Picture this: A young Utah family, excited to buy a first home, finds a dream house slipping further out of reach with each passing month. Sound familiar? It should.

In the Beehive State, the affordability crisis isn’t just making headlines — it’s reshaping lives. Redfin data shows that, since May 2019, median home prices have increased by a startling $206,700 — a 61.53% increase that’s left many Utahns reeling.

And what about renters? From 2013 to 2020, rent in the Salt Lake City area increased by 6% annually, spiked by 19% in 2021, rose moderately in 2022, and remained elevated in 2023, resulting in a substantial overall increase over the decade. But what if we’re only seeing part of the picture?

Andrew Gruber, Executive Director of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, thinks we’re overlooking a crucial piece of the affordability puzzle. In a candid conversation with The Salt Lake Tribune’s Innovation Lab, Gruber challenges us to rethink our approach to this pressing issue.

“We need to stop looking at housing costs in isolation,” Gruber asserts. “For most Utahns, the real story of affordability is written in the combined ink of housing and transportation expenses.”

Intrigued? So were we. Let’s dive into Gruber’s fresh perspective on Utah’s affordability challenges.

Michael Parker (MP): Andrew, you’ve suggested we should look at both housing and transportation costs together when considering affordability. Can you explain why this combined approach is so important, especially for middle-class families?

Andrew Gruber (AG): Housing and transportation expenses are fundamentally linked in a household’s budget and lifestyle choices. By looking at them in tandem, we get a much clearer picture of the true cost of living in a particular area. This holistic view isn’t just about numbers on a spreadsheet — it’s about developing strategies that can genuinely improve affordability and quality of life for our communities.

MP: It’s true that most families instinctively juggle these expenses in their household budgets. But you’re suggesting a broader perspective. How could elevating this approach to a community-wide strategy create meaningful change for Utah families?

AG: Where we live can reduce how much we spend on transportation. Take a typical family earning $70,000 a year. Traditional guidelines suggest they shouldn’t spend more than $21,000 annually on housing (30%). Say that family finds a home in a suburb where their mortgage plus utilities are $18,000 per year. But what about transportation?

If their home is far from work, shopping or schools, with limited public transportation, they might need multiple cars, increasing costs significantly.

Now, consider if they choose a home in a mixed-use community, close to jobs, schools, shopping and public transit. That family might drive less, have shorter trips and maybe need just one car. They could save thousands annually on car payments, insurance and gas. They’d also save time by avoiding traffic.

This makes a huge difference in overall household costs. The two locations might not even be far apart — the mixed-use area could be the center of the same suburb.

MP: Can you give us an example of a successful local model?

AG: Definitely. Look at Daybreak as a mixed-use community within the city of South Jordan. This community is designed to be walkable with schools, parks, places to work and shops all within a short distance. Residents can bike or walk to most places and the UTA’s Trax line has two stations in Daybreak. Another will be opening soon. Another example would be Station Park [in Farmington] focusing on jobs and transit. This all significantly reduces the need for driving. This model not only cuts down on transportation costs — with both money and time savings — but also enhances quality of life by promoting a healthier, more active lifestyle.

MP: Would this approach to how we design our communities impact local taxes and city budgets?

AG: Yes, usually positively. In mixed-use communities like Daybreak, with diverse housing and transportation options, infrastructure costs are often lower per home. Smaller lots, townhomes and increased use of public transit or walking also reduce the land and resources needed. This can lead to more investment in parks and amenities, improving quality of life while keeping tax rates reasonable.

MP: Would this approach help a family get around for things like soccer practices?

AG: Yes. The basic concept is to give people easier access to the things that are most important to them. Imagine living in a neighborhood where job opportunities, schools, parks and grocery stores are within a short drive, or even within walking or biking distance. This means less time spent driving to soccer practices or running errands, saving both time and money.

MP: Are you suggesting every community should follow the same design?

