The Rag is just now receiving information about a crazy project being proposed for Pacific Beach. A “Pencil” tower is potentially coming to the beach community.
A developer is proposing a 23-story high rise at 970 Turquoise Street in PB. It is supposed to have 139 hotel rooms on 9 floors and 74 housing units on the other floors, including a whooping 10 units as affordable (5 very low income and 5 moderate income). It proposes 7 floors (2 below ground) of parking alone.
The City Development Services staff has apparently labeled the permit for the “pencil” skyscraper as “discretionary” which means because it meets certain criteria, it can bypass public scrutiny and just be built.
If built, Project “Vela” would be a little over 238 feet.
The developer is Nathan Pitters of 970 Turquoise LLC from Los Angeles. He’s banking on key “waivers” that the City by law cannot turn down including waivers on 30 ft height limit from 1972 Proposition D and the 60 ft height limit Community Commercial (CC) 4-2.
There is pushback and it’s coming from folks on the PB Planning Committee. They’re asking ‘How is this a discretionary permit which is only seen by the City of San Diego, DSD reviewers, — and NOT the Planning Commission nor the City Council. In fact, doesn’t even require notice the Pacific Beach Planning Group OR to neighbors within 300 ft.’
They’re also asking ‘How is this possible to put a hotel within 23 story building with essentially 5% affordable housing?
They also have specific concerns about:
- traffic congestion;
- roads and intersections are not prepared for this kind of increased traffic
- SD Fire Department does not have capabilities in coastal area to combat emergencies for a 23-story building
- Water, sewer infrastructure does not have capacity for such a development
It should be noted that, according to members of the PB Planning group, Councilmember Joe La Cava AND Mayor Todd Gloria are AGAINST this development. The Mayor and LaCava are supposedly waiting on a “Technical Guidance” memo from the California Housing and Community Development Agency (HCD) on the legal issues concerning this development.
Wait. I thought they could only go over the height limits and have “allowances” if ALL the units were affordable or low income. wtf is happening here? Unacceptable. This build isn’t even about housing.
“Discretionary” means the opposite, that the City decision makers have discretion whether to approve the project or not and may impose project-specific conditions. You seem to mean “ministerial” or “administrative,” which means that a project must be approved if it meets certain minimum requirements. best,
Thanks for the clarification.
I’m curious; what size is the lot they’re planning to build this pencil high rise on?
It’ll take 4 lots, French Gourmet to German Motors inclusive.
Miami West.
Rally Against zoning abuses and press conference 5:45 October 9 PB library. Scott Chipman 619-990-7480 Scott@chipman.info
From the folks at SavePB:
Dear SavePB Member,
Please join us on October 9th at 5:45 p.m. at the Taylor Library courtyard. This gathering and the subsequent PB Planning Grou[p meeting are crucial because you will hear about the disregard of building rules and coastal height limits and their negative impacts on Pacific Beach.
Gather on October 9th at 5:45 p.m. in the library courtyard, where speakers and media will be present.
The developer will present the plan to the PB Planning Group at 6:30 p.m.
Join us before the meeting to voice your concerns in public.
Taylor Library, 4275 Cass St,
2661 Garnet: Rose Creek Village, 5-story building
Remember Wasabi Sushi restaurant at 2661 Garnet Ave on a small triangular lot across from Weinerschnitzel and next to Rose Creek? Despite a 1972 voter-enacted law that keeps building heights at 30 feet or less in coastal neighborhoods, the City has approved funding for a five-story building on that lot. This will be a roughly 60-foot-tall building with 60 units for low-income tenants and only 9 parking spaces. The structure will overshadow Rose Creek. (see images below). We have questions for the developer and the City:
What is the City’s reason for ignoring the coastal height limit of 30 feet? Click here for a thorough editorial on this issue.
Considering the potential risks and negative environmental impacts of building a tall building beside Rose Creek, has the City’s Planning Department carefully evaluated the potential for flooding, soil stability, and ecosystem disruption?
The location is one of the busiest traffic-wise in PB. With only 9 parking spaces, has the City considered Residents’ concerns about increased traffic, noise, and parking?
