What would SLC mayoral candidates do for transportation, air quality and pedestrian safety?

Para leer este artículo en español, haz clic aquí.

To read about the candidates’ positions on other issues, read The Tribune’s Salt Lake City voter guide.

(Candidates’ answers have been edited for length and clarity.)

Pedestrian deaths are rising across the country. In October alone, eight Utah pedestrians were hit and killed. How would you address pedestrian safety in Salt Lake City?

Erin Mendenhall

Every street deserves to be the safest street in our city. I committed to Vision Zero because too many people were being hurt or killed on our streets by traffic violence and I’m not going to stop working to achieve it. We took that step after lowering the speed limit on most city streets to 20 miles per hour, and after forming a Safe Streets Task Force with partners from local and state transportation and law enforcement agencies. As you know well, the speed-limit reduction and other traffic-calming measures face stiff opposition from some residents. Not every problem can be solved in one fell swoop — we need to work hard for our progress and take it in steps if that’s what it takes to get there.

Michael Valentine

These are heartbreaking and tragic numbers and we need to always have pedestrian safety at the top of mind, especially when it comes to master plans, city planning and zoning. The reality is cars are dangerous, huge blocks of metal with the ability to go extremely fast, causing extreme harm to anyone walking, on a bike or living their life commuting on the streets. Drivers need to always be aware of what they are doing and we need better defensive driving training to reinforce driving with safety, but we really need to begin investing in and building a better Salt Lake City for public transportation, so more and more folks move away from cars and can live full, mobile lives via bus, trolley, Trax, Frontrunner, bikes, etc. I fully support investing in protected bike lanes as well to keep bike commuters safe. It’s important we tailor a full spectrum approach here across the board, working with the county and state on researched and scientific measures that will prevent pedestrian deaths, and quickly act to adopt such measures into reality. Our ultimate goal is a world with zero auto-related deaths. We will get there.

Rocky Anderson

When I first took office as Salt Lake City Mayor, the SLC/Ogden area was ranked 12th worst for pedestrian safety in the nation. I recognized that our wide streets (encouraging speeding and making pedestrians less visible) and long blocks (necessitating many mid-block crosswalks) posed unique challenges regarding pedestrian safety.

We took several innovative, effective measures, including installation of red or orange pedestrian flags to make pedestrians more visible and remind motorists to slow down and stop; countdown-timers at walk/don’t walk signs so pedestrians would know how long they have to get to the other side of the street; pedestrian-actuated overhead traffic lights at several mid-block walkways; signs on streets reminding pedestrians to look both ways; pedestrian actuated blinking lights embedded in the road across mid-block walkways; and increased enforcement and publicity regarding the enforcement, including use of decoys walking across mid-block walkways and motorists being ticketed if they were within a lane of where a pedestrian is located and do not stop. I would revive and expand all of the measures we undertook to significantly reduce the number of pedestrian-vehicle accidents and injuries.

Some cities are now banning right turns on red lights as a response to pedestrian fatalities — would you support banning right turns at red lights?

Erin Mendenhall

Banning right turns on red lights is definitely something we should consider, yes. Even a targeted ban could be a great safety tool. The city has implemented other common-sense signal measures, such as giving pedestrians a head start across intersections before a red light turns green, and turning off blinking yellow left-turn arrows at busy intersections while kids are walking to and from school. And we’ve partnered with UDOT through the work of the Vision Zero task force to implement some of these solutions on state streets. We’re eager to innovate on solutions throughout the city to keep everyone on our streets safe.

Michael Valentine

Yes, but I would first love to see more research and data on this. I am very analytical and certainly not an expert in all areas. Taking into account the experience of traffic experts and city planners is critical, as well as the voices of the public and the community. If banning right turns at red lights shows to lower pedestrian fatalities, as it certainly seems it would, I would absolutely support this measure to keep folks walking in crosswalks safe. Drivers must always surrender the right of way to pedestrians and it is sad that so many don’t, are aggressive and intimidate people walking on the streets.

Rocky Anderson

If there were evidence that right turns on red lights are responsible for vehicle/pedestrian accidents, I would support banning them. The move toward allowing right turns on red lights (RTOR) was initially a fuel-saving measure. The air quality and climate impacts of unnecessarily idling at red lights should still be kept in mind in determining whether to change the laws regarding RTOR, but pedestrian safety should be the predominant consideration. Instead of an across-the-board prohibition, we should consider prohibiting RTOR — with conspicuous signs or signals — in areas where pedestrian volumes are high or during the busiest times of day.

The Utah Department of Transportation has proposed two controversial projects: the 1-15 expansion and the gondola in Little Cottonwood Canyon. What is your stance on these two projects and how would you approach them?

Erin Mendenhall

I oppose both and will continue to argue for more practical, cost-effective and equitable transportation strategies.

The city is finalizing its official comments on the I-15 preferred alternative and while I strongly disagree with widening the highway, I also feel strongly that the city needs to be at the table to get the very best outcomes for our residents, both during and after construction. My priority is saving peoples’ homes. We also have to ensure residents are protected from impacts, including construction noise and dust. And if this project can be leveraged in a way that increases east-west connectivity and supports neighborhoods rather than destroys them, then we need to aggressively pursue those solutions.

On the Little Cottonwood Canyon project, I have spoken out against the gondola repeatedly and instead support increased bus service. UDOT should do everything possible to make that successful so that building a gondola is off the table. There are too many impacts — both known and unknown — to our watershed and natural lands. It’s also incredibly troubling that a public project of this magnitude will benefit two private companies. There are also real problems with the environmental impact statement and my team is evaluating potential next steps.

