The new church, called the Light Project, will include construction of a 55,000-square-foot building with 900 seats, Sunday school space and classrooms, offices and a gym.
SAN DIEGO (CN) – A San Diego community group opposed to the development of what it describes as a mega-church argued Friday city officials failed to adequately analyze the project’s environmental impacts, which the group says it properly challenged during the public review process.
The arguments in San Diego Superior Court are the latest episode in the long legal battle between them Save Del Cerro and the Church of All Peoples.
The church originally purchased a 6-acre site in the Del Cerro neighborhood, located near San Diego State University, in 2017. However, the San Diego City Council denied the church’s plans to develop the site in 2024, which the church called an attack on its religious freedom.
But in March 2025, the city council changed course. Save Del Cerro then filed a lawsuit against the city, alleging it violated the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, and planning and zoning laws. But before the court can take action, Save Del Cerro must first exhaust all its administrative options, which the Church of All Peoples argued it did not do.
In particular, the church argues that Save Del Cerro failed to raise an objection to the anticipated weekend vehicular traffic during the environmental review process.
San Diego Superior Court Judge Carolyn Caietti agreed with the Church of All Peoples in a trial decision Thursday.
The church anticipates that its Sunday worship services will bring an additional 2,000 daily trips to the area. But Save Del Cerro argues the city improperly relied on another vehicle traffic study that showed only 280 additional daily weekday trips, which fell below the city’s threshold for requiring a more detailed traffic analysis.
below city guidelinesprojects with fewer than 300 daily trips qualify for an exemption from a more thorough traffic analysis. Save Del Cerro attorney Corey Briggs argued that because the church was expecting nearly 2,000 rides on Sunday, the city should have sought additional review.
“The city does not have the discretion to choose a model that is unworkable on its face,” he said. “This is not the city exercising independent judgment. This is the city sealing what the applicant says. This is not acceptable.”
Additionally, the case revolves around a piece of real estate that was slated for residential use in the city’s master plan. While the project site retains residential zoning for future use, that doesn’t bode well for a city facing an acute housing shortage, Briggs said.
“When you get rid of a country for an important issue, which is homelessness, other people will feel it,” he argued. “They won’t feel it in La Jolla or San Ysidro nearly as much as in Del Cerro. The suggestion is that it doesn’t matter what the community experiences because it’s a citywide issue. That misses the point of CEQA.”
Save Del Cerro raised other issues with the church project, such as concerns about dangerous road construction and damage to sensitive environmental habitat.
Page, duplicated Project of Lightincludes the construction of a 55,000-square-foot church building with 900 seats, as well as space for Sunday school, classrooms, offices, and a gymnasium. The project will also include a two-story parking garage and surface-level parking spaces.
The project has no plans for elementary school spaces, according to the Church of All Peoples.
While the church has high traffic on Sunday, attorney Heather Riley argued that average traffic is generally low throughout the week. Riley added that existing traffic analysis models did not account for Sunday commutes.
The Sunday church traffic analysis was provided in an effort to be transparent, she said.
The church asked the judge to confirm its preliminary ruling.
“After careful review of the administrative record, the court is unable to find any evidence that this matter was raised with the respondent prior to this action,” Caietti wrote in its preliminary decision.
Ultimately, the issue is about transparency and communication with the public, Briggs told Courthouse News after the hearing.
“We are not arguing with the conclusion,” he said. “We’re taking issue with the process the city used to reach its conclusion.”
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing arguments provides the latest on ongoing trials, major litigation and decisions in courts around the US and the world, while monthly Under the lights feeds legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
