Midway District 30-Foot Height Limit Upheld: California Supreme Court Blocks Mayor Gloria's Development Push, Creating Uncertainty for Point Loma and Bay Park Homeowners

California Supreme Court Delivers Major Setback to Midway Rising Development

On December 31, 2025, the California Supreme Court denied San Diego's final appeal to override the 30-foot height limit in the Midway-Pacific Highway district, marking what appeared to be a decisive victory for community activists who have fought high-density development in the coastal neighborhood for years.

The ruling stems from a lawsuit filed by Save Our Access, a community group that successfully argued the City of San Diego violated the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) by failing to adequately inform voters about environmental impacts when they approved ballot measures to remove the height restriction in 2020 (Measure E) and again in 2022 (Measure C).

According to the Fourth District Court of Appeal's October 2025 decision, which the Supreme Court let stand, the city's environmental review "did not adequately assess how taller buildings could affect air flow, construction noise and Peregrine falcons' ability to nest, among other issues." Justice Joan Irion specifically identified four areas where the city's analysis was inadequate: noise, air quality, biological resources, and geological conditions.

For homeowners in Point Loma, Bay Park, and the Midway District itself, this legal victory created a brief moment of relief. The 30-foot height limit, originally enacted by San Diego voters in 1972 as Proposition D, would be restored. The massive Midway Rising development—proposing 4,254 residential units in 105-foot-tall buildings—appeared to be blocked.

But that relief would prove short-lived.

Mayor Gloria Doubles Down: "Midway Rising Will Move Forward"

Just 15 days after the Supreme Court ruling, Mayor Todd Gloria used his January 15, 2026 State of the City address to send an unmistakable message: the legal setback would not stop the city's most ambitious development project.

"Legal challenges have caused some to doubt the future of the project known as Midway Rising, so let me be crystal clear: The redevelopment of the Sports Arena will move forward!" Gloria declared to applause from development advocates in the audience.

The mayor's defiant stance reflects a broader strategy that city officials had been preparing for months. Rather than accepting defeat, the city plans to use California's density bonus laws as a workaround to the voter-approved height limit—a legal pathway that could allow the development to proceed with even less local control than the original ballot measures would have provided.

Gloria announced he would bring the project forward "this spring for public hearings and a vote by the City Council," signaling that the battle over Midway's future is far from over. City officials confirmed they are "weighing a menu of options, including updated CEQA review work and use of state density bonus provisions" to chart what they hope will be a legally sound path forward.

For homeowners in surrounding neighborhoods, the mayor's commitment creates a worst-case scenario: years of continued legal uncertainty, with development likely proceeding through alternative pathways that may offer even less opportunity for community input or environmental review than the original proposals.

Understanding the Midway Rising Project: 4,254 Units on 49 Acres

The Midway Rising development represents one of the most ambitious urban transformation projects in San Diego's history. The proposal would remake the 49.2-acre site around Pechanga Arena San Diego (the former Sports Arena) into a dense, mixed-use neighborhood that bears little resemblance to the current low-slung commercial district.

Project Components:

• 4,254 residential units in buildings up to 105 feet tall (3.5 times the current 30-foot height limit)
• 2,000 affordable housing units restricted to households earning 80% of area median income or below—what developers claim would be "the largest affordable housing development in the history of California"
• 2,254 market-rate apartments priced at current San Diego market rates
• 165-foot-tall replacement arena with 16,000-seat capacity for concerts and sporting events
• 130,000 square feet of commercial space including shops and restaurants
• 14.5 acres of parks and public space integrated throughout the development

The project's sheer scale is staggering. The 4,254 units would add approximately 8,000-10,000 new residents to a neighborhood currently dominated by big-box retail, parking lots, and light industrial uses. The 165-foot arena would be the tallest structure in the area, visible for miles across Point Loma and Bay Park.

