PUBLIC COMMENTS OPPOSE CONTEMPORARY ART MUSEUM IN THE HISTORIC HEART OF THE PRESIDIO

Less than 10 percent of letters from the public received by the Presidio Trust want a contemporary art museum in the designated prime location on the historic landmark, the Presidio of San Francisco. 30 percent specifically favor a proposal by the Presidio Historical Association for a History Center at the Golden Gate. The Trust chose not to consider that proposal due to the fact that it was not funded. Comments ranged from 15 percent in favor of both museums to 15 percent saying no museum construction at all.

This information was acquired by reviewing one half of the 300 letters submitted. 43 of the letters were from civic and cultural organizations or commercial businesses. Of these, only 10 percent want the contemporary art museum built as proposed, while 25 percent specifically endorsed the History Center proposal. 

The Presidio Trust made the decision to move forward with the Contemporary Art Museum at the Presidio (CAMP).

Stay tuned. How long can the Presidio Trust Board (on which Mr. Fisher, the donor of CAMP has served)  ignore overwhelming public opinion that CAMP is the wrong idea in the wrong place at the center of a valued National Historic Landmark and a National Park? 

TRUST SELECTS ART MUSEUM FOR THE PRESIDIO

Today, January 30, it was announced that the CAMP Museum (Contemporary Art Museum at the Presidio) was selected by the Presidio Trust, the govermental corporation that manages most of the Presidio National Park.  However, overwhelming public opposition resulted in the Trust confirming that no decision would be made until a comprehensive environmental review is completed. It is possible that this review will require relocating the big glass and white stone structure away from a proposed central position in the historic park to a less objectionable site. That would be a major victory for those of us who defend historical values and American history. 

The Presidio Trust also announced 5 million dollars for a visitors' center ( a Park Service responsibility that has not been funded) and a "history center." But, the "history center" is nothing more than a promenade with exhibits along the way and an audio tour of the buildings: it does nothing real to bring meaning to the history of America found at the Presidio National Historic Landmark District. That historical meaning will remain a closed book to the public if the promenade were to be the only "history center." 

A proposal for a 50,000 square foot "History Center of the Golden Gate" was rejected on the grounds that it was not funded.  The group proposing the History Center, the Presidio Historical Association, had asked the Trust to join with it to explore funding opportunities for a museum with nation importance at the Presidio, a proposal that is fitting with the magnificent site and National Historic Landmark.

PRESIDIO NOMINATED AS MOST ENDANGERED HISTORIC PLACE

The Presidio of San Francisco was nominated to be one of the nation's "11 Most Endangered Historic Places". What do you think? Let us hear your comments. Here is the press release:

News Release

 

For Immediate Release - January 9, 2008

 

For more information, contact:

Whit Hall, Director:   707/778-6975, 

Gary Widman, President:  415/921-8193, presidio-assoc@att.net

http://www.presidioassociation.org/

 

Historical Association Seeks “Endangered” Status for San Francisco’s

Presidio

 

The Presidio Historical Association (PHA) announced today that it is

seeking “Most Endangered Historic Site” status for San Francisco’s

Presidio park.

 

On Tuesday, the Historical Association formally requested that the

National Trust for Historic Preservation include the Presidio on its 2008

list of the nation’s “11 Most Endangered Historic Places.” The National

Trust, a prominent nonprofit organization, provides leadership, education,

advocacy, and resources to save America’s diverse historic places.

 

PHA President Gary Widman said the move was necessary because the

Presidio’s management requested a proposal from Gap founder Donald Fisher to build a 100,000 sq. ft. modernistic stone-and glass-structure

showcasing his contemporary art collection on the Presidio’s historic Main

Post. The Presidio Trust, a federal agency, manages that part of the

Presidio. It has already named a developer for another new building, an

80,000 sq. ft. hotel to be built nearby on the Post.

 

The Presidio was a military garrison from 1776 to 1994, and is designated

a National Historic Landmark District, the highest possible designation,

by the Secretary of the Interior. Its buildings and setting reflect 220

years of America’s heritage.

 

The Presidio has not had a history museum since 1994.  PHA submitted a

plan for a “History Center at the Golden Gate” as an alternative to

Fisher’s much larger art museum.

 

“This precious historical site must be preserved for future generations

and protected  from incompatible structures and uses that would destroy

its integrity forever,” said Widman.  Widman noted the location sought for

the art museum lies in the heart of the Presidio, just yards from where

the Spaniards built their garrison in 1776.

 

Preeminent San Francisco landscape architect Lawrence Halprin said of

Fisher's proposed structure, "The design...is absurdly inappropriate. It

would ruin the unique architectural character of the Presidio..."

 

Charles A. Fracchia, Founder and President Emeritus of the San Francisco

Museum & Historical Society and author of three San Francisco history

books, wrote that “...the [Main Post] should be preserved as it exists.

The intrusion of a large hotel and museum in a contemporary style of

architecture into this delicate space would be a desecration, both to the

aesthetic and historic importance of the site. Such a mistake, if allowed

to continue, will be looked upon in ages to come as eyesores built by the

unfeeling and the insensitive.”

 

Boyd de Larios, speaking for the Descendants of the Anza and Portola

Expeditions, whose ancestors founded the original Presidio garrison in

1776, supported PHA’s request for endangered status to bring “national

attention to the irresponsible proposals for large-scale, new, and

inappropriately designed construction in the historic heart of an

irreplaceable national treasure.”

 

The controversy over building the art museum and hotel on the historic

Main Post, when many more appropriate sites are available on the Presidio,

has generated thousands of critical comments on the internet.

