Application for Construction of Large Church in Del Cerro Was Properly Denied

By Michael Livingston of Save Del Cerro

On January 9, 2024, in a 6-2 vote, San Diego City Council denied the All People’s Church (“APC”) application to build a 54,476 square foot, 900 seat facility, with over a dozen classrooms, over 20 offices, over 350 parking spaces, along with a 71,010 square foot two-level parking structure, at the intersection of Interstate 8, College Avenue and Del Cerro Boulevard.  In response, APC filed a federal lawsuit alleging religious discrimination.  All Peoples Church v. City of San Diego 24 CV 0562 TWR-MSB.

The City Council denied APC’s application based upon the inadequacy of the 2019 traffic analyses that APC used to support its application and the safety dangers that the proposed project created.  Both parties will now need to spend significant time and money litigating APC’s claims, when the traffic analyses and safety issues could have been decided years ago— indeed even when APC first made its plans — if APC had simply provided full and accurate traffic as well as safety analyses.

The history of the application is revealing.  On August 8, 2023, the Navajo Community Planning, Inc. (“NCPI”), after years of interactions with APC, unanimously recommended that the application be denied.  In pertinent part, NCPI determined that the APC application violates the San Diego Municipal Code Section 126.0505 (a), not only because it is inconsistent with the Community Plan, but also because it is detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare.  Although the San Diego Planning Commission members expressed concerns about the application, such as its not capturing the full impact of traffic, the Commissioners recommended approval of the application on September 28, 2023, with some limitations; the application then proceeded to the San Diego City Council.

RK Engineering Group, Inc. (“RK Engineering”) was asked by Save Del Cerro (a group of concerned Del Cerro residents) to review APC’s application.  RK Engineering’s expertise includes traffic engineering and design, as well as transportation engineering and parking.  RK Engineering found numerous areas of concern with the APC application, including traffic estimates and analyses.  RK Engineering offered its expert opinion that additional analysis was needed.  RK Engineering specifically noted concerns with the location of a proposed traffic signal and its effect on operations and safety, the APC application understating trip generations, the APC application understating expected traffic influx before and after services, and the lack of general analyses pertinent to the project, such as special event analysis as well as stopping sight and corner distance analysis. RK Engineering concluded that the areas of concern need to be addressed and resolved before the project should be considered for approval.

At the January 9, 2024 City Council Meeting, Councilmember Raul Campillo presented his analysis of the APC application.  Mr. Campillo made clear that any decision must be made on the basis of land use and whether the application met the legal requirements for approval.  He then detailed how the APC application failed to meet those legal requirements.  Specifically:

• APC submitted its traffic impact as a ‘small project’ because it estimated only 280 additional daily trips per weekday resulting from the project.  This, however, was not supported by the evidence. In fact, using the square footage of the project, the calculated additional daily trips far exceeded the threshold of 300 additional trips to make it a “small project”, thereby triggering the San Diego Transportation Manual requirement for a full and detailed Voluntary Miles Traveled (“VMT”) analysis.  APC did not provide a full VMT analysis, which was necessary to determine if the traffic impacts of a project are safe.
• The APC project will take heavy traffic from westbound Interstate 8, College Avenue (both northbound and southbound), and Del Cerro Boulevard (both eastbound and westbound).  This traffic will then need to merge and weave, not only around the APC project, but also in traveling to San Diego State University and Hearst Elementary School, all creating serious traffic dangers.  These dangers were not presented in APC’s application because APC did not perform a full VMT.
• The proposed project is unlike the other houses of worship which the APC cited in its application.  Specifically, none of the other houses of worship in the Del Cerro and Navajo community have blind curves in the roads that access them.  The APC project, on the other hand, lies in a downhill blind curve, such that drivers cannot see the traffic signal.  This was also not addressed in APC’s application.

During the Council’s discussion and questions posed to City Staff, the City’s Development Project Manager confirmed the inadequacy of the review.  Specifically, the Development Project Manager stated that City Staff did not verify the proposal’s data, but merely accepted what APC provided to them.

Given the safety concerns and the inadequacies of the APC’s application, the City Council’s denial was in the best interests of San Diego.  To have approved the application under these circumstances would have jeopardized the safety not only of those living in Del Cerro and the neighboring communities, but also those traveling on the affected roadways.  And, it would have exposed the City to enormous municipal liability.  The rush to approve projects despite warnings cautioning more research and analysis, has led to such things as the pension and Ash Street problems, which will burden San Diego for years to come.

The Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act is not designed to place a religious institution in a superior position; rather, it is intended to level the playing field regarding land use.  Here, the City Council denied APC’s application on the basis of land use and the law that any religious or non-religious applicant must obey. The denial does not prevent APC from performing the necessary traffic and safety studies and analyses, including a full and proper VMT, to determine if its proposed project can meet the objective legal standards required by any other applicant.  The denial does not, therefore, prevent APC from submitting a new application with the  required information.