Turquoise Tower FAQ

Answers to common questions about the proposal, the City’s review, state housing laws, traffic and safety, and NFABC’s work

PROJECT

  • Project Vela, commonly called Turquoise Tower, is a proposed 23-story mixed-use development on Turquoise Street in Pacific Beach.

    The current proposal includes residential units, visitor accommodations, retail space and a multi-level parking garage.

    Because of the project’s size, height and location in the coastal zone, it has raised significant questions about whether it complies with applicable zoning, Density bonus and review requirements.

    NFABC is closely following the City’s review and challenging several aspects of how the project is being processed.


  • The project is approximately 239 feet tall and 23 stories.

    That is far above the 30-foot coastal height limit that has historically applied in this area.

    The developer is seeking to exceed that height through state Density Bonus Law waivers. Whether those waivers are legally available for this project is one of the issues NFABC continues to examine and challenge.

    Different height numbers have appeared in project materials because height can be measured in different ways, but the overall proposed building height is approximately 239 feet.

  • The current proposal includes 213 total units.

    Of those:

    • 139 are visitor accommodations

    • 74 are residential units

    The project also includes ground-floor retail and a large parking garage.

    This distinction matters because most of the units in the project are not residential housing.

  • Of the 213 total units, 139 - about 65% -  are visitor accommodations, while 74 - about 35% - are residential units.

    The visitor accommodations include kitchens and may accommodate extended stays, but they are classified as commercial visitor accommodations rather than residential housing.

    That classification is important because the project is seeking benefits under state housing laws while a majority of its units are not classified as housing.

    NFABC has raised questions about whether those visitor accommodations can properly be counted when determining the project’s eligibility for certain housing-law protections and bonuses.

  • The current proposal includes 10 deed-restricted affordable residential units: 5 for very-low-income households and 5 for moderate-income households.

    For 2026, San Diego County’s Area Median Income (AMI) is $130,900. Income limits vary by household size.

    Very Low Income limits:

    • 1 person: $61,250

    • 2 people: $70,000

    • 3 people: $78,750

    • 4 people: $87,450

    Moderate Income limits:

    • 1 person: $109,950

    • 2 people: $125,700

    • 3 people: $141,400

    • 4 people: $157,100

    The current project materials reviewed by NFABC do not clearly identify the bedroom sizes of the 10 affordable units, so NFABC is not assuming whether they will be studios, one-bedroom, two-bedroom or larger units.

    Overall, the 10 affordable units represent about 4.7% of the project’s 213 total units.

  • NFABC recognizes San Diego’s need for more housing, including housing affordable to a range of income levels. Our concern is not development on this site, but whether this project is entitled to the extraordinary height, density, waivers, and streamlined review it seeks.

    Of Turquoise Tower’s 213 proposed units, 74 are residential and 139 are classified as commercial visitor accommodations. Only 10 residential units are deed-restricted affordable.

    State housing laws must be applied as intended, and projects seeking significant housing-related benefits must meet the legal requirements for those benefits.

    NFABC does not oppose development on this property. We maintain that any project must comply with applicable laws and development standards and undergo the level of review required by law.

    NFABC supports responsible growth that expands housing while ensuring affordability, infrastructure capacity, public safety, and neighborhood compatibility.

  • Turquoise Tower includes a seven-level parking garage:

    • 2 levels underground

    • 5 levels above ground

    Current project plans show the garage extending to the project’s setback lines on all sides, creating a large parking structure beneath the tower.

    Because the project includes residences, visitor accommodations, employees, deliveries and commercial activity, NFABC continues to review how vehicles would enter and exit the site and how the garage would affect the surrounding street network.

WHERE THINGS STAND

  • Turquoise Tower has not been approved.

    The project is still under review by the City of San Diego’s Development Services Department. The developer continues to respond to City comments and revise project documents as part of that review.

