CHANGE MY LOCATION
Local
Multimedia News
Public given voice for 45 more days
SEE HOW THIS STORY DEVELOPED
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
Five hundred people filled the Presidio Trust’s meeting Monday night to capacity, while hundreds more stood outside waiting to tell the board what they thought of the museum plan put forward by Gap founder Don Fisher.
Leaders of one of the plan’s opponents, the National Parks Conservation Association, said they would have no choice but to press forward with a lawsuit if the trust backed the proposal. Deborah Reames, attorney for the NPCA, said the organization sent a letter to the Trust last week “warning” it that approving the projects would violate the Presidio Trust’s enabling legislation, which prohibits new construction in the Presidio except when new buildings are replacing old buildings.
Trust Chairman Dave Grubb was met with a round of applause when he announced the board would extend the public comment period by 45 days, to mid-September.
The delay effectively moves back the likely approval date for any project from before the end of the year to early next year, according to Lane Kasselman, spokesperson for Fisher’s Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio.
The offer by Fisher to build a 100,000-square-foot modern-art museum in the Presidio to house his sizeable collection has evoked passionate responses from history buffs and neighborhood residents, who disagree over the vision for the future of the 1,491-acre national park.
Opponents, who include the Sierra Club, the Presidio Historical Association and nearby neighborhood associations, unleashed a litany of complaints about the project: namely, that the large museum and hotel would overwhelm the historic nature of the park, which overlooks the Golden Gate, and create dire parking and traffic problems in the area.
But project supporters, including city officials and art enthusiasts, told Trust members that The City would be foolish to reject Fisher’s offer of a world-class art museum.
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