By Staff / CBS8 / August 25, 2025
The Chollas Valley Community Planning Group is suing the City of San Diego, alleging officials broke state planning laws and violated California’s fair housing mandate by approving a 23-home subdivision on land long promised for a public park.
The lawsuit targets the city’s use of Footnote 7, a controversial zoning loophole that enabled dense housing development only in Encanto and Emerald Hills, each neighborhood historically impacted by redlining.
Residents say city leaders ignored environmental justice rules and fair housing law by fast-tracking the Klauber Project over unanimous local opposition.
The suit argues that San Diego’s City Council applied Footnote 7 to sidestep the area’s 20,000-square-foot minimum lot standards, allowing the developer to subdivide steep hillside terrain for an inward-facing subdivision.
The council approved the project 6–3 in July, despite warnings that it violates more than 40 provisions in the city’s General Plan, Community Plan, and local land use rules.
Community leaders call Footnote 7 a form of targeted upzoning, claiming city officials applied it exclusively in the poorest and most segregated areas, not in higher-resource, wealthier, and whiter communities.
The council’s move, critics say, strips away a park site mapped in both the city’s General Plan and the Chollas Valley Community Plan and instead approves high-density construction on steep, environmentally sensitive land without required environmental review.
City records show that after residents protested and exposed Footnote 7, the city rescinded the policy in less than a year, an unusually rapid reversal. However, projects like the Klauber Project, approved while the rule was on the books, continue to advance. The complaint alleges the city’s actions violate California’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing law, which obligates local governments to address past segregation and expand park access and opportunity in underinvested areas.
The Chollas Valley group seeks court orders reversing the project approval, requiring a full environmental review, and blocking future development on the site until the city complies with all legal and planning requirements.
The group says the five-acre parcel is essential to meeting the city’s parks acquisition goals, which are currently falling short.
The San Diego City Attorney’s Office declined to comment for this story due to pending litigation.
