Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Midway Rising topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

City staff update council on Midway Rising redevelopment, says EIR and financing analyses underway

San Diego City Council · January 27, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City economic development staff updated the council on the Midway Rising Sports Arena redevelopment: a proposed 48.5-acre mixed-use project with roughly 4,250 homes (about 2,000 affordable), a modernized 16,000‑seat arena, park and retail. The city said the draft EIR and EIFD analysis are under review and the project remains on track for consideration later in the year.

City economic development staff delivered a quarterly update Jan. 27 on the Midway Rising redevelopment of the former Sports Arena site in the Midway District. The development team proposes roughly 4,250 housing units — approximately 2,000 offered at or below 80% area median income — a modernized 16,000-seat arena, an urban park and a cultural/retail district, city staff said.

Staff reported concurrent work on an enhanced infrastructure financing district (EIFD) analysis, an appraisal underway, and continued community outreach. The developer has submitted an updated draft environmental impact report (EIR) and staff said the EIR was under review with release anticipated in the coming weeks. City staff and the developer are working with the county to coordinate EIFD analysis and review, and staff said the target was to bring a formal recommendation to council before the summer legislative recess.

Public commenters — including labor organizations, community planning groups, nonprofit housing partners and business interests — expressed broad support for the project’s potential to provide construction and arena jobs, affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization. Other speakers raised concerns about transparency in campaign contributions and asked for more clarity about the composition, timing and financing of the proposed affordable units. Councilmembers pressed staff and the developer on middle‑income housing, EIFD timing and whether the team remains the same; staff and the developer said they are still pursuing a full spectrum of AMI levels and that negotiations and analyses are ongoing.

Staff emphasized that many milestones are concurrent — technical submittals, EIR review and negotiation of term-sheet elements — and that the documents will be structured to account for economic cycles and implementation flexibility. The project team said it hopes to bring final deal terms to council later in the calendar year for decision.