Board continues UCSF Parnassus tree-removal appeal; asks for firmer, enforceable replacement plan

The San Francisco Board of Appeals continued, without deciding, an appeal by neighborhood advocates of a Public Works authorization allowing UCSF to remove 28 street trees on Parnassus Avenue tied to the new hospital project.

Appellant Joshua Klipp argued the Public Works decision conflicted with departmental policy that generally resists tree removal for construction, that many subject trees are mature and healthy, and that the department did not require an appraisal or an enforceable, measurable replacement program. "The permit on appeal was issued in error," Klipp said, urging the board either to deny the permit or to continue the matter so parties can negotiate a stronger mitigation package.

UCSF representatives said seismic, programmatic and site constraints leave little room to retain the trees within the project footprint and that the removal is contemplated in the project's FEIR. UCSF offered a mitigation package: a 2:1 replacement ratio (14 new street trees on the Parnassus frontage and 42 trees in neighboring blocks), a three‑year establishment maintenance commitment for new street trees, and an RFP to select planting partners. UCSF and DPW said the 42 off‑site trees could be planted beginning in 2023, with Parnassus frontage plantings occurring as the project nears completion.

Public Works Bureau of Urban Forestry (Chris Buck) explained staff reviewed project approvals and EIR material before deciding that the public had an earlier opportunity to weigh in and that DPW’s decision to approve with a 2:1 replacement was reasonable under the code and project circumstances. Buck acknowledged the replacement does not equal the appraised value or trunk girth of the existing mature trees and said DPW will consider appraisal options and in‑lieu fees where planting is infeasible.

Community speakers urged a stronger, faster and more accountable mitigation plan, including larger applicant-funded plantings in high-need neighborhoods. Commissioners asked UCSF and DPW for concrete, enforceable proposals — not statements of intent — and suggested hybrid remedies (larger box trees, additional trees in underserved neighborhoods, and cash/in‑lieu to reach appraised value metrics).

The board voted 4–0 to continue the appeal for further negotiation and return with a refined plan on Feb. 8, 2023 (with a possible earlier date if parties can meet the board’s needs). The board asked UCSF and DPW to present: the RFP scope and bidders, exact planting locations or a prioritized list of basins, proposed tree sizes and timelines, a financial/maintenance commitment, and any appraisal or in‑lieu calculations so the board and public can evaluate whether proposed mitigation approaches the value of the mature trees being removed.

What happens next: UCSF, DPW and the appellants will meet and return to the Board of Appeals with a detailed, enforceable replacement and monitoring plan at the February hearing; the continuation preserves the board’s ability to rule on the underlying permit at that time.