U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HANGAR …

U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HANGAR NO. 101 AND HANGAR NO. 102

Honolulu County Hawaii

PHOTOGRAPHS

WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA

REDUCED COPIES OF MEASURED DRAWINGS

FIELD RECORDS

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY PACIFIC WEST REGIONAL OFFICE

National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior

333 Bush Street San Francisco, CA 94104

HASS Hl-311-Q HABS Hl-311-Q

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY

. r tfft1\¢'<, , ;,.,~::p~~ U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HANGARS 101 AND 102

Location:

Present Owner:

Present Use:

Significance:

HABS No. Hl-311-Q

Restricted. The two hangars, 101 and 102, are located on the Mokapu Peninsula on the windward side of Oahu, Hawaii, on present-day Marine Corps Base {MCB) Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay. The locations of the two hangars are restricted pending concurrence of the owner to release the building locations to the public. MCB Hawaii is located near Hawaii.

U.S. Marine Corps

Aircraft Hangar

Hangars 101 and 102 at MCB Hawaii are significant for their association to American military history and architecture. First, the two buildings are part of the U.S. military and economic expansion into the Pacific region starting in the 1930s and early 1940s to counter the Japanese Empire. The hangars are associated with the Hepburn Board's recommendation, and the U.S. Navy's implementation of those recommendations, for the development of a naval air base at Kaneohe Bay on Oahu for five patrol squadrons to relieve overcrowding of aircraft at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor {the only permanent naval air station in Hawaii). Second, the hangars are part of the Navy's aviation infrastructure that developed during World War II, and NAS Kaneohe Bay was developed to field primarily the Consolidated Patrol Boat Y {PBY) Catalina and other patrol bombers to maintain control of the shipping lanes of the Pacific. Hangars 101 and 102 were built to house and repair the station's Catalina aircraft. Third, the design of Hangars 101 and 102 represent the distinctive characteristics of the standardized B-M Seaplane Hangar type constructed in the U.S. military buildup before and during World War II. As part of the 1940 Naval Appropriations Act, the Navy contracted with the Albert Kahn, Inc. architectural firm to produce standardized plans for landplane and seaplane hangars. The distinctive characteristics, design, and materials used in the construction of Hangars 101 and 102 are an expression of Kahn's standardized seaplane hangar work are excellent examples of his military hangar design. Fourth, Hangar 101 is directly connected to the Japanese attack on 7 December 1941. The targeting of NAS Kaneohe, the near complete destruction of Hangar 101 in the Japanese attack of 7 December 1941, and the subsequent repair and reconstruction of Hangar 101 are associated with the United States' entry into World War II, a major event that has contributed to the broad pattern

U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HANGARS 101 AND 102 HABS No. HI‐311‐Q

(Page 2)

of U.S. history. Additionally, the repairs and reinforcement to Hangar 101 embody the military’s construction and design response to the attack of 7 December 1941. Hangar 101 was bombed and nearly destroyed during the attack and is a contributing element to the NAS Kaneohe Bay National Historic Landmark (NHL) at MCB Hawaii. Both Hangars 101 and 102 are determined eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as contributing elements to the NAS Kaneohe Bay Historic Aviation District.

Historians: Geoff Mohlman, MA; David Crowell, MS; and Travis Fulk, MA, SEARCH,

February 2015.

Project The Historic American Buildings Survey team for this project included Geoff Information: Mohlman, MA; David Crowell, MS; John Cullinane, AIA; and Travis Fulk, MA,

all of whom work for SEARCH. The team also included Dennis Hirota, PhD, PE, LPLS, of Sam O. Hirota, Inc., and David Franzen of Franzen Photography. Geoff Mohlman, David Crowell, and Travis Fulk served as the historians for the project; Dennis Hirota served as the Engineer and Surveyor; and David Franzen served as the photographer.

Part I. Historical Information

A. Physical History 1. Date(s) of erection: 1940, Maintenance Hangar (102); 1940‐41, Hangar 101; 1941‐

42, Hangar 101 Repair; 1941‐42, Maintenance Hangar (102) Expansion1 2. Architect: Albert Kahn, Inc.2 (presently Albert Kahn Associates) 3. Original and subsequent owners, occupants, uses: The two hangars were originally

utilized by the U.S. Navy from 1940‐41 to 1952. The buildings were transferred to the U.S. Marine Corps in 1952 and remain in its stewardship today. The buildings were originally used as seaplane hangars, and subsequent use has them still serving their original function as aircraft hangars but now for fixed rotor aircraft.

4. Builder, contractor, suppliers: Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases (CPNAB)3

1 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Maintenance Hangar, Elevations, December 9, 1939, drawing no. 136477;

Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Historic Building Inventory: World War II Era Buildings Aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay (August 2011), 49‐52.

2 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Maintenance Hangar, Elevations, December 9, 1939, drawing no. 136477; Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Historic Building Inventory: World War II Era Buildings Aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay (August 2011), 49‐52.

3 Anthony, Hawaii Under Army Rule.


(Page 3)

5. Original plans and construction: Albert Kahn Inc.’s Maintenance Hangar plans were approved in December 1939, and CPNAB began construction in 1940. The date of the plans for Hangar 101 is not known; however, CPNAB began construction in 1940. The Maintenance Hangar (102) and Hangar 101 were completed by December 1941, prior to the Japanese attack. Both hangars were based on the standardized Type B‐M Seaplane Hangar, although the Maintenance Hangar (102) was designed and built at roughly quarter‐scale to be easily expanded to a full‐size B‐M Seaplane Hangar. Because the standardized B‐M plans and Hangar 101 plans could not be located and compared, it is not known if there were any variations to the standardized design outside of the approximate quarter‐scale version of the Maintenance Hangar (102). The hangars were built in a line parallel to the seaplane ramps along Kaneohe Bay with the hangar door openings perpendicular to the bay. Parking, taxiways, and paved areas surrounded the hangars.

Hangar 101 was based on standard B‐M Seaplane Hangar design of a rectangular, steel‐frame building around a central, single open hangar bay flanked by two‐story lean‐tos on the northeast and southwest sides of the hangar. Overall hangar dimensions of the B‐M Seaplane Hangars were 320'‐0" x 240'‐0", and the open hangar bay was created by the clear span, flat gabled trusses at an interior height of 38'‐0". The flat gabled roof was a built‐up composite roof topped by the two distinctive sawtooth monitors. There were large, horizontal‐rolling, hangar doors on the southeast and northeast sides of Hangar 101. The hangar doors were made up of steel‐frame door panels with two rows of steel‐sash panel windows. There were large rectangular hangar door storage bays on the north, east, south, and west corners of the hangar. Steel‐sash window panels clad the first and second floors’ exterior of the lean‐tos, and the rest of the exterior was clad in asbestos‐protected metal panels, scheduled on the original plans as mansard protected metal. The original design of the Maintenance Hangar (102) was a rectangular‐plan, steel‐frame building with a central open bay and flanked by one‐story lean‐tos on the northeast and southwest side of the hangar. The overall dimensions of the hangar and lean‐tos was 158'‐2" x 110'‐0" and 45'‐0" high. The Maintenance Hangar (102) roof had a low‐pitch shed roof, later expanded to a flat gable, with a built‐up composite roof. There was a large, horizontal‐rolling, hangar door with steel‐sash panel windows and a large rectangular hangar door storage at the north corner on the northwest side. Steel‐sash panels clad the exterior lower third of the hangar and lean‐tos. Corrugated asbestos or asbestos‐coated corrugated metal clad the hangar door storage and the upper third of the hangar covering the steel trusses. The monolithic floor was reinforced poured concrete. Scuttles topped the hangar door storage bay.

6. Alterations and additions: Both hangars have undergone major alterations since the original construction, ranging from the rebuilding of Hangar 101 to the expansion of


(Page 4)

Hangar 102. Although the hangars have been extensively altered on the interior and exterior, the massing of the buildings remains essentially unchanged. With the exception of the center administration areas and enclosed second floor lean‐tos, the interior layout of the rooms and door openings remain largely intact since the original construction. a. Hangar 101

The first significant alterations to Hangar 101 were the repairs and reinforcement of the structure following the Japanese attack in 1941. Much of the steel framing was reused through straightening, patching, and adding additional steel for rigidity, such as the built‐up lattice box beams on the center columns. The steel columns in the hangar, and steel‐sash window headers and sills in the lean‐tos, were encased in concrete. The floors and roof decks in the lean‐tos were replaced with poured concrete slab floors and roof decks, and new interior and exterior walls, windows, and doors were installed throughout the hangar. The hangar door bays were rebuilt and hardened.4 Subsequent major alterations to Hangar 101 occurred in the early‐to‐mid‐1970s, 1990, 1998, and 2009. Repairs to the hangar doors were made in the mid‐1960s, and the steel‐sash window panels in the door were still present at the time.5 The electrical systems for both Hangar 101 and 102 were upgraded in 1970, and mercury light fixtures replaced the original light fixtures in both hangars in 1973. Some infilling of the steel‐sash window panels was begun at Hangars 103‐105 in the early 1970s, and the original fenestration at Hangars 101‐105 was dramatically altered in 1975 during a project that brought climate control to the

4 Jacobs/Burns & McDonnell, 35% Historic Design Review, FY14 Project P‐863 Aircraft Maintenance

Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.0:8; 3.0:10.

4 Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar, Elevations & Section, December 3, 1941, drawing no. 164,314; Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar, First Floor, December 3, 1941, drawing no. 164,329; Mason Architects, “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Aviation District, Honolulu, Hawaii,” National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, 7:4.

5 Jacobs/Burns & McDonnell, 35% Historic Design Review, FY14 Project P‐863 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.2:7.



