Would a museum built by a powerful local citizen in the heart of the San Francisco Presidio for his private art collection be a gift to the public? Or would it exact a price in the form of unacceptable damage to a precious historical heritage site? That’s being hotly argued right now and the stakes are high.

The Presidio Trust, which manages most of the Presidio, has proposed to permit the erection of two large-scale new buildings--a 125-room hotel and a 100,000-square-foot museum--overlooking the parade ground on the Main Post, the ceremonial and administrative center of what was the oldest military base on the West Coast and is now a national park. The museum would be built by Don Fisher, the founder of the San Francisco-based Gap clothing chain, to house the contemporary art collection he owns with his wife, Doris.

These plans have outraged historians, preservation and park officials, and citizens who toiled together for two years to craft a vision for the future of this great urban park in keeping with its historic significance. Objections to the projects and irregularities in the process by which they have advanced have come from State Historic Preservation Officer Milford Wayne Donaldson, the San Francisco Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, and the National Parks Conservation Association, among others. Brian O’Neill, Superintendent of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area (GGNRA), has warned that the Presidio could lose its designation as a National Historic Landmark District, the highest category of protection for historical sites.

At O’Neill’s request, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation has asked the National Park Service to evaluate all the development proposals for the Main Post. That evaluation, due for completion in October, will determine whether the integrity of the Presidio’s National Historic Landmark District status will remain intact.

The Presidio is part of the GGNRA, but 80 percent of its 1,491 acres--all except the shoreline on both sides of the Golden Gate--are managed by the Presidio Trust, a government corporation created by Congress in 1996, with a seven-member board of directors, six appointed by the President, one by the Secretary of the Interior. Don Fisher is a former board member.

Unlike any other national park, the Presidio is required to become self-sustaining by 2012. The Trust has already met that requirement by leasing many of the park’s 500 buildings (400 designated as historic), as well as recreational facilities and land to private and public entities.

Watchful historians and others involved with the Presidio’s future give the Trust high marks for restoration work on individual buildings. Much more money will be required to realize the vision in the management plan adopted in 2002 after wide public discussion. How it should be raised is at issue in the current controversy. A forest, meadow, or Victorian house can also be seen as valuable real estate, and creeping privatization is a concern.

On June 9, 2008, the Trust published a draft “Main Post Update to the Presidio Trust Management Plan,” proposing the two new buildings, as well as other changes and management plan revisions to make them possible. These were moving forward with unusual speed, although at earlier scoping sessions, required to solicit public comment, many participants objected, instead favoring a smaller historical and education center related to the place and its natural and historical features.

“This is a conflict between private interests and the weight of the preservation movement,” commented retired Army colonel Whitney Hall, who was commander of the Presidio from 1979 to 1982 and is now vice president of the Presidio Historical Association. “If we allow very important persons to override the national historic preservation program, we will kill both the Presidio and the national park.”

Generosity or Arrogance?
The museum, a massive white modern building with a glass front, would stand on the most prominent spot in the Presidio’s Main Post, on a rise overlooking the main parade ground, which is now a concrete parking lot but is to be revived as a great green open space. It would be three times bigger in volume than the largest of the Spanish Civil War-era barracks below it, according to Hall. Art works would be installed inside the building, outside, on a high platform, and on the roof. Just west of the proposed site is El Presidio, where archeologists are still discovering remnants of the northernmost Spanish military settlement, founded in 1776.

The hotel, which the Trust calls a “lodge” and compares to Ahwanee Lodge and others in non-urban national parks, would stand alongside the parade ground. It would have restaurants, a bar, a fitness center, and an underground garage, and would be suitable “for small corporate retreats,” as described by the Trust.

In selecting a site for the museum, the Trust noted that it was considering Fisher’s wishes. Many have suggested that it be built at Crissy Field, on the site of the old Commissary that now houses Sports Basement. That is one of three alternative sites presented in the Trust’s proposal. Fisher has said, however, that he would accept only his preferred site.

If he wins approval, Fisher has said he would establish a foundation to build and operate the museum, rehabilitate an adjacent barracks building for an arts education center that he would endow, and provide $10 million toward the planned conversion of the main parade ground to a green space.

