Carmel Valley board opposes elimination of deed restrictions at Surf Sports Park

The Carmel Valley Community Planning Board has joined a growing coalition against a proposed San Diego City Council action to terminate the grant deed on city-owned property currently leased and operated by Surf Sports Park. At the July 24 meeting, the board approved writing a letter in strong opposition to eliminating the open space easement and deed, stating that the city’s proposed actions would “violate the public trust and restrict public access to open space.”

The Carmel Valley Library meeting room was filled with residents speaking out against Surf Sports Park’s commercial event activities, the unsafe traffic on neighborhood streets, the illegal fences blocking public access, and the “unbearable” noise heard in their homes.

During one of many public comments, Jeff Carmel, a member of the Friends of the San Dieguito River Valley, said he opposed the “city’s scheme to gut the grant deed restrictions” that have protected the playing fields for the past 40 years.

“Even if they have the right to eviscerate open space protections, doing so would be a monumental betrayal of public trust that will harm our community and damage the city’s reputation for years to come,” Carmel said.

In a lawsuit filed in 2023, the Fairbanks Polo Club Homeowner’s Association accused the city of violating the terms of the 1983 grant deed that gifted the 114-acre property on El Camino Real and Via de la Valle to the city.  The lawsuit’s goal is to ensure enforcement of the deed restrictions, which call for passive, non-commercial recreational uses not involving large assemblages of people or cars. They are seeking to limit events on the property to 25 days a year.

The grant deed allows for an amendment or termination as long as the original grantor owns any part of the land. In defending the lawsuit, the deputy city attorney found that Ocean Industries, the original developer’s successor company, still owns two parcels and is agreeable to terminating the use restrictions, subject to City Council approval.

Per a court filing, if the City Council adopts the resolution, the grant deed would cease to exist and there would no longer be any use restrictions to interpret or enforce, rendering the lawsuit moot.

The decision must be made by City Council in an open session and there will be opportunities for the public to weigh in. City Council goes dark in August so it might not be docketed until September.

Carmel Valley Community Planning Board Chair Michelle Strauss said it was disappointing that they hadn’t heard anything from the city about the direction they planned to take. Board member Jason Stahl said he would have liked for Surf to be engaged in the process and for them to share how they intend to be good stewards of the property.

“This is probably an issue of money, I think those Surf fields make the city a lot of money in TOT (Transient Occupancy Tax) and sales tax, and I think frankly they don’t want to see more regulations because that limits how much money can be made,” Strauss said. “I would say I’m shocked…but after the whole police station situation, not much shocks me anymore. I’m growing increasingly concerned that this community has become a punching bag for the city in general. They have shown that they’re not interested in what we have to say and they’re not that interested in preserving things that we hold.”

Formerly known as the Del Mar Polo Fields, and still called the Polo Fields by many, the property has historically been used for recreational activities such as polo, soccer and lacrosse.

In 2016, the city awarded a 28-year lease to Surf Sports, collecting annual rent in addition to a 10% assessment on events. The economic impact of the park is estimated at $120 million annually with its events resulting in the booking of 155,000 hotel rooms a year, second only to Comic-Con.

Since 2022, the San Diego Wave women’s professional soccer team has additionally used Surf Sports Park as its official practice facility.

“Surf Sports is a vital member of the San Diego community, having developed local youth athletes and benefited the regional economy for nearly 50 years,” said Jeremy McDonald, chief executive officer of Surf Sports in a statement. “We are proud of our longstanding practice of using Surf Sports Park in a manner that complies with our lease and respects our neighbors. We believe the city’s proposal is a common sense solution and ensures the community can continue benefiting from our programs for years to come.”

While neighbors and the planning board expressed concerns about back-room deals and closed session discussions, Surf Sports said in a statement that the city and Ocean Industries are “openly and transparently exercising their rights under the terms of the grant deed.

“This is all a matter of public record and will be considered by the city council in a public hearing following considerable public input, as it should be,” McDonald said.

The neighbors in opposition maintain that they are not against local soccer players.

Surrounding residents have complained to the city for years about the park’s expanded use and traffic issues on the busy Via de la Valle and El Camino Real streets, road safety, noise levels, the dust kicked up into their homes from cars in the busy dirt parking lot and commercial signage and fencing around the property.

Recently, neighbors have also raised concerns about the new Performance Lab, which opened in April on the northeastern corner of the site. Operated in partnership by Spellman Performance, the training center includes a fenced-off synthetic turf area and a semi-permanent shipping container that houses training and recovery equipment.

