unjust discrimination" (49 U.S.C. § 47107(a) (1)) and without
providing any "exclusive right" to use of the airport. (49 U.S.C. § 47101(a)(1) and
(4)). Similar conditions apply to conveyances of land from the federal government for
use as a public airport. The FAA has adopted regulations related to these grants, and
they include provisions establishing an administrative process for enforcing the grant
conditions. (See 14 C.F.R. Part 16).
Santa Monica's Airport has been the subject of many legal disputes between the City
and Airport users, Airport neighbors, or Airport businesses. However it is the legal
disputes between the City and the FAA that have proven to be the most difficult. The
most recent example is the eight year legal battle over the City's Aircraft Conformance
Program and the corresponding ordinance banning Category C &D aircraft. This dispute
cost the City well over $1,000,000 and the C & D ban was struck down.
Over the course of that dispute, the FAA explained its legal position relative to the City's
obligations in its briefs filed with federal appellate courts. Thus, on the issue of Airport
closure, the FAA has made it very clear that it does and will take the position that the
City cannot close the Airport in 2015 because the Instrument of Transfer, executed after
the conclusion of World War II in 1948, obligates the City to operate its Airport in
perpetuity. Additionally, the FAA takes the position that the City accepted federal grant
funds in 2003 and is thus required by federal law to operate the Airport for at least 20
years thereafter, or until 2023.
The City takes a different position on the closure issues, which is not surprising given
the FAA's and the City's very different responsibilities. However, the FAA's position on
closure must be understood and appropriately acknowledged because it bears heavily
upon the City's options. The clearest and most extreme example is potential closure. It
is crystal clear that, if the City attempts to close the Airport, the FAA will not hesitate to
aggressively fight against closure in the courts. Such a fight would go on for years; and,
at best for the City, the outcome would be highly uncertain. What is certain is this: the
fight would be long and expensive and -- perhaps most important -- neither party would
be able to control the result.
Likewise, in the process of conceiving possibilities for the Airport Campus's future other
than attempted closure, it is crucial to understand and acknowledge the FAA's authority
and the federal constraints at work here. Thus, for instance, it is important to bear in
mind that most of the Airport Campus land must be utilized for aviation
7
purposes. Some of the land has been released for non- aviation purposes, but that land
is also subject to certain federal constraints. For example, Airport Park is built on non -
aviation Airport land; and federal restrictions (mostly ensuring safety) applied to what
the City could build on the site. Other non - aviation land at the Airport Campus is leased
to Santa Monica College and to businesses. Federal law requires that these leases be
at or above market rate and that the proceeds be used solely for the Airport Campus.
Because understanding the federal legal constraints and the FAA's role are essential to
any discussion of the Airport Campus's future, legal staff anticipates continuing to
participate actively in the process of identifying and discussing the possibilities.
Discussion
The expiration of the 1984 Agreement and all of the land and building leases in 2015
presents a unique opportunity for the City to reengage with the FAA to discuss Airport
Campus operations within the aforementioned parameters. The operations and
facilities of the Airport Campus are serious and important matters to the City and the
community. At the conclusion of the intensive phased outreach process, the City will be
well informed by the findings and well positioned to discuss those findings with the FAA
as the termination date of the 1984 Agreement and various leases approaches.
Phase I of the three - phased process began in March 2011. It engaged a broad group of
community participants and industry experts informed by best practices, global trends,
and state -of -the art thinking in compatible land use design and economic impact of the
facility. 16 Phase II, an extensive public process is proposed featuring an open house at
the Airport Campus to kick off the effort followed by a large number of focus groups
comprised of members of the public to be held throughout the city beginning this winter
and through spring 2012. With these essential inputs providing a full range of identified
preferences given the constraints on Airport operations, the City can then undertake an
analysis process grounded in a comprehensive understanding of what is possible and
the associated costs and benefits as a part of Phase III for in -depth analysis.
