An Open-or-Shut Case

The most famous building in Los Angeles had historic beginnings. Its cement was mixed with sand from every California county and water gathered from each of the state’s 21 missions.

When it opened in 1928, its 28 stories and distinctive tower made it the tallest building in the city. It presided alone over the skyline until a 13-story height limit was removed in 1958.

Now, after 68 years as the jewel of downtown’s Civic Center, Los Angeles City Hall faces a week that could be a telling one.

The upper floors of the landmark, faded-white tower have been shuttered since shortly after the Jan. 17, 1994 Northridge earthquake, which did extensive damage to the interior.

An extensive repair and retrofit effort has been underway, but the growing cost has shocked city officials. An advisory panel named by the mayor and city controller may decide as early as today to save money by leaving as many as the top 24 stories vacant.

Leaving higher floors unoccupied would reduce the cost of renovations since the elaborate interior reinforcing of the tower needed to protect office workers would not be necessary. Also, the empty space could be used to more cheaply brace the tower to withstand a future quake.

The chairman of the retrofit advisory panel, developer Stuart Ketchum, told Mayor Richard Riordan informally at a recent dinner party that leaving the tower vacant was emerging as a serious option--perhaps the best one to keep down retrofit costs estimated at up to $300 million.

But Ketchum acknowledged that it is not a sure thing yet.

“How much would be saved?” he asked last week. “I spent two hours quizzing the engineers on that point and didn’t get a precise answer.”

The advisory group has the goal of winding up its deliberations and reporting recommendations by the end of the month. Ketchum said he hopes that some decisions will be made at today’s meeting, which will be private.

Vacating the tower is the most drastic of the ideas under consideration by the panel. Despite the rising cost of retrofitting, which at one time was projected to total less than $100 million, there has been no serious talk of abandoning City Hall and replacing it with a modern, seismically safe building.

But the structure is considered dangerous and at risk of being severely battered if another quake should occur before seismic reinforcements are completed.

The retrofit’s lead designer, structural engineer Nabib Youssef, testified last month before Ketchum’s panel that in its present state, City Hall would not collapse in a large quake. But he warned that there could be “a permanent distortion of the building frame and a serious falling hazard” for those standing below when the quake struck.

As it was, huge chunks of the terra cotta ceramic tiles that make up the building’s “skin” tumbled off in the quake. Only the early hour of the temblor prevented lives from being lost because of falling debris, officials said.

In another serious quake, staircases would probably be warped to the point that the occupants’ exit would be impeded, Youssef testified.

The preservationist on the 14-member panel, Christy McAvoy, said that vacating the tower is acceptable if it is the only means to secure a cost-effective rehabilitation of City Hall.

“Most preservationists would want a fully usable building,” she said. “But we may not have the money to do a lot of things people would like to do. We’d clean it up and render it safe.”

Under that scenario, she added: “You wouldn’t do anything to the tower. You’d simply close it up. You’d freeze it until you have the resources to do the job.”

In any event, she said, the most public parts of City Hall--the City Council chambers, the mayoral and council offices, and the central rotunda on the lower four floors--would remain fully operational under a scaled-down retrofit.

Kathryn Welch-Howe, president of the Los Angeles Conservancy, said her organization is not excited about closing all but the lowest floors of such a historic building.

“We would prefer to have the tower open and used,” she said. “Other buildings are being successfully retrofitted.”

Some of the cost figures for the retrofit seem to the Conservancy to be “alarmist,” she said, padded with moving costs and new furniture and equipment.

But city officials contend that a dollar spent moving city employees or leasing temporary quarters is just as costly as a dollar spent on retrofitting.

Already, the city has spent $22 million to move 900 employees out of City Hall’s upper floors to allow the retrofit’s earlier stages to proceed.

Even if a decision is made to keep the upper levels of City Hall vacant indefinitely, Ketchum said several important questions will remain.

For instance, will the observation deck on top of the tower also remain closed? Or restricted to specially escorted groups?

Will stairwells have to be maintained for firefighters, as the city code requires for certain high-rise buildings?

And, finally, will the plan be to keep the tower, and probably the mid-rise floors from five to 10, closed forever, or will there be an understanding that they eventually will be reopened?

Ketchum, meanwhile, has disclosed two decisions that already have been made.

First, City Hall will be seismically base-isolated, as was planned before retrofit work was suspended in September amid soaring cost estimates. Under this system, a series of elaborate shock absorbers in the foundation insulate the superstructure from the heaviest ground shaking.

“The base isolation is needed to keep the fabric of the building from sustaining severe damage in a quake,” he said. “It’s essential for its safety.”

And, he added, it was decided not to demolish City Hall and build a new one, even though it is conceivable that option could be cheaper.

“It might be desirable, but it’s not palatable politically,” he said. “I don’t know anybody pushing it, and I’m certainly not.”