(Page 5)

lean‐tos areas of the hangars. The project included the installation of new water chillers, air conditioners, ductwork and mechanical systems, insulation, weatherproofing, doors, and chain link fencing. Both the exterior and interior steel‐sash window panels were infilled with various finishes, including expanded metal mesh, cement plaster, and spray‐on insulation over metal furring channels. Interior glass doors were also scheduled to be covered in hardboard panels.6 Gypsum‐board panels were installed over insulation material and plywood that covered steel‐sash window panels infilled previously. Awning‐style sash windows previously installed in the hangars were fixed, the openings were sealed, and existing soundproofed walls were clad in gypsum‐board panels. Minor repairs were made to the interior finishes of the Hangar 101 lean‐tos in 1977 and also included repairs to the hangar doors and exterior windows. Repairs were made to the gutters, downspouts, flashing, and safety rails, and exterior ladders were upgraded at Hangars 101‐105 in 1981 under two separate projects. Drawings from both projects as well as photographs from that time show the sawtooth roof monitors still present on the roofs of Hangars 101 and 102. An energy improvement project in 1982 replaced several hot water heaters and installed heat pumps and new ventilation in the bathrooms of Hangars 101‐105. Upgrades to the air conditioner, chiller units, and mechanical controls were made at Hangars 101‐105 in 1984. In 1990, a major alteration to the interiors of the hangar bays occurred at Hangars 101‐103 and 105 with the construction of the centerline structures to create additional shops and administration space. The two‐story centerline structures partitioned the single, wide‐open hangar bay and monolithic floor created by the clear‐span flat gable trusses, significant features of the original Kahn design, into two separate bays. The original monolithic floor slabs were cut, removed, and patched to build the centerline structures. The centerline structures were identical, roughly H‐shaped rectangular structures planned for Hangars 101, 103, and 105. The project also installed 2.5‐ton hoists mounted on monorails fastened to the underside of the trusses in all of the hangars, including 104.


Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.2:7.



(Page 6)

A small electrical upgrade project related to the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Act took place at Hangar 101 in 1996‐97, and the next major alteration to Hangars 101‐105 was a project in 1998 with the hangars being re‐roofed with corrugated, galvanized metal roofing. While no demolition plans of the sawtooth monitors were included in the incomplete set of plans, the installation of square skylights in the main hangar roofs would suggest that the removal of the monitors was performed as a part of the project. The existing sprinkler systems were relocated to a new roof level also suggesting that the sawtooth monitors were demolished, which necessitated adjustments to the fire protection system. The shed roof canopies over the hangar doors were altered, flattening the pitch, extending the roof overhang, and installing the turnbuckle hanging rod hardware. Some interior and exterior finishes were altered with metal siding replacement, some window and door replacement, changes to interior wall finishes, mechanical system demolition, acoustical ceiling installation, and hangar door repainting. The 1998 plans show the second floors of the lean‐tos open to the hangar bays. Minor work was performed at Hangar 101 in the ensuing decade with new day lighting controls in 2000, a communications upgrade in 2003, and pavement restoration of the south flight line in 2007. In 2009, the most recent major alteration took place at Hangar 101. The second story of the lean‐tos were enclosed with fire‐ and sound‐rated solid walls and insulation, fixed sash windows, and roll‐up doors for access to the existing fire protection riser. The original pipe railing from the open second floor was preserved with the walls constructed on the inside of the railing. A new wet pipe fire sprinkler system and suspended acoustical ceiling system was installed in newly created corridors. Repairs were made to existing floor coverings and suspended acoustical ceilings, existing spray on insulation was removed from ceilings, and new and existing spaces received new paint. Extensive plumbing renovations were made, removing and replacing existing fixtures and installing new floor drains, hot water heaters, and supply and waste lines as necessary. New ventilation systems and duct modifications were installed in the bathrooms as needed. New electrical systems were installed in the newly created corridors, and new lighting was installed throughout the lean‐tos. Environmental remediation included removal of lead‐based paint and asbestos in the work areas.

b. Hangar 102

The first major alteration to the original Maintenance Hangar was the expansion of the hangar to full size in 1942. Designed at a roughly quarter‐scale, the Maintenance Hangar (102) was expanded to the southeast and southwest of the original hangar footprint. It would be nearly thirty years from the expansion of the hangar that any work was recorded. The steel‐sash windows and panels at


(Page 7)

Hangars 102‐104 were repaired in 1971, replacing broken glass panes, painting metal and wood panes, and replacing steel‐sash members and operators. In addition to painting the steel and wood panes, the exterior and interior of all steel sashes, angle iron casing, mullions, and flashing were to be painted. All window dimensions, glass pane sizes, and existing conditions were also to be recorded as part of the project. The electrical systems for both Hangar 101 and 102 were upgraded in 1970, and mercury light fixtures replaced the original light fixtures in both hangars in 1973. The 1970 plans for the electrical upgrade project show that the majority of the steel‐sash window panels were infilled at Hangar 102, and most of the original fenestration at Hangars 101‐105 was dramatically altered in 1975 during a project that brought climate control to the lean‐tos areas of the hangars. The project included the installation of new water chillers, air conditioners, ductwork and mechanical systems, insulation, weatherproofing, doors, and chain link fencing. Both the exterior and interior steel‐sash window panels were infilled with various finishes including expanded metal mesh and cement plaster and spray‐on insulation over metal furring channels. Interior glass doors were also scheduled to be covered in hardboard panels.7 Gypsum‐board panels were installed over insulation material and plywood that covered steel‐sash window panels infilled previously, date unknown. Awning‐style sash windows previously installed in the hangars were fixed, the openings were sealed, and existing soundproofed walls were clad in gypsum‐board panels. Repairs were made to the gutters, downspouts, flashing, and safety rails, and exterior ladders were upgraded at Hangars 101‐105 in 1981 under two separate projects. Drawings from both projects as well as photographs from that time show the sawtooth roof monitors still present on the roofs of Hangars 101 and 102. An energy improvement project in 1982 replaced several hot water heaters and installed heat pumps and new ventilation in the bathrooms of Hangars 101‐105. Upgrades to the air conditioner, chiller unit, and mechanical controls were made at Hangars 101‐105 in 1984. In 1989, emergency shower and eye wash stations were installed in the hangar bays of Hangars 102 and 105.


Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.2:7.



(Page 8)

In 1990, a major alteration to the interiors of the hangar bays occurred at Hangars 101‐103 and 105 with the construction of the centerline structures to create additional shops and administration space. The two‐story centerline structures partitioned the single, wide‐open hangar bay and monolithic floor created by the clear‐span flat gable trusses, significant features of the original Kahn design, into two separate bays. The original monolithic floor slabs were cut, removed, and patched to build the centerline structures. The centerline structure at Hangar 102 was a narrow, roughly U‐shaped, rectangular form. The project also installed 2.5‐ton hoists mounted on monorails fastened to the underside of the trusses in all of the hangars, including 104. In 1992, the fire protection system was further upgraded at Hangar 102. The next major alteration to Hangars 101‐105 was a project in 1998 with the hangars being re‐roofed with corrugated, galvanized metal roofing. While no demolition plans of the sawtooth monitors were included in the incomplete set of plans, the installation of square skylights in the main hangar roofs would suggest that the removal of the monitors was performed as a part of the project. The existing sprinkler systems were relocated to a new roof level also suggesting that the sawtooth monitors were demolished, which necessitated adjustments to the fire protection system. The shed roof canopies over the hangar doors were altered, flattening the pitch, extending the roof overhang, and installing the turnbuckle hanging rod hardware. Some interior and exterior finishes were altered with metal siding replacement, some window and door replacement, changes to interior walls, mechanical system demolition, acoustical ceiling installation, and hangar door repainting. The 1998 plans show the second floors of the lean‐tos open to the hangar bays and no centerline constructed in Hangar 103. Other minor work that closed out the millennium included the installation of another crane beam in 1999 in Hangar 102 on the underside of the gable trusses. The new millennium saw a communications upgrade project completed at Hangar 102 in 2003, and in 2008 a new chiller was installed on the exterior bayside of the hangar. The most recent major alteration took place at Hangar 102 in 2009. The second story of the lean‐tos were enclosed with fire‐ and sound‐rated solid walls and insulation, fixed‐sash windows, and roll‐up doors for access to the existing fire protection riser. The original pipe railing from the open second floor was preserved with the walls constructed on the inside of the railing. A new wet pipe fire sprinkler system and suspended acoustical ceiling system were installed in newly created corridors. Repairs were made to existing floor coverings and suspended acoustical ceilings, existing spray on insulation was removed from ceilings, and new and existing spaces received new paint. Extensive plumbing renovations were made, removing and replacing existing fixtures and installing new floor drains, hot water heaters, and supply and waste


(Page 9)

lines as necessary. New ventilation systems and duct modifications were installed in the bathrooms as needed. New electrical systems were installed in the newly created corridors, and new lighting was installed throughout the lean‐tos. Environmental remediation included removal of lead‐based paint and asbestos in the work areas.

B. Historical Context

Introduction

Hangars 101 and 102 at MCB Hawaii are associated with four major themes in American military history and architecture. First, the two buildings are part of the U.S. military and economic expansion into the Pacific region starting in the 1930s and early 1940s to counter the Japanese Empire. Second, the hangars are part of the Navy’s aviation infrastructure that developed during World War II to field the Consolidated Patrol Boat Y (PBY) Catalina and other patrol bombers to maintain control of the shipping lanes of the Pacific. Third, the design of the hangars represents the distinctive characteristics of the standardized B‐M

Seaplane Hangar type constructed in the U.S. military buildup before and during World War II. The distinctive characteristics, design, and materials used in the construction of the hangars, designed by Albert Kahn, Inc., are an excellent expression of the work of a master and whose components represent a significant and distinguishable entity. Fourth, the targeting of NAS Kaneohe, the near complete destruction of Hangar 101 in the Japanese attack of 7 December 1941, and subsequent repair and reconstruction of Hangar 101, are associated with the United States’ entry into World War II, a major event that has contributed to the broad pattern of U.S. history.

