Warning: Constant ABSPATH already defined in /home/public/wp-config.php on line 27

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/public/wp-config.php:27) in /home/public/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: A Small Victory … https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/ On-line Opinion Magazine...OK, it's a blog Wed, 24 Nov 2010 03:21:31 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.3 By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-54245 Wed, 24 Nov 2010 03:21:31 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=17954#comment-54245 I get really annoyed with the places that have ramps, Steve, except they are too narrow for a wheelchair to fit, and the same for doors inside doctor’s offices. If I build a house, not very likely at this point, I would make it wheelchair accessible because it is easier to get around in even if you aren’t in a wheelchair.

Oh, yes, Jill, it is never their fault. It was so unreasonable of the state legislature to require the building to meet the current building codes regarding efficiency and energy use.

]]>
By: cookie jill https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-54239 Tue, 23 Nov 2010 06:31:21 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=17954#comment-54239 The original courthouse was flattened by the earthquake of 1925 and promptly rebuilt, finally finished right before the bottom went out of the market.

Yeah…truly emphasis on the HOG in the case of the TajCourt. I love how the greedy (when caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar) always seem to blame environmentalists…or unions.

]]>
By: Steve Bates https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-54238 Tue, 23 Nov 2010 06:16:39 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=17954#comment-54238 Heh. Houston’s so-called “Taj Mahal,” the HISD main administration building until 2006 and subsequently sold and demolished, was a boondoggle if ever there was one. On top of that, if you were confined to a wheelchair (as I was for a while), it was very difficult to negotiate. It was a visually attractive building, but all things considered… good riddance.

]]>
By: Bryan https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-54233 Tue, 23 Nov 2010 06:05:31 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=17954#comment-54233 In reply to cookie jill.

Jill, they are putting nearly of forest of mahogany [with the accent on “hog”] in the stupid building, and they are an appeals court. They don’t have trials, they have hearings with a few judges and some attorneys. They need an office building with some conference rooms, not a temple. The only people who will see the inside are the judges and their staff, as most of the work is reading written briefs and writing opinions.

I might go along with good wall paper, but a bathroom and kitchenette for every judge is wretched excess. If they want these kinds of perqs they should have learned to coach football or gone into divorce law.

Hmmm… 1929, must have been completed just before the bottom fell out, because it is too early for the WPA.

]]>
By: cookie jill https://whynow.dumka.us/2010/11/22/a-small-victory/comment-page-1/#comment-54231 Tue, 23 Nov 2010 05:36:31 +0000 http://whynow.dumka.us/?p=17954#comment-54231 We here in Santa Barbara happen to love our “elaborate” courthouse, which leans naturally on the environmentally friendly side.

http://www.santabarbaraview.com/index.php/2010/10/courthouse-night-360-in-the-garden/

But it has been around since 1929.

]]>