Fisher Museum Proposal Deficient
Last night the Presidio Trust held a meeting to discuss interim results of their Section 106 process regarding the proposed Main Post contemporary art museum, lodge and theater addition.
In an interesting “cooking channel” overhead video-style presentation, a Trust representative effectively demonstrated how the proposed museum at the head of the Main Post did not meet the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for rehabilitating historic buildings. Even though the Trust selected only 5 of the 10 Secretary’s standards as being applicable to their Main Post rehabilitation project, it was an important initial public discussion of how the Secretary of the Interior’s standards were relevant and applicable to the Presidio, a national park and National Historic Landmark District. Many audience members expressed their appreciation to the Trust for the presentation.
Trust representatives were unapologetic, however, about the time, money and effort spent on promoting the proposed action. Representatives went on the say that no one should have interpreted that the proposed Fisher museum was actually the Trust’s preferred action.
The Trust did not explain their decision to choose rehabilitation as a treatment approach for historic buildings, given that the National Park Service has defined four different possible approaches: preservation, rehabilitation, restoration and reconstruction. A careful read of these approaches suggests that large scale new construction is not the intent of the Secretary’s standards for the treatment of historic buildings. Instead, the standards do seem to contemplate “related new construction” that “will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property.”
There are also extensive Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archeological and Historic Preservation. These standards, while relevant to the Presidio and the Main Post, were not discussed at the meeting.
–Doug Kern
Discussion Area - Leave a Comment