Neighbors for a Better California Newsletter

December 4, 2025

Project Vela Lawyers Claim the 23 Story Tower Is “Deemed Approved” Why This Cannot Be A Rubber Stamp

First things first: we need a legal fund

Dear Neighbors and Friends,

Before anything else, here is the bottom line:

The developer’s lawyers are telling the City that the 23 story Project Vela tower on Turquoise Street is already “deemed approved” and that staff must issue the permits.

NFABC has already had to hire an outside attorney just to pry loose basic public records.

If the City accepts this theory as a simple ministerial box check, it becomes a blueprint for similar towers in coastal and inland neighborhoods across San Diego.

NFABC is preparing for a serious legal and procedural fight. That means attorneys, technical experts, and the ability to move quickly if the City tries to issue permits. We will need to raise at least $150,000 to do this right!

Please donate today at NFABC.org.

Your support is the only way we can keep pushing the City for real oversight and be ready to go to court if we have to.

The short version

The developer filed a preliminary SB 330 application in March 2024 and now claims that every favorable rule and staff interpretation in that package is permanently “vested,” even if it was wrong or incomplete.

Their lawyers argue that because the City missed a tight AB 130 deadline during plan check in summer 2025, Project Vela is “automatically approved” and the City must issue building permits.

They insist Density Bonus Law is frozen as of August 2024 and cannot be applied as updated.

The only way this “deemed approved” claim can work is if the City treats a 23 story tower on a tight 0.8 acre site as a simple ministerial permit, similar to a kitchen remodel.

NFABC has already had to use an outside attorney to obtain more than 100 pages of records that should have been produced through the City’s own Public Records Portal.

If you are already convinced this is wrong, you can help right now by donating at NFABC.org and sharing this update.

For those who want the full story, here is what we have learned from the documents and why it matters.

What we found in the new public records

Over the past couple of weeks, we have been reviewing more than 100 pages of new public records from the City of San Diego. Many of our board members also serve on the Pacific Beach Planning Group, so we know how community planning and transparency are supposed to work when the system is healthy.

These records are documents that Neighbors for a Better California (NFABC) had already requested from the City’s Development Services Department through the City of San Diego’s Public Records Portal (NextRequest) under the California Public Records Act. The City did not produce them in response to our request. We only received these documents after NFABC hired an outside attorney to push for disclosure.

That alone should concern anyone who cares about open government. If basic records about a 23 story tower in North Pacific Beach are hard for a community planning group and a neighborhood coalition to obtain, it raises serious questions about whether City staff are honoring California’s public records laws.

One of those documents is especially alarming.

On October 21, 2025, the law firm Allen Matkins, representing Kalonymus Development Partners, LLC, sent a three page letter to the City’s Development Services Department. In that letter, they claim their 23 story “Project Vela” at 954 to 980 Turquoise Street is already approved “by operation of law” and demand that the City immediately issue building permits.

In plain language, the lawyers are telling the City:

- The rules are frozen.

- The project is already approved.

- The City must stamp the permits.

Below is how they argue their case, and why it matters for every neighborhood in San Diego.

What the developer told the City

1. SB 330 “vesting” freezes the rules as of March 2024

SB 330, the Housing Crisis Act of 2019, was passed to speed up housing by limiting certain local barriers and freezing some rules once a qualifying application is submitted.

The developer argues that when they filed a preliminary SB 330 application in March 2024, every favorable rule and interpretation became permanently frozen in place, including:

1. Density bonuses:

   Extra units and concessions in exchange for including affordable housing.

2. FAR bonuses:

   Higher floor area ratio (more square footage than standard zoning would normally allow).

3. The three bedroom incentive:

   Extra building capacity when a project includes three bedroom units.

4. Exemptions for balconies, rooftop equipment, garages and similar areas:

   Portions of the building that do not count toward size limits such as FAR.

They are using SB 330 to claim that even if earlier staff interpretations were incomplete or wrong, the City and the community are now stuck with those interpretations forever. In effect, they argue that everything listed in the March 2024 SB 330 submittal is permanently “vested,” no matter what is discovered later.

2. AB 130 “deemed approved” claim

The lawyers then argue that because the City did not respond to their third round of plan check corrections within a very tight statutory deadline in the summer of 2025, Project Vela was “automatically approved” under Assembly Bill 130 (signed by Governor June 30, 2025).

According to their letter:

1. The City is no longer allowed to question height, bulk, bonuses or design.

2. Any remaining issues must be treated as minor construction details only.

3. City staff must “follow through and issue a building permit.”

They make this claim even though the City still had outstanding life safety and code compliance concerns at the time.

3. Density Bonus Law frozen at August 2024

Finally, they insist that Density Bonus Law must be applied as it existed on the date they filed their building permit application in August 2024. Any later changes in state law or local implementation would be off the table.

