A San Francisco supervisor who pushed to turn a 2-mile stretch of highway into a car-free park faces a recall vote in his district.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/36015848

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — During the coronavirus pandemic, the city closed a stretch of a four-lane highway along San Francisco’s Pacific Coast and made it an automobile-free sanctuary where bicyclists and walkers flocked to exercise and socialize under open skies and to the sound of crashing waves.

But with the post-pandemic return to school and work, resentment grew among neighborhood residents who relied on the artery to get around. Some blamed the district city supervisor who helped make the change permanent by placing on a citywide ballot a measure to turn the 2-mile (3.2-kilometer) stretch into a new park.

On Tuesday, district voters will decide whether to recall Supervisor Joel Engardio.

The recall of a local supervisor who represents one-tenth of a city of 800,000 might seem like minor politics. But the election highlights a San Francisco in flux and a still cranky, even emboldened electorate as leaders prepare to make tough decisions about the city’s future.

The recall election will be the city’s third in four years. It’s fueled by many of the same people who tossed out three liberal school board members in February 2022 followed by the ouster of politically progressive San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin in June of that year.

“This recall is really about the future of our city,” said Engardio in an interview with The Associated Press. “Do we want to be a city that just preserves itself in amber and goes back in time? Or do we want to be a city that innovates, thinks ahead, is forward-looking and welcomes new people?”

  • fubarx@lemmy.worldEnglish
    10·
    2 days ago

    The effect of the highway closure was studied by SFMTA: https://www.sfmta.com/blog/new-data-great-highway-road-closure-how-were-supporting-your-trips

    Some roadways are busier and more congested. Chain of Lakes Drive has about 2,000 more vehicles per day than pre-closure. Lower Great Highway has about 700 more vehicles per day – that means about one additional vehicle per minute at peak hour –compared with pre-pandemic traffic.

    At the same time, traffic on the Upper Great Highway between Fulton and Lincoln has dropped by 30%. Together, these two major park crossings – Chain of Lakes Drive and the Upper Great Highway – now carry about 3,200 fewer weekday car trips than before the closure. This suggests that while some traffic has shifted to nearby streets, other trips may have moved to different routes, different types of transportation, or aren’t happening anymore.

    Other roadways remain below pre-pandemic traffic. Sunset Boulevard remains at 90% of pre-pandemic traffic volumes. Lincoln Way east of Chain of Lake was not impacted by the closure of the Upper Great Highway and remains 7% below pre-pandemic traffic volumes.

    While some traffic has shifted to avenues, all the avenues where we collected data had typical traffic volumes for neighborhood streets.

    That park is a great asset to the neighborhood. It started because roads were closed during the pandemic and people really liked having a place to take the kids, get to the beach, and not have to worry about cars. Traffic data shows closure impact is minimal. But some people are still raging that they have to drive a few blocks out of their way.

  • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.netEnglish
    5·
    2 days ago

    Update: voters recalled Joel Engardio, the supervisor who championed the highway closure, with 65% in support of the recall.

    I’m not surprised. The whole city got to vote on the highway closure, which passed with majority approval, but with very strong opposition from Engardio’s district, where that closed stretch of road actually was. The recall election was limited to Engardio’s district. The result was pretty much inevitable.

    You could complain about car brains, but I think it’s a lesson in the importance of putting in the work and getting community support for road closures - or for any other change that directly impacts a specific community, no matter how well intentioned - instead of imposing them from the top down.

    • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
      4·
      2 days ago

      Keeping the highway open would have been very expensive. There is major coastal erosion, and just the routine sand clearing. Closing the highway is consistent with official long-term plans that have gone through decades of meetings. Unless this very small number of voters wants to foot those costs all on their own, then I see no reason to give them veto power.

      • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.netEnglish
        2·
        2 days ago

        Unless this very small number of voters wants to foot those costs all on their own, then I see no reason to give them veto power.

        It’s not about veto power. It’s about consensus building. Or the lack thereof.

        The community around that stretch of the Great Highway felt unheard and disrespected. They felt the rest of SF had imposed a decision on them without their consent. And they used the power they did have to punish one of the people they blamed for it.

        You’re absolutely right about the highway - it was routinely closed for sand and flooding and climate change was just going to make it worse. It’s on its way out.

        And yet the city failed to convince the people who live around the highway of that, and went ahead by force, imposing the will of the majority on the minority, creating anger and hard feelings that could have been avoided had they put in the work to convince the community they were right.

        I don’t think the city or its voters had bad intentions. I just think it exemplifies one of the worst flaws of democracy.

  • pc486@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    11·
    3 days ago

    These are the same assholes who are suing the city saying proposition K was illegal. Check out this crazy statement in their court petition:

    The effects of Proposition K will be to displace longtime residents, merchants, visitors, and daily commuters. Proposition K advances exclusionary public policies of limited benefit, and compromises the safety, accessibility, and overall well-being of the entire Bay Area. It effectively denies people equitable access to public roads, safe transportation, and a livable environment.

    Briefs have just been filed and the city’s opposition brief is pretty damning. You can check out the case document’s if you’re so inclined, but we can also just wait. The hearing is scheduled for November 10th and I’m planning to make some fresh popcorn when that news hits.