Early results from Tuesday’s election show Proposition K, which seeks to permanently close a section of the Upper Great Highway to vehicular traffic, slightly ahead with 52.9% of votes in favor, as per latest updates. The contentious measure aims to transform a 2-mile stretch of San Francisco’s coastal boulevard between Lincoln Way and Sloat Boulevard into a park for pedestrians and cyclists. The ballot has indeed split opinions among residents, with younger and progressive voters tending to support it, while older and moderate voters, particularly from the Asian community, have shown resistance, according to a poll by the SF Chronicle.
Proponents argue that this proposal is a step toward a new vision for the city’s westside and addresses changing needs, especially with part of the Great Highway poised to close due to coastal erosion. In fact, a recent report by the San Francisco Estuary Institute suggested that doing so will provide substantial ecological benefits to the region. Lucas Lux, campaign manager for the Yes on K campaign, expressed cautious optimism to KQED, stating, “If K passes, it would be a win for the whole city to enjoy the coast in new ways, and it’s reclaiming a space for people to enjoy.” However, critics are concerned the closure will reroute traffic into residential neighborhoods, causing congestion and delays for local drivers.
Among the supporters of the ballot measure are city supervisors and prominent figures, including Mayor London Breed, state Sen. Scott Wiener, and Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi. If Proposition K were to pass, it would mark the continuation of an experiment that began with a COVID-19 pandemic-era pilot program, wherein the Upper Great Highway was closed to car traffic on weekends, allowing for recreational activities along the stretch. According to a statement obtained by the Chronicle, Supervisor Joel Engardio, who championed Proposition K, believed this to be a “once-in-a-generational” opportunity for a “renaissance” in the Sunset District.
Skeptics have raised their voices as well, pointing to everyday practicalities that they believe the measure undermines. “Closing this road would permanently push vehicles onto adjacent neighborhood streets, bringing noise, traffic snarls and potential accidents,” Richie Greenberg articulated in the opposition argument against Prop. K, as reported by KQED. The San Francisco Estuary Institute’s October report cited by KQED, laid out three scenarios for the highway’s future, indicating that a car-free highway could have notable ecological benefits. Still, the question of community consensus remains very much alive, as expressed by residents like Albert Chow during the “No on K” rally, when he criticized the measure for not fully representing community-led compromise, as reported by the SF Chronicle.
With the final vote count yet to come in, the debate over Proposition K underscores the broader discussion on urban planning and sustainability in San Francisco. The city waits to see whether the proposed transformation will indeed take place or if further negotiations and community dialogue will shape the fate of the Great Highway.
Note: Thank you for visiting our website! We strive to keep you informed with the latest updates based on expected timelines, although please note that we are not affiliated with any official bodies. Our team is committed to ensuring accuracy and transparency in our reporting, verifying all information before publication. We aim to bring you reliable news, and if you have any questions or concerns about our content, feel free to reach out to us via email. We appreciate your trust and support!
Leave a Reply