A year after the city appeared victorious, the battle of over building heights in San Diego’s Midway District wages on in appellate court. In recent weeks, environmental group Save Our Access and the city of San Diego have sparred in opening briefs filed with California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal, both arguing that their application of California’s Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, is correct. At issue is the legality of the 2022, voter-approved ballot measure that lifted the 30-foot height limit for the entirety of the Midway District. The measure also cleared part of the regulatory way for the Midway Rising development team to remake the city’s 48-acre property along Sports Arena Boulevard. Save Our Access, which sued successfully to invalidate a similar 2020 ballot measure, views the issue as an existential threat to public access in coastal areas. The group is appealing a trial court decision upholding the 2022 measure, arguing that the city erred in its environmental analysis of the impacts of taller buildings. The city, the suit claims, studied visual impacts but ignored consequences such as worsened traffic conditions, air quality and greenhouse emissions. “This is déjà vu all over again,” said Everett DeLano, a lawyer representing Save Our Access. “We told the city the first time that the 2018 (environmental impact report for the Midway-Pacific Highway Community Plan) didn’t address removing the height limit — and they ignored us and we sued and we won. We’re doing it again because they’re basically trying to rely on the same analysis when they haven’t done that analysis. I think we have a good chance of prevailing on appeal.” The city attorney’s office, through a spokesperson, declined to comment for this story, citing the ongoing litigation. The office’s opening brief, filed on Nov. 15, argues in favor of the sufficiency of the environmental work. “The city conducted the appropriate environmental analysis and adequately informed the decision-makers and the public about the environmental impacts of the (ballot measure to remove the height limit), and the city’s approval of the project complied with CEQA,” the city attorney office’s written argument states. North of the San Diego’s airport and south of Mission Bay, the 1,324-acre Midway District has been subject to a 1972 referendum on buildings over 30 feet in the city’s Coastal Height Limit Overlay Zone, or coastal zone for short, which was defined at the time as extending from the water to Interstate 5 in city limits with some exceptions. Local leaders have blamed the height limit for stunting the growth and prosperity of a neighborhood best known for its aging sports arena, strip clubs and suburban-style shopping centers. In 2020, the city asked voters to strike the entirety of the community plan area from the coastal zone to allow for redevelopment. The ordinance, which was approved by 57% of voters, was challenged in court by Save Our Access. The group was ultimately successful in invalidating measure, with the trial and appellate court agreeing that the environmental analysis prepared for the Midway-Pacific Highway Community Plan did not study the impact of buildings taller than 30 feet. In 2022, the city returned to the ballot box with a do-over initiative, Measure C, which passed with 51% approval. Measure C was said to be on solid legal footing because the city’s planning department studied the visual impacts of buildings up to 100 feet tall, as permitted by the different zones in the community plan. The supplemental environmental impact report was certified by council members before presenting the do-over initiative to voters. The analysis studied 10 view corridors that look into the Midway area, and found there would be significant and unavoidable impacts to views and neighborhood character with the removal of the coastal height limit. Save Our Access sued again, however, arguing that the supplemental analysis was insufficient and ignored other environmental factors, such as traffic and transportation impacts, biological resource impacts and water quality. This time, the group lost at the trial court. The San Diego Superior Court ruling, in December 2023, appeared to settle the matter and create a path forward for the Midway Rising project. The project, which has not yet received City Council approval, calls for 4,250 residential units, a 16,000-seat replacement arena and 130,000 square feet of commercial space alongside an unspecified number of acres of parks, plazas and public space. But, in March, Save Our Access appealed the trial court’s ruling to California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal. Last month, the environmental group made its case for invalidating the do-over ballot measure in its opening brief, leaning on an argument that helped secure a victory in the first legal battle. Related Articles Business | UC San Diego buys MOCA downtown, will create $15M arts campus dubbed ‘The Depot’ Business | Carlsbad approves airport land-use regulations Business | The loophole for coastal ADUs is officially closed. That hasn’t ended these neighbors’ war over one. Business | San Diego takes key step toward preserving thousands of low-rent apartments Business | Port of San Diego hires Carlsbad City Manager Scott Chadwick as CEO The environmental group maintains the city is violation of CEQA, because eliminating the height limit represents a sweeping change to the community that warrants an all-new environmental impact report, as opposed to a supplemental study singularly focused on visual impacts. “This failure to address numerous potential environmental impacts impeded public participation and involvement, a core of CEQA’s procedural requirements,” the group’s written argument states. “The city’s Notice of Preparation of the (supplemental environmental impact report) itself only raised one environmental issue: ‘visual effects and neighborhood character.’ Community residents were not provided with information about the numerous other impacts that could occur and were not encouraged to address these potential impacts.” San Diego’s counter argument hinges on a few factors, primarily the Superior Court judge’s ruling last year that the supplemental analysis differs materially from the community plan analysis. The judge also agreed with the city’s conclusion in the supplemental analysis, that removing the height limit does not increase building density or impact additional resources because the underlying zones in the community plan have not changed. The Save Our Access appeal is expected to take several months to play out. As it stands, the 2022 ballot measure is in effect and the city is not prohibited from approving projects with buildings taller than 30 feet.