Don Fisher's CAMP in the Presidio: Done deal?

Late last week the Presidio Trust announced that it would work with Don and Doris Fisher to bring the Fishers' Contemporary Art Museum of the Presidio onto the military base-turned-national-park.

"This is really good news for the Presidio and really good for San Francisco," said Craig Middleton, executive director of the Presidio Trust, a federal agency that has managed the 1,491-acre park since 1997. "San Francisco is a beacon to the world, and this adds to that, creating a place of innovative beauty, art and history."

But is it? It's great that art lovers will be able to enjoy what the Fishers have collected. But the question of whether the Fishers are selecting the right site for their museum is under-discussed. As I've mentioned here before the Presidio is a lovely tourist attraction. But that's the problem: It is significantly removed from the life of the city. A contemporary art museum, even a vanity museum, should ideally be sited somewhere within the city, not in an enclave effectively outside of it.

San Francisco-area historic preservationists are concerned about the project, especially because the process has essentially denied them any substantial input. The city of San Francisco has no jurisdiction over the Presidio, and the only approvals that the CAMP project needs are from the state and from the federal government. Both of those processes are presently controlled by Republican administrations, and the Fishers are among California's biggest Republican donors.

Everyone with whom I spoke last week said that while environmental impact reports will be done and that while those will involve some public comment, it is overwhelmingly likely that the Fishers' political connections will ensure smooth sailing. The only thing that can stop CAMP now, they said, was the discovery of some wholly unexpected environmental issue, such as the discovery of some small newt that exists only in a certain area of the Presidio.

Not likely. In two-to-three years, unless something changes, CAMP will be approved by all relevant oversight boards and agencies. However, everyone I have talked to about CAMP expects the Richard Gluckman designs to change substantially -- the principal building is so large and so out-of-place that it is likely to be substantially downsized. (Tellingly, the historical context of the Main Post is missing from Gluckman's drawings, such as the one above.)

That doesn't mean that outside groups won't try to stop Fisher's CAMP plans. MAN has learned that the Presidio has been nominated for the National Trust for Historic Preservation's 2008 'most endangered' list which will be finalized and released in late spring. Concerned San Franciscans say that the NTHP is their best hope for forcing CAMP to go somewhere else in the city.

I'm disappointed that there's been no discussion about where else CAM(P) might go. "No one else has stepped up to entice [the Fishers] to go somewhere else," a well-connected Bay Area preservationist told me. So here are two ideas: Numerous piers along the Embarcadero are available and would provide dramatic settings. There's also a beautiful, prominent, in-the-middle-of-it-all San Francisco site that would perfect for an art museum just south of where the Bay Bridge enters the city. The state of Florida's pension fund owns land there, and it may be available. Why not put CAM(P) there?