To build the museum and hotel, the Trust proposes to raise the ceiling for allowable new construction provided in the management plan and increase the allowable amount of demolition. Up to 141,000 square feet of buildings on the Main Post could be demolished, including the bowling center, Red Cross building, Presidio Child Development Center, YMCA Fitness Center, and Herbst Exhibition Hall.

During June and July, the draft Update, together with a draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, was available for public comment. The Trust offered well-publicized guided walks to explain its proposed projects, but at least three people who went on them found that their guide was insufficiently informed.

On July 14, at the only public board meeting during this public comment period--held before the required historical Finding of Effects was completed--the Fisher family’s spokesmen had a press release ready: “Supporters line up to tell the Presidio Trust they want CAMP [Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio].”

What happened was rather different. About 700 people came, filling Herbst Hall to capacity, with a crowd of maybe 200 unable to get in at 6:30 p.m., when the meeting began. By the time it ended, shortly after midnight, about 100 had spoken, mainly in opposition to the projects as proposed.

Museum advocates said the Update proposals would revitalize the Main Post and bring in other projects to enliven the place. A letter from former mayor Willie Brown was read: “The Fishers’ generosity is beyond belief.” Carpenters Union Local 22 offered a letter of support. Mayor Gavin Newsom said he supports having the museum in the Presidio, and offered the assistance of his office to help resolve concerns about the site.

Opponents, questioners, and doubters included a wide range of citizens and perspectives: “If the Fishers are retaining ownership of the collection, is that a gift?” “The Presidio is a sacred place, I would no more revitalize it than Monticello.” “A modern art museum proposed as the centerpiece of our historic district--the idea is illogical.” “The special genius of this place is what happened here. Who was involved in building this place? Where were these men coming from, where were they going?” “There is no museum of the Presidio in the Presidio. The real culture of the Presidio is its history.”

Edward P. Von der Porten, who together with Hall was a member of William Penn Mott’s planning team when Mott was special representative of the Secretary of the Interior, said Mott envisioned a historical museum and interpretive center where visitors would learn about the Presidio, from early settlement to the present. Mott “strove to bring the greatest benefits to the American public,” he said, while “the museum is designed as a dominating structure which would visually overwhelm the entire Main Post area, robbing it of its historical integrity. Its site was obviously not selected for its practicality--accessibility, traffic, and parking--but for its presence and for the vistas from its windows and plazas. It would appeal to well under 10 percent of the public at the cost of preempting the park’s premier public space.”

The Presidio Child Development Center was represented in force, pleading to remain, and two parents stepped up to speak way past the bedtime of the children they carried drooping over their shoulders. This is the only public school in the city to accept toddlers. Seventy percent of its children are from low-income families and 50 percent have English as a second language. It has a waiting list.

As the board members sat expressionless above them, several people expressed the view that their voices would not count. “This meeting tonight is just a show, a place for common people like me to vent. The real decisions are made elsewhere.” “Many people here believe you have already made your decision. If that is indeed the case, then what you are doing is very dishonorable.”

“That structure has no more place on the parade ground than in colonial Williamsburg,” said Robert Laws, a retired attorney. “Pay attention to us. It’s going to be a long, hard process, and it’s utterly unnecessary.”

In contrast to the emotional pleadings of the project’s opponents, some advocates sounded contemptuous. “All they [the Fishers] want is to pick the spot,” said one woman toward the end of the meeting, and suggested an analogy: Say Uncle Charlie wants to give you a Rembrandt, with only one condition: that it be hung above the fireplace. But that spot is occupied by a painting by a college roommate who took an art course while in dental school. Some will want to keep the roommate’s painting.

Angrily, a man urged: Write your congressman to change the requirement that the Presidio, a national park, needs to pay for itself. Without that “we wouldn’t have to bend to the will of a few wealthy men who want to put their offices and museums in the national parks.”

The Trust agreed to extend the comment period to September 19, then to November 17, and to hold another public hearing November 13.

The struggle over the future of the Presidio is ongoing. Will the Main Post be a living historical museum where everyone can get a taste of the past and consider the future in light of that past, or will it become a busy “theme park” with crowds flocking to unrelated new museums, hotels, and to shops and cafés in converted historic military buildings? This is a crucial chapter of a long story, another opportunity for the citizenry to chime in.