Presidio hopefuls sweeten the pot in new development plan
The WeWork-led development team that wants to revive Fort Scott in San Francisco’s Presidio — and so far has made little headway — is trying again.
The new elements in its proposal include $30 million to relocate and improve the police facilities for the Golden Gate National Recreation Area, which includes the Presidio’s 1,490 acres. There’s a $15 million commitment for infrastructure improvements beyond Fort Scott’s boundaries, and a pledge to “pay for all anticipated site and infrastructure improvement costs” within Fort Scott, an estimated $85 million investment.
The team’s revised bid comes one month after its initial proposal was dubbed a “nonstarter” by planners at the Presidio Trust, which manages the scenic enclave just south of the Golden Gate Bridge. The trust’s board was no more enthusiastic — “We set out requirements, and those requirements were not met,” one board member told the team at a public hearing.
With the revised details, the team clearly is hoping for a different reception in advance of the June 19 board meeting, when a final decision is expected.
“We’re trying to address the concerns raised by the trust,” said John Clawson of Equity Community Builders, who is involved in the development effort.
Calling itself the “Campus for Change,” the team has three main investors. One is the parent company of WeWork, which would be the primary manager of the 22 buildings within Fort Scott. The others are Epicenter for Climate Solutions, a nonprofit focused on issues related to climate change, and OpenAI, which was founded in 2015 with Silicon Valley roots and is researching artificial intelligence.
The only private tenant now at Fort Scott, the World Economic Forum, would remain in two buildings but is not part of the development team.
Campus for Change describes its mission at Fort Scott as no less than to provide “a home for, and an inspiration to, a diverse community of mission-driven organizations and individuals addressing the most significant issues of our time.”
Trust officials, by contrast, criticized the initial proposal as little more than a glorified co-working space in a one-ofa-kind setting.
The revised proposal would create a nonprofit to oversee the restored facility, with a board that “would establish the screening, leasing and mission alignment criteria for all tenants.” Profits for investors would be capped at 9%, with any additional revenues being steered back into Fort Scott, including subsidies for tenants that might not otherwise be able to get a foothold.
“We want to create an affordable campus to help organizations get started that are in line with the social aims,” Clawson said.
The added financial commitments are in response to criticisms that the initial proposal was too vague about improvements that the trust had required when it launched the competition for Fort Scott’s restoration.
In addition, the team specified that it would restore murals located on the top floor of one of the barracks — “making them available to the public in whatever reasonable manner the trust prefers.”
The Presidio Trust, which will issue a new staff report on Fort Scott the week of June 10, declined to comment on the proposal.