The Stranger slams Seattle City Hall building
The Stranger, Seattle’s alternative weekly, is notorious for being especially skeptical of… well, everything. In this week’s issue, the paper takes on Seattle City Hall in honor of the announcement that Seattle has more LEED certified buildings than any other city in the country (see my post below on that).
Erica C. Barnett’s article concentrates on the building’s solar panels, which according to The Stranger, were never purchased or hooked up, and the “splash effect” of waterless urinals. To read what The Stranger has to say, click here.
This isn’t the first time the seat of Seattle government has faced harsh criticism. In July 2005, the Seattle PI blasted the new building for its energy use. To read that story, click here. The DJC wrote a story about those claims in 2005 here. This February, I wrote a story about the future of LEED and lawsuits here, which looked at the PI’s City Hall allegations.
The point is, these issues are out there and bring to light problems in the green building world, especially in LEED certification, which does not currently look at how a building lives up to its promises, or performs over time.
What do you think? If you work in City Hall, what is your experience? If you work with green projects, are these problems more commonplace than most realize?
Most importantly, if The Stranger’s claims hold water…. was a green city hall worth your tax dollars? Is it better to have a LEED-gold building with problems, or no LEED building at all? Let me know what you think!
Tags: LEED, Problems, Projects, Seattle, Seattle City Hall
Loading ...
April 24th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Its amazing how much implied responsibility “LEED” has! The writers of the linked articles act as if “LEED” were a governing body and not just a simple metrics in which to assess and compare green building design across the nation.
Failures due to design, equipment failure, dishonesty of the owner, gaming of LEED points, etc. are on the conscience of the specific project and not for LEED to govern or be responsible for.
Failures due to pioneering work that become a lesson learned should be applauded and addressed in a positive light. We cannot progress as an industry if we do not evolve and media supporting that positive evolution helps the movement.
April 25th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Late yesterday afternoon, I got a fascinating reply to this topic in my innbox from Anne Whitacre, a senior associate at Gehry Partners in Los Angeles. Anne’s response will be written about in my next post, and her full letter will be published as a letter to the editor. Anne is a full time specifier at Gehry, but worked in Seattle for 30 years.
Among her comments, she said, “I simply do not understand the bally-hooing of LEED buildings. From a design professional’s perspective, there are “good” buildings and there are “bad” buildings, and the procuring of a LEED rating does not automatically turn a “bad” building into a “good” one.”
Stay tuned for more!