Add to favorites Examiner Bio

And the beat goes on: CAMP reveals more details

Bit by bit, the Fisher team is letting out details of the revised Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio (CAMP). As you recall, the previous design by architect Richard Gluckman was scrapped in the face of tremendous public opposition.

 

Wednesday night, architects Bryan Shiles and Sam Nunes (WRNS Studio) shared the most we have seen to date at a meeting in the AIA San Francisco offices. Floor plans for the building were revealed as was a new study model. What did we learn?

 

 

The linear building still sits at the head of the Main Parade. It is a two level structure with most of the gallery space on the “courtyard level” which is below grade. The above ground story, the “pavilion level”, houses the lobby, museum shop, event space and some gallery space. Two of the Serra sculptures in the Fisher collection reside in a sunken courtyard off the east side of the building. The angular roof, a gesture to the contours of the Presidio landscape, is proposed as a “green” roof. According to Shiles, two factors influenced the form of the building: a desire to not cap the Main Parade with a backstop and the outdoor location of the Serra sculptures.

 

As far as the selection of exterior materials, questions remain. Shiles stated that stone would likely be a prevalent material used in walls and exterior retaining walls. The rather prominent soffits extending from the roof line would likely be a lacquered wood, painted “Presidio white”. Shiles did go on to state that most of the questions regarding materials were not resolved.

 

This design is clearly a response to the criticism of the previous design, a taller and more monumental building. Whether it is the elegant museum this collection deserves is still unclear from this conceptual design. A lot will depend on the selection of exterior materials and, as with every piece of architecture, the execution of the concept will determine whether the project is elevated to the level of excellent architecture. While the building appears to work reasonably well in plan, three dimensionally it remains an exercise in a large roof. Yes, the events gallery on the north side of the building exploits the stunning views of the bay and Marin beyond, but whether this building successfully negotiates its position and context on the Main Parade remains to be seen.

 

None of that will matter to the various interest groups who are opposed to siting the museum on the Main Parade. That drama will be continued at the April 7 public meeting of the Presidio Trust. Expect the opposition to be present in full force and vocal.

 

Which leads me to ask, how will it all play out?

 

My hunch is that the Presidio Trust is prepared to approve the new conceptual design over the objections of the Presidio Historic Association, Save the Presidio, and other allied groups. The Trust’s decision must be reviewed by the Department of the Interior, who has jurisdiction over development within national parks and over construction in a designated historic district such the Main Parade. The Interior Department reviews the proposed project in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and applies what are referred to as the Secretary’s Standards for Historic Preservation. The process is rather byzantine and, yes, politics will enter in.

 

Let me speculate a bit further. Should the current CAMP design be approved by the Trust, I think it likely that the opposition groups will band together and file suit in federal court, challenging the legality of the project. According to some of those opponents, there is precedent for not allowing a proposed use which does not relate to the historic use of a district. It’s a fine distinction because we are talking about the Main Parade as a historic district and not the entire Presidio. But clearly a modern art museum doesn’t relate to the military history of the Presidio. Now, I’m not an expert on preservation law, but the opponents might have a strong legal argument, possibly a winnable argument. Even if such a lawsuit doesn’t succeed in stopping the museum, it would likely delay it for a few years.

 

And then what will Mr. Fisher do with his museum?