Great Highway in San Francisco officially closed to vehicular traffic
Park rangers closed the gate to traffic on the Great Highway on Friday morning and park supporters hope they don't open again.
At 5 a.m. Friday morning, San Francisco park rangers closed the gate to the Great Highway for what may be the last time. Voters in November approved Proposition K, aimed at transforming two miles of the Great Highway into a park.
With the closure of the gates, that park is one step closer to reality.
"It's something that's going to take a lot of work to get to the future park that we all dream of," said park supporter, Lucas Lux. "But, today is day one, and we should be proud of that."
Opponents to the park say they've filed a lawsuit aimed at blocking it, saying park supporters overstepped the authority of the state to determine how roads are used, and say the park plans don't address environmental concerns.
Plaintiff Matt Boschetto said today's closure won't stop efforts to block the park.
"It's certainly long from over," said Boschetto. "Again, I think we have a great case, and hopefully we see it through court and get justice served there."
By midday Friday afternoon, work was already underway on Lincoln and the Great Highway, where SFMTA crews were busy re-striping the road and installing signs saying the Great Highway was closed. The Recreation and Parks Department said plans are underway to begin work to open the park next month.
"Rec and Parks will be adding seating, recreation areas," said Tamara Barak Aparton from the Recreation and Parks Department. "Signage. All the things that parks need."
On the first day of the closure, pedestrians began walking up and down the highway. Paul Greer said he enjoyed his stroll and is looking forward to the park officially opening.
"It's a safe place to take your family," said Greer. "I'm thrilled about it. I can't wait to enjoy it for many more hours to take the kids out. I have a 4-year-old and a 2-year-old and I think it's going to be great for the community."
Stephen Gorski lives across the street from the proposed park, and is among those calling for the recall of District Supervisor Joel Engardio over his support of it.
He said the park will push more traffic into the neighborhood, and is out of step with what people on the west side want.
"People on the other side of town don't realize the impact here," said Gorski. "How would you like it if we just decided to close a major thoroughfare? Like Lombard, say 'no, no, we're just going to close this now, figure it out.' It's the same thing. If they can do it here, they can do it anywhere."
For now, lawsuit withstanding, the Rec and Parks department is looking to have a ribbon cutting for the park in mid-April.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
a day ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Recall of Supervisor Joel Engardio is a warning shot to other S.F. politicians
Regarding 'Endorsement: No on Joel Engardio recall. Yes on charter reform' (Editorials, Aug. 16): The editorial board disagrees with over 10,000 District 4 voters who signed the recall petition: San Francisco Supervisor Joel Engardio's offenses warrant an immediate vote rather than waiting until the 2026 election to remove him from office. The disconnect is not surprising: For months, the thrust of the Chronicle's news reporting and opinion writers has been that the reason for the recall is that Engardio championed Proposition K to turn the Great Highway into a park. He did not notify District 4 voters about plans to introduce Prop K. Months before submitting Prop K, he met with groups supporting the highway closure, but gave no opportunity to those opposed to lobby or argue through public meetings or other venues. He submitted Prop K at the last minute, so that no competing proposition could be placed on the ballot. He promised traffic issues would be addressed before the Great Highway was closed. Many District 4 voters disagree with the editorial board and view Engardio's 'insufficient outreach' not as a 'political misstep' but as a callous disregard for basic democratic processes. A successful recall sends a warning to politicians: They ignore and disrespect their constituents at their political peril. John Higgins, San Francisco Have hybrid elections Before the city first switched to district elections in 1977, supervisors were concentrated in a few wealthy neighborhoods. The first district elections corrected that, but without a high voter turnout, it resulted in more fringe candidates. Maybe now is the time to retain residency diversity for selecting the top two candidates per district, but make them accountable to all the city voters in a runoff. To me, this is better than adding new at-large supervisors Ann Carberry, Sacramento Trump's claims are baseless Regarding 'Oakland leaders should listen to what Trump's criticism gets right about city' (Letters to the Editor, Aug. 19): While Oakland has problems — like most cities — the headline for the letter in the print edition ('Trump's criticisms are based on reality') is wrong. For one thing, President Donald Trump did not mention and does not pretend to address the issues the letter raises — businesses closing and underfunding of schools — issues that the city government is addressing and that the president's policies are exacerbating. Trump just talks about crime, when the reality is that crime is down in Oakland. So his criticism is not based on reality at all; rather, it is based on his desire to sow fear and to establish what he hopes will be a police state through the deployment of military force in American cities. Trump doesn't care about Oakland; he cares about power. That is reality. Clyde Leland, Berkeley Penalize Sen. Schiff Regarding 'Trump's motivation for accusing Adam Schiff of fraud is clear. But the legal case is not' (Politics, Aug. 15): As the law states, you can have only one primary residence, it has zero exemptions, and the language is quite simple. You can have only one and meeting the requirements is clearly spelled out. Sen. Adam Schiff has zero special status, just like the other 534 members of the House and Senate, nor do the head of any corporation, legal firm, state, local or city government. The story's attempt to present Schiff's side on a clear violation of tax law falls on deaf ears. Schiff should pay all back taxes, penalties and be happy he's not expelled from the Senate. James Sandler, Pleasanton
San Francisco Chronicle
5 days ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Endorsement: No on Engardio recall in S.F. but Yes on charter reform
Recall elections have become a regular facet of life in California — particularly in the Bay Area. The latest public official to face a constituent uprising is District 4 Supervisor Joel Engardio, whose fate will be decided by voters in San Francisco's Sunset neighborhood in a recall election on Sept. 16. If Engardio is recalled, Mayor Daniel Lurie would appoint a replacement. The District 4 supervisor seat would then be on the ballot for the city's next scheduled election in June 2026, and whoever wins that race would be eligible for reelection the following November. Throughout the recent uptick in California recall elections, the editorial board has held a clear stance: Recalls should be reserved for instances of gross incompetence and egregious or illegal misconduct by an elected official. Does Engardio meet that threshold? Recall supporters insist he does. They say Engardio deceived them in 2024 when he joined four other supervisors to place Proposition K on the November ballot. It permanently closed a portion of the Great Highway to car traffic after passing with nearly 55% of the vote citywide. However, 64% of District 4 voters rejected it. In an interview with the editorial board, John Crabtree, a District 4 resident and volunteer with the recall campaign, said Engardio lied to voters by abandoning his support for weekend closures of the Great Highway after previously backing them. 'That's betrayal. In fact, it's politically corrupt,' he said. 'Not perhaps in a sense of something you would charge someone with … But, politically, it is absolutely corrupt.' No, it isn't. Politicians are allowed to evolve their positions on key issues. Moreover, the allegation that Engardio engaged in willful deception is dubious. In an interview, Engardio told the editorial board that he was transparent about his support for a park at Ocean Beach between Lincoln Way and Sloat Boulevard during his election campaign and throughout his time in office. He noted that he supported the weekend closures as the best option over Prop I on the 2022 ballot, which called for opening the road 24/7 and was defeated by voters. 'Gordon Mar, as a candidate, refused to ever utter the words 'permanent oceanside park,'' Engardio said of his opponent in 2022. 'I was bold enough to say it in a debate and write it on my campaign platform.' Beyond that, Engardio campaigned in 2021 on a platform of urbanist change for the Sunset — and has championed the idea of ' turning the Sunset into Paris ' with denser mixed-use housing developments for nearly a decade. He openly and publicly shared on social media his desire to turn the Great Highway into a permanent park long before he brought the issue to the ballot. No one in his district should have been surprised that Engardio would step forward to champion a ballot measure that would turn the Great Highway into a full-time park. Where recall proponents are right in their criticism of Engardio, however, is that he placed Prop K on the ballot at the last-minute and without input from Sunset residents, who would be most affected by issues stemming from the road closure. Engardio has apologized for doing that. The editorial board understands why many Sunset residents would be upset — even outraged — that Engardio didn't conduct sufficient community outreach on a divisive issue before taking action. But insufficient outreach for an idea plainly aligned with a politician's broader policy platform is a political misstep, not an unethical bait and switch. Meanwhile, few if any in his district have been critical of Engardio's performance on other key issues, from his popular night market initiative to his lobbying for increased public safety. While many disagree with his support of Mayor Lurie's plans to upzone broad swaths of the west side, more and taller housing development for the neighborhood is something Engardio openly campaigned on. The editorial board believes that District 4 voters should reject the recall. There is no justification for expending diminishing city resources on a recall when angry Sunset voters could simply oust Engardio when he's up for reelection next year during the regular election cycle. If residents consider Engardio's position on the Great Highway a dealbreaker, they can identify and support a candidate who better suits their sensibilities in 2026. Regardless of what happens with this year's recall, however, this entire saga speaks to San Francisco's need for broader governmental reform. It's already apparent that the long-term benefits of Sunset Dunes, the park created on the 2-mile stretch of closed road, will outweigh any short-term disruptions. So far, the closure hasn't created the kind of congestion apocalypse opponents warned of, according to a Chronicle analysis of traffic data. Meanwhile, the park is immensely popular – and will only become more so as the next generation of city residents grows up enjoying its amenities. This burgeoning popularity is already creating economic benefits for many small businesses in the district — which are receiving increased foot traffic — and for the city's moribund general fund. San Francisco needs politicians who are empowered to take big swings on broadly popular and beneficial citywide initiatives like Sunset Dunes. The Engardio recall, regardless of its outcome, is destined to have a chilling effect on bold moves unless broader structural changes are implemented. That inevitably means charter reform to allow for some citywide supervisors to complement district-based representatives. Voters outside the Sunset will have no say in the Sept. 16 recall. Nor should they. But that doesn't mean the result won't impact them. They should be paying attention and thinking about action accordingly.
Axios
7 days ago
- Axios
What to know about Supervisor Joel Engardio's recall election
Over 50,000 voters in District 4 are set to receive ballots for the Sept. 16 special election to recall Supervisor Joel Engardio. Why it matters: The moderate Democrat's support for closing the Great Highway ignited a wave of backlash from his constituents, a majority of whom opposed the initiative over concerns about traffic and longer commutes. How it works: The ballot will ask voters to vote "yes" or "no" on whether to remove Engardio from office. Once filled out, voters can return them via mail or drop them off at City Hall's elections department office. Three official ballot drop boxes will also be stationed at the Ortega Branch Library, Parkside Branch Library and City Hall. If voters oppose the measure, Engardio will remain in office and fight to retain his seat when he's up for reelection in November 2026. If they approve it, Mayor Daniel Lurie will appoint a replacement to serve until the June 2026 primary, which will ask voters to decide who should fill the remainder of the term. The big picture: Engardio was put on blast after he championed Proposition K, which would convert a 2-mile stretch of the Great Highway into a park, in the lead-up to the November 2024 election. Though the measure passed with 55% of voters' approval citywide, only 36% of voters in District 4 agreed with Engardio. A recall campaign was launched shortly after amid rebuke from voters in the Sunset and Richmond districts. The Department Elections called for a special election in May after certifying the 9,911 signatures — 20% of the district's registered voters — needed to put it on the ballot. What they're saying:"District 4 voted against Prop K — overwhelmingly. If Joel Engardio didn't know that was going to happen — he was out of touch, not listening, not talking to us or he deliberately defied our will," the recall campaign's website states. The other side: "Prop. K was decided by voters in the most open, transparent, and democratic process possible," Engardio said at a Wednesday San Francisco Democratic County Central Committee endorsement hearing for Prop. A.
