Panel to Weigh Deep Cuts in Ventura Boulevard Plan : Improvements: Proposal would slash budget to $67 million and reduce the contribution of developers by 94%.

A Los Angeles City Council committee will consider a proposal Tuesday to make deep cuts in the budget of the Ventura Boulevard Specific Plan, but it is far from the only suggestion to fix the troubled plan.

The 20-year, $222-million plan was adopted in 1991 and called for street widenings, additional parking and shuttles to improve traffic flow and make the San Fernando Valley’s main street a more desirable place to shop.

Developers were to pay for more than half of the planned improvements, but many appealed their fees, which were inflated by incorrectly calculated costs and other problems. Because the plan has brought in little revenue, few improvements have been made and both supporters and detractors have spent much of the past four years arguing over what to do next.

On Tuesday, the council’s Planning and Land Use Management Committee will consider a Planning Commission proposal to cut the plan’s budget to $67 million and add additional turn lanes at 11 fewer intersections--19 as opposed to 30. The proposal would also reduce the financial contribution of developers by 94%, from $125 million to $8 million.

But during the past four months, a counterproposal has been devised by aides to Valley council members Laura Chick, Marvin Braude and Joel Wachs as well as the Ventura Boulevard Specific Plan Review Board, a citizens panel overseeing the plan.

Arguing that the Planning Commission’s proposal puts key elements of the plan in jeopardy, the aides and panel members recommend that parking lots and community shuttles be paid for by developer fees. Under the Planning Commission’s proposal, those improvements were to be financed through assessment districts.

The council aides’ proposal would cut the plan’s budget to $75 million, add turn lanes at 11 fewer intersections and reduce the developers’ share of the bill for improvements to $14 million. It would also set aside $250,000 to promote the idea of an assessment district to businesses along the boulevard.

Although both proposals contain recommendations for seemingly drastic budget cuts, the figures are somewhat misleading because the city has determined that the original $222-million budget is almost $140 million too high due to a math error, outdated projections of land acquisition costs and street widening plans later deemed unworkable or unnecessary.

A compromise between the two proposals may be in the offing. On Wednesday, Chick aide Ken Bernstein, who spearheaded the counterproposal, met with Fred Gaines, an attorney who is championing the Planning Commission’s proposal on behalf of his developer clients, at a meeting of the Valley Industry and Commerce Assn. Land Use Committee.

According to Jeff Brain, chairman of the citizens panel, one of the remaining issues is whether developers should be made to bear the costs of shuttles in Sherman Oaks, Studio City and Encino.