Choosing Best Buys for Beach : Venice: Workshop members dicker about the future of such things as the pier, the pavilion and the bike path.

Playing with red, white and blue poker chips, a group of Venice activists put their (pretend) money where their mouth was Saturday, choosing which beach area renovations were most important to them and allocating funds accordingly.

The planning game was part of a workshop conducted by the California Coastal Conservancy, a state planning and funding agency that takes a community consensus approach to public works projects.

About 50 people attended Saturday’s session at Westminster Elementary School in Venice, the last in a series of workshops that started in 1988. The Venice Waterfront Restoration Plan area encompasses all of Venice Beach from the Santa Monica boundary to the Marina jetty. Also included is the city Beach Impact Zone, bounded on the east by Main Street and Washington Boulevard, on the north by Rose Avenue and on the south by Washington Street.

Proposed improvements for the area range from restoring Venice Pier, to revamping the bike path so as to make room for pedestrians, to redesigning Washington Street where it meets the beach at the pier.

After almost two years of planning, the conservancy is expected to devise a priority list by summer’s end, taking into account community needs, funding sources and its own mandate to improve beach access.

By design, Saturday’s planning game was all too true-to-life in one sense: Players were asked to factor in budget constraints before picking their pet projects.

For example, would they to vote to replace the Venice Pier, budgeted at about $4 million, or restore it for $2 million? A restoration would free up money for other proposed improvements, such as sprucing up Ocean Front Walk and improving public restrooms at the beach. Each player had $4 million in chips to work with.

If all the projects proposed were funded, it would roughly total $24 million, according to Coastal Conservancy estimates.

Even with warnings of limited dollars, workshop leader Peter Brand said afterward that he was struck by participants’ optimistic belief that there was money available for all.

At one game board, the six players, representing several points of view, included the executive director of the Venice Chamber of Commerce, who is a staunch anti-growth advocate, the attorney who sued to block Marina Place shopping center in Culver City and an advocate of low-income housing.

All of them agreed on one item that proved to be the most controversial project at issue: what to do about the Venice Pavilion. They wanted it demolished to make way for open space and a skating area.

At the next table, proponents of saving the Pavilion, a closed-up concrete theater at the end of Windward Avenue, debated with skaters who want the space. The two can coexist, argued the pro-Pavilion forces.

Though Save the Pavilion had strong proponents, the consensus was that it should be razed in favor of a multi-use plaza or a return to being sandy beach.

At earlier workshops, most favored razing, according to the conservancy’s preliminary report. At the outset of Saturday’s event, the manager of the conservancy Water Restoration Program, Marc Beyeler, described the Pavilion area as “a policing, security and maintenance problem.”

John Wesley, a Save the Pavilion advocate, denounced the workshops’ sentiment as not representative of the community. Welty said his group has 7,000 signatures on petitions to back up its campaign. He also noted that no blacks or Latinos had participated in the workshop, saying they were probably not there because they were working--perhaps cleaning the homes of some of those in attendance.

The Save the Pavilion group wants to return the Pavilion to theatrical and other community uses by fixing its substandard acoustics. Activist Carol Berman, who said she was at the Pavilion when it was in use, was having none of that. “If that theater would have been workable, it would be working now,” she said.

Though the Pavilion area is a priority to the community, disagreement over what to do with it means that it is unlikely to be one of the first projects to get under way.

Although tallies from individuals’ priority lists have not been tabulated, the teams, with notable exceptions, seemed to favor beach and bike path improvements and doing something about the Pavilion over improvements to Windward Avenue, Windward Circle, and Venice Boulevard. Saving the Venice Pier came out somewhere near the middle.

The conservancy and the city of Los Angeles have already funded a feasibility study to see if the pier is salvageable, after an earlier effort to tear it town for safety reasons met with community resistance.

Beyeler said the community is key to funding. “Without the vigilance of community support, these projects will not happen,” he said.

The conservancy staff acts as a resource by providing planning assistance to help local communities design and implement public waterfront facilities.

In addition to having its own money to disburse, the conservancy helps get matching local funds, taking into account which projects are realistic and which are pipe dreams. The state agency also has its own agenda: public beach access and recreation opportunities. They do not fund transportation projects.

During the comment period after the game results were in, several people put in a pitch for water conservation, including drought-resistant plants in any landscaping done. “I really get irritated when I see those damn pansies planted underneath the palm trees,” Berman said.

Among the projects and their cost estimates:

* Ocean front walk: Repave walkway and replace existing benches, trash receptacles and lighting, $2.1 million. For an additional $950,000, Ocean Front Walk could be extended south to the Marina jetty.

* Beach path: Reconstruct the bike path into a multi-use path with separate walking and skating lanes, add lights, $2.5 million.

* Beach facilities: Improve and expand beach restrooms, $750,000. An additional $900,000 would replace deteriorated pagoda areas and add beach piazzas.

* Pavilion alternatives: Restoring the area to sand is the least expensive alternative, at $800,000. Retaining the theater with the rest of the area redesigned for multi-use would cost $2 million, an estimate disputed by Save the Pavilion advocates. An “Open Plaza” alternative that would tear down most of the Pavilion but retain some foundations for multi-use is budgeted at between $500,000 and $1 million. Finally, a “New Plaza” starting from scratch, to turn the area into a place for many uses, has a price tag of $1.9 million. This list does not include “Seaskate,” whose supporters want an area for skaters interspersed with park-like places, as proposed by some in the community.

* Venice Pier: The pier can be demolished for $500,000, restored for $2 million and rebuilt for $4 million.

* Windward Avenue: For $800,000, Windward Avenue, which ends at the Pavilion, could be redesigned for more pedestrian use.

* Windward Circle: Some community members want this redesigned as a “Gateway to Venice,” a focal point for pedestrians and vehicles at a cost of $1.5 million.

* Washington Street Plaza: Washington now ends unceremoniously at a beach parking lot. The plan would put a plaza at the end of the street, with fountains, palm trees and lights for $800,000.

* Venice Boulevard: This $8-million-plus project would include $3 million to acquire property, $1.5 million to put utilities underground, $1.5 million to build a park and $700,000 to $2.5 million to build a parking lot or structure.