City Hall

Thank you for acknowledging in your Jan. 29 editorial and other articles the significance of preserving the historic Los Angeles City Hall. We have an obligation and a duty, as a civilized society, to protect and preserve our precious civic and cultural landmarks that have defined the greatness and optimism of this city.

City Hall has embodied the soul and spirit of Los Angeles for almost 70 years. It would be difficult for us to explain how a world-class city that we promote as one of the world’s greatest economies, a progressive city of creative and dynamic people that has led the way in a multitude of industries, could not protect and preserve its most important landmark.

We are troubled by the estimated rehabilitation cost and its potential impact on the future of the building. But, let us hope that through fiscal responsibility and able project management, we will transcend the present difficulties and undertake the much-needed rehabilitation and restoration of our city’s most enduring symbol.

GEORGIA ROSENBERRY

President, Project Restore, L.A.

* With over 50 years of experience in the construction business, I am strongly opposed to the retrofitting of the L.A. City Hall. Any building built prior to 1933 is prone to earthquake damage. City Hall is no exception. This building has inadequate foundations as well as structural weaknesses. No amount of retrofitting will make this building safe in a major earthquake. It would be cheaper and save the taxpayers additional money to demolish it and rebuild a safer and more efficient building. I am in sympathy with the preservation groups, but priority should be given to safety, efficiency and cost.

THEODORE R. GENTRY

Los Angeles