Once again, futurists seek to provide an economic and psychological boost to our waning progress. And once again, another study is commissioned to evaluate the viability of the Civic Center Complex. With leases on current city-occupied buildings ready to expire, proactive steps are being taken to evaluate the present and future practicality of continuing as is or taking a leap into the future. Numerous specialized consultants have recently been engaged to crunch complex numbers associated with various short- and long-term scenarios. What was found was not a surprise to anyone. The existing buildings contain a great deal of asbestos (a known carcinogen), mechanical systems working significantly past their life expectancy, a decaying roof, outdated lighting, heating and cooling systems and dysfunctional and redundant work space environments. Moreover, they don’t meet many current fire and safety codes. Portland’s Gerding Edlen Development Co. proposes to build a 34-story City Hall, at a cost of between $179 million and $231 million, with a design that surpasses the requirements to attain a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) platinum rating–the highest level of United States Green Building Council certification. The iconic, intelligently designed venue would be a model for sustainability amid its rooftop wind turbines, integrated photovoltaic solar panels, an on-site water treatment and reclamation system, hydronic heating and cooling systems and a thermal storage system to reduce peak energy demands. The design incorporates green roofs, native drought-tolerant landscaping, rainwater harvesting, natural ventilation and solar shading. The goal: The new City Hall would produce more energy than it consumes. San Diego has it all–the finest weather, stunning geography, delightful people and unsurpassed potential. So why do some say San Diego lacks a creative vision to make our town rank among world-class cities? Could it be the attributes that make San Diego so desirable also contribute to our failure to craft an ideal metropolis? Do we create a place for people or allow people to stop the future in its place? Do we hal the future or hold on to our past? “The current [City Hall] building is a disaster waiting to happen. Do we place a Band-Aid on the building in hopes to save money later? I think not,” said Bill Sauls, of M2i. Diego Velasco (M2i) eloquently answered, “Our spectacular geography and unique natural environment should be the best source of inspiration for how we build our city. If we can recognize this and pay homage to it, we can achieve great things.” Over the last 15 years, modern buildings, some extremely striking, have been sprouting up all over Downtown. Yet in the center of it all meekly hides our Civic Center complex. In fact, policies that affect our daily lives, and our very future, are being handed down by decision makers who work in frumpy and dowdy buildings constructed in the mid-1960s, buildings past their prime. That’s a compelling reason to rebuild the center of our government, but it’s not the real reason. Economically and psychologically, it makes sense. Our city deserves better. A world-class city needs a world-class place for the people. Sandra Simmons, who writes Downtown News’ Life in the City column, is a 17-year resident of Downtown. Her column will be presented in its regular format in August.