Transmittal - 9/26/2022ERIN MENDENHALL DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY
Mayor and NEIGHBORHOODS
Blake Thomas
Director
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV
P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
________________________ Date Received: _________________
Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: _________________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: September 26, 2022
Dan Dugan, Chair
FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community and Neighborhoods
__________________________
SUBJECT: Transportation Master Plan – Plan Update
STAFF CONTACT: Joe Taylor, Transportation Planner, joe.taylor@slcgov.com or (801) 535-
6679
DOCUMENT TYPE: Information Only
RECOMMENDATION: It is requested that the Council review the following summary and
provide any recommendations to ensure that the priorities and goals of the public and the
Council are met in the update of the Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan. This update will
review the plan process so far and request Council direction for any further goals, priorities, or
processes the Council deems necessary for the future of the transportation network in Salt Lake
City.
BUDGET IMPACT: None. Funds have already been allocated in prior fiscal years for this
project.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The existing Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan, a
progressive document for its time, is more than 23 years old. The state of the practice of
transportation planning, the City’s transportation infrastructure, the preferences of the City, and
concern about air quality has changed significantly since 1996, when the original document was
produced. Following the lead of Plan Salt Lake, the Transportation Master Plan seeks to create a
shared vision for the future of transportation in Salt Lake City. Like Plan Salt Lake, the
Transportation Master Plan will outline an overarching “umbrella” transportation policy to be
applied citywide.
Sept. 26, 2022
Sept. 26, 2022
The update will outline the process so far, including team selection and the public engagement
efforts, and the policy goals we hope to achieve. It will also allow the Council to provide
direction and raise specific policy questions.
Through a competitive RFP process, we selected Nelson Nygaard as the project consultant lead,
with Avenue Consultants handling the local engagement process. Selection was aided by several
City divisions, including Planning, Engineering, and Compliance, as well as regional partners
including UDOT, Wasatch Front Regional Council, and UTA. This combination allowed us to
draw on a well-established background of progressive transportation planning in the Western
United States and a deeply engaged local network.
The Nelson Nygaard / Avenue Consultant proposal stood out to the selection committee for
several reasons. The overriding message was that the process would be led by the residents of
Salt Lake City, especially those that have been overlooked and underserved by the traditional
transportation infrastructure delivery process. Specifically, the proposal made two key
recommendations that serve as the backbone of the plan. The first action was the formation of a
Community Advisory Council (CAC). The second was that community engagement should lead
the process and that values should be established before any policy or specific action.
The CAC is the cornerstone of the Transportation Master Plan. We sought people who lived,
worked, and/or went to school in Salt Lake City and represented a specific community that we
would otherwise struggled to access. Nearly 100 people applied to join our team in a paid
position that would both shape the engagement process and ensure that any resulting policy
would be grounded in the needs of the community.
So far, our CAC members have reviewed all engagement strategies, shown up to numerous in-
person events, and messaged the work to their various communities. The CAC keeps the focus of
the project on the residents and visitors to Salt Lake City. They ensure we stay accountable to
those people that use our transportation network and specifically those that have be historically
underserved.
With the CAC in place, the team began a community survey of what people value in
transportation infrastructure. This survey did not mention any specific project, mode, or policy. It
simply asked what was important in people’s daily lives. This process required alteration due to
the COVID-19 pandemic as some of our outreach efforts were unsafe due to their in-person
nature. With the assistance of Salt Lake City’s Civic Engagement Team, we pivoted our in-
person engagement to the free vaccine clinics being offered at west side elementary schools. At
these clinics, our team took advantage of the 15-minute, post-vaccine wait period to ask people
to fill out surveys. These events allowed us to meet people we often struggle to engage where
they are.
The values survey indicated that every City transportation project should incorporate the
following values:
• Air Quality and the Environment
• Reliability
• Safety From Harm
• Affordability
More on these values and the process by which we arrived at them is detailed in Appendix A.
The second round of engagement sought to translate these agreed-upon values into specific
policies and goals that could be implemented by the Transportation Division and our partners.
Like the first round of engagement, this activity was formatted for both virtual and in-person
engagement. People were asked to review the values from the first survey, then examine a series
of possible solutions that may be applied. Finally, they were asked to use two maps, the first to
identify things that were not working in their daily lives, and the second to identify things that
were.
Continuing to push our efforts to engage residents that have been previously overlooked, the
CAC, City staff, and consultant teams hosted or attended several events. These included the halls
of West High School, the Gail Miller Homeless Resource Center, a party at Spy Hop, a pop-up at
the Northwest Recreation Center, and more. It is always difficult to balance quantitative and
qualitative analysis; however, the long conversations we had at these events, often conducted
with the help of a native Spanish speaker, were some of the most productive sessions this project
has undertaken so far.
Concurrently with the second round of engagement, the project has sought greater understanding
of the internal processes, both those that are working and those that may be causing delay, that
deliver transportation projects in Salt Lake City. The Transportation division identifies, funds,
and designs transportation infrastructure. However, we cannot deliver these projects without a
host of internal and external partners. A key tenet of this plan is to make our work with these
partners more seamless and extend the utility beyond the Transportation division.
To this end our team, with the help of a regional expert (see Seattle Street Illustrated), conducted
several work sessions with those partners that deliver transportation projects. These work
sessions were conducted with Engineering, Public Utilities, Streets, Compliance, Planning, and
other city divisions. They were open forums for us to learn what process improvements were
needed to better facilitate the work we do together. The goal of these sessions was to make the
updated Transportation Master Plan a document that has both utility and viability City-wide. The
Transportation division understands we cannot (and do not want) to do this work alone.
Going forward, the work of updating the Transportation Master Plan will focus on taking what
we have heard from our partners and the community and crafting a document that serves as a
guide to ensuring that every transportation infrastructure project is an expression of the values of
Salt Lake City and its residents. Our intent is not to lay out which projects to work on, but rather
how, why, and with whom they should be conducted. We seek to create a document that helps
everyone in our city take advantage of the Right-of-Way more fully.