Expanding the U.S. Naval Bases in the Pacific, 1930–39

During the 1930s, the Empire of Japan initiated both economic and military expansion within the Pacific Rim in hopes of creating a greater sphere of influence within the region. This expansion, known first as the New Order in East Asia, and later as the Greater East Asia Co‐Prosperity Sphere, culminated in 1937 with Japan’s invasion of mainland China, an ally of the United States. The U.S. government, seeing threats to its strategic partners in Asia from the expansion of Japan, began revising its basic war plan for the region and planning for new bases in the region.8 In July 1938, Secretary of the Navy Charles Edison appointed Admiral Arthur J. Hepburn, former commander in chief of the fleet, to chair a board to review American defenses in the Pacific and to make recommendations pertaining to how they might be strengthened.9

8 See Edward Miller, War Plan Orange: The U.S. Strategy to Defeat Japan, 1897–1945 (Annapolis, MD: U.S.

Naval Institute Press, 2007). 9 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II: History of the Bureau of Yards and

Docks and the Civil Engineer Corps, Volume 1 (Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1947), 4.


(Page 10)

Hepburn was uniquely qualified to chair the board to examine the defenses of the Pacific. He graduated from the Naval Academy in 1897 and served on the battleship Iowa during the Spanish‐American War. After that war, Hepburn assisted in oceanic surveys in the Pacific during the 1900s and served on several ships during World War I. He then served as head of U.S. Naval Intelligence in the late 1920s. Between June 1932 and July 1933, he served as a naval member to the three‐power Limitations of Arms Conference, as naval adviser to the Geneva Delegation in Switzerland, and to the American Representative at the London Naval Conference. At the culmination of his career, Hepburn served as commander in chief of the U.S. fleet in 1936.10 These experiences allowed Hepburn to understand the strategic importance of bases in the Pacific.

The Hepburn Board quickly but methodically reviewed the existing Naval War Plans for the Pacific (War Plan ORANGE) and other documents from various naval bureaus to determine the needs of the United States in protecting the Pacific. Regarding the review process, Hepburn stated, “I would say that every item that the board has suggested has been considered in the past some time by one department or another or by the Joint Board involved, and they have been put down as projects to be attained when they can get the money.”11 In December 1938, the Hepburn Board submitted its final report to Congress, which recommended:

the establishment of new air bases and the expansion of existing bases to provide three major air bases on each coast, one in the Canal Zone, and one in Hawaii; with outlying operating bases in the West Indies, Alaska, and our Pacific island possessions. The board also recommended that the naval air training station at Pensacola be greatly enlarged and that possibly an additional air training station be established at Corpus Christi, Texas; new submarine bases be established in Alaska and the mid‐Pacific area, and several existing stations be improved or retained. Some additional facilities were suggested for the existing destroyer bases at Philadelphia and San Diego. No new mine bases were considered necessary, but certain deficiencies were noted in existing bases. A general priority schedule was set up, based on the necessity for providing facilities when the ships and aircraft authorized by the Vinson bill would be completed. In addition, there was a list of projects, considered to be of immediate strategic importance, which should be undertaken at the earliest practicable date. These items were: (1) improvement of air facilities at Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii; (2) submarine and air bases at Wake Island, Midway Island, and Guam; (3) air facilities at Johnston Island and Palmyra Island; (4) air and

10 U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command, “Hepburn,” electronic document,

http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/h5/hepburn.htm. 11 Arthur Hepburn quoted in Public Works Authorization Act. H.R. Committee on Naval Affairs Hearings,

76th Congress, 1st Session, 26 January 1939, p. 94; Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume I, 4.


(Page 11)

submarine bases at Kodiak and Sitka; and (5) submarine facilities at San Juan, Puerto Rico.12

The report was met with excitement by the U.S. public and political leaders. The New York Times called the report “the most complete ever written so far as the navy, air and submarine defenses of the nation are involved.”13 While the Hepburn Board determined that Guam, already surrounded by Japanese possessions, probably could not be defended by the United States, it stressed the importance of the islands of Midway, Wake, Johnston, and Palmyra. The board also recommended the development of a naval air base at Kaneohe Bay on Oahu for five patrol squadrons to relieve overcrowding of aircraft at Ford Island, Pearl Harbor (the only permanent naval air station in Hawaii).14

The Navy’s plan for expansion of its bases was part of a larger mobilization of the American economy for war, which began in 1939, picked up sharply in mid‐1940 after the Germans overran Western Europe, and finally achieved real efficiency in 1943.15 The U.S. Congress authorized $5.8 million for the construction of the base at Kaneohe Bay on 25 April 1939.16 Later that year, on 5 August 1939, the Navy signed the contract for the construction of a new naval air station at Kaneohe, on the northern shore of Oahu, as well as the expansion of the existing air base on Ford Island and the construction of naval air facilities on Midway, Johnston, and Palmyra islands, at a total cost of $15.5 million.17 By 1941, Congress passed another $186 million for the expansion of naval bases in the Pacific, including the continued expansion of Naval Air Station (NAS) Kaneohe Bay.18

Naval construction of NAS Kaneohe Bay, as well other construction projects in Hawaii and the American islands of the Pacific, was conducted by Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases (CPNAB) and was part of “the most stupendous building program ever undertaken in history.”19 Seeing the large scale of the construction work the Navy needed in the Pacific, and knowing that no one company was capable of it, a consortium of three construction companies, each a specialist in its own field, combined to design and construct defense installations in the Pacific Ocean area, including the islands of Hawaii, Wake, Johnston, and Midway. CPNAB’s cost‐plus‐a‐fixed‐fee contract began with a capacity of $31 million and

12 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 1, 4 13 New York Times, “Navy Board Urges 41 Defense Bases for Entire Nation,” 4 January 1939. 14 New York Times, “Island Defense Plans Alter Pacific Picture,” 12 February 1939. 15 John W. Jeffries, “Part One: Mobilization and Its Impact,” in World War II and the American Home Front:

A National Historic Landmarks Theme Study (Washington, D.C., The National Historic Landmarks Program, 2007), 10.

16 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 1, 28. 17 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II: History of the Bureau of Yards

and Docks and the Civil Engineer Corps, Volume 2 (Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1947), 121. 18 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 1, 34. 19 Joseph Garner Anthony, Hawaii Under Army Rule (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1975), 3.


(Page 12)

expanded to over $200 million.20 Because of the size of the projects, CPNAB subcontracted with the renowned industrial architectural firm Albert Kahn, Inc. to design facilities and brought in Morrison‐Knudsen Company, which constructed the Hoover Dam, as contractor.21

Initial Construction of Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay, 1939–41

As originally planned, NAS Kaneohe Bay was designed to be a seaplane base with facilities to support five patrol squadrons. CPNAB commenced construction in September 1939, under the Pacific Naval Air Base contract, on forty‐two projects at the new base. The major project entailed extensive dredging operations to provide the necessary seaplane runways within the sheltered waters of Kaneohe Bay. Dredging continued for three years, during which time 11 million cubic yards of material were removed.22

The Navy had initially considered two sites within Kaneohe Bay for the new air base: Libbyville on the shore of Kaneohe Bay and the Mokapu Peninsula. The Commander of Patrol Wing Two, based at Pearl Harbor, argued that the west side of Mokapu, Heleloa, had the necessary waterfront area to develop a base and the open space needed for the construction of base buildings. Finally, the Heleloa tract also allowed the Navy future expansion of the base and the runways.23

On 10 August 1939, the Navy acquired 553 acres of land from the Mokapu Land Company and other owners for the new air station. The area was quickly added to when a second tract of land of 33.9 acres was acquired on 8 September 1939. The CPNAB first constructed temporary wooden structures to house the workers and then began building aircraft hangars, gasoline storage, administration buildings, recreation facilities, warehouses, housing, and mess halls.24

Mokapu Peninsula had already been used by the U.S. military before the construction of the new base. In 1918, the U.S. Army occupied approximately 322 acres on the eastern side of the peninsula for military use. The base was likely named Fort Kuwa‘ahoe Military Reservation, and the base was deactivated sometime after the war. During the buildup for World War II, the United States reactivated the former Fort Kuwa‘ahoe as Camp Ulupau in 1941 and redesignated it Fort Hase the next year.25

20 Anthony, Hawaii Under Army Rule, 3; Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World

War II, Volume 2, 121. 21 Steve Spiller, “An Island Worth Defending,” ppresentation to the Redlands Fortnightly Meeting, #1748,

electronic document, http://www.redlandsfortnightly.org/papers/spiller07.html. 22 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 2, 138. 23 Mason Architects, “World War II Resources of U.S. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay,” National Register of

Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form, E‐2. 24 Mason Architects, “World War II Resources of U.S. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay,” E‐3. 25 Mason Architects, “World War II Resources of U.S. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay,” E‐2.


(Page 13)

By the fall of 1941, NAS Kaneohe Bay contained approximately ninety permanent concrete‐masonry and steel facilities and sixty temporary wooden facilities, and 465 acres had been added to the base. Among those new facilities constructed to support the patrol aircraft were:

five steel hangars,

five seaplane ramps,

concrete parking areas,

two warm‐up aprons,

one maintenance hangar,

two seaplane hangars, and

two Midway‐type hangars.

Shops, offices, and toilets/locker rooms were built as approximate 24’‐wide lean‐tos adjoining the hangars. Because most of the buildings in the hangar and airstrip areas were located on fill land, pile foundations were required. Corrugated asbestos, asbestos‐protected corrugated metal, corrugated metal, lathe and concrete plaster, steel‐sash panels, steel‐sash window panels, and gypsum‐board panels were used as walls, partitions, and sheathing on hangars and similar structures at NAS Kaneohe Bay.

