Separated bike lanes. Wider sidewalks. A new tunnel for traffic with a lower speed limit and narrower road.
If transportation officials want to get a crush of new people into the state-supported Power District on Salt Lake City’s west side, the Wasatch Front Regional Council says, they will need to embrace those strategies and others outlined in a study the planning agency conducted last year.
But a traffic-calming bill on Capitol Hill could put a halt to the proposals.
“This is very frustrating,” transportation activist and west-side resident Mike Christensen said, “because this will make it a whole lot harder to be able to implement things.”
The legislation, folded into a larger transportation bill called SB242, gives the state more influence over road design in Salt Lake City. It would disallow any projects that reduce vehicle capacity on major roads, while enhancing the Utah Department of Transportation’s veto power over pedestrian safety measures on those streets and others.
The Wasatch Front Regional Council says the Power District’s plans for a taxpayer-backed Major League Baseball stadium and thousands of new housing units mean all forms of transportation — bikes, walking, public transit and cars — need to be embraced to get people into and out of the area.
How upgrades could conflict with SB242
(The Larry H. Miller Co.) A rendering of the Power District.
The bill requires Salt Lake City and the state to craft an agreement outlining which roads are considered major thoroughfares.
Some of the proposals in the regionals council’s study could be end up being illegal under SB242 because they are on roads previously identified by the city as arterials.
On 900 West, the regional planning agency calls for cutting turn lanes in favor of a separated bike lane, a treatment that would run afoul of the bill in its current iteration because it would reduce car capacity.
Similarly, a proposal to add an off-street bike path and a tunnel for cars and buses under the train tracks on 200 South would likely violate provisions in the bill because it would reduce lanes on the street and lower the speed limit in some sections, according to planning documents.
Other proposals, including improvements for walkers and bikers along Redwood Road and North Temple, would likely be subject to more scrutiny by the state under the bill.
State-owned Redwood Road could see enhanced crosswalks, wider sidewalks and a new crossing for pedestrians and bicyclists either above or below the road near its intersection with Interstate 80. Along North Temple, planners pitched a separated two-way bike lane and wider sidewalks.
Making Power District upgrades work
(Larry H. Miller Co.) A rendering shows Rocky Mountain Power's future headquarters and its outdoor deck at night.
Despite the new hurdles the bill could create, those who would be subject to the stricter planning rules say they would be able to make it work.
Benn Buys — executive director of the Utah Fairpark Area Investment and Restoration District, the state-created agency that is overseeing the Power District’s development — backs the study’s recommendations, but noted there is a path forward even if SB242 goes through.
“There’s a mix of projects that we can do to help ensure people can get in and out of the area in different modes and as quickly and as easily as possible, so [I’m] only supportive of those,” he said. “But as far as getting into specifics on which road has a bike lane and which doesn’t, we can certainly work within the parameters of the bill, should it pass.”
Officials with the Wasatch Front Regional Council would not comment on how the bill could affect the council’s recommendations, but planning administrator Julie Bjornstad said it will take more than road widening to get people into a project that is being billed as a second downtown for Utah’s capital.
“This development is quite intense, and we’re not going to be able to handle that intensity just from road expansion,” Bjornstad said. “So, that’s why there’s so many other projects in the plan that are connectivity-related.”
The study also calls for building more roads that reach into the district, expanding highway ramp capacity and boosting transit service — via bus and TRAX connections — in the area.
The Larry H. Miller Co., the firm developing the district, said it supported the recommendations in the study but did not comment on the bill itself.
Better collaboration or a hindrance?
For his part, the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Wayne Harper, R-Taylorsville, said he expects his legislation will help collaboration between UDOT, Salt Lake City and Power District leaders.
“Since you’re dealing with some city-owned streets and UDOT-owned streets and access into a number of large state-owned facilities,” he said, “I believe this will go through and enhance the coordination and ensure that all modalities, all mobility measures are really incorporated into those plans.”
Salt Lake City officials have previously said they were consulted on the bill as it was drafted. When asked if officials had concerns about conflicts in the Power District development, spokesperson Jordan Carroll did not note any. The city stands ready to work with UDOT as outlined in the bill, she said.
But west-sider Margaret Holloway said it would be better if the state got out of the city’s way. Utah’s capital, she said, does a good job keeping in touch with residents on traffic-calming projects and should not be inhibited by state review.
“We all ask for those speed bumps. We ask for the narrowings. They do very thorough [work],” she said. “... They don’t just randomly do this. They ask the neighbors, ‘What do you want?’”
The legislation awaits a key vote in the Senate with less than two weeks left in the general session.
Note to readers • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.