National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Golden Gate National Recreation Area San Francisco, CA 94123 Fort Barry Balloon Hangar and Motor Vehicle Sheds Abbreviated Historic Structures Report Fort Barry Balloon Hangar, 1939. (PARC, GOGA 32423) Cover Photo: Fort Barry Balloon Han- gar and Motor Vehicle Sheds, 2004. (John Martini) Fort Barry Balloon Hangar and Motor Vehicle Sheds Abbreviated Historic Structures Report Golden Gate National Recreation Area San Francisco, California Produced by the Cultural Resources and Museum Management Division National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior Washington, DC Contents Introduction 7 Preparation 7 Relevant Documents 7 Executive Summary 7 Historic Significance 8 World War I and 1920s 8 World War II Era 11 Nike Missile Era 12 Presidio Riding Stables 12 Evaluation Criteria 13 Balloon Hangar 13 Vehicle Sheds 13 Developmental Timeline 15 Developmental History 17 Pre-Hangar Era 17 Balloon Hangar Era 17 Coast Artillery Use 20 Post-War and Cold War Eras 21 Riding Stable Era 25 Physical Description - Balloon Hangar 28 Exterior 28 Foundation 28 Structure 28 Wall Surfaces 28 Roofing 28 Interior 29 Floor 29 Walls 29 Mechanical and Plumbing 29 Physical Description - Motor Vehicle Sheds 30 Structure 30 Roofing 30 Siding 30 Significant Features 32 Bibliography 33 Appendix A Structural Evaluation of Balloon Hangar Architectural Evaluation of Balloon Hangar Cost Estimate - Balloon Hangar Fort Barry Balloon Hangar and Motor Vehicle Sheds, 2004. (John Martini) 6 Balloon Hangar Historic Structures Report Introduction This Abbreviated Historic Structure Report was prepared by the National Park Service (NPS), Division of Cultural Resources and Museum Management (CRMM), Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA). Preparation There are four primary sources of research ma- The Historical Architect in charge of the report terials: was Jane Lehman (NPS-CRMM). John Martini, Historical Consultant, conducted the historical 1) The Historic Document Collection of the research. Tennebaum-Manheim Engineers pro- Golden Gate National Recreation Area, located vided the Structural Evaluation, Aviva Litman at the Park Archives and Records Center at the Cleper Architects provided the architectural Presidio of San Francisco; evaluation, and Rudy Carrasquilla Construction Consultant provided the cost estimates. 2) The Historic Document Collection of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area housed Relevant Documents at the Park Archives and Records Center; The Fort Barry Balloon Hangar is one of many cultural resources within the Forts Baker, Barry 3) The Sierra Pacific Area branch of the National and Cronkhite Historic District located within Archives and Records Administration (NARA), the Marin Headlands section of the Golden Gate located at San Bruno; and National Recreation Area. The General Manage- ment Plan/Environmental Analysis (GMP, Sep- 4) The Main branch of NARA located in Wash- tember 1980) is the main planning document for ington, D.C. the GGNRA. Executive Summary The 1973 National Register of Historic Places This Historic Structures Report is being pre- form, expanded in 1979, lists the Fort Barry Bal- pared in order to document the existing condi- loon Hangar as a contributing feature to the tions and provide guidance for the maintenance Forts Baker, Barry and Cronkhite Historic Dis- and preservation of the Fort Barry Balloon Han- trict. When a National Historic Landmark nomi- gar and the adjacent Motor Vehicle Sheds. nation for the Seacoast Fortifications of San Francisco Bay is completed in the near future, the hangar will be listed as a contributing struc- ture. The hangar, building FA-905, is also in- cluded on the List of Classified Structures. Two documents written about the Golden Gate National Recreation Area contain sections about Fort Barry and the Balloon Hangar. The His- toric Resource Study entitled Seacoast Fortifica- tions San Francisco Harbor was written by Erwin Thompson and published by the National Park Service, Denver Service Center, in May 1979. Shortly after this document another Historic Re- source Study, History of Forts Baker, Barry and Cronkhite, was written by Erwin Thompson and published by the Denver Service Center in No- vember 1979. Air Service Recruiting Poster with C-3 Balloon, circa 1920. (NARA) National Park Service 7 Historic Significance The balloon hangar at Fort Barry is a surviving element of the U.S. Army’s brief experimentations with using tethered balloons as part of the nation’s system of coastal defenses. Constructed and abandoned the same year, the structure is the only surviving hangar of its type that actually housed an army balloon, and one of only two examples of its type known to survive in the country. As such, it has a national level of significance for its part in the evolving stories of both coastal defense and military aviation. The U.S. Army