The pre‐Japanese attack buildings at NAS Kaneohe Bay, including the hangars, torpedo storage, administration buildings, and bachelors’ quarters, were mostly designed by Albert Kahn, Inc., and reflected the industrial style. Kahn was best known for his industrial buildings, including the Ford River Rouge Plant in Dearborn, Michigan, and over 521 factories in the Soviet Union.26 Albert Kahn, Inc. also designed standard plans for aircraft hangars as well as aircraft and tank factories.27 It should be noted that the prewar facilities not designed by Kahn still employ many of the same simple characteristics of Kahn’s designs.28

Consolidated Patrol Boat Y Catalina's and Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay

The reason for the construction of the naval air station at Kaneohe Bay was to house several squadrons of naval patrol aircraft, primarily the Consolidated PBY Catalina that would be used to patrol the shipping lanes of the Pacific. The Catalina’s long range (over 3,100 miles) and ability to carry 4,000 pounds of bombs or torpedoes made it a valuable weapon to the Navy in the Pacific because it could conduct reconnaissance, antisubmarine warfare, and search and rescue. It could also escort conveys. Workshops and magazines were

26 Time, “Industry’s Architect,” 29 June 1942. 27 Aubin Leroy, “Entre L’usine et la villa Les archives d’Albert Kahn a la Bentley Historial Library,” electronic

document, http://bentley.umich.edu/academic/france/kahn_essay.pdf. 28 Mason Architects, “World War II Resources of U.S. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay,” E‐3.


(Page 14)

constructed at NAS Kaneohe Bay for the storage of bombs, torpedoes, and small arms.29 The PBY was capable of carrying 4,000 pounds of bombs, depth charges, or torpedoes, so the storage of large amounts of armaments was necessary. The PBY Catalina was designed in the early 1930s to serve as a patrol aircraft to locate and attack enemy transports and shipping. During the war, over 4,000 PBYs were constructed and used in all theaters of operations of maritime patrol, antisubmarine warfare, night attack, and search and rescue. It was a PBY Catalina that identified the Japanese Fleet during the Battle of Midway, and the Black Cat Squadron PBYs performed nighttime search‐and‐attack missions using state‐of‐the‐art radar. In fact, during 1942, the PBY and the B‐17 Flying Fortress were the only long‐range aircraft that the United States operated in the Pacific. After World War II, the PBY continued to serve the navies of the United States and its allies until the 1970s. It was also used as an aerial water bomber by the U.S. Forest Service.30

Construction of Maintenance Hangar (Hangar 102) and Hangar 101

Of more than 1,000 hangars in the Department of Defense (DoD) inventory, 16 percent were built during the World War II period (1939–45), and the majority were constructed from standard designs. The military built 161 hangars between 1939 and 1945, with 2 percent (n=4) of the World War II hangars built in 1939, 6 percent (n=10) built in 1940, 32 percent (n=52) constructed in 1941, and 17 percent (n=28) constructed in 1942. The 1939 hangars were built in Florida and Texas, while the military constructed hangars in California, Georgia, Texas, and Hawaii in 1940. By 1941, the number and geographic location of hangar construction greatly expanded, as the United States ramped up its military in response to world events, with hangars constructed in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Texas, Mississippi, New Jersey, Ohio, and Virginia. Similar to the geographic diversity of hangar construction in 1941, hangars built in 1942 were located in Alaska, California, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. For the Navy, the standardized Type B‐M Landplane and the Type B‐M Seaplane Hangars dominated the World War II hangar inventory, both of which typically had distinctive sawtooth monitor roofs.31 Military buildings were often built from standardized plans. These standardized plans combine architectural styles and influences from the period, but the plans were created with features to accommodate military mission. Military architects and their architect

29 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 2, 138–139. 30 Mel Crocker, Black Cats and Dumbos: WWII’s Fighting PBYs (Blue Ridge Summit, PA: AERO, 1987); Louis

B. Dorny and Jim Laurier, U.S. Navy PBY Catalina Units of the Pacific War (Oxford: Osprey, 2007); Bill Yenne and John H. Batchelor, Seaplanes of the World: A Timeless Collection from Aviation’s Golden Age (Cobb, CA: First Glance Books, 1997).

31 Michael A. Pedrotty, Julie L. Webster, Gordon L. Cohen, Aaron R. Chmiel, and Julie L. Webster, Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars: A General History, Thematic Typology, and Inventory of Aircraft Hangars Constructed on Department of Defense Installations, United States Air Force, Air Combat Command, (May 2001), 6‐15, 6‐20, 7‐4, A‐66‐A‐77;


(Page 15)

contractors typically tempered stylistic influences to decrease construction costs and ease construction. Consequently, the buildings constructed from standardized plans would only display a few architectural features of a particular style(s) instead of embodying the full range of stylistic details. While developing standardized plans to increase efficiency and reduce costs in building construction, the military allowed bases to adapt the plans to local weather conditions, materials, and regional stylistic influences and traditions. Accommodating standardized plans to local influences resulted in variation of building materials, massing, size, and ornamentation. Aviation facilities, including hangars, were no exception to military standardization and adaptation to site conditions and available materials.32

As part of the 1940 Naval Appropriations Act, the Navy contracted with Albert Kahn, Inc. of Detroit, Michigan, to produce standardized plans for landplane and seaplane hangars. The standardized plans resulted in the Type B‐M Landplane and Type B‐M Seaplane Hangars. Varying only by size between the landplane and seaplane plans, the B‐M Seaplane Hangar had a single hangar bay measuring 320’‐0” x 240’‐0” that was spanned by a steel flat‐gabled truss at an interior height of 38’‐0”. The landplane hangar bay was smaller than the seaplane hangar, measuring 200’ x 200’ and spanned by a steel flat‐gabled truss at a clear height of 28’‐0”. 33 Hangars 101 and 102 and the majority of the hangars built from these plans were constructed with mansard protected metal exterior walls and roofs or built‐up composite roofs. Variations did occur, with the B‐M hangars at NAS Corpus Christi clad in concrete stucco.

The B‐M Hangars were designed to be constructed incrementally in smaller configurations and to be expanded later or at full scale, based upon funding. Many of the hangars constructed from the B‐M plans had the standardized Two Monitor Sawtooth Form with dual sawtooth monitors running perpendicular to the roof gable and located toward both hangar door ends of the building. There were variations to the B‐M Seaplane Sawtooth Monitor Form, such as the Gable Monitor Form, an alternate design that began to be used in the early 1940s.34 Examples of the B‐M Landplane and Seaplane Hangars were built across Hawaii and the United States. Some locations of Type B‐M hangars include Barbers Point (HI), Corpus Christi (TX), Floyd Bennett (NY), Jacksonville (FL), Kaneohe Bay (HI), Key West (FL), Kodiak (AK), Long Beach (CA), Norfolk (VA), Pearl Harbor (HI), and Quonset Point (RI).35

32 Heather McDonald and Michelle Michael, Design Guidelines for Department of Defense Historic

Buildings and Districts, electronic document http://denix.osd.mil/cr/upload/07‐382_FINAL.pdf; Pedrotty, Webster, Cohen, Chmiel, Webster, Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars, 1‐1‐1‐3, 6‐6.

33 Pedrotty, Webster, Cohen, Chmiel, Webster, Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars, 4‐23

34 Pedrotty, Webster, Cohen, Chmiel, Webster, Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars, .6‐15.

35 Pedrotty, Webster, Cohen, Chmiel, Webster, Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars, 4‐23‐4‐24, 4‐31.


(Page 16)

Albert Kahn’s name is synonymous with early‐to‐mid‐twentieth‐century industrial and military design. Born in Rhaunen, Germany in 1869, Albert Kahn’s parents along with their six children immigrated to the United States in 1880. Having received his architectural training as an apprentice to the architecture firm of Mason and Rice in Detroit and having traveled across Europe for a year studying architecture in 1891, Kahn formed a partnership with George W. Nettleton and Alexander B. Towbridge in 1896. With Towbridge leaving to become dean of the Cornell University School of Architecture in 1897 and Nettleton passing away in 1900, Kahn opened his own architectural firm in Detroit in 1902. During the decades he practiced, Kahn changed industrial design with the prolific use of steel, reinforced concrete, and glass to afford large open spaces with natural light and ventilation, housing an entire manufacturing process under one roof. Kahn is well known for his automobile manufacturing plants and buildings, completing over 1,000 projects for Henry Ford alone. In addition to Ford, Kahn also worked with General Motors, Packard, and Chrysler. During his four decades of industrial design, Kahn and his team supervised the construction of nearly $2 billion in industrial buildings.36

In both World War I and World War II, Kahn used his industrial design expertise to develop standardized plans for the military airplane hangars and other airfield buildings, and in some instances, he designed the majority of significant buildings for entire bases, including Hangars 101 and 102 and Building 215 (Administration building) at present‐day Marine Corps Base Hawaii. During the interwar period of the late 1930s and early 1940s, Kahn also designed industrial buildings for the defense manufacturing industry such as the Detroit Arsenal Tank Plant in Warren, Michigan. Kahn was the architect of the Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases, a coalition of contractors who worked with the Navy and developed NAS Kanehoe Bay. Almost one year after the 7 December 1941 attacks, Albert Kahn passed away on 8 December 1942.37 Despite passing away early in the war, Kahn is one of the preeminent architects of World War II buildings.

Beginning in 1939, fill was used to extend the south and west coastlines of Mokapu Peninsula for airfield and hangar construction. Hangars 101 and 102 were built on fill land consisting of mixed material dredged from the bay, imported or graded material from adjacent uplands, and general material from other sources.38 Fill materials of coral, sand, and coral limestone were dredged from Kaneohe Bay and deposited in low‐lying areas along

36 Hardy Heck Moore Inc., Mitigative Historic Building Recordation for Aircraft Hangars 122 and 123, Naval

Air Station Jacksonville, Florida (September 2005), 5‐6. 37 Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Historic Building

Inventory: World War II Era Buildings Aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay (August 2011), 9, 18; Hardy Heck Moore Inc., Mitigative Historic Building Recordation for Aircraft Hangars 122 and 123, Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida, 5‐6; Wil Chee—Planning, Inc, Helrber Hastert & Fee, Planners, Mason Architects, Inc., Historic Context and Building Inventory, Marine Corps Base Hawaii (February 2012), 42.

