Developer cuts units and adds parking to controversial Pacific Beach project, but neighbors remain opposed as lawsuit continues.

SAN DIEGO — A developer behind a controversial housing proposal in Pacific Beach has unveiled a revised plan that reduces the number of units and increases parking, but neighborhood opponents say the changes do not address their core concerns.

The project, known as Chalcifica, originally proposed 136 accessory dwelling units (ADUs) across two parcels of land in Pacific Beach. The development quickly sparked opposition from nearby residents, who filed a lawsuit seeking to stop the project.



This story continues below.

Under the new proposal, the development would consist of six buildings containing 125 homes, including 110 one-bedroom units and 15 two-bedroom units. The updated plan reduces the total number of units by 11 and nearly doubles the amount of parking, increasing available spaces from 70 to 126.

“We’re trying to craft a better relationship with our neighbors and with our city officials,” said Brian Doyle, CEO of Infill Innovation, the company behind the project.

Doyle argues the development is well-suited for the area because it is located near the intersection of Pacifica and Bluffside streets and is within close proximity to public transit, including a trolley stop. He said the project would help San Diego meet state housing requirements while providing housing options in a desirable location.

“It’s close to public transportation, it’s close to where people work, it’s close to amenities that people want to have in their city,” Doyle said.

But critics remain unconvinced.

Merv Thompson of Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach said the proposal is being improperly characterized as an ADU project.

“Frankly, it’s an apartment complex that’s passing itself off as an ADU project. It’s ridiculous. It makes no sense whatsoever,” Thompson said.

Thompson also criticized the condition of the property, pointing to what he described as a deteriorating fence, overgrown weeds and accumulated trash.

He further questioned the developer’s credibility, citing ongoing legal disputes.

“He’s getting sued for not paying his trustees. He’s sued back. There’s allegations of fraud. This is not responsible development. This isn’t a responsible developer,” Thompson said.

Opponents also argue the site has historical significance. Thompson said the property should be recognized for its ties to the Kumeyaay people.

“It really, frankly, historically belongs to the Kumeyaay tribe,” he said.

Doyle said the company is taking steps to respect the property’s historical importance, including relocating parking away from the sensitive area.

“We’re actively trying to pursue a solution here and one that will work for all constituents involved,” Doyle said.

For now, the project’s future remains uncertain. Development plans remain on hold while a lawsuit filed by Neighbors for a Better Pacific Beach moves through the court system. A court hearing is currently scheduled for November.