Michael Valentine

I oppose both of these projects in the strongest way possible and would do everything in my power to make sure they are not enacted. They are both disasters in every way. Both of these projects go against the public’s wishes, very similar to my work fighting to save the Utah Pantages Theater. This entire plan is not for the public, but for a small group of rich folks who would benefit from a billion-dollar gondola that would decimate the natural beauty of Little Cottonwood Canyon. Same with the 1-15 expansion, that is an even worse idea. Expanding freeways has been shown to have little to no impact on reducing traffic, an economic phenomenon known as “induced demand”. Why spend billions of dollars to have traffic be the same? Additionally, freeways are historically forms of structural racism, segregating neighborhoods, destroying communities. This freeway would destroy the west side of Salt Lake City adding more pollution to our most diverse neighborhoods.

Rocky Anderson

I am firmly opposed to both projects. I am on record as saying that, if there is a good faith legal basis for stopping the expansion through a lawsuit, I would favor doing it if there is no other option for stopping the expansion.

The expansion of highways is a temporary fix that, in the long-run, makes everything worse: more sprawl development, destruction of homes and other property, more traffic, more time driving and less time engaging in other activities, worsening physical condition for motorists, more pollution and more calls for even more expansions or new highways. That cycle can be stopped with more affordable housing near where people work, efficient mass transit, an end to sprawl development and an end to expanding and building new highways.

The gondola idea is an obscenity, both in terms of the environmental impacts and the proposed massive public funding to benefit a couple ski resorts and property developers. There is nothing “conservative” about spending billions of dollars of public money to deteriorate the quality of one of our precious canyons, solely to benefit the resort owners and a few developers. As with our opposition to the expansion of I-15, we should all join together in a non-partisan fashion to effectively oppose this outrageous proposal, including a boycott or other effective strategies if that’s what it comes to.

What kinds of transportation projects do you think the state, county and city should be investing in?

Erin Mendenhall

The widening of I-15 sure shouldn’t be one of them. We need to be taking a longer view of the region’s transportation needs, which means putting public transit at the center of our transportation strategy. Investments in public and active transit modes are investments in lowering our cost of living, improving our air quality, improving safety and even beautifying the community. The Green Loop, for example, will not only add a safe loop to circle downtown on bike, foot, wheelchair, or scooter, it will provide accessible park and recreational space and add hundreds of trees to our urban canopy.

Michael Valentine

We must move past terrible plans from a legislature working against the public and begin investing in public transportation. I fully support the wonderful community Rio Grande Plan to revitalize our historic Rio Grande station downtown, build a “train box” and bury the rails along the Rio Grande. This has been done successfully in many other cities including Denver and Reno, and will allow us to end the injustice faced by West Side residents who spend so much time waiting at train crossings that East Side residents would never stand. This also would free up over 50 acres of land that are being used by these trains to be redeveloped for the public.

Rocky Anderson

The transportation projects governmental entities should be investing in are the maintenance of our current infrastructure, including SLC roads that have been allowed to deteriorate significantly during the past four years; a convenient re-charging infrastructure for EVs; efficient, convenient mass transit, including rail systems and buses; and vastly improved bicycle access.

Air quality is a persistent problem in Salt Lake City — how would your approach to transportation policy address air quality stemming from on-road sources?

Erin Mendenhall

Our investments in public transit and complete streets are aimed at helping people feel safe and comfortable using transit, bikes, and their own two feet, instead of feeling compelled to jump in their car. Bike lanes benefit more than just bicyclists. The fewer cars on the road, the less gridlock and stop-and-go traffic we have, which adds up to cleaner air. Transportation policy is part of it, but land-use and housing policy are also key components to addressing air-quality challenges. Building more densely next to transit lines is an important aspect of increasing transit ridership and trying to ensure that increasing population doesn’t equate to more cars on the road. My administration has also prioritized transportation-related air quality impacts in our budget. We are in the process of building an e-bike incentive program to make it easier for residents to purchase them, and we’ve provided 25,000 free UTA passes for public school students, their teachers and a parent.

Michael Valentine

The pattern in my transportation policy comes from living downtown for many years and seeing how we can’t possibly expand auto transportation anymore in the heart of our city and state. Utah and Salt Lake City are at the precipice of an exciting transformation and growth period. We must plan for what our great city will be in 2030, 2040, 2050 and beyond. It is time for us to move to public transportation and away from cars. Expanding Frontrunner, Trax, bringing back historic trolley lines, increasing bus routes, making public transportation free in Salt Lake City as it has been in Logan with CVTD for 20 years. Investing in the Rio Grande Plan, connecting all of Utah together. I also support moving the refineries away from the city or shutting them down completely. They are a direct hazard to the health of our city air and public.

Rocky Anderson

When I was mayor, we set and far exceeded major climate protection goals, reducing greenhouse gas emissions from city operations by 31% in three years.

I began a program to allow low- or no-emission vehicles to park free at city parking meters. I would expand those incentives in every way possible and provide more charging stations — powered by renewable energy sources — with exclusive parking for EVs. We should implement more stringent regulations that apply to polluting vehicles and step-up enforcement against them.

Expanding mass transit opportunities will be a major source of air quality improvement, but all energy for such transit should be from renewable energy sources (e.g., solar, wind, geothermal, hydroelectric).

Because public health and quality of life is at stake for everyone in the Salt Lake City area, I would consider all legal remedies to achieve environmental justice, including possible legal actions to enjoin harmful industrial practices.

We should be resolute and provide public education about how transportation policies impact the health and safety of our residents. We should also incentivize no-emission vehicle use in every way possible and work with the Legislature to reverse present disincentives for electric vehicle (EV) use.