38 Soil Survey of the Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, and Lanai, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC. Foote, D. E., E. L. Hill, S. Nakamura, and F. Stephens (1972).


(Page 17)

the coastal flats.39 Because the hangars were constructed on fill lands, the buildings required piling foundations. Present‐day Hangar 102 was originally known as the Maintenance Hangar and was the first of five Seaplane Hangars constructed between 1940 and 1943 at NAS Kaneohe. Designed under contract NOy3550 by Albert Kahn, Inc., the Navy approved plans for the Maintenance Hanger on 9 December 1939. The Maintenance Hangar (102) was designed at a small scale, just over a quarter‐size of Kahn’s standardized B‐M Seaplane Hangar with a single bay measuring 120’‐0” x 160’‐0”. The 1939 plans for the Maintenance Hangar (102) show a one‐story lean‐to added to the northeast and southwest elevations with a two‐story extension in the north corner of the building. The Maintenance Hangar (102) was designed with one hangar door and door storage on the northwest side. Present‐day Hangar 101 was to be located adjacent to the Maintenance Hangar (102) to the southeast. No original plans were found for either the standardized B‐M Seaplane Hangar or Hangar 101, but background research and present‐day building inspection indicates that Hangar 101 was based on the standardized B‐M Seaplane Hangar designed by Albert Kahn, Inc. Built with a low‐sloping gable roof pierced by two sawtooth monitors, Hangar 101 also had large rolling hangar doors with steel‐sash windows, large rectangular hangar door storage bays, low, flat‐gabled steel trusses, open hangar bays, monolithic concrete floors, and subordinate, two‐story lean‐tos attached to the building on the northeast and southwest elevations that functioned as shops, support facilities, and office and administration areas.40 The form, layout, and details, such as extant steel‐sash wall panels and metal framing and clips in Hangar 101, are all indicative of the B‐M Seaplane hangar standardized plan. It is likely that Hangar 101 had individual plans similar to those found for the Maintenance Hangar (102); however, these were not located. Historic aerial photos (see Part III. B.) reveal the progression of construction of Maintenance Hangar (102) and Hangar 101. A 20 April 1940 aerial photograph shows the Maintenance Hangar and seaplane ramps for Maintenance Hangar (102) well under construction by 20 April 1940. In the same photograph, the initial stages of construction of Hangar 101 are visible. Historic photos from six months later (30 October 1940) show the steel frame of the Maintenance Hangar (102) nearly complete, many of the steel‐sash panels installed, and the hangar floor and paved areas being poured. A 29 November 1940 photo shows the

39 Marine Corps Base Hawaii Integrated Natural Resources Management Plan/Environmental Assessment

(MCBH INRMP/EA) (2002–2006). Prepared for Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, under contract to Geo InSight International, Inc., Contract N47408‐98 D‐2408, DO 0005. Prepared by Diane C. Drigot, Environmental Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, and Bruce A. Wilcox and Kristin N. Duin, Sustainable Resources Group International, Inc. Drigot, Diane C., Bruce A. Wilcox, and Kristin N. Duin (2001).

40 Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Historic Building Inventory: World War II Era Buildings Aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay (August 2011), 49; Mason Architects, “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Aviation District, Honolulu, Hawaii,” National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, 7:4.


(Page 18)

Maintenance Hangar (102) progressing, while Hangar 101 remained in the early stages of construction with four of the five seaplane ramps completed, and the parking areas, squadron office, and storage buildings partially completed. On 3 December 1941, the Navy had approved plans to expand the Maintenance Hangar (102) and work on this expansion was underway when the Japanese attacked NAS Kaneohe Bay.

Attack of 7 December 1941 and Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay

By the end of 1941, the Navy had based Patrol Wing 1, a portion of the Scouting Force for the Pacific at NAS Kaneohe Bay, under then‐Commodore Patrick Bellinger. On Sunday morning, 7 December 1941, two waves of Japanese Imperial Navy aircraft attacked NAS Kaneohe Bay. The first wave occurred before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and the second wave took place after Pearl Harbor was attacked. At the time of the attack, Hangar 101 and Maintenance Hangar (102) were complete. Another hangar, Hangar 103, also was completed, while Hangar 104 was under construction. The Japanese attack targeted Hangar 101, seaplane ramps, the airstrip, and aircraft. Hangar 101 was almost completely destroyed during the attack, and the Maintenance Hangar (102), as well as Hangars 103 and 104, suffered some damages.41 A later report by CPNAB described the results of the 7 December 1941 attack on present‐day Hangar 101:

During the attack on Kaneohe, bombs burst on the roof and on the floor of hangar No. 1; 50‐calibre ammunition and planes were set on fire. The wood used in construction of the two‐story leant‐tos, and in the roof deck, added fuel to fires which caused more damage to steel framework than did the bomb bursts. The steel was warped by the fire, pierced by bomb fragments and exploding ammunition.42

An 8 December 1941 after action report by the Commanding Officer (CO) of NAS Kaneohe Bay noted that a bomb struck Hangar 101 and destroyed four planes inside the hangar during the second wave of attacks. A 1 January 1942 report by the Commander of Patrol Wing One noted that two bombs hit the hangar, two bombs hit close to the hangar, and one dud hit the hangar. The fire destroyed all of the records of the two squadrons stationed in the hangar with the exception of service records of the enlisted men of one squadron. The resulting fire burned until the evening when it was finally extinguished. Firefighting efforts were hampered, in part, because the main sprinkler line in Hangar 101 was broken during the attack, and in the confusion, the main valve was not turned off, draining the station's

41 Mason Architects, “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Aviation District, Honolulu, Hawaii,” National Register

of Historic Places Nomination Form, 7:4; Wil Chee—Planning, Inc, Helrber Hastert & Fee, Planners, Mason Architects, Inc., Historic Context and Building Inventory, Marine Corps Base Hawaii (February 2012), 42‐43.

42 Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases, Technical Report and Project History Contracts NOy‐3550 and NOy‐4173 (circa 1945), A‐543 as quoted in Jacobs/Burns & McDonnell, 35% Historic Design Review, FY14 Project P‐863 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.0:8.


(Page 19)

reservoir. 43 Photographs of Hangar 101 shortly after the attack show that most, if not all, of the building envelope and exterior windows did not survive the fire. Sliding hangar doors were half‐bent and off their tracks, and some steel framework were twisted and bent from explosions and the resulting fire. Aerials of the airfield two days after the attack show Hangar 101 as still standing, but severely damaged, while the Maintenance Hangar (102) appears fairly intact, vis‐à‐vis Hangar 101. The CO report noted that Hangar 101 “was burned completely to the steel structural work, but [it] is believed that its frame is in sufficiently good condition so that it can be recovered and used again.”44

The specific damages the Japanese inflicted on Maintenance Hangar (102) are undetermined. Aerial photos taken two days after the attack (9 December 1941) show the expansion work underway at the Maintenance Hangar (102). The expansion, which had started just prior to the attack, continued into the coming months.45

Of the 36 PBY Catalina “flying boats” based at NAS Kaneohe Bay, 27 of 33 on the ground or moored in Kaneohe Bay were destroyed. Only three planes that were on patrol survived the attack, although they did sustain air‐to‐air combat damage from the Japanese forces.46 The United States suffered 18 deaths and 69 wounded at NAS Kaneohe Bay. NAS Kaneohe Bay defenders did manage to shoot down two Japanese planes, and U.S. Navy Ordnanceman John W. Finn, who was wounded during the attacks, later was awarded the Medal of Honor for his heroic actions.47 Commodore Bellinger was responsible for the message, “Air raid, Pearl Harbor … This is no drill,” which was the first notice to the outside world of the attack. After the attack, Bellinger survived the purge of officers, probably because he had co‐authored a report with Air Corps General Fredrick L. Martin, warning of the possibility of an air attack on Pearl Harbor.48

43 Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases, Technical Report and Project History Contracts NOy‐3550

and NOy‐4173 (circa 1945), A‐543 as quoted in Wil Chee—Planning, Inc, Heber Hastert & Fee, Planners, Mason Architects, Inc., Historic Context and Building Inventory, Marine Corps Base Hawaii (February 2012), 43.

44 Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, T.H. “The incidents connected with the air raid at the Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, T.H. on 7 December 1941 – Narrative of” (8 December 1941), 1,3. Commander Patrol Wing One, “Report of Japanese Air Attack on Kanehoe Bay, T.H., ‐ December 7, 1941” (1 January 1942); Historic digitized photographs g32943, h97427, h97430, “Hangar #1 after Japanese attack, 12‐7‐41”, hanger 1 80G32843A, hanger 1 80G32843B on file at Environmental Compliance and Protection Department at MCB Hawaii.

45 Historic digitized photographs "Aerial view of the hanger area 9 December 1941", "Damage of Attack on Hangar #1 and mat, 12‐9‐41", g32943, h97427 on file at Environmental Compliance and Protection Department at MCB Hawaii.

46 Naval History and Heritage Command, “Pearl Harbor Raid, 7 December 1941. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, during the Pearl Harbor Raid,” electronic document, http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/ wwii‐pac/pearlhbr/ph‐kan.htm.

47 USMC Base Hawaii, “Historic Tour and Guide,” electronic document, http://www.mcbh.usmc.mil/tour/ mokapu/Mokapu_military2.htm.

48 Kent Budge, “Bellinger, Patrick Nieson Lunch,” The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia, electronic document, http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/B/e/Bellinger_Patrick_L.htm; Marine Corps Base Hawaii.


