pastedGraphic.jpg
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Another Glassy White Intrusion into a National Park and a National Historic Landmark District
This is the rendering that the Fisher people leaked to the Chronicle. Can you believe the Trust's lack of sensitivity to the historic site? Law requires that any construction permitted in a National Historic Landmark be "compatible" with the structures on the site. This is compatible? Trust documents imply that the National Park Service approved this contemporary museum. That is not true. The Park Service participated in a workshop to identify characteristics of a design that might be acceptable from an historic preservation point of view. This building is not what the NPS described.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Revised Main Post Plan Is Released
OH, NO! NOT ANOTHER 300 PAGES! The supplement to the supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement was released today (February 27). Is this fun or what?
We have quickly scanned the version posted on the Trust website and have issued a press release available at presidioassociation.org.
In summary, the revision is mostly the same sour wine in new bottles. The Fisher art museum now is partly underground, but still at the objectionable location at the head of the parade ground near the El Presidio, the 1776 birthplace of San Francisco. Oh, yes, that's part of it. The other part is placed across Moraga Street in the area of the old Library and the Child Care Center.
Our main objection echoes over 1,000 of the public comments: a contemporary art museum just does not belong in a national historic landmark or in a national park. The Presidio is both. The final call is based on total intrusion into the historical landmark of changes past. present, and future. When Lucasfilm, the Disney Museum's expected 400,000 visitors a year, the art museum and its 300,000 visitors a year, an 85,000 square foot hotel, "greening" the Main Parade and a hokey walk through time next to the hotel, a multiscreen movie house, Doyle Drive, parking meters, on street parking where there never was any, stop lights soon? etc., are added up to judge if these all together wil impair visitors' ability to experience the history of the Presidio, there can be only one conclusion: all that construction will bury the historical character of the most important historic site on the West Coast forever. With your help, that will not happen.
And where is the Park Service? It bravely objected last April for historic preservation reasons. It has yet to rule out this project for the reasons laid out in the laws that govern ALL national parks. I bet that it will though, when the time comes. That time may be in court.
Stay tuned. No one has read the whole document yet.
We have quickly scanned the version posted on the Trust website and have issued a press release available at presidioassociation.org.
In summary, the revision is mostly the same sour wine in new bottles. The Fisher art museum now is partly underground, but still at the objectionable location at the head of the parade ground near the El Presidio, the 1776 birthplace of San Francisco. Oh, yes, that's part of it. The other part is placed across Moraga Street in the area of the old Library and the Child Care Center.
Our main objection echoes over 1,000 of the public comments: a contemporary art museum just does not belong in a national historic landmark or in a national park. The Presidio is both. The final call is based on total intrusion into the historical landmark of changes past. present, and future. When Lucasfilm, the Disney Museum's expected 400,000 visitors a year, the art museum and its 300,000 visitors a year, an 85,000 square foot hotel, "greening" the Main Parade and a hokey walk through time next to the hotel, a multiscreen movie house, Doyle Drive, parking meters, on street parking where there never was any, stop lights soon? etc., are added up to judge if these all together wil impair visitors' ability to experience the history of the Presidio, there can be only one conclusion: all that construction will bury the historical character of the most important historic site on the West Coast forever. With your help, that will not happen.
And where is the Park Service? It bravely objected last April for historic preservation reasons. It has yet to rule out this project for the reasons laid out in the laws that govern ALL national parks. I bet that it will though, when the time comes. That time may be in court.
Stay tuned. No one has read the whole document yet.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
New Proposals for Alien Art Museum on Presidio to Be Announced in Late February
Just when we thought that we had gotten rid of pigs wearing lipstick, the Presidio Trust and Donald Fisher will soon introduce another scheme for a contemporary art museum and a big hotel in the center of the Presidio National Historic Site and National Park. Think of a contemporary art museum in Valley Forge. Think of Fisher's modern museum in San Francisco's Alamo Square or its being side-by-side with Mission Dolores. Unbelievable, but that is the mentality that once again wants to build the art museum in the Presidio.
There are National Park rules that are based in law that rule against building "cultural facilities" in National Parks unless the facility is directly related to the resources and values of the park. Somehow to me, a 1776 Spanish Presidio and 230 years as the Presidio's being central to America's growing presence on the Pacific do not have any relationship to contemporary art. The Park Service has not said that it will permit this museum that is so alien to any national park to be built.
The Trust officials and Mr. Fisher never have made the case why this art museum belongs on the Presidio other than Fisher's saying that is where he wants it.
Mr. Fisher, listen to the over 1,000 letters that say we the people do NOT want it there.
Please write, e-mail or phone Nancy Pelosi and the Trust to let them know how you feel. Why does a contemporary art museum belong in the Presidio close to the birthplace of San Francisco, when such an art museum would be permitted anywhere in a national park?
