Two proposals to develop RV parks on prime southern California oceanfront property are stirring controversy in San Diego.
De Anza Cove
De Anza Cove is in Mission Bay. One hundred seventy mobile homes occupied the 70-acre Mission Bay Mobile Park until September 2022. The trailers have been there since the 1960s. Campland on the Bay® and its affiliated company, Northeast MB, LLC, proposes an RV park for the property that will accommodate 147 campsites. However, the RV park plan is moving forward under a temporary ground lease as opposition swirls around the proposal.
The fight over the property lasted 35 years. Residents received eviction notices in 2003 after a master lease expired for the park. The residents sued the city, and the matter dragged on.
In 2018, the trailer park residents received a notice to vacate the area by 2019. The De Anza Cove Trailer Park demolition only began in September 2022. Varied reports suggest that the city provided mobile home dwellers with relocation assistance totaling $32 million, or roughly $100,000 for each of the approximately 300 residents, to help find new housing.
Environmentalists are concerned about the impact of the RV park project on the local ecosystem. The area around De Anza Cove is a habitat for bird species, including the endangered California Least Tern. The expansion project would require the removal of several acres of natural habitat, which would have a detrimental impact on the local wildlife.
The mobile home park demolition involved asbestos removal, environmental remediation, and waste management. Campland on the Bay claims it spent more than $8 million on the project. However, elements of the agreement between the city and Campland indicate that the cost of demolition and remediation will be paid back to Campland on the Bay through rent credits.
Coronado Cays
Another proposal would create an RV park on Coronado Cays, the narrow spit of land on the west side of San Diego Bay. The 4.8-acre property used to be owned by the Coronado Cays Homeowners Association and used as a storage area for boats and trailers and a boat brokerage business. The parcel is currently part of a public trust of state lands overseen by the Port of San Diego.
The proposal is for 45 cottage-style RV vacation rentals on Grand Caribe Isle. The proposal does not include RV spots for visitors to bring their own RVs. The Port of San Diego is currently studying the proposal, which the residents of Coronado Cays oppose. The residents are circulating a petition in opposition to the development.
##RVT1092b
Mission Bay RV Park and Campland on the Bay are two RV parks in the north east area of Mission Bay in San Diego. Mission Bay was dredged decades ago with the intent of creating an aquatics park for the public along with the creation of a 2 mile hydroplane race course. De Anza was a mobile home park with a RV park on the property. There was political maneuvering as some developers wanted to profit from the land and force the lower income mobile homes out. A fight in the courts ensued and it’s taken decades to get where it is now. Oh and the city wants to remove the current Campland on the Bay park, turn it back into wetlands, and move them to the De Anza side. None of this makes sense. Both locations should be kept as RV parks, let the city get the hotel tax revenue and let people enjoy the bay. As for Coronado, the location is on the bay side very close to Silver Strand State Campground. There really aren’t many options in San Diego county to camp along the ocean.
I agree with you. I fondly remember the days when camping on the California beaches was wonderful.
Not a fan of either one. However we rarely stay at an RV park, opting for national, state and local campgrounds
Wow…the only thing about the “RV park on Coronado Cays” that is close to RVing is the two letters “RV” in the name.
Lived in San Diego for most of my life. This situation has been “shoveled” back and forth for so many years! It’s constant fodder for politicians, gossip, residents, and campers!
Inferring outrage as the motivation for opposition seems reasonable, requiring no suspension of logic to get there.
That works if the only settings on our controversy meters are “1” or “10.” But surely somewhere between complacence and outrage there’s room for a “5” or “6”? For concern, or just plain disagreement? Unfortunately, I think Backcountry164 (below) nailed it.
“Outrage?” Really? Where in the article is that evident?
Wow, a contributing member questioning an article, how honest.
It’s implied. If we’re going to be honest, “outrage” is the default position for most people today who are opposed to anything. Rational thought is in short supply these days…