Editor:
Like many residents of the Outer Richmond District, I am dismayed that Proposition K passed. The Upper Great Highway (UGH) is a major artery for those who commute to and from the peninsula. During the weekend closures of UGH, traffic on 19th Avenue and Sunset Boulevard has been awful. We can expect this problem to worsen in the near future when UGH is permanently closed.
I understand that the proponents of Prop. K, and a similar measure that closed JFK Drive to cars a couple of years ago, would like everyone to take public transit. However, this is not practical for many reasons. First, public transit serves only some parts of the City. It is convenient if, for example, one needs to go from the Richmond District to downtown for work, or from the Richmond to Stonestown for shopping. But many residents have jobs outside of the City or work odd hours when public transit is unreliable or not available. In addition, safety is a concern. Homeless people with dubious hygiene often board buses. Sometimes they are drunk. Occasionally they are loud, obnoxious or even aggressive. Finally, if everyone in the City were to take public transit, the system would collapse under its own weight. There are not enough buses to serve the entire City or even a fraction of it.
All of this is to say that the proponents of Prop. K (and similar measures) are putting the cart before the horse. If they want people to get out of their cars and onto public transit, the way to do that is not to inconvenience drivers by closing roads and hoping they get the hint. The way to do it is to build more, better, and safer public transportation.
Scott Kiddy
Categories: letter to the editor
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
If you think Prop K is bad, get a look at the new SFMTA Biking and Rolling Plan they are now pushing. Hopefully with the election of Daniel Lurie, defeat of London Breed, defeat of Dean Preston, hopefully the future defeat of Joel Engardio, the SFMTA will stop being hijacked by the SF Bicycle Coalition who divert attention and money for 10% of the population and while ignoring the other 90%. https://www.sfmta.com/media/41116/download?inline,
LikeLiked by 1 person
Great comment, I agree.
LikeLike
Exactly. Prop K was nothing but a complete disservice to the thousands of tax payers that live near and around the Great Highway. Thanks to the thoughtless and incompetent SF supervisors (especially Joel Engardio) who championed this idiotic proposition/idea. SHAME ON YOU!
LikeLike
Good point. And as we speak, SFMTA is proposing cuts to Muni to compensate for a budget shortfall of approx. $300Million, approximately 25% of its budget. Prop K is a lose-lose ballot initiative.
LikeLike
It’s that they sold it dishonestly – and let the entire city decide how 2 districts should be run – by Billionaire dark money shenanigan fiat. It’s but one small sellout of a series, a test bed for complete redevelopment under similar means and methods anywhere they see profit doing so. Public commons to private profit. If they can pretend it’s “green” or “cooling” to cause avoidable traffic safety problems and exacerbate peak demand gridlock in the Sunset, inconveniencing working classes to placate a yuppie lawyer-nonprofit class that has supplanted everything else SF, surely the Snowy Plover will sleep a little better during the years of (“privately funded!”) construction and further human encroachment into their thus far protected habitat! Surely an (privately managed?) outdoor stage and miles more pavement, possible concessions and associated tax burdens (as the planners imagine) will further their “benevolent and ecological” interests? Fools. Ocean Beach is a treasure owned by all of us and they’ve stolen it and sold it to a bicycle coalition minority of “non-profits” as if their own personal property. How Green it is. If the Martin’s beach saga has taught anything, they will find there are people who will resist their land grabbing by every available means. We, the people you lied to.
LikeLike