Let's not be hasty on Hangar One Let's not be hasty on Hangar One (July 29, 2005)

The Navy appears to be in a hurry to let go of its local hot potato, Hangar One.

The graceful structure, coveted by some for its great size, interesting history and prime location, currently suffers from one fatal flaw: The materials from which it is built are highly toxic. And every day that it remains standing, say government officials, it continues to leach poisonous chemicals -- including PCBs, lead, zinc and asbestos -- into the surrounding wetlands.

Or as the Navy's official in charge of cleanup at Moffett Field, Rick Weisenborn, recently put it, the hangar is "an existing, imminent threat to human health and the environment."

That's a Hangar One-sized problem, and one the Navy would like to resolve as soon as possible. Last month, officials presented more than a dozen possible solutions for cleaning up the hangar. By last week, those options had dwindled to just two: demolish the structure altogether or remove its toxic siding, leaving just a steel frame.

That second option is in question, since NASA, the current owner of the site, has said it doesn't want a partial structure. That seems to leave one option, and there's plenty of nearby residents -- preservationists, military buffs, pilots and other admirers -- who don't like it one bit.

This week, a group of those residents gathered at the Mountain View Public Library to discuss ways of saving Hangar One. The ideas show the inventiveness of Peninsula residents, and a few are worthy of serious consideration by the Navy.

One idea that has garnered some attention involves stripping off the toxic siding and replacing it with solar panels. Although this may sound outlandish -- and it's questionable how effective the curved sides will be in generating power -- solar panels tacked to the side of such a visible structure would make an excellent advertisement for renewable energy resources. For this reason the idea could, if nothing else, prove to be a politically effective way to save the hangar.

Another enticement to saving the hangar could involve turning it into an air and space museum. The idea has been bandied about for years, but suffered a setback at the news that the hangar was toxic. It is clear, however, that no cleanup proposal will fly without the proper funding, and it may be the museum idea could draw that funding from the private sector.

Perhaps among the wealthy scions of Silicon Valley, a few might be willing to chip in to help save Hangar One.

These options will probably fall by the wayside, however, if the Navy continues on its present course toward demolition. Possibly sensing that Hangar One will forever be a thorn in their side if it is not dealt with now, officials seem to be quickly narrowing their options until the simplest -- demolition -- appears to be inevitable.

Two years ago, Sen. Barbara Boxer and Congresswoman Anna Eshoo wrote a letter to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, urging the Navy to "adopt a long-term remediation plan that allows Hangar One to be preserved," because, they said, "It is an important historical landmark in Silicon Valley." We hope the Navy remembers that letter, and takes its advice to heart, during these next crucial weeks.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.