$147.5-Million Price Tag for Library Restoration Approved

Amid concerns over rising costs and a lingering aesthetic debate, a committee of the Los Angeles City Council on Tuesday endorsed plans to proceed on a $147.5-million restoration and expansion of fire-damaged Central Library.

Under the complicated financing scheme, the Community Redevelopment Agency is to provide $119.2 million, while the city is expected to furnish $28.3 million--almost twice its initial commitment.

The original 1982 plan--four years before the April, 1986, fire closed the historic downtown building--envisioned the CRA financing the entire rehabilitation and expansion project. The city in 1985 made its commitment to cover a project deficit--initially estimated at $14.5 million. The fire did not appreciably alter the estimated restoration costs.

Before asking approval Tuesday for the financing plan, Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, the committee chairman, questioned mounting cost estimates for the project design and for operation of a temporary library facility at St. Vincent’s Square at 7th Street and Broadway. The former Bullocks department store building is intended as a temporary library site during construction. It has also been used for storage in the aftermath of the fire.

Originally, officials estimated that they would need the temporary library for 18 months, at a cost of $1.7 million. Now they estimate that the facility will be needed for 4 1/2 years at a cost of $8.9 million.

Design fees for the project, meanwhile, have increased from $8.1 million to $12 million. Yaroslavsky attributed the higher cost to completion of a $9.5-million contract with the architect, Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer Associates. Other design cost increases involved historic preservation, art restorations and a redesign.

The redesign of architect Norman Pfeiffer’s original plan sparked renewed debate Tuesday. Two models of the east wing expansion were displayed--Pfeiffer’s original with a peaked atrium, and his redesign with a flat atrium. The original, preferred by Yaroslavsky and some others, had been judged “too massive” by the Cultural Affairs Commission.

4 Groups Can Use Veto

Four bodies--the Cultural Affairs Commission, the Library Board, the CRA board and the council--have veto power over design. Pfeiffer said he intends to work with a design committee from the boards to resolve issues as more detailed designing proceeds.

The go-ahead was important, Central Library Director Betty Gay said, because it is believed that delays in the project could add as much as $500,000 a month because of inflation. The city is considering a tax-exempt bond plan to finance the library project.