0
The Phase II public process is intended to be a comprehensive process including
preliminary analysis of relevant concepts and their local applicability that will elevate the
discussion to a new level. Informed by possibilities and constraints, people throughout
the community with different interests and perspectives would be able to engage in an
in -depth dialogue about their concerns, priorities, and preferences for the future of the
Airport Campus. The results of each focus group will be documented and presented to
Council in May 2012.
Phase I Consultant Findings
The consultant teams have completed their Phase I efforts and their findings are
summarized below.
Consultant Findings: Point C
Point C's initial phase of work involved research and developing relationships with a
broad spectrum of community groups and potential participants in a public process.
These conversations with the community were intended to be distinct from previous
endeavors by involving discussions amongst an expanded group of interested parties in
an attempt to build a foundation for an informed and inclusive dialogue. Understanding
the needs of current and potential users and communities was essential for framing the
discussion. Point C's activities included the following:
• In collaboration with City, staff, RAND, and HR &A, Point C identified a wide range
of interested communities from the aviation, residential, business, education, and
other areas within the city.
• Based on research, Point C developed discussion questions intended to both
inform and inspire discussion. The objective was to facilitate a dialogue that
provided a platform for different groups to move from problem to possibilities,
while at the same time allowing Point C to understand perspectives on the Airport
impacts and benefits to the community, the quality of life, etc.
• *Note: The purpose of these conversations was for research purposes only.
Conversations were used to understand the issues and perspectives involved, for
the purpose of designing a public process. The work is NOT a random, scientific
survey and is NOT intended to represent citywide attitudes about the Airport
Campus.
9
• Point C engaged in almost 60 in- person interviews with people from various
industries and parts of the community. Over 70 people were interviewed by
phone or, if they preferred, through an online survey
• The main takeaways from the in- person conversations and online survey results
are: (1) people recognize that the FAA is one of, if not the biggest challenge in
determining the future of the Airport; (2) the Airport is not perceived as being
consistent with other aspects of life, policy and community in Santa Monica; (3)
people are willing to discuss and identify alternative futures for the Airport; (4)
there is a general lack of understanding of the constraints imposed on the City in
the operation of the Airport; and (5) there is a critical need to build and maintain
trust on this issue going forward.
• Generally, the top concerns from the in- person conversations and online surveys
were the following:
a. People have expressed awareness of changes at'the Airport Campus over
the past several years, both as increased operations as well as new
service & facilities. Specifically, people spoke of a perceived increase in
jet operations and added noise, and noted that on -site, more recreational
opportunities were available (i.e., park);
b. There was a solid understanding and somewhat nostalgic view of the
Airport's historical context in the community (i.e., Douglas Aircraft, aviation
history, etc.). People stressed the value of the Airport's history and
indicated that they would like to see more educational programs or
resources relating to the history. The Museum of Flying was perceived as
an important educational resource;
c. People expressed significant concerns regarding the compatibility of the
Santa Monica Airport and its current operations (i.e. air pollution, flight
schools, curfew hours, etc.), safety parameters, and current uses and
services; and
d. People indicated concern regarding the aesthetics and function of the
Airport and property. They perceived it as "run down" and indicated that
they would like to see increased recreation and community uses (art and
music events, educational resources, etc.), improved accessibility to the
property, and improvements to the grounds and facilities.
• Point C heard from these conversations that the Airport Campus can and should
be a place of civic pride that includes a compatible, quieter and safer airport; a
leader in green aviation technology; a place for education; a center to grow Santa
Monica's art community; and a civic gathering space.
10
Consultant Findings: HR &A
HR &A Advisors, Inc. (HR &A) prepared estimates of the general economic impact that
the current operation of Santa Monica Airport, including that of the Airport Campus, has
on the city's economy, and its net fiscal impacts on the City budget. HR &A has
extensive experience preparing related analyses for a wide range of institutions,
development projects, and planning initiatives throughout California and other parts of
the U.S., including a number of related assignments for the City.
