The SHGA Gazebo Renovation Project is open for Comment

Look here for ongoing projects and volunteer opportunities the SHGA is working on. Members may also submit any ideas they have.
JT

The SHGA Gazebo Renovation Project is open for Comment

Post by JT » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:54 am

First of all, these designs are more PAVILION than gazebo.

For those that wish to provide their comments, criticisms and opinions more discreetly, please send mail to

lazyshade@hotmail.com

All mail will be forwarded to the Board of Directors. Direct access to a BOD member may be found on the website at SHGA.com.

No internet? When someone tells you or you see the plans at the LZ, write snail-mail to SHGA or call and leave me a message if I don't answer:

(818) 515 9005

SHGA Communications
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Hang Gliding Capital of the World

Post by SHGA Communications » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:21 am

Full information and additional drawing here: http://shga.com/gazebo.asp

Option A, cost about $10,000

Image

This provides 600 ft2 of roofed area, plus 200 ft2 of shaded area, plus 216 ft2 of open terrace. All of this is about at ground level. For reference, our current gazebo is 16 x 24 feet, providing 384 ft2 of shaded area.
Last edited by SHGA Communications on Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:28 am, edited 1 time in total.

SHGA Communications
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Hang Gliding Capital of the World

Post by SHGA Communications » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:23 am

Option B, cost about $20,000

Image
This is similar to Option A, but includes redwood decking under the covered areas, raised three feet above ground level (the height of a picnic table). This way we can sit back and watch the whacks without standing on the picnic tables as we do now. There will be railings around the raised area, along with additional stairs in locations still to be determined. It provides space underneath to store about 40 gliders (2 tubes high, 22 tubes wide, each 14 inches in diameter and 20 feet long).

SHGA Communications
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Hang Gliding Capital of the World

Post by SHGA Communications » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:25 am

Option C, cost between $30,000 and $40,000
Image

This provides 576 ft2 of roofed area raised three feet above ground level, plus 544 ft2 of deck, half of it raised two feet and the other half raised one foot. Two thirds of the deck area is shaded. It also provides space underneath to store about 30 gliders (2 tubes high, 15 tubes wide, each 14 inches in diameter and an extra-long 24 feet to accomodate big gliders). This is architecturally more intesting, and consists of four staggered 12 x 12 foot units, each with a metal roof and a skylight on top. Some would have back walls; others would be open. One might eventually have a couple movable walls that would normally be folded back, but could be rolled out on casters to enclose a space on cold and stormy days. Another might eventually have real bathrooms, as we would be required to have in order to get a Conditional Use Permit. But now we're dreaming, and those aren't immediate plans. This concept incorporates many desires from the members' wish list, and provides flexibility for future expansion.

SHGA Communications
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 11:20 am
Location: Hang Gliding Capital of the World

Post by SHGA Communications » Fri Mar 30, 2007 10:26 am

Questions . . . and Answers

How can I express my opinions?

March 30 through April 17 is reserved for member comments. Please express your opinions to Jim Thompson (lazyshade@hotmail.com) or to any board member (see www.shga.com for email addresses and phone numbers) or post your comments to the pilot forum by April 17.

What is the design and construction schedule?

We don't know how long each stage will take, so the schedule is only tentative. It would be nice to incorporate member comments by the end of April, and hold a full membership vote to select a design in May. Detailed architectural work will be done in June, and construction will begin in July. With construction help from club members, we expect to have a completed replacement by the Dahlsten Cup in September.

What are the financial costs and benefits to the SHGA?

The construction costs listed above ($10K for Option A, $20K for Option B, $30K-40K for Option C) include labor costs. Club members can probably do most of the construction, and this would reduce the costs considerably. The costs do not include tubes for the glider storage spaces. These could be installed in stages, or paid for by the first renters in exchange for rental discounts.

In the long term, Options B and C will make money through rented glider storage space. Because a 14" tube rents for $260/year, Option B would earn about $9,300/year after management expenses, and would nearly pay for itself in two years if full. Option C would earn about $7,000/year if full, and would pay for itself over several years. While demand for storage space is difficult to predict, we'll guess that a dozen spaces will be filled promptly, and all will be taken within two to three years.

Our property taxes may increase eventually, but any changes will probably be small because the land will continue to be worth far more than any structure we build.

Can the SHGA afford this?

