Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the UCSF Murals EIR topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff says UCSF EIR includes mural-preservation mitigation; task force to advise on displays
Summary
Planning staff told the Historic Preservation Commission that the UCSF Parnassus MOU does not itself address mural protections because preservation is included as mitigation in the project EIR; UCSF will convene a task force by the end of 2021 to advise on display and has contracted a preservation firm to remove and store murals for relocation.
Marcel Boudreaux, a planning department staffer, told the San Francisco Historic Preservation Commission on Jan. 6 that the memorandum of understanding (MOU) between UCSF and the city does not specifically address protections for the Bernard Zakheim medical murals because preservation measures are included as mitigation in UCSF’s environmental impact report (EIR).
"UCSF will convene a task force by the end of 2021 to advise on options for the display of the history of medicine murals in a publicly accessible setting," Boudreaux said, adding that the task force would include the commission chair or a designee.
The staff update said UCSF contracted a historic preservation contractor in October 2020 to begin safely removing and storing the murals for future relocation. Boudreaux also noted that the UC Regents were scheduled to meet Jan. 20, 2021, to consider approving the EIR; the MOU signing was described as planned for February 2021 by city agency directors and the university chancellor.
At the start of the hearing, public commenter Richard Rossman urged stronger city protections for murals, saying he had read the MOU "and there's no mention of protection of the murals in there." Rossman also alleged that a water leak at Coit Tower in September damaged several murals and asked the commission to investigate why the damage occurred.
Boudreaux said preservation and future display options would be coordinated through the EIR mitigation process and the proposed UCSF task force, and that questions about the mural advisory committee’s membership and process should be directed to UCSF, with department staff available to help coordinate.
Next steps noted by planning staff included a UCSF community meeting scheduled that evening, an informational presentation to the Planning Commission on Jan. 7, and an anticipated discussion at the Board of Supervisors in the following week, with details to be determined.
The commission did not take a formal action on the mural topic at the Jan. 6 hearing.
