Agency Asks Court to Oust Bank From Its Crenshaw Site

Attorneys for the Los Angeles Community Redevelopment Agency have asked the courts to force the Bank of America to vacate a 27-year-old branch office near the $120-million Baldwin Hills Crenshaw Plaza to make way for a street-widening project and construction of a supermarket and drug store.

At a hearing in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday, the agency asked for the authority to exercise the right of eminent domain to take immediate possession of the Bank of America property, which occupies a prime corner of the plaza development at 39th Street and Crenshaw Boulevard.

However, Judge Pro Tem Herbert M. Klein put off a ruling to allow the bank more time to prepare its case. The matter will go to trial next year.

The agency requested condemnation proceedings last summer after it reached an impasse in negotiations with the Bank of America on the amount of money to be paid in compensation and after offers to relocate the branch to another site on the grounds of the newly restored plaza were rejected.

Loss of High Visibility Spot

Bank of America officials said they opposed the move because it would force them to trade their high visibility location for one of several locations being offered off the beaten path on the plaza grounds. “For 27 years, we have had a prime location fronting Crenshaw Boulevard, and we would like to keep it,” said Ronald Owens, a spokesman for Bank of America.

However, both the redevelopment agency and the Alexander Haagen Co., the joint developers of the plaza, have made it increasingly difficult for the 9,500-square-foot bank to hold on to the strategic corner, just north of the Baldwin Hills Crenshaw Plaza, an 800,000-square-foot mall that includes a Sears, a Broadway, a May Co. and space for 100 shops.

The Community Redevelopment Agency, which pumped $24 million into the development, wants a portion of the property for space to widen 39th Street and to make other street improvements.

The agency offered to pay $556,000 to Bank of America to compensate it for the loss of its 18-year lease, building fixtures and equipment on the site. When Bank of America rejected the offer last summer, the agency asked the court to begin condemnation proceedings.

The Alexander Haagen Co., which has spent $50 million on the project, plans to use the bank location as the site of a community supermarket and drug store. “We have hit an impasse and negotiations with Bank of America have been extremely difficult,” said Andrew Natker, a spokesman for Haagen. “If Bank of America doesn’t move, then we can’t build the community shopping center (supermarket and drug store), and that will really hurt the community.”

Natker said that the developer cannot switch the shopping center to another location on the plaza grounds because that would substantially alter the plans for the project and threaten the loss of $30 million in development bonds. Marc Littman, a spokesman for the redevelopment agency, disagreed. He said that such changes would not necessarily jeopardize the project’s bond backing.

John W. Davis, vice president for corporate real estate for Bank of America, said the bank was willing to reduce the size of its building by one-third to accommodate the street widening. That solution would do little to satisfy the developers, however, who want to put a market at the site.

“Haagen has placed us in the position of looking like the bad guy when he says that we are holding up the market,” Davis said. “There are other options.”