LAGUNA BEACH : City’s Mobile Home Park Plan Raises Ire

Residents and the owners of Treasure Island Mobile Home Park say they plan to criticize recommendations to close the park by City Manager Kenneth C. Frank at a special meeting of the City Council tonight.

“We regard it as a total sellout of the moral position that the city has taken,” said K.P. Rice, president of the Treasure Island Residents and Owners Assn.

“We don’t like it, and we don’t think it’ll fly,” said Richard Hall, a Costa Mesa businessman and partner in the park’s ownership. “This will end up in court.”

Tonight’s meeting is the latest installment in a nearly two-year process involving the city, the park’s owners and its residents.

In May, 1992, the City Council approved a conditional use permit that requires the park’s owners to compensate residents who are forced to relocate because of the park’s closure. Negotiations over that compensation plan began in September when Hall and his partners notified the city that they planned to close the park and develop the 29-acre, oceanfront parcel at the city’s south end.

Hall and the firm of Merrill Lynch Hubbard are partners in the investment group Treasure Island Associates, which bought the prime property in 1989 for $43 million. Although no plans have been drawn up, Hall said, he and his partners envision developing it for single-family homes.

The owners have said they plan to close the park in the next two years but have not given a definite date.

Among the recommendations that City Manager Frank will present to the council tonight are four options that the park’s owners could choose from:

* Allow mobile home owners to keep their residences in the park for 10 years with no relocation benefits provided.

* Relocate mobile homes, at the park owner’s expense, to other parks deemed suitable by the city with no further relocation benefits required.

* Find a comparable replacement mobile home at another park at the park owner’s expense.

* Pay a portion of the appraised fair market value, based on a sliding scale, for the resident’s mobile home if it must be relocated.

Rice, president of the residents’ group, complained that the city manager’s proposals give all the power to the park’s owners.

Most residents would consider unacceptable a relocation to another mobile home park, which would not have the scenic location and amenities of their current homes, Rice said. He also objected to a provision in the proposed agreement that would allow residents to sell their mobile homes to Treasure Island for a maximum of $5,000.

“It does not help residents deal with their loss,” Rice said. “We look forward to a council position that will restore the balance and treat both sides fairly.”

Hall likewise objected to the proposals. He said they exceed state requirements for “reasonable costs of relocation.” He also protested that the agreement would require his partnership to reimburse mobile home owners who do not live in the park, or who only vacation there.

The council considered similar proposals on Nov. 3 but postponed action to allow the city and the park owner an opportunity to negotiate an agreement. However, meetings among the three parties and a mediator were not successful.