    The City is currently processing the application as a ministerial, or by-right, project, meaning it could be approved without a public hearing if the City determines that it meets all applicable requirements.

    NFABC disputes that review path and has raised concerns about whether the project qualifies for ministerial approval and for the state Density Bonus benefits and waivers it is seeking.

    For now, there is no final City approval and no building permit allowing construction to begin.

  • The City’s Development Services Department is still reviewing Turquoise Tower. The developer must continue responding to City comments and providing revised plans or documents when requested.

    Because the City is currently treating Vela as a ministerial, or by-right, project, there is no scheduled public hearing where residents or a planning board would vote on whether the project should be approved. The City’s review is focused on whether the application meets the requirements the City believes apply to the project. The City has publicly described Vela as a “by right” proposal. 

    If the City determines that the project meets all applicable requirements, it could move toward permit approval. If the City finds that it does not comply, the developer may have to revise the project or address those issues before permits can be issued.

    Although the City continues to process Vela as a ministerial project, its review has raised numerous technical and compliance questions that the developer must address. A ministerial review can still involve extensive technical review; what it does not allow is the broader judgment and discretion available in a discretionary permit process.

    NFABC continues to review the City’s findings, project revisions and public records as the application moves through this process.

    There is currently no announced date for a final City decision.

  • The City is treating Turquoise Tower as a ministerial, or by-right, project because it believes the application qualifies under state and local housing laws that allow certain projects to be reviewed using objective standards rather than through a discretionary public-hearing process.

    The developer is also seeking benefits under California’s Density Bonus Law, which can allow additional density, incentives and waivers when a project provides qualifying affordable housing.

    Under ministerial review, the City’s role is largely to determine whether the project meets the objective rules it believes apply. It does not have the same ability to weigh broader community impacts or exercise judgment about whether the project is appropriate for the site.

    NFABC disputes whether Turquoise Tower qualifies for this ministerial review path. Among the issues NFABC has raised is whether the project’s 139 visitor accommodations can properly be counted when determining eligibility for the housing-law benefits and protections the developer is seeking.

    That question matters because only 74 of the project’s 213 units are residential housing.

  • NFABC is pushing for discretionary review because it believes Turquoise Tower does not qualify for the streamlined ministerial process the City is currently using.

    A discretionary review would provide a broader review process than the ministerial pathway. Depending on the permits and approvals required, it could include public hearings, greater public participation and consideration of a wider range of project impacts.

    Discretionary projects are generally subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), although the level of environmental review depends on the project and the circumstances. Discretionary review does not automatically require a full Environmental Impact Report.

    NFABC believes a project of this size and complexity should receive the level of public and environmental review required by law before a final decision is made.

TRAFFIC AND SAFETY

  • Many residents are concerned that Turquoise Tower could add significant traffic to Turquoise Street and nearby roads.

    Under California law, however, traffic congestion by itself generally is not considered a significant transportation impact under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

    SB 743 changed how transportation impacts are evaluated under CEQA. Instead of measuring how much a project slows traffic at streets and intersections — known as Level of Service (LOS) — CEQA transportation analysis now generally focuses on Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

    As a result, increased traffic congestion or delay, standing alone, generally would not constitute a significant CEQA transportation impact, even if the project were subject to CEQA review.

  • Evacuation and emergency access are different from ordinary traffic congestion.

    Turquoise Street is a major route used by residents traveling to and from North Pacific Beach and surrounding neighborhoods. A project the size of Turquoise Tower raises questions about whether emergency vehicles could safely reach the site and whether added vehicles could affect evacuation during a major emergency.

    Unlike ordinary traffic congestion, emergency access, roadway safety and evacuation concerns can still be relevant to a project’s review.

    The City is currently processing Turquoise Tower as a by-right project. NFABC continues to raise emergency access and evacuation concerns and is advocating for a review process that allows these public-safety issues to receive broader consideration.

  • Pedestrian and roadway safety are separate from ordinary traffic congestion and can still be important.

