View Single Post
Old Posted Dec 10, 2009, 9:16 AM
urbanlife's Avatar
urbanlife urbanlife is offline
A before E
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Milwaukie, Oregon
Posts: 10,928
Originally Posted by scleeb View Post
I hate to admit it, but I think these Senators make a compelling point. From the day this project was announced I was wondering the same thing. The cost of new construction was at, or below, the proposed renovation cost. If the object it to go green, imagine the efficiencies and improvements that would be gained by starting from the ground up. I know the "greenest" building is the one that is already built, but this renovation seems like a missed opportunity to me.
Well McCain can go F* himself on this one. Granted he is from Arizona and tear down and start from the ground up is how they like to do it down there. From a structural standpoint there is nothing wrong with this building...but the envelope is basically a huge energy leak...not to mention most of the energy that the building uses is being consumed through its lights. None of these issues warrant the need to tear down and start over.

If they did start from ground up, the only right thing to do would be to recycle over 90% of the original building back into the new building which would make the final price tag much higher than this....then we would have to listen to old McCain crying about us wanting too much money. The way I see it, I vote for senators that try to bring federal money to my state, not turn it away.
Reply With Quote