Houston19514

I guess I have not seen the Chicago design. I don't recall ever seeing a Trump Building anywhere that was noteworthy for its architecture, design, decorating, or any other category (other than the all-important category of massaging the ego, and filling the bank account, of The Donald).

Yes, that is correct. From their website: Club Quarters are private, full service hotels for member organizations designed for the business traveler Go to www.clubquarters.com for more information The Houston Club Quarters also has furnished apartments for lease, IIRC

Great news! The Intermodal Center location is looking better and better. While Houston has changed incredibly over the past 5-10 years, it is looking like the changes over the coming 5-10 years will be even more amazing. As an aside, I've always wondered why so many Houstonians seem so averse to attaching names to areas/neighborhoods. Names can help provide the much-sought-after "sense of place" and help to add a little bit of soul to a city.

Great Hizzy, I think you are exactly correct.

But, there IS a movie theater downtown.

LOL I never said "sweatheart" I apologize if I forgot to use a quote mark on an occasion or two. Cutting and pasting does not automatically insert quote marks. And once again, we see no response whatsoever to the facts and arguments presented in my post It's been fun, but I have to get to bed to be well-rested as I am preparing to depart tomorrow on a trip to thirty-seven foreign countries on four continents and several sub-continents. Good night and God Bless.

LOL I can't believe you are actually now attacking me for spelling... my misspellings of the words "teh" and "attackes" were direct quotes from your posts. I wanted to quote you precisely, so I did it by cutting and pasting. My whole point, all along, has been that Terminal A is not the last terminal that is to be redone into "banks" of gates from the current "banjo" design," as you stated. The truth (the fact, if you will) is that Terminal A has already been redone into banks of gates from the former banjo design (you keep talking about underground systems, the existence of which I am well aware and you keep conveniently ignoring that the topic is "gates" which I have not yet seen in an underground configuration, even in Atlanta... the reason I ignored your comments about the underground portions of the Atlanta airport is that your comments were irrelevant. I had asked if you had ever seen underground gates and you responded by telling me that Atlanta has undergound baggage handling and passageways. Yes, and Seattle has a space needle... ), and Terminal B will be redone into banks of gates from their current banjo design, therefore, by simple deduction, we can see that Terminal B, not A is the last terminal that is to be redone into banks of gates from the current banjo design. Go back to the beginning of our discussion, you will see that was the point from the start. Go to the Master Plan, you will see that I am correct. And by the way, I never said in any post that IAH has no underground ops. Now, you are apparently trying to avoid admitting your error by stating that you had also noted Terminal B would be changed. Nice try. You earlier admitted that it would be changed, but in some mysterious "different" plan, which somehow didn't constitute redoing it into banks of gates. As I've stated repeatedly, the plan is there for all to see in the Master Plan. Sure looks like banks of gates to me. I've been ignoring all of the other statements about the undergound systems, etc etc etc, because, as I said before, it's tangential to the issue of whether Terminal A is the last terminal that will be redone into banks of gates.... I don't see any way for either of us to prove what we believe to be the case regarding the details of the underground systems. I have gotten my information from people who have worked in Terminal A baggage handling, but I have no way to prove it. And you don't have any way to prove what you're saying either. If you do, I'd love to see it. I'm genuinely curious. But, as I said, it's irrelevant to the issue we were discussing As for pointing out personal attacks, how about these: "well "teh" spell man..." "You have shown nothing but a lack of understanding which does not suprise me after reading all of your posts here. " constant use of you favorites "kiddo" and "kid" "people like you, simpletons if you will," "look out from your RJ window (that is the round thing made of glass and plastic" "I would type slower if I could HAHA." "Sorry kiddo. I am just curious as too why it bugs you? Do you have airport issues?"

<yawn> If you don't need "personal attackes", why do your posts consist of little BUT peronsal attacks? Please, go look at the Master Plan, Terminal Development, Phase I. I just proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that your initial statement (which is what this whole thread is about) was incorrect. Everything that followed is tangential (mostly me presenting my understanding of the facts and you throwing out personal attacks.) Again, the simple fact, which is, indeed a stubbon thing: The plan for Terminal B is to remove the banjos and replace them with banks of gates. Please, go take a look at the master plan. The fact that they plan for it to be RJ focused is irrelevant. Terminal B is RJ focused now as well. The fact remains that the rj-focused banjos will be removed and replaced with rj-focused banks of gates. Again, please go look at the Master Plan, Terminal Development, Phase I. You will surely understand then that you are mistaken. For your convenience, here's a link: http://web.houstonairportsystem.org/iahmasterplan/frame.htm Then click on previous and future meetings: Then click on Stakeholder Meeting #4: Scroll down and click on "Terminal Boards" Scroll down to "Terminal Development - Phase 1"

Spin it, man, spin it. Simple fact: The plan for Terminal B is to remove the banjos and replace them with banks of gates. (See the Master Plan, Terminal Development, Phase I) Thus, very clearly, Terminal B, and not Terminal A, is the "last one that is to be redone into "banks" of gates from teh current "banjo" design." As to the rest of your rant, I'll let others (including the board moderator) read the thread and determine who has engaged in peronsal attacks.

