Ned Heite,

Looking at (a) potentially eligible historic building(s) out of context is
like looking at a flaked stone Folsom Point in a pothunter's box. The same is
true for quonset huts, Nissen huts and Temporary 600-800 buildings and
structures . All discussion of quonset and Nissen huts relocated to farming
communities, garages and civilian airfields etc. is irrelevant to the issue
of assessing the contributing role a building or structure has to an historic
context. If you determine said buildings and structures have been
substantially altered or are no longer in their original setting, then you
probably fall into the class of things in the collector's box. Finding intact
historic contexts with eligible buildings, structures or districts is and
will be considerable difficult in the future as decision-makers demolish them.

I object to personalized value judgements interfering in Section 106
assessments. I feel federal agencies need objective and open-minded
assessment to protect them from litigation. I do not expect to hear personal
bias used to justify demolition. All talk of quonset huts breaking down old
agricultural communities or temprorary buildings as fire hazards is both
irrelevant and demonstrates a lack of objectivity.

A year ago, I managed a National Register eligible historic district. The
good folks I worked for and with were concerned about the older 1904-1940
district or 32 buildings, but were eager to demolish an intact 1942-1945
cantonment of Series 700 barracks, a mess hall, original latrines, and a
movie theater in direct association with cast concrete artillery batteries,
base end stations, and other infrastructure. The minor issues like modernized
stairs, aluminum windows, and incorrect color are all reversible.
Professionally and personally, I considered the rush to demolish a shame.

One of these days, we are going to find temporary buildings and quonset hugs
in original historic context a relic of memory. But, heck, this is just my
opinion.

Ron May
Legacy 106, Inc.