Currently, the SHGA has about $68,000 in the bank, and our assets are growing at $9,000 per year due to glider storage rentals. If Option C is selected, and if it costs $40,000, then our assets would dip to a minimum of about $32,500 in September. There are some emergencies that we couldn't fix for $32.5K (and that we could fix for $68K), but such an emergency seems unlikely.

In the long term, Options B and C would make more money for the SHGA than they would cost in maintenance.

Who will build it?

Our goal is to build it with 100% volunteer labor from club members. We have plumbers, electricians, builders, architects, woodworkers, and landscapers among the members. Many have offered to donate their skills, and help from everyone will be sought and appreciated. Most construction will occur on weekends over a couple of months.

What about building permits? And Conditional Use Permits?

We don't yet know. The board is prepared to begin discussions with our friends in the City Council office. We may have to make some compromizes in our plans, or they may be able to grant us everything we ask. Only time and careful negotiation will determine this.

Who do I thank for all the work that's been done already?

The architectural work and drawings above were done by Jesse Benson and Hiro Matsunaga. The gazebo committee is led by Jim Thompson, with participation from Jeff Chipman, Richard Seymour, Mike Knapp, Rob Burgis, Joe Greblo, and others.
Last edited by SHGA Communications on Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:10 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Christian
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Pacific Palisades

Post by Christian » Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:05 am

Great work everybody, amazing achievement in very short time.

Personally, I like Option B the best. I wish the deck area on the left side provided shade, like the one on the right.

Very impressed by them all.

--Christian

User avatar
Ken Andrews
Site Admin
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Pasadena

Post by Ken Andrews » Fri Mar 30, 2007 11:09 am

Google sketchup is very cool! I downloaded the free version last night and had much fun experimenting. Here's my rendering of Hiro's drawings, though my level of detail isn't up to Jesse's.

Image

greblo
Posts: 434
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2006 11:22 am

Post by greblo » Fri Mar 30, 2007 9:27 pm

Ken;
Great job on sketchup. What should be noted about Option 3 is that it's easily expandable in the future if the club members ever decide they want things like restrooms, a clubhouse, etc.

Emily
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:44 am

Gazebo

Post by Emily » Sat Mar 31, 2007 7:49 am

I like option B because of the openess, elevation, and glider storage capability. Christian, I remember a discussion in the lz about which areas should be shaded. The east part was left uncovered for better overhead viewing. Thanks to all who are working so hard for our benefit! -Emily

User avatar
stebbins
Posts: 607
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 9:02 am
Location: Palmdale, CA

Post by stebbins » Sat Mar 31, 2007 12:54 pm

Jim (and all on the committee),

First, thanks for all the hard work. I know that getting input from a group as independent-minded as hang glider pilots tend to be is never easy. We all tend to think that we are right and everyone else is wrong. I offer my thanks and appreciation.

Now to my comments.

I really like option C. My only concern is the larger up-front outlay. Is it possible to build two of these sections this year and two more next year? If so, that would seem to make sense. If not, I'd still be inclined to select option C, but would be equally happy with option B.

I think that Option A is just too small (but quite lovely), and doesn't give us any more storage. Let's go with something that will make the club a little money.

My opinion (and it is just that, and could easily be wrong) is that we are unlikely to fill 30 or 40 more storage tubes anytime soon. Even over the next 4 years. On the other hand, if we don't buy the tubes until needed, I'm sure we could fill 10-15 over the next few years. That would offset the cost of either option B or C enough that I think they beat option A hands down.

One last thought. If we need a CUP anytime in the next two years, we might need the money spent on Option C for that instead. I have advocated for getting the CUP soon for several years now, so that is a concern for me. On the other hand, if we are careful with our neighbors, maybe we can plan on the CUP after funds from storage have brought us back up to par in two years or so.

Those are my thoughts for now. I'll be out of town during the rest of the comment period, but might have more input as I think it over.
Fly High; Fly Far; Fly Safe -- George

JT

from Allan Binder

Post by JT » Sun Apr 01, 2007 6:18 pm

Option 'C' seems to be the best to me. It's costs more, but is definitely more flexible and the idea of being able to add to it at a later date seems to be worth the extra money.

Allen Binder

{I will transfer mailings regarding the pavilion to the Forum for the benefit of all with the exception of any that the author wishes to keep confidential.

JT}

JBBenson
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 9:19 am

Post by JBBenson » Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:52 pm

Re: Adding decks/rooms later.

In theory one can add anything one wants later, provided the foundation is robust and flexible enough.

