Thanks to “both the economic recession and the innovative strategies being used to manage…design and construction,” the construction cost for UCSF’s Medical Center at Mission Bay will be “at least $200 million below the original cost estimate.”
An anonymous pledge for a new $100 million donation brings the current fundraising total to $325 million, more than half-way to UCSF’s goal of $600 million.
And as a plugged-in tipster notes, “the plan is to build the hospital with the assumption that no funding will be forthcoming from the State.”
Maybe the state will have something left over after the new homebuyer tax credits.
Why is that GIANT parking lot being “built” in San Francisco? Where do they think Mission Bay is, Pleasant Hill?
PRE – the justification for the large lot is supposedly as a triage area in case of emergency (i.e. The Big One). You can read the discussion here : https://socketsite.com/archives/2010/01/making_way_for_ucsfs_new_mission_bay_medical_center.html
I think a garage with smaller footprint would have provided as many parking spaces while still fulfilling the role as a triage area.
The lot is intended to be developed later on. No need to build a parking structure before it’s needed.
Yes a multi level garage would be a great triage area, if it actually survived the “big one”. What happens when the top two levels of the garage collapse and the remaining area is determined as “unsafe” due to aftershocks, etc. Where do you put the triage area then?
My guess is that the parking lot also works as a placeholder for future expansion. If they built it out as a park there would be an outcry in 10 years when UCSF wants to build on it. If its a parking lot…not so much outcry.
The parking lot will definitely be developed in the future. I’ve seen massing renderings for it. I’d rather have the parking lot with trees and landscaping for the time being instead of a fenced off dirt lot – there is no shortage of those in mission bay these days.
k&l – if a parking garage is planned to be a key asset for disaster recovery, then you design it to survive the disaster. If the hospital can be designed to survive the big one then the parking garage can also be designed similarly robust.
anon@11:43 and CameronRex’s explanation is reasonable : future expansion can claim the surface lot.
geez, I get so tired of the people here who bitch and moan every time they see a new parking lot. I mean seriously, cars are NOT going away. Do you expect every person visiting the hospital to show up on their bike, or take Muni?
Cars are NOT evil. Muni may be. I’ll reserve judgement.
Additionally, for those who understand masterplanning, that parking lot is available for future building expansion and growth. Some of you need to think in larger terms and more open minded.
“geez, I get so tired of the people here who bitch and moan every time they see a new parking lot.”
Seriously, I never understand these No Parking Anywhere for Anyone people. Could we get another tired reference to how parking lots apparently belong only in Contra Costa County? You see some reference to the suburbs in every frickin’ thread about this hospital.
It’s a hospital. It needs parking because that’s how patients and doctors get there. This is common sense to almost everyone else. Furthermore, people would die if they took Muni to the hospital.
Oy JimBobJones, you’ve set up multiple strawmen in a single post. Has anyone here proposed “No Parking Anywhere for Anyone” ? Certainly not in this thread.
And did anyone suggest that the critically ill take Muni to the hospital ? Gosh, I wonder whether there are any other ways that a wounded or seriously ill person could get to a hospital without driving a car, riding a bike, or taking Muni. Let me think really hard on that one ….
Reasonable advocates of smart growth promote controlling parking, not eliminating it. Controls come in the form of zoning and/or market based pricing policies. The main purpose of controls is to keep traffic moving smoothly which benefits many people including motorists.
Sorry, I don’t want to turn this thread into another parking fight. It is just frustrating when a moderate view is painted as an extreme one. This is similar to those who attempt to discredit bike and ped advocates by labeling them as car haters. (Hint – most walkers and cyclists are also motorists)
your last line is too funny, JimBob.
FWIW, my sister the nurse said that triage needs to be in an open area–remember MASH? Trying to move people around and communicate with other personnel visually would be difficult in a dark, closed in parking garage.
What in the world does disliking a surface parking lot have to do with Muni or getting rid of cars? Very few surface parking lots downtown, yet still boatloads of cars…hmmmm…maybe there’s some other way to store cars that doesn’t take up so much land? Hmmm…
Is anyone else amazed at the $325 million in donations? This great news for the city and area. I go to a medical campus on El Camino near University in Palo Alto that was also built with donations (or so they claim). It is very nice and much of it brand new. I guess there still is some cash out there…I think this is part of the secret sauce that keeps the A properties/locations moving.
Milkshake, I’ve read Don Shoup’s papers and talked to him personally about them, so spare me the lecture. I’m just tired of the knee-jerk reaction every time a picture has a parking lot or a new curb cut or garage.
Anyway, I see that you failed to respond substantively to anything in my comment besides the first sentence. Do you really think the vast majority of people take an ambulance to the hospital? There are things called outpatient procedures and elective surgery and specialist visits and non-hurry case ER visits.
Anyone who’s complaining about parking at a *hospital* is being an extremist. Find me the moderate position there.
The parking lot/structure is not a big deal at all. Many people who need to travel to the hospital are elderly (in the case of outpatient procedures). If there is ever a spot to have copious amounts of parking, a hospital would be the place.
JimBobJones – I don’t see a single commenter complaining about parking. I see some commenters complaining about *surface* parking, which is entirely different from garage or underground parking, because it uses much more space and is more hostile to those walking.
I don’t see a problem with surface parking for now, because there is so much land available there for now, but I certainly recognize the difference between complaining about too much surface parking and too much parking. Surface parking IS a suburban thing, not an urban thing, where structured or underground parking can be either.
Earlier depictions of the Medical Center showed a garage on part of the space, and part of the space designated for another building. It is not in these depictions because it won’t yet be built with the current funding plan. The location makes sense for parking because the southern entrance to the hospital will directly connect with the Mariposa St on and off ramps to 280, helping prevent traffic jams, by bypassing the intersection of 16th, 7th, Mississippi St, and the Caltrain track crossing, already a difficult intersection.
Wow! Congratulations to UCSF on the donations.
Its always gratifying to see good things like this happen without government support. Kudos!
Relax! A parking garage is planned for this site. The photo shown is for the purpose of showing a rendering for the building only. Also, it is not mentioned but a park is to be included on this site
Relax! A parking garage is planned for this site. The photo shown is for the purpose of showing a rendering for the building only. Also, it is not mentioned but a public park is to be included on this site
That parking lot is going to be turned into a parking garage. This is only the first phase of USCF’s MIssion Bay vision.