In preparation for the upcoming presentation with City Council, Transportation staff ask the
Council to consider two questions.
• What are we missing? Are there specific topics, areas, or inequities we may have
overlooked?
• What are the metrics we should be focusing on? Metrics are important for helping gauge
success and improvement over time. Specific metrics also provide a tool for analyzing the
success of the plan. Possible metrics include:
o Mode shift (i.e., changes in transit ridership, bike or bike share use, single
occupant auto use, etc.)
o Changes in the number of vehicle accidents, or fatal and severe vehicle accidents
o Tracking transportation investment by area or neighborhood
o Engagement in future transportation projects in languages other than English
o Changes in number of cars per household
PUBLIC PROCESS: Community Advisory Council, online engagement, and in-person events
as described in more detail in the body of the transmittal.
EXHIBIT:
Appendix A Final Connect SLC TMP Vision-Values-Priorities Survey Report 2021.02.04
M E M O R A N D U M
To:Salt Lake City
From:Nelson\Nygaard
Date:January 28, 2022
Subject:Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Background
Connect SLC is in the process of updating the City’s Transportation Master Plan based on current conditions and the
broader community’s vision and priorities for transportation. As early community input into the Connect SLC process,
Salt Lake City collected public feedback on transportation values and priorities through an online public survey and
using an interactive Community Values Tapestry activity. These activities occurred at both in-person and virtual
public events. The online survey was available between November 4, 2021 through January 9, 2022 in English and
Spanish and promoted on social media, on Salt Lake City’s website, through email notifications to city agencies and
public advisory bodies, and via in-person outreach, like on-street promotion and at COVID vaccination clinics. Salt
Lake City worked with the Connect SLC Community Advisory Committee and Avenue Consulting to promote the
survey to communities across the city to ensure participants are representative of the city’s diverse population with a
particular emphasis on underrepresented communities.
This Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report (Survey Report) includes three
sections: (1) Who We Heard From describes who was reached by initial outreach efforts, (2) What We Heard
summarizes public input received to shape the plan’s vision, values, and issues, and (3) Attachments presents
detailed analyses of self-reported participant information, open-ended responses, and survey instruments used.
Who We Heard From
A total of 879 people responded to the City’s online survey and approximately 60 people participated through in-
person outreach. While demographic information was not consistently collected for in-person participants, these
events focused on reaching communities who were under-represented in online survey responses, particularly
people who live in SLC’s Westside neighborhoods.
Who participated?
Most online survey participants reported being between 25 to 60 years old and earning household incomes of
$60,000 or higher. Over 80% of survey participants identify as white, including people who identify as white and
another race/ethnicity. Figure 1 shows the self-reported demographic composition of survey participants compared to
Salt Lake City’s population. Based on self-reported demographic characteristics, people who are under 18 years old,
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 2
women, who identify as Latino/a/x or Hispanic, and who earn lower incomes may be underrepresented relative to
their composition of the city’s population. For detailed online survey participant information, see Attachment 1.
Figure 1 Summary of Key Demographics of Online Survey Participants
Population Characteristic Citywide 1
(n=199,723)
Respondents
(n=879)
Under 18 years old** 20.2% 1.0%
Over age 60 15.4% 16.3%
Identify as female** 49.1% 45.0%
Live with a disability 7.7% 8.6%
Black or African American 2.6% 2.1%
American Indian or Native American 1.5% 3.0%
Asian or Asian American 5.4% 5.2%
Latina/o/x or Hispanic** 21.8% 12.0%
Annual household income of less than $100,000** 72.0% 57.3%
** Indicates this group may be under or over-represented compared to proportion of citywide population
Where do participants live?
Out of the 567 participants (64.5% of total) who shared their home location, over 80% of online survey participants
said they live in Salt Lake City, and over 60% of respondents work in the city. Figure 2 shows that most participants
report living across the zip codes within city boundaries.
Figure 2 Home Zip Code of Online Survey Respondents
1 Source: American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2019
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 3
What We Heard
This section presents highlights from public input on transportation values that should guide the city’s transportation
master plan update as well as current user experience with existing conditions. Attachment 2 offers a detailed
analysis of top value rankings by participant characteristic and Attachment 3 presents a detailed analysis of open-
ended responses received for all survey questions. Attachment 4 presents the English and Spanish language survey
questionnaires used to collect public input.
What is the community’s vision for improving streets and
transportation?
Online survey participants were asked to describe their vision for how Salt Lake City’s streets and transportation
should feel and look in the future. The following key themes emerged as potential inspiration for the transportation
master plan’s vision statement and its policy options:
Enhanced Safety: Participants envision a city with safe, convenient, and efficient road network that serves
all people who travel, like transit riders, vehicle drivers, pedestrians, bicycle users, and skateboard users,
people with disabilities and/or with mobility devices. Participants want to have well-lit, highly visible, and
delineated areas for people of all ages and abilities to comfortably travel without fear of being hit by a car.
Better Transit: Participants envision a city with an expansive transit system that enables riders to
conveniently access their desired destinations with fewer transfers and throughout more times of day, every
day of the week. Participants want to have consistently reliable and quality transit service enabled by bus
rapid transit (BRT) routes, transit-only lanes, and transit signal priority.
Fewer Car Trips: Participants envision a city that prioritizes active mobility and sustainable transportation to
help address the city’s growing congestion, air quality and emissions, and safety concerns. Participants
want roadways designed for people and not vehicles, featuring narrower lanes, shorter crossing distances,
and lower speeds, and less private vehicle parking to discourage driving.