Now there's some breaking news hot off the presses ;-)

Yes, indeed, facts are facts. And I can't help but notice that you neither addressed nor contradicted a single one of the facts in my post, to-wit: The inbound and outbound baggage belts were moved to the new bridges when the new north and south concourses were built. For another, the "basements" were never basements underneath the banjos and were never in the banjo configuration. They were merely tunnels (one to each of the north and south sides I believe). Virtually nothing of the original banjo configuration remains at Terminal A. And BTW, sweetheart, I know what "ops" means. I was just trying to get you to move beyond the very generalized statements you were feeding us (and continue to feed us). Nothing you have posted in this thread indicates that you have ever been on the "ops" side of an airport or know anything about the "ops" side of Bush Intercontinental. To the contrary, your statements that the banjos had basements and that the basements of the banjos are still there indicate you have never been anywhere near the ops sid of Terminal A. Just for S's and G's (as someone like you actually did say), let's review a few facts: Fact: You stated that "Terminal A is the last one that is to be redone into "banks" of gates from teh current "banjo" design. "" (A statement that is clearly, demonstrably, visibly incorrect) Fact: The city started a major renovation of that facility around 1997. During this time the southwest pod (or "banjo") was demolished and construction started on a new, modern south concourse. This concourse opened in 1999, and shortly after the old southeast pod was demolished. Construction then moved to the north side of the facility, and the new north concourse opened there around 2001/2002. (Terminal B, not Terminal A, still has the banjo design.) Fact: When called on this misstatement, rather than admitting error, you tried to back and fill by saying that: "I mean Terminal A's servicing below ground is still in the banjo configuration, " which, of course is not anything at all like what you actually wrote, to-wit: "Terminal A is the last one that is to be redone into "banks" of gates from the current banjo design." Tell me, from your vast knowledge and experience of airport ops, have you ever seen "banks of gates" below ground? ;-) Fact: Terminal A's "servicing below ground" was never in a "banjo configuration." There were no banjo-shaped basements as you suggested. (If you were correct that the underground system was in the banjo configuration, there would surely be four underground compartments, given that there were four banjos. In your latest response/personal attack, you state that "one full underground compartment is left and half of the other," strongly implying that there were only 2, not 4, underground compartments. What happened to the "basements" under the other two banjos, man?

You tell a good story, but I'm calling BS on this one. For starters, the inbound and outbound baggage belts were moved to the new bridges when the new north and south concourses were built. For another, the "basements" were never basements underneath the banjos and were never in the banjo configuration. They were merely tunnels (one to each of the north and south sides I believe). Virtually nothing of the original banjo configuration remains at Terminal A.

Well, now you've finally told me something... (I understand the concept of a basement; it's just that your previous responses told me nothing about what you believe is in these banjo-shaped basements.) So you're saying the baggage is still run from the airfield into the terminal on underground systems beneath where the "banjos" used to be?

I am in total agreement with the comments regarding comparing this to Grand Central Station. Once again the Chronicle does a disservice to the city of Houston. The frequent silly comarisons such as this and the lame comarison of the new park to Cenral Park just seem juvenile and insecure. Sometimes I think the best thing that could happen for the future of Houston is to replace the entire staff at the Chronicle.

I still don't get it. Surely you can explain it better than that. What "ops" are still buried in the banjo configuration?

Don't be ridiculous. I (and I am sure others) are quite aware of the size of Manhattan Island. And any misguided belief that the only "destination" on Manhattan is in downtown or any misguided belief that there are no workplaces, offices, retail stores, residences, restaurants etc, etc, etc. within easy walking distance of GCS is also to completely ignore the realities of NYC. (and, trust me, there is a good deal more within a short walk from GCS than just the UN and the Public Library.) If there are almost no destinations in the GCS neighborhood, I wonder what all of those people rushing in and out of the building were doing every time I've been there. Are they just actors hired to make it look busy? In short, no one even hinted that they believed that ALL of NYC or even all of Manhattan was a "pleasant 2 block walk from" GCS. This is quite contrary to the proposed Intermodal station in Houston, where almost NOTHING wold be a pleasant 2 block walk, and almost every arriving passenger would have to switch to another mode of transportation (other than walking). I think it's probably the best we can hope for, I totally support it, and hopefully, the area around it can grow into a good mixed-use area, so that there can be some pedestrian traffic coming and going from the facility.

I'm sorrry if I'm being obtuse, but I still don't know what that means. What is underground? and why would it be banjo-shaped? ;-)

I think the point really was that the area/neighborhood is a destination, not the building itself. Many people can get off the trains in GCS and walk to their ultimate destination.

What does that mean?

Maybe because the same tired line has been used regarding every war in history? ;-)

Ditto on wishing it could be closer to the core of downtown, so a good portion of arriving passengers could walk away from the station, rather than transferring to another mode. But I guess the increased costs (higher land costs and no doubt sky-high costs of getting all of the rail lines to converge somewhere near the middle of downtown, probably requiring they be in tunnels) probably make such a location totally infeasible. The fact that they are hiring a top-tier architecture/planning firm, indicates they are aiming to build a landmark structure, not just a glorified Greyhound station. I think they are going in the right direction here. Mark me down as a ,

Terminal A's "banjos" were removed several years ago, new concourses were built and the whole terminal was remodeled. The remaining banjoes are in Terminal B, the interior of which has also been completely remodeled. The airport system is developing a 20-year master plan for the airfield and terminals at George Bush Intercontinental, in order to handle double the current traffic. The plan will remove the central terminal buildings of Terminals A, B, and C, build a new consolidated central terminal building and new concourses, and connect them all via an a new high-speed underground train (similar to Atlanta's I suppose). It will be done in phases as needed. Go here to see more: http://web.houstonairportsystem.org/iahmasterplan/frame.htm

I'm not seeing any hate from RedScare in this thread. Far from it.

I think you've overstated it more than a little.

Here's another: Detroit's Campus Martius Park. Only 2 acres! Its amenities include: major fountains and waterwalls ice rink cafe major monuments Lawn light and vine towers two lawn areas sitting gardens two stages all on only 2 acres. and it's surrounded by apparently pretty high-traffic streets. (It actually is making me think more of the possibilities for Holcombe Square.) And they gave it a name! The horror of it all. Those Detroiters are sooo pretentious. ;-)