Economic Impact Analysis
The general economic impacts of the Airport Campus were estimated using an IMPLAN
input- output model and economic data specific to the geography of the City. IMPLAN is
a widely accepted modeling system for measuring economic impacts including direct
and "multiplier effect" impacts, which are typically expressed in terms of jobs and
economic output. The economic impact estimates are based on detailed analysis of on-
site Airport Campus employment at all aviation and non - aviation tenants (for - profit and
non - profit), governmental agency expenditures (i.e., Airport Administration and Santa
Monica College), and estimated visitor spending by arriving air passengers who stay in
city hotels. The annual operation of the Airport Campus includes 177 different aviation
and non - aviation businesses spread across 42 different industry sectors; $7.5 million in
City and Santa Monica College annual expenditures; and $2.5 million in arriving air
passenger annual expenditures in the city.
• This scale of activity at the Airport supports 1,487 total full -time and part -time
jobs in the city, of which 894 are located directly at Airport Campus. This means
the Airport Campus ranks among the city's top 10 employers, equivalent in scale
to the number of jobs at RAND Corporation.
• The top three sectors in the city's economy that are supported by Airport
operations, as measured by total jobs, are: (1) air transportation; (2) food
services and drinking places; and (3) legal services.
• For every direct job at the Airport, 1.66 total jobs are created within the city's
economy. This is a larger employment "multiplier effect" than found in typical
forms of city development (e.g., office buildings, retail and hotels).
• The annual operation of the Airport also results in a total annual economic output
impact of $275.2 million in the city's economy, including $187.5 million in annual
11
tenant sales, governmental expenditures at and air passenger visitor spending in
the city.
• The top three sectors in the city's economy that are supported by the Airport
Campus operations, as measured by total annual economic output, are: (1) air
transportation; (2) legal services; and (3) motion picture and video services.
• On average, every job in the city's economy that is supported by operation of the
Airport generates $185,000 in annual economic output in the City economy.
• Stated another way, the scale of direct economic activity at the Airport ($187.5
million) is equivalent to the direct economic output generated by 1,855 average -
price hotel rooms, or 1.2 million square feet of general retail, or 350,000 square
feet of commercial office space.
• Beyond the city's borders, the Airport Campus also supports a wide range of
economic activity in the surrounding West Los Angeles sub .region, including
transportation of transplant materials for the UCLA Medical Center, operation of
the largest citrus grower in the State of California, a range of activities related to
the film, television and entertainment industries, and it provides a critical role in
emergency preparedness.
Fiscal Impact Analysis
The fiscal impact analysis (i.e., total City reverues minus total City operating and capital
costs) was based on budget data for the Airport Fund and original research on General
Fund revenues generated by Airport Campus annual operations. HR &A's analysis
concludes that the current operation of the Airport Campus had the following fiscal
impacts in FY 2010 -11:
• The Airport Campus produced about $5.0 million in total revenues, including
$4.0 million recorded in the Airport Fund and $1.0 million recorded in the
General Fund.
• Forty -six percent of the Airport Fund revenues were derived from land leases,
with the remaining revenues derived from the combination of hangar rentals,
building space rentals, landing fees, fuel sales, tie -down charges, and interest
earnings.
• Forty -six percent of the General Fund revenues were derived from the City's
share of property tax paid by tenants, with the remaining revenues derived from
business license tax, utility user's tax, parking tax, sales tax, and transient
occupancy tax paid by arriving air passengers who stay overnight in City hotels.
• These estimates do not include revenues derived from businesses and
household expenditures elsewhere in the City that are indirectly supported by
business and governmental operations at the Airport Campus.
12
For FY 2010 -11, annual Airport Campus operating costs recorded in the Airport Fund
and General Fund including salaries, supplies and other general expenses, capital
costs, and the cost of services provided by other City departments were nearly equal to
total revenues.
Consultant Findings: RAND
The RAND Corporation was charged with developing a set of conceptual proposals for
activities that could take place at the Santa Monica Airport Campus over the coming
years. RAND conducted a scan of trends in aviation and airport practices to determine
how other airports were developing in relation to their nearby communities. RAND also
assessed local economic, social, and cultural trends and planning documents specific to
Santa Monica and its neighbors as background when developing its recommendations.
