JUDGE RULES BANKERS HILL CONSTRUCTION CAN CONTINUE

Residents objecting to the project tried to block 20-story apartment tower

Construction can move forward on a 20-story apartment building in Bankers Hill now that a Superior Court judge ruled on a lawsuit that claimed the project harms community character and blocks views.

The judge’s ruling that the lawsuit was without merit could discourage similar lawsuits by groups of residents who oppose tall buildings and dense housing in their neighborhoods. This suit was filed by Bankers Hill 150, a resident group.

“This important project, which received unanimous City Council approval, can finally move forward now that the court has determined the lawsuit lacks merit,” said City Attorney Mara Elliott. “It’s unfortunate that the project was delayed when our region critically needs more affordable housing options.”

San Diego’s efforts to solve its housing crisis include allowing taller buildings in already dense areas along established transportation corridors.

The apartment tower is proposed for a site next to the iconic St. Paul’s Cathedral, at the corner of Olive Street and Sixth Avenue, just west of Balboa Park and a few

blocks north of the El Prado entrance at Laurel Street.

Supporters say the 223foot, 204-unit building would help reduce greenhouse gases because the project is near transit, bike lanes and job centers downtown and in Hillcrest.

Judge Gregory Pollack ruled last week that the 262,530-square-foot tower does not violate the city's general plan or the neighborhood's growth blueprint, rebuffing the lawsuit's contention

that it does.

Pollack wrote in his ninepage ruling that the project meets the standard of either furthering the general plan or at least not hindering it. And he wrote that it doesn't matter that Bankers Hill 150 would like to see the plan implemented in different ways.

“It is irrelevant that an opponent would strike a different balance than the public agency,” Pollack said.

Opponents complained before the council's January 2019 approval of the project that it would destroy neighborhood character, cast long shadows on Balboa Park

and damage views.

Pollack ruled that the arguments on views have no merit.

“Olive Street is neither designated as a public viewshed nor a public view corridor,” the judge wrote.

He also wrote that the residents want an “overly expansive interpretation” of policies in the neighborhood growth blueprint for Uptown, an area that includes Bankers Hill, Hillcrest, Mission Hills and Park West.

The ruling also addressed a dispute over balconies.

Pollack disagreed with

residents that balconies illegally intrude into the public right of way, agreeing with the developer and the city that they foster architectural variety.

Everett Delano, the attorney who filed the suit, said Friday his clients might appeal the ruling. Delano also said Pollack seemed sympathetic to the arguments of Bankers Hill 150, despite his ruling.

“Our take is there are ways the city ignored some planning requirements,” Delano said.