Sylmar Hang Gliding Association

WE CAN GET A 40FT. CONTAINER FOR $2100 (NO TAX), DELIVERED. IT WILL HOLD 47? GLIDERS WITH ROOM FOR HARNESSES ETC. WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT FRAMEWORK IN. PILOTS COULD BUY THIER OWN TUBES AND PAY NO STORAGR COSTS UNTILL THEIR COSTS EQUAL RENTAL FEES, AT THAT TIME THE TUBES BELONG TO THE CLUB, AND PILOTS WILL START PAYING FEES.EVEN IF THE FRAMEWORK COSTS US $100,we COULD SAVE ABOUT $37,800 to57,800. DOLLARS. COST ANALISIST EXPERT ROME

And then we can burrow under it to have a nice shade structure. Or maybe just use the gopher tunnels!

Look, I'm not necessarily for the highest end Gazebo. But to claim that we can replace the Gazebo project by putting in another box is ludicrous. The storage under the new Gazebo is not it's main purpose. It is a good thing, yes. But to imply that it is the reason for the Gazebo project is highly misleading.

Oh, and I'm sure Rome's container will be just as nice as his old shuttle was.

I could be wrong, but my recollection from when we bought the second box is that for $2100, you get a piece of junk. And the idea that the framework would cost $100 is just nonsense. Materials alone were much more than that for the second box.

BTW, the first box ended up costing us as much as (or more than?) the second one, even though it isn't as nice. Why? We did it on the cheap and had to keep messing with it. It was a nightmare. Whatever people may say about Fred Weinman being high-end, he sure did a great job in buying that second box. High quality for a reasonable price. And the work put in by the folks who racked it was phenomenal. (Dave F, Larry C & Dan B?)

O.K., SO WE MAY ONLY SAVE &35,000. THE BOX WE BOUGHT FROM DON WAS REALY, REALY A PIECE OF CRAPOLA!!!I TOLD THE BOARD THEN THAT WE OUGHT TO BUY A DOUBLE CONTAINER, BUT NOOOO, IF IT IS'NT THIER IDEA IT SUCKS.DON'T LET THEM START CONSTRUCTION UNTILL WE MOVE OLD ONE 20 FEET NORTH, SO WE WILL HAVE SHADE ALL SUMMER, REMEMBER 105 DEGREES? BOTH CLUB BUILDERS SAID 9 MEN COULD MOVE IT , STAKE IT DOWN, THEN IF OUR VOLUNTEER LABOR POOPED OUT WE WOULD STILL HAVE SHADE. P.S. SUMMERS ALMOST HERE ROME

George,

I'm new to all of the politics of the club. You mention that the storage is not the main purpose of the Gazebo. What is the main purpose? Shade? A more permanent presence in the neighborhood? Something else?

P.S. SUMMERS ALMOST HERE ROME

Speaking of which, Rome, you might want to get to work on your high-end cooling system. It's a little dilapidated. Now that you no longer have to pay that exhorbitant SHGA membership fee, you should have plenty left over to donate for some new hose, right? Wouldn't want to spend any of the club funds for that either, now would we? Oh, I forgot, the club funds are "your money," too, as you keep reminding me. So, does that mean we should or shouldn't spend club funds, either, to bring the mold-facilitator back up to your standards? Let me know, I'll have it put on the meeting agenda.

Busby wrote:George,

I'm new to all of the politics of the club. You mention that the storage is not the main purpose of the Gazebo. What is the main purpose? Shade? A more permanent presence in the neighborhood? Something else?

Good question. And good guesses.

Those are two of the main reasons. Also, the fact that the current Gazebo is reaching the end of it's safely usable life. One of the others (in my mind the main one) is this: We need to get it recognized by the city that we have a right to hang glide here. Yes, they've been good about it. We've got good relations with all the required politicos. But, if that changes it would be trivialy easy for them to shut down flying. Once we have a CUP or some other written, official, due-process permission, it becomes much harder for them to stop us. We've been told that a structure such as we are talking about is a prerequisite for one approach to that. The other approach (a CUP) might cost nearly as much, but wouldn't get us the structure.

The whole discussion about this is on this forum. JT has posted some quite clearly worded and logically argued stuff about it, as I recall. (Thanks, Jim!)

------ The following isn't directly addressing the question posed, and isn't directed at the questioner.

As I said previously, I'm not necessarily for the high-end gazebo. I'm not necessarily against it, either. But the argument that yet another storage box will solve the problems we are trying to solve is just silly.

IF we were just trying to get more storage, then of course another box would be one possible (likely the best) solution. But that's not the case. And if it was, we'd surely want to look at quality as well as price. Too high end wastes money. Too low end wastes money and makes it a nightmare to maintain the purchase - plus it looks worse. There is an old saying: Penny wise and Pound foolish. I used to buy and sell houses before the change a few years ago. I repeatedly saw the results of "do it yourself", "just get it done" and "Let's not spend any more than we have to." Usually, it meant I could buy the house dirt cheap and spend the money to fix it. Then sell for a profit. If the previous owner had used appropriate materials, labor and judgement, they'd have spent twice as much. But they'd have made far more than that when they sold it. And they'd have spent far less time doing maintenence. Plus, they'd have been able to charge more for rent, instead of getting dead-beats for renters. There are two other old sayings: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. And: A stitch in time, saves nine.