Objectives
The recommended concepts are not specific as to place, time or cost; instead, they are
"concepts" intended to inform and stimulate the community process. The individual
concepts are consistent with the following overall goals:
• They integrate the Airport with the dynamic changes and growth patterns already
underway in the community;
• They are intended to enhance the City's strong position as an environmental
trend setter and as a source of creativity;
• They honor the rich history of aviation in Southern California and especially in
Santa Monica; and
• Activities at the Airport Campus are suggested which are compatible with on-
airport and adjacent activities, including residential land uses nearby.
13
Elements of the Future Nature of the Airport Campus:
1. In order to complement existing airport activities, to modernize facilities, and to
respect the surrounding communities, implementation should begin by making
use to the extent possible of existing buildings and structures.
2. Increases in local, neighborhood - serving retailing activities and restaurants
should be encouraged on the Airport. These must be at modest scale to insure
compatibility with the surrounding community.
3. Access to the Airport Campus should be dramatically improved. This includes
automobile access and suggests the importance of improved parking facilities at
the Airport. There is a special need to address substandard intersections at
Airport Avenue and Bundy Drive and especially at Airport Avenue and Walgrove
Avenue. Transit access should also be upgraded, In addition, bicycle and
pedestrian access routes should be included to enhance access for the
surrounding community and also within the site.
4. The Museum of Flying can be expanded into a regional educational destination.
It should be a cultural center honoring Santa Monica's leadership role in the
history of aviation, including educational programs for children and adults, and
commemorative events and gatherings of specialized aviation - related
associations and interest groups.
5. A "Sustainable Santa Monica" Center could be located at the Airport, providing a
focal point for the high priority that this community has placed on sustainability.
The already considerable presence of the performing arts and visual arts can be
expanded by increasing the number of facilities and tenants and broadening their
activities.
6. The already successful outdoor recreational activities located at the Airport can
be expanded in terms of their size and programmatic variety.
7. The Airport Campus could become the site of an "economic incubator" at which
small new startup companies could be located and supported by shared
professional and support staff and facilities that would enable them to grow,
improve, and market their goods and services. An incubator could have a
specific theme — e.g. computer electronics, graphics, and the entertainment
industry or environmentally sustainable aviation products and services.
8. The Airport could host a regional Emergency Communications and Control
Center that would supplement and coordinate with the actions of fire and police
departments, FEMA, the American Red Cross, the National Guard, and others.
Supplies can be stockpiled at the Airport for use when needed. Establishment of
communications systems and facilities necessary to a Command and Control
Center which could also provide excellent training and readiness resources to
many agencies, educational facilities for the public, and to colleges offering
degrees and specialized skills training. Such a center would significantly expand
the capabilities of existing emergency operations centers at the Santa Monica
14
Public Safety Facility and at the American Red Cross regional center in West Los
Angeles.
In all cases, these concepts are preliminary, but they have been discussed with local
and regional authorities, educational institutions, governmental departments, private
sector organizations, and those who would play roles in implementing future activities of
these sorts at the Airport Campus.
Proposed Phase II Public Process
The Phase II public process would provide an opportunity for all members of the public
with an interest in the future of the Santa Monica Airport Campus to fully engage in an
in -depth interactive discussion about its impacts, physical and policy relationship to the
city and surrounding communities, and possible future opportunities through focus
group meetings that would be held throughout the city. The focus groups would be
comprised of approximately 8 to 12 participants each and are intended to be exhaustive
in their breadth and frequency. Through these focus groups, staff anticipates a wide
range of participants with a variety of viewpoints will be reached between January and
March of 2012.
Any interested individual can participate in one focus group, which would be facilitated
by a professional organizer of public meetings and community processes. The
approach would emphasize inclusiveness and a high level of community interaction.
Prior to the commencement of the focus group sessions, an open house would be
conducted on the Airport Campus in December 2011. This would provide all interested
members of the public an opportunity to tour the site, its facilities, and operations. This
is similar to the Airport Park public process that featured self - guided tours and
observation stations.