Residents also shared concerns that Surf is deliberately blocking the public use of the Coast to Crest trail, which runs 1.3 miles along the edge of the playing fields and the San Dieguito River.

When complaints have come up, the city has routinely stated that Surf is in compliance with the lease. According to the city, there are no restrictions on the number of events that can be held a year. The lease states that the general public shall not be permanently excluded from any portion of the premises unless during activities that may require ticketed spectators. The public trail and passive use area is to remain open to the public during daylight hours.

“Surf Sports has met the obligations of its lease with the City of San Diego by using the property consistent with the way it has been used for decades, including providing public access,” McDonald said in a statement. “We remain fully committed to compliance with our lease, using the property consistent with its historical use, and to being a good neighbor to our surrounding communities.”

Regarding complaints of intensified use, Surf Sports has maintained that it doesn’t make sense to tax the turf with overuse as their 20 premium playing fields are their best asset.

At the time Surf pursued its lease in 2016, it stated that it hosted eight events the previous year—the website states now that it hosts more than 35.

Surf has seven major Surf soccer tournaments on the books for 2025 that would exceed any 25-day-a-year limit envisioned by the lawsuit. One of the longest-running tournaments is the Surf Cup, which runs over three weekends every summer. In addition to tournaments, the park is also leased out for non-sporting events, including music and art festivals, and the Del Mar Wine and Food Festival, planned for Sept. 10-14.

At the planning board meeting, several residents expressed their worries that the city’s “legal loophole” to nullify the lawsuit will result in stripping the environmental protections to preserve the land as open space. Without the open space easement, the land could be rezoned for any non-open space use, neighbor Rick Leyva argued.

In addition to environmental concerns, Rancho Santa Fe resident Beth Nelson said the surrounding community does not have the infrastructure to handle the current level of use. She raised similar concerns earlier this month to the Rancho Santa Fe Association, whose political action committee pledged $50,000 in support of the Fairbanks Polo Club lawsuit.

“If this agreement is gutted and the river valley is allowed to be swallowed up by Surf Cup’s profit-maximizing endeavors, then no open space park is sacred,” Nelson said. “Promises made to protect open space land for the public benefit must be honored and not simply thrown out through clever legal maneuvering to benefit a private, for-profit sports organization.”

Planning Board Chair Strauss noted that the Carmel Valley planning group has been on record for many years as having the same concerns and priorities about the Surf property as many of community members, going back over 20 years to when polo pony use was damaging the Coast to Crest Trail.

The majority of the planning board was in favor of opposing any city council action to remove the deed restrictions.

“I’m personally shocked that the city would even take the position it’s taken,” board member Kevin Jasper said. “It’s frankly ridiculous…I’m shocked the city would betray its citizens like this and its open space that’s not even available to the public, it’s a commercial enterprise. I’m all for fighting this as hard as we can fight it.”

Board member Jeffrey Heden likened the city’s proposed action to a “slap in the face” to the public’s trust in the process. In his support of the board’s opposition, he cited the comments made by then-City Council President Sherri Lightner, who was the sole dissenting vote in granting the lease to Surf in 2016.

“Per the original grant deed it was clear to me that this land was intended to be open space…I believe neither polo’s use in the past nor Surf’s proposed future use is appropriate,” Lightner said. “If it was up to me the city would dedicate the polo fields as open space…given how limited and precious a commodity open space is in San Diego.”

San Diego City Council President Joe LaCava’s representative said as the litigation continues, he did not have a comment on his position at this time.

With its action, the planning board joined other groups that have opposed the termination of the grant deed including the Friends of the San Dieguito River Valley, the San Dieguito River Park JPA and the San Dieguito Planning Group, as well as numerous residents from the communities of Whispering Palms, Rancho Del Mar, Sun Valley, and Polo Estates.

The San Dieguito River Valley Conservancy also recently lodged its opposition in a July 22 letter to the city.

“We urge you to keep these restrictions in place. Once they are removed, there may be no going back,” wrote Cheryl Goddard, executive director of the San Dieguito River Valley Conservancy. “The San Dieguito River Valley plays a vital role in protecting water quality, wildlife, and the natural character of our region. These protections are not just about preserving open space, they support the well-being of surrounding communities and help maintain a healthy environment that benefits all San Diegans.

“We recognize that the City must balance goals such as revenue generation and tourism,” Goddard continued. “But lifting these long-standing protections for short-term gain would unravel decades of thoughtful planning, collaboration and conservation.”