Developers McKellar McGowan see converting the former Mission Beach Elementary School site into condominiums as a desirable and beneficial redevelopment project.
But to some members of the Mission Beach Precise Planning Board, who’ve turned their thumbs down on the project as currently construed, it’s a potential community character-buster.
Recently, two days after the board unanimously opposed the dual project, which envisions a total of 20 buildings housing 63 individual units in a mix of duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes and one single-family residence, the city’s Planning Commission unanimously endorsed it.
That decision would seem to set the stage for the project to be appealed to the City Council, which will likely have the final say, barring a lawsuit.
“There was nothing but superlatives from the mouths of planning commissioners about this project, which will be a jewel in Mission Beach,” said developer Chris McKellar. “It’s a beautiful project. Every building is different. No two buildings are the same.”
Longtime Mission Beach planner Dennis Lynch sees it differently.
“This is an unlawful planned development,” Lynch said. “We do not allow planned developments in our planned development ordinance (PDO).”
Mission Beach’s PDO is its community-approved blueprint for development that spells out what is — and is not — allowed in the coastal community’s land-use zoning. That zoning was laid out in the early 20th century by pioneering San Diego developer and sugar heir John D. Spreckels.
“We’re doing nothing but preserve the beach community the way it is,” contended Lynch. “We don’t want to set a precedent with big developers and big money buying large plots of land and redeveloping them. Pretty soon, you end up with a patchwork quilt of different-size housing instead of all the same, as historic Mission Beach was set up.”
McKellar McGowan actually has two projects in play: Mission Beach Residences, 17 multi-family buildings with 51 units ranging from 1,220 to 2,310 square feet in a mix of duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and one single-family residence on a 1.88-acre site with a project density of 27.1 units per acre north of Santa Barbara Place. There’s also Santa Barbara Place Residences, three fourplex buildings with 12 units on a 0.34-acre site with a project density of 35.3 units per acre with units ranging from 1,265 square feet to 1,345 square feet. Each unit has two dedicated parking stalls in a private garage.
According to McKellar McGowan, both projects are designed respecting the urban grid found throughout Mission Beach, which provides a network of pedestrian courts and vehicular alleys. Developers insist both projects conform to the San Diego municipal code and the Mission Beach PDO. Besides zoning, linear park space proposed has become a sticking point between the developer and the beach community. “Our park is really cool,” McKellar said. “It’s got exercise equipment, a tribute to the elementary school and to Mission Beach and its history. Planning commissioners said they were all for the linear park, that it was a great idea to have it there with its beautiful landscaping, interactive nature and covered spaces — even a dog-watering station.”
Another bone of contention with the proposed redevelopment is a high-profile ficus tree on the old school site at 825 Santa Barbara Place. Developers say they’ve been warmed by their arborist that the tree is “very dangerous and unstable” and should be removed. But local residents prize the ficus tree as a community artifact that should be preserved.
“The Mission Beach Town Council strongly urges the City of San Diego to require developers to preserve the landmark ficus tree at the site and create a true community park as required for a 2.23 acre parcel, incorporating the tree,” posted the town council in a letter on its website. “Further, we strongly oppose the substitution of the required park with a ‘green’ strip along Mission Boulevard. We remind the City that the initial requirement was that developing the entire former school property site … would mandate a.35-acre population-based park for the Mission Beach community.”
McKellar said developers are “scratching their heads” about some of the community’s arguments opposing their project. He contending that there is a minimum, but no maximum, size for lots in the PDO while adding that the density of their project is “less than what we are allowed.”
Lynch answered the project is problematic for a variety of reasons.
“The structures would be large and out-of-scale with the community,” he argued. “It’s going to provide parking problems and more-people problems, which we already have so much of.”