Our Houston teams have broken our hearts on more than one occasion. The oilers left. The Astros can't buy a game, but demanded a new stadium, The Rockets dumped the Summit, demanded a new stadium, The Texans demanded Reliant Stadium. Nobody wants to drive an old car anymore. Nobody want to live in an old beatup house either. Lets make it a flea market, Hell lets just park all the Metro buses inside. Now we're talking. Look at whats going on in our neighborhoods. The south loop area is next. Greed speeks louder than history in this town. Close your eyes if you stand the sight of blood.

Save the Dome!! Respectful, adaptive re-use is preferable to destruction. It's close enough to the Medical Center for some type of research facility. Maybe it could function as a full scale model of a Space Station evironment.

See Howard Hill's comment on 02/25/2005. He should be writing for a major publication. Great storytelling and point making. I thing a person outside the field of Architecture would find Howard's comments enlightening. P.S. I have never met Howard Hill.

This is a tough one. The spatial impact on entering the domed area remains a "knock your socks off" experience which is hard to beat and which would be tragic to lose...but none of the proposed uses, to date, have an equal effect on my footwear...and I have no new idea to contribute. Changing the subject a bit, tho still dealing with a stadium--one which is not a public property but which is much finer architecture...how many are aware of the proposed modifications to Rice Stadium which could be very destructive architecturally? Voices should be raised in this regard and those who have stroke should use it.

I cannot believe that demolition is even being considered.

I have taken the opportunity to read most of the responses, and it seems an almost unison cry to save the dome in some manner, thus preserving it for future generations. Being a sports fan myself, I realize the history the dome has to Houston beyond obvious fact that it forever changed the stadium typology. Memorable events occurred there from the greatest face-off in college basketball history (Lew Alcindor's UCLA versus Elgin Balyor's UH), to the struggles of the Astros and Oilers as we lived and died with their games, to Rodeos unlike anywhere else. All of us in the generations that truly experienced the dome have individual memories of this structure, and we all know the historic significance of the eighth wonder of the world.

There is a school of thought that leads us inexorably towards saving this piece of history, but the contrary school would remind you that (as some one already mentioned) it now sits as an empty shell of its former glory. While the Roman Coliseum shares a typological connection with the Astrodome, they are separated by time and culture. The Coliseum saw regular action for hundreds of years throughout the Imperial days of Rome and even more so at the end, while the Astrodome has lasted only forty years in an age where everything moves faster. In Europe the building is permanent, sometimes to the point of being sacred, and they are much less likely to be destroyed and more likely to be reused (unless of course youre just carving a boulevard through a Jewish neighborhood for the sake of urbanity, but I digress). Houston is a disposable city, existing in the zeitgeist mentality that created it, and we fool ourselves by thinking we have to save something for the sake of history. But are we really saving the right things in this historical lipservice? I can hardly answer that question for the collective, but it is a question we each must answer. What constitutes architecture worth saving? If your answer includes an amazing engineering feat that changed the face of stadiums worldwide, then the Astrodome not only must be saved, but preserved without intervention.

Everyone in this forum has a soft spot for a ruin, otherwise we wouldnt be clamoring to save something we all know very well is neither beautiful nor inherently architectural. We feel this connection, this sense of identity with the Astrodome although it hasnt been an icon for the city in many years, if it ever was one at all. While our children will ultimately know of the dome and maybe some of its history, it will never be an attraction for tourism. Other stadiums have been able to attract that stream, and many classics are being refitted for new action, like Chicagos soldier field, due to a heartfelt clamor over the need to preserve it. The dome has never truly attracted tourism, in spite of its legacy and had Houstonians felt strongly for its preservation, they would have never left it to rot as it has. It has been said that if you love something, then you have to set it free, and it is time for us to let go of our strangely ambiguous emotional attachment to this structure and let it rest in peace where it belongs: in the glory and splendor of our minds, our hearts and most importantly our memories. She has been on life support for too long, let's do the right thing by her: we owe her that much.

I'm for finding a use for it. It is a strong part to Houston's history.

With all of the creativity embodied in the membership of our Chapter, I'm confident a viable re-use can be defined and developed. This structure, while not necessarily an architectural 'masterpiece' it is nontheless synonomous with this City and deserves to be preserved to serve a new, higher purpose. The Harris County Sports Authority should be inundated with 'demands' from our members to save this structure, once known, around the world, affectionately as 'The Eighth Wonder of The World'. Long Live The Astrodome in its future, new embodiment.

The Astrodome is definitely a piece of Houston history that needs to be preserved. More recent stadiums may have overshadowed its architecture, but it was a landmark when it was built. After all, without the Astrodome we wouldn't have "Astroturf."

Indeed, it would be a shame to destroy the 8th Wonder of the World, one of Houston's few landmarks remaining. Save it. Let's not continue to tear down our history.

I'm for continued work to preserve it. There has to be some alternative use or a way to retrofit that building and make all of that great space useful.

RUDE NEIGHBORS: RELIANT STADIUM

Have you ever experienced the pleasure of new neighbors moving in, and then discovering that they are intolerably rude? Mowing the lawn at 8:00 am on Sunday morning, loud music blaring out of the outdoor speakers at all hours, maybe a big, constantly-barking dog. How about the day you go out and discover that a car has appeared in their front yard and it's up on blocks. In a few years, it's rusting. When you mention any of this, it is belligerently pointed out that it's their property and they can do anything they please, and if you don't like it, well, they'd love for you to meet the dog up close and personal! Sadly, this isn't all that uncommon a story.

Buildings can be ugly, new neighbors too. Meet the 1000 pound gorilla of Rude Neighbors: Reliant Stadium.

Reliant Stadium is a huge presence in our landscape. It can be seen from, literally, miles away along several view corridors such as along Braes Bayou west of the Loop. Its sheer size commands attention and demands that you respond to it in some way. It sits, like a lump in the parking lot, muscling its way into our collective consciousness in a strident, aggressive way. The Ford Excursion of buildings.

In this article, it is not my intention to criticize the building itself. Certainly, it's a technologically superior facility. Structurally, it's a tour-de-force of sophistication and sheer power. It's probably a fine venue for football and the Rodeo, and the removable grass playing field is a fascinating solution to the multi-use nature of the place. I've heard, though not experienced firsthand, that as an arena concert facility, it leaves quite a bit to be desired. But then, so do most large arenas used for music. All that said it's a very, very rude neighbor.

Pity the poor Astrodome. Once the pride of Space City, it now sits, forlorn - the forgotten stepchild, the unwanted toy, the aged relative that's become just too much trouble. In its day, the Astrodome saw substantial criticism for being a lone icon in a sea of parking. While true enough, this criticism was leveled at a time when Modern architecture was seriously out of fashion. Buildings that weren't either historically derivative, or didn't fit in to a close, urban context, were being criticized all over the nation. In fact, the Astrodome, designed in the early 1960's, stood as a fine monument of modern architecture. What a fabulous symbol for Houston! Space City! We positively lived in the future, and the Astrodome was our shining star, our rocket ship.

Indeed, it sat alone, on a vast plane, a geometric purity resting on a clean slate - the future, waiting to be written. The lone monument was a hallmark of International Style, or "modern", architecture. Standing alone, like a heroic human upright and virtuous, the modern architectural building was an analog for modern Man, elevated by science and technology -freed from the turmoil and degradations that were the plight of pre-modern humanity. Unfortunately, this quality of standing alone was at once the International Style's most brilliant achievement and its ultimate downfall. As it turned out, the International Style played right in to the hands of corporate America. The lone building became the perfect vehicle for a company to create a corporate identity, and it didn't hurt that people quickly found out "modern" buildings could be built cheaper, too. Coupled with a natural boom in construction after World War II, this resulted in an absolute proliferation of "modern" style buildings. When you got a whole bunch of these buildings close together in a city, each and every one of them trying to be a lone hero, well, you ended up with a kind of urban wasteland with incoherent open space rather than a human-scaled, comfortable urban street life. At its best though, when the type of building merited the heroic quality that modern architecture could do so well, International Style buildings could be positively brilliant. Coming as it did, in the age before corporate naming rights, the Astrodome is such a building. It didn't stand for consumption, corporate greed, or the privileges of luxury sky boxes. Rather, it truly was an egalitarian symbol of what we in Houston felt made us great. It was a monument for Houston's Everyman. It was big! It was bold! It shouted to the world that we had arrived - the city of the future!

And now it sits, squashed. I would venture that, as magnificent as our new stadiums truly are - and I think Minute Maid Park is finding its way very nicely into our new downtown life - none of them will ever enter into our collective psyche as deeply or significantly as did the Astrodome. Where Minute Maid Park and the new Toyota Center work very well within the context of the "new" downtown, Reliant Stadium takes a very strident, non-contextual tone. The problem is really one of size and location. Reliant Stadium crouches like some great, gargantuan beast, jaws open, ready to clamp down on its unsuspecting prey. It literally looms over the Astrodome and completely crushes it with its sheer mass. Could it have been done more respectfully, or less intrusively? Could it have been a better neighbor?

As an architect, I do not like to second-guess the work of other architects. Every project has numerous difficulties to overcome, and people might be surprised at how little influence architects sometimes have over the outcome. In a project as massive as Reliant Stadium, the problems were undoubtedly enormous - some probably insurmountable. It is a juggling and balancing act between many variables - budget, function, architectural design, parking, mechanical systems, features, structural limitations, building codes, safety requirements, and this doesn't even get into the added difficulties of the participant's egos and political agendas. It is an extremely tough job for any architect to resolve all of these variables into one, beautiful, architectural whole. Clearly, though, some do it better than others. One does wonder what decision chain lead to Reliant Stadium being located just where and how it is, and whether other locations and orientations on the site were studied in terms of their overall quality. Was it possible to place the building on the property in a way that was not so intrusive to the Astrodome? I'm not sure, but I also wonder if anyone even cared. Could the building have been less massive? The Astrodome is actually sunk in to the ground substantially, which is one of the reasons why its proportions are so elegant. Reliant Stadium sits perched on the surface of the earth - a decision necessitated surely by the requirements of the removable, grass playing field, but it has the effect of making the building a hulking presence in the landscape. Could the retractable roof structure have been more elegantly designed, rather than having the current kind of "jaws-of-death" effect? Probably, but given the overall size of the building, it really wouldn't have made much difference.

The whole presence of Reliant Stadium just smacks of inconsideration. It practically screams its lack of concern for where it is, and what's around it. You can almost imagine it making a permanent, and very rude, gesture aimed squarely at the old Astrodome. And now we are wringing our collective hands and trying to decide what is to become of the old dame, er, dome. Will it be transformed into some massive commercial development? A casino? An annex to Astroworld? A museum? An indoor city? All have been proposed at one time or another. There's been a somewhat secretive request for proposals from developers, that many thought was ill-considered, and in fact turned out to be a quiet failure since nobody really wanted to take on the effort. A truly considerate process would have started with the thought that the Astrodome held a special place in Houston's built history. It would have placed a high level of importance on how the new stadium would impact the presence of the old. And it would have begun with serious consideration given as to what kind of use the Astrodome could be put once it was no longer needed as a stadium. Who knows what discussions were held, but the results sure do suggest that these things weren't taken very seriously. In fact, the whole process of creating Reliant Stadium seems to have happened with relative haste, and sort of without a lot of fanfare. There sure wasn't the great public debate, ending in a referendum, which preceded the construction of Minute Maid Park. Well, the Super Bowl and the fact that we were all held hostage - no new stadium, no new football team. Period. both drove the process.

And so, the Astrodome is quiet now - alone and seeming more and more forgotten. Once a shining symbol of Houston's power, it's now lucky to host the occasional monster-truck rally. What has been done is truly sad, but all does not have to be lost. It is still possible to imagine the Astrodome standing proud. Perhaps, in the way that good fences make good neighbors, there is some way to cushion the impact of the hulking beast by new development. I can see the Astrodome resurrected to some of its former glory. Imagine the vast sea of parking being put partially underground, and perhaps some of it into parking structures on the other side of the new stadium, and the Astrodome reclaiming its image as a heroic icon in a pure landscape - but this time, a landscape of green parklands and places for people to go. What would happen in the Astrodome? I don't know, but I do fancy the idea of the Space Park - it would almost be like coming full-circle. Our Rocket Ship, come back home! I also think developing a mixed-use program of residential, retail, and entertainment could actually work very well in the building, and in the area. The Astrodome may be visually squashed by its rude neighbor, but it's still a very large building and can absorb a lot of uses.

I don't know about you, but I'm hoping our Sports Authority and Harris County suffer an attack of the Visionaries, and seize this one opportunity we have to soften the blow caused by Reliant Stadium and to create something truly special for Houston.

Return the Astrodome to its status as Houston's shining star!