If the materials are consistent, and an eye for the design sensibility is retained, it can be just fine.

Two schools of thought:

1.
Build a firm foundation, and use easy-to-adapt, local materials. Use removable fasteners, and make a "as-built" plan showing any modifications made during construction. Make the design flexible, and changable, because it will eventually be modified, like it or not.

2.
Try to anticipate every eventuality. Use indestructable "commercial" materials for spaces, that, if they do not work as imagined, are very difficult or even impossible to modify, or remove. Try to strictly define spaces without regard for the vernacular, and without allowing for activities other than those on the plans.

One of my favorite books on architecture is “How Buildings Learn�, which is the study of buildings through time. It seems the more flexible and adaptable the building, the more it is used and loved and cared for by it's tenants.

The more rigid plans seem to fail and fall apart. Nothing worse than organized fun. Utterly fascinating and easy to read, the core design principles can be applied to anything:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Buildings-Lea ... 015&sr=8-1

User avatar
Christian
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 9:32 am
Location: Pacific Palisades

Post by Christian » Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:33 am

Consider Trex decking, indestructible wood substitute. I have it at home, extremely warm and natural to the touch, no paint, splinters, damage ever.
http://www.trex.com/deckscapes/2003/deckdreams.asp
This is stone color, but there are many color options now:
Image

User avatar
Don
Posts: 510
Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 8:58 am

Choice 3 (or is "C")

Post by Don » Mon Apr 02, 2007 8:21 am

I'll start by saying - THANK YOU :D to everyone that worked on this project.

I like the third choice !

Don

User avatar
rsherwoo
Posts: 41
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2006 12:21 pm
Location: Glendale
Contact:

Post by rsherwoo » Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:18 pm

My vote is for option C. I think it will be better over the long term. It's a nice place for the neighbors and other interested folks to come watch our landings.

Rob
H4

User avatar
Michael Knapp
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:06 pm

Gazebo project

Post by Michael Knapp » Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:43 pm

I think it is time that our club begins to make the improvements that many of us have talked about for years. I have been flying at this location since the early 70's and not much has changed. Every small improvement has been met with resistance.

Remember whatever we build will likely remain unchanged for years so lets build something nice. We have the $ to do the job right. I am in favor of plan C. for the following reasons: 1) To make this club a place were our families and neighbors can come and feel comfortable. 2) To make our club look and feel more legitimate to the community. (if we build a structure that looks temporary it gives the impression that we are not serious and may be thought of as being temporary. If we build a nice structure we will be seen as being more permanent within the community.

Big Mike

User avatar
skygeek AKA Seabass
Posts: 252
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 9:34 pm
Location: Newhall
Contact:

Plan C

Post by skygeek AKA Seabass » Thu Apr 05, 2007 11:22 pm

Plan C is the answer, it will make Crestline look like the Getto. I am getting exited about the project, if there is room in the budget I would like to set up a flat panel TV, that will go in a weather proof lock box, with audio/video jacks remotely located to plug in a video camera or a computer & a audio system with remote speakers that can be utilized for TV, music & the flying radio chatter & a stationary 2 meter permanently installed, all the labor & materials would be provided at cost. Anybody want to discuss it call me Sebastian Lutges 818 521-7888

User avatar
Chip
Site Admin
Posts: 645
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 8:20 pm
Location: Sylmar, CA
Contact:

Option C for Me!

Post by Chip » Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:02 am

Love your comments Sebas ..... :P

I'm for option C and will likely donate time and $ to see it happen. I think others are likely to follow. I think the club may initially outlay the money to begin but I have a feeling as club members see progress they'll likely pitch in with $ of their own. :wink:

JBBenson
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu May 12, 2005 9:19 am

Post by JBBenson » Fri Apr 06, 2007 8:05 am

Why on earth would anyone want a television and/or music in the LZ?

Isn't there enough extraneous noise blaring everywhere else?

I see this club as an oasis away from all the sensory overload that this city provides.

I see no reason to import yet more noise pollution to Sylmar. The peace and quiet of the LZ is one of it's main attractions.

User avatar
Ken Andrews
Site Admin
Posts: 209
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Pasadena

Post by Ken Andrews » Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:51 am

Jesse Benson has created some very nice three dimensional drawings of Hiro's "Option C" gazebo design. Those drawings follow, and large versions of them are posted as a photo gallery here. Note that these show restrooms under the fourth roof at the west end; these would not be installed as part of initial construction, but would be planned for as a future improvement.

Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Post Reply