Taken together, the strategy is clear: lock in the most generous possible reading of every law, then use technical deadlines to shut down further review.

Ministerial versus discretionary: why it matters

The only way this “deemed approved” theory works is if Project Vela is treated as a simple ministerial permit.

-A ministerial permit is a checkbox process. Staff verifies objective standards that can be measured with a ruler or a calculator. No judgment. No balancing.

-A discretionary project is different. Someone has to make findings, weigh impacts and decide whether a proposal fits community plans, safety and the public welfare.

Ask yourself honestly:

Does a 23 story tower on a tight 0.8 acre site in North Pacific Beach really belong in the same category as a kitchen remodel or a code compliant duplex plan check?

Project Vela still raises serious questions, including:

-Does the height and bulk match what the Pacific Beach Community Plan ever envisioned?

-Do the requested density bonus waivers and incentives create real impacts on light, air and adjacent properties?

-Are traffic, parking and emergency access genuinely safe on these narrow streets?

-Is it honest to call these judgment calls “mere construction details?”

If the City treats all of that as ministerial in order to accept a “deemed approved” threat, this is not just about one project. It erases real community planning and replaces it with quiet staff sign offs, even when volunteer planners and neighbors are raising alarms.

Why this should worry every San Diegan

1. A 23 story tower in a low and mid rise neighborhood

On a tiny 0.8 acre site in North Pacific Beach, Project Vela is far larger than anything contemplated in the Pacific Beach Community Plan. If this is labeled “by right” and “ministerial,” then almost anything can be.

2. The “deemed approved” tactic is the new playbook

Instead of listening to residents and fixing problems, some developers are leaning on deadlines and threat letters to claim automatic approvals and sidestep public input and environmental review.

3. The public records problem is a warning sign

NFABC had to hire an outside attorney to obtain documents that should have been produced through the City’s own Public Records Portal. When basic correspondence is hard to access, it is much easier for aggressive legal tactics to play out outside public view.

4. If the City accepts this framing, no neighborhood is safe

If Project Vela is rubber stamped without resolving traffic, parking, emergency access, shadowing and view impacts, it will be used as precedent in La Jolla, Ocean Beach, Mission Beach, Clairemont, City Heights and beyond.

What Neighbors for a Better California is doing

NFABC is not treating this as a done deal.

1. Pressing City leadership for answers

We are meeting with the Mayor’s office and Council District 1 to ask a simple question: Do you agree with the developer that Project Vela is already “deemed approved,” or will you defend real oversight?

2. Challenging the “ministerial” label

We are asking Development Services to put in writing why they believe a 23 story tower qualifies as a ministerial permit. We are requesting the full density bonus file, all requested waivers and any findings that were made.

3. Demanding transparency on legal interpretation and records

We are seeking all internal memos and City Attorney analysis about AB 130 and SB 330 as applied to this project. We are also documenting how and when key records were withheld or delayed. Residents have a right to know whether staff is being pressured into accepting a story that is not supported by law and whether public records are being improperly kept out of view.

4. Preparing legal and procedural action

If the City attempts to issue permits under this “deemed approved” theory, NFABC is preparing to support formal challenges, including possible litigation and a Temporary Restraining Order to pause construction while a court reviews the case.

5. Keeping the community informed and organized

We will continue to share documents, timelines and action alerts so residents and community leaders can respond quickly and in an informed way, not after the fact.

How you can help right now

1. Share this newsletter

Forward this to your neighbors, HOA boards, tenant groups, civic clubs, and local businesses. Most people still have no idea that a 23 story tower is being pushed on Turquoise Street under a “deemed approved” theory, and that key documents were only released after legal pressure.

2. Contact your elected officials today

• Councilmember Joe LaCava: joelacava@sandiego.gov

• Mayor Todd Gloria: toddgloria@sandiego.gov

Sample message to paraphrase:

I am a constituent and I am deeply concerned about Project Vela on Turquoise Street. Do you agree with the developer that this 23 story tower is already “deemed approved” as a ministerial permit, or will you defend our community plan, our community interests, and insist on full, transparent review, including full compliance with California Public Records Act requests.

3. Support the legal fund

Please consider a donation at NFABC.org. Based on initial estimates, we need to budget at least 150,000 dollars to seriously contest this project. That means attorney time, technical experts, public records work and court filings.

No single resident can carry this. Together, we can.

We still believe that good faith planning and respect for community plans are possible, but only if the City refuses to be bullied by aggressive legal tactics and refuses to pretend that a 23 story tower is a simple ministerial plan check.

Together, we can protect the character of Pacific Beach and prevent this dangerous precedent from spreading across the California coastline.

In solidarity,

Neighbors for a Better California

P.S. The full Allen Matkins “deemed approved” letter is at NFABC.org. Please read it and share it. The more people understand both the legal tactics and the public records stonewalling behind this project, the stronger our community response will be.