Utah Stories

Why “Deeply Affordable” Housing Is Not Being Built in Utah and it Won’t be Built Anytime Soon

The affordable housing crisis is likely the most important problem younger and low-income Utahns are facing today.

|


A tent that survived for 3 weeks despite abatementes. Photo by Robin Pendergrast.

Utah’s last state legislative session allocated just $70 million toward deeply affordable housing, despite the state coffers containing a $2 billion state surplus. The affordable housing crisis is likely the most important problem younger and low-income Utahns are facing because today a growing percentage of low-income residents are priced out of the housing and rental market some of which are finding themselves homeless or living in cars or RVs.

This low allocation came as a huge disappointment to homeless advocates including the newly appointed Homeless coordinator Wayne Niederhauser, who was seeking $150 million for more “deeply affordable housing”. Instead, the state surplus will go towards mostly water projects.

Critics might assume that the State Legislature is heartless, inhumane, and aloof of the seriousness of the homeless and housing problems in Utah. But according to sources the Utah State Legislature they are pragmatic. They want to see a better ROI (return on investment) for dollars allocated to homeless services.

Former Utah State Senate President Scott Howell served on the special legislative committee for homeless services over a decade ago. He says that no matter how much money the State Legislature allocated towards assisting with homeless services, each year homeless service providers always needed more. Also, he says, that goals and objectives are often vague and accountability of funds attached to results is not a priority, and not being provided to the State Legislature, as evidenced in the homeless audit conducted last November

Why is this? Some critics claim that there is a “homeless industrial complex” at work. That those at the top levels of homeless services are enriching themselves by maintaining high levels of homelessness and poverty and they do not actually want to solve the problems. But we have spoken to these leaders, and it seems they have the best of intentions at heart. 

Under a traditional business model, the goals and objectives would be established then the achievement of those goals would be implemented on a cost and ROI analysis. Homeless advocates of course want to provide homes to the homeless, and currently, there is a three-year waiting list for homeless people who are signed up for “free housing”. But there clearly aren’t enough homes and there is no push to build them. But why?

Magnolia Apartments in Salt Lake City. Photo by Rick Egan | The Salt Lake Tribune.

Why “Deeply Affordable” Housing Isn’t Being Built In Utah

Due to both increases in labor, materials, and real estate, the cost of providing “deeply affordable housing” has been increasing exponentially in recent years. The newest housing units, such as the Magnolia Apartments, offering quartz countertops, balconies, and an open floor plans offer far more “dignity” to those who need Housing First. But the reality is that the costs compared to the benefits to provide these housing units have become extreme.

Palmer Court, completed in 2009, construction costs were less than $1.5 million. Certainly, building costs and construction costs have increased substantially since 2009. Palmer Court provided 201 housing units for $7,500 per unit. The Magnolia Apartments cost $265,000 per unit—Certainly, things are a lot more expensive today, but Magnolia is 35 times more per unit than Palmer Court! And three times fewer units. 

If the goal is to get as many homeless people off the streets and into housing as possible, how can a per-unit expenditure 35 times greater than what they were in 2009 be considered a success?

Utah’s homeless population has increased approximately six-fold in the past six years, (from 1,500 to 6,500. Considering the 600% increase in spending by the Utah State Legislature, and Salt Lake City since 2016, the cost of providing more homes to the homeless has increased far more than any adjustment for the increased cost of housing, inflation, real estate costs, and construction costs. Certainly, cheaper and more housing could have been built, but cheap wasn’t the priority. Why?

We won’t assume that this is because our leaders want to intentionally keep the supply of homes for the homeless low (risking lowering property values of the developer/politicians in Utah), but why is it proving next to impossible to pass actually “deeply affordable housing” such has been the case with the Other Side Village

Even the most forgiving financial officer, could not view the deeply affordable housing that has been built in recent years as a success, but an abject failure. With construction costs at an all-time high; inflation at record levels, and no end in sight of finding any “cheap solutions” in Utah what could possibly be done?

Could Pre-Fabricated Housing Solve Utah’s Affordable Housing Crisis?

We pointed out in our current episode of the Utah Stories show, that there is a new company called Boxabl. They use factory assembly-line efficiency to address the current incredibly high housing construction costs in the United States. They are building 365 square foot collapsable and portable housing units, including kitchen and bathrooms for $50,000.

Boxabl collapsable and portable house. Photo from Boxabl Instagram account.

These are intended to be installed on a concrete pad with hook-ups for electricity, water, and sewer, but simpler and cheaper solutions could just be small studio apartments. 

The homeless abatement conducted at the beginning of July 2022, clearly demonstrates that there is no shortage of empty fields where temporary housing units could be installed. We estimate the field at 230 South and 700 West was around 40 acres. There is another 40 acres, under the freeway at 600 South 700 West. Nobody builds in these places due to their proximity to rail lines and freeways. At least 1,000 units could be put on these 80 acres. This could be considered a temporary solution, but still, a good investment because all of these housing units could eventually be folded up and moved someplace else or sold as low-income or “deeply affordable” housing inventory increases.

