WHY
Why are we doing this?
- This is a crucial project for Serra Mesa, as it sits on a site that defines the primary gateway between our community and Kearny Mesa. The project takes on major importance because it is the first of what City Staff wants to see in redevelopment in both directions from the project along Aero Drive, and so will set the tone and precedent. It must be done right. As approved, the project will radically transform the character of our community in a way that the community does not support.
- Palladium at Aero will be significantly taller, wider, and deeper than any nearby building, resulting in a physical structure 10 times larger than the average building along Aero Drive. It will be twice as close to the street as its neighbor, Canyon Pottery. At the corner of Sandrock and Aero, the corner of the building will sit in the median of the existing right turn lane. Yet, the City’s environmental documents state that the project “would not result in a visual impact,” would not be incompatible with surrounding development in bulk, scale, or style, and would not result in substantial alteration to the existing character of the area.
Why do we think we can win?
- This is not the first time a community group has taken the City of San Diego to court over a massive development project, and the City historically does not do well in the judge’s chambers. Recent community victories include Kensington Terrace and 301 University.
- The Serra Mesa Community Council believes that Palladium at Aero, as approved by the City Council, is not in compliance with the City of San Diego General Plan, the Kearny Mesa Community Plan, the Serra Mesa Community Plan, the California Environmental Quality Act, and the legal prohibition against spot-zoning and piecemeal land use planning.
- The City of San Diego General Plan calls for new development to integrate with the existing fabric and scale of development in surrounding neighborhoods, and has a goal of ensuring that “quality of life is maintained, and essential community character is respected” by providing “infill housing… that is sensitive to the character and quality of existing neighborhoods.” The facts and evidence in this case support SMCC’s belief that Palladium at Aero does not meet these requirements.
