Blight Is Embraced Over Glitz : Sherman Oaks: To homeowners, boarded buildings represent a triumph of activism over redevelopment plans.

Nearly seven years after they began their fight to preserve the small-town flavor of their quaint neighborhood, a stubborn group of residents here say they have learned to embrace blight over glitz.

And a good thing too, since the stretch of Ventura Boulevard near their homes has turned from a lively pedestrian center boasting cafes and the popular Scene of the Crime bookstore to a ghostly stretch of boarded and decaying buildings attractive only to vagrants and vermin.

Yet to these homeowners, the weed-choked sidewalk and its empty storefronts symbolize a triumph of activism over redevelopment plans that would have brought apartments and traffic to their enclave of carefully tended single-family residences.

“Homeowners are not responsible for the blight. They’re just protecting their neighborhood,” said resident Rose Elmassian, co-chair of a committee that has successfully blocked all new development proposals for the one-acre strip along Ventura Boulevard between Woodman Avenue and Ventura Canyon Drive.

Resolving the dispute over the so-called Ventura-Woodman project is a priority for newly elected Councilman Mike Feuer, who inherited a problem whose solution eluded two previous council representatives.

Feuer met for the first time last week with owners of the property and expects to continue negotiations this week with other factions, including merchants and residents.

“We would like to see something done there that is beneficial to the community,” Howard Gatman, a spokesman for Feuer, said. “We are very concerned with the blight.”

Everyone agrees that the block of mostly old, single-story buildings, plastered over with entertainment posters and strewn with empty liquor bottles, is ugly. But as Gatman noted, less clear is what should be done.

The latest proposal--calling for a combination of shops and apartments for low-income seniors--apparently has died, not only because of opposition, but a lack of financing.

After years of failed attempts to find a development proposal that would appease the neighborhood, the property is back on the market. Owners say they are now willing to reconsider what residents have demanded all along--to either refurbish the existing buildings or replace them with a similar strip of one- or two-story shops. Earlier, the developers had argued that this was not financially viable.

“That place has been a nightmare,” said Mel Guthman, who owns the property along with his partner, Shep Weiner. “We want to resolve this as quickly and honorably as we can and make everybody involved happy.”

Some merchants and residents have urged that the buildings be demolished.

“ Anything besides what’s there would be good,” said Jasmin Deirmendjian, whose parents operate the Vanavana Italian restaurant across the street. The view for patrons seated in the restaurant’s outdoor dining area is disconcerting, she said. “What our customers see is the bums and homeless people hanging out over there.”

Others, however, say they are willing to stick with the blight in the hope the block will be saved. “All you have to do is look at Studio City and see how it is thriving with all of its one-story shops,” said Virginia Shabaik, who co-chairs the residents’ Ventura-Woodman committee.

In a way, the Ventura-Woodman debate is a mini-model of the planning struggle under way throughout Los Angeles.

The city Planning Commission is considering an entire new set of revisions to the General Plan, adopted in 1974, which must be updated under federal and state regulations. While public hearings have just begun, many critics say the plan is a blueprint for disaster because it promotes overdevelopment.

Proposed changes would permit high-density development along certain growth corridors, including Ventura Boulevard. The proposal suggests, for instance, that the Ventura-Woodman site is suitable for the unpopular mixed-use development of retail stores and apartments. New plans also would permit greater density and taller buildings along the boulevard, which many residents and business owners oppose because of the shadows that would be cast and the additional traffic that bigger buildings would bring.

To counter what homeowners derisively call “Manhattanization,” the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn., one of the oldest and most powerful homeowner advocacy groups in the Valley, was instrumental in formulating provisions of the Ventura Boulevard Specific Plan. Finally adopted a few years ago after more than a decade of debate, the plan includes a series of protective measures, including limiting the height of new buildings to two stories. Ideally, the building rules mandated by the Specific Plan will complement the broad goals of the still-developing General Plan.

It was not surprising, therefore, that homeowners sprang into action when developers announced ambitious plans to redevelop the Ventura-Woodman retail strip in 1988. Jackie Gamliel, the developer at the time, began evicting owners of a dozen shops in the block before residents learned of his proposal to build a three-story, 85,000-square-foot office and retail project.

The property owners, who had leased the block to the developer, now say Gamliel acted prematurely. “He committed the unforgivable sin of giving people [eviction] notices before he had a [building] permit,” Guthman said. “It was an unfortunate situation.”

*

Popular shops that were ousted over four years included the intriguing Scene of the Crime bookstore and tea room, a tennis shop, gift shop, toy shop, several boutiques and a cafe.

After Gamliel’s project was blocked by protests, developer Ovadia Oved proposed a combination of retail stores on the street level and 84 apartments for low-income seniors above in a three-story building that would be only five feet higher than guidelines in the Specific Plan.

Some residents and business owners said they liked the mixed-use concept, but the majority opposed granting any exception in height and density, fearing it would set a precedent and undermine their stance on rules being considered for a new General Plan.

Despite objections, the City Council last year agreed to give the developer a $2.4-million, low-interest federal loan to help finance the $8-million project. The developer, however, has since been unable to obtain the balance of financing, property owners said last week. Oved could not be reached for comment.

New signs--offering the property for sale or lease--now hang from decaying rooftops along the block.

“We’re getting lots and lots of inquiries,” Guthman said. “We’re open to anything that will make it a better place than it is right now. It couldn’t be much worse.”