The Current Cost of Keeping So Many of Utah’s Homeless Unsheltered

Currently, millions of dollars are being spent on homeless camp abatements by the Salt Lake City Police Department; Utah Department of Health as well as the uncalculated environmental costs. 

Temporary or semi-permanent housing units would be a much better investment than the current millions of dollars being spent on homeless camp abatements. As New York Times photographer Robin Pendergrast said, “These abatements are inhumane. These people have nowhere else to go and we are treating them like they are sub-humans. ” It’s a disgrace to the city and its leadership. 

The additional millions being spent on hand-outs from Volunteers of America and the Nomad Project, Church groups, etc on tents, sleeping bags, and clothing that often end up in dumpsters after a homeless abatement, are all being wasted. 

If zoning laws were relaxed and permitted these low-income, tiny-home communities to be allowed placed in every County (at least 7,000 total), this could solve our affordable housing crisis. Very likely developers and landlords would be on board to make the $50,000 investment if they could charge $400-$500 in rent. How much could this then save taxpayers over the next ten years for every homeless person they could remove from the streets? Tens of millions. 

If we included the current expenditures of the Department of Workforce Services, Shelter the Homeless, The Road Home, Volunteers of America, Salt Lake City Police Department, and the Health Department, criminal justice expenses: all of the current costs for shelters, abatements as well as the costs inflicted by downtown Salt Lake City businesses for business disruptions and clean-ups due to homelessness, this investment could pay for itself in under three years. But residents would need to embrace the idea of zoning changes for tiny home communities, supported by community gardens as the new “starter-home” model for low-income residents.

 The key, of course, would be support services, especially the support provided to a person requiring that person to become a functional member of society by having a job and staying clean. Another support within a homeless camp would be a community garden, where those who are unable to hold regular jobs could still put their labor towards productivity: growing food. With these measures, Utah’s State law enforcement of our no-public-camping ordinance could be maintained with a clear conscience. This would be a far better model than our current inhumane measures of removing unsheltered people off empty land where they literally have no other place to go. 

WATCH THE PODCAST

RELATED CONTENT
Did Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall Lie to the Homeless People?

Utah Homelessness Getting Out of Control: What are the solutions?

How More Bicycle Infrastructure Could Help Solve Our Affordable Housing Crisis

Why Utah’s Developers/Politicians Do Not Want Tiny Homes

If Salt Lake City’s Homeless Had a Say in The over $20 Million Spent on Them

SUPPORT LOCAL JOURNALISM AND SUBSCRIBE TO PRINT MAGAZINE

 

Subscribe to Utah Stories weekly newsletter and get our stories directly to your inbox

* indicates required



 

 



Join our newsletter.
Stay informed.


  • The $7 Million Recruit: How NIL Changed College Athletics Forever

    In 2012, Jabari Parker, a top high school prospect and member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, was facing his biggest decision to that point in his life: where to play college basketball. 

    Fans of BYU athletics hoped and perhaps prayed that Parker would pick the school owned by the church he was raised in. BYU was listed as one of his final choices. But he ultimately chose to spend his college years at Duke before attempting a career in the NBA. BYU fans were disappointed, but no one was truly surprised. Duke over BYU was the best choice for a young prospect in 2012. 

    A.J. Dybantsa.

    What changed between 2012 and 2024 when A.J. Dybantsa, the number one high school prospect, chose BYU over every other school? The answer is roughly $7 million dollars. That is what Dybantsa is reportedly making to play basketball at BYU. 

    The deal was supported by Utah Jazz owner Ryan Smith, who met multiple times with the Dybantsa family in multiple attempts to bring the young player to Provo. 

    According to Smith, he had no financial role in bringing Dybantsa to BYU, but the influence of Utah’s most famous billionaire acting as a “booster” or unofficial recruiter certainly swayed the decision.

    Prior to 2021, boosters acting as recruiters was taboo to the NCAA governing body. It was called improper recruiting. But in 2021, California began the modern era of NIL, or the ability of a college athlete to benefit from their name, image, or likeness, when they passed the “Fair Pay to Play Act.” 

    This new law gave college athletes in California the ability to benefit from their NIL, something that was banned in the rest of the country to that point. The NCAA saw that this law would create an unfair advantage for California schools that could now give young athletes the chance to make money off their talent and image while still in college. 

    The NCAA knew they needed to do something quickly, so they rushed through a policy that opened up NIL to all college athletes in the country, and it has been expanding and evolving over the last four years. 

    Grant Duff, who has coached at the University of Utah, Weber State University, and is now the defensive coordinator for Idaho State University, says, “The best part of NIL is that athletes have an opportunity to make good money. The downside comes with the free-for-all that money causes.”