Connected Bikeways: Participants envision a city connected by a network of well-maintained and safe
bikeways, especially protected bicycle lanes, and adequate bicycle parking options. Participants want a
bicycle network that connects to the transit system to improve first- and last-mile access and partnerships
with bicycle advocacy groups to inform future bicycle projects and programs.
What are the community’s transportation values?
Salt Lake City has gathered public input on values for transportation that should guide transportation improvements
in the city. Specifically, the online survey and in-person interactive activity asked participants to rank successful
transportation outcomes they value the most from a list of twelve value options. Figure 3 shows the number of times
each option appears in participants’ top three choices.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 4
Figure 3 Count of Overall Top Ranked Transportation Values
The top four transportation values for all overall participants and common reasons are:
1. Air Quality & the Environment – People who selected this option want healthy air quality and natural
environment protection to improve human health and community well-being today and for future
generations.
2. Reliability – People who selected this option want consistent, predictable, and easy to use transportation
options that get people where they want to go throughout the day and every day are important to access
jobs, education, appointments, and essential destinations.
3. Safety from Harm – People who selected this option want roads and connections that are safe for people
of all ages, abilities, and using non-car modes to support human health and mobility.
4. Affordability – People who selected this option want affordable, quality transportation options help increase
access to opportunities and essential destinations for people with less means, including workers who earn
low incomes, students, older adults, and people with disabilities.
Although the top four values of Air Quality & the Environment, Reliability, Safety from Harm, and Affordability were
highly ranked by all outreach participants, there were some differences in value rankings by participant
characteristics that should be weighed against the representation of these groups in overall participation. Notable
differences in value rankings by group are:
Affordability was the top value for Asian and Hispanic/Latino/a/e participants, participants who reported
earning less than $60,0000 in annual household income, and participants with disabilities. This confirms that
affordable transportation is important to supporting the travel needs of people of color, people living on low
incomes, and people with disabilities.
Air Quality and the Environment was the most popular choice for participants who live in the northeast
and southeast parts of the city, who live and work or attend school in the city, who are between 25 to 39
years or 60 or more years old, and who are white. This is likely due to the outsized online survey response
rate of participants with these characteristics compared to their composition of the city’s population.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 5
Easy to Use Options was selected over Safety from Harm by people between the ages of 18 and 24 and
who identify as Hispanic or Latino/a/e, selected over Affordability by people who live in the city but work or
attend school outside the city, and the third-most selected value for people who live in northeast Salt Lake
City over Safety from Harm and Affordability. This indicates that people who share these characteristics may
experience difficulties or friction using the options currently available to them.
Equitable Access to Opportunity was chosen more often than Air Quality and the Environment by people
who identify as non-gender binary and over Safety from Harm by Hispanic or Latino/a/e participants. In
many cities, gender and ethnic minorities tend to have fewer or lower quality housing, job, and other
opportunities available to them due to disparities in wealth, resources, and belonging, thus prioritizing
equitable access would benefit these communities in Salt Lake City.
Reliability was the first-most selected value by people who participated in in-person outreach, which is
different than the most popular value overall of Air Quality and the Environment.
Safety from Harm was the second-most popular value for people ages 60 years or older and first-most
popular value those living on household income of $29,999 or less. This indicates that prioritizing
transportation safety would support the travel needs of older adults and people living in extreme poverty.
What are community ideas for advancing top values?
Participants were encouraged to share why these values are important to them, and what actions the city could take
to advance these. Figure 4 highlights common ideas from participants for what Salt Lake City could do to advance
each of the top ranked values.
Figure 4. Summary of Participant Ideas by Top Ranking Value
Top Value Frequent Participant Ideas
Air Quality & the
Environment
Grow transit ridership
Reduce car use and trips
Increase and improve zero-emissions options (e.g., walking, bicycling, clean vehicle
fleets).
Reliability Increase the number of transit stops
Expand transit hours of operations
Enhance transit frequency and reliability
Increase on-demand shared options
Provide real-time information
Safety from Harm Invest in protected bicycle lanes
Lower vehicle speeds
Improve road pavement conditions
Enhance street lighting, especially around transit stops
Widen sidewalks and create pedestrian connections
Affordability Reduce transit fares for people with less means (workers who earn low incomes,
students, older adults, and people with disabilities)
Make transit fare-free for all
What are issues and opportunities for the plan to address?
Online survey participants were asked to share their current and recent experiences with transportation in Salt Lake
City. The following key themes were detected in user feedback that should be addressed by the transportation
master plan:
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 6
Transit Riders: Participants who ride transit expressed that transit can be unreliable, slow, infrequent, feel
unsafe, and not available when it is needed, especially during late nights, early mornings, and on weekends.
Bus riders mentioned the system can be difficult to navigate and too many transfers are required to get
where they want to go.
People Who Walk: Participants who use pedestrian infrastructure mentioned feeling very unsafe when
moving throughout the city. Frequently mentioned ideas to improve people’s experience walking or rolling on
pedestrian networks include lowering vehicle speeds, shortening and protecting pedestrian crossings, and
improving pedestrian areas to be universally accessible and free of obstructions, like scooters.
Bicycle and Personal Mobility Vehicle Users: Participants said that bikeways should be designed and
maintained for user safety, like separating on-street curbside parking from bike lanes to prevent conflicts
between people riding bicycles and opening car doors.
Attachments
Attachment 1: Demographic Profile of Online Survey Participants presents responses to a series of
optional questions asked to understand community representation in the data.
Attachment 2: Value Rankings by Participant Characteristic presents a detailed analysis of the
importance of each value option by: zip code, self-described relationship to the city, age group, gender
identity, race and ethnicity, annual household income, and disability status to understand differences across
communities.
Attachment 3: Analysis of Open-Ended Responses presents qualitative responses to survey questions
soliciting perspectives on values, ideas for improving transportation, and experiences with getting around in
Salt Lake City.
