Progress comes at a cost. Conventional wisdom will tell you that supporting the removal of the Embarcadero Freeway in the early ‘90s cost Art Agnos a second term as mayor. But 30 years later, you’d have a hard time finding a San Franciscan who openly advocates for putting the Embarcadero Freeway back up.
Perhaps we will say the same one day about Ocean Beach Park and its main advocate, District 4 Supervisor Joel Engardio. Though he could lose his job over his support for closing the Great Highway to traffic, he will win the future. Political coalitions, which we tend to think of as static, keep reforming, and Proposition K is just the latest fault line sorting urbanist-minded voters from suburban-minded ones. This year, the suburban mindset lost — and that, in my book, is a mark of progress.
Prop. K, the successful measure to turn the Great Highway into Ocean Beach Park, is the latest version of the Embarcadero Freeway. Is it an essential roadway, as its defenders say? Or is it an opportunity to revitalize our western waterfront as we work to fight climate change? For the past few years, we’ve tried to have it be an awkward combination of both, with the avenue open to motorists Monday through Friday morning and to pedestrians and cyclists Friday afternoon to Monday morning.
But on Election Day, the city’s majority urbanist voters said it should be a park. Prop. K performed overwhelmingly well in the urban core of San Francisco, racking up big margins in the Mission, Haight, and Dogpatch, among other neighborhoods, while being handily rejected by voters in the western and southern parts of the city.
Two different San Franciscos voted for two different outcomes, leaving west-side residents stinging over something they feel was done to them, not by them. This is just the latest in a long line of fights between dueling tribes in San Francisco that will continue to flare up.
While many like to dissect the city along political lines of moderate and progressive, we’re increasingly seeing those divisions break down, replaced by an urban–suburban divide. The urban version is what many voters on the east side are accustomed to: They tend to support taller, denser buildings; robust public transit; bike lanes; and a rejection of parking spaces — all trappings of the modern urban landscape.
The west side is the suburban seat of San Francisco, where single-family homes dominate, and you can even find a few well-manicured lawns. Driving, to many, is essential and public transit doesn’t feel like an option. While a proposition to eliminate cars from JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park fared stronger on the ballot two years ago, it was resisted by the same portions of the city’s west and south sides: the Outer Richmond, Parkside, Portola, and Visitacion Valley.
Some of those voters were among the minority who rejected 2022’s Muni funding bond, contributing to its narrow failure, as it required a two-thirds majority to pass. The weakest support for affordable housing bonds in the past has also come from the west side, home to more conservative voters who oppose government spending and taxing than anywhere else in San Francisco.
More fights will inevitably change the look and feel of the west side. San Francisco has to rezone to make space for thousands of new homes as part of our state-mandated Housing Element, which is going to mean a boom in midsize (six- to eight-story) apartment buildings and homes throughout the Richmond and Sunset.
San Francisco has agreed to this construction; it’s not a question of if but when we finish the rezoning. The only question is whether the west side actively participates in the process and takes it seriously, or if the state has to step in because we refuse to plan for and build homes.
Similarly, we continue to envision the future of transit systems like BART, extending them to the west side. These long overdue investments will irrevocably change how we get around, but they make sense only if we have the housing density to support them. Gone are the days of suburban BART stations surrounded by single-family homes. For BART to succeed, we need every line and every stop to reach as many houses as possible.
Speculation swirls like the sands of Ocean Beach around the political impact of Prop. K. Will loud online dissenters succeed in recalling Engardio in District 4? Does he stand any chance when he comes up for reelection in 2026? Is Prop. K the reason the moderate candidate Marjan Philhour lost in District 1? Given the citywide victory of Prop. K, are we seeing an urbanist coalition finally emerging as a solid voting bloc — as well as a suburban block prepared to enact revenge?
I don’t have a crystal ball, but I’m most interested in the last question. Change is coming. Our choices, just like the choices for Prop. K, are to participate in the evolution of San Francisco or to dig in our heels and fight it. Do we embrace our status as the second densest U.S. city (after New York), or do we keep our heads in the sand?
Slowly but surely, we are driving toward a more urbanist future for all of San Francisco. Pretending we’re the suburbs simply isn’t the answer.
Jane Natoli is the San Francisco organizing director for YIMBY Action, a board member of Equality California, and a member of the commission overseeing San Francisco International Airport.