A New Road to the Future : Planning: Architects offer aesthetic and practical options for Ventura Boulevard in the 21st Century.

After years of debate over a controversial plan to tame unruly growth, ease traffic and enhance Ventura Boulevard, a team of architects has unveiled its vision of what the 17-mile road might look like in the year 2000 and beyond.

In an effort to make the boulevard’s communities distinctive, tree-lined jogging trails, public sculpture and parking lots that double as public plazas characterize the designs that will be presented to the public sometime this summer.

Included as well are practical elements, such as smog-absorbing trees, solar-powered street lights and graffiti-proof bus stops.

“We don’t want to impose our views,” said Ken Bernstein, president of the Ventura Boulevard Specific Plan Review Board, the group charged with overseeing implementation of the 20-year, $222-million plan. “We want to present to the community a menu of options.”

Three different designs have been drawn for a representative stretch of Ventura, between Topanga Canyon Boulevard and Canoga Avenue in Woodland Hills. In addition, two new developments in the area may actually incorporate some of the ideas.

But even as planners were celebrating their first glance at what could be, hurdles remain. A fee system that is supposed to power the realization of the plan is yielding little, budget cuts last week cost the review board half its city support staff, and city agencies that must cooperate are pulling in opposite directions.

Funding for the $222-million plan, which was passed by the City Council in 1991, was to come largely from fees levied against business owners based on a formula estimating the added traffic they generate.

The city has billed about $13 million in the so-called trip fees to date, but only about $1 million has been collected. In April, the City Council gave merchants four more years to begin payment, and created a process for appeal.

The sort of improvements unveiled by the architects would be funded exclusively by trip fees. They are estimated to cost $17 million, compared to $152 million for street improvements.

Logistics aside, concepts for the face lift ranged from pragmatic to whimsical.

In his vision of the boulevard, architect Jeffrey Kalban used landscape elements and simple geometries to transform what he deems negative elements, such as parking lots, into something positive.

In one drawing, a semicircle of giant palms sets off a large parking lot that would be done in special paving patterns, allowing it to double as a public plaza that could be used for weekend festivals and events. In another, a meandering tree-lined walkway provides a pleasant path to the front doors of boulevard businesses.

“I’m trying to marry the public’s desire for a nicer place to live with the wants and needs of the entrepreneur,” Kalban said.

Tarzana architect Greg Nelson, also a member of the plan review board, envisions a tree-lined jogging trail paralleling the boulevard and would try to use the comparatively underdeveloped stretch to induce a parklike feeling.

Nelson said he thinks the boulevard should remind people of what he says the West Valley is all about.

“I mean, why do people move here?” he said. “Open spaces, family living, community.”

At the center of Nelson’s vision--as well as at the center of the intersection of Ventura and Topanga Canyon boulevards--is a statue of boy in a baseball uniform.

Shirttails out and head bowed, the youth could be frozen in shame after having served up a home run pitch to his concrete counterpart across the street.

The notion to transform the intersection into a baseball diamond, complete with an infield, backstop and bases, was “kind of a playful tribute to kids,” according to Nelson.

The architects had help from landscape architect and review board member Lauren Melendrez and a group of Pierce College architecture students.

Though different, the architects’ visions are by no means rival, said Lawrence Robbins, who drew the preliminary sketch. “We are working as a team,” Robbins said. “We build on each others suggestions.”

The search for the money to translate the designs into reality is continuing, and the review board has begun to consider a number of options.

“The plan, as far as trip fees, is not materializing,” said Jeff Brain, who heads up the review board’s budget and finance subcommittee, and has called for reducing the overall budget of the plan, as well as reducing dependence on trip fees by forming a benefit assessment district.

Under such a district, Brain said costs would be spread among all property owners, not just businesses, along the boulevard.

“By spreading the cost, it basically comes down to pennies per square foot per property owner, and it makes it more fair and more equitable.”

Outside funding, such as grants from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and from the state and federal governments, will also be sought, Bernstein said.

The designs for the street, unveiled at a meeting last week, have received favorable reviews.

“I was very impressed with what I saw,” said Cindy Miscikowski, planning deputy for City Councilman Marvin Braude, who attended the meeting. “These things are not that expensive or extravagant. These are things that can be done.”

Miscikowski pointed to another potential roadblock that has developed, which is pitting those pushing traffic improvements against architects and planners.

One sign of the tension centers on traffic medians. Miscikowski said transportation and safety officials would oppose placing any kind of median in the center of the boulevard.

But architects said medians are an essential element in creating distinct communities between heavily traveled freeway access roads.

Some planners are unhappy with the extensive traffic improvements contemplated by the plan, arguing they run counter to their task of revitalizing the boulevard and creating a sense of community.

“The streetscape is just as important as widening the streets,” said Tom Rath, a city planning associate in the Van Nuys Division. “Treat it as a boulevard, not a superhighway.”

Despite the problems, Bernstein said he is pleased with the recent progress.

“It’s gratifying to see that the Ventura Boulevard plan, a complicated 150-page document that was looking like it lacked life, may be something that’s going to give the boulevard life,” he said.

“It may not come about overnight, but I would hope that by seeing this menu of options, the residents of the Valley would see that Ventura Boulevard could be more than just an endless corridor of stores and an ugly jumble of signs.”

Remaking Ventura Boulevard

A team of architects has created three proposals to redesign the San Fernando Valley’s most famous street. Focusing on a representative strip of the futuristic to the lighthearted. One, for example, employs a baseball theme to celebrate children. The designs aim to make the area more livable and to give each community a distinct identity. The designs are not final and funding for such a remake remains uncertain.

Framing the Boulevard:

Another design calls for multipurpose street lights, which could accommodate everything from wires for an electric trolley to hanging plants or banners. It also would serve to frame the boulevard, as well as the sidewalk. Architect Jeffrey Kalban said the framing creates “a room for you to drive through.”

One architect suggests embedding the image of a giant Louisville Slugger and baseball at the entrance to Woodland Hills.

Trees and paving patterns would lure pedestrians into commercial areas.

The intersection would be transformed into a baseball diamond, with a statue of a pitcher in the center.

A jogging trail would parallel the boulevard.