Californians have voted to shut a part of an almost century-old freeway in San Francisco to vehicles, remodeling a two-mile part right into a park for pedestrians and cyclists.
On election day, metropolis residents voted to approve Proposition Okay, extending the ban on autos on a portion of the Higher Nice Freeway alongside the shoreline. The measure has sparked intense debate over whether or not vehicles ought to have common entry to the world.
Opponents argue that shutting down the freeway will improve visitors congestion and impose excessive prices on town, whereas supporters imagine the closure will assist mitigate coastal erosion and create a protected pedestrian house for the group.
The roots of the Prop Okay debate hint again to the Covid-19 pandemic, when town’s board of supervisors closed the Higher Nice Freeway to autos, permitting residents to stroll and bike there whereas social distancing to cut back virus transmission.
The choice’s recognition led to a pilot program in 2022 that closed the highway to vehicles on weekends however allowed weekday entry.
The pilot concludes on the finish of 2025. With the measure’s approval, town can now start the method of completely closing the part after the pilot ends.
As of Monday afternoon, the vote stood at greater than 54% in favor of Prop Okay, in accordance with San Francisco’s division of elections. The measure wants 50% or extra to be accredited.
Critics argued that redirecting visitors from the Higher Nice Freeway to inland routes might add as much as three minutes to commutes for drivers and create security dangers for pedestrians at intersections. “Many people on the west facet really feel unheard and missed,” mentioned Vin Budhai, founding father of the Open the Nice Freeway/No on Okay Marketing campaign. “Households, seniors and staff who depend on this highway will now need to spend extra time in visitors.”
Jared Lozano, a resident, advised CBS Information Bay Space: “I’ve already had a pal who’s been T-boned at [a nearby] intersection,” including: “I used to be nearly run over at that intersection in the present day. That is simply going to create so many security issues for town.”
Whereas town has put in velocity bumps in some areas to cut back rushing, opponents contend that the prevailing weekend-only closure was already a good compromise for weekday commuters and leisure customers.
Supporters of the park conversion say it would allow public businesses to revive dunes and coastal habitats, strengthening them to resist rising sea ranges. Additionally they argue that limiting automobile entry will scale back greenhouse gasoline emissions and air pollution on this delicate coastal ecosystem, making the coast safer and extra accessible for individuals utilizing wheelchairs, curler skates and bikes.
Supporters additionally level to the excessive prices of sustaining the freeway, which is closed as much as 65 days per 12 months – 18% of the time – attributable to sand accumulation.
Preserving the freeway accessible to vehicles prices town between $350,000 and $700,000 yearly for sand elimination, with a further $1.5m in one-time capital prices, in accordance with the San Francisco controller’s workplace. Proponents argue that changing the stretch to a park might save these funds for different makes use of.
Prop Okay obtained notable endorsements from former Home speaker Nancy Pelosi, the state senator Scott Wiener, and the incumbent San Francisco mayor, London Breed. Organizations and teams together with the San Francisco Chronicle, San Francisco Parks Alliance, and Sierra Membership additionally prolonged their assist.
Opponents included Aaron Peskin, president of the board of supervisors; Daniel Lurie, town’s newly elected mayor and Mark Farrell, former interim mayor.
Town supervisor, Joel Engardio, who supported the measure, expressed on Sunday his dedication to listening to residents who voted towards Prop Okay.
“I perceive and respect the views of voters who mentioned no to Prop Okay,” he mentioned in an announcement. “I’ll work with residents to make sure that they’ve a voice in selections about methods to preserve visitors shifting shortly whereas minimizing the impacts on neighborhood streets.”