new major on the block

Maybe this would be a good choice for an architcture/development firm looking to move their offices or looking to expand.(*hint*hint* I'm available for hire if they are expanding)  I saw this building a few years ago and took some pictures from the ground.

So the Antonov 225 Flew in on the 19th of May and could be seen from Lee Rd. Part of the tail was hanging over the fence alongside the road.  Here are some images. It was still there as of 4pm today, not sure when it was scheduled to leave.

I went to the landing party and it looked huge when landing. But then I drove over to see it at the terminal and, like you, was a little let down. It just didn't look as enormous as I had expected.

Well after spending 10yrs of my youth in San Antonio and hearing the screeching sounds of the C-5 Galaxies every hour flying overhead in regular patterns of touch and go traffic in and out of Kelly AFB and seeing them up close and personal, you pretty much look at other plane and think "thats not soo big".

Never seen a golf cart under D before. Is that Menzies' or LH's?

I believe they came from the continental hanger, they were infront of me while it taxied by. Continental runs alot of golf carts on the ramp.

And a few more if anyone is interested

Well not the best quality but closer than you can normally get

Maybe ill snap a few pics and upload them when i get back to work on fri. Until then ill get back to working on my golf game

If I'm not mistaken I saw this plane today when I came back from my lunch break taxing by the cargo terminal about to leave.

For years now, I've been advocating covering the buses and trains with several layers of marshmallows to soften the blow of impacts, but nobody listens.

For years now, I've been advocating building either subway lines or elevated train lines for more efficient mobility and for safety, but nobody listens.

My daughter started out as an architect major at Rice but later changed majors. Meantime she has graduated and is employed but all her fellow archy students that graduated a year or two ago and are all unemployed. 

lol, I'm one of them. Graduated in August of 09 with my Masters of Architecture and am unemployed. Im actually gonna start on my Law Degree this coming fall, god willing I do great on my LSAT this saturday.

My luck, 3yrs down the line, the economy is still in the can so architecture will still be bad, plus there will be an oversaturation of lawyers which will then force me to Medical school.

I like the idea of a monument of some kind. Perhaps we can steal Huntsville's giant MC 900 Foot Sam Houston.

They've already got their monument... the penitentiary.

900ft statue? Last time i saw it, it was more like 50ft.

But I would also endorse the Buffalo Bayou idea, and yes i'm pretty sure that even Bill Gates could afford that. Wasn't it estimated at a cost of like 20 billion or something? That way the entire buffalo bayou complex that stretches through the cities center makes up Houston's version of Central park, nothing against Discovery Green. Perhaps even line it with low rise and midrise structures on the north and south sides of it as it snakes its way through the city. And along its backside, a rail system that connects UT and DT(NOT THE CURRENT STREET LEVEL VERSIONS!!!) Either elevated(like Chicago's EL) or Subway(ala New York). Only we could do one better by making either version alot more pleasing to the eye.

Probably Joshua Prince-Ramus, he also has an attitude about the term, recently taking stabs at the older set of practicing architects.

http://www.fastcompa...ince-ramus.html

Yeah, I met Joshua Prince-Ramus this summer and hes a no B.S. down to earth kind of guy. Hes concise and to the point when it comes to architecture. Thats probably why he started REX, to get away from being grouped up with that system that he worked under at OMA.

Ok, so lets start with gasoline. It is produced from oil which is produced fields all over the world which:

A. All the easy fields are being used up... YES it is a LIMITED resource.

B. All the other oil is not worth the amount of money to extract it from the ground.

So simple economics tells us that in order to extract that hard stuff from the ground we will eventually have to charge more at the pump in order to make up for the profit margins that the oil companies charge (if you think they will lower profit margins you are sorely mistaken). Thats why 10 years ago gas was .75 cents and now we see it fluctuating between $2-4 bucks. With the current rate of countries becoming "industialized" i.e. China, our cheap gas will not last, that is a fact. There is where we get $10-15, which may be sooner than 15-20 years. So, I'm going to jump out on a limb and say "what about electic cars?!"... Well, it's obvious that there is a niche market for them now. However, that niche market is not going to create the cheap used car surplus that gasoline and diesel autos have now. SO, theres a gap. How long will it take before everyone can afford an electric car??? How long before the current electric grid can support charging those cars? Ok so, you say that gets rid of a few (or more) communters. Lets flip the coin and look at what we drive on, asphault and concrete. Well... asphault is the stuff at the bottom of the barrel at oil refineries, basically a by product which as oil dissappears it will follow in cost. Now concrete, which is a much better product made from mainly crushed limestone BUT making that concrete is pretty energy consuming (hence the reason we use asphault instead). Where does that energy come from? Cheap gas, which in turn causes concrete to follow the rise in gasoline price. The only option to pay for these roads will be to charge for them, just as we see through the outer loop. So as you see the price will rise, by how much? Only time will tell, but it in FACT will rise.

