The effort to redevelop the Midway District has taken a unique path.<\/p>\n
Over the past several years, two proposals have involved two ballot measures lifting a height limit, two court rulings overturning those votes, two developers, two mayors, and now two bills approved by the Legislature to boost the current project.<\/p>\n
Those are some wild deuces. Despite the ups and downs, the current massive housing-commercial-entertainment-arena proposal known as Midway Rising is moving forward. How this ends is far from certain.<\/p>\n
The project could join the pantheon of city real estate debacles \u2014 101 Ash St. and the overpriced former indoor skydiving building downtown, to name a couple \u2014 or perhaps become the positive, if densely populated, contribution to the city\u2019s economy and social structure that supporters say it will.<\/p>\n
If it\u2019s the latter, Midway Rising would join the Rady Shell, Petco Park and (optimistically projecting) San Diego State\u2019s emerging SDSU Mission Valley campus, housing and office complex, adjacent to where the university\u2019s still-new Snapdragon Stadium is located.<\/p>\n
It\u2019s worth noting that even some of those projects had their struggles. Construction of Petco was temporarily halted amid city financial difficulties, and SDSU Mission Valley survived an intense political battle. Even so, the cost and cost recovery of each may not turn out as they were cracked up to be.<\/p>\n
Still, neither faced the amount of turmoil encountered by redevelopment in the Midway District.<\/p>\n
The public votes, developer selection disputes, court actions \u2014 and workarounds \u2014 and legislation have received plenty of attention (more on those later).<\/p>\n
What hasn\u2019t \u2014 because we don\u2019t know yet \u2014 is what kind of deal will be struck between the city and the Midway Rising development team to redevelop the municipally-owned Pechanga Arena site and surrounding properties.<\/p>\n
Negotiations have been going on and off for four years. If nothing else derails the project, which is not a given, it seems certain a lease will be reached. The city wants this project badly, and all the maneuvers to make it happen add pressure for approval. Yet there\u2019s intense opposition.<\/p>\n
That will lead to scrutiny as to whether the city is getting the best deal for San Diego and its residents.<\/p>\n
What rent, if any, will be paid?<\/p>\n
And what will the city\u2019s contributions be to huge infrastructure costs? Something called an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District would be created that freezes property tax baselines on the properties and uses future tax growth to fund infrastructure.<\/p>\n
The Midway Rising folks say on their website that there will be \u201cno direct financial participation by the City or San Diego Taxpayers.\u201d \u201cDirect\u201d is an important word here. The city will be giving up potential future property tax revenue for the betterment of the Midway District, its surrounding area and the city at large.<\/p>\n
That\u2019s the theory, anyway.<\/p>\n
Another thing occasionally mentioned but not much discussed is how the Midway proposal \u2014 a mixed-use project with 4,254 total residential units (nearly half rent-restricted for lower-income residents) \u2014 will interface with the Navy\u2019s plans to redevelop the neighboring NAVWAR<\/a> site, which also could have high-rises and up to 10,000 residential units.<\/p>\n The infrastructure upgrades needed to properly handle all that will be massive and costly, to state the obvious.<\/p>\n What shouldn\u2019t be lost in all of this is that the Midway District right now is generally a congested, outdated and ugly area in desperate need of redevelopment. Hundreds of news stories, commentaries and uncountable hours in meetings have been committed to the debate over what that redevelopment should be and what can pencil out.<\/p>\n Most specifically, the dispute centers on whether the project should be allowed to have 100-plus-foot residential towers and other buildings that bust the 30-foot maximum in the city\u2019s Coastal Height Limit Overlay Zone, where the Midway District resides.<\/p>\n San Diegans have twice voted to lift the height limit in the Midway District, in 2020 (56.6 percent yes) and 2022 (51 percent yes). Judges overturned the elections, in both cases ruling the city did not adequately assess the potential environmental impacts of tall buildings.<\/p>\n That may seem distant now, but it should never be forgotten what an embarrassment it is for City Hall. The response to the first overrule, among other things, was a limited supplemental EIR that fell short, according to the courts. Given it was clear what the concern was, it\u2019s inexcusable that the city didn\u2019t pull out the stops on that review for tall buildings.<\/p>\n Granted, even some neutral observers have questioned whether the second ruling against the environmental assessment was an overreach. But still, here we are.<\/p>\n The city and developer\u2019s answer was two-fold.<\/p>\n Last year, they received a policy statement from the state Department of Housing and Community Development that the housing bonus density law that would provide an exemption for the tall buildings<\/a> could be extended to related commercial uses, which, in this case, includes a new sports arena (165 feet high), according to Jennifer Van Grove of The San Diego Union-Tribune.<\/p>\n From the proponents\u2019 point of view, that makes the court rulings on the height limit irrelevant.<\/p>\n However, the city law regarding allowing waivers appears to apply only to residential density.<\/p>\n No doubt opponents of the project will look to see if there\u2019s a way to legally attack the interpretation of the density bonus laws, along with other provisions regarding the development.<\/p>\n Then, state Sen. Akilah Weber Pierson, D-La Mesa, carried two bills that were overwhelmingly approved<\/a> last Sunday that aim to protect the project from environmental lawsuits, the likes of which led to the rulings against the two voter-approved exemptions from the height limit.<\/p>\n Critics of the project complained<\/a> about state intrusion in local affairs (note: the legislation was sponsored by Mayor Todd Gloria) and that one of the bills was a secret 11th-hour job. That latter measure basically would declare this specific project to be fully compliant with the California Environmental Quality Act \u2014 a first, according<\/a> to Van Grove.<\/p>\n As of Friday, the bills were awaiting action by Gov. Gavin Newsom.<\/p>\n