The focus groups allow direct dialogue between interested participants. The process
would be augmented by a web site that provides a summary of each session as well as
general resource information about the Airport Campus. This would facilitate
15
transparency and allow any interested party to follow the process. The comments and
suggestions of each of the focus groups would be recorded and a summary of the
results of each group would be presented to Council in May 2012 along with the
proposed Phase III analysis process.
Next Steps
If Council directs staff to proceed with the proposed Phase II Public Process concept,
staff will work to further define the Phase II tasks and budget as well as identify
consultants and /or facilitators who could support the process. Professional strategic
consultants, working in concert with City staff, would develop materials for and facilitate
the focus group meetings, conduct an open house, establish the Phase II website, and
provide broad public notice of the Phase II process and focus groups. The Phase II
input will be reported back to Council and the community in May 2012.
r
Financial Impacts & Budget Actions
If Council directs staff to move forward with the proposed Phase II Public Process
concept, staff will return to Council this fall with a recommendation to enter into an
agreement with a consultant for Phase II tasks.
Prepared by: Susan Cline, Assistant Director of Public Works
Rod Merl, Airport Administrator
Approved: Forwarded to Council:
Rod Gould Rod Gould
City Manager City Manager
Attachments:
A — Map of Airport. Campus
16
io -4,it
1-� - A
Current Economic and Fiscal Impacts
in the City of Santa Monica
October 4, 201 1
2800]8' S1,aat, 50nto Mank, CA 90405 Pt. (3)0)581 0900
Table of Contents
1. Santa Monica Airport's Historic Role in the City's Economy
2. Overview of the Santa Monica IMPLAN Economic Model
• City of Santa Monica Economy, 2011
3. Santa Monica Airport Campus —What's There Today
4. Santa Monica Airport Campus Quantitative Economic Impacts
• Jobs
• Annual Economic Output
5. Santa Monica Airport Campus Fiscal Impacts on the City
Budget
6. Conclusions
Santa Monica Airport's Historic Role
in the City's Economy
Iys, Advise_ Atl_
Overview of the Santa Monica IMPLAN Economic Model
• IMPLAN (IMpact Analysis for PLANning) is a widely accepted
economic model.
• Models utilize 440 different industry sectors and 500
commodity categories.
• Santa Monica IMPLAN model based on 2009 Los Angeles
County economic data
• Further calibrations based on: EDD, SCAG, and the U.S. Census
Bureau's ZIP Code Business Patterns and 2007 Economic
Census.
Overview of the Santa Monica IMPLAN Economic Model
IMPLAN Models Measure Impacts in Direct and "Multiplier Effect" Terms
Change In "Final Demand"
—e.g. new development,
plan or investment.
From the purchase of
goods and services to
support the direct
impacts.
"Multiplier
h Effect"
From household spending
by direct and Indirect
employees.
Overview of the Santa Monica IMPLAN Economic Model
Total Impacts are a Function of Industry- Specific Relationships
16 Restaurant Jobs
16 Aviation Jobs
1.25 Total Jobs per Direct Job
$80,000 Total Output per Job
1.81 Total Jobs per Direct Job
$231,000 Total Output per Job
Santa Monica Airport Campus —
What's There Today
Hnsy.- .A,M,e AAt
Santa Monica Airport Campus — What's There Today
42 Industry Sectors Represented at Santa Monica Airport, Mostly in Small Businesses
Transport by air
Legal services
Sdentiflc research and development services
Food services and drinking places
Independent artists, writers, and performers
Motion p[do,. antl video industries
Medial and other ambulatoryato senile,
Aulomothee equipment rental and leasing
Accounting, tax preparation, bookkeeping, and payroll
Architenura{ engineering, and related services
All other professional, eclentlRq and technical services
Insurance carriers
Construction ofnew nonresidential commercial
Advertlsing and related services
Other Primus ed.o.U.nalservices
Maintenance and repair construction of nonresidential
Retail 51.1.1- Food and beverage
Photograph[ cserobot
Wood kitchen cabinet and countertop manufacturing
Sound recording Industries
Specialized design services
Investigation and security services
Fitness and recreational sports centers
Gantmaking, gluing, and sodat dvoce, nrganbetb t
Wholesale trade businesses
Performing arts companies
Museums, historical sites, zoos, and parks
Personal and household goods repair and maintenance
Real estate establishments
Insurance agencies, brokerages, and related activitles
Promoters of performing sale and sports
Other amusement and recreation Industries
Apparel accessories and other apparel manufacturing
Mol.rcysla, bicycle, and parts manufacturing
Retail Stares- Motor vehicle and parts
Couriers and messengers
Custom computer programming services
Employment services
Retail Stores- Clothing and clothing accessories
Sanl ..d sightseeing transportation
Radio and television broadcasting
Federal, State and Local Gooemment
e 177 Total Businesses
109 (62 %) Have One to Two Employees
151(85 %) Have Less Than Six Employees
Santa Monica Airport Campus
Quantitative Economic Impacts:
Jobs
HM, A,,,s,- A, t
Santa Monica Airport Campus
Quantitative Economic Impacts:
Annual Economic Output
lJC_ ,,, yzc, ndvN, A,L
Santa Monica Airport Campus Fiscal Impacts
Santa Monica Airport Campus Fiscal Impacts
A,,y,, Advi, na.