AG: Definitely not. By offering both single-family housing neighborhoods and mixed-used communities a city offers more options to residents based on their wants and needs. So each community has to consider what works best for its residents. Some smaller suburban or rural communities can have a nice main street or town center that connects to residential areas with safe roads and sidewalks for biking and walking. Other areas can have a mixed-use city center where some of its residents can live, work and shop. And our larger cities can have “downtown” areas with lots of activity and development, like Ogden, Provo and our capital city of Salt Lake.

MP: How would you sum up what you’ve described?

AG: If we want Utah residents and families to be able to afford to live here, and to thrive, we should be thinking not just about housing costs, but overall household affordability. By considering the costs of housing and transportation together and considering that relationship as we develop our communities, we can give Utahns a better shot at making it. And not only can this help with household costs, it can enhance quality of life at the same time.

MP: Thank you for offering this fresh perspective on affordable living, one that extends beyond just rent or mortgages. It’s a broader, more holistic approach to thinking about our cities and finances. With innovative ideas like these, the future of Utah could become more affordable and enjoyable than we ever imagined. For instance, including transit passes with rent for apartments near TRAX stations or with home purchases within half a mile of fixed transit lines would be a transformative change for many families.

Andrew Gruber is the executive director of the Wasatch Front Regional Council, which along with its partners develops the Wasatch Choice Vision to create strategies for better transportation, diverse housing options, and walkable city centers. Learn more at www.wasatchchoice.org.

Michael Parker is the director of community solutions for The Salt Lake Tribune’s Innovation Lab and principal and founder of Do Good.

The Innovation Lab invites Utahns to share ideas on supporting the middle class. Email voices@sltrib.com to contribute.

“Don’t want to go through that again.”

“What are you talking about, the Winter Olympics here in 2002 were fantastic, one of the best experiences ever in the history of Salt Lake City.”

“Hated ‘em.”

“Loved ‘em.”

Overheard a conversation — no, an argument — the other day between two guys — friends, I think — either sitting on a city park bench or in the far reaches of my imagination, not really sure. They were going at it over the fact that Utah this week pried, if that’s the right word, another Winter Olympic Games out of the International Olympic Committee, this time in 2034, minus the misunderstandings, minus the bribes, minus the corruption, minus the ridicule and stigma of the first time around, with the possibility that Salt Lake could become a future part of a regular Olympic city rotation.

“2034, and beyond? Might not even be alive by then,” the one said.

“If you are, it’ll be a sight worth having stayed alive to see,” said the other.

“Nah. Too much hassle, too much traffic, too many people, people from other places speaking … you know, other languages. This is our town here, our streets, our canyons, our mountains, our slopes, our ice, our fry sauce, our quirkiness, our one-sided politics, our inversion.”

“C’mon. I’ve never witnessed downtown SLC so awake at all hours, it was hopping at 1, 2, 3 in the morning. For 17 days and nights, it put the ‘F’ in ‘un.’”

“Parking was atrocious.”

“There was, indeed, a whole lot of healthy walking going on.”

“Got sick of everybody dressing like — what was it, Canadians or Norwegians or members of the French Foreign Legion? So many berets, berets here, there, everywhere. I know a guy living in Sandy who grew up in Panguitch, who was raised herding cattle and moving sprinkler pipe, a countrified cowboy who said ‘was’ when he should have said ‘were,’ who wouldn’t use any profanity, but used ‘fetch’ and ‘frickin’ all the time, who once told me he threw an ‘apple car’ out the ‘core window,’ who knew more about tractors then he ever did about any of life’s fineries, who wore a frickin’ beret for two weeks during the games, and a month after them. He looked ridiculous, but thought he was all sophisticated in that getup.”

“It was the pin collecting and trading that I got into and that was a gas. Meeting folks from all over, buying and swapping hockey pins, skiing pins, skating pins, pins with moose heads on them, pins from Sweden, pins featuring foamy mugs of German beer, pins with an American flag on them. It was all the rage.”

“Wasn’t there a news story after the games ended about the thousands of condoms they found in and around the Olympic village, where all the athletes were … um, sleeping, trying, apparently, to keep one another warm during their time there?”