There are National Park rules that are based in law that rule against building "cultural facilities" in National Parks unless the facility is directly related to the resources and values of the park. Somehow to me, a 1776 Spanish Presidio and 230 years as the Presidio's being central to America's growing presence on the Pacific do not have any relationship to contemporary art. The Park Service has not said that it will permit this museum that is so alien to any national park to be built.
The Trust officials and Mr. Fisher never have made the case why this art museum belongs on the Presidio other than Fisher's saying that is where he wants it.
Mr. Fisher, listen to the over 1,000 letters that say we the people do NOT want it there.
Please write, e-mail or phone Nancy Pelosi and the Trust to let them know how you feel. Why does a contemporary art museum belong in the Presidio close to the birthplace of San Francisco, when such an art museum would be permitted anywhere in a national park?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
FACING THE DECISIVE YEAR FOR THE PRESIDIO AS A NATIONAL PARK
2009. What lies ahead? A large hotel and a contemporary art museum in the center of a national park and a national historic landmark? The path open for more wealthy donors to build their personal dreams in a park that belongs to all of the people? The present proposals and the revisions we are told to expect in January will continue to endanger the Presidio's status as a national park. If it to continue as a national park, it must be managed to the standards of a national park. Every action that the Presidio Trust Board takes that impairs the historic resources of the Presidio is one step closer to the Presidio's losing its status as a national park and national historic landmark. There are people in San Francisco and in Washington who would be delighted to see that happen. Some don't want the Presidio to be governed by national park rules, but to be a gorgeous vacant lot upon which they can build their fantasy of the moment. Others probably think that they could profit from such a development. Still others think that they can manage the park functions of a national park better than the men and women of a Park Service that has nearly 100 years of experience and proud tradition as custodian of America's national parks.
All the public - even those who admire Mr. Fisher's art collection- cannot find a single reason why the Fisher Museum has to be in a national park rather than in the thriving, arts-loving city nearby. That is because a contemporary art museum is alien to the values of the Presidio. It expresses the values of a modern city. It makes the Presidio someplace that is fundamentally different than when it was designated a national historic landmark.
So, how can we continue to keep the pressure on to save the Presidio? Write now to Congresswoman Pelosi to express your outrage that this struggle is still going on. Ask on what authority the Presidio would be a part of the only national park in the nation with a newly built contemporary art museum, when no other national park would have such an alien activity forced upon it. Ask her why the Presidio believes that it is not required to follow the laws concerning the protection of national park resources that guide all other other national parks. Does she support that position? Was the intent of Congress in the Presidio Trust Act for the Presidio to be in the parks system, but not follow the rules that define what a national park is? Is or is not the Presidio a national park? Send a copy of your letter to mainpost@presidiotrust.gov .
Write! Continue to monitor this blog and presidioassociation.org.
All the public - even those who admire Mr. Fisher's art collection- cannot find a single reason why the Fisher Museum has to be in a national park rather than in the thriving, arts-loving city nearby. That is because a contemporary art museum is alien to the values of the Presidio. It expresses the values of a modern city. It makes the Presidio someplace that is fundamentally different than when it was designated a national historic landmark.
So, how can we continue to keep the pressure on to save the Presidio? Write now to Congresswoman Pelosi to express your outrage that this struggle is still going on. Ask on what authority the Presidio would be a part of the only national park in the nation with a newly built contemporary art museum, when no other national park would have such an alien activity forced upon it. Ask her why the Presidio believes that it is not required to follow the laws concerning the protection of national park resources that guide all other other national parks. Does she support that position? Was the intent of Congress in the Presidio Trust Act for the Presidio to be in the parks system, but not follow the rules that define what a national park is? Is or is not the Presidio a national park? Send a copy of your letter to mainpost@presidiotrust.gov .
Write! Continue to monitor this blog and presidioassociation.org.
Friday, November 21, 2008
MORE CHAOS AT THE PRESIDIO
Events are occurring so fast in the environmental review process for a huge art museum and a 140 room hotel on Main Post that even we who spend half our lives fighting for a true historical park cannot keep up. Here's a guess as to what's happening:
1. The historic preservation authorities at Park Service, state, and national level have finally convinced the Trust that Fisher's museum cannot be built at the chosen bowling alley site and that it cannot be built elsewhere as a massive monument. Public opposition made it possible for these authorities to do their job in a difficult political situation. What government agency wants to buck the Speaker of the House? Public opposition paid off in this step toward preserving the historical Presidio- but we are a long way from having succeeded.
2. NPS and Trust got together to work out what MIGHT be acceptable for the art museum in the area of the Day Care Center across Moraga Street. Those ideas are now the subject of review. IMPORTANT: This does not say the art museum should be at that location: it only studies what it would have to look like if it were located there. I argue that there are very strong objections to having 100,000 square feet of two story construction within 160 yards of El Presidio and located at an elevation 26 feet above the objectionable bowling alley site and Main Parade.
3. This idea of relocating and redesigning does nothing to answer fundamental policy objections concerning the legality or appropriateness of a contemporary art museum in ANY national park.
