Future of the UCSF Parnassus Heights Campus Advisory Committee Meeting #6 Thursday, February 6, 2020 SUMMARY NOTES Advisory Committee Members/Designated Alternates Present: Andrea Jadwin, Inner Sunset Resident Bob Walsh, Cole Valley Resident Caleb Krywenko, Inner Sunset Resident Calvin Welch, Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council Charles Canepa, UCSF CAG, Cole Valley Improvement Association Dan Sider, Inner Sunset Resident Dennis Antenore, Inner Sunset Resident, UCSF CAG Erica Kajdasz, Cole Valley Merchant, Cole Valley Fair Kelly Akemi-Groth, Inner Sunset Resident Kevin Hart, Inner Sunset Resident, UCSF CAG Maria Wabl, Inner Sunset Resident Martha Ehrenfeld, UCSF CAG, Inner Sunset Park Neighbors Robert Ogilvie, Inner Sunset Resident, SPUR Sarah Jones, Cole Valley Resident, SFMTA Susan Maerki, Inner Sunset Resident, UCSF CAG Susannah Wise, Cole Valley Resident, Inner Sunset Merchants Association Tes Welborn, UCSF CAG, Haight-Ashbury Neighborhood Council Walter Caplan, Forest Knolls Resident, Forest Knolls Neighborhood Organization Advisory Committee Members/Designated Alternates Absent: Beatrice Laws, Cole Valley Resident, Kezar Stadium Citizen Advisory Benji Jasik, Inner Sunset Resident Donald Luu, Forest Hill Resident, Chinese Chamber of Commerce Jeanne Myerson, Cole Valley Resident, SPUR Subject Matter Experts Present: Alicia Murasaki, Assistant Vice Chancellor of Campus Planning, Real Estate Barbara French, Strategic Advisor, Office of Senior Vice Chancellor Brian Newman, Sr. Assoc. Vice Chancellor, Real Estate & Vice President, UCSF Health Christine Gasparac, Senior Director, Community and Government Relations 1 Diane Wong, Principal Planner/Environmental Coordinator, Real Estate Elizabeth Polek, Vice President, New Hospital Planning and Optimization, UCSF Health Francesca Vega, Vice Chancellor, Community and Government Relations Joshua Switzky, Planner, SF Planning Department Kevin Beauchamp, Director, Physical Planning, Real Estate Paul Takayama, Assistant Vice Chancellor, Community and Government Relations Stuart Eckblad, Vice President, Major Capital Projects, UCSF Health Tammy Chan, Senior Planner, Real Estate Subject Matter Experts Absent: Jorge Rivas, Deputy Director, OEWD, SF Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD) Welcome, Recap of Last Meeting, and Agenda, Andrea Baker, CEO En2Action Andrea opened by requesting any public comments that are not on tonight’s agenda. A community member requested a discussion about the project’s obligation to maintain light with the additional shadowing of the new building height versus the current heights Moffitt and Long sites. Kevin Beauchamp replied that effects on light, air, and shadow will be analyzed in the upcoming EIR. The EIR Scoping Meeting on February 10, 2020. A community member shared she grew up in the area of 2nd and Arguello. Her mother was involved in an accident with a UCSF Shuttle Bus on 6th Avenue. She raised the question of pedestrian and Muni traffic at the intersection of Arguello and Irving Street and pedestrian safety and crossing at Arguello and 2nd Avenue. Kevin Beauchamp thanked the neighbor for her comment and replied that pedestrian safety is also one of the topics that will be analyzed in the EIR. A community member asked how long UCSF’s community engagement commitments last until they sunset? Francesca Vega responded that UCSF will walk through their commitment for a long-term community investment project. There is no cookie-cutter length of time and that as part of this project, UCSF is considering commitments through a long-term lens and based on feedback received from this community process to address needs in the community. Andrea Baker presented upcoming opportunities for community engagement, including: Advisory Committee Meetings: March 11, April 22, May 13 EIR Scoping Meeting: February 10 Parnassus Community Day (CPHP Open House): May 30 2 UCSF Report Back, Francesca Vega, Vice Chancellor, Office of Community & Government Relations Francesca Vega provided a 30-day recap of UCSF’s activities and discussions to explore the viability of community investments offered by the community in previous Advisory Committee meetings. Since the January Advisory Committee meeting, UCSF has engaged in the following efforts: 1. Publication of the Initial Study, January 14, 2020 2. Internal Executive Committee Meeting 3. Chancellor Executive Team Meeting 4. Communication with Elected Officials including Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Norman Yee, and Supervisor Dean Preston An Advisory Committee Member asked for greater specificity. Francesca replied that Supervisor Preston had many similar questions as those raised during Advisory Committee Meetings, including questions about housing and transportation