    A project of this size could add more cars, deliveries, ride-share vehicles, visitors and turning movements along Turquoise Street and nearby intersections. That can raise questions about pedestrian crossings, driveway access, visibility, turning conflicts and overall roadway safety.

    NFABC believes these issues should be carefully reviewed, especially because Turquoise Street serves residents, businesses, pedestrians, cyclists and emergency vehicles.

    The question is not simply whether traffic will be slower. It is whether the project can operate safely within the surrounding street network.

  • That is one of the key questions NFABC believes deserves closer review.

    Turquoise Street is a two-lane road that already carries neighborhood traffic and also serves an important emergency and evacuation function. Turquoise Tower would add residents, visitors, employees, deliveries and other vehicle trips to that same corridor.

    The issue is not simply whether traffic will get worse. The more important questions are whether the street can safely handle the project’s added activity, whether emergency vehicles can maintain access, and whether evacuation conditions could be affected during a major emergency.

    NFABC continues to press for these safety issues to receive meaningful review before the project is approved.

WHY EXISTING RULES HAVEN’T STOPPED IT

  • San Diego voters approved the 30-foot coastal height limit, commonly known as Proposition D, in 1972. That height limit still applies in the Coastal Height Limit Overlay Zone.

    However, California’s Density Bonus Law can require cities to waive certain local development standards - including height limits - when those standards would physically preclude a qualifying project from being built at the permitted density and with the concessions or incentives allowed under state law.

    The developer of Turquoise Tower is relying on Density Bonus Law and has requested a waiver of the 30-foot height limit.

    That does not mean Proposition D has been repealed. It means the developer is arguing that state housing law allows an exception to the local height limit for this particular project.

    NFABC disputes whether Turquoise Tower qualifies for the Density Bonus protections and waivers it is seeking, including whether a project with 139 visitor accommodations and only 74 residential units can properly rely on those housing-law provisions.

    That eligibility question is a key part of NFABC’s challenge to the project.

  • Yes. California’s Density Bonus Law can require cities to waive or modify certain local development standards for qualifying housing projects that include affordable units. These can include rules involving height, setbacks, floor area, parking and other development standards.

    But those waivers are not automatic for every project that includes affordable housing. The project must first qualify for the protections and benefits provided under Density Bonus Law.

    Turquoise Tower’s developer is relying on Density Bonus Law to seek waivers from local development rules, including the 30-foot coastal height limit.

    NFABC disputes whether this project qualifies for all of the Density Bonus benefits and waivers it is seeking, particularly because 139 of its 213 units are classified as visitor accommodations rather than residential housing.

    That eligibility question is important because if the project does not qualify for a particular Density Bonus benefit, the developer cannot simply use that benefit to bypass the local rule.

  • The site’s existing zoning allows a much smaller project than the 23-story tower now proposed.

    The developer is relying on California’s Density Bonus Law and related housing laws to seek more density and waivers from local development standards that would otherwise limit the project’s size.

    That is how a project can be proposed at a scale far beyond what the underlying zoning would normally allow.

    But the key question is whether Turquoise Tower actually qualifies for all of those state-law benefits. NFABC disputes that point, especially because most of the project’s units are visitor accommodations rather than residential housing.

    So the issue is not that the local zoning disappeared. It is whether state housing laws legally allow this particular project to go beyond it.

  • Yes. San Diego voters approved the 30-foot coastal height limit through Proposition D in 1972, and that local height limit remains in effect.

    However, voter approval does not prevent California law from requiring exceptions in certain circumstances. State housing laws, including Density Bonus Law, can require a city to waive local development standards for a project that qualifies for those protections.

    So the question is not whether Proposition D still exists — it does. The question is whether Turquoise Tower legally qualifies for an exception from the height limit under state law.

    NFABC believes that question deserves careful scrutiny and continues to challenge whether this particular project qualifies for the Density Bonus benefits and waivers it is seeking.