4. The ideas do nothing to justify ANY construction in a national historic landmark when there is no clear statement of purpose and need. The Trust's propaganda "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update is meaningless with such phrases as "revitalization" and "making the Presidio a great urban park." This is marketing. These are not clear expressions of need that can be analyzed throughout the EIS. The public should be able to understand a convincing need that is expressed in clear terms such that when the project is done, the results can be measured, Objective analysis based on a purpose and need that is understandable should be able to guide the public in its analysis and support for one of the alternatives in the EIS. That is required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
5. There are many rumors that the schedule will be changed yet again, but that was denied by the Trust attorney at the recent meeting when the new design concepts were introduced. These concepts are posted on the Trust website presidiotrust.gov.
STAY TUNED. There is a key historic preservation consultation scheduled for preservation organizations and neighborhood groups on December 2. The situation should be clearer then.
I suggest waiting to write your comments due December 15 until after the December 2 meeting when I will update you. Meanwhile, look at the new concepts on the website. Review "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update, also available on the Trust website. If you think they don't make sense, then please write a letter saying that and mail it to the Trust. Overwhelming public objection or lack of understanding of the "purpose and need" would require the Trust to rewrite the Main Post Update and repeat most of the review process. PresidioPal
1. The historic preservation authorities at Park Service, state, and national level have finally convinced the Trust that Fisher's museum cannot be built at the chosen bowling alley site and that it cannot be built elsewhere as a massive monument. Public opposition made it possible for these authorities to do their job in a difficult political situation. What government agency wants to buck the Speaker of the House? Public opposition paid off in this step toward preserving the historical Presidio- but we are a long way from having succeeded.
2. NPS and Trust got together to work out what MIGHT be acceptable for the art museum in the area of the Day Care Center across Moraga Street. Those ideas are now the subject of review. IMPORTANT: This does not say the art museum should be at that location: it only studies what it would have to look like if it were located there. I argue that there are very strong objections to having 100,000 square feet of two story construction within 160 yards of El Presidio and located at an elevation 26 feet above the objectionable bowling alley site and Main Parade.
3. This idea of relocating and redesigning does nothing to answer fundamental policy objections concerning the legality or appropriateness of a contemporary art museum in ANY national park.
4. The ideas do nothing to justify ANY construction in a national historic landmark when there is no clear statement of purpose and need. The Trust's propaganda "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update is meaningless with such phrases as "revitalization" and "making the Presidio a great urban park." This is marketing. These are not clear expressions of need that can be analyzed throughout the EIS. The public should be able to understand a convincing need that is expressed in clear terms such that when the project is done, the results can be measured, Objective analysis based on a purpose and need that is understandable should be able to guide the public in its analysis and support for one of the alternatives in the EIS. That is required by the National Environmental Policy Act.
5. There are many rumors that the schedule will be changed yet again, but that was denied by the Trust attorney at the recent meeting when the new design concepts were introduced. These concepts are posted on the Trust website presidiotrust.gov.
STAY TUNED. There is a key historic preservation consultation scheduled for preservation organizations and neighborhood groups on December 2. The situation should be clearer then.
I suggest waiting to write your comments due December 15 until after the December 2 meeting when I will update you. Meanwhile, look at the new concepts on the website. Review "purpose and need" in the Main Post Update, also available on the Trust website. If you think they don't make sense, then please write a letter saying that and mail it to the Trust. Overwhelming public objection or lack of understanding of the "purpose and need" would require the Trust to rewrite the Main Post Update and repeat most of the review process. PresidioPal
Friday, November 7, 2008
TRUST FEELING THE HEAT: CHANGES DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING
For the second time, the Trust has changed the date of the big public meeting. Could it be that they do not want 700 more angry citizens objecting in front of the press to the wild plans to fit a huge contemporary art museum into the heart of a 230 year old National Historic Site and a National Park? The new date is December 9, but keep checking- a lot is happening behind the scenes.The Trust staff and Board of Directors are feeling heat from you, the public, and from national official preservation authorities.
Please keep e-mails and letters to the Trust flowing in. You may write more than once if you have a new idea or another specific objection. Go to the Trust website presidiotrust.gov and look at the documents. The Main Post Update has screwy statements of need: what really is the need for a contemporary art museum and hotel? It has design guidelines to control building that are specific to Fisher's art museum. Do you object to those guidelines, and why? Pick an item or two that really bugs you from the Main Post Update and then write your concerns. Be specific and cite the page number that you are objecting to.
The tide is turning!
Please keep e-mails and letters to the Trust flowing in. You may write more than once if you have a new idea or another specific objection. Go to the Trust website presidiotrust.gov and look at the documents. The Main Post Update has screwy statements of need: what really is the need for a contemporary art museum and hotel? It has design guidelines to control building that are specific to Fisher's art museum. Do you object to those guidelines, and why? Pick an item or two that really bugs you from the Main Post Update and then write your concerns. Be specific and cite the page number that you are objecting to.
The tide is turning!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)