A marvel, to some, it still remains. Like a particular scent, it evokes memories with certain Houstonians, those who remember when the Astro's uniforms matched the seats of the stadium they played in, when beer (or Coke) was affordable ("coldest foam in the dome" was the catch phrase for vendors), and the vinyl seats in the station wagon burned when you left that afternoon, following the game&

I'm not sure what it means today, however. Like the Colliseum, it represents a page in time to a certain generation, or generations, that perhaps today, does not resonate as strongly. Unfortunately, that building met the fate of many a good, older building in Houston-the slate wiped clean, the memories erased (do you remember the single palm tree at the entrance?), a new generation.

I certainly do hope it can be saved, and as Bill Neuhaus has mentioned, a use can be found for it, for it is a gracious lady, and deserves to continue living.

Regarding the Dome: It will be a crying shame of this building is torn down! In the disposable society we live in, even landmarks get special dispensation when and if there is enough of a voice......and, sure, enough money. Granted it would not be inexpensive to keep and maintain this building, but surely a coalition can be formed that will make the most of this Houston and world icon. It can be put to good use in so many ways, not the least of which is a huge indoor recreation/hotel facility. That is just the beginning of ideas. What if the Romans had purposely torn down the Coliseum, or the Greeks the Parthenon, or the French the Eiffel Tower......? Not exactly the same, but in the long run, over time, this will be a place that can continue to serve a useful purpose and be an integral part of the young history of Houston. Change is inevitable, but survival is optional. Houston owes it to itself to find a way, or ways, to make this building survive. Yes, I know there is a huge market for scrap steel over in China........let's not fall into that trap with this one....... Just do not get me started on the "rational" of the facilities that have replaced it........ And thus I spoke, Paul

Save it. Radio was talking this morning about the State discussing legalized gambling in cities who approve it by election. As much as I hate gambling, the Astrodome could easily be turned into a Las Vegas type of Casino and is served by the new rail line from Downtown Convention hotels etc. E. Wayne Alderman

I feel that the Astrodome should be Preserved!

I strongly believe the Astrodome, as a significant piece of Houston's (and the nation's)history should not be demolished. But it also should not be relegated to a fast food court or a Quality Inn. My preference would be that an ad hoc committee be formed of civic minded individuals who will search for the highest public good for the building and explore its potential to that end, (not necessarily its most profitable commercial potential.) Except for shopping, Houston is currently a wasteland for tourists and international visitors. Even Space City Houston at NASA has become a huge disappointment (even embarrassment) to the city. I would love to see the Astrodome become a visitor's mecca.

5 suggested Astrodome uses:
Biosphere to simulate a natural rain forest habitat.
Replace with athletic dorm for visiting sports teams.
Replace with retention pond with fountains.
Replace with outdoor sculpture park with Texas or western theme.
Replace with a parking structure with direct access off 610 and improve the entrance to Astroworld.

Astrodome needs to stay!

Yes, the Astrodome should definitely be preserved. It is one of this city's best-known icons and symbolic of our can-do spirit. Houston broke the mold and created the first of a building type that swept the world. It was the perfect solution for its time and culture.

Of all the suggestions I have heard, I like Peter Marzio's best. Create a Houston History Museum housed in one of our strongest symbols. The Dome is large enough to hold any display - standing rocket ships, oil derricks, even entire buildings. Endless archival space for collections. So many efforts and groups could consolidate in one space that would still be large enough for divergent views.

Fund it through private corporate donations and public money. Upfront capital could be kept to a minimum. It could start small and grow as the collection grows.

Almost every city in the world has a venue that celebrates its own history. Houston's gets summarily torn down, shoved into dark closets, divided among disparate organizations or worse, simply discarded and then forgotten. The Astrodome represents a huge opportunity to reverse that tide.

Yes, save the Astrodome.

I definitely think that the Astrodome should be preserved and recognized as an architectural icon of our fair city. It is a testament to providing a solution to the problem our climate sometimes presents - heat and humidity.

Regarding the Astrodome-----at the time it was built they called it "the Eighth Wonder of the World" and now it may be the only one left and we should not allow it to go the way of the others. There is surely an entertainment/ history/adventure venue that could be accommodated as an adjunct to Astroworld. NASA has a great educational space venue, but this one could be much more accessible and more "Buck Rogers" in its thoughts, and address Houston as the greatest and most diverse city in Texas. It looks so tiny compared to Reliant Stadium and that comparison just shows where we have come in only 40 some years. Have them saying.... "Don't miss the dome if you go to Houston!!!!"