Developers argue the project would transform an underutilized area into a vibrant, walkable neighborhood that addresses San Diego's housing crisis while creating thousands of construction jobs. The high percentage of affordable units—nearly 47% of the total—is central to both the project's political appeal and its legal strategy for using density bonus laws to override local restrictions.

Community opponents, however, see a project that would fundamentally alter the character of the Midway District and create cascading impacts on traffic, parking, and quality of life in adjacent residential neighborhoods.

The Density Bonus Workaround: How State Law Could Override Local Voters

The most controversial aspect of the city's renewed push for Midway Rising is the planned use of California's density bonus laws to circumvent the voter-approved 30-foot height limit—the very restriction the Supreme Court just upheld.

California's density bonus law allows developers to waive local development restrictions—including height limits, density requirements, and parking minimums—if they reserve a certain percentage of units for low-income residents. With more than 2,000 affordable units planned, Midway Rising easily qualifies for these waivers.

According to reporting by Times of San Diego, developers "want to make Midway Rising the largest test of the state's density bonus laws." After the October 2025 court ruling, developers immediately announced they were "already prepared to rely on California's density bonus law, which lets developers waive local development restrictions."

The legal foundation for this strategy came in 2022, when city planners and developers of a separate Pacific Beach project asked state housing authorities if density bonus waivers could breach the coastal height limit. The state Department of Housing and Community Development concluded that the 30-foot height limit "did not get any special treatment for being enacted by voters in 1972 and could be waived just like any other local restriction."

This interpretation creates a paradox for Midway area homeowners: the Supreme Court ruled the city violated CEQA by not adequately disclosing environmental impacts, yet the density bonus pathway may allow the same development to proceed with even less environmental review than the ballot measures provided.

The City Council vote, expected in spring 2026, will determine whether San Diego embraces this controversial legal strategy. Either outcome—approval or rejection—is likely to trigger additional years of litigation.

Traffic Impact on Point Loma and Bay Park: 22,514 Additional Daily Trips

For homeowners in Point Loma and Bay Park, the most immediate concern about Midway Rising isn't the principle of density bonus laws or CEQA compliance—it's the concrete impact on their daily commutes and neighborhood livability.

A local mobility analysis prepared by engineering firm Kimley Horn projects the development will generate 22,514 additional daily car trips at full build-out during typical event days. These trips will primarily flow through three key corridors that Point Loma and Bay Park residents use to access freeways, schools, shopping, and employment centers:

Sports Arena Boulevard is already one of the most congested corridors in the city, regularly gridlocked during peak hours and arena events. The planned reconfiguration—reducing from six lanes to four vehicle lanes while adding two bus-only lanes—is intended to improve transit access, but residents question whether it will handle the additional traffic volume.

Rosecrans Street, the primary east-west artery serving Point Loma, already experiences heavy congestion during morning and evening commutes. As Javier Saunders, head of the Midway District's long-range planning committee, noted, "Rosecrans Street is already congested, and the project doesn't fully mitigate that." He warned that "adding this volume of traffic will exacerbate congestion, leading to longer idling times (hence more air pollution) and frustrating delays for residents in Midway, Point Loma and Ocean Beach."

Midway Drive and Pacific Highway form the district's north-south spine, connecting to Interstate 5 and Interstate 8. These routes are critical for Point Loma residents accessing freeways, but they already experience significant delays during peak hours.

Perhaps most concerning for homeowners: the new entertainment center is estimated to host 158 events per year—translating to over 40% of days with event-related traffic congestion. Unlike the predictable weekday commute peaks, event traffic creates unpredictable congestion on evenings and weekends when residents are trying to access restaurants, beaches, and recreational activities.

Point Loma residents have repeatedly raised concerns about the project's traffic impact and their ability to access Interstate 5 and Interstate 8 during public meetings. These concerns appear in the environmental analysis but remain largely unmitigated in the current project design.

Property Value Uncertainty: The 2-5 Year Legal Timeline

The Supreme Court ruling and Mayor Gloria's defiant response create a particularly challenging scenario for Point Loma and Bay Park homeowners considering selling in the next few years: extended uncertainty with no clear resolution timeline.

