Hangar One (Blogs, Posts, and News)
Blog Archive
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Hanging hopes on analysis, Study could decide fate of Hangar One
Palo Alto Daily News
Prior to that announcement, the Navy was slated to release this month its evaluation of what should be done with the hangar at Moffett Field.
That evaluation has been postponed pending completion of the steel frame analysis, according to a letter from Darren Newton, environmental coordinator for Base Realignment and Closure. Newton could not be reached this week by phone to discuss the matter.
The Navy, which once owned and operated the structure that used to house giant airships, is now responsible for cleaning the site, which is known to contain toxins. The Navy previously recommended razing the Depression-era hangar, upsetting some residents who want it to be preserved.
"It's a good thing that the Navy is doing the structural analysis, because there really wouldn't be a need to look at those issues if demolition was the only option," Lenny Siegel of the Save Hangar One Committee wrote in an e-mail to the Daily News.
Still, Siegel said, there is a remote chance the analysis may find that the hangar is too unstable to save.
Siegel said in his e-mail he is starting to think the Navy will propose removing the siding and roof and coating the frame, leaving the skeleton for new owner NASA and the community to deal with.
"I don't think that's sufficient, but it is better than demolition," Siegel said.
Moffett Field Museum Curator Bill Stubkjaer said anything that prolongs the life of the structure is good.
"I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt," Stubkjaer said.
Longtime preservation advocate Bob Moss said he is somewhat skeptical about the Navy doing an analysis at this stage of the game.
Others are somewhat more hopeful.
"It signals that retaining the steel frame may be one of the alternatives to be considered in detail in the Navy's report," Steve Williams, a Save Hangar One Committee member, wrote in his blog.
The options under consideration for the hangar are to cover it with rubberized material; give it an acrylic coating; cover it with a visually similar siding; remove the siding and coat exposed surfaces; or demolish and remove the entire structure.
Hanging hopes on analysis, Study could decide fate of Hangar One
Prior to that announcement, the Navy was slated to release this month its evaluation of what should be done with the hangar at Moffett Field.
That evaluation has been postponed pending completion of the steel frame analysis, according to a letter from Darren Newton, environmental coordinator for Base Realignment and Closure. Newton could not be reached this week by phone to discuss the matter.
The Navy, which once owned and operated the structure that used to house giant airships, is now responsible for cleaning the site, which is known to contain toxins. The Navy previously recommended razing the Depression-era hangar, upsetting some residents who want it to be preserved.
"It's a good thing that the Navy is doing the structural analysis, because there really wouldn't be a need to look at those issues if demolition was the only option," Lenny Siegel of the Save Hangar One Committee wrote in an e-mail to the Daily News.
Still, Siegel said, there is a remote chance the analysis may find that the hangar is too unstable to save.
Siegel said in his e-mail he is starting to think the Navy will propose removing the siding and roof and coating the frame, leaving the skeleton for new owner NASA and the community to deal with.
"I don't think that's sufficient, but it is better than demolition," Siegel said.
Moffett Field Museum Curator Bill Stubkjaer said anything that prolongs the life of the structure is good.
"I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt," Stubkjaer said.
Longtime preservation advocate Bob Moss said he is somewhat skeptical about the Navy doing an analysis at this stage of the game.
Others are somewhat more hopeful.
"It signals that retaining the steel frame may be one of the alternatives to be considered in detail in the Navy's report," Steve Williams, a Save Hangar One Committee member, wrote in his blog.
The options under consideration for the hangar are to cover it with rubberized material; give it an acrylic coating; cover it with a visually similar siding; remove the siding and coat exposed surfaces; or demolish and remove the entire structure.
Friday, December 14, 2007
Latest Hangar One delay offers hope
http://www.mv-voice.com/news/show_story.php?id=302
Friday, December 14, 2007, 4:34 PM
A highly anticipated report that would announce the fate of Moffett Field's historic Hangar One has been delayed again, this time so the Navy can do a structural analysis of the hangar's steel frame.
Friday, December 14, 2007, 4:34 PM
Latest Hangar One delay offers hope
In reading tea leaves on Navy's intention, advocates applaud new structural analysis
Even though the report has been delayed almost a year now, preservationists believe this latest delay could be a good sign.