The Astrodome opened the same year I was born in Houston, so I have a personal connection with the structure. I think of the Dome as an integral part of the Houston story. It gives a snapshot of the optimism and can-do attitude prevalent in Houston at the time, the attitude that drew enough people to make Houston the fourth-largest city. Although our city's culture has evolved, the embodiment of this part of our history is better captured by the Astrodome than any other structure of the period. It's one of the very few buildings that people outside of Houston know. If we have the political will to complete three new major sports facilities in one decade, we can surely find an appropriate use to save the Astrodome.

My family and I are soccer fans and have attended many Houston Hurricane games in the Astrodome in the 80's. We also attended several L.A. Galaxy games in the Rose Bowl in the 90's when we lived in California. I read your artical twice, to see if I had missed you mentioning the Astrodome as a suitable venue for Major League Soccer. As an architect, I certainly appreciate the architecural significance of the Astrodome, the first long span structure indoor stadium. I understand that Astroturf or "Magic Carpet" is not the ideal playing surface for soccer, especially when players go "thespian," rolling around the grass as if in agony when fouled. However, I believe that the problems of Astroturf could be solved. If MLS really insisted on a grass field, grass pallets could be brought in and out of the stadium. Certainly less expensive than a new stadium! When I watched the USA vs. Mexico soccer match at a full Reliant Stadium last year, I realized that soccer had indeed arrived in Texas. We have a perfectly good Astrodome. Why risk an investment in another stadium, when people would be happy to watch games in the "Eighth Wonder of the World"? "Billed as the Eighth Wonder of the World by Astros' original owner, Judge Roy Hofheinz, the Astrodome was the first ballpark to have a roof over the playing field. It also boasted cushioned orange and red seats, 53 futuristic "Sky Boxes," and a $2-million scoreboard featuring home run extravaganzas, cartoons, and helpful instructions to fans. At first, the Astrodome had real grass. The first Astros game, an exhibition with the New York Yankees, demonstrated that the semitransparent cream-colored panels in the roof made fly balls too difficult to see. So, the ceiling tiles were painted, but the grass died. This led to the installation of plastic grass known as Astroturf. It was ready for Opening Day, 1966"

I would like you to forward my email to Oliver Luck of the Harris County-Houston Sports Authority. I love the Astrodome and I would love to see Major League Soccer in Houston again.

Tearing down the Astrodome would be wasteful, costly and unnecessary. I'm sure there are plenty of opportunities for other uses

To save it a use msut be found. Isn't that the focus rather than should it or shouldn't it. For me memories are better than an empty shell, but like many of us I love a ruin.

I am sure that I am not alone in the way I feel about the Astrodome. I never though of it as a beautiful piece of architecture, but I respected it as a significant architectural achievement. So should I have a dilema about supporting its preservation? Absolutely not! Just because we don't like the look, does not give us the justification for demolishing historically significant remnants. What irks me more is the disrespect shown by the awkward relationship of the new Reliant Stadium next to the old Astrodome. It is as if they (the client I presume) assumed that it would go away after the new stadium became fully operational. I say save the beast, and challenge the County to turn it to a beauty.

The astrodome should be saved and used in a way that protects its spatial characteristics.

There are early rumblings about building a new venue for professional soccer (futbol) in Houston. With some reconfiguration of seating to accommodate a soccer field, and a spirited new skin, this could be a bargain "new" venue without giving the sports authority new life.

The Astrodome is a Houston icon and must be saved. I propose removing everything from the building but it's structural members and the skin of the dome. It can then act as a large canopy/open air pavilion for various events.

Houston's history is closely tied to the Astrodome. It is not only an engineering marvel, but a structure of signifcant historical value. Tearing down the Astrodome would be like tearing down the Esperson Building in downtown. Either way, it is a great loss in our culture. If our city/county government is interested in historical preservation, start with the Astrodome!

Remember the ASTRODOME! should be our call today just like Rember the Alamo in 1836.

For a generation of Houstonians (and Texans), the Astrodome represents the brash spirit of their city in one of its heydays: the Space Age. Even with its faults, it was a grand experiment that spawned many subsequent design solutions. It was a structural tour-de-force and a mechanical engineering marvel. It remains a landmark, and to destroy it without the highest level of consideration for a viable alternative future would be regrettable. Let's do something, seriously, to save it -- in whatever form that means. It makes me sick to think that all of that pricey scrap steel would be shipped to China and melted down -- likely to create a new oil refinery in support of their economy. Show some creativity!