Look, I'm a cheapskate too. Maybe not quite as much as Rome, but pretty cheap. But there are times when being cheap costs you money or worse. A good example is with the storage boxes. Another is with the picnic tables - tables that Rome objected to, if I recall correctly. Just like he objected to the grass. While I don't think it will cost us money to not replace the Gazebo, doing it half-assed, cheap looking or slipshod will, in the long run, cost us: In agravation, in legal permissions, in community support, whatever. The point is, we want to be flying here in 20 years, right? Let's not look 1 year down the road. Let's look 20 years down the road. If that means high-end gazebo, then that's what we should do. If a middle-of-the-road one works, that's fine too. I submit, however, that low-end is a big mistake. It would be shortsighted.

This is all about making sure we can fly at Kagel for the foreseable future. And do it in a comfortable manner, in a place that our significant others, drivers etc, would like to spend time at.

And damn, I really didn't mean to get so worked up and run so long. My apologies. Despite the fact that I'm not flying as much lately, I really care a lot about our flight park*. Please excuse me for that.

Fly high; Fly Far; Fly Safe; Take Care of your Flight Park

George


* Many of the newer pilots don't know this, but there used to be many more places to fly in the LA area. (I posted a partial list a few years back. It's length surprised even me.) They have been closed due to development, pilot poor behavior, accidents, legal issues and so on. Kagel and Crestline are there only because we decided not to just let things go, and not to take the cheap route. Or they'd be just as closed as the other sites.

DeadEye wrote:.....DON'T LET THEM START CONSTRUCTION UNTILL WE MOVE OLD ONE 20 FEET NORTH, SO WE WILL HAVE SHADE ALL SUMMER, REMEMBER 105 DEGREES? BOTH CLUB BUILDERS SAID 9 MEN COULD MOVE IT , STAKE IT DOWN, THEN IF OUR VOLUNTEER LABOR POOPED OUT WE WOULD STILL HAVE SHADE. P.S. SUMMERS ALMOST HERE ROME

I think trying to move the box would be a mistake. However, Rome's point about shade during construction is a very good one.

One possibility is to temporarily cover the area between the two storage boxes. I think Rome suggested this before - I take no credit for it. I thought it a good idea then too.

I'm sure there are other possibilities for solutions.

Ideas?

BTW, after some thought I also think that we shouldn't proceed with the gazebo as designed if the price rises very much. The numbers we had for the estimate were already right at the upper end of my willingness to vote for it. (Which I did do.) I don't think we should go low-end, but if we can keep the cost within the original budget, or close to that, I'd be much happier. I like the design. I am just concerned that cost-creep has set in. See, I don't always disagree with Rome completely!


Cheops Law: "Nothing is ever built on time or within budget."

Cheops was Pharaoh of Egypt ca. 2650-2630 BCE, and builder of the Great Pyramid at Giza.

I am not a long time member of SHGA (3rd year) and have not invested as much money or time into our club as many others.
That being said I hope to be around a long time flying and contributing and believe that a new gazebo is in order.
Having a "nice" safe and sound structure both for the pilots/families and also the view of our club/park by the surrounding community including local government is important
I think the design for the gazebo is great; serving the purpose of housing gliders and personal shelter from the weather for us.
If it serves as a way to solidify our claim on "Hang Gliding Rights" at Sylmar/Kagel then that is all the better.
I am in favor of the new gazebo and if it is within 20% of the original cost estimates I would prefer not to have a new vote required but to go forward as soon as possible.
If the cost is significantly higher then I think it is fair to our members to take another look at the cost and possible options to help keep costs down before final approval.
As far as shelter for us during the construction period, I think it is imperative that we come up with a plan that will protect our pilots and families from the extreme heat of summer. There have been offers for netting, easy-ups, etc from members. I know we can make this happen!

This is a great club, I am proud to be a member and look forward to a new structure that we can enjoy for many years to come.

First - I will be delighted if construction starts this summer. But somehow I don't think the wheels will move that fast.

Second - shade is nice - don't the trees provide enough?

Third - the idea of cutting the base legs of the existing structure and moving it while the construction is being performed is a nice idea - BUT - what is going to happen when the winds start to blow - maybe as early as September? That "thing" is either going to go rolling toward the new construction, the storage sheds, or Erwin's living quarters. That assumes that it just doesn't collapse first. If someone wants to go sit under it - fine - just sign a waiver!

We could appoint a cost control czar to the project.

The paragliding schools and manufacturers love it when there is no available hang glider storage. I would be in favor of adding another storage container in addition to the pavilion storage.

[quote="dhmartens I would be in favor of adding another storage container in addition to the pavilion storage.[/quote]


That sounds good to me I would like to keep my glider at the LZ .