http://www.10news.com/news/surf-cup-soccer-seeks-move-to-del-mar-polo-fields
Will be interesting to see what plays out.
Will be interesting to see what plays out.
Surf Cup move
- Thread starter teamt
- Start date
S
Sped
Guest
They can finally pave the parking lot and build some bathrooms, lol. That alone is worth the fight.
Which "Surf"?
How many mistakes can you find in that 10News article?
Was that in their proposal?
The lease as proposed --
Editing note -- the original PDF URL is no longer working, but this one is --
http://dockets.sandiego.gov/sirepub/cache/2/wtculwhsdnn5z4c2pe4ahdjl/96310007262016091340344.PDF
Lease payments are $20,000 a month plus 10% of all sub-rents (which inspires the question of what rent Surf Soccer Club will pay Surf Cup Sports), adjustable according to cost of living every 5 years.
Lessee will complete the repairs to the public trail graded without permission by the Polo Club.
Lessee may pump up the City's groundwater without paying an additional fee.
Pages 33 and 42 are maps. The infamous parking lot is not included.
The neighbors have already hired a lawyer who is threatening to sue because large athletic tournaments do not fit within the "allowed uses" cited in the original deed when the land was given to the City of San Diego in 1983 (see page 37).
Editing note -- the original PDF URL is no longer working, but this one is --
http://dockets.sandiego.gov/sirepub/cache/2/wtculwhsdnn5z4c2pe4ahdjl/96310007262016091340344.PDF
Lease payments are $20,000 a month plus 10% of all sub-rents (which inspires the question of what rent Surf Soccer Club will pay Surf Cup Sports), adjustable according to cost of living every 5 years.
Lessee will complete the repairs to the public trail graded without permission by the Polo Club.
Lessee may pump up the City's groundwater without paying an additional fee.
Pages 33 and 42 are maps. The infamous parking lot is not included.
The neighbors have already hired a lawyer who is threatening to sue because large athletic tournaments do not fit within the "allowed uses" cited in the original deed when the land was given to the City of San Diego in 1983 (see page 37).
Last edited:
Charlotte's Chauffeur
SILVER
This issue was addressed by the city attorney. Basically there's a lot of ambiguity on the definition of allowed uses, and if the issue goes to the court, the court will look to the actual use since 1983. Because Surf does not intend to expand or change the use of the land moving forward, the city feels comfortable that it will prevail.
My personal observation is that the neighbors' attorney seems to be a bit of a hack, and I'm sure the city is not overly concerned with the threat of a lawsuit.
The original deed specifically allows "equestrian activities, jogging, frisbee, and similar activities" as long as it does not involve "large assemblies of people or automobiles".
The neighbors have been complaining for years about the traffic nightmare they face three weekends a year, and they didn't get those big houses on the hill by backing down from a fight.
Charlotte's Chauffeur
SILVER
Right, but what are "similar activities" and what are "large" assemblies? Those terms are not defined in the lease. The city attorney said a court would look to the prior use over the last 30 years to help define.
Because soccer has been played at the polo fields for decades, it is likely a court would find that soccer is a similar activity (and from anyone's "common sense" evaluation, I think soccer would be considered a similar activity). Likewise, what is a "large" assembly? 500 people, 5,000, 50,000? It's too subjective in the abstract, but soccer practices and games have occurred at the polo fields for the last three decades and no law suits challenging this have been filed, so the prior use would suggest to the court that these activities would not be considered a "large" assembly of people.
Given this, the city seems comfortable with its position in light of the threatened legal action from the white-hair contingency overlooking the fields.
Are you sure no lawsuits have been filed? I know that there have been news reports over the years about the neighbor's complaints, and not just whining but formal written complaints to the City. On top of that, the old lease has expired, the new lease is a new opportunity for haters to hate.
Subjective items in legal documents are how lawyers make the most money.
Charlotte's Chauffeur
SILVER
That's what they said in the SD city council meeting yesterday. There have been complaints through the years, but no legal action.
Wez
DA
Seems like Surf is successful enough to be able to afford to make the big tournaments flow well by building parking and entrance/exits that alleviate resident concerns about traffic. If all the residents are concerned about is traffic during these highly successful tournaments that only happen a few times a year, that sounds like a problem that can be resolved to everyone's satisfaction.
Do the residents enjoy any benefits that come from the tax revenue from these tournaments?
Do the residents enjoy any benefits that come from the tax revenue from these tournaments?
NIMBYs.
Traffic around the polo fields is at its worst every Friday afternoon, backed up into Carmel Valley going north. And guess what? The polo fields are vacant on Fridays. You can't blame the traffic on soccer or weekend tournaments. Blame explosive growth in Carmel Valley and older two lane roads connecting CV to Del Mar.
Disengage your schadenfreude, espola. Your hate of Surf and Surf Cup is well established. Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.
Traffic around the polo fields is at its worst every Friday afternoon, backed up into Carmel Valley going north. And guess what? The polo fields are vacant on Fridays. You can't blame the traffic on soccer or weekend tournaments. Blame explosive growth in Carmel Valley and older two lane roads connecting CV to Del Mar.
Disengage your schadenfreude, espola. Your hate of Surf and Surf Cup is well established. Surf's win at the polo fields is a win for everyone in youth soccer.
Schadenfreude? I have always enjoyed Surf Cup and I don't hate Surf Cup Sports. They are probably the best non-profit entity one could imagine to manage the Polo Fields. I am just trying to be realistic about the situation. For example, someone mentioned improving the parking lot - maybe they will, but it's not in the leased property.
As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them. Some people don't like that.
Bruddah IZ
DA
Depends. The parking lot on the North end/Villa De la Valle is privately owned.
Bruddah IZ
DA
So, "Truth", you disagreed with that. What part do you think is wrong?
Bruddah IZ
DA
I don't think E hates Surf or Surf Cup. No organization is without flaws and Surf is not immune to organizational flaws.
Surf Cup is well established because of their families/volunteers. Those families saw their fees increase by $500 2 years ago, while free parking passes for Surf Cup Sports events became a thing of the past.
But Surf does provide opportunities for families/volunteers to work at SCS events to reduce club/tournament fees which is unique to Surf as far as I know. Kudos to the staff at Surf for managing a work for fees program that has the potential to be a financial nightmare.
SCS still runs a really good tournament. But Field Marshall gear over the last 2 or 3 years has been pretty lame. And Connerly needs to bring back the end of year Dinner gala for all surf team managers and SCS volunteers. Oh! and that VIP section at Man City cup needs to go. It wreaks of Elitism. The kids would rather have tournament pins or bag tags!! Most requested item at SCS events
As for Surf Soccer Club, I have always told the truth about them.