Inquiry Urged in Builder’s Failure to Keep Promises : Studio City: A councilman charges that a developer failed to put in required traffic improvements in two projects.

Councilman Michael Woo on Tuesday called for a city investigation into why the developer of a problem-ridden Studio City shopping center failed to widen an intersection as promised and was then allowed to open another, nearby mini-mall with its own set of incomplete traffic improvements.

Woo also called on the city’s traffic, engineering and legal staffs to explain why they allowed the Ventura Boulevard developer to settle a bond-default suit out of court for $205,000 when the cost of the traffic project would have been closer to $250,000--roughly the amount of the bond.

The case was settled in June, 2 1/2 years after developer Mitch Francis was supposed to have paid for installation of a double left-turn lane at the corner of Laurel Canyon and Ventura boulevards in return for permits to build the “Times Square” shopping center at 12215 Ventura Blvd.

In August, another Francis project, the “California Pavilion” shopping center, opened at Ventura Boulevard and Laurel Grove Avenue although a street-widening project there also remains incomplete. The shopping center has a temporary occupancy permit and a permanent permit is dependent on finishing the traffic project.

Francis blamed the city bureaucracy for delays in both traffic projects. He also had harsh words for Woo, saying “this is just typical of the way Woo operates, where he makes these grandstands to point to bad-guy developers, and it’s just completely unfair and wrong.”

In the case of Times Square, Francis, the shopping center’s new managing partner Stephen Getzoff, and their attorney Fred Gaines all said the city engineer’s office could not decide what it wanted and repeatedly required time-consuming and expensive changes in the plans.

As for the California Pavilion’s incomplete street-widening project, Francis said his construction crew encountered unexpected telephone lines where a traffic signal is supposed to be installed. Again, he blamed the city, saying that its maps failed to show the phone lines and its staff was slow to work out an agreement with the utility.

Times Square attorney Fred Gaines questioned why Woo was calling for an investigation five months after the matter was settled. The $205,000 settlement fee was derived by subtracting the money spent on engineering fees from the original $247,695 bond, Francis and Getzoff said.

Woo said he was calling for the investigation now because “we still need to understand, ‘How did this happen in the first place?’ ” He said he mainly wanted to know why the Times Square project received a permanent occupancy permit in 1988 when the traffic work wasn’t done, and “why the city didn’t get a larger amount of money” when it settled the foreclosure case out of court.

Woo said it “could’ve been great” if he and his staff initiated the investigation earlier “but we were busy.” In his motion before the City Council on Tuesday, Woo asked that the city attorney’s office, the Bureau of Engineering and the Traffic Department submit reports on the matter within 30 days to the Governmental Efficiency Committee, which he chairs.

The traffic improvements Francis was supposed to have made will cost between $214,000 and $244,000, Woo’s deputy Diana Brueggemann said Tuesday. The city is negotiating with another developer, Ira Smedra, to include the project when he makes additional improvements to the intersection for his “Laurel Promenade” shopping center at the southeast corner of Ventura and Laurel Canyon boulevards.