970 Turquoise: Vela, 23-story building
At the north corner of Cass and Tourquoise, where the German Motors garage, Freddy’s Liquor store, and the French Gourmet, now closed, are located, a 23-story building project is proposed on four lots.
23-story privately funded high rise in Pacific Beach
Height: 238 ft and 4 1/2 inches
4 parcels
Hotel: 139 visitor accommodations on 9 floors
Housing 74 units with 10 units (5 very low income and 5 moderate income)
Waives received by this project (City by law cannot turn down these waivers), 30 ft height limit 1972 Proposition D, 60 ft height limit Community Commercial.
How is this a discretionary permit only seen by the City of SD Development Services Department reviewers, NOT the Planning Commission, NOT the City Council, and doesn’t require notice from the Pacific Beach Planning Group or neighbors within 300 feet? It will look like a skyscraper against the businesses on that block and the neighborhood behind it.
How can a hotel be placed within 23-story buildings with 5% affordable housing?
Traffic congestion: Roads and intersections are not prepared for this much increased traffic during and after construction.
SD Fire Department needs capabilities to combat emergencies in a 23-story building.
Water and sewer infrastructure needs to have the capacity for such a development.
Please take the time to join us at the rally and press conference. There is power in numbers.
Respectfully,
Suzanne, Scott, Marcie and Marcella at SavePB.org
Has anybody calculated the square footage for the proposed Turqoise and Garnet Street project land, and how they compare with the Point Loma Ave project which was proposed but held up when the appeal against it was granted? I think that Pacific Beach is NOT “documented” as historic. In Ocean Beach, we need to know that what happens in Pacific Beach wants to happen in Ocean Beach. Perhaps some developers do not consider us upscale enough.
Go to PB Planning site: https://www.pbplanning.org/
I believe the authors are mis-interpreting the word “discretionary” and confusing it with the term “mnisterial” in this paper. Discretionary is where the government reviewing agency and the public can review the plans and permit applications. Ministerial is where the applicant plops money on the counter and walks away with a permit, such as a fence permit. I highly recommend you engage the services of a qualified attorney who understands California and City of San Diego law and can guide you to demand your rights.
I am now 25-years retired from a 24-year career at the County of San Diego reviewing all manner of discretionary construction projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). I do know the State Legislature under Toni Atkins, Tod Gloria and other miscreant legislators weakened the laws to enable high density developers to build such monstrosities as the “Pencil” in Pacific Beach (PB), but you still have very strong rights to demand a reduction in height, scope, and scale in our coastal communities. Since Craig Sherman did such a great job on the proposed apartment building in the Emerging Ocean Beach Historic District, I recommend a group of you retain his services to ensure your rights are being honored by the City of San Diego.
Ron, thank you for this. We’d already knowledged the error but it’s important to understand the difference and the different roads the community can take.
Ministerial permits were designed for hot-water heaters and plumbing. They are granted over-the-counter, are not noticed, and cannot be appealed. These pesky appeals disappear for ministerial permits.
Definiition: A ministerial permit, also known as a by-right permit, is a streamlined permit process in San Diego that is used for projects that automatically meet county requirements:
Application: You can apply for a ministerial permit online using the City of San Diego’s website.
Approval: If the project meets all applicable regulations, staff will approve the permit. The approval process is quick, often taking as little as 90 days.
A very nice review in normalheightscpg.org:
https://normalheightscpg.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/Discretionary-vs.-Ministerial-Projects.pdf
I am interested in any followup information concerning the Pencil in PB article.
This is a craziest proposal for a small low key community such as north PB
The damage to the community & environment will be massive & not to mention the burden on our already overstretched infrastructure
How about we ban STVRs and free up those thousands of units for long term housing instead of adding to the tremendous strain we already feel in the beach communities (traffic, parking, trash, delayed police response, etc)??
Ah yeah! Tell that to Campbell & CO.
