San Francisco’s Proposition H of 1990, the Waterfront Land Use Plan, reserves the waterfront “for maritime uses, public access, and projects which aid in the preservation and restoration of the environment”. It specifically prohibits hotels, and sets straightforward criteria for defining an “unacceptable” land use:
- does it need to be located on the waterfront to serve its basic function?
- is it compatible with existing or planned maritime operation on surrounding parcels?
- does it provide the maximum feasible public access?
- does it improve the ecological balance of San Francisco Bay?
- does it protect the waterfront’s architectural heritage?
- does it present the best interests of the people of San Francisco?
Do these criteria sound like a description of the Warriors’ proposal?