CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
California News
Multimedia News
Historical association requests historic status for Presidio
SEE THE LATEST ON THIS STORY
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - In a move to stop the building of a new 100,000 square foot structure, the Presidio Historical Association has requested the Presidio of San Francisco be considered for Most Endangered Historic Site status.
The request was submitted Tuesday to the National Trust, which is creating its 2008 list of the country’s 11 Most Endangered Historic Places.
In August, the Presidio trust requested a proposal from Gap Inc. founder Donald Fisher to build a museum to house his contemporary art collection at the Presidio’s Main Post.
The PHA submitted a plan to build an alternative to Fisher’s museum, a History Center at the Golden Gate. According to the PHA, the Presidio has not had a history museum since 1994.
In addition, PHA officials said an 80,000-square-foot hotel could be built nearby.
“This precious historical site must be preserved for future generations and protected from incompatible structures and uses that would destroy its integrity forever,” said PHA President Gary Widman.
The Presidio was a military garrison from 1776 through 1994, when it became part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. It is a designated National Historic Landmark District.
“The design ... is absurdly inappropriate,” landscape architect Lawrence Halprin said of Fisher’s proposed structure. “It would ruin the unique architectural character of the Presidio.”
According to the Presidio Trust, Fisher and his wife would pay for the construction and operations of the museum, which would house works by Andy Warhol, Frank Stella, Gerhard Richter and Ellsworth Kelly among others.
“The presence of a major cultural institution, such as the one proposed by the Fishers, would be an important catalyst for attracting other vibrant, public-serving uses to the Main Post,” said Craig Middleton, Presidio Trust Executive Director. “The Trust envisions the Main Post, once the ceremonial and administrative center for a military community, as the cultural and civic center for this unique national park.”
Comments from Examiner Readers
10:45 AM MST on Tue., Jul. 15, 2008 re: "Public given voice for 45 more days"
Report as inappropriate
1:49 PM MST on Sat., Jun. 14, 2008
re: "Museum plan for Presidio getting heat"
Report as inappropriate
11:19 AM MST on Tue., Jun. 10, 2008
re: "Plans paint new picture for art museum"
Report as inappropriate
8:25 PM MST on Mon., May. 5, 2008
re: "Presidio plans spark outcry for resistance"
Report as inappropriate
4:39 PM MST on Mon., May. 5, 2008
re: "Presidio plans spark outcry for resistance"
Report as inappropriate
11:22 AM MST on Mon., May. 5, 2008
re: "Presidio plans spark outcry for resistance"
Report as inappropriate
6:24 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 16, 2008
re: "Museum plan for Presidio getting heat"
Report as inappropriate
10:06 AM MST on Wed., Apr. 16, 2008
re: "Museum plan for Presidio getting heat"
Report as inappropriate
1:16 PM MST on Tue., Feb. 26, 2008
re: "Lake needs cleanup, warnings, supe says"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader said:
How does this museum/hotel project fit into the current or historical tone of the Presidio? Simply put, it does not.
1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
parkpal said:
The fact is that the "preferred alternative" for the large art museum and hotel still chooses the awful location right next to the Spanish era presidio wall and the flagpole of a 200 year old National HIstoric Site. Why? Because Mr. Fisher says that he will take his marbles and play somewhere else if he cannot get that exact central location, where his huge white museum overwhelms the historic character to the Presidio. The Presidio is not some vacant lot to be played with by wealthy developers. It is sacred ground in the history of California and our nation. Save it from desecration.
4 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
If Sam Singer is speaking for someone, you know that they are up to no good. When will the dung stuck to Singers' expensive shoes after stepping in it for his clients over and again stick to Singer?
2 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How much city staff time and resources will go into this revived group? I am concerned that the city's minimal resources will be unnecessarily used to support neighborhood groups who are well organized and will surely submit comments to the Presidio Trust on their own anyway. I'm supportive of these groups sending the Trust their comments, but why does the city need to foot the bill?
4 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
marian price said:
So Sam Singer says the Fishers have received overwhelming support for the idea. Are there any who are not employees or cronies of the Fishers who believe the majority of Park users will laud the replacement of open space and bowling alley for this purpose. Borrowing a word from an outspoken British critic of out-of-context architectural extravaganzas, it will be a carbuncle of the face of the Presidio.
3 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Once again, everyone, including Supervisor Alioto-Pier, should consider the concept of moving the bloody mess to Shorenstein's Pier 29-31 development where Donald Fisher could walk to visit his MGM Grand collection. Don't even have to alter the architect's drawings. I think it would be a great save for the Main Parade Ground!
3 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
For two hundred years the parade ground area in the Presidio has been and historic landmark for San Francisco Residents. It is hard to understand the Presidio Trust allowing a hotel/theatre complex and now a modern monolithic art museum to desecrate this lovely site. I applaude the Service's decision. However, the Park Service has shown itself subject to political pressure in the past. Let us hope that it will continue its opposition to this ill conceived project. There are other areas of the Presidio, such as the area near Baker Beach, which have lovely views and easy access for these projects if they must be built. I really don't see the need for another hotel, there are several being built in SF, nor a movie complex in the Presidio. It is difficult to get there and more mutilation will be needed for traffic/parking. My wifes' and my family have lived here for well over a hundred years-we are dedicated to this unique city and its historic richness. Please restrain the P
9 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
parkpal said:
It is about time that the Park Service asserted itself to protect the Presidio from development. It is a National Park, after all, and belongs to you and me, not a bunch of Bush political appointees who run the Presidio Trust like a business park. Go! Park Service!
6 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I grew up near the lake. It is very dirty and the homeless wash themselves there.
44 agree | 35 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree