This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2017, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

I must respond to Mark O. Miller's letter of June 16 ("A misguided plan for 2100 South"), who somehow gets the idea that it's "an interim step to create the streetcar line." This plan has absolutely nothing to do with a streetcar. That's a red herring.

This plan is about improving user safety in the 2100 South corridor between 1700 East and 2300 East. Miller is correct in that "enforcing the speed limit handles safety." This plan enforces the speed limit — through its design. Currently the street has four traffic lanes with no center turn lane and no shoulder. Changing the striping to two traffic lanes with shoulders and a center turn lane will indeed cause a slight decrease in overall automobile speed (most noticeable at rush hour). It will also be safer. Much safer.

Empirical studies based on real data show that when this type of change is made, the number of accidents is reduced by 25-30 percent, and the severity of accidents is reduced. Slower traffic is safer for all users, including cars. Will your travel time increase slightly? Yes. Will there be temper tantrums about it? Of course. Will drivers be happy that left turn conflicts will be eliminated? I'm pretty sure they will be. Will the facility be safer? Fact-based studies say, "Yes."

Miller is correct. People aren't going to stop driving cars. Roads are intended to accommodate vehicles. However, pedestrians (our kids, for example) and other nonautomobile users (bikes, bus riders) are also reasonable in expecting a safe facility on which to travel and get across. To me, a facility that is safer for all users is a win-win for the community.

John Barnhill

Salt Lake City