Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Convention Center topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City officials say Convention Center expansion remains on track for Olympic readiness amid fire‑safety and signage cost questions
Summary
City staff told the Budget & Finance Committee the $2.5 billion Los Angeles Convention Center expansion is on schedule for Olympic readiness in March 2028, but highlighted fire life‑safety issues, legacy smoke‑control concerns and signage revenue uncertainty, and said some landscaping and sightline work could add millions to costs.
The Los Angeles Budget & Finance Committee was told the Convention Center expansion remains on track to meet an Olympic readiness milestone of March 31, 2028, even as officials flagged fire life‑safety risks and higher‑than‑expected signage costs.
Matt Szabo, City Administrative Officer, said the $2.5 billion project is "on target" for cost and schedule after mitigating a previous nine‑day delay. Szabo told the committee the project has expended $218 million to date and that the budget includes $1.6 billion for construction, $385 million for contingency and $345 million in allowances for scope items not yet finalized.
Jennifer Halstead, project executive, and Richard Lui, the Bureau of Engineering project lead, described two risks the team is monitoring closely: fire life‑safety systems that must be updated and recertified by authorities having jurisdiction, and signage procurement and visibility costs. Halstead said an April pricing estimate exceeded the $147.6 million signage allowance by about $7.5 million and that landscaping to preserve sightlines — required to ensure signage generates projected revenue — could add as much as $15 million.
Council members pressed staff about Caltrans approvals for landscape changes and whether cutting or removing trees would be required. Szabo said Caltrans approvals are "in process" and that the revenue model assumes clean sightlines; staff also said the project cannot pursue off‑site advertising without state approvals it previously failed to secure, which reduces projected advertising revenue. Szabo gave the committee an average signage‑revenue assumption of roughly $38 million per year and estimated a $2 million to $23 million annual delta if off‑site advertising were allowed.
Fire Department staff raised separate but related safety concerns about the project's design over Pico Boulevard. Fire Deputy Chief David Perez told the committee the department believes NFPA 502 applies to the Pico Passage analysis and said the site's longer span and clearance characteristics make its modeling and mitigation needs different from other local projects. Perez said fire models used so far include scenarios up to a 250‑megawatt design fire and that project assumptions could be reduced to a 100‑megawatt design in some analyses, but that additional review is required and the joint venture has been asked to respond to questions.
Perez and project staff said an unresolved issue is that the existing West Hall has older smoke control systems; the city cannot certify the new building if systems that connect to it do not meet current high‑rise standards. "We can't even certify the new building if the West Hall is connected to it and the West Hall doesn't work," Perez said, warning that needed upgrades could affect cost and schedule.
The committee also heard that 16 relief‑event notices have been filed and six advanced to claims; staff outlined a process that requires early notification and sets a 60‑day window for a relief‑event claim followed by a 45‑day owner and city review period intended to surface issues early so they can be worked through rather than building up into late, costly claims.
Council members asked for follow‑up reports on relief events, Caltrans engagement on signage, and detailed landscape plans. The committee voted to note and file the CAO's May 13 and June 9, 2026 reports and requested an update at the next monthly meeting.
