resources rather than creating more parking garages. there is technology we have begun to implement at a very rudimentary level. other cities have more advanced systems to allow people to know where parking spaces are located. right now, there are many on- street parking spaces run with four-hour limits. providing a shuttle system that allows people to get through the more distant parking garages to the other distant events and the destinations along the waterfront. some examples that we look at in the report, and back to the closest from the building is almost invisible behind the plaza. in particular, the clay street

and the walk behind the the fountain credit greatly benefit and make new connections between parking in a waterfront uses. we looked at green space and recreation. this is a map from the open space plan showing the lack of playgrounds along the entire waterfront, not to be found until you reach the baseball park. bringing playground and exercise stations to the waterfront, especially as there are several -- it is too small for any kind of development. the other thing was the importance of a world-class bike center. it would serve not only locals, it might be ready in time for

america's cup. if any of you have walked along and chosen to walk on the city side rather than the bay side, it is an amazing experience for all sorts of historic uses. chapter 6 also talked about the city with cross-town transit. the existing connections between chinatown and north beach rerouted to disconnect from the waterfront. these were hard fought lines that the chinatown community fought for and are now subject to the cuts. the planning department study also made reference to the great service of muni lines.

if any of view have tried to wait for a line at the waterfront, it is quite an experience. i know there have been certain discussions. about rerouting the 82 line. it could be a primary interface. finally, we focus on an economically feasible and community supported plan. consensus was not reached on the study presented by the planning department. our study had a consensus of four of the major neighborhood groups. part of that consensus came out of trying to figure out what would be the committee supported

development of the publicly owned lots the way that support was gathered for the lots south of market street. we want to see a vision that goes beyond parking lots to create development opportunities. it respects neighborhood character and existing height limits. we talked about a variety of uses within the scope including hotels, cultural facilities, and waterfront recreation. we talked about work force housing on the lot owned by the state off broadway. we talked about lots to small for development and the bike center close to the ferry building. is this impossible? we looked at the area near south beach where many of the developments were built in the late nineties and early 2000's. it is a question of vision and

development for all of the lots as a whole. with that, i want to conclude. i think you have in front of you our documents. if you have further questions, the question about implementation. this is a golden opportunity. we bring together the agencies involved in this, dealing with parking, the planning department, the ports to create an implementation plan. with the following priorities that we have identified. reconnecting the neighborhoods, planning for parking, bringing back transit on broadway. preserving the existing recreation opportunities and creating a development plan that

balances public use and revenue generation. president olague: we have several speaker cards. . >> i wanted to make a request, the commissioner needs to leave. president olague: former commissioner? >> maybe not. president olague: hello. >> i haven't been here in many years. i am the executive director of the chinese historical society of america and i was invited to come this afternoon to listen to the presentation and give a few remarks. i am neutral on the plan. i grew up in this area at a time

when the the market still existed and there was no center. as the freeway was being built, chinatown had no connection to the waterfront. so to me, i using the catalyst of what ever other development begins to be discussed, how to build connections is really important. it remains one of the dentist neighborhoods. our people have no place to go. we have chinese playgrounds and the recreation center that is being renovated right now. all they have to do we access -- there is no plan to build

anything to connect those spaces to the residential neighborhoods. that is what it takes listening to the plan encourage adoption of proposals that will help to enhance the waterfront and make meaningful improvements. chinatown is also a tourist destination, and anything that also connects the economics of the neighborhood is really important. we don't want chinatown to remain in ethnic enclaves. -- an ethnic enclave. we need to make -- recognize the connection. that is my two cents. president olague: it is great to

see you again. [reading names] >> i am a pedicab operator, and i support this plan. we need to more facilities for bicycles. it will be a great improvement to what we have now. i would personally encourage the removal of car parking. there is no reason for it to be there. it serves no housing or retail. it would increase the space for

bicycles and pedicabs. president olague: thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am a member of the community coalition in developing the community vision for san francisco's northeast waterfront. my comments will focus on bringing life back to washington street. and proximity to the ferry building by creating better connections between chinatown, north beach, and more. as a resident of the gateway, i speak of the need to change the washington street corridor. it was originally designed to accommodate the freeway. what we feel is the criteria of

the physical fabric into an oriented street. with easier pedestrian and bicycle buildings and with safety. our vision plan calls for narrowing to two lanes. and make washington a 2-way street and it will call on traffic and allow for safe bike lanes and improve the streetscape. our plan wishes to develop and design sidewalks on the sunny side to create stores and corners of the north side of washington. and to bring temporary vendors, to increase the flow with positive activities, we must

improve the crosswalks for the safety of the pedestrians. no more peter pan tents. the park is a people's place to all the visit the waterfront. we want to improve visibility and bring back active uses like soccer, frisbee, volleyball, and more. let us preserve the refuge. we urge the construction of a major bicycle center similar to the one in chicago. serving the public as the preferred location, this would not only rent and store bikes, but would be an outlet for sports sales. the center would be a fit for the public trust status that

would be interconnected with the recreational center that must be preserved in its entirety. [chime] thank you for your consideration. president olague: thank you. sir, it's been three minutes. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i am president of the golden gateway tenant's association. a rent-controlled complexes founded by washington and other streets. we enthusiastically support the community vision for reasons stated by other speakers. we are especially interested in

preserving open spaces, preserving its existing community facilities and improving access to and from the area. i would like to add a personal fought. -- thought. we are expecting significantly increased traffic. including the plaza bordered by retail shops instead of a barricade of parking lots. we hope you will give this favorable consideration as you move afford in planning the future of the exceptional neighborhood. >> thank you.

