Zoning Plan Will Lead to Changed Village, Critics Say : Neighborhoods: Merchants and residents disagree about whether it will save the area’s small-town charm.

If there’s one thing Brentwood residents and merchants seem to agree on, it’s that they all want Brentwood Village to hold on to its small-town charm.

But a proposal to restrict the size of buildings in the small, three-acre shopping district is meeting not enthusiasm, but opposition and suspicion. Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce officers charge that the proposal is the first step in paving the way for a developer to raze the village and build a new walking mall. City officials deny that such a proposal is even under discussion.

The zoning change for the small, tree-lined shopping district that straddles Barrington Avenue between Sunset Boulevard and Barrington Place faced its first public hearing April 20. The proposal would restrict new buildings to 75% of the size of a lot. But it also would prevent owners of existing buildings from enlarging their buildings beyond that limit.

The Brentwood Village Chamber of Commerce sees the proposed zoning change as the beginning of the end for individual ownership. They argue that rather than promoting the preservation of the village of individually owned stores, the proposal will encourage consolidation of the lots.

Councilman Marvin Braude, who presented the proposal last year, said it is simply “a fine-tuning of the zoning ordinances to see that the area is preserved as a local neighborhood shopping area” with its mix of hair salons, dry cleaners, a hardware store, a pharmacy, clothing shops, eateries and gas stations.

The zoning proposal is intended as a way to keep Brentwood Village as a small commercial area, said Cindy Miscikowski, Braude’s chief deputy.

Building sizes in the village now vary from one lot to another, Miscikowski said, but the average building is 75% the size of the lot. Current zoning regulations allow a building to be 150% the size of the lot, she said. The owner of a 10,000-square-foot parcel can build a 15,000-square-foot building. Under the new regulations, the building would be limited to 7,500 square feet.

“This is not your major commercial area, but that intensity is the same as (allowed) on Wilshire and San Vicente boulevards,” she said. “Brentwood Village is meant to be a small commercial area.”

Chamber President John Handal conceded that limiting building size is not bad as a way of limiting growth. Nobody wants to see another San Vicente Boulevard with high-rises and tow-away zones, he said.

But the zoning change also would put many of the existing buildings out of conformance, he said. Although Handal’s restaurant, San Genero on Barrington Place, is smaller than the maximum allowed under present zoning, it would be a nonconforming building under the proposed zoning change. That would mean that variances would be necessary for any improvements that would affect square footage, he said.

Nick Tortorice, chamber vice president, said he is concerned that owners will get discouraged and just allow their properties to deteriorate. He and Handal said that could open the door to the resurrection of a plan first formulated in 1989.

Instead of redeveloping individual buildings and lots, the plan called for the village to be razed in two phases and replaced with a walking mall built over an underground parking facility, Tortorice said. Barrington Court and a portion of Barrington Avenue would then be closed to traffic.

Councilman Braude disputed the contention that a walking mall is being planned.

“There is no merit to that. There is nothing proposed or likely to change the configuration of the area. All of those alternatives were explored and rejected,” he said. The chamber has gathered 500 signatures from residents opposing the rezoning, and it hopes to gather 1,000 more, Tortorice said.

Jon Byk, a Brentwood resident and building owner, said he opposes the plan because it is unnecessarily restrictive.

Some of the buildings in the village date from the 1940s and need updating, he said.

“They’re little boxes,” he said. Upscale merchants can’t make a living in such small stores, he argued, adding that the only businesses than can succeed are hair and nail salons and dry cleaners.

He said the effect of the new zoning would be to lock those buildings into the 1948-49 period.

Byk’s 4,000-square-foot building, which houses his advertising agency and a clothing store, is nearly twice the size of the lot. Under the proposal, he said, he would be unable to remodel in a way that would change the square footage without getting a variance,

Byk said if he were to tear his building down and replace it, he could only put up a one-story building. Either way, for the owners the zoning “would turn it all into useless property,” he said.

Byk said he is not alone, and that with rezoning, the village would be made up of a bunch of nonconforming buildings.

Miscikowski acknowledged that although the average building in the village is 75% of the size of the lot, the average is based on a range of building sizes.

Rather than pass a new zoning ordinance now, Byk would rather see homeowners, commercial landlords, merchants and city planners come together and jointly create a master plan based on everyone’s needs.

“Let’s wait till we have a plan and then change the zoning,” Byk said. “Why put us in a position to have to get a variance?”

The first decision on rezoning will be made public June 8 when the hearing examiner issues a report to the Planning Commission. On June 18, the commission will consider the proposal, listen to public comment and makes a recommendation to the City Council.