(Page 20)

Repair of Hangar 101 and Expansion of the Maintenance Hangar (102)

The Navy began repairs and reinforced Hangar 101 shortly following the Japanese attack. The CPNAB after attack report described the repairs to Hangar 101:

Much of the framing was re‐used, but only at considerable expense; straightening, patching, adding stiffener members. Even the main center column, a 24‐inch "I" beam, with 1‐inch web and flanges, was reinforced by a surrounding cage. Side columns too, although badly twisted, were encased in concrete; the effect was to replace the steel with steel‐core concrete columns. 49

Additional repairs and hardening of Hangar 101 included poured‐in‐place concrete encasing the original steel beams and columns supporting a continuous concrete spandrel beam between the first floor window headers and second floor window sills. The lean‐tos had to be completely rebuilt with the steel encased in concrete and the concrete slab floors and roof decks, new exterior and interior walls, and new doors and windows installed. The hangar door storage bays were nearly destroyed during the attack and were rebuilt as hardened structures for defense in case of future attacks. 50

In addition to the repair and reinforcement of Hangar 101 and in response to the attack, the Navy constructed fifty plane revetments (only Facilities 14, 15, and 17 remain) to protect aircraft on the ground from air attacks. The Navy also shifted its design and construction methods to develop other protective buildings or to harden existing buildings or structures at the base.51

Expansion work on Maintenance Hangar (102), which had begun in the days prior to the Japanese attack, continued in 1942. Albert Kahn, Inc.’s original drawings transformed Hangar 102 from a quarter‐size Maintenance Hangar into a B‐M Seaplane hangar with the two standard sawtooth monitors on the roof. Expansion work on Hangar 102 was completed in 1942. Expansion of the Maintenance Hangar (102) was made with the additions to the southeast and southwest of the original hangar footprint.

49 Contractors Pacific Naval Air Bases, Technical Report and Project History Contracts NOy‐3550

and NOy‐4173 (circa 1945), A‐545 as quoted in Jacobs/Burns & McDonnell, 35% Historic Design Review, FY14 Project P‐863 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.0:8; 3.0:10.

50 Jacobs/Burns & McDonnell, 35% Historic Design Review, FY14 Project P‐863 Aircraft Maintenance Hangar Upgrades, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe, HI, Contract N62742‐10‐D‐007‐008. (March 27, 2013), 2.0:8.


51 Bureau of Yards and Docks, Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II, Volume 2, 139.


(Page 21)

The Navy quickly expanded NAS Kaneohe Bay as the war in the Pacific expanded. The fleet stationed five seaplane patrol squadrons and several land‐based patrol squadrons at NAS Kaneohe Bay. From 1942 to 1945, sixty‐four patrol, three photo‐reconnaissance, and six search‐and‐rescue squadrons operated out of NAS Kaneohe Bay. The base also supported ninety carrier aircraft from Carrier Air Service Unit (CASU) 1A and CASU 38. The Navy also operated an air bomber training unit that trained gunners for the bomber fleet and a school for celestial navigation and other patrol aircraft at NAS Kaneohe Bay.52

World War II and Modern History

After the Battle of Midway in June 1942, the naval combat arenas moved west to other Pacific islands, and the role of bases in Hawaii became focused on supply, repair, and training. The Seabees arrived in mid‐1943 and replaced CPNAB. The Seabees constructed a new bombproof powerhouse and an electrical distribution system that included fourteen concrete substations as well as other support buildings. In February 1944, the Seabees constructed a second runway, measuring approximately 400' x 5,000'.53

After World War II, the Navy decommissioned and closed NAS Kaneohe Bay. All property (except buildings) was transferred to NAS Barbers Point. In the early 1950s, the Marine Corps saw the Mokapu Peninsula as a perfect home for an air‐to‐ground combat unit. On 15 January 1952, Marine Corps Air Station Kaneohe Bay was commissioned to encompass all of what had been NAS Kaneohe Bay and Fort Hase. The next year it became home to the First Marine Expeditionary Brigade, and it continues to be an important part of the Marine Corps presence on the island.54 In 1994 the Marine Corps consolidated the command in Hawaii, and the installation was renamed Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay. The buildings are still serving their original hangar functions, and several alterations have been made to the buildings to suit the modern aviation functions.

Part II. Architectural Information Because the buildings are based on standardized plans, share the same design principles, and are thematically linked, a broader discussion of existing conditions at the hangars will be presented first, and individual discussion of remaining original or significant features will be presented for each hangar below. Both hangars have been extensively altered; however, many significant features remain such as the massing, two‐story lean‐tos, site plan, exposed structural steel‐columns, girders, open‐span trusses, low gable roof, and framing, rolling hangar

52 M. L. Shettle, United States Naval Air Stations of World War II, Volume 2: Western States (Bowersville,

GA: Schaertel Publishing Company, 1995), 111. 53 Mason Architects, “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Administration District,” National Register of Historic

Places Nomination Form, 7:7. 54 USMC Base Hawaii, “Historic Tour and Guide.”


(Page 22)

doors, stairwells and pipe railings, and some steel‐sash panels with glass, wood, and steel panes. Hangars 101 and 102 are parallel to Kaneohe Bay in close proximity to the seaplane ramps, taxiways, and parking areas and arranged southeast to northwest along First Street. Set within an open, paved area, each hangar is a two‐story, rectangular, steel‐framed building with tall rectangular hangar door storage bays at each corner. The hangars are composed of three major sections, with the northeast and southwest sections commonly referred to as lean‐tos, while the middle section is the hangar area. The two‐story lean‐tos house administration areas, restrooms, and shop areas. The lean‐tos are sheltered by flat pitch roofs, while the middle hangar section is capped by flat gable roofs. The central interior hangar space is one large two‐story space that has two levels of shops and offices opening into it from each side. These shops and offices are housed within the attached lean‐tos. One of the main character defining features of the hangars, the single open interior hangar space, was divided into two approximately equal sections in 1990 when two‐story office structures constructed of concrete masonry units were built in the hangar bays. Exterior dimensions of Hangar 101 are 386’‐1 7/8” on the southeast side, 255’‐7 7/8”on the southwest side, 253’‐5” on the northeast side, and 386‐1 1/8" on the northwest side. Hangar 101 is 49’‐11 1/4” high at the south end and 49'11 3/8" on the north end of the northeast side and 50'‐6 1/2" at the north end and 50'‐5 1/2" at the south end of the southwest side. Exterior dimensions of Hangar 102 are 384'‐5 1/8” on the southeast side, 253’‐10 1/4”on the southwest side, 256’‐7 5/8” on the northeast side, and 386‐1 3/4" on the northwest side. Hangar 102 is 386’‐8” on the southeast side, 253’‐9” on the southwest side, 386’‐7” on the northwest side, and 253’‐9” on the northeast side. Hangar 102 is 50’‐5 1/2” high at the south end and 50'‐5 1/2" on the north end of the northeast elevation and 50'‐5 1/2" at the north end and 50'‐7 1/8" at the south end of the southwest elevation. The standardized B‐M Seaplane Hangar exterior dimensions were 320’‐0” x 240’‐0” and spanned by a steel truss with a 38’‐0” interior height. The original foundations of both hangars remain with deep concrete piles driven into the marshy fill to support the reinforced poured concrete footers and reinforced concrete slab foundations. An 8” x 16” strut was constructed under the partition wall of the hangar bay and lean‐tos, and a 10” concrete beam supports the floors. Some of the original mansard protected metal siding remains, but it has been largely removed or encapsulated by repair and modernization projects. The walls of the buildings have a variety of exterior finishes. Originally, the siding was corrugated asbestos panels or asbestos‐covered metal panels, some of which still exists; however, much of it has been replaced with steel siding with a similar corrugation pattern. On the two long sides of each building are large sliding hangar doors, which continue to be manually opened and closed along the historic door tracks. While many of the steel windows in the hangar doors remain, nearly all of them have been painted over or covered from the exterior. Historically, there was a continuous band of steel windows around


(Page 23)

the facilities; however, many of these, though extant on the interior, have been covered with metal siding on the exterior, or the glass has been painted. The exposed steel structure and framing are one of the hallmarks of Kahn’s industrial design. The columns, girders, flat gable roof trusses, and transverse trusses indicative of the original designs are intact, except where they have been altered by the repairs to Hangar 101 and the construction of the centerline offices in both Hangars 101 and 102. Historic exterior door openings are largely extant at Hangars 101 and 102, and the doors have been replaced with modern steel doors. The horizontal rolling hangar doors are still present and in use at Hangars 101 and 102, although much of the dual rows of original steel‐sash panel fenestration have been infilled with solid panels and painted, or flat metal panels have been riveted over the steel‐sash panels. The original roof design of composition roof over wood plank decking and sawtooth monitors has been replaced by galvanized corrugated metal roofs with square skylights on the main hangar gable roof and awning roofs over the hangar doors. The hangar door storage bays and lean‐to roofs are rolled composite roofing, consistent with original roofing schedule. The underside of the galvanized roof is exposed in the hangar bays and other parts of the buildings. Other roof decking material includes plywood and reinforced poured concrete. Access and emergency ladders have been updated with modern safety features and replaced but remain largely in their original locations. Historic door openings between the first‐floor lean‐tos and the hangar bay, second‐floor lean‐to offices, and the corridors and stairs are largely extant at Hangars 101 and 102. A number of door openings have been added and/or altered between the interiors of the lean‐to rooms. Door schedules have mostly changed with steel doors on the first floor and wood slab doors on the second floor, although a few historic doors remain. The walls enclosing the second floors were built inside the historic pipe railings, and the pipe railings remain exposed in the hangar bays of Hangars 101 and 102. Through the years, the majority of the open interior office spaces have been renovated and modernized. Most of the finishes have been altered, and all of the original steel‐sash panel fenestration on the interior and exterior of the hangars has been infilled. Some original wall finishes still present in the interior of the hangars include solid partition walls constructed from both cement plaster and gypsum planks and panels. Some original fire cabinets inset into the interior walls are still present in the hangars. Despite the major alterations, the original floor plan and room layout are mostly intact. Some of the historic high office ceilings within the lean‐tos remain exposed to the structure above, while most have been concealed with a suspended ceiling. The monolithic concrete hangar floors have been altered with the construction of the centerline structures. Much of the remaining exposed concrete floors are historic, some of which has been covered with vinyl floor tiles or carpeting.