Attachment 4: Survey Questions presents the online survey questionnaire in English and Spanish.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 7
Attachment 1
Demographic Profile of Survey Participants
People who took the survey online were asked to answer a series of optional demographic questions to help Salt
Lake City staff understand who was well represented and who was not. The charts in this section show the
responses to those questions.
Relationship to Salt Lake City
Figure 5 Relationship to Salt Lake City
Answered by 587 survey respondents
Age
Figure 6 Respondent Age
Answered by 582 survey respondents
I live in SLC I work in SLC I attend school in SLC I visit SLC Other (please specify)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Which of the following best describes you? Choose all that apply.
Under age 18 Age 18-24 Age 25-39 Age 40-60 Age 60+
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Which of the following best describes you?
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 8
Gender
Answered by 576 survey participants
Race and Ethnicity
Answered by 575 survey participants
Woman Man Non-binary Prefer to self-describe
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Which of the following best describes you?
White or
Caucasian
Black or
African
American
Hispanic or
Latina/o/e
Asian or Asian
American
Native
American
Pacific
Islander
Another race Prefer to self-
describe
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
Which of the following best describes you? Please check all that
apply.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 9
Income
Answered by 572 survey participants
Disability status
Answered by 580 survey participants
Less than $29,999 Between $30,000 and
$59,999
Between $60,000 and
$99,999
More than $100,000 Prefer not to say
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Which of following best describes your household’s annual
income?
Yes No Prefer not to say
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Are you a person with a disability(s)?
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 10
Attachment 2
Top Values by Group
Focus Groups and Pop-Up Outreach
People who participated in the Transportation Values activity in focus groups and at community events chose the
same top values overall as people who took the survey online. Their responses differed in that Reliability was the
most popular value, while Air Quality and the Environment was the most popular overall.
Figure 7 Top Values for Focus Group and In-Person Participants
Home Location
Respondents were asked to provide their home zip code. The zip codes were aggregated to larger regions to explore
any differences in values by home location. Within Salt Lake City, the regions are Northwest, Northeast, Southwest,
and Southeast, with boundaries corresponding as closely as possible to City Council Districts. Respondents who live
in nearby communities are grouped in a single area called Outside of Salt Lake City.
The main differences between groups are:
People who live outside of Salt Lake City put Reliability, Safety, and Affordability over Air Quality and the
Environment.
People who live in northeast Salt Lake City selected Easy to Use Options as the third-most selected value.
The chart in Figure 8 represents the percent of people in each geographic area who put each value in their top three.
The bars in the chart area labeled with the number of times each value was chosen.
15
15
22
28
31
35
37
40
43
45
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Healthy Active Options
Supporting the Economy
Clean Well Maintained System
Equitable Access to Opportunity
Many Ways to Get Around
Easy to use
Affordability
Safety
Air Quality & the Environment
Reliability
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 11
Figure 8 Top Values by Home Location
Relationship to Salt Lake City
The survey asked respondents whether they live, work, attend school in, or visit Salt Lake City. People could choose
more than one option. The chart in Figure 9 groups responses by the most common combinations of responses,
including: people who said they live in SLC only; people who said they work and/or attend school in SLC but do not
live there; people who both live in and work or attend school in SLC; people who work or attend school and visit SLC;
and people who visit SLC only.
The main difference between groups are:
People who work, attend school and/or visit SLC but do not live in the city chose Reliability over the other
top values.
People who live in SLC but do not work or attend school there chose Easy To Use Options over
Affordability.
Figure 9 Top Values by Relationship to Salt Lake City
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 12
Age
People from different age groups chose the same top overall values, except for:
People under age 18 chose Many Ways to Get Around most often, however there were not very many
respondents in this age group
People between the ages of 18 and 24 chose Easy to Use Options over Safety
Figure 10 Top Values by Age Group
Gender
Respondents’ top values varied by gender identity, with non-binary respondents selecting Equitable Access to
Opportunity more often than Air Quality and the Environment, and choosing Affordability most often of all.
Figure 11 Top Values by Gender
Race and Ethnicity
The chart in Figure 12 shows the differences in how people with different racial and ethnic identities rated their top
three values. Survey participants could choose more than one option for the race and ethnicity question. In the chart,
people who chose more than one option are represented in each of the categories they identified with. For example,
a single respondent’s answers might be shown in the White category, the Black category, and the Hispanic/Latino/a/e
category, if they identify as all three.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 13
The main differences between groups are:
Easy to Use Options was chosen more often than Safety by people who identified as Hispanic/Latino/a/e
Affordability was the top value for Asian, Hispanic/Latino/a/e and Black respondents (tied with Reliability for
Black respondents)
Many values were equally popular for Black, Native American, and Pacific Islander respondents; this is
related to the fact that the total number of responses was low for these groups
Figure 12 Top Values by Race/Ethnicity
Income
The top values selected did not vary much by income category, but respondents in the lowest two income brackets
selected Affordability more often than respondents with higher incomes, as shown in Figure 13.
Figure 13 Top Values by Income
Disability Status
There were not any major differences in top values by disability status, but people with disabilities selected
Affordability more often than people without disabilities, as shown in Figure 14.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 14
Figure 14 Top Values by Disability Status
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 15
Attachment 3
Analysis of Open-Ended Responses
Key takeaways from open-ended responses received are organized by the top four transportation values most
important to in-person outreach and online survey participants and summarized below:
Air Quality & the Environment
Open-ended responses of participants who ranked “Air Quality & the Environment” as their top transportation value
were coded by key subthemes to understand what specific transportation outcomes and priorities matter most in
relation to this value. Figure 15 summarizes the number of times key subthemes appeared in these open-ended
responses.
