Editor:

Response to Joel Engardio’s article pushing closure of the UGH from Community Group

Recently, five supervisors, led by D4 Supervisor Joel Engardio and working in partnership with the Great Highway Park and the Bike Coalition, blindsided the taxpaying residents of D4 and D1 with a shocking ballot initiative to close down the Upper Great Highway (UGH) without any input from those who will be negatively affected by such an action. This end-run around the pilot plan is undemocratic, inequitable, and unfair and should be immediately removed from the ballot. Joel Engardio, along with Supervisors Melgar, Mandelman, Dorsey and Preston, have misused their power to the detriment of the safety, health and quality of life of thousands of constituents. 

Joel Engardio, et. al., have acted with the assumption the taxpayers and residents most affected have no right to engage in a discussion about the future of the Upper Great Highway. This act has activated a ground swell of indignation and anger that will not be suppressed. We demand that this ballot ordinance be withdrawn now, and the pilot plan be restored to its original intent for the following reasons:

1. New Ballot Guts the Pilot: This new ordinance guts the original pilot ordinance in several unfair and undemocratic ways by revising Section 6.13 of the Park Code.
   1. Section 2.a, adds, without evidence, that “the Upper Great Highway is not needed for Vehicular Traffic. (Surrounding streets will be sufficient for displaced traffic.) Where is the evidence for such an outrageous statement? Who believes that it is not needed for vehicles? Certainly not the thousands of working people who rely on this highway for work or the thousands of residents who will have to suffer the dire consequences of permanent closure. Special interest groups like to quote the outcome of Prop. I. This was a flawed proposition that muddled the effect of closures between GGP, the Great Highway Extension and the UGH and proved nothing about the actual choice of the voters about the UGH. There was no option for a compromise for the UGH. This addition is a lie. The UGH is definitely needed for vehicles. The surrounding streets are NOT sufficient for displaced traffic. It illustrates the disrespect that Engardio and his allies have for the safety and health of residents nearby. 

• Section 2.c Public Notice and Engagement eliminates all data collection and deletes the language that “RPD and SFMTA shall collect and publicly report data on pedestrian and cyclist usage and vehicular traffic on the UGH and surrounding streets at regular intervals throughout the duration of the plot program ….”  Data collection will no longer be required. An informed decision about closure will not be necessary because a special interest group wants a park where a needed major arterial in and out of San Francisco exists, which working people depend on five days every week, and for which emergency vehicles need immediate access to save people. There has been no review of emissions, no review of snowy plover effects, only bloated numbers of walkers and bikers based on highly suspect eco-counters that can count one person four times in one visit. The actual count is probably about one-half or less of published numbers. Those who live on the Lower Great Highway see the cars and people every day. Sometimes, not often, the highway will be busy on an exceptionally nice day. The well-kept secret is that the highway on closed days is actually sparsely used, even on good weather days, in spite of what data suggests. We need third-party data that actually reflects the true use of the UGH.

• The Section 2.c.4 deletion is the most egregious of all. Gone from the original pilot is this protection for residents: “The RPD and the SFMTA shall engage in community outreach during the pilot period to gain public input on the effectiveness of the pilot program….” We are robbed of our right as the population most negatively affected by this closure to have any engagement whatsoever. We must bow to the whims and desires of a special interest group who has no compassion or understanding of the harm that this closure will cause thousands of residents. This crude destruction of our rights to speak exposes the selfish and arrogant aims of those who would force their tyranny on us. We have no voice in a decision that ignores the plight of residents whose safety, health and well-being will be destroyed by permanent closure of a much-needed highway. 

• Ignores a Compromise: This initiative completely ignores the possibility of a compromise which a significant population in D4 and D1 would support. Engardio partnered with the Friends of the Great Highway Park on this initiative but chose to not discuss it with any of his other constituents. He repeatedly insults our intelligence by claiming the proposed ballot measure will give us a voice in the decision. We can vote no, he says, but he knows that the citywide majority will vote yes. The desecration of our neighborhood is not their problem. If he really cared about ALL his constituents, he would withdraw this ballot measure, support completing the pilot project as written and support a new ballot measure in 2025-26 that would include a compromise, either Sup. Chan’s proposal (two lanes traffic, two lanes for recreation) or the weekend closure proposal for Saturday-Sunday closure. Does he not entertain a compromise because he is afraid it will win? Instead, he is removing all possibility of discussion and compromise from his own constituents. He knows that the outcome of the mayoral and supervisor elections may result in new officials with different opinions about this issue, and hence his urgency to ram this closure through, ASAP. 