>> good afternoon, president. it is great to see everybody here this afternoon. it is groundbreaking. they hire a professional planning group and put together a plan. this is groundbreaking for us. we have spent countless hours inside the workshop and outside the workshop. i am sure that you have some much spare time. if you have a moment, take a moment to read this. we have put -- or what we

thought was missing was a community input. instead of just railing against the plan, we have come up with something unbelievable, in my opinion and unprecedented with the level of cooperation. the effort is kind of impressive because what we found was a bunch of neighborhood groups not just saying that they want open space, we recognize the need for revenue generating projects along the waterfront. we came up with a great, specific ideas. these are revenue generating projects. and yet, it complies with the trust. there is no need to look at isolated projects. this is a holistic vision that

i, for one, am a part of. i wanted to talk about the time, death, energy, and passion. you can bet we have been hearing a lot about it. thank you for your consideration. president olague: [reading names] >> good afternoon, commissionaires. i am a resident of the golden gateway center now called the gateway for over 30 years. i want to offer my support for this asian neighborhood design vision plan. i have been an active

participant in the development. i attend a workshop and i can honestly say that it reflects the wishes of those that contributed to the preparation. the part that i find most gratifying if you have a chance to read it is chapter 5, social infrastructure. open space and active recreation. there is overwhelming consensus and support for this in my neighborhood, particularly active recreation. i was also an active participant in the northeast steady. i intended all of the workshops, submitted written comments, and i can honestly say that design principal 5 on recreation does

not reflect the consensus for the neighborhood, particularly active recreation. i urge you to adopt this vision plan. this plan balances revenue generating open sce and active recreation uses across the lots and is both financially and politically feasible. thank you for your time. >> i am president of of the coast neighborhood association. if you review the boundaries of the community vision plan, that you're learning more about today, you would find the area under study is practically identical to the boundaries of

the neighborhood coast association. we work in the neighborhood and we try to raise children. as the association most affected by planning, we had high hopes when supervised chiu convinced the planning department to make appointments in the area but we were disappointed with the outcome. primarily designed to justify a huge development, it lacked details concerning the other lots and set up a continuation. in addition, the pleas for community consensus was alternately ignored. it was embarrassing for those of

us that live in the subject area. we joined a dozen organizations to provide a model for development and growth for many decades. the vision planet is it fair to the city and the port. we urge you to adopt this plan and to steer it and the proper direction. president olague: if you limit your comments to the northeast plan, did not focus on projects because of his knowledge the discussion is for today. >> i approve of this vision plan that hits on all of the important items necessary for the beautification of san francisco. we do not need a monster tower

at washington that would block the view of the historic building. it goes against your own planning department policy. please go by your own suggestions. there is an article that says as eliminating cars in the cities of europe are the focus of a wonderful area. avoiding pollution, cancer, all of that stuff. america's cup will bring huge revenues. a sole focus on getting the big money in. incidentally, i know a little

bit about developing space. as far as recreation and the park, we don't have an off land to develop playgrounds. what we do have is a terminal that has four football fields long of park areas that will have sufficient exercise, playgrounds, and all of that stuff. we don't have an of available plans to develop that. focus on what is needed. let's get the proper development. let's bring in businesses like that.

there is the beautification of it. it lets keep the waterfront beautiful. it brings in of a lot of money from events. this report has all the right things. please listen to the people. it they live here and work here. they know what is best. thank you. president olague: [reading names] everyeone elone else i called b. >> my name is nancy shanahan. the luxury condo project that requires the inclusion of a

publicly owned a lot held in public trust for the people of california is not what comprehensive planning is about. but that is what the planning department the study did. we participated in good faith in the department's planning process and grew more and more frustrated as it became clear that the comprehensive process was being used to respond to a single private development proposal. this frustration is the reason that the telegraph hill dwellers and other community organizations decided it was necessary to engage in an alternative planning process. by approaching development of the comprehensive lot, our plan shows that economically viable and politically feasible development can occur on the lot that meets all of the following planning principles.

respecting the height limits. character and scale of the surrounding neighborhoods as well as the historic but bullethead building. -- bulkhead building. luxury condos are not permitted without special legislation. not adding shadow to existing parks protected by proposition k. protecting public views of the city's world renowned iconic topography. and developing parks and open spaces, recreational uses active and not active on several of the lots. 76% of the telegraph hill numbers supported it in a recent

survey. thank you for considering our community's vision for the waterfront. >> i am the new president of the telegraph hill dwellers. we are one of the oldest and largest neighborhood groups. san francisco truly is -- at the title story is a port city. san francisco always has been and always will be intimately connected to the waterfronts. over the 57 years, the city has seen the waterfront and the port evolves. for too long, for most of our city's history, it was the wild

wild west. it was reactionary driven by ideas, many of them extraordinarily bad. it was only shot down because of neighborhood organizing. to replace the northeast waterfront, a real proposal that had political juice behind it, in response to those, citizens and environmental groups got together and asked the voters to approve a ballot measure. what it did was put a moratorium on development until a comprehensive land-use plan was created. not just by the government, but

with a genuine community input. the land-use plan was adopted. one of the reasons we're here today is that it is wildly out of date. that is not just a bad idea, it is a violation of the law. the waterfront plan should be reviewed by the city agency designated by the board of supervisors every five years. it hasn't happened once. it is not just a bad idea, it is a violation of the law. they say it will take years and