December 14, 2007

Craig Middleton, Executive Director
Board of Directors of
The Presidio Trust
John Pelka, Compliance Manager
34 Graham Street, P.O. Box 28052
San Francisco, CA 94129

 Re: Identification of significant issues in determining appropriate scope of the Supplemental Environment Impact Statement for the Main Post District

 Ladies and Gentlemen:

The Pacific Heights Residents Association (PHRA) represents more than 500 member households who are neighbors of the Presidio on its south and eastern borders. We are also active participants in NAPP. PHRA applauds the Trust’s decision to study the Main Post District in its entirety, recognizing the cumulative impact of a new lodge, an expanded theatre, the Disney Museum, one or two proposed new museums, multiple special events on a newly redesigned Parade Ground, in addition to all the present uses.

On October 9, PHRA wrote a letter outlining some general issues to be considered in the Preparation of an EIS for a Public Museum on the Main Post. This letter addresses specific issues following the November 28 and December 3 public meetings and some statistics that indicate the need for comprehensive study in several areas, but especially in the areas of traffic, parking, and public transportation.

            The Impacts of Traffic and Parking within and outside the Presidio and the lack of Public Transportation 

The cumulative activities envisioned at the Main Post will attract huge numbers of visitors and require a substantial number of employees. The traffic methodologies used in the PTMP analysis are not applicable. PHRA urges the Trust to study the impacts of these people-intensive uses thoroughly and professionally. To fail to do so will negatively impact both the Presidio and its neighbors outside the Lombard Street, Marina Boulevard, and the Arguello and Presidio Avenue Gates.

Specifically, for example, The Contemporary Arts Museum of the Presidio (CAMP) is proposed to be even larger than the SF Museum of Modern Art (SFMOMA) and Mr. Fisher announced that its programming will be comparable. SFMOMA had 560,469 visitors on the 309 days it was open to the public in 2006: that is more than 1800 visitors per day. Significantly, the visitor count swelled on the 12 days the museum was open free of charge: there were a total 48,218 visitors or more than 4,000 visitors a day. In addition, SFMOMA has a staff of 233 (not including guards or store personnel). The Disney Museum, planning less than one-half the exhibit space that CAMP proposes, projects 400,000 visitors a year.

These figures point out the real volume of usage that will impact the Main Post and, indeed, the entire Presidio and many adjacent neighborhoods. The support traffic generated by these people-intensive uses also has to be studied: what are the needs for truck bays and where will they be located? Where will tour busses drop-off and pick-up their groups, and where will they wait?  Where do taxis drop-off, wait, and pickup? Special events sites, including a Museum, the Lodge, a theater and the Parade Grounds, add more people, cars, taxis and busses. How can PresidiGo shuttles be used if this planned expansion is implemented?

PHRA requests that the Trust analyze all the modes by which visitors will arrive and the varying requirements of these modes. At SFMOMA there are city busses, BART and taxis, in addition to a large number of public garages. Located where it is, the Main Post cannot be compared to downtown San Francisco. How can public transportation best serve the Main Post? What should it be and who will provide it? Can it be implemented in conjunction with the opening of the proposed new uses on the Main Post?

The Presidio is not easy to access other than by automobile. Please give us specifics on the number of parking spaces that will be needed, where they will be located, and who will be responsible for providing them. The 100 parking spaces that CAMP proposes probably will not even meet its staff needs. There must be an adequate combination of parking and transit in place before any new construction is approved at the Main Post.

            The Full Range of Alternatives

At the November 28 hearing we learned that the SEIS would examine three alternatives:

· One museum at the south end of the Main Parade Ground, a new lodge on Graham Street, and the rehabilitation of the Presidio Theater with an addition;

· One Museum at the Commissary, a new lodge at Pershing Hall, and the rehabilitation of the Presidio Theater;

·A no action alternative

PHRA believes that the list of three alternatives announced by Mr. Pelka at the November 28 hearing is incomplete. Two proposals for museums were submitted, but there is no alternative that accommodates both museums. Each of the proposed museums has substantial merit and has the potential to revitalize the Main Post. The Trust must study access to the museums and to the Lodge to determine if their location on the Main Post is even plausible. In any case, a thorough study of at least four alternatives will bring to light the impact of these uses on the heart of the Presidio, a National Historic Landmark District, on the Presidio as a whole, and on its neighbors.