Figure 15 Air Quality & the Environment Subthemes
Subtheme Description Number of
Mentions
Transit Use &
Improvements
Mention buses, bus rapid transit, streetcars, and heavy/light rail 43
Car Use/Trip Reduction Mention reducing single occupancy vehicle ownership and overall
trips taken
25
Health & Quality of Life
Effects
Mention individual health, comfort, and safety 20
Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emissions Reduction
Mention improving air quality through the reduction of GHG
emissions
18
Clean Vehicles/Fleet Mention vehicles with fewer GHG emissions and waste 11
Multimodal Use Mention seamless integration of several transportation modes 8
Bicycle Use Mention bicycles and bicycle infrastructure (e.g., bicycle lanes,
bicycle parking, bicycle signals, etc.)
7
Pedestrian Experience Mention walking and pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., crosswalks,
sidewalks, etc.)
4
Sustainable Growth Mention growth that is repeatable, ethical, and responsible to, and
for, current and future communities
4
Traffic Calming Mention lowering speed limits through various safety treatments
(e.g., road diet, curb extensions, etc.)
2
Parking Management Mention public/private parking, parking removal/adjustments 2
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 48
Survey participants mentioned the following ideas and concepts within the most common subthemes:
Transit Use & Improvements
Many participants are motivated to ride transit due to the negative environmental impact associated
with driving
Desire more frequent and reliable transit so people can choose this option without worrying about being
“stranded” at bus stops
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 16
Car Use/Trip Reduction
Note the city’s dependence on single occupancy vehicle trips as key contributor to the city’s precarious
air quality
Encourage strategies and policies to reduce congestion and car ownership will be crucial for improving
the city’s overall air quality
Desire a more robust transit system (more accessible stops and routes) to get around the city without
needing to own a single occupancy vehicle, especially for those who earn low incomes
Health & Quality of Life Effects
Mention short- and long-term effects of air pollution on human health and well-being—especially for
individuals with respiratory health concerns—have significant consequences for current and future
generations if unaddressed
Reliability
Open-ended responses of participants who voted “Reliability” as their top transportation value were coded by
subtheme. Figure 16 summarizes the number of times key subthemes appeared in these open-ended responses and
describes ideas and concepts mentioned for the most common subthemes.
Figure 16 Reliability Subthemes
Subtheme Description Number of
Mentions
Transit System &
Service Expansion
Mention transit system expansion (more routes/stops), increased
operational hours, more consistency of schedule/timetables
32
Transit Frequency &
Speed
Mention transit speed and frequency through operational and policy
improvements (e.g., bus only lanes, bus rapid transit, transit signal
priority)
24
More Travel Options Mention reducing reliance on single occupancy vehicles 24
Access to Jobs,
Education, Appointments
Access to employment centers, educational institutions,
appointments, and essential services
10
Ease of Use Degree to which riders affective and cognitive effort on a trip by
public transit
6
Real-Time Information Information available to transit providers or customers about the
status of vehicles, including approximate locations and predictive
arrival times
2
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 12
Survey participants mentioned the following ideas and concepts within the most common subthemes:
Transit System & Service Expansion
Desire for greater number and locations of transit stops and routes
Desire for expanding transit operating hours to accommodate those who need to travel early morning or
late at night
Some participants shared that they would like increased transit service during the weekend (Saturday
and Sunday), holidays, and special events
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 17
Desire for transit timetables that are consistent and predictable so riders can feel confident they will get
to their destinations on schedule
Transit Frequency & Speed
Participants hesitate to use transit because they feel it is often infrequent and slow
More frequent and faster transit service is crucial for riders that take transit to access key employment,
education, and essential services destinations
More Transportation Options
Participants choose to drive their cars or use other modes because transit does not consistently get
them to their destinations on-time. This is especially important for people who rely on transit to travel to
work, school, appointments, and other essential services.
Safety from Harm
Open-ended responses of participants who voted “Safety from Harm” as their top transportation value were coded by
subtheme. Figure 17 presents the number of times each subtheme appears in these responses and highlights ideas
mentioned within frequent subthemes.
Figure 17 Safety from Harm Subthemes
Subtheme Description Number of
Mentions
Bicycle User Experience Mention bicycles and bicycle infrastructure (e.g., bicycle lanes,
bicycle parking, bicycle signals, etc.)
26
Transit User Experience Mention buses, bus rapid transit, heavy/light rail, streetcars 17
Pedestrian User
Experience
Mention walking and pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., crosswalks,
sidewalks, etc.)
11
Car/Trip Reduction Mention reducing single occupancy vehicle ownership and overall
trips taken
9
Onboard Enforcement Mention enforcement presence onboard and while waiting at
stations and stops
9
Traffic Calming Mention reducing roadway speed limits through various safety
treatments (e.g., road diet, curb extensions, etc.)
6
Road Improvements Mention construction and maintenance improvements of the
existing roadway
6
Multimodal Mention integration of several modes of transportation 3
Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA)
Accessibility
Mention accessibility for persons with disabilities and older adults 2
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 34
Survey participants mentioned the following ideas and concepts within the most common subthemes:
Bicycle User Experience
Desire for the city to do more to improve bicycle safety on its roadways
Suggest city remove Class III bicycle lanes (i.e., sharrows) and blender zones, invest in more protected
bicycle lanes, and lower city speeds at key corridors
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 18
Want city to investigate increasing the number of free and safe bicycle parking locations (e.g., corrals,
lockers, etc.) in the city
Two participants shared that they have been involved in a traffic crash in the past and are no longer
comfortable bicycling in the city
Some roadways are dilapidated, hazardous for bicyclists, and need maintenance
Transit User Experience
Some participants shared that they often choose not to take transit because they feel unsafe when
traveling to/from and waiting at the stop.
Improve lighting at stops and the immediate area surrounding stops so that riders feel safe and
comfortable.
