Roads & Infrastructure

Pacific Centre Project by Coast Income Properties

The Coast Income Properties project was approved by the San Diego City Council in 1997, before Councilman Peters was elected to the City Council.

Upon being made aware of provisions in the 1997 agreement with Coast Income Properties, Councilman Peters was concerned that the project was being allowed to expand without review by the local planning group or the City Council. He agreed with the community planning group that there should be a discretionary review process for the transfer of car trips from one project to another. On December 19, 2001, Councilman Scott Peters wrote a memo (PDF: 402K) to the City Manager asking the Manager to deny the SCR for Coast Income Properties.

The City Manager responded that the project was approved by the City Council in 1997 with a mechanism that allowed it to transfer average daily trips (ADTs) from other projects within Torrey Hills through a substantial conformance review (SCR) process. This allows the project to bypass review by the City Council or local planning group. The City Manager determined that the project met the criteria for transferring ADTs that was allowed as part of the 1997 City Council action. The Manager also stated that because this was a staff process, the City Council (or Councilman Peters) had no authority over approval of the SCR.

The Torrey Hills Community Coalition sued the City of San Diego and Coast Income Properties in 2003. The Court found that the city staffs use of the SCR process was improper and ruled on behalf of the Torrey Hills Community Coalition.

Councilman Peters requested that the City Council not appeal this action, and the City Council chose to honor Councilman Peters’ request.

The project continues in litigation as Coast Income Properties has appealed the decision.

Councilman Peters has been frustrated by permits that were approved by past City Councils, and agrees with many of the criticisms voiced by members of the Torrey Hills Community. The City Attorney has determined that there is no mechanism to block or reconsider these developments and the City is bound by the agreements entered into by the 1997 decisions.