 Design Impact of the Two Museum Proposals on a National Historic Landmark

District

PHRA recommends that the Trust itself more closely define a plausible range of design and scale preferences.  The objective is to not compromise the value of the National Historic Landmark District. This issue is so important that it merits a thorough study by a committee of architects and historic preservationists to set up guidelines for new construction.

Finally, PHRA thinks it is important for the Trust to change its stated sequence of events. A complete study of the environmental impact of the full range of alternatives should be completed before deciding which cultural institution(s) to negotiate with. It will not be possible to set parameters before the analyses suggested above are completed. The Main Post is paramount to the Presidio’s identity. Please study the issues before making any decisions.

We also hope that there will be ample time for the public, the City, and MUNI to study the issues in depth and to be heard and considered before the Trust selects its preferred alternative.

Sincerely,

 

Greg Scott
PHRA President

Cc:
Mayor Gavin Newsom
Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier
Kyri McClellan, Mayor’s Office

  

October 9, 2007

 

Mr. John Pelka
NEPA Compliance Manager
24 Graham Street, PO Box 28052
San Francisco, CA 94129

Re the development of a public museum on the Main Post in the Presidio

Dear Mr. Pelka:

The Pacific Heights Residents Association (PHRA) represents more than 500 member households who are neighbors of the Presidio on its northeastern border. We welcome the opportunity to comment on what the environmental impact statement (EIS) for the proposed construction of the Fisher Art Museum should include. It is important to provide the public with an EIS that considers the most important issues and presents all of the appropriate alternatives.

Examine the Appropriateness of locating a fine arts museum in the Presidio

Is any fine arts museum appropriate to the program and purpose of the Presidio and its role as a National Park with a significant military and native history and a vibrant laboratory of various habitats?

The Notice of Intent to Prepare an EIS and Conduct Scoping, dated August 8, 2007, states that a museum or other cultural use at the Main Parade Ground site may animate and activate the open space development. Staff expressed to NAPP that such a development would encourage the rehabilitation of the Montgomery Street barracks. The EIS must show how the construction of an art museum can accomplish those objectives.

Take the time to prepare a comprehensive plan for cultural uses in the Presidio

As a first step, assess the kinds of museums that would enhance the overall development of the Presidio as a National Park and prepare a plan that identifies type, placement, and, most important, transportation and parking mitigation measures

for all cultural institutions and museums.

Consider the architectural impact of the structure at the Main Post and alternate sites  

The scale of the allowable structure – approximately 100,000 square feet and a maximum of 45” high will impact any location that is finally chosen. It will be larger than SFMOMA.

1.   The south end of the Main Post is the location preferred by the Fisher family. The impact of a huge contemporary building on the Main Post needs to be studied, regardless of the Department of the Interior’s guidelines. The Montgomery Street barracks set the visual tone for this important site and inappropriately large new construction might have a negative effect on the integrity of the site.

2.   The former Commissary, currently occupied by the Sports Basement, which is located adjacent to Crissy Field, is being considered as an alternative site. Excessive height and bulk in this location is also of concern.

3.   Located near, but not in the Presidio, The Exploratorium, when it is vacated, has been mentioned as an alternative site.

4.   Fort Scott has a prominent location in the Presidio and yet it has not yet been impacted by change. The site is easily accessible to San Franciscans and tourists, as well as to other counties in the Bay Area. We urge you to consider this location as a viable alternative site.

Study the impact of transportation and traffic in both the Presidio and the adjacent neighborhoods

The EIS should include traffic and parking studies within the Presidio and include city streets in the Marina and Cow Hollow neighborhoods to the east, the Pacific Heights and Presidio Heights neighborhoods to the south. Neighborhoods outside the Lombard Gate area are currently experiencing stress caused by Presidio parking overflow.

The Fort Scott site is the only location that may not exacerbate problems on the eastern and northeastern sides of the Presidio. Comprehensive traffic and transportation studies need to examine museum and special event usage and find ways to accommodate buses and cars.

Should you have any questions, please call.

Sincerely,

 L. Gregory Scott
President