Concerns with safety from harm while onboard transit, there is general interest for increasing onboard
enforcement to address safety onboard transit
Pedestrian User Experience
Cars are often traveling too fast and too close to the sidewalk
Want safer sidewalks/streets and drivers to drive with caution and care to advance this value
Consider identifying streets that have enough space to widen the sidewalk and reduce the number of
travel lanes in each direction
Affordability
Open-ended responses of participants who voted “Affordability” as their top transportation value were coded by
subtheme. Figure 18 Figure 16presents the number of times each subtheme appears in these responses and
highlights ideas mentioned within frequent subthemes.
Figure 18 Affordability Subthemes
Theme Description Number of
Mentions
Lower Fares/Free
Transit
Mention lowering transit fares or making transit completely free for city
residents
15
Jobs, Education,
Appointments
The ability to access key employment, educational, and essential
service destinations without worrying about expensive fares.
2
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 16
Survey participants mentioned the following ideas and concepts within the most common subthemes:
Lower Fares/Free Transit
Many participants felt that the city should have much more affordable fares to increase accessibility of
transit for all, especially for lower income riders.
There is also agreement that transit should be free for all residents. If that is not possible, there is
interest in making transit free for low-income riders, students, persons with disabilities, and older adults.
Jobs, Education, Appointments
A couple of participants shared that affordable fares are extremely crucial for people, particularly
workers, students, persons with disabilities, and older adults, who utilize transit daily.
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 19
Key takeaways from open-ended responses received to the question “What would you like streets and transportation
in Salt Lake City to feel and look like in the future to better serve you?” (Question 10) are summarized in Figure 19
below:
Figure 19. Key Themes from Open-Ended Responses on Vision
Theme Description Number of
Mentions
Safety Safety for all roadway users 35
Better Transit Buses, Bus rapid transit, heavy/light rail, streetcar 23
Car ownership & trip
Reduction
Behavior change, incentives to use non-car modes of travel, removal of
travel lane(s)
20
Bicycle Connections Bicycles and bicycle infrastructure (e.g., bicycle lanes, bicycle parking,
bicycle signals, etc.)
20
Air Quality
Improvements
Air quality, clean vehicles (e.g., CNG, electric, etc.) 15
Equity/Accessibility Ease of use, alternative options available, proximity to transit/other
modes of travel, equitable access to resources/key destinations
14
Multimodal Trip
Supports
Integration of several modes of transportation 13
Pedestrian Connections Walking and pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., crosswalks, sidewalks, etc.) 12
Transit Speed &
Reliability
Transit speed and reliability through operational and policy
improvements (e.g., bus only lanes)
11
Speed Limit Reducing roadway speed limits to increase safety and comfort for all
roadway users
9
Connectivity Connectivity of the overall transportation network, including all modes
of travel
9
Street Trees Public trees, street landscape 5
Parking Public/private parking, parking removal/adjustments 5
Community
Engagement
Empowering community members, consulting with key community-
based organizations (CBOs), inclusive planning
4
Street Lighting Lighting on the streets and at transit stops. 3
Street Typology Street types/definitions, Street Typology Guidelines 2
Road Improvements Construction and maintenance improvements of the existing roadway 2
Signal Timing Vehicle/transit/bicycle signal infrastructure and timing improvements 2
Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA)
Accessibility
Accessibility for persons with disabilities and older adults 2
Affordability Free/cheaper fares, equity 2
Technology Technology improvements, information sharing 1
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 2
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 20
Safety:
Many participants envision a safer, more convenient, and efficient transportation system that considers
all modes of travel, such as transit, vehicles, pedestrians, bicycles, and skateboards.
Participants would like to see more well-lit and marked areas to improve roadway visibility and comfort.
There is an opportunity to foster a more inclusive planning process that considers the specific needs of
the disabled and elderly communities in Salt Lake City.
Transit:
Participants want an expanded transit system so that all riders can conveniently access their desired
destinations without having to make multiple transfers.
The implementation of more transit speed and reliability improvements, such as bus rapid transit
service, transit-only lanes, and transit signal priority, would improve the consistency and quality of
service.
Participants who take transit early in the morning and late at night would like to see more frequent
service and expanded operating hours (i.e., early in the morning, late at night, and weekend).
Car/Trip Reduction:
Participants envision a city that prioritizes more sustainable forms of transportation (such as transit,
walking, bicycling, rolling, etc.) to help address the city’s growing congestion, sustainability, and safety
concerns.
Salt Lake City’s roadways should be designed for people and not vehicles. When applicable, roadways
should be narrower and have lower speeds.
Removing the abundance of private vehicle parking could be an effective strategy to discourage driving.
Bicycle:
Participants envision a connected network of bikeways, especially protected bicycle lanes, and
adequate bicycle parking options.
Participants are interested in a bicycle network that connects to the transit system to improve first- and
last-mile trips.
Participants encourage the city partner with bicycle advocacy groups when planning future bicycle
projects and programs in the city.
Key takeaways from open-ended responses received to the question “Is there anything else you’d like us to know
about your experiences with transportation in Salt Lake City?” (Question 11) are summarized in Figure 20 below:
Figure 20 Key Transportation User Feedback Themes
Theme Description Number of
Mentions
Transit Use Buses, Bus rapid transit, heavy/light rail, streetcars 25
Safe Streets Safety for all roadway users 16
Travel Options
Ease of use, alternative options available, proximity to transit/other
modes of travel, equitable access to resources/key destinations
14
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 21
Theme Description Number of
Mentions
Transit Speed &
Reliability
Transit speed and reliability through operational and policy
improvements (e.g., bus only lanes, bur rapid transit, transit signal
priority, etc.)
9
Multimodal Integration of several modes of transportation 6
Connectivity
Connectivity of the overall transportation network, including all modes
of travel
6
Car Reduction
Behavior change, incentives for other modes of travel, removal of
travel lane(s)
6
Bicycle Bicycles and bicycle infrastructure 5
Affordability Free/cheaper fares, equity 4
Speed Limit
Reducing roadway speed limits to increase safety and comfort for all
roadway users
4
Road Improvements Construction and maintenance of the existing roadway 4
Sustainability Air quality, GHG reduction, clean vehicles (e.g., CNG, electric, etc.) 3
Pedestrian
Walking and pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., crosswalks, sidewalks,
etc.)