CAN IT BE STOPPED OR REDUCED?

  • The current 23-story Turquoise Tower proposal can still be challenged and could be stopped or substantially changed. The City has not given the project final approval, and important legal and technical issues remain under review.

    When NFABC or public officials talk about “stopping Turquoise Tower,” that does not necessarily mean preventing any development on the property. The owner could still pursue a different project that complies with the zoning and laws that apply to the site.

    NFABC’s focus is on the current proposal and the unusually large scale and development benefits it is seeking, including its reliance on state Density Bonus Law, waivers from local development standards, and ministerial review.

    There are no guarantees about the outcome. But while the current application remains under review, there are still meaningful opportunities for it to be denied, revised or reduced.

  • Yes. A project does not necessarily have to be either approved exactly as proposed or stopped entirely.

    If the City determines that Turquoise Tower does not qualify for some of the density, incentives, waivers or other benefits the developer is seeking, the developer could be required to revise the project.

    The developer could also choose to modify the proposal in response to legal, technical, financial or regulatory concerns.

    NFABC’s goal is to ensure that the City correctly applies the laws and development standards that govern the site. If the current proposal is not entitled to all of the benefits it claims, a smaller or substantially different project could result.

  • NFABC is examining several interconnected legal, technical and procedural issues rather than relying on any single argument.

    Among the central questions are whether Turquoise Tower qualifies for the state housing-law protections and Density Bonus benefits it is seeking; whether its 139 visitor accommodations can properly be counted for purposes of those benefits; whether the requested waivers from local development standards are legally justified; and whether the project qualifies for the ministerial review process the City is currently using.

    NFABC is also reviewing technical issues involving emergency access, evacuation, roadway safety, project design, infrastructure and other requirements reflected in City and developer documents.

    These issues continue to evolve as the developer revises the project and the City reviews new information.

  • Several things could affect the final outcome.

    The City could determine that the project does not comply with one or more applicable requirements or that certain Density Bonus benefits, waivers or other protections are not available. That could require changes to the proposal or affect whether it can proceed in its current form.

    New project revisions, City findings, technical review, legal analysis or information obtained through public records can also raise issues that must be addressed before permits are issued.

    Public officials can ask questions, request careful review and help ensure that unresolved concerns receive attention, although they cannot simply disregard state law or applicable development rules.

    If necessary, legal remedies may also be available after a final City action. Whether litigation would be appropriate would depend on the City’s eventual decision and the administrative record at that time.

    For that reason, NFABC’s work now is focused on developing a strong factual and legal record before the City makes a final decision.

WHAT NFABC IS DOING

  • NFABC is actively following the City’s review of Turquoise Tower and raising legal, technical and procedural concerns as they arise.

    Our work includes reviewing the developer’s revised plans and City correction notices, submitting written comments and supporting documentation, communicating with City staff and elected officials, and pressing the City to fully address unresolved questions before any permit is issued.

    NFABC is also challenging the City’s decision to process the project as ministerial and is advocating for discretionary review, which would allow broader public and environmental review.

    As the application changes, NFABC continues to track the record so that important issues are raised while the City still has the opportunity to address them.

  • NFABC reviews City records, project plans, correction notices, technical studies, and other documents related to Turquoise Tower.

    We also file California Public Records Act requests to obtain materials not readily available to the public, including communications and technical review documents.

    These records allow NFABC to compare the developer’s proposals with City requirements, identify unresolved issues, and ensure our comments reflect the official project record.

    This review is essential because many key questions about Turquoise Tower are technical and procedural and not visible to the public.

  • NFABC has engaged legal and technical professionals to review Turquoise Tower and assess its compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and development standards.

    This review has included the project’s use of state Density Bonus Law, requested waivers from local standards, and the City’s decision to process the application as ministerial.

    NFABC has also reviewed City correction notices, plans, technical studies, and other records for issues related to zoning, project eligibility, emergency access, stormwater, fire and life-safety requirements, and other applicable standards.

