The Tenacious Coliseum Issue

The Los Angeles Coliseum Commission is due to receive an independent peer review of work on the stadium’s press box, perhaps in time for its regularly scheduled meeting on Wednesday. But even if the review comes out in support of the original design work, construction and subsequent inspections, a question may remain: Will the review be enough to put to rest the matter of the press box’s safety?

The Coliseum press box, built entirely with emergency federal and state funds after the Northridge earthquake, has been in use since the 1995 college football season. In recent months, however, the quality of that construction has been challenged. Most recently, for example, a Times story pointed out that three steel columns considered crucial to the support of the press box were rejected by construction inspectors. The same columns were later accepted and used without a recommended repair being made.

John A. Martin and Associates, the firm conducting the review, brings good credentials to the table. It was chosen to investigate why Cal State Northridge University’s signature Oviatt Library sustained heavy damage during the 1994 temblor, and its expertise was valuable in analyzing the collapse of unrelated parking structures. But the press box matter may demand a more thorough inquiry than that provided by the peer review.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a Coliseum Commission member, is one who openly wonders whether a complete, independent structural investigation isn’t in order. It’s true that, among public officials, Yaroslavsky has been something of a lone wolf in his consistent complaints about the way the press box matter was handled, but the issue extends far past the complaints of one commission member.

Just last month, for example, grand new plans were unveiled for turning the 73-year-old facility into a state-of-the-art football stadium. But there are barriers to professional football’s return to the Coliseum. The National Football League is reluctant to even consider the stadium as a home for a Los Angeles franchise. Does the Coliseum Commission want to risk compounding the difficulty by leaving doubts over the safety of the press box and the way the matter was handled? The commission must ask itself this once the peer review is in hand. Long-range thinking is essential.