 

Founded in the 1950s, the nonprofit Presidio Historical Association (PHA)

has worked in cooperation with the National Park Service and Presidio

Trust since 1994 to advocate for preserving the integrity of the

Presidio’s National Historic Landmark District, located within the Golden

Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA).  PHA created a museum for the Army when it was based at the Presidio. Earlier, PHA helped restore historic

Fort Point at the base of the Golden Gate Bridge. 

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS AT THE PRESIDIO

The very modern contemporary art museum proposed for the Presidio of San Francisco National Historic Landmark District viewed from in front of an 1890's barracks at the intersection of Sheridan and Montgomery Streets looking toward the 1776 "El Presidio." (Officers Club.) Is this the right building at the right place in a national historic landmark?


Despite official words of welcome for the 100,000 square foot art museum by Presidio Trust officials and the Mayor, and the premature praise of some newspapers, it is becoming clear that the proposal for an out of place, oversized, inappropriately designed art museum on the Presidio is not going to be a "slam dunk." The National Historic Preservation Act calls for a formal consultation process that includes representation from the Park Service, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Presidio Historical Association. The first meeting of this group recognized many difficulties with the art museum proposal as it stands now and with the hurried process that an environmental review is scheduled to take. The protected status of the Presidio as  one of fewer than 2,500 National Historic Landmark Districts in the nation brings close scrutiny when a proposed action, such as the art museum, would have severe adverse effects on the national landmark. We also are encouraged by public opposition to this project that has been expressed in letters to the Trust and by e-mails to the newspapers that have reported on the art museum. The weight of public opinion is leading to an atmosphere in which - just perhaps- reason will prevail and a redesigned art museum would be located elsewhere on the Presidio, while a suitably designed history center might be established somewhere near Main Post. That would be a win-win situation for everyone, including the public that a national park is meant to serve and the values the park represents.

Public Letters on the Presidio's Future

The comment period closes today for letters or e-mails to the Presidio Trust concerning several proposed projects on the historic Main Post. These letters are for the public to tell the Trust what must be studied in a proposed Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement. This SEIS is supposed to make it possible to build an 80,000 square foot hotel and a 100,000 square foot contemporary art museum within 200 yards of each other, the flagpole, and the 1776 El Presidio (Officers Club).

The letters range from the highly detailed and technical submission by the Presidio Historical Association to individual angry comments against any construction at all.

Thank you, Everyone, who sent in e-mails and letters. We have not seen them, unless you sent them to us. Within a day, we will post some on this blog and invite you to post yours as comments. Also, ask questions that you think all would like to have answered, and we will do our best to answer them.

Watch this space for some sample letters and e-mails.

FIRESTORM OF PUBLIC OUTRAGE

Over at the San Francisco Chronicle blog, SFgate, look for the comments on John King's article yesterday. 210 posts last time that I looked. Most see a big airport looking building as out of place in the historical park district, but would like to see it elsewhere in the Presidio.

The organization proposing a more fitting history center is at www.presidioassociation.org.

Take a look there at an alternative to the mega museum in that location..

Monstrous Art Museum in a National Historic Landmark and National Park???

The image of the proposed Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio was revealed in a well orchestrated demonstration of Establishment support at a meeting on December 3. We will post those images here or on as soon as we get them. In short, the 100,000 square foot structure would overwhelm the site. It would have three to four times the size of any nearby building. It would change the identity of the Presidio from a National Historic Landmark into an office park of old buildings where that big art museum is. The 220 years of history would be overwhelmed in visitors' perceptions.

The Presidio Association responded with a proposal for a history center half the size, with much less bulk, sensitive to the surroundings and environmentally advanced. It would have an inviting open layout and the latest exhibition design, all to present four themes: Completion of America's Westward Expansion, America on the Pacific Rim. Changing Peoples and Cultures, and From Here to Where.

In the tightly controlled meeting, assertions were made with much enthusiasm how a contemporary art museum would "revitalize" the old Presidio and bring the public to it, thereby making it a great national park. Somehow the logic escaped me that a museum that had nothing to do with the values of a National Park could make a great park. The Historical Association presented the case for a modern, well thought out and appropriate history center that could accomplish "revitalizing" the Presidio as a park better. This assertion was simply not acknowledged. We cited the British Columbia Museum in Victoria which draws over 1,000,000 visitors a year. The chief tourist attraction in San Francisco is not MOMA; it is Fisherman's Wharf, with 12 million visitors a year. Alcatraz alone attracts 1.4 million and many more turned away. There is no question that the issue of attracting crowds is wrongly put: the first issue is what is the carrying capacity of the Presidio to handle large numbers of visitors. After all, the Disney Museum claims to bring in 400,000 a year (highly unlikely, in my judgment, but what do I know?) How many succesful mueums can the Presidio have before it is unable to receive any more the visitor?

The crowd last night was packed with speakers brought in by the art museum sponsors, from Mayor Newsome and two MOMA directors, through many art dealers and board members with Mr. Fisher at MOMA, to several architects who sang the praises of this completely overscaled, inappropriate museum proposal that showed no sensitivity to the site.

This begins a long process of hearings and regulatory processes. The art museum proposal obviously has very major adverse effects on the integrity of a national historic landmark district. That fact triggers a lot of regulatory standards and guidelines. Unfortunately, the way the Presidio Trust Law is written, it manages a national park, but does not report to the Park Service, that has the responsibility for preserving national landmarks. Instead, it reports directly to a congressional subcommittee.

In this regulatory morass, THE PUBLIC MUST BE HEARD again and again.

More later. NEXT STEP: get in your letter dealing with the scope of what you want studied on Main Post of the Historic Presidio.
Your ideas on the fast schedule of this process, scope, and alternatives to present in the E.I.S. are important.