Maybe... although bus lines will also be effected by the rise in gas costs and will hit a point to where they no longer become feasible.

I agree 100%, if you put enough time and money into it subways are possible. There was a reason I used the word feasible. It is NOT feasible to build a subway because of the unearthly amounts of cash and man hours in order to successfully complete it. The more feasible option would be to use existing roadways or construct a street level system.

Are you aware of the effects that $4 gas prices had on our habits as a society in 2008? Do some research, I think you would be surprised.

Edited for LOTS of spelling mistakes...

I really don't see the electric car market taking off anytime soon either. If anything it will fall to the use of bio diesel and such which many are pushing for. In that case that would probably be the main fuel for any transit buses that would service to outter communities. Maybe everyone will have a diesel car or truck to drive. But its still gonna take something more drastic than just switching to alternative fuels or electric vehicles to totally change the mindsets and habits that are practically becoming human nature here in the Houston area. By that I'm referring to getting as far away from the city as possible.

Lol, isn't this called price fixing? Didn't the govt catch Sutherbees and Christies auction houses conspiring to do the same with their business back in the late 90's?

Next 15-20 years. This brings up a good question. Are people going to be willing to pay $10-15 or more per gallon of gas and sit in traffic? My answer would be no. I don't think we will see a sprawl like we have in the past, but quite the opposite. We have begun to see it all over the nation with the revitalization of our downtown and innercity areas because people are living closer to work/play/shopping and don't want to pay huge ammounts in fuel costs to get where they want to go. Think about how cities were structured and where people lived when fuel was too high priced to afford, vertical. You end up with something that looks like most large European cities, and New York. To say that we will be similar to LA as far as sprawl is saying that everything as it is today will continue with no changes.

That being said, an inner city mass transit system with light rail and commuter trains doesnt seem so unlikely. Granted, light rail may not be the best option out there BUT is is a better option than most. Subways I'm going to say are not feasible simply because we have MAJOR, uncontrollable issues with flooding in Houston, which can only be managed and strategically built around. Raised, high speed trains is not a bad idea but you are right in the fact that Houston WILL not afford to put it in, not CAN not afford it but will not. If we were to take a good look at the transit plan they are building our city around, a lot of the contruction they are planning on starting in the next 10 years could be scaled down or eliminated if they redirected traffic to a mass transit system.

I think we will see some big changes in the way we travel over the next couple of decades and this will cause big changes in the way that city planning thinks.

D

But the idea of $10-15 in 15-20 years is plausable if you consider that there would be inflation and other factors. No one right now in this current economy would pay that much, at least not most of us. But even with all the new construction within the city will still never pull in all those millions who live outside of Houston to live an work closer. People down here want their space and are still continuing to move out further and further. The sprawl is continuing and won't stop just because of the "possibility" that gas prices will be that high and a few midrises might sprout up. Looking at the outter reaches of the suburbs shows its stretching out into the prairie lands and woodlands areas.

But lets say out of the blue people start moving into these revitalized areas that are targeted. This process, while good for a certain class of people, hurts others. To go in and practically force out people who have owned their lil homes for years is outrageous. These neighborhoods that have had generations of people growing up there are the areas targeted for such revitalization. This movement of development will force them out, just because they are poorer than the middle class and as such they don't happen to have such a higher standard of up keep that the suburbs do. It will probably become the complete reversal of "white Flight" and actually might just force the lower and lower-middle class to revert to the suburbs and there in start a vicious cycle.

But of course thats not gonna happen because people here, for the most part, will probably stay where theyre at or continue to move out. Maybe some areas will have more move in, but not to the extent as youre comparing to NY or Europe. If anything you will see more bus services out to the suburbs, private and public, similar to The Woodlands Express extending its reach deep into the outter areas of the suburban sprawl. That would be the alternative to the high gas prices you estimated.