A weekend closure compromise means that bikers and walkers can continue to have access, including the holiday and special event closures. A permanent closure would result in the highway sitting empty 75-90% of the time during the day, each weekday (and often during the weekend), while the Lower Great Highway and other streets including Lincoln Way, Sunset Boulevard and 19^th Avenue will be choked with heavy traffic and suffocating auto exhaust pollution. The streets will be unsafe on high-injury corridors. The UGH is a model Vision Zero street. No cross traffic and synchronized traffic lights. Safe timed crosswalks to the beach. The safest street in the Sunset. 

The weather in this area is cold, windy, cloudy, foggy and damp. Sand blows constantly. The occasional day with good weather often does not result in heavy use. Even on the Fourth of July, the highway was essentially empty the entire day, with only a few walkers and bikers. We who live on the Lower Great Highway believe our own eyes, and often the highway sits empty of walkers and bikers on weekends. A permanent weekend closure compromise is enough and equitable for all. Proponents of full closure refuse to face the reality of the harsh windy weather and the obvious lack of usage during days it is closed. Weekend closure is fair to all parties involved. A compromise will calm the public outrage that is destroying our community. A compromise will be FAIR.

• No Police Enforcement: Lack of police enforcement against bad actors will create an untenable situation in the outer Sunset area, on the UGH and on the fragile dunes if the highway is forever closed. Those who live out here saw the consequences of full closure in 2020 and 2021. Violent assaults, drunkenness, human excrement in driveways (including my own) and other anti-social behaviors increased dramatically, and the police did not have the manpower to patrol and enforce the laws. The same will happen with the highway closed again. The cars during the week have a mitigating effect on bad behavior and desecration of the dunes, and when eliminated there will be no SFPD or park police to stop people from trashing the highway and dunes and setting up camps everywhere. Residents will be at the mercy of increased crime and this beautiful area will become a frighteningly unsafe place to live and visit. Engardio often talks about “joy.” There will be no joy at Ocean Beach and the Sunset when it is trashed by irresponsible visitors leaving garbage everywhere and setting up illegal campsites. Unless there is a dramatic increase in the police force, we residents will have no help against the bad actors. They know there will be no police monitoring behavior. Even now residents are experiencing increased harm from homeless, drug users and criminal activity. It will only get worse. Those who want to close the highway ignore these realities. 

• No Funding: This new ordinance provides absolutely no funding source for any kind of park. The City faces deficits in all agencies, especially SFMTA. Where is the money for a park? Why isn’t SFMTA focusing on improving the transit system instead of bike lanes everywhere that are hurting the economy of San Franciso? Sections 5 and 6 of this proposed ordinance will close the highway within 180 days of the election, or at the latest April of 2025 after Section 5 approvals are granted. Since there are no funds, the highway will sit empty for the majority of the time, covered in sand, for an unknown number of months or years. Meanwhile, the Sunset residential streets will be clogged with cars to avoid the gridlock of Lincoln, Sloat, Sunset Boulevard and 19^th Avenue. Drivers will divert their route into the avenues when Lincoln and Sloat are impassable. Engardio’s plan to put in traffic lights will do nothing to reduce the dramatic increase in traffic into the Sunset streets when the UGH is closed.

• Bad for the Environment: Engardio and associates say this will be good for the environment. Actually, it will be a disaster for Sunset dwellers who will have a huge increase in air pollution from auto exhaust from diverted vehicles. Vehicle miles traveled will increase. Stop-and-start driving in the avenues will increase pollution. The dunes will continue to be desecrated by careless visitors who run, slide, ride bikes and bring dogs onto the fragile dunes. The protected bird sanctuary will continue to be harmed by human activity. Much of the vegetation on and near the UGH is already destroyed. The exhaust from vehicles on Chain of Lakes Drive will increasingly harm the vegetation in GGP. Trash, needles, excrement and discarded food will be everywhere. Animals will be harmed. The serene, unspoiled natural beauty of this place will be lost when Rec. and Park brings in smelly noisy food trucks and inappropriate “improvements.” According to NOAA climate scientists, a sea level rise of 10 feet at Ocean Beach will not even reach the highway, while the north and east coasts of San Francisco will be inundated with massive floods. In total, closing the UGH will increase harm to the environment, not reduce it.

For these reasons, the best way forward for D4 Supervisor Engardio or other BOS supporters is to withdraw this unfair ballot initiative and include all his constituents in a decision for a compromise about the Upper Great Highway’s future. While creating a park on a highway may be good PR for San Francisco in the NY Times, it is shockingly inequitable for people who actually live here. Now is the time to withdraw this flawed initiative from the ballot, return to the original pilot, and plan for the inclusion of all stakeholders in a decision that is a compromise.

Patricia Arack, D4
Retired Faculty, CCSF
Leader, Concerned Residents of the Sunset