The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
Back to feedPost
Greenwood Lake Airport – West Milford
PROJECT OVERVIEW
Greenwood Lake Airport is a new fuel facility project located in West Milford, New Jersey. The project was developed for the State of New Jersey and includes a 12,000-gallon fuel storage facility designed to support airport operations.
The project required coordinated civil, structural, and MEPF engineering services to develop a safe, functional, and reliable fuel facility suited to the operational requirements of the airport.
PROJECT DETAILS
Client: State of New Jersey Location: West Milford, NJ Project Type: New Fuel Facility Facility Capacity: 12,000 Gallons
OUR SERVICES
• Civil Engineering
• Structural Engineering
• MEPF Engineering
ENGINEERING APPROACH
Our team provided multidisciplinary engineering services for the development of the new airport fuel facility. The design required close coordination between civil, structural, and MEPF disciplines to address the facility's site, structural, and building-system requirements.
The project was approached with an emphasis on functionality, durability, and proper coordination of the systems required to support a specialized aviation fuel facility.
PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS
• 12,000-gallon fuel facility
• New construction
• Aviation infrastructure
• Civil engineering
• Structural engineering
• MEPF engineering
• Multidisciplinary engineering coordination
The network for creativity
Join 1.25M professional creatives like you
Connect with clients, get discovered, and run your business 100% commission-free
Creatives on Contra have earned over $150M and we are just getting started
Related posts
Tamp, a Framer template for coffee shops and cafés.
Resolve: an AI support agent that answers from a company’s own policies, looks up orders, and escalates weak matches to a human instead of guessing. A human approves replies before they go out.
Live demo: support-resolver.vercel.app
For the human approval step, I'd show the exact policy passage and its effective date beside the draft. Does Resolve flag a reply for re-review if the policy changes while it waits for approval?
Same app. Same model. Same spec.
Built with Angular, it cost $4.97 per run. Built with Hono + htmx, $2.67.
The framework you pick is now a line on your AI bill.
Nobody budgets for this yet. Here is the data.
Nolan Lawson (engineer at Socket, the PouchDB maintainer) had Claude Opus 5.5 build the same small Pokémon app 12 times over, once per framework, 5 runs each (3 for Angular), medians reported.
Every build had to pass the same spec suite.
→ Cheapest: Hono + htmx, $2.67, 4.26M tokens, 1,370 lines, 8.6 min
→ Astro $2.76 · Nuxt $2.82 · plain Vite $2.98
→ Next.js $3.14 · React Router $3.81 · SvelteKit $4.28
→ Most expensive: Angular, $4.97, 9.76M tokens, 2,009 lines, 17.2 min
→ Source: nolanlawson.com, Oct 28 2026. Two Angular runs failed the spec and were counted as failures.
The gap is not the model. It is the ceremony.
Angular made the agent write 47% more code for the same features. More code costs tokens twice: once to write it, once to re-read it on the next change.
Plain Vite was not the cheapest. No framework means no conventions, so the agent invents its own, and that costs tokens too.
The cheap column was also the fast column. Astro, Hono + htmx and Lit all scored 100 on mobile Lighthouse with almost no JavaScript shipped.
Why it works that way:
An agent pays for every file it opens.
Config, boilerplate, framework docs, a second read after each error.
Less ceremony is fewer pages before the first useful line.
Call it the ceremony tax: everything your stack makes the agent type before it ships a feature.
I run a one-person company on AI agents. Most of my code is written by them now, and I watch tokens per task the way I used to watch cloud bills. The same feature costs me very different amounts depending on which codebase the agent is standing in.
If agents write your code, the framework is no longer a developer-experience choice. It is a unit cost.
Rule 1: Measure tokens per task, not per month. A monthly bill hides which stack is burning it.
Rule 2: Pick the stack the agent types least in. Fewer lines written today is fewer lines re-read tomorrow.
Rule 3: Cheap must still pass the spec. Every run here cleared the same tests and Lighthouse; cheaper and better landed in the same column.
One small app, one model, one author's benchmark, and the author says so himself. Treat it as a pattern, not a law. The direction matches what I see every day.
Angular is good software. I mean that. It was built for teams of humans.
AI did not make frameworks free.
It put a price on them.
For an agent-built app, would you go Minimal or Batteries? One word is enough. 👇