(Page 24)

The monitors along with the clearstory above the lean‐tos and steel‐sash panel windows used throughout the hangars supplied light and ventilation to the hangar bays. However, with the removal of the monitors and the infilling of the fenestration, this original major design feature no longer exists, although remnants may be encapsulated in the existing walls. The second‐floor interior spaces in the lean‐tos of both hangars were enclosed in 2009, and the historic second‐floor pipe railing was preserved on the hangar side of the wall enclosure. The stairwells are largely original and contain excellent examples of the original steel framing, pipe railings, and prefabricated construction design. Almost all of the extant original steel sash panels at the hangars are infilled, but portions are still visible in the stairwells of the hangars. All of the historic lighting elements in the lean‐tos have been replaced by fluorescent lighting fixtures, and replacement mercury halide warehouse‐style light fixtures are used in the hangar bays. Air conditioning ducts have been added in some offices. Original bathroom fixtures and finishes have been replaced, and locker room portions of the original bathrooms have been demolished with the space incorporated for other uses. A. Hangar 101

While extensively altered, there are some extant features present at Hangar 101 from the original design. There is also evidence of the repair and reinforcement of the hangar that characterizes changes in design and materials following the 7 December 1941 attack. Where not altered by the centerline construction, the original and the reinforced and repaired steel structure and framing is still visible. The trusses are largely original with some patching and stiffening members and panels added. Evidence of the repair and reinforcement to the steel structure include the offset cross braces in the hangar bay and visible cross bracing in the interior of the lean‐tos, which in the absence of plans and notes about the repair, were ostensibly to straighten and reinforce the twisted and wracked steel structure. The center columns supporting the center transverse truss and gable ends of the roof trusses still have the reinforced built‐up lattice boxes and stiffening members and patches. The steel columns along the northeast and southwest sides of the hangar bays that were encased in reinforced concrete are present. Many original architectural features and evidence of repairs and reinforcement are present in two first‐floor rooms of the southwest lean‐to. Although extensively altered by mechanical and communication modernization projects, original steel‐sash panels with steel, glass, and wood panes are present in their original configuration and installation. The steel framing and strapping and clip‐fastening system for the panel installation is largely intact in one of the rooms, and the steel framed door opening is largely unaltered, although the age of the door is uncertain. The near complete wall and door panel are excellent examples of the original standard design and prefabricated construction. While covered in numerous mechanical systems, the ceilings have not been covered by suspended acoustical tiles or otherwise infilled and show the second‐


(Page 25)

floor concrete‐encased steel floor joists and poured concrete floor decking that replaced the original wood framing that proved to be disastrous during the attack.

B. Hangar 102 Presently, the northwest corner of the street‐side lean‐to at Hangar 102 contains a near complete section of the original 1939 design, with original steel columns, girders, trusses, framing, sash panels (partial), and flashing dating to the earliest construction of the Maintenance Hangar (102) in 1940. The first‐floor room was originally constructed as a paint shop and had a hood vent in the ceiling that is currently covered by suspended acoustic ceiling tiles and visible from the second floor. The first floor room maintains the original layout and door openings of the 1939 design; however, the interior finishes have been extensively altered during several repair and modernization projects, including multiple ceiling, wall, and floor penetrations. A 20" floor drain has been installed in the room and the floor regraded for drainage. A double door leads to the interior of Hangar 102, and a single door leads to the exterior. There is no internal access to the second floor from the room. The second floor is accessed from the hangar bay via a now gated and locked steel ship ladder and steel rail to a room with a wood plank floor and wood framed structure supporting the third floor. In addition to the wood floor and framing, the room also contains original steel framing and fasteners, cement plaster wall finishes, infilled and partially exposed original steel‐sash panels, concrete curbing and steel flashing, and a three‐quarter‐sized door opening that led to the single‐story roof of the street‐side lean‐to. When the second floor was added in 1942, the original structure remained; and the three‐quarter‐sized door presently leads into the interior office at the northwest end of the second floor. There is also a wood plank ship ladder at the bayside end of the room that leads to the hanging steel and wood framed third floor. The third floor is in poor condition but has many original features present such as the original metal framing, lathe, and cement plaster, hanging steel framing, and hanging rods supporting the third floor deck. There is a partially exposed and infilled steel‐sash panel framed in the original steel on the exterior wall, and the 1998 galvanized steel roof and framing serve as the roof and decking above the third floor. A steel mesh equipment cage with a gear loft encloses the street‐side end of the room, date unknown. The framing and decking and suspended steel framing and rods present at Hangar 102 reflect the early hangar design and construction of the B‐M Seaplane Hangars at NAS Kaneohe Bay. The same type of wood construction was likely used in Hangar 101, and because of its role in the near destruction of the hangar, it was redesigned and replaced with concrete reinforced steel framing with a poured concrete floor and roof decks. The original steel columns, trusses, bracing, framing, and cement plaster exterior of the


(Page 26)

three‐story rooms are visible on the interior of the hangar door storage in the north corner of Hangar 102. Evidence of the 1942 Maintenance Hangar expansion is also present at Hangar 102. Where the steel structure and framing was joined to the original framing is visible in the northeast hangar bay of 102, and the floor in the bay contains a seam that shows the areal extent of the original Maintenance Hangar. Additionally, the only steel sash panel, infilled but visible and outside of the stairwells, is located in the northeast hangar bay on the partition wall with the lean‐to.

Part III. Sources of Information As part of the preparation of the HABS documentation of the Hangars 101 and 102 at MCB Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, the historians conducted research at several archival repositories, collecting primary and secondary sources, to prepare the historic context. Archival research was done in Hawaii and Washington, DC, for oral histories, maps, historic photographs, and other pertinent documents. SEARCH historians researched the following repositories:

National Archives and Records Administration, College Park, Maryland;

Facilities Department at MCB Hawaii;

Environmental Compliance and Protection Department at MCB Hawaii; and

The SEARCH library.

A. Architectural Drawings No early drawings of Hangar 101 or Kahn, Inc.'s Standardized B‐M Seaplane Hangar were located during background research. Drawing No. 136476. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Maintenance Hangar First Floor Plan. December 2, 1939. On file at Facilities Department, MCB Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii. Drawing No. 136477. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Maintenance Hangar Elevations. December 2, 1939. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing No. 136479. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Maintenance Hangar. December 2, 1939. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland.


(Page 27)

Drawing Number 136483. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Maintenance Hangar. December 2, 1939. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 136486. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Maintenance Hangar Elevations. December 2, 1939. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164288. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar Mechanical Work. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164291. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar Cross Section and Details. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164314. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar Elevations and Section. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164315. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar Elevations and Section. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164318. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 164322. Navy Department, Bureau of Yards and Docks, U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe (Oahu) T.H. Extension to Maintenance Hangar Sliding Hangar Door Details. December 3, 1941. On file at the National Archives, College Park, Maryland. Drawing Number 04927. U.S. Contractors Pacific Naval Bases, Kaneohe, Extension to Maintenance Hangar Layout Plan, Notes, and Details. December 2, 1939, Contracts NOy3550 and NOy4173. October 16, 1942. 14th Naval District. On file at Facilities Department, MCB Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii.


(Page 28)

Drawing No. 136476

.

I

' ..

·?--;.,;.~ ... .y· -

::;.., _: : . .. ~- ·-:.·

~-.... ~:-. _.,,

... '-·· ~ ~--

' . ..... .. "r-: ,

'•

. ~:·· . . . . •. : ·;.:. ·


(Page 29)

Drawing No. 136477

\ ' '

' ' . '

•.

--;--

: ~ . "\ ' ' ~ ~

I

' ' : . ~

C)

' ..... .... ""- · 'l:!

" ~ "-I"'


(Page 30)

Drawing No. 136479

I - -@

-~ -··

t

! 1!

. ... .....

~ ()

' t

l l...

' I \.)

t l . " .. ! \ ', ~ \ ,"\

l -J ~ '-,

J ' ..J l "' r ' ..,,

~

" sJ

"


(Page 31)

Drawing No. 136483

-.. 0 © ©

\ I ~~ ' l \

lJ • l<:,

~ I+ ·-· • 1<L-~


(Page 32)

Drawing No. 136486

~ ~ ~ e :;;

"' ~ " ' " .. ' ' .., . .., ' ~

" . ; ... . ': ... . ..... ~'i

~ ~ -

~ ... ' ...

t ... ... .., '-:,

' ... ' ... ... .... () r. ...

()

... .. " ... ....

~ • j

r ·r !1 i-tl ,, !t

I_


(Page 33)

Drawing No. 164288

~~~~~,~~~Iii .~t ~4 i } l !

'jj.aj-"'-"l,<I:.- ©

@ l JI~ ·:G> ,!l 1tuh

, . . ,, · t)U lnH

~~~"· ~ 1111 111 · 1


(Page 34)

Drawing No. 164291

~~, 1 P-1

T!_11,n,t1:1~

ti!-,-,~ u i


(Page 35)

Drawing No. 164314


(Page 36)

Drawing No. 164315


(Page 37)

Drawing No. 164318

. ' ----'-"


(Page 38)

Drawing No. 164322


(Page 39)

Drawing No. 04927


(Page 40)

B. Early Views

Historic photos were collected from the Environmental Department, MCB Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Hawaii. Aerial photo, NAS Kaneohe and hangars under construction, looking south, April 20, 1940. Seaplane ramps and hangars under construction, looking northwest, October 30, 1940. Maintenance Hangar (102) under construction, looking east, November 29, 1940. Hangar 101 on fire, looking across First Street, looking northwest, December 7, 1941. Aerial photo, seaplane and hangars following attack, looking southeast, ca. December 1941. Aerial photo, NAS Kaneohe, looking south, 1942.