Real estate experts suggest the legal battle over Midway Rising could continue for 2-5 years through the following stages:

• 2026: City Council votes on density bonus approach (spring), followed by likely litigation from Save Our Access challenging the density bonus strategy (summer/fall)
• 2027-2028: Trial court proceedings on new CEQA analysis if required, plus appeals of any adverse rulings
• 2029-2030: Possible return to California Supreme Court if fundamental questions of density bonus law and coastal protection remain unresolved

During this extended uncertainty period, homeowners face several property value risks:

Traditional buyers may discount offers to account for development uncertainty. Real estate agents report that buyers are already asking detailed questions about the Midway Rising project during Point Loma and Bay Park showings, and some have withdrawn offers after researching the potential traffic impacts.

Disclosure requirements create marketing challenges. California law requires sellers to disclose known factors that could materially affect property value. The Midway Rising controversy and associated traffic concerns likely trigger disclosure obligations, forcing sellers to highlight negative information that suppresses buyer interest.

Stagnant appreciation during uncertainty. Historically, neighborhoods adjacent to major development battles experience slower price appreciation than comparable areas without development uncertainty. Even if the long-term impact is neutral or positive, the years of uncertainty can cost homeowners significant opportunity cost.

Current market data shows diverging trends

Point Loma median prices were approximately $2 million as of late 2025, up 17.7% year-over-year according to Redfin data. However, average homes were selling for 2% below list price with 45-day market times—longer than the San Diego average—suggesting some buyer hesitation.

Bay Park median prices stood at $1.41 million, down 1.7% year-over-year, with average homes selling for 1% below list price and 30-day market times. The year-over-year decline suggests Bay Park may already be experiencing development-related uncertainty effects.

The contrasting trends—Point Loma appreciating while adjacent Bay Park declines—may reflect Bay Park's closer proximity to the Midway District and greater exposure to traffic corridor impacts.

Why Cash Buyers Offer Certainty in an Uncertain Market

For Point Loma and Bay Park homeowners frustrated by the Midway Rising uncertainty, cash buyers offer a fundamentally different transaction dynamic: immediate certainty at a known price, regardless of how the development battle ultimately resolves.

Traditional financed buyers increasingly factor development uncertainty into their offers. They ask questions like:

• "What will traffic be like if Midway Rising gets approved?"
• "Will the 165-foot arena block my view?"
• "How will 4,254 new units affect neighborhood character?"
• "Should I wait to buy until the legal battle resolves?"

These questions lead to lower offers, more contingencies, longer due diligence periods, and higher fall-through rates. Traditional buyers have the luxury of waiting for clarity—and many are choosing to do exactly that.

Cash buyers create several advantages for sellers:

No development uncertainty discount. While cash offers typically come 5-10% below asking in San Diego's current market, this discount reflects quick closing and transaction certainty, not development-specific concerns. Homeowners avoid the larger discounts traditional buyers might demand to compensate for Midway uncertainty.

Simplified disclosure obligations. Cash buyers typically purchase properties "as-is" with limited inspection contingencies. While sellers must still provide legally required disclosures, cash buyers are less likely to renegotiate based on development concerns or request credits for perceived future impacts.

7-14 day closings vs. years of waiting. The most valuable aspect of cash offers may simply be timing. Rather than waiting 2-5 years to see how the legal battle resolves—while watching neighbors struggle to sell and dealing with disclosure obligations—homeowners can achieve liquidity in under two weeks and redeploy equity elsewhere.

Preservation of equity before potential negative outcomes. While Midway Rising might ultimately increase property values by bringing urban amenities and improving walkability, it might also decrease values through traffic congestion and neighborhood character changes. Cash sales allow risk-averse homeowners to lock in current equity rather than gambling on unknown future outcomes.