    When concerns are identified, NFABC documents them in the City record through written comments, supporting materials, and communication with City staff and public officials.

    This work is ongoing as the developer revises the application and the City continues its review. NFABC’s goal is to ensure that key legal and technical issues are identified and addressed before any final decision is made.

  • Turquoise Tower is a complex development proposal governed by state housing law, local zoning regulations, technical requirements, and an active City review process.

    The developer is supported by a full team of attorneys, architects, engineers, consultants, and regulatory experts working continuously throughout the approval process. To participate meaningfully and on equal footing, the community must also have access to qualified legal and technical expertise.

    Funding enables NFABC to retain professionals who can review City and developer submissions, assess legal and technical implications, respond promptly as the project evolves, and help ensure that community concerns are fully considered before key decisions are made.

    Community donations make this work possible by building and sustaining the professional capacity NFABC needs throughout the City’s review process.

HOW THE COMMUNITY CAN HELP

  • NFABC provides updates as the Turquoise Tower application moves through the City’s review process.

    Visit nfabc.org for current project information, documents, community updates, and explanations of the legal and technical issues affecting the proposal.

    You can also join NFABC’s email list and attend our monthly community update meetings to hear what has changed, what happens next, and where community involvement can be most useful.

    Because the project and City review continue to evolve, NFABC encourages residents to rely on current project documents and verified information rather than rumors or outdated information circulating online.

  • NFABC holds monthly online community update meetings to share the latest information on Turquoise Tower, explain what is happening in the City’s review, and answer community questions.

    You can register for upcoming meetings on our Community Updates page. If you cannot attend live, NFABC posts meeting recordings and follow-up information on the website.

    You can also sign up for the NFABC newsletter to receive updates by email.

    Please help us keep the community informed by sharing NFABC updates and newsletters with friends and neighbors who may want to follow the project.

    Residents may also submit questions in advance for future community updates.

  • There are several urgent and meaningful ways you can support NFABC’s work on Turquoise Tower and your involvement right now can make a real difference in shaping what happens next.

    You can donate directly to NFABC today to help fund the legal, technical, and professional expertise needed to thoroughly review the project and respond effectively as the City’s process continues. Your contribution directly strengthens NFABC’s ability to advocate for the community and ensure critical concerns are not overlooked.

    You can also take immediate action by:

    ● Signing up for the NFABC newsletter to stay informed in real time

    ● Attending monthly community update meetings to stay engaged and make your voice heard

    ● Sharing NFABC information with friends, neighbors, and local networks

    ● Encouraging others to stay informed and involved before key decisions are made

    ● Contacting public officials when community input is requested or needed

    ● Introducing NFABC to individuals who may be able to contribute financial or professional support.

    Every donation, every conversation, and every act of participation strengthens NFABC’s ability to represent the community effectively. The decisions being made now will have lasting impact - your support today helps ensure the community has a strong, informed voice throughout the entire review process.

  • Yes. Public officials need to hear that residents are paying attention to Turquoise Tower and expect the project to receive careful, lawful review.

    Community comments are most effective when they are specific, factual, and directed to the officials or departments that can act on the issue.

    NFABC will let supporters know when there are important opportunities to contact the Mayor, City Council representatives, Development Services, or other decision-makers about specific issues or upcoming actions.

    Rather than sending the same general message repeatedly, we encourage residents to stay connected with NFABC so community outreach can be timely, accurate, and focused where it can have the greatest impact.

    Sign up for NFABC updates to receive alerts when your voice is most needed.

  • No. Neighbors for a Better California (NFABC) and Team Turquoise Tower (Team TT) are separate organizations with distinct leadership, communications, and fundraising.

    Both groups have raised concerns about the Turquoise Tower proposal, but NFABC independently handles its legal, technical, and City advocacy work.

    Donations made to NFABC support its work, including the legal and technical professionals it retains.