Developers’ Interest in Mall Site Remains

More than three years after the Northridge earthquake wiped out all but one store at the Laurel Plaza shopping center, developers are still trying to get city approval for a plan to breathe new retail life into the site.

The matter appears on today’s City Council agenda, but officials said a vote would most likely be delayed several months, as it has been repeatedly since the quake. Keeping the issue on the council agenda will enable developers to avoid duplicating necessary paperwork, according to Tom Henry, a planning deputy for City Councilman Joel Wachs, who represents the area.

Mark Armbruster, a land-use attorney who represented former Laurel Plaza property owner Forest City Development, said he is negotiating with a new local developer on a revised plan that should be ready by summer.

It is “much lower intensity” than a proposal by Forest City in 1986 that called for demolition of private homes to create a mall twice the size of the previous one. That earlier plan also included movie theaters, a day-care center and a relocated private school run by Emmanuel Lutheran Church. That scenario drew heavy criticism from residents who found it too ambitious for the site near Oxnard Street and Laurel Canyon Boulevard.

The Robinsons-May Co. department store emerged as Laurel Plaza’s lone quake survivor and now it owns the shopping center property. The center, perhaps best known as the home of the popular Ice Chalet skating rink, was torn down after city inspectors declared it unsafe.

Armbruster declined to reveal specifics about the new developer’s plan to open a cluster of stores, but predicted the City Council would probably consider the plan by October.

Henry maintained Robinsons-May Co. is thriving and the surrounding property is “not a blight.” But he said a new shopping center would benefit the neighborhood.

Even Bob Carcia, who lives near the department store and led residents’ bitter campaign against the previous proposal, agrees there is room for more commercial space.

“We would not be against that step forward,” he said, “as long as they do it the right way, with concern for our safety and security.”