“I was more fixated on the athletes’ skillful performances on the ice and snow in their respective sports. Man, don’t you remember Sarah Hughes skating? Chris Witty speedskating? Katrin Apel biathloning? Tristan Gale skeletoning? Simon Ammann ski jumping? Martin Brodeur goaltending? Kelly Clark snowboarding? And all the rest?”

“I remember, like, none of those. I do remember at the medals plaza Scott Stapp singing ‘With Arms Wide Open,’ striking classic rock star poses as Creed’s front man.”

“You probably remember Bobsled Costas?”

“Was that the Olympics when his one pink eye was oozing and then both of them were?”

“No, that was Sochi in 2014, and Bob’s efforts there were nothing short of heroic. He was an American hero.”

“I do remember American hero Picabo Street in 2002 finishing 16th in her final ski race. That was disappointing. I remember her saying, ‘I’m over it.’”

“Do you remember Wayne Gretzky’s joy at the Canadians winning gold in men’s ice hockey? The Great One was thrilled, and so was I. Just like I was thrilled when the 1980 U.S. ‘Miracle On Ice’ hockey team lit the torch during the opening ceremony at Rice-Eccles Stadium. Cool.”

“What I remember more clearly is French skating judge Marie Reine Le Gougne throwing in with the Russians, initially screwing the resplendent Canadian skating team of Jamie Sale and David Pelletier out of a gold medal. Luckily, later they were granted, in a ceremonial re-do, gold medals of their own. That whole thing was nice, but weird.”

“So much soaring athleticism at those games, right here in our backyard.”

“You mean athletes like the dudes in the luge who plop down on what amounts to a cookie sheet, who spread their bodies over a sled like cream cheese on a bagel, and slide down an ice track to glory? Athletes like the curlers who slide stones across the ice while teammates sweep the surface like Aunt Gertrude and Uncle Billy cleaning out the family kitchen?”

“Lighten up. There are always the heartwarming stories of the future, like the ones of the past — such as at the 2002 games, when Jimmy Shea won a gold medal in skeleton with a picture of his father, Jack, who had won a gold medal years earlier in speedskating, tucked inside his helmet. Jack had died just weeks before the games started in an auto accident. And the story about American snowboarder Chris Klug, who two years earlier had undergone a liver transplant, winning a bronze medal on Feb. 15, which happened to be National Organ Donor Awareness Day.”

“I get it. I just wonder about stuff like security. I recall the lengths to which officials went to keep the 2002 games safe, what with the world watching just months after 9/11. The world will be watching again, at least the part of it that cares about sports done on ice and snow, in 2034. That’s a lot of risk and responsibility that falls on the locals here in Utah, even with help from the feds. Some of the Olympic venues last time around looked like prison encampments, complete with walls and gates covered in razor wire. If anything horrible were to happen, Salt Lake City would get the blame — and the ridicule.”

“And if proper measures are taken, it will get the credit, like it did last time, for putting on a tremendous event. Utah’s volunteers were as much a part of that success as anyone, and everyone knew it, even if they were decked out in those gaudy jackets and, in some instances, yeah, the berets, too.”

“There were 2,399 athletes at those games. And there were something like five times that many used condoms found. Makes me understand better those games’ motto: ‘Light the Fire Within.’”

“They were lit, all right. Those Winter Olympic Games were lit.”

Editor’s note • This story is available to Salt Lake Tribune subscribers only. Thank you for supporting local journalism.

Over and over the conservative majority on the Supreme Court has buried a knife in the back of the Biden Administration’s attempt to deliver cleaner air, cleaner water and a fighting chance to mitigate the climate crisis. By doing so, they also buried a knife in the back of the health and life expectancy of everyone in Utah, almost literally. Yet Utah’s Republican leaders cheered the court’s callousness.

Two years ago, the court neutered EPA’s Clean Power Plan, aimed at reducing coal power plant emissions nationwide and accelerating their disappearance as major climate villains. Last year, they narrowed the definition of wetlands in a way that dismisses the many environmental benefits that wetlands provide, and wetlands throughout the country will be lost because of it.