plans, inclusivity of community process, and UCSF’s budget for monetary investments. The daily population in 2020 is projected to be 17,300 with faculty and staff totaling 12,000. An Advisory Committee Member asked if contractors and construction workers are included in the population projections. Kevin Beauchamp responded that the numbers are all-inclusive. An Advisory Committee Member asked about the letter UCSF received from Mayor London Breed, Supervisor Dean Preston, and Supervisor Norman Yee requesting an MOU with the City and County of San Francisco and what the university’s response entailed. They asked for a copy of the letter to be included in subsequent meeting materials, for the MOU to be on a future meeting agenda, and for community input to be taken into consideration. Francesca replied that she uses the terminology of “formalized agreement” which is what the MOU is. She doesn’t have details or a framework yet, but that the university’s intention is for this community process to help inform the commitments outlined in the MOU and be responsive. UCSF is committed to coming to the table to formalize an agreement that everyone can be proud of. UCSF is committed to talk with the Advisory Committee of what the MOU could look like. 3 An Advisory Committee Member commented that it’s important for the Advisory Committee to understand how their feedback will be involved into the MOU. They advocated for the community to be able to share direct feedback to the city without being filtered through UCSF. They asked for a greater amount of involvement of the public in the development of the MOU. They asked why they haven’t received a copy of the letter from Mayor London Breed and Supervisors Preston and Yee. Francesca responded that there are open discussions taking place, there is no separate process underway, and that the city wants to work collaboratively to ensure that the communities voice is heard. She reiterated that she is a part of the leadership team, and an ambassador for the community. Her role is to ensure that the community’s concern, needs and feedback are responded to. [UCSF has subsequently shared the letter from the City and UCSF’s response letter to Advisory Committee members] An Advisory Committee Member commented that their roles as city staff working in city departments, and certainly our elected officials, are to serve the public and community, and that is what they are bringing to these tables as we have the ongoing discussions with UCSF about how we work together to ensure city needs are being served of the course of this many year plan. CEQA Process, Diane Wong, Principal Planner, UCSF Real Estate The Initial Study was published on January 14, 2020 and is now available for public review. The study identifies scope and content of the environmental information that will be included in the Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR). Examples of topics include: impact of increased traffic on pedestrian safety impacts on historic buildings additional need for housing effects of construction (noise, air quality, traffic) An EIR Scoping Meeting will be held on February 10, 2020 at 6:30pm in the City Lights Room at Millberry Union. The Initial Study is available online at http://campusplanning.ucsf.edu/ UCSF’s Framework for Community Investments, Francesca Vega, Vice Chancellor, Office of Community & Government Relations When assessing impacts and investments, UCSF will focus on addressing potential impacts from the CPHP and development activities. Potential impacts will inform the nature and type of potential investments. Investments are generally categorized into three “buckets”: Project Design CEQA Mitigation 4 Community Investments Community investments are intended to be long-term and sustainable over time and are connected with CPHP development projects as they come online. UCSF’s guidelines for community investments must: benefit neighbors and UCSF address anticipated impacts of UCSF development be visible and meaningful rather than small and unmemorable be beyond the scope of individual projects/sites be contingent on approval of the project(s) An Advisory Committee Member asked why we were reviewing an example of UCSF’s community investments in the Dogpatch when the Parnassus Campus is in a completely different neighborhood with different needs. Francesca replied that UCSF is providing examples to give the Advisory Committee members a sense of what might be possible and to help spur the generation of ideas. Connectivity with Nature Brian Newman, Senior Associate Vice Chancellor, Real Estate, Vice President, UCSF Health Brian opened with a framework of the topics of the meetings. The last meeting UCSF shared the design guidelines and focused on public realm. Tonight’s meeting is focused on Open Space