"It sounds like the Navy is considering preservation, as we asked them to do, and they need more time," wrote Save Hangar One Committee member Steve Williams in his blog.
And committee member and founder Lenny Siegel, a longtime advocate for toxic cleanup of military bases, agrees.
"I don't think a structural analysis is very useful if the Navy intends to propose demolition," he wrote in an e-mail. "This suggests that it [the Navy] may propose removing the contaminated materials and leaving the superstructure intact. In that case, it would be up to NASA, other agencies, local communities, or private companies to fund re-skinning."
According to a monthly Hangar One report issued by the Navy, the structural analysis will determine whether the hangar's frame can stand on its own or withstand the weight of a new coating.
In a letter, Navy spokesperson Darren Newton said the new efforts are "in response to concerns expressed by the regulatory agencies and members of the community." He went on to say that "conducting a structural analysis at this time will provide useful information necessary for a sound evaluation of the feasibility of several alternatives being considered in the EE/CA" -- shorthand for environmental evaluation and cost analysis.
The Navy has also announced that the original 13 alternatives studied in the EE/CA have been narrowed down to six, which will be selected based on cost. Those options include covering the hangar with rubberized material, with acrylic material, or -- the least favorite among locals -- demolish and remove the hangar altogether.
Toxic PCBs have been found in Hangar One's siding, and are leeching into the air and the groundwater. The Navy, which is on the hook to clean up the toxic materials, had previously decided to demolish the structure, causing a public outcry last year.
For more information, contact Newton at (619) 532-0963 or darren.newton@navy.mil.
Thursday, December 13, 2007
Moffett Airfield and Stevens Creek in the blogosphere
Moffett Airfield and Stevens Creek in the blogosphere & news (blews?)
By judielaine
He's provided an update on the Hanger One report from the Navy, delayed until January. In other news, the SF Chronicle ran an article about the release of the South Bay Salt Pond Restoration Project report with this supportive blog ...
Curious.Judith - http://www.grey-cat.com/curious
Monday, December 3, 2007
Fate of Hangar One could be set this month
Article Launched: 12/03/2007 08:39:56 AM PST
Advocates for preserving historic Hangar One in Mountain View are cautiously optimistic they will receive an answer from the Navy this month regarding the facility's future. But they're not holding their breath.
Last year the Navy recommended demolishing the Depression-era hangar at Moffett Field, upsetting some residents who want to save the icon that is visible from Highway 101. For more than a year, the Navy has been reconsidering its decision that demolition is the most cost-effective way to cleanse the site of harmful chemicals - an option it estimates would cost $12.2 million.
The Navy, which once owned the hangar that housed giant airships and is now responsible for cleaning up the site, announced in November it would release a new evaluation this month.
Bob Moss, a member of the Save Hangar One Committee and the Restoration Advisory Board, said there is no guarantee the Navy will stick to its timeline.
"They said it would come out in August," Moss said.
Fellow committee member Steve Williams thinks the Navy is working hard to develop an airtight report that is not open to debate, unlike last year's evaluation, which met with heavy criticism.
"They're taking their time to get it right," Williams said.
Navy spokesman Darren Newton could not be reached for comment over the weekend.
Save Hangar One Committee members have proposed "re-skinning" the hangar with a Teflon-coated fiberglass after the cleanup is complete and thecurrent layer of corrugated steel is removed, likely at cost of about $42 million. Roughly 1,500 signatures have been gathered in support of the plan.
"Once we've saved it, it's much more straightforward to find investors" to help fund its restoration, Williams said.
NASA, which now owns the hangar, would ultimately determine its future uses.
Moss said it could serve as the home of a yet-to-be-completed zeppelin commissioned by a Los Gatos-based company.
"Rent money could be used to refurbish (the hangar)," Moss said.
On Tuesday, the Mountain View City Council approved a resolution supporting a plan by Airship Ventures to house its 246-foot sightseeing zeppelin at Moffett Field. NASA has yet to decide whether the company will be allowed to store their zeppelin at nearby Hangar Two, as the company has proposed.