Airport Campus
produced $5.0 million
in total revenues in
FY 2010 -I1.
• $4.0 million -
Airport Fund
$1.0 million -
General Fund
Santa Monica Airport Campus Fiscal Impacts
Conclusions
In FY 2010 -11,
Airport Campus
total operating
expenditures
were about
equal to total
Airport Fund and
General Fund
revenues.
,,l ,. Adv &e. Aa ,
Conclusions
• In addition to its important role in U.S. aviation history, the Airport Campus
has also played an important role in the City's economy since the early
1900s.
• Today, economic activity at the Airport Campus is spread across 42 different
industry sectors and 177 individual business, of which, 85% have less than
six employees.
• The Airport Campus accounts for a total of 1,487 total jobs in the City's
economy, of which 894 result from on -site activity and local visitor spending
by arriving air passengers.
• The Airport Campus supports $275.2 million in total annual economic output
in the City's economy, of which $187.5 million occurs directly on -site and in
local visitor spending venues.
• Jobs and economic activity at the Airport Campus have higher "multiplier
effects" in the City's economy than other typical forms of development.
• In FY 2010 -11, the Airport Campus generated enough revenue to offset
nearly all operating costs.
Current Economic and Fiscal Impacts
in the City of Santa Monica
Questions?
NAP„"., _t,
2800 ]8"` Sbeel, Smna Mohko, C 90405 Ph, (810) 5810900
�z INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY,
AND ENVIRONMENT
Dr. Martin Wachs
October 4, 2011
Integrate
the future
of
the airport with the dynamic
changes
underway
in
Santa Monica
Develop concepts for non - aviation airport land that
emerge from the community
Enhance the city's strong position as an
environmental trend setter and engine of creativity
Honor the rich history of aviation in Santa Monica
and Southern California
Based on "best practices" and our understanding
of the Santa Monica community
Have not been rigorously evaluated; are not
"endorsed" or "recommended" as yet
For discussion and consideration in community
dialogue and for further development should they
emerge as promising
• •' r •
�_.
:;.:,,
..*
..
RAND
IM
h •
RAND
A INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY,
AND ENVIRONMENT
� -
III Fill
�} ,guy � r i^ �` R' .� � `' nt a 'i ti � ttii � � ,p
1 f r 3 .'� ( 2,..
,. ✓` ,i. ,. x,U 4i ...., 1 .,. ,, � �,. .r a h„ ,ti t i,..at � .. ,.
® Understand perspectives & establish possibilities
Value of
Airport's
History
Educational
Resources
Airport
Museum
Recreation &
Community
Uses
Improvements
to grounds &
facilities
Accessibility
BIG TAKEAWAYSl
a
SMO Can + Should Be a Place of Civic Pride
)mpatible,
ter, & safer
airport
A place to grow
& show off
Santa Monica's
art community
• Leader in green
aviation
technology
place for
iucation
gathering -
space .
rus' rt1?iflu�tr,,,
}lt�l