Proposed Courthouse Would Create Uncertain Future for Historic Spring Street Structure
California Historical Society / USC Digital Archives
Opened in January 1939, the Federal Building on Spring Street originally housed a post office, courtrooms and offices for multiple government agencies.
DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — Shifting plans for a proposed new federal courthouse at 1st and Broadway have created an uncertain future for one of the court's current homes, the 1939 Federal Building at 312 N. Spring.
At a congressional hearing this morning, representatives of the judiciary and the agency charged with constructing federal facilities defended plans for the proposed $400-million courthouse, which would include 24 courtrooms and 32 judges' chambers. Rep. Jeff Denham scheduled the hearing after targeting the project as a "prime example of government waste."
"This is probably the last building that will ever be built in Los Angeles," said U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Morrow, who pressed the need to relieve security and space concerns in the court's current configuration, which is split between Spring Street and the 1991 Edward R. Roybal Federal Building on Temple.
"It seems like we've studied ever combination and permutation" of existing and new space, said Robert Peck, a commissioner with the General Services Administration. "GSA is ready to move forward with this project."
The Spring Street courthouse would be emptied, and it would be years before the government is able to determine whether it makes sense for it to reuse the building for its own purposes.
"We'll either find that we can efficiently renovate the building ... or we will declare it surplus," said Peck.
If a renovation were to take place, space in the building would be used to house agencies currently in leased space around the city. Historic courtrooms could be used for grand juries and for training space.
Costs of such a project would not be known until 2016 or 2017, after the new courthouse has been completed and a study of the building has been done. The historic structure is "riddled with asbestos," Morrow said, and is in need of a seismic retrofit.
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents Washington D.C., expressed her fears that the Spring Street courthouse would wind up sitting empty. Her district includes the E. Barrett Prettyman federal courthouse, which has sat empty since a modern annex was opened in 2006.
"It makes you want to cry to go into a building that no one thought would ever be abandoned," said Prettyman.
David McBane on November 04, 2011, at 10:58AM – #1
It is good to hear that at least the new courthouse is getting some focus. It is ridiculous that the federal government has spent so much time and still has not made a final decision. Plus, with the economy the way it is, this would be a great time to do the construction with the lower than usual construction costs.
Tony Hoover on November 04, 2011, at 12:52PM – #2
The county should buy the Fed courthouse move current facilites from each side of civic center park to this building. That would open up land to triple the size of civic center park.
Then the Cathedral should open its south gate to the park so people feel welcomed into the plaza. On the opposite end of the park, the first floor of the LA Times building should be repurposed into restaurants and other more "civic" uses that "interact" with the park.
This would elevate the park into a world class venue that would also pull several Downtown "icons" into it visually (Cathedral, Music Center, City Hall & LA Times).
William Crandell on November 04, 2011, at 03:39PM – #3
"World class"?
Why not galaxy class? Tear the damn place down and hire Frank to design a wavy-gravy L.A. Times skyscraper.
I know, I know. That would be after David Geffen buys that rag.
Dion on November 04, 2011, at 05:41PM – #4
Tony, that just makes too much sense unfortunately.
Tony Hoover on November 06, 2011, at 03:04PM – #5
I might also add, that if the county bought the federal courthouse there is enough real estate on the west side of the property to put 2 addtional buildings on each side of the entrance in case they wanted to expand. It would also bring the counties criminal and civil courts closer to one another (they could, in fact be connected, and also give the county more direct access to the LA Mall. The LA Mall needs to be turned over to a private developer who can reenergize it and make it more appealing.
Rich on November 06, 2011, at 03:19PM – #6
I work in both federal and state courts. It seems to me that we're in more need of a replacement for Stanley Mosk Superior Court than the federal courthouses. There's just not enough room in Superior.
However, with the changing demographics of the state as well as increased deportation of criminal aliens under the current administration, there may be some big changes in the court systems in the next few years. No one really knows how it will play out.