I’d like to take a moment to update you on the latest developments regarding the “Turquoise Tower” project at 970 Turquoise St., based on our recent efforts behind the scenes. ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏ ͏
Neighbors For A Better California

 Dear Supporters of Neighbors for a Better California,

 TURQUOISE TOWER:

I hope this message finds you well. I’d like to take a moment to update you on the latest developments regarding the “Turquoise Tower” project at 970 Turquoise St., based on our recent efforts behind the scenes. Neighbors for a Better California (NFABC) met with city staff from the Mayor’s Office to review the Cycle 1 comments provided by the Development Services Department (DSD). The DSD conducted a thorough review, and through this process, we gained clarity on the origin of the proposed base density of 31 units. According to the Pacific Beach Community Plan, the commercial section permits up to 47 units per acre—however, this is contingent upon obtaining a discretionary permit. To address this discrepancy, the Pacific Beach Planning Group submitted a letter (attached for your reference) notifying the City of the issue with the base density calculation. We are still awaiting an official response from the City.

Unofficially, we’ve been told that when municipal codes conflict, the City defaults to the "highest and best use" of the property. In this instance, however, we believe this interpretation overlooks the requirement for a discretionary permit. NFABC disagrees with the City’s preliminary stance and continues to advocate for a resolution that respects the established planning process. As of now, neither Councilmember LaCava’s office nor the Mayor’s Office has not received a response from the developer addressing the Cycle 1 comments. At this stage, we’re uncertain about what this silence might indicate regarding the developer’s next steps. We’ll keep you informed as soon as we learn more. Thank you for your continued support and engagement. Please stay tuned for further updates as we navigate this process together.

 LINK TO LETTER

 

CITY OF SAN DIEGO’S BONUS ADU PROGRAM:

Neighbors for a Better California has taken a firm and official position to advocate for the repeal of the City of San Diego’s Bonus ADU Program, urging a return to the California State ADU framework. In addition, we are actively participating in the Community Planners Committee to draft their formal letter to the City of San Diego on this matter.

It is clear to us that the proliferation of what are effectively apartment complexes within RS or single-family neighborhoods is both inappropriate and detrimental to the character of these communities. In addition, the RM-1-1 zones were intended to support gentle, thoughtful density—not large-scale apartment developments. Furthermore, we believe the Bonus ADU law requires reform, not only in single-family areas but also in multifamily zones, to better align with the needs and vision of our neighborhoods.

We remain committed to ensuring sensible planning policies that preserve the integrity of our communities, and we appreciate your support as we move forward with these efforts.

 

NEW CALIFORNIA BILLS:

In addition, we are following multiple State of California legislative efforts including:

 SB 79 (Wiener): California Senate Bill 79 aims to tackle the housing crisis by promoting transit-oriented development, allowing higher-density housing near major transit stops 

 https://www.neighborsforabettercalifornia.org/castateletters

AB 609 (Wicks): Creates an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for housing projects that are compliant with local laws and in environmentally friendly locations, thereby greatly reducing risks and increasing feasibility for these projects. Sponsored by CA YIMBY and Bay Area Council.

SB 607 (Wiener): Incorporates several important reforms to CEQA that would benefit housing projects, including focusing analysis, expanding exemptions, and strengthening the determinations of lead agencies to allow exemptions. Sponsored by Bay Area Council, Housing Action Coalition,Rural County Representative of California, and Prosperity CA.

LINK TO “Why Is Housing So Expensive” by author, Patrick Condon, Broken City

 

Warm regards,

Marcella Bothwell, MD, MBA

Chair, Neighbors For A Better California

bothwellm@icloud.com

 

Neighbors For A Better California
9855 Black Mountain Road
SAN DIEGO
United States

Powered by Squarespace

Unsubscribe

Neighbors For A Better California