began experimenting with using World War I and 1920s lighter-than-air craft during the Civil War when, During World War I, both the Allies and the in 1861 the Union Army contracted with civilian Germans experimented with using balloons in balloon company for relaying signals, spotting combat, both in the familiar “fixed” role of teth- artillery fire and watching enemy troop move- ered spotting platforms and also in the form of ments. An official Air Division was organized in powered dirigibles, which were capable of carry- 1864 as a replacement for the civilian Balloon ing out long-distance bombing sorties. When the Corps, and the division was made part of the United States entered the war in 1917, only three Signal Corps or Signal Service, names that were U.S. balloon companies existed: the 2nd, 14th and used interchangeably from 1864 to 1891. Tethered 24th. General John J. Pershing, realizing the value to the ground and inflated with hydrogen, the of the balloons, repeatedly requested 125 balloon balloons were considered to be less than suc- companies for his Allied Expeditionary Force. cessful in their embryonic role. In 1908, The U.S. However, only 26 companies arrived in France Army’s Board of Ordnance and Fortifications and of these only 17 were sent to the front. 2 authorized $25,000 for the purchase of a diri- gible, and a new Aeronautical Division was cre- The Americans did not have much of their own ated. In August that year, the single hydrogen- equipment, though, and instead adopted the filled airship constituted what would eventually French army’s “Caquot Type R” observation bal- become the US Air Force. Shortly thereafter, the loons. Measuring 92 ft. long and 32 ft. diameter, Division was headquartered at Fort Omaha, Ne- the Type R could stay aloft in winds as high as 70 braska, the home of the Signal Corps School.1 mph. These airships (sometimes derisively called “sausage balloons” because of their bulbous C3 Army Balloon at San Francisco City Hall, circa 1929. (San Francisco Public Library: SFPL AAB-7399) 8 Balloon Hangar Historic Structures Report shape) consisted of a hydrogen-filled body was to identify locations for future hangars and equipped with fins that provided stability in billets, and in a study of existing coastal artillery rough air, and a suspended wicker basket that systems and the nature of the work involved.4 held a two-man crew. Communication between the observers and the ground crew was via a Each company’s equipment consisted of a Type telephone cable spliced onto the mooring line. C-3 tethered observation balloon, a type A-7 Before long, the Americans began manufacturing spherical “free” balloon, a portable hydrogen their own version of the French balloons, which generator, numerous vehicles, mooring winches, the army designated the Type C-3. During 1918- and a maze of ground tackle and rigging equip- 1919, nearly a thousand C-3s were manufactured ment. At this time there were no buildings spe- in the U.S. 3 cifically designed for the balloon companies’ use, either for housing the troops and their equip- The Caquot design proved durable, and the sau- ment or for storing the balloons, so the balloons sage balloons continued to be manufactured up were apparently deflated when not in active ser- through World War II, where they frequently vice. saw use as unmanned “barrage balloons” de- signed to ward off low-flying aircraft. (Only one The 24th was briefly detached to Fort Worden in Caquot Type R / C-3 is known to exist today, and Washington State in May 1920 where they car- is on display at the U.S. Air Force Museum in ried out similar duties planning future balloon Dayton, Ohio.) sites in the Harbor Defenses of Puget Sound. An idea of the amount of equipment allocated to the In 1920 the Air Service decided to dispatch sev- balloon companies is indicated by a report filed eral balloon companies to the Pacific Coast to upon the arrival of the 24th at Fort Worden, carry out experiments with the Coast Artillery in which stated the company’s equipment filled coordinating fire control between aerial observ- eight railroad cars.5 ers and fixed shore batteries. The 14th and 24th companies arrived in San Francisco on April 10, The company returned to San Francisco later 1920, and were assigned respectively to Fort that summer and on November 24, 1920, the Funston in San Francisco and Fort Baker in the Coast Artillery carried out the first balloon-as- Marin Headlands. At the time of its arrival at sisted firings of a major caliber gun battery, Fort Baker, the 24th Company was under the when a crew from the 24th Balloon Company command of First Lieutenant F. J. Durrschmidt, moored at Fort Barry directed the fire of the two Air Service. During their three weeks at San 12-inch guns near Point Bonita at Fort Barry. Ac- Francisco the balloons did little flying. Instead, cording to the Air Service Newsletter: the companies’ mission during this early phase Ft.