    Dybantsa confers with BYU Head coach, Kevin Young.

    One of the biggest current examples of what a school can do when the boosters are willing to pay for success is Texas Tech University. From 2020-2024, Texas Tech had 34 wins, which works out to 6.8 wins per year with a low of 4 wins and high of 8. Then Texas Tech’s boosters got involved, led by Cody Campbell, an oil industry businessman and Chairman of the Texas Tech board. The football program was given 28 million dollars for NIL with a simple message attached to the large pile of money: Win. And win now. And win they did. 

    By signing NIL deals with athletes in the transfer portal, Texas Tech went from a middle-of-the-pack school in their conference to one of the top 12 teams in the country. They didn’t just win games in 2025, they made many of their opponents look like they didn’t belong on the same field, including the University of Utah and BYU twice. That is what money can buy.

    Continue reading and support independent Utah journalism with a purchase of Utah Stories (Digital + Print) or 3 month free trial (Digital).


  • Cottonwood Heights Corruption Allegations: A Case That Never Reached a Courtroom

    A year ago, we here at Utah Stories recorded a podcast episode that we never published. We were revisiting corruption allegations from ten years ago. We decided not to publish the video, so it sat there on YouTube for nearly 12 months.

    Then somehow the video was published. How? We are not sure, but once it got out there, the comments came pouring in.

    Dozens of viewers, then hundreds, supported the video with their comments on our examination of allegations of police misconduct in Cottonwood Heights. The video recounts how the Police Department was reported by business owners as focusing enforcement on customers of the former Canyon Inn bar. These allegations did not result in a publicly documented, full investigation by Utah’s Justice Department nor the FBI (at least to our knowledge). So why rehash the past?

    We believe the story of The Canyon Inn (and other area business owners) vs. CHPD and Cottonwood Heights Mayor Kelvin Cullimore raises questions about what can happen when allegations surface and do not move forward through a formal legal process with state or federal oversight.

    In 2012, Cottonwood Heights business owners at the mouth of the canyons began publicly objecting to police activity whereby up to seven cruisers were pulling over 711 and Canyon Inn bar customers on their busiest evenings.

    According to those accounts, drivers leaving the bar were frequently pulled over by police and were given DUI tickets, sometimes even after passing a sobriety examination. The volume and concentration of those stops led residents and business owners to complain about the “heavy-handed treatment” of CHPD toward motorists, especially in and around the Canyon Inn and neighboring 711, and eventually the Porcupine Pub.

    Customers responded in predictable ways. Some chose not to return and avoid the area. Others went to different establishments. Over time, the owner of the Canyon Inn, Jim Stojack, stated that his revenue declined by 70% and that he believed police activity near his business was the main contributing factor.

    Utah Stories reported on these concerns by conducting interviews; gathering video documentation provided by those involved; and making public records requests. Through our GRAMA requests, we reviewed DUI citations issued by the Cottonwood Heights Police Department and examined how those cases were resolved in Holladay Justice Court. During that period, we observed a higher number based on our review of DUI cases dismissed in court due to lack of evidence compared to other jurisdictions. One DUI attorney, Tyler Ayers, went on record saying that CHPD was issuing a high volume of DUI citations that were later dismissed.

    That observation raised questions about how cases were being documented and prosecuted. It did not, on its own, establish intent or misconduct, but it became part of a broader set of concerns raised by multiple sources.

    Continue reading and support independent Utah journalism with a purchase of Utah Stories (Digital + Print) or 3 month free trial (Digital).


  • Why Did Salt Lake City Tear Down Its Most Beautiful Buildings?

    If you go into the Utah State Archives and spend time with photographs from the late 1800s and early 1900s, you start to notice something that doesn’t line up with what exists today.

    Main Street looks cohesive. Not in a uniform way, but in a way that suggests the people building it shared an understanding of proportion, material, and permanence. Four-story buildings line the street—stone, brick, cast iron—each one detailed in ways that don’t feel incidental. Arched windows, carved stone, brickwork that changes pattern as it rises. Even the cast iron facades were designed to replicate masonry, not hide behind it.

    Then you go downtown and try to find those same buildings.

    Most of them are gone.

    Out of more than 400 buildings designed by Richard Kletting, over 300 have been torn down. That number alone reframes the conversation. Kletting designed the Utah State Capitol, the Saltair resort, commercial buildings, schools, churches, mansions—virtually every type of structure…

    Continue reading and support independent Utah journalism with a purchase of Utah Stories (Digital + Print) or 3 month free trial (Digital).


  • Momomaru Sushi Review: Salt Lake City’s New Destination for Japanese Hand Rolls

    A new Salt Lake City sushi spot is drawing crowds with Japanese-style hand rolls served fresh, fast, and warm, offering a more intimate and interactive take on traditional sushi.