Thank you for the information Ron. What legal rights are left after the Banker’s Hill150 vs. San Diego decision and the Schreiber vs. City of LA decision by the appellate court?:-)
Leslie, I recommended Craig Sherman for this kind of answer. I am not an attorney, but aspects of those laws still exist and Sherman can help you best. My family relocated from Point Loma to PB during my high school and college years and the thought of 23 stories on Turquoise Street turns my stomach. Best of luck to you all.
For all those who have a soft spot in their heart for Circulate San Diego, see this: They support the 23-story monster. “Transit and housing advocacy group Circulate San Diego is pleased with the application of the state law.
“The Turquoise project is one of the first in San Diego to utilize AB 1287, and as the principal sponsor of this bill, we’re excited to see it supporting the construction of both affordable and middle-income homes,” said Jeremy Bloom, an executive with Circulate San Diego. “It’s promising to see this legislative tool being used as intended to help address our region’s housing affordability challenges.”
I don’t believe for moment that Gloria is against this. If he were, he would order the city to turn it down and compel the developers to sue the city and not force local residents to have to do it.
Carolyn – for all the time you’ve spent over the decades watching this city – I believe you’re correct once again. Thanks for saying it.
You’re welcome. Sure would be nice to follow the money on the “homelessness” spending. With hundreds of millions of dollars going out the door, and let’s just say 10,000 unhoused – how much of that is direct help and how much is building rent-controlled units and how much is – as one activist put – the homeless industrial complex. I’m sure some has gone for good, but really….there doesn’t seem to be any serious analysis of what is a problem in Every City in the USA.
And you see it Italy and France and the UK. Not so much in Scandanavia since not only to they generally believe that housing is a right, but they find ways to provide it. Austria also has an effective public housing program. Copenhagen in particular finds ways to provide affordable housing that isn’t bland and prone to low qualities of life, i.e. they are designed with green spaces and worthwhile architecture. It’s not rocket science – it’s design consciousness.
What we have around here in too many cases is cheap design and construction (not designed to last though the costs are definitely hard to manage) to support the bottom lines of the project. It is with some irony that San Diego is hosting the Design set this year. I’ve seen creative projects, it’s the cheap attitude in how a project is designed that I resent. A little flair and long-term thinking at the design level can make a big difference later. Affordable housing does not need to luxe it needs to be practical and designed with a sensitivity of the humans going to live there day-in and day-out.
What’s happening now is a retreat to the indoors – something the Mediterranean peoples figured out oh maybe a thousand years ago. The secure in society retreat to their private patios (clubs etc) leaving the poor and those who have to travel in cars – to fight it out over the streets. Into the social engineering fray bicyclists get killed and small businesses are left with another source of stress. Building a bike lane – if it’s used – increases problems for pedestrians. Oh – and I saw one used the other day. Some body in cruiser turned into the bike lane going the wrong way on 5th. I was surprised that the lanes are 1) designed to allow such a wide car to enter and 2) designed so that they can.
Planning is Dead and it seems to engineers designing things either 1) have never used a bike in a real city 2) have not had to use transit 3) Do not have any meaningful oversight /input from those who do.
Maybe I could offer to lead a junket to Copenhagen etc. I bet that would have takers. But no, when you try and promote effective Best Practices you run into the Not Invented Here mentality.
Ask me what I really think.
Oops sounds like a few different columns in there.
Thanks
During my 24-year tenure with the County of San Diego, I often witnessed a common political sleight of hand con job by elected officials to count up the votes in advance of a public hearing so the Supervisor could “look supportive” by voting no, when he/she knew the other Supervisors had the votes locked-in to approve even with his/her no-vote. I watched former Councilman Todd Gloria play the same game before he left the Council only to return as mayor. So of course he is the man behind the screen pulling the levers to approve the 23-story Turquoise Street project.
It’s not even sleight of hand anymore at the City. The structural change to the “strong mayor” system gave all the power to one person is no longer required to attend public hearings and participate in a public discussion about what is happening and what should be happening. Furthermore they hire consultants to deal with the public, asking them to go to meaningless meetings, too often when the major decisions have already been made behind the scenes.