Public Safety Building is greenest of the green in the country

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • GreenDude Portland, OR
    Nov. 15, 2013 1:26 a.m.

    First off, it's LEED, not LEEDS. Second, LEED buildings increase productivity nearly 16% because of the increased daylight and another 9% due to better ventilation. (I don't know about you, but I want my police, fire, and dispatch as productive as they can be!). Third, this is earthquake proof and operational after a magnitude 7.5 earthquake. You kinda want the people in this sort of building to be there for you in a disaster, don't ya? Fourth, the ROI on LEED buildings is pretty solid. And, finally, all the taxpayers did was approve the the municipal bond - a security. So, no taxpayers are actually "paying" for this building anyway. If anything, since the the portion that taxpayers will pay - utilities, will be smaller, this actually is a win-win. Public funds (taxes) did go to build Rio Tinto and Energy Solutions Arena (the Delta Center). Interesting fact.

  • mcdugall Murray, UT
    Nov. 12, 2013 3:21 p.m.

    @DN Subscriber 2 - Is any cost that is too much for you to pay for the chance for residents on Salt Lake County to have the "luxury" of breathing cleaner air? If more organizations and local governments took the lead as SLC has, the air and quality of life will increase for everyone in the valley.

  • Say No to BO Mapleton, UT
    Nov. 12, 2013 1:32 p.m.

    This is what institutions do these days...including churches.
    Secularism continues to win the battle.
    But someone gets to check it off as being green-compliant and the bragging rights for the brochure. What's a few million among friends?

  • Tajemnica West Valley, Utah
    Nov. 12, 2013 1:29 p.m.

    Clearly none of the previous commenters know how much maintenance and operational costs are incurred in buildings of this size. Sure it will take a few years to make up the difference but it won't be too long. Props to SLC for this. (Coming from a super conservative that thinks environmentalism is usually just a laughing matter.

  • Fitz Murray, UT
    Nov. 12, 2013 12:32 p.m.

    Salt Lake City pushed for a LEEDS Platinum Certification, and they got it. But the cost of $125 Million is way out of proportion to what the taxpayers should have paid. Had SLC stayed with a LEEDS Silver Certification, the cost would have been in the $40 Million range. It will take a long time to make up the $85 Million difference in O&M costs. There is no way the City can tell you all the upgrades will function as represented, nor how often they will require repairs or maintenance, and so many other unanswered questions. This is ground breaking, meaning there is no track record of any this working.

    If SLC had gone with LEEDS Silver, then the evidence room, which was left out, would have been part of this project. The City used the evidence room to sell this project to the taxpayers, who foolishly bought it.

    Taxpayers should demand new buildings be built to sustainable standards. But taxpayers should also demand that they keep the costs in check. The Legislature should pass a law limiting all government entities within Utah to LEEDS Silver Certification; allowing Gold or higher ratings to be done through private donations.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Nov. 12, 2013 12:00 p.m.


    Now, how much MORE did we taxpayers pay for this "green" building over the cost of the same number of square feet of usable space built in the traditional manner? What is the difference in operating cost and maintenance over the life of the building?

    Being green is great, if you are a frog, but as payoff to demands of environmentalists arguing that it is needed because "junk science" says so, amounts to paying ransom demands when no one has been kidnapped.

    If the numbers make it a good deal for the taxpayers, then I applaud all the cool "green stuff." But, if those features just run up the total costs, then we need to fire everyone connected with this Taj Mahal.