If the salvage value is enough to pay off the debt incurred for Bob Adams, then perhaps it should be demolished, but it is hard to believe that it couldn't have another life.

The many great memories that were imortalized by the Astrodome cannot conceal the fact that the Astrodome was never a "beautiful" building and with the poor juxtiposition of Reliant Stadium, the Astrodome is now a pitiful outdated useless relic. Let's move on!

The Astrodome the 8thwonder of the world was a fantastic place to watch Houston Cougar football during the days when Bill Yeoman was the head coach and The Houston Astros played alltheir games there. But Bud adams destroyed the Astrodomes unique qualities when he insisted that the Houson sports assoc. remove the scoreboard in place of additional seating as a money grab. He then left Houston with the Oilers and Luv ya Blue was history. The building which remains is nothing of what the original stadium offered to spectators in the 60's. unless a viable use can be offered as reason to keep it. there really is not much to say. should tax dollars be used to keep it open. can private usage be found to convert it into something reasonable and profitable. A motel or convention center or shopping mall. If so then keep it. If not then make way for new progress and let us keep our memories of the good times we all had there.

This landmark must remain! It's proximity to the Medical Center, Reliant and the Astroworld Complexes puts it in a prime location for enhansing those functions. How about creating a sports medicine complex with dwelling units for patients, visiting ball teams (and other athletic groups) and visitors to the entertainment facilities. Supplement with high tech indoor activities, small sports venu arenas, and create an indoor "health and entertainment" complex. Unless there are hazzards and major code violations, I say we give new life to the old girl.

If the Dome stays, it's got to be as an unclad skeleton as it is in the photo on the Call To Voice e-mail.

My view is that the Astrodome should be preserved as a project that broke ground in the realm of public stadia. It was first in a number of categories. And it was (is) distinctly Houston.

We live in a disposable society which we must evolve beyond, in my opinion. But where and when do we draw that line? I'm still amazed that our community let the sports teams dump and run from this facility. That is when we disposed of this facility, and now we're trying to figure out what to do with it. Can some other entity use it, like Lakewood Church is using the Summit? That's the best answer to me. Can the County invest in an adaptive reuse of it? If not, we get to pay for it to sit idle until we pay for it to be demolished. To preserve it implies to me that we keep it up as some sort of sports venue that it was designed for. Preservation implies subsidization to me. Is there enough demand from sporting organizations for it to pay for itself? Or do we just leave it for tourists like the Roman Coliseum? Is the highest and best use of the land dictating that we doze it and move on? That's usually the bottom line here. Recycling the steel will provide for a few more buildings to be added to the local inventory. Maybe that's a good location for another mall or car dealership.

It was the first domed stadium, and a source of pride for that, and it was the home of two professional sports teams and the Rodeo, among others. What is it a home for now? It won't be the first dome to be demolished. I'd love to see it reused. I don't have a reuse for it. If no one has a use for it, I won't stand in the way of its demolition. Perhaps we could build back a native prairie or some other form of ecologically friendly development that won't contribute to the urban heat island or the storm water runoff, or our air quality problem. Maybe we could learn from our mistakes.

The Astrodome was an interesting accomplishment at the time it was done, not great architecture but a noteworthy accomplishment. It didn't take long for the initial economies to be noticed next to more fully finished enclosed stadia. It served Houston well for a long time, but with Reliant Stadium nestled so close by the overall site composition just cries out for removal of the Astrodome.

It should be saved ,but reconditioned for some useful purpose / adaptive use... dont erase "the 8th wonder of the world" , the first domed stadium!

tearing it down would be the same as if the Romans had torn down the Coliseum a few hundred yrs ago, saying it had 'filled its purpose'.

It would be a terrible shame for Houston to lose the Dome, one of the cities few iconic buildings. However, economic reality suggests it is on very swampy ground. Question is what can we as Architects do to help save it?

We must save the Astrodome!

A building without a purpose will soon fade that building from our daily lives and our consciousness. So, the structure that used to house our football stadium will cease to exist, whether we deem it right or not. However, the memory of the Astrodome, its ingenuity, will persist in our civic memory. Don't let a love of a decaying building prevent the phoenix of a new architecure. Let the Astrodome go.

The Astrodome must be saved!