Hangar OneHangar OneWindow Preservation

Presentation to the Moffett Field Restoration Advisory Board Committee01.13.11

PurposePurpose

•Representatives Eshoo and Garcia had arranged fro an appropriation earmark of $10 Million that was retracted by Congress.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 existingNASA planned on the $10 Million for the preservation of the existing windows that would be needed by the end of February.

Find a Workable Solution

The Existing Windows

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

Options for Hangar One Windows

1. Remove (E) Glass and replace in (N) frames for re-installation.

2 D li h (E) l d f d l ith ll (N) i d t t h (E)2. Demolish (E) glass and frames and replace with all (N) windows to match (E).

3. Demolish (E) glass and frames and replace with all (N) flat glass windows.

4. Demolish (E) glass and frames and replace with metal siding.e o s ( ) g ass a d a es a d ep ace e a s d g

5. Demolish (E) flat glass and frames except corrugated glass only.

Sustainability History Function Reconstruction

$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

Options to Benefit All

NASA Ames

1. Reduces Cost • Least cost for Hangar Renovation

• Best option for tax incentives for private sector tenants

2. Most Historically Sensitive • Aligns with public’s opinion for restoration

Best option for tax incentives for private sector tenants

• Daylighting reduces energy costs

• Aligns with public s opinion for restoration

• 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 handlinggy p y g g

• Allows natural daylighting and views for potential LEED points

4. Functionality All t d f ti• Allows more occupancy types and functions

Navy

1. Reduces Cost

2 M t Hi t i ll S iti

• Less handling and off-haul

• Additional fees for preserving glass

2. Most Historically Sensitive • 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.

Citizens

We keep our National Landmark and what it represents…

Our contributions:

Nation

Community

Technology

Your Challenge - Commit to make restoration work and the right solutionSuggestions for DialogSuggestions 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 ppbudgeting 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 What is the Silicon Valley private sector fund5. What is the Silicon Valley private sector fund raising for the windows?

Plan of Action

Navy – NASA – RAB yWindow Task Force

• Keep overall Work on Schedule• Meet objectives for Historic preservation• Keep function options open for NASA• Keep function options open for NASA

Community Campaign• Historic Preservation • SHOC• Veterans

Representative AssistanceRepresentative Assistance• Interface with Federal Groups

Private Sector Fund Raisingg

Thank YouThank You