3
Community
Engagement
Empowering community members, consulting with key CBOs, inclusive
planning
3
Parking Public/private parking, parking removal/adjustments 3
Signal Timing Vehicle/transit/bicycle signal infrastructure and timing improvements 2
Micromobility Shared bicycles, scooters, etc. 2
Street Trees Public trees, street landscape 1
Street Typology Street types/definitions, Street Typology Guidelines 1
General General responses not categorized in the subthemes listed above 14
Transit:
“Bus transportation can be unreliable at times, dangerous, and in some cases non-existent. I've had to
run from one stop to the next because my regular stop didn't exist anymore. Make public transportation
more reliable so people are more willing to use it.”
“Transportation for after hours when establishments like bars close would increase the safety in our
community by offering a more affordable and safe option.”
“I do not own a car, and bus is my primary mode of transportation.”
“The buses are good, but very slow.”
Safety:
“I love Salt Lake City's bicycle network. But I hate "car door bicycle lanes" to be honest. I wish Salt Lake
City wouldn't create so many scary doors zone bike lanes.”
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 22
“Allowing electric scooters and other motorized mobility devices in downtown and especially on the
sidewalks has created a dangerous situation for pedestrians. I do appreciate that there are now only
two scooter companies operating in Salt Lake City.”
“I really value the many different travel options that exist. I just wish I didn’t feel like I was risking my life
every time I cross a street.”
Accessibility:
“I love the train, and Trax, and even the buses are pretty good. But sometimes, it’s just too far between
different connections, or there’s just too much time to wait if I miss a connection.”
“I love how easy it is to navigate in Salt Lake City, and I love the steady increase in sophisticated active
transportation routes.”
“Presently, I have very little use for Trax despite living two blocks from a green line stop. It just doesn't
go anywhere useful without an awkward transfer. Its limited hours of operation and frequency on the
weekend makes this even worse.”
“I would love more linked transport options between SLC, South Salt Lake and surrounding areas.”
“I find the bus system difficult to navigate.”
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 23
Attachment 4
Survey Questions
English Language Version
Salt Lake City is launching Connect SLC, a process to develop a new citywide Transportation Master Plan. The plan
will lay out how transportation can support the needs of everyone in Salt Lake City over the next 20 years. As we kick
off the process, we want feedback on what YOU VALUE in creating a transportation system for the coming decades.
Your input will help the city shape a vision for transportation and set goals for the new Transportation Master Plan
that will help inform decisions about future investments. Just a few minutes of your time can go a long way in helping
shape the future!
What do YOU VALUE most as you think about investing in Salt Lake
City transportation?
The city wants to know what aspects of a successful transportation system you VALUE most. We are interested to
know:
What is most important to you when it comes to your daily transportation needs?
How should Salt Lake City improve the transportation network to better serve you?
How can Salt Lake City government and our partners better improve transportation for you?
Share your feedback
1. Did you participate in an activity facilitated by the Connect SLC team?
2. No, I did not participate in an activity. Take me to the full questionnaire.
3. Yes, I participated in an activity. Take me to the additional questions
4. For completing this survey, you can enter an opportunity drawing to receive a one-time mobility benefit!
Please select your preferred option:
a. A five-day ride pass from Utah Transit Authority (UTA)
b. A deeply discounted annual pass from SLC GREENbike (Account Required)
c. $10 scooter ride credit from SPIN (Account Required)
d. I prefer to not to be entered in the opportunity drawing.
5. If you would like to enter the drawing, please provide us your name and email or phone number to reach
you should you be selected: [Open-ended]
6. Please rank your top three transportation values from the following list:
a. Healthy, active mobility options
b. Air quality and the environment
c. Clean, well-maintained system
d. Easy to use options
e. Regional connections
f. Affordability
g. Equitable access to opportunities
h. Comfort
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 24
i. Safety from harm
j. Many ways to get around
k. Reliability
l. Supporting the economy
7. Please share why your #1 ranked transportation value is important to you. What does it mean to you? Is
there one thing that Salt Lake City could do to advance this value?
8. Please share why your #2 ranked transportation value is important to you. Is there one thing that Salt Lake
City could do to advance this value?
9. Please share why your #3 ranked transportation value is important to you. Is there one thing that Salt Lake
City could do to advance this value?
10. What would you like streets and transportation in Salt Lake City to feel and look like in the future to better
serve you? [open-ended]
11. Is there anything else you’d like us to know about your experiences with transportation in Salt Lake City?
[open-ended]
We’d like to know a little more about you!
All these questions are optional, and your responses are anonymous. We are asking because we want to
know how well we are reaching different types of community members.
12. Where do you live (i.e. zip code, nearest street intersection, neighborhood, etc.)?
a. Open-ended
13. Which of the following best describes you? Please check all that apply.
a. I live in SLC
b. I work in SLC
c. I attend school in SLC
d. I visit SLC
e. Other
14. Which of the following best describes you?
a. Under age 18
b. Age 18-24
c. Age 25-39
d. Age 40-60
e. Age 60+
15. Which of the following best describes you? Please check all that apply.
a. Asian or Asian American
b. Pacific Islander
c. Black or African American
d. White or Caucasian
e. Hispanic or Latina/o/e
f. Native American
g. Prefer to self-describe: [open-ended]
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 25
16. Which of the following best describes you?
a. Woman
b. Man
c. Non-binary
d. Prefer to self-describe: [open-ended]
17. Which of following best describes your household’s annual income?
a. Less than $29,999
b. $30,000 to $59,999
c. $60,000 to $99,999
d. More than $100,000
e. Prefer not to say
18. Are you a person with a disability(s)?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Prefer not to say
19. Is there anything else about yourself you want to share with the Connect SLC team?
a. [Open-ended]
Thanks for your input! Want to stay informed about Connect SLC? Visit us at the link below! Scroll down to sign up
for the project email list. https://www.slc.gov/transportation/plans-studies/tmp/
Spanish Language Version
Encuesta De Valores Y Prioridades Comunitarias De Connect SLC
Salt Lake City está lanzando Connect SLC, un proceso para actualizar el Plan Maestro de Transporte de la ciudad.
