San Diego developer resubmits plans for coastal tower amid housing law dispute

Kalonymus is expected to resubmit plans for a 23-story mixed-use tower in Pacific Beach after the City of San Diego requested clarifications on outstanding issues. The project, known as Project Vela, sits at 970 Turquoise Street and includes 65 market-rate housing units, 10 low-income units, and 139 hotel rooms. The developer pitched the concept in 2024, relying on a structure that allows hotel units to count toward housing totals to maximize density.

The core of the current dispute involves the application of California’s Density Bonus Law. YIMBY Democrats of San Diego, a pro-housing advocacy group, stated in a letter to Mayor Todd Gloria on August 10 that the city is violating state statutes by requiring special approval. The group asserts that state law supersedes local restrictions, specifically the 30-foot height limit for new coastal buildings in that area.

City planners raised concerns in a December 2025 letter, alleging that Kalonymus was using hotel designations to bypass height regulations. The YIMBY Democrats countered that the city is yielding to public pressure and opposition from elected officials. They noted that qualifying projects west of Interstate 5 currently face a review process that functions as discretionary in everything but name. This process is shaped by organized opposition from some of the region's most affluent neighborhoods.

The advocacy group argues that city staff should approve the project directly. They contend that the state law allows for ministerial approval to expedite permitting, rather than requiring a vote by the Housing Commission or City Council. The group expressed disappointment that the city appears to take the position that housing, particularly affordable units, does not belong near the coast.

Neighbors for a Better California, the group leading the opposition, disagrees with the pro-housing stance. Members Marcella Bothwell and Karen Ventimiglia stated that the city still appears poised to let staff review the project without subjecting it to approval from appointed or elected officials. They clarified that their concerns are not about whether the city should follow state housing laws, but whether this specific development meets the legal requirements for the density-bonus incentives being requested.

The community group emphasized that the proposal exceeds current zoning restrictions by more than 106,000 square feet. Bothwell and Ventimiglia wrote that the city's responsibility is to apply those requirements consistently, regardless of whether a project is processed ministerially or discretionarily. They argued that the central question is not whether politics should override state law, but whether the project satisfies the legal requirements for the development benefits it seeks.

City spokesperson Richard Berg confirmed the status of the application in a written response. He stated that the city has requested the applicant clarify outstanding issues where the developer is requesting exceptions to standards and building code regulations. Berg noted that the city expects the applicant to resubmit plans with clarifications that address those issues.

The developer first proposed the tower in 2024. The design includes 139 hotel units intended to be filled through traditional long-term leases, not nightly or weekly stays. This structural choice allows the developer to maximize the housing they can build within the site's footprint. Pacific Beach residents organized quickly in opposition, primarily because the project exceeds the city’s 30-foot height limit on new coastal buildings.

The YIMBY Democrats' letter to the mayor highlighted the tension between local zoning and state mandates. They stated that while they applaud the city for its usual housing-forward approach, they are disappointed by its current stance. The letter detailed how the review process has been shaped by organized opposition. The city's request for clarifications serves as the immediate next step in a process that has become a focal point for local housing policy debates.

The project’s status remains in the hands of the developer and city staff. Kalonymus must address the specific exceptions requested by the city. The 106,000 square feet of excess zoning space and the hotel unit structure are the primary technical points of contention. The outcome of the resubmission will determine whether the tower proceeds with staff approval or faces a higher level of scrutiny.