Council Puts Brakes on Artworks for Hollywood Streets : Renewal: Opponents say the paintings would be erased by traffic in 10 years. Backers argue that the project would bring visitors.

Painting the streets of Hollywood with movieland designs would waste tax money in a city struggling to pay for basic services, Los Angeles City Council members said Tuesday in rejecting a novel public art proposal.

The council voted 7 to 5 against a Community Redevelopment Agency proposal to commission three asphalt artworks for Hollywood Boulevard--paintings that would be erased by street traffic in seven to 10 years.

Of the initial $175,000 art project, only a decorative wrought-iron fence on Ivar Street in Hollywood was preserved by the council action.

Critics described the asphalt art as “idiotic” and “wasteful,” but backers said it would bring a creative spark and attract more visitors to the downtrodden boulevard.

The Community Redevelopment Agency envisioned six public artworks as part of the initial redesign of the thoroughfare.

The central feature in the first three projects was to be painting directly on the asphalt with a specially mixed paint.

One design would have filled the intersection of Hollywood Boulevard and Vine Street with a Fred Astaire movie tableau, re-creating the dance floor from the 1935 film “Top Hat.” Another would have painted the word INTERMISSION on a crosswalk connecting the Ivar Theater and Hollywood Library to a parking lot across the street. The third would have been a film strip painted down the middle of Ivar Street, where it intersects with Hollywood Boulevard, depicting the area’s history.

Redevelopment officials said in June that it would take two to five years for the paintings to be rubbed away or covered in grease, oil and asphalt. They reported Tuesday that the paintings would actually last longer, up to a decade.

“This has got to be one of the most idiotic proposals ever brought before the City Council,” said frequent redevelopment critic Robert Nudelman. “We need that money for police and fire and paramedics.”

Nudelman also questioned how pedestrians could enjoy the art from street level. “Unless you are a bird, you are not going to get any value out of it,” Nudelman added. “And they will know what to do when they see it.”

City Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky said the city’s difficult financial picture makes the project unacceptable.

“People say to me, you mean you can’t even pave the streets, but you can paint the street in Hollywood?” Yaroslavsky said.

Yaroslavsky said the $175,000 would be enough to put four more police officers to work.

But several other speakers told the City Council that the artwork would brighten the gritty thoroughfare and perhaps bolster the neighborhood’s sagging economy.

“It will create a positive excitement for visitors that is now missing,” said Aaron Epstein, a Hollywood Boulevard property owner. “This is seed money that will come back in increased sales taxes and property taxes.”

An exasperated City Councilman Michael Woo, who represents Hollywood, said that similar criticism could have greeted another public works proposal that has become a major attraction--the Hollywood Walk of Fame.

“They don’t understand this. They just don’t get it,” Woo said, after this colleagues voted down the street art. “That’s why we have so many mini-malls in this city and why we have so many ugly streets--because no one has taken the leadership to plan for improvements.

“We could have created a real landmark and attraction with this,” Woo said.

The public art debate was the second during Tuesday’s City Council session in which Woo, a newly announced candidate for mayor, found himself scrambling to defend the $922-million Hollywood redevelopment project, a centerpiece of his council record.

Woo also fought for continued negotiations with developer Melvin Simon on the proposed $300-million Hollywood Promenade shopping and entertainment center.

Opponents balked at continuing to pay a consultant who has been negotiating with Simon to determine how much support the Redevelopment Agency should give the project. The discussion ended when the consultant’s contract was referred to a City Council committee.