Airship Ventures aims to have their dirigible in the Bay Area by the end of next year.
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Christmas may come early for Hangar One
Christmas may come early for Hangar One
Mountain View Voice - Mountain View,CA,USA
by Daniel debolt The Navy, which has kept the public guessing about whether it will demolish historic Hangar One at Moffett Field, is scheduled to announce ...
See all stories on this topic
Christmas may come early for Hangar One
Decision due in early December on whether Navy will demolish Moffett icon
by Daniel DeBolt
Mountain View Voice Staff
The Navy, which has kept the public guessing about whether it will demolish historic Hangar One at Moffett Field, is scheduled to announce its decision in early December.
"If all goes well, it [the decision] will go out in early December," said Navy spokesperson Darren Newton in a phone interview last week. It was the same thing he said to dozens of people at the last Moffett Field Restoration Advisory Board meeting Nov. 8.
After saying last year that it had decided to demolish the huge hangar, the Navy stepped back from that position after a huge public outcry and strong criticism of its analysis, and has spent the last year re-evaluating its decision.
The December decision will be subsequently discussed at the Jan. 10 advisory board meeting, which may be a big party -- or an angry meeting reminiscent of what happened the last time the Navy said it would tear down the hangar.
There will "either be lots of cake or lots of rope," joked RAB co-chair Bob Moss.
The Navy may have already given it away: At a recent RAB meeting, Newton leaned over and told Moss, "We're going to have the official response back in a month or two and I think you'll be happy with it," Moss recalls.
Nevertheless, Moss said, "It's very hard to read what they are going to do."
Newton's predecessor, Rick Weissenborn, told the RAB earlier this year that a decision had to be made by the summer. A temporary coating is peeling off the hangar's toxic siding which, when combined with winter rains, could be a recipe for increased runoff of toxic PCBs.
The delayed announcement "may mean they are going to demolish it and they don't care about sealing it," Moss said. "Or it may mean they can't make up their minds."
The Navy was initially supposed to release the decision earlier this year in the spring, but has rescheduled the announcement numerous times. "Every time they give us a date, it slips," Moss said.
Meanwhile, the Save Hangar One Committee, a group dedicated to preserving the hangar, has had success in presenting an alternative to the toxic siding.
In particular, the group's architect, Linda Ellis, has been educating the public on a Teflon fiberglass covering that could serve as a new siding. However, the Navy won't let her inside the hangar to confirm once and for whether the idea would work.
At the RAB meeting earlier this month, Navy spokesman Newton said it was the Navy's position that the public is not allowed onto the site. But while the Navy is responsible for cleaning up the site, it is NASA that now owns the hangar.
Several government officials have been allowed inside. Wayne Donaldson, director of the State Historic Preservation Office, recently visited the hangar and said he was "more determined than ever" to save it.
The current campaign to re-skin the hangar hinges on its feasibility. The committee has gathered 1,500 signatures in support of the fabric covering.
"You have to see what the inside of hangar looks like before you can intelligently make a decision" as to how the fabric will work, Moss said. "I'm not convinced that we know that it will."
The revised environmental evaluation and cost analysis will lay out several options for the hangar, telling the complete story behind whatever position taken by the Navy. Last year its costs were disputed because the estimates for demolition and restoration differed substantially from NASA's, whose numbers made restoration seem much more feasible.
More information is available at www.savehangarone.org.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comments
HORRAH LINDA ELLIS! OPEN YOUR EYES NAVY!
Posted by peter a, a resident of another community, on Nov 26, 2007 at 8:22 am
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11.26.07
After visiting the Hangar One site last May and studying the available drawings and photos of this building, the volunteers are confident that covering the Hangar One structure with PTFE is a viable solution. To reiterate, in addition to the architects, the volunteer team including a structural engineer, construction executive, and architectural fabric manufacturer and installation representatives that have all been involved in significant and related projects.
The team requested to access the Hangar to provide a more detailed design and cost analysis for the PTFE solution for Hangar One. Any information acquired would be provided to the Navy and RAB Committee.
Linda Ellis, Architect
Posted by Linda Ellis, on Nov 26, 2007 at 3:42 pm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)