FREE
Subscriptions:
Quick Links:
:: Print Edition
:: Digital Edition
:: eNewsletters
:: Reader Service
:: Webcasts
:: White Papers
:: Award Programs
:: Store

Site Search
Powered by Zibb

Sponsored By
Supplier Search
Products/Services
Companies

Site Sponsors

Directories
Office Furniture
Computer Desks
Canopies
Awnings
Cabanas
Easi-Set Industries
Fabric Structures
Tension Structures Furniture Store
Honeywell
Nora® Rubber Flooring
Office Chairs
Alcan
Flooring
NFBA



Letters





Seattle City Hall is not the 'energy hog' that has been portrayed

In your recent news story on the new green Seattle City Hall (BD&C September 2005, p.9) you report that the facility is an "energy hog" and it consumes "up to 50% more electricity than the larger building it replaced."

One of my colleagues looked into this and learned that the new city hall has six elevators instead of the four that insufficiently served the old building. It also houses a new television station that broadcasts city business, and has many more computers, copy machines, and other modern electronic systems. In addition, it has been designed for extensive public use, with meeting rooms and open public spaces that are used during the evening and on weekends.

It appears that simply comparing the electric bills of the two buildings is not an appropriate measure of energy efficiency. Has there been an evaluation of how well the building is fulfilling its program, including the increased public use? That would be more interesting. The coming winter's gas bill may get some attention.

Also, note that not all of the green building technology is aimed at energy use. Presumably, the building has been built with materials that can be replaced in nature and also recycled; its glazing systems probably perform much better than those in the original buildings; and, although it contains more plumbing fixtures than the old building, each one has water-conserving features.

Edna E. Heatherington , Baltimore

Credit where it's due

We were delighted to receive a Grand Award for the Essex County Courthouse restoration in your annual Reconstruction Awards program (BD&C October, p. 20). However, there was one omission that needs to be corrected: Cobra Construction Company of New Jersey was responsible for the infrastructure improvements to the courthouse, which created the fire safety, environmental comfort, and security conditions to enable the judiciary to function in this building. Hall Construction, which was listed as the general contractor, was responsible for the restoration of decorative finishes and artwork.

Michael J. Mills , FAIA, Partner, Farewell Mills Gatsch Architects, LLC, Princeton, N.J.

 

Have Something to Say?

Send your "Letters to the Editor" to: Robert Cassidy, Editor-in-Chief, at rcassidy@reedbusiness.com.


  

© 2008, Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All Rights Reserved.




E-mail a friend Printer-friendly version



Talk Back

There are no comments posted for this article.

POST A COMMENT ON THIS ARTICLE