El plan establecerá cómo el transporte puede satisfacer las necesidades de todos en Salt Lake
City durante los próximos 20 años.
Al iniciar el proceso, queremos comentarios sobre lo que USTED VALORIZA en la creación de
un sistema de transporte para las próximas décadas.
Su opinión ayudará a la ciudad a dar forma a una visión para el transporte y establecer metas para el nuevo Plan
Maestro de Transporte que ayudará a informar las decisiones sobre inversiones futuras.
¡Solo unos minutos de su tiempo pueden ayudar mucho a dar forma al futuro!
¿Qué es lo más importante para moverse por Salt Lake City?
La ciudad quiere saber qué aspectos de un sistema de transporte exitoso valora más. Nos interesa saber:
¿Qué es lo más importante para usted cuando se trata de sus necesidades de transporte diarias?
¿Cómo debería Salt Lake City mejorar la red de transporte para servirle mejor?
¿Cómo pueden el gobierno de Salt Lake City y nuestros socios mejorar sus opciones de transporte?
Comparte sus comentarios
1. ¿Participó en una actividad facilitada por el equipo de Connect SLC?
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 26
a. No, no participé en una actividad. Llévame al cuestionario completo.
b. Sí, participé en una actividad. Llévame a las preguntas adicionales.
2. Al completar esta encuesta, puede ingresar un sorteo de oportunidades para recibir un beneficio de movilid
ad por única vez. Seleccione su opción preferida:
a. Prefiero un pase de viaje de cinco días en servicios de transito de Autoridad de Tránsito de Utah
(UTA)
b. Prefiero un pase anual con gran descuento de
SLC GREENbike bicicletas compartidas (se requiere una cuenta)
c. Prefiero un crédito de $10 por viaje en scooter de SPIN (se requiere una cuenta)
d. Prefiero no participar en el sorteo.
3. Proporcione su nombre y correo electrónico o número de teléfono para contactarlo, en caso de
ser seleccionado: [abierto]
4. Clasifique sus tres valores principales para el sistema de transporte de la siguiente lista:
a. Opciones de transporte activas y saludables
b. Calidad del aire y medio ambiente
c. Sistema limpio y bien mantenido
d. Opciones fáciles de usar
e. Conexiones regionales
f. Opciones económicas
g. Acceso equitativo a oportunidades
h. Comodidad
i. Seguridad
j. Varias formas de moverse
k. Opciones confiables
l. Apoyo a la economía de la region
5. Comparta por qué es importante para usted el valor de transporte que ocupa el primer lugar. ¿Hay algo que
Salt Lake City pueda hacer para aumentar este valor?
6. Comparta por qué es importante para usted el valor de transporte que ocupa el segundo lugar. ¿Hay algo
que Salt Lake City pueda hacer para aumentar este valor?
7. Comparta por qué es importante para usted el valor de transporte que ocupa el número 3. ¿Hay algo que
Salt Lake City pueda hacer para aumentar este valor?
8. ¿Cómo le gustaría que se sintieran y se vieran las calles y el transporte en Salt Lake
City en el futuro para mejorar sus opciones de transporte? [abierto]
9. ¿Hay algo más que le gustaría compartir sobre sus experiencias con el transporte en Salt Lake City?
[abierto]
¡Nos gustaría saber un poco más de ti!
Todas estas preguntas son opcionales y
sus respuestas son anónimas. Preguntamos porque queremos saber qué tan
bien estamos llegando a diferentes tipos de miembros de la comunidad.
10. ¿Dónde vive (código postal, intersección de calles más cercana, vecindario, etc.)?
a. Abierto
Connect SLC Community Transportation Values and Priorities Survey Report
Salt Lake City Transportation Master Plan
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates, Inc. | 27
11. ¿Cuál de las siguientes le describe mejor? Por favor marque todos los que apliquen.
a. Yo vivo en SLC
b. Yo trabajo en SLC
c. Asisto a la escuela in SLC
d. Yo visito SLC
e. Otro
12. ¿Cuál de las siguientes le describe mejor?
a. menor de 18 años
b. 18-24 años
c. 25-39 años
d. 40-60 años
e. 60+ años
13. ¿Cuál de las siguientes le describe mejor? Por favor marque todos los que apliquen.
a. Asiático/a o asiático/a americano/a
b. Isleño del pacífico
c. Negro/a o afroamericano/a
d. Blanco/a o caucásico/a
e. Hispana/o o Latina/o
f. Nativo/a Americano/a
g. prefiero autodescribirme: [abierto]
14. ¿Cuál de las siguientes le describe mejor?
a. mujer
b. hombre
c. no binario
d. prefiero autodescribirme: [abierto]
15. ¿Cuál de las siguientes opciones describe mejor los ingresos anuales de su hogar?
a. Menos de $29,999
b. $30,000 a $59,999
c. $60,000 a $99,999
d. Más de $100,000
16. ¿Es una persona con alguna discapacidad?
a. Sí
b. No
17. ¿Hay algo más sobre usted que quiera compartir con el equipo de Connect SLC?
a. [abierto]
¡Gracias por tu contribución! ¿Quiere mantenerse informado sobre Connect SLC? ¡Visítanos en el link
de abajo! Regístrese para nuestra lista de correo electrónico a continuación. https://www.slc.gov/transportation/plans
-studies/tmp/