COMMONWEALTH SAVINGS BUILDING

Commonwealth Savings Building. Photo by John Eng.

After engaging in a two-year feasibility study in collaboration with the Conservancy, the owner of the Commonwealth Savings Building in North Hollywood will proceed with the building’s demolition. 

Also known as Allstate Savings (now Citibank), the 1961 building at 5077 Lankershim Boulevard was one of the first high-rise commercial structures built in the San Fernando Valley. 

Designed by architect Gerald Bense, this distinctive building has long been recognized as an important example of mid-century office design. The building was included in the Modern Committee’s 2000 tour, “How Modern Was My Valley,” as well as in a session on Modern office buildings at the 2007 California Preservation Foundation conference. 

In 2007, the building’s owner, Chandler Partners, announced plans to demolish the Commonwealth Savings Building and redevelop the site. The current version of the development plan includes a five-story building with 11,200 square feet of commercial space, 156 residential units, and two levels of underground parking.

The Conservancy launched an aggressive yet unsuccessful campaign to designate the building as a Los Angeles Historic-Cultural Monument. In September 2007, the city’s Cultural Heritage Commission voted four-to-one against recommending designation.

Chandler Partners then reached out to the Conservancy, starting a dialogue that ultimately produced an agreement to work together to evaluate alternatives to demolition. 

Chandler Partners funded a feasibility study to determine the costs of upgrading the building for continued use as office space. The study was prepared in a collaborative process, with the Conservancy providing technical assistance regarding financial incentives, design issues, and code compliance.

Prepared by consultants selected by the Conservancy, the study concluded that rehabilitation would yield a very low rate of return on investment—far lower than prevailing standards in the development industry.

After a thorough review by the Conservancy, the inescapable consensus was that rehabilitation could not provide a reasonable return, even under the most optimal assumptions. 

This deeply regrettable outcome underscores the technical challenges of preserving certain 1960s structures. We will use what we’ve learned through this difficult process in our efforts to address these challenges and continue advocating for the preservation of our rich 1960s heritage.