Comparing Midway Rising to Other San Diego Development Battles

The Midway Rising controversy isn't occurring in isolation. San Diego County is experiencing an unprecedented wave of high-density development proposals facing community opposition and legal challenges. Comparing these battles provides context for what Point Loma and Bay Park homeowners might expect:

Seaside Ridge in Del Mar involved a proposed 285-unit development on coastal bluffs that faced California Attorney General and community opposition over environmental impacts. After years of litigation, the project was significantly reduced in scale. Timeline: 4+ years of legal battles before resolution.

Turquoise Tower in Pacific Beach proposed a high-rise development in a low-density beach neighborhood. Community opposition and legal challenges over density bonus interpretations delayed the project for years. Timeline: 3+ years and ongoing.

Chalcifica ADU Project in Pacific Beach involved a 136-unit ADU complex that was halted by a December 2025 Superior Court ruling over inadequate CEQA review—the same issue that defeated the Midway height limit override. Timeline: 2+ years and counting.

These precedents suggest several patterns:

• CEQA litigation typically takes 2-4 years to resolve through trial and appellate courts, with potential for additional Supreme Court review.
• Community opposition rarely kills projects outright but frequently forces significant modifications, delays, and added costs that may cause developers to abandon proposals or reduce scale.
• Density bonus strategies remain legally untested at the scale proposed for Midway Rising, creating additional uncertainty about whether state housing law truly overrides all local restrictions including voter-approved coastal protections.
• Property values in adjacent neighborhoods experience volatility during litigation periods, with some areas seeing stagnant appreciation or modest declines until uncertainty resolves.

The Midway Rising battle appears likely to establish important precedents about the limits of density bonus law and the balance between state housing mandates and local coastal protection. This means it could drag on longer than comparable disputes as higher courts weigh competing policy priorities.

Decision Framework: Should You Sell Now or Wait?

Point Loma and Bay Park homeowners face a complex decision: sell now during the uncertainty, or wait to see how the Midway Rising battle resolves. Here's a framework for thinking through the choice:

Consider selling now with a cash buyer if:

• You're risk-averse and value certainty over maximum proceeds
• You have a time-sensitive need for liquidity (retirement, relocation, estate planning)
• You're frustrated by the political/legal battle and want to exit before potential impacts materialize
• You're concerned about 2-5 years of stagnant appreciation during the uncertainty period
• Traditional buyers are already asking questions about Midway Rising during showings
• You want to avoid increasingly complex disclosure obligations about development uncertainty
• You believe traffic impacts from 22,514 additional daily trips will negatively affect quality of life

Consider waiting if:

• You believe Midway Rising will ultimately increase your property value through improved urban amenities
• You can afford to wait 2-5 years for legal clarity without financial hardship
• You're willing to accept disclosure obligations and potentially lower traditional buyer interest during the uncertainty period
• You're confident the density bonus approach will fail and the 30-foot height limit will stand
• You don't need to access your home equity in the near term
• You're comfortable with the possibility of adverse outcomes (traffic congestion, neighborhood character changes)

The uncertainty cost calculation:

A homeowner with a $1.5 million Point Loma property facing a cash offer of $1.35 million (10% below asking) must weigh:

• Immediate certainty: $1.35 million in 14 days, redeployable elsewhere
• Traditional sale attempt: Potential $1.5 million but with longer market time (45+ days), higher fall-through risk, and buyer negotiations over development uncertainty
• Waiting 2-5 years: Unknown outcome—property could appreciate to $1.65 million if Midway Rising succeeds and improves the area, or decline to $1.35 million if traffic impacts and legal battle suppress values

The $150,000 difference between the cash offer and potential traditional sale might seem significant. But if the alternative is 2-5 years of uncertainty, disclosure obligations, and potential market stagnation, the "discount" may actually represent fair compensation for risk transfer.

Many Point Loma and Bay Park homeowners are concluding that certainty has value—and that value may exceed the premium they'd receive by gambling on unknown development outcomes over the next 2-5 years.

Frequently Asked Questions