BTW subways could work if they actually put a little thought and money into it. Anything is possible, it just costs money to do it, more money than anyone around here is willing to pay for though. But to say its not feasible because of uncontrollable flooding is simply an excuse to avoid the time and money it takes to actually build it.

Lightrail will never reach the level of efficiency needed to service this city. I'm all for public transportation but it just won't happen because it just won't solve the traffic problems here. This city is too spread out, for it to be an option for most. The fact is most of the traffic problems in Houston spawn from the outter suburbs. More people drive 20 to 30 miles into Houston to work and shop which clog the freeways then feeder roads, and such. Even when and of if METRO decides to run their lightrail line out to the suburbs, noone in their right mind is going to jump on a train that does 45mph and stop every minute for a station.

Of course thats where commuter rail comes in right? Well even then, youre still gonna have to get off the commuter rail line, probably in downtown, and either jump on a METRO bus or lightrail to continue on to your destination. The actual time for all this changing modes of transportation coupled with the cost of a ticket, I doubt it will be a single dollar for both commuter rail and then bus or lightrail, will not be worth the hassle. People will still opt to drive by themselves. Even if it was actually cheaper to jump on a commuter rail then to a lightrail or bus to get to work and back everyday, I am willing to bet most people will still refuse to ride because it will still take longer than just sailing down the freeway at 70mph. Sure once you hit rushhour, you might sit because of some accident or two, but depending on what actual time you leave for work, sometimes you miss make it through without a hitch.

Its a great idea for those who live in the inner city who would rather save their vehicles for traveling out of town for trips and vacations but its still limited on where you can go on it at this point. When they finish the lines im sure it will be even more efficient than it is now but, it will still be primarily used for the inner city folks located close to the lines.

Houston, as a city, will probably resemble Los Angeles of today within the next 15 to 20 years, not necessarily in population size, but as far as a similar transportation system trying to cater to urban sprawl. Houston's already spread out over 500 sq mi, but will still have difficulty in managing the traffic that will continue to clog up the freeway system. Yes, people use their system(speaking of L.A.'s system) but not nearly the numbers i'm sure they would like to see or originally expected.

This current system and plan is the most reasonable and "COST EFFECTIVE" system that METRO could get to the citizens of Houston to atleast start to alleviate the problem. I mean its possible that the city of Houston could have had a system that would've ben a web of fast moving subways (like New York) and steel elevated track (like Chicago, I mean El, not monorail like some seem to think when I mention elevated trains) with a mix of High speed elevated commuter rail( MAGLEV like China and a few others) that services from Galveston to Huntsville I-45 corridor, Katy to Baytown and maybe even Beaumont I-10 corridor, Sugarland to cleveland Hwy 59 corridor, and Hempstead to Houston for Hwy 290 etc. Who wouldn't love to just jump on a MAGLEV train say in Katy and want to go to galveston for the day. Leave Katy at 7:30am and be at the main transfer hub right north of Downtown in just about 10 min. Then jump onto the next one out to Galveston that maybe makes 3 stops all the way there. But you still arrive in Galveston by 8:10 or 8:15.

But who am I kidding, integrated systems like these would probably set the city back soo far, the generations growing up in the year 3000 would still be paying it off. Too bad though, it would've definatley put "space city" on the map as far as transporation is concerned in the 21st century. I guess its time to stop daydreaming and face reality, I gotta be to work early in the morning.

In many ways I agree, but thinking back to the blood feud that was the approval for making a rail line, there was no way in hell a much more expensive elevated train plan would have passed, so its kind of a moot point.

It couldn't have been that much though. I mean when you think about it, its just straight steel columns and beams. Theres very little in the process to building it as far as tearing up the streets to lay track. Its almost like putting up billboard foundations and such. Houston has enough of those i can't imagine it really costing the tax payers as much as what the current lightrail projects are. I understand that a system was and is needed but i feel it was almost thrown out there just to make people feel better, and once one line was done, theres no other choice but to add to it in the same manner. If such an elevated system of train was more expensive than this current one then its true what they say, you get what you pay for. Its just one of those things i dislike about Houston and Texas in general, everything is always done half-assed here. Don't get me wrong, i'm a native Texan but still, everything is always screwed up or complex here.