We cannot save Great Salt Lake while degrading and amputating its wetlands. But that’s what’s in store for more than tens of thousands of acres of the lake’s adjacent wetlands thanks to the misguided warehouse building frenzy brought to you by the Utah Inland Port Authority.

Trading wetlands for asphalt is an air pollution “double whammy.” Wetlands act like sponges and absorb particulate pollution. The presence or absence of wetlands can even predict levels of particulate pollution in an area. On the other hand, asphalt, even without vehicle traffic, emits VOCs and secondary organic aerosols virtually indefinitely, especially in summer heat. In fact, this phenomenon was calculated as equal to, or even exceeding the contribution of tailpipe emissions to summertime PM2.5 in Los Angeles. VOCs are toxic in and of themselves and are also precursors of ozone.

Wetlands can store 20 to 40 times more carbon than agricultural land, and for hundreds of years. But once warmed or disturbed, they release three potent greenhouse gasses — CO2, methane and nitrous oxide. Wetlands’ capturing of sediment helps sequester heavy metals, preventing them from reaching Great Salt Lake and becoming airborne if the lake dries up. Heavy metals are some of the greatest hazards contaminating the lake’s dust.

In the past two weeks, the court continued swinging their wrecking ball at all aspects of American life, particularly at the environment. Air pollution is responsible for about one in five deaths worldwide and contributes to four of the five leading causes of death. Nonetheless, the court buried their knife in the Good Neighbor Rule, which would have forced Utah to be a good neighbor to Colorado by requiring tighter pollution controls on our large coal fired power plants whose emissions actually do “bury” people in Colorado.

Utah’s political leaders celebrated the court allowing them to continue being a bad neighbor and bury even more people in Colorado, as if their lives and health mean nothing. But Utah’s coal power plants are major regional sources of pollution. They drape our own national parks with smog, and as the state’s largest sources of nitrogen oxides, (precursors of ozone and particulate pollution), damage and shorten the lives of Utahns, as if our lives and health also mean nothing.

Anti-regulatory zealots have dreamt about reversing the “Chevron doctrine” like it was the second coming, and the Supreme Court, assuming the mantle of deity, answered their prayers. Gaps or ambiguity in congressional law (and there is inevitably both) will no longer be filled by the judgment of civil service experts. Details of the laws that govern federal agencies will now be filled in by judges via their ruling on lawsuits. And given their recent judicial power grab and eagerness to have the final say on just about everything, six hard right judges have made themselves the final arbiters on environmental issues.

Big polluters like the Koch Brothers, who funded the Chevron challenge in the first place, are licking their chops to start filing lawsuits to gut federal environmental rules. The knowledge of actual medical and scientific experts will now take a back seat to the opinions of Federalist-Society-approved law school graduates on how clean your air and water will be.

Through dark money from the pockets of hard right billionaires, Leonard Leo has acted as their middle man in essentially purchasing our Supreme Court and lower courts. And on their behalf, the investment has paid off handsomely. Federal agencies that depend on scientific expertise to establish regulations will now be at the mercy of ideologues who hate regulations.

Expertise matters, and the farcicality of the ruling was exposed before the ink was dry. In writing the conservative majority’s opinion, in five places Justice Neil Gorsuch showed he didn’t know the difference between nitrogen oxides (a hazardous smoke stack pollutant) and nitrous oxide (best known as an anesthetic gas). An anesthesiologist who doesn’t know the difference could kill someone. A Supreme Court that doesn’t know the difference could kill en masse.

When anti-regulatory purity is prioritized over expertise, your life could be the consequence.

Dr. Brian Moench is president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment. He recently retired from a 40 year career practicing intraoperative anesthesia.

The Salt Lake Tribune is committed to creating a space where Utahns can share ideas, perspectives and solutions that move our state forward. We rely on your insight to do this. Find out how to share your opinion here, and email us at voices@sltrib.com.