Nevertheless, the mayor remains adamant that he will use any means to blow up the bridge proposal. His latest obstructionist scheme would sell the air rights for the bridge to someone other than the developer of City Creek Center, the two-block, mixed-use project now under way by the LDS Church and Taubman Centers Inc.

We don't doubt that the mayor has the best interests of downtown at heart, but on balance, he's wrong about the sky bridge. He should yield to the collective judgment of the City Council and let the $1 billion project, including the sky bridge, go forward.

Without the pedestrian bridge, which would span Main Street on the block between South Temple and 100 South, connecting the two halves of City Creek Center, the retail development would be cut in half. If shoppers cannot move from the second level on one side of the street to the second level on the other, as the bridge would allow, retailers will bolt the project.

The mayor argues that urban planners are unanimous that the bridge is a mistake, that it will suck pedestrians off Main Street and hold them hostage on the east-west axis through the center of the two blocks.

We don't buy that in light of the way the development will open itself onto surrounding streets. All of the street-facing, ground-floor spaces in City Creek's residential buildings will house retail, and one of its anchor stores, Macy's, will face Main. Dillard's will face 100 South, and Nordstrom will face West Temple.

A waterfall will beckon pedestrians off 100 South between Main and West Temple.

Is the sky bridge ideal? No. But it will not block important city views and it is the best solution among available alternatives to unify the development.

The mayor claims that he could unilaterally block the bridge by leasing the air rights to some other party or conveying those rights as a conservation easement. Those moves could provoke needless litigation arising from a balance-of-powers fight with the City Council.

The city would be better off if the mayor gave way.