Well in My humble opinion, i think the city of Houston should've followed Chicago's direction and done elevated trains. At least there wouldn't've been as much as a hassle and fuss over it with worrying about how the congestion and construction or tearing streets and putting businesses and homes out to pasture in the process.

I think this one goes well above Cheney. This was ordered by the Masons.

Youre right, We should get Nicolas Cage to help solve this puzzle. After all he did find the national treasure that was hidden by those same conniving masons

As was I...

lol ah. I was gonna say don't group me in with mister topic starter lol. But to go along with your last post, I gratuated with my masters in architecture this past August, that doesn't necessarily make me an expert and a glorified architect to offer an expert opinion for people to take my word over a thousand others. I mean come on, the guy gratuated in 07? Really people, really?

I agree. Nothing is perfect but I would say concrete is definitely better than steel when exposed to heat extremes. By the way, the empire state building has had planes run into it including a B25 bomber. But I'm not suggesting any building be built to specifically hold up to a plane crash. Would be nice though if engineer/architects would research the effects of fire on structural components when designing a structure. If they did there would be no such thing as things like lightweight truss construction. 

Hey, come on its Empire, king Kong couldn't even take it down

One of those 29 experts.. McCoy.. just graduated in 07 with his BS in Civil Eng..... which made him about 15 at the time of the WTC collapse.

How can you not trust such wisdom and experience ?!?!?!

Lol, its sarcasm. I'm intentionally making fun of it, not believing it.

Good post, Jgriff. That's the type of post I was hoping to see in this forum.

Urbanerd, I saw 'jet fuel' in your comment....that's why I said 'Keep in mind, WTC7 was not hit by a jet plane.'

While the jet that hit WTC1 had 10,000 gallons of jet fuel, there was no such amount of fuel that entered WTC7.

Only saturated debris that flew a football field away and crashed through WTC7's windows...causing small ordinary fires.

29 Structural/Civil Engineers Cite Evidence of Controlled Explosive Demolition

http://www.ae911truth.org/downloads/29_Structural-Civil_Engineers_2009-06-17.pdf

Use the magnifying glass to enlarge the text.

OMG!!! So i should take the words of 29 people over actual evidence to the contrary because we all know that these 29 guys have no possible political agenda whatsoever?!?!

Its hard to use logic and facts to explain events to people who are gullible to such opinions. These people tend to believe that there has to be something fishy that caused this because appearantly its totally impossible for 9/11 to have happened the way it did. To them, it restores some evidence of sanity in their minds while they exist and live in an insaine world.

I've had the same discussion with two members of my family about this and they still believe in this fallacy of "controlled demolition", and it being an "inside job". They have to want to analyze it themselves to actually understand the facts, not just have it spoon fed to them. "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink" pretty much sums up most people who buy into the conspiracies.

I have no idea.

Well someone needs to clear this up and find out officially. Obviously the owners of the building seem to think its as tall as they say it is as well as the rumer about it being originally planned as an 80 story tower and such about the FAA. It seems to be up in the air. Until someone shows concrete facts about this building, and i mean like actual survey measurements or the actual blueprints or even an interview with I.M. Pei, i have no clue who to believe. If Hines is saying it then im gonna start to believe their facts seeing as they own it.

Definitions of seedy vary so much. I stayed in a place that I found perfectly fine, but I have no doubt some would call it seedy.

You could always try a hostel. I stayed at one for a week back in may, The Village Inn, it wasn't seedy. Was like $41 dollars a night or so. It was a great place and great location in the east village. Not exactly a place for privacy cause you share your room with up to 5 other people but there are lockers and they keep the upkeep very well. Most who go there are forigners from europe so it makes for interesting conversations. I plan to use it again the next time i visit NYC. And its right around the block from the green and yellow lines. And a 24hr Rays pizza place sits on the corner Another great feature is the new Cooper Union Bldg is right there too, good architecture imo. Only catch is you need a passport to stay there but you cant beat the prices for Manhattan, you'd save more money staying there and have enough to spend on other things.

Well i was helping a friend move into their new home north of Willis and we all ordered from this little place in town called Pizza Shack. It was very delicious. Actually reminded me of Rays Pizza in NYC that i had back in May. My favorite hands down, But the next best would gotta be Pizza Shack there in Willis. Not exactly convenient as far as the location seeing as its like 45 miles north of Houston but a definate must stop for those weekend fisherman on lake Conroe or Motorcyclists that like the weekend travel north.