letter to the editor

Letter to the Editor: New Park a Crown Jewel

By on • ( 17 Comments )

Editor:

As a Sunset District resident, I want to share my perspective on the Upper Great Highway. I drive my 95-year-old father-in-law to the VA Hospital regularly, so I have firsthand experience with driving through the areas surrounding the new park. Despite concerns raised by some, we’ve had no trouble at all navigating to the hospital—often during rush hour—using Sunset Boulevard and Golden Gate Park. The route is smooth, scenic and reliable, unlike the Upper Great Highway, which was often closed due to sand.

Since the transformation of the Upper Great Highway into a promenade, I’ve heard from many neighbors who haven’t noticed major traffic changes. Of course, some are still adjusting, but we should not rush to judgment based on a handful of anecdotes. The SFMTA is actively retiming traffic signals and improving signage where needed. In fact, thanks to Supervisor Engardio’s leadership, a brand-new traffic signal was installed at 41st Avenue and Lincoln Way in just two months—a process that normally takes two years. That kind of swift action shows a real commitment to safety and responsiveness.

Meanwhile, the benefits are undeniable. My father-in-law, who uses a wheelchair, now gets to enjoy the beach in a way he never could before. The promenade has become a truly welcoming and inclusive community space. As the third-most visited park in San Francisco, it is already beloved by residents and visitors.

The new park is a true gift to our neighborhood, and I expect that as my fellow Sunset residents see the benefits over time and see for themselves that the traffic impacts are nowhere near as bad as they’re painted to be, people will come around to see the park as the crown jewel of the west side. I’m looking forward to building it together. 

Julie Lindow

Categories: letter to the editor

Tagged as: , , , ,

17 replies »

  3. Ocean Beach was always a park – you fell for developer lies. Sunset and Richmond did not.

    “My father-in-law, who uses a wheelchair, now gets to enjoy the beach in a way he never could before.” – There was an entire paved pathway adjacent to the UGH the entire time. Are we provably making things up again?

    There was always access to wheelchairs, bikes, walking, jogging, all of it. Always.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  4. Crown jewel? Please! This park is nothing more than an abomination. If you’re looking for a real gem in the San Francisco park scene, look no further than Tunnel Tops in the Presidio. Boasting a variety of amenities such as stunning views, lush gardens, and an interactive playscape, and loads more, Tunnel Tops is a testament to community-minded design and genuine collaboration. It’s clear that the park on the Upper Great Highway falls far short in comparison. So let’s stop calling it a ‘crown jewel’ and instead celebrate the other more remarkable parks that San Francisco has to offer.

    Celebrating the Upper Great Highway’s transformation into a park severely misses the mark by glossing over the valid concerns of those who have been negatively impacted by the closure. The author’s reliance on anecdotal evidence and dismissive tone demonstrate a lack of empathy and understanding for the diverse experiences of the community.

    Furthermore, by implying that traffic concerns are exaggerated or unfounded, the article engages in a form of gaslighting that is both harmful and unproductive. It’s crucial to acknowledge and address these issues, rather than sweeping them under the rug in favor of a rose-tinted narrative.

    Lastly, the author’s celebratory stance regarding the new park smacks of entitlement, as it disregards the potential negative consequences that others may face as a result of the closure. A truly inclusive and welcoming community space must take into account the needs and concerns of all members, not just those who are fortunate enough to enjoy the benefits without experiencing the drawbacks.

    Contrary to the author’s assertion that traffic impacts have been minimal, many Sunset residents have shared firsthand accounts of significant delays, increased childcare costs due to overtime pay for parents picking their kids up late from daycare, and worsening health issues due to increased traffic congestion. It’s crucial to acknowledge and address these very real consequences, rather than minimizing them in favor of a one-sided narrative.

    Additionally, concerns about the safety of the materials used in the new park’s artwork raise important questions that should not be brushed aside. If the paint is indeed harmless, as claimed, then those responsible for the park’s construction should have no qualms about demonstrating its safety by eating it.

    Overall, the article’s dismissive tone is not only insensitive but also counterproductive to fostering a dialogue that genuinely addresses the concerns and needs of all Sunset residents.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • Thank you! I am so sick of hearing the same old propaganda and lies being regurgitated over and over and over again by the park proponents. I defy anyone to show me a original point made in the letter. It gets old quickly, as most of us who are affected by the closure can tell you.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  5. If you “haven’t noticed major traffic changes”, but SF Standard has objective hard data backing on firm ground the conclusion that traffic elsewhere has significantly gotten worse (e.g., “Streetlight found that traffic more than doubled in both directions of Lower Great Highway between Sloat Boulevard and Lincoln Way at 8:30 a.m. Eastbound traffic on Sloat Boulevard jumped 50%.” from https://sfstandard.com/2025/04/07/great-highway-san-francisco-traffic-worse-sunset/), well, you’re either deliberately delusional or dense, or you outed yourself as a plant.

    This is the same SF Standard that was in the tank for Joel Engardio in maligning PropK opponents as nothing but misguided car nuts (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6jSyz_myRNM&t=2580s)–not one word was mentioned of the fact that D4 felt betrayed and lied to by Joel Engardio. Not one word.

    Even SF Standard couldn’t be that delusional.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. Julie:

    I respect your opinion. However, as a native San Franciscan living in the Sunset my whole life, you should please note that your opinion re GH does not speak to the supermajority of Westside residents who disagree with you. Regarding your praise of the Sunset supervisor, again you are in the minority. We here in the Sunset are suffering because of poor leadership, a failure to represent one’s constitutes. We now have lawsuits, recalls, increased traffic and safety concerns for the residents, neighborhood against neighborhood, a supervisor calling for opening back up the GH, civil unrest, civil disobedience. Does this sound like good leadership? I think not. The supervisor should be recalled and the GH opened back up to serve the working class and Westside residents. Thank you.

    Sincerely,

    Marty Murphy

    sfpoliticshub.com

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    • She’s a paid writer with admitted clients including SF Park & Rec. (Google her name.) Almost certainly other clients as well.This “fake anecdote” here needs to be called out for what it is, especially when 1. virtually anybody else in the Sunset has noticed, particularly near the alternative thoroughfares. (If you’re on average tripling your peak commute hour transit time, how can you not notice?!) 2. SF Standard, which did a fluff piece for Engardio, admits to the stark increase with actual hard data3. even the more experienced politicos (e.g. Peskin) wouldn’t touch PropK with a ten foot stick–the s would the hit the fan one day, and it has, but nobody can be found! At least Peskin can say he opposed PropK. Engardio isn’t going to hold a town hall on the increased traffic anytime soon because he’ll continue his strategy of gaslighting the underinformed with Conway-style alternative facts.It is not worthy of recognition as any sort of a valid statement.Taking Engardio as a client (paid or otherwise) ought to have blow-back consequences. “no noticeable traffic changes”, ha, give me a break, is anybody really obtuse?

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. Julie, thank you for this! Great to know that your commute with your father-in-law has been smooth with the changes.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Lian Chang Cancel reply