The Chronicle and anti-carism

Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon

Letter to the editor in today's SF Chronicle:

The Chronicle hates cars

Regarding “Road reopening mandate has red flag” (Endorsement, Sept. 23): 

Leave it to The Chronicle to continue its war against anyone that still drives a car.

In the disdainful endorsement against Proposition I, the city’s supposed paper of record calls it a “mild inconvenience” for those of us that would have to reroute to Sunset Boulevard, Sloat Boulevard and 19th Avenue, and their painfully slow stop lights, if the Great Highway extension is closed for good.

I question whether the paper’s editors and reporters would feel the same if we were discussing the permanent closure of the Fifth Street off-ramp on Interstate 80 near the Chronicle’s headquarters because that is what this is akin to for those of us on the west side who use this stretch of road five days a week to drop off and pick up our kids at school.

The irony of the Chronicle’s argument was also not lost on me — the preferred option would fortify the Great Highway extension just enough to “allow for a new trail, public restroom and parking lot in the area.”

It’s not hard to see what agenda the Chronicle is pushing — putting the desires of a handful of bicyclists above the needs of working parents.

Kathryn Koughnett

San Francisco

See also Anti-carism on the Great Highway from last year and Losing the war on cars by Randal O'Toole.