Hangar One Window Preservation presentation to Moffett Restoration Advisory Board, January 13, 2011. Linda Ellis, DGA.

1. Hangar One
Window Preservation
Presentation to the Moffett Field Restoration Advisory Board Committee
01.13.11

2. Purpose
•Representatives Eshoo and Garcia had arranged fro an appropriation
earmark of $10 Million that was retracted by Congress.
•NASA budgeted $20 Million for the restoration of the Hangar One siding.
•NASA planned on the $10 Million for the preservation of the existing
NASA
windows that would be needed by the end of February.
Find a Workable Solution

3. The Existing Windows

5. Why corrugated and flat wire glass as part of the skin system?

6. Options for Hangar One Windows
1. Remove (E) Glass and replace in (N) frames for re-installation.
2. Demolish (E) glass and f
2 D li h l d frames and replace with all (N) windows t match (E)
d l ith ll i d to t h (E).
3. Demolish (E) glass and frames and replace with all (N) flat glass windows.
4. Demolish ( ) g ass a d frames a d replace with metal s d g
e o s (E) glass and a es and ep ace e a siding.
5. Demolish (E) flat glass and frames except corrugated glass only.

7. Sustainability History Function Reconstruction

8. $3.3 Million
Option 5. Remove and replace corrugated glass in existing frames and ? No Impact ? Existing corrugated glass ?
replace the flat glass $3.3 Million

9. Options to Benefit All

10. NASA Ames
1. Reduces Cost
• Least cost for Hangar Renovation
• Best option for tax incentives for private sector tenants
• Daylighting reduces energy costs
2. Most Historically Sensitive
• Aligns with public’s opinion for restoration
public s
• Moderne aesthetics maintained
• Maintains Historic District National Parks Landmark Status
• Aligns with State Historic Preservation Officer’s recommendations
3. Most Sustainable
• Reuses glass
• Less energy toward transport recycling and handling
gy p y g g
• Allows natural daylighting and views for potential LEED points
4. Functionality
• Allows more occupancy types and functions
All t df ti

11. Navy
1. Reduces Cost
• Less handling and off-haul
• Additional fees for preserving glass
2. Most Historically Sensitive
2 M t Hi t i ll S iti
• Maintains naval pride – Nationally & Locally
• Honors Veterans
3. Sustainable Credit
• “Federal Leadership in Environmental Energy and Economic Performance Executive Order 13514”
Requires 50% decrease in the quantity of recycling (glass) and waste diversion.

12. Citizens
We keep our National Landmark and what
it represents…
Our contributions:
Nation
Community
Technology

13. Your Challenge - Commit to make restoration work and the right solution
Suggestions for Dialog
1. Is it possible for NASA to increase the priority to
include the windows in their $20M budget?
2. If acceptable to SHPO, is it possible for the Navy
to reduce the $1.2 M to only save the corrugated
windows to allow more opportunities for
pp
budgeting and fund raising?
3. Are there any other opportunities to receive
Government funding to preserve the windows?
4. As the $10M was retracted, can the Navy:
- Provide a delay for window demolition?
- Allow phased payment as the Work progresses?
- Contribute the effort?
5.
5 What is the Silicon Valley private sector fund
raising for the windows?

14. Plan of Action
Navy – NASA – RAB
y
Window Task Force
• Keep overall Work on Schedule
• Meet objectives for Historic preservation
• Keep function options open for NASA
Community Campaign
• Historic Preservation
• SHOC
• Veterans
Representative Assistance
• Interface with Federal Groups
Private Sector Fund Raising
g

15. Thank You