(Page 41)

Aerial photo, NAS Kaneohe and hangars under construction, looking south, April 20, 1940.


(Page 42)

Seaplane ramps and hangars under construction, looking northwest, October 30, 1940.


(Page 43)

Maintenance Hangar (102) under construction, looking southeast, November 29, 1940.


(Page 44)

Hangar 101 on fire, looking across First Street, looking northwest, December 7, 1941.


(Page 45)

Aerial photo, seaplane and hangars following attack, looking southeast, ca. December 1941.

,ncentr· t.i ,n of t.t c.k .n f ns· r 1 n:1. t. ~


(Page 46)

Aerial photo, NAS Kaneohe, looking south, 1942.


(Page 47)

C. Selected Sources Anthony, Joseph Garner. Hawaii Under Army Rule. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1975. Budge, Kent. “Bellinger, Patrick Nieson Lunch.” In The Pacific War Online Encyclopedia.

Electronic document, http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/B/e/Bellinger_Patrick_L.htm. Bureau of Yards and Docks. Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II: History of the Bureau of

Yards and Docks and the Civil Engineer Corps, Volume 1. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1947.

Bureau of Yards and Docks. Building the Navy’s Bases in World War II: History of the Bureau of

Yards and Docks and the Civil Engineer Corps, Volume 2. Washington, D.C., U.S. Government Printing Office, 1947.

Commanding Officer, Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, T.H. “The incidents connected with the air

raid at the Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay, T.H. on 7 December 1941 – Narrative of”. 8 December 1941.

Crocker, Mel. Black Cats and Dumbos: WWII's Fighting PBYs. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: AERO,

1987. Drigot, Diane C., Bruce A. Wilcox, and Kristin N. Duin 2001 Marine Corps Base Hawaii Integrated Natural Resources Management

Plan/Environmental Assessment (MCBH INRMP/EA) (2002–2006). Prepared for Commanding Officer, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, under contract to Geo InSight International, Inc., Contract N47408‐98 D‐2408, DO 0005. Prepared by Diane C. Drigot, Environmental Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, and Bruce A. Wilcox and Kristin N. Duin, Sustainable Resources Group International, Inc.

Dod, Karl C. The Corps of Engineers: The War Against Japan. Office of the Chief of Military

History, Washington, D.C., 1966. Dorny, Louis B., and Jim Laurier. U.S. Navy PBY Catalina Units of the Pacific War. Oxford:

Osprey, 2007. Drolet, Louis B., and Jim Laurier. U.S. Navy PBY Catalina Units of the Pacific War. Oxford:

Osprey, 2007. Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe

Bay, Hawaii. Historic Building Inventory: World War II Era Buildings aboard Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay. August 2011.


(Page 48)

Environmental Compliance and Protection Department, Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hawaii. Historic digitized photographs g32943, h97427, h97430, “Hangar #1 after Japanese attack, 12‐7‐41”, hanger 1 80G32843A, hanger 1 80G32843B.

Foote, D. E., E. L. Hill, S. Nakamura, and F. Stephens 1972 Soil Survey of the Islands of Kauai, Oahu, Molokai, and Lanai, State of Hawaii. U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Hardy Heck Moore Inc. 2005 Mitigative Historic Building Recordation for Aircraft Hangars 122 and 123, Naval Air

Station Jacksonville, Florida. Naval Facilities Engineering Command Engineering Field Division South.

Jeffries, John W. “Part One: Mobilization and Its Impact.” In World War II and the American

Home Front: A National Historic Landmarks Theme Study. Washington, D.C., The National Historic Landmarks Program, 2007.

Leroy, Aubin. “Entre l’Usine et la Villa: Les Archives d’Albert Kahn a la Bentley Historical

Library.” Electronic document, http://bentley.umich.edu/academic/france/ kahn_essay.pdf.

Mason Architects. Historic Context Report and Historic Preservation Plan for World War II

Defense Accessory Facilities. Building Types Assessment: Splinterproof Shelters and Gun Emplacements. Prepared for Commander, Navy Region Hawaii and NAVFAC Pacific, November 2004.

Mason Architects. “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Administration District.” National Register of

Historic Places Nomination Form. Mason Architects. “Naval Air Station Kaneohe Bay Aviation District, Honolulu, Hawaii.” National

Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Mason Architects. “World War II Resources of U.S. Naval Air Station, Kaneohe Bay.” National

Register of Historic Places Multiple Property Documentation Form. McDonald, Heather, and Michelle Michael 2008 Design Guidelines for Department of Defense Historic Buildings and Districts.

Department of Defense Legacy Resource Management Program Project 07‐382. Electronic document, http://denix.osd.mil/cr/upload/07‐382_FINAL.pdf, accessed 31 January 2013.


(Page 49)

Miller, Edward. War Plan Orange: The U.S. Strategy to Defeat Japan, 1897–1945. Annapolis, MD: U.S. Naval Institute Press, 2007.

Naval History and Heritage Command. “Pearl Harbor Raid, 7 December 1941: Naval Air Station,

Kaneohe Bay, during the Pearl Harbor Raid.” Electronic document, http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/events/wwii‐pac/pearlhbr/ph‐kan.htm.

New York Times. “Navy Board Urges 41 Defense Bases for Entire Nation.” 4 January 1939. New York Times. “Island Defense Plans Alter Pacific Picture.” 12 February 1939. Pedrotty, Michael A., Julie L. Webster, Gordon L. Cohen, Aaron R. Chmiel, and Julie L. Webster.

2001 Historical and Architectural Overview of Military Aircraft Hangars: A General History, Thematic Typology, and Inventory of Aircraft Hangars Constructed on Department of Defense Installations. U.S. Air Force, Air Combat Command.

Public Works Authorization Act. H.R. Committee on Naval Affairs Hearings, 76th Congress, 1st

Session, 26 January 1939. Shettle, M. L. United States Naval Air Stations of World War II, Volume 2: Western States.

Bowersville, GA: Schaertel Publishing Company, 1995. Spiller, Steve. “An Island Worth Defending.” Presentation to the Redlands Fortnightly Meeting,

No. 1748. Electronic document, http://www.redlandsfortnightly.org/papers/ spiller07.html.

Time. “Industry’s Architect.” 29 June 1942. USMC Base Hawaii. “Historic Tour and Guide.” Electronic document,

http://www.mcbh.usmc.mil/tour/mokapu/Mokapu_military2.htm. U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command. “Hepburn.” Electronic document,

http://www.history.navy.mil/danfs/h5/hepburn.htm. Wil Chee Planning, Helber Hastert & Fee, and Mason Architects. Historic Context and Building

Inventory, Marine Corps Base Hawaii (Prefinal), 2012. Yenne, Bill, and John H. Batchelor. Seaplanes of the World: A Timeless Collection from Aviation’s

Golden Age. Cobb, CA: First Glance Books, 1997.


(Page 50)

D. Likely Sources Not Yet Investigated

Sources known or thought to contain further or related information on Hangars 101 and 102 may include:

Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Naval History and Heritage Command, Washington, DC

National Archives and Records Administration, San Francisco, CA

U.S. Navy Seabees Museum, Port Hueneme, CA

WRITTEN HISTORICAL AND DESCRIPTIVE DATA

HABS HI-311-QHABS HI-311-Q

ADDENDUM TO:U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION KANEOHE, SEAPLANE HANGAR ANDLANDPLANE HANGAR(U.S. Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hangar Nos. 101and 102)(Facility Nos. 101 and 102)1st Street between B & C StreetsKailua vicinityHonolulu CountyHawaii

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEYNational Park Service

U.S. Department of the Interior1849 C Street NW

Washington, DC 20240-0001

ADDENDUM TO: U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION KANEOHE, SEAPLANE HANGAR AND LANDPLANE HANGAR

HABS HI-311-Q (Page 51)

HISTORIC AMERICAN BUILDINGS SURVEY

U.S. NAVAL AIR STATION KANEOHE, SEAPLANE HANGAR AND LANDPLANE HANGAR

(U.S. Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hangar Nos. 1 and 2) (Facility Nos. 101 and 102)

This is an addendum to the 50-page report previously transmitted to the Library of Congress.

Original survey name: U.S. Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hangar No. 101 and Hangar No. 102

Corrected survey names: U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe, Seaplane Hangar and Landplane Hangar

(U.S. Marine Corps Base Hawaii, Kaneohe Bay, Hangar Nos. 1 and 2

(Facility Nos. 101 and 102)

Original survey address: Kaneohe vicinity, Honolulu County, Hawaii

Corrected survey address: 1st Street between B & C Streets Kailua vicinity, Honolulu County, Hawaii

Facility No. 101 is located at latitude: 21.441465, longitude: -157.765567. Facility No. 102 is located at latitude: 21.442195, longitude: -157.767111. These points were obtained on July 23, 2019, using Google Earth (WGS84).

While conducting research about three historic hangars at Marine Corps Base Hawaii,1 Ann Yoklavich (Mason Architects, Inc.) found that the site name for this survey did not reflect the original site name, as is HABS convention. Based on her research, the site names and address were updated in 2019.

1 Ann Yoklavich, “U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe, Seaplane Hangar,” addendum to HABS No. HI-311-A, Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 2019; Ann Yoklavich, “U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe, Seaplane Hangar,” HABS No. HI-311-R, Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 2019; and Ann Yoklavich, “U.S. Naval Air Station Kaneohe, Landplane Hangar,” HABS No. HI-311-S, Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS), National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 2019.

Documents

U.S. MARINE CORPS BASE HAWAII, KANEOHE BAY, HANGAR …