By Zina Josephs

Residents at Village Trailer Park (VTP) have been notified that management will begin demolishing 10 trailers on Monday, October 31st.

My understanding is that this demolition should not be occurring at this time due to: A) the Draft EIR process, B) current Planning Department research into the historic significance of VTP, and C) state mobile home residency laws.

Is there anything the City of Santa Monica can do to delay this demolition?

*******************************************************************************************************

A) The comment period for the Village Trailer Park Draft EIR lasts until November 28th, and my understanding is that the property owner is not allowed to make changes to the property during the comment period.

http://www01.smgov.net/planning/planningcomm/environmentalreports.html

“In accordance with CEQA, a Draft EIR with Appendices for the project has been prepared and is now available for a 45-day public review period. Comments may be submitted, in writing, by 5:30 p.m. on November 28, 2011.Contact Planner, Jing Yeo, Special Projects Manager.”

B) At its October 10th meeting, after discussion, the Landmarks Commission voted unanimously to direct Planning staff to research the historic significance of Village Trailer Park.

http://www01.smgov.net/planning/landmark/agendas/2011/lca10102011.htm

Agenda Item 11-C. “Discussion on the potential historic significance of the Village Trailer Park located at 2930 Colorado Avenue. (NF)”

During public comment on that October 10th agenda item, one of the VTP owners, Marc Luzzatto stated that the Village Trailer Park had been built for tourists and had never been intended for permanent residents.
He also stated that the trailer park utilities all need to be upgraded.

Following his comment, Village Trailer Park resident Catherine Eldridge spoke and handed out copies of telephone book pages from the 1950′s (from the Santa Monica Public Library archives) that included dozens of private telephone numbers listed for permanent residents at Village Trailer Park. She also stated that all of the utilities had been upgraded 5 to 6 years ago, with the exception of the sewer system, which management was told didn’t need replacing as long as they flushed the system monthly.

C) One of the trailers scheduled to be demolished (I believe it’s A-23), is currently in probate and is therefore not owned by Marc Luzzatto. It was originally owned by a woman who died. Her son, who inherited the trailer, subsequently died, leaving the trailer to his son (the grandson of the original owner). While the grandson was out of town on a job assignment, the trailer park management apparently declared the trailer abandoned, removed some of the grandson’s belongings, and according to VTP residents, seem to have used an ax to make a hole in the roof.

According to California Mobilehome Residency Law, when a trailer/unit owner dies, a relative has the right to move into the trailer or sell it. It seems that Marc Luzzatto — http://www.luzzattocompany.com/ — may have told relatives of deceased trailer owners that they have to move the trailers, and it costs relatives tens of thousands of dollars to challenge him in court, money which they may not have.

Other residents say that when the management hires tree trimmers, the workers sometimes walk on top of the trailers with spiked shoes, which creates holes in the roofs. Sometimes during tree trimming, heavy branches are allowed to fall on the roofs of the trailers, which can create damage that cannot be repaired.
When that happens, if the trailer owner leaves the park, the VTP owner only has to pay the trailer owner the “scrap” value of the trailer, rather than the true value.

http://www.hcd.ca.gov/codes/mp/2011MRL.pdf

“Violations of the Mobilehome Residency Law, like provisions of conventional landlord-tenant law, are enforced by the courts; that is, the disputing parties must enforce the MRL against one another in a court of law. The State Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) does not have authority to enforce these Civil Code provisions.

“For example…., a homeowner in a park, not the state, must sue the park in court to enforce a notice or other MRL requirement, or obtain an injunction, if the management will not otherwise abide by the MRL.”

**********************************************************************************************************

The reason that 9 of the 10 trailers are empty seems to be that the VTP owners and management have managed to persuade some residents to leave, including the man who ended up living in his car and dying of exposure.

It’s really disgraceful that a city which brags about its commitment to affordable housing and protecting neighborhoods is allowing the destruction of the Village Trailer Park neighborhood to take place.

Is there a way for the